So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, adieu
Adieu, adieu, to yieu and yieu and yieu
Posted on 05/28/2009 10:59:46 AM PDT by NYer
The Rev. Alberto Cutié, the celebrity priest removed from his Miami Beach church after photos of him kissing and embracing a woman appeared in the pages of a Spanish-language magazine earlier this month, will leave the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Miami to join the Episcopal church.
The small and private ceremony will happen early Thursday afternoon at Trinity Cathedral, the church's South Florida headquarters in downtown Miami. Bishop Leo Frade, head of the Episcopal Diocese of Southeast Florida, will officiate.
Later, Cutié is expected to announce that he will marry his girlfriend, whom media reports have cited as 35-year-old Ruhama Buni Canellis, a divorced mother living in Miami Beach.
Cutié got into trouble with the Archdiocese of Miami earlier this month when compromising pictures of the 40-year old cleric were published in the Spanish-language magazine TVnotas. The magazine's cover showed the priest in blue shorts lying on his back embracing a woman with long brown hair, a violation of his vow of chastity. Additional photos inside the magazine showed him kissing the woman.
Such a relationship is not prohibited in the more liberal Episcopal church, which considers itself the "middle way'' between Protestantism and Catholicism. It ordains women and has an openly gay bishop.
The church represents the U.S. wing of the 77 million-member Anglican Communion and traces its roots to the Church of England, which broke from Rome in the 16th century.
Cutié will initially be a lay person in the Episcopal church … not a priest. The process of a Catholic priest becoming an Episcopal priest takes at least a year, experts say.
While not having the same authority as a priest, Bishop Frade plans to give Cutié special status as a lay minister, meaning he can preach in Episcopal churches but not celebrate the Eucharist, the symbolic body and blood of Christ.
In previous interviews, Frade had said he and Cutié had spoken following the media frenzy surrounding the priest, which included an appearance on CBS' The Early Show and Spanish-language network Univision, in addition to national and international newspapers.
In the interviews, Cutié has said he loves the woman and hinted at marriage and kids in the future.
Frade, who has been friends with Cutié for seven years and first met him through a Cuban ecumenical group, has said the popular priest had also spoken privately with leaders of other Christian denominations, such as Baptists and Lutherans. It is unclear if those conversations focused on joining those churches.
In South Florida, at least five former Catholic priests serve in the Episcopal church. Nationally, there are more than 100 Episcopal priests who were once Catholic.
"It's possible to receive a Catholic priest straight into the Episcopal priesthood,'' said Bishop C. Christopher Epting, the church's national Deputy for Ecumenical and Inter religious Relations. Cutié would need to pass an examination in church history and doctrine and have two Catholic priests recommend his "moral and Godly character,'' but he could bypass the seminary.
While the Episcopal and Catholic churches have almost identical worship services, there are also significant differences. Episcopals do not believe in the infallibility of the Pope, nor do they believe in transubstantiation … that during the consecration of the Mass, the bread and wine are transformed into the actual body and blood of Christ.
Ping!
Sexual deviancy...Episcopal...what a shock.
Delighted to hear this. I wish more jerks would leave the Catholic Church.
But, but, the boy’s a Cutié!
I would not exactly call a man falling in love with a woman “sexual deviancy”. I’m no fan of the Episcopal Church but obviously Pastor Cutie can no longer remain a priest and I guess for him this is his best option.
A guy digging on a chick is now “sexual deviancy”?
The story is factually incorrect.
“While not having the same authority as a priest, Bishop Frade plans to give Cutié special status as a lay minister, meaning he can preach in Episcopal churches but not celebrate the Eucharist, the symbolic body and blood of Christ.”
Catholics consider the Eucharist THE BODY OF CHRIST. It is not symbolic.
Let him embarrass THAT Church!
The article was written by a guy named Jaweek Kaleem. What can ya expect.
The Episcopal Church should be more circumspect about accepting Catholic clergy than they are, IMHO. Not that I have anything against Catholic clergy, mind you. But Fr. Cutié took a solemn vow of chastity when he accepted his Holy Orders in the Catholic Church. For him to renege on that solemn vow and step over to the Episcopal Clergy should be less of a seamless transition.
If he was willing to throw over one solemn vow, how will he react when he faces the next temptation? I’m not saying that it is impossible for him to be a good Episcopal Priest, but we should not automatically assume that he will, just because we don’t require celibate clergy.
No thanks. We don’t need him.
Hurray! We need more heterosexuals in the Episcopal Church.
We should at least think about it before saying “Okey Dokey!”
I’m glad this is over. All the shows in Miami have been about this guy. Did he kiss her? Did he fart? Did he drink a beer? bla, bla, bla...
I'm sorry, but of what possible relevance is the name of the article's author?
I agree.
So, what is he gonna do after divorce in the Episcopal church?
get married . . . again, and again, and again . . .
no problem!
Remember the Episcopal Church’s doctrinal formulation:
ALL MAY
SOME DO
NONE MUST
Good riddance!
Where he belongs. I’ll gladly trade the Anglican communion all our priestly deviants for all their priestly holy men.
The article was referring to the Episcopal view, not that of the Catholic Church.
Bingo! You are so right. If he broke one vow, how trustworthy is he?
Not possible, I'm sorry to say...
Celibacy.
I don’t know if he had “relations with that woman”, but he found a woman attractive enough to leave the Church. At least he left the church and didn’t hang around violating his oath.
If he did have “relations” outside of marriage, then even the Catholic Church would consider that a “sin” and not “deviancy”.
sadly you are right....they have no shame left.
Please do not generalize and condemn the members of the entire Episcopal church for the actions of it’s current nitwit presiding bishop and the vocal militant gay agenda minority that has regretably gotten a foothold. Unfortunately, NO denomination is exempt from the ills of society but as Christians we should be better equipped to fight back. A man falling in love with a woman is not deviancy. Horrendously bad judgement in publicly being with the woman before leaving the priesthood, yes. But should he be kicked out of Christianity?? Is that we’re all about now??
Absolutely not.
He's right where he belongs.
Adios. This man made a promise to God to be celibate, and he has chosen this woman over his faith. We need strong leaders in the Catholic Church.
“Please do not generalize and condemn the members of the entire Episcopal church for the actions of it’s current nitwit presiding bishop and the vocal militant gay agenda minority that has regretably gotten a foothold. Unfortunately, NO denomination is exempt from the ills of society but as Christians we should be better equipped to fight back. A man falling in love with a woman is not deviancy. Horrendously bad judgement in publicly being with the woman before leaving the priesthood, yes. But should he be kicked out of Christianity?? Is that we’re all about now??”
I have no problem with Episcopalians, and I actually have no problem with this man leaving the Catholic priesthood in order to become married; celibacy is certainly not for everyone, and if it was going to continue to be a problem for him, better to leave than stay and continue hiding and lying. Some are called to celibacy, and others are called to marriage; he (and others who participated in his formation) did a poor job of discerning his vocation.
The ONLY problem I have with this, as a Catholic, is the fact that he decided to walk away from the Eucharist. If he truly believed in the True Presence as a priest, he could have NEVER walked away from it. His girlfriend is not the only thing he has been lying about- I can only infer that he never believed in transubstantiation.
If he was willing to throw over one solemn vow, how will he react when he faces the next temptation?"
How will he react? Probably like recently ordained Episcopal Bishop Robinson, who threw over his solemn marraige vow to his wife so he could be with his boyfriend. Vows don't mean squat in the Episcopal Church. Ask Henry VIII.
First, this news conference should never have happened. This was just one more opportunity for Alberto Cutie (do I still call him Father?) to put on a show. He should have gone away for six months to reflex quietly, then he could made a decision. They announced he will be "preaching" this Sunday. Hey all you faithful that are being lead astray, come join him! Coffee afterwards in the parish hall. Gee whiz.
Also, he could have left the priesthood and remained a catholic. Instead he has left the church and all it stands for. It seems to me he values his position and the accolades he receives more than he values his faith. The Episcopal bishop also said that Cutie will not be a regular parish priest, that he is being groomed (whatever) by the top people. Again, this continues to be about Cutie's need for adoration and position and has little to do with service and faith.
And the woman, don't get me started on her. As women we are called to live holy lives and help and direct the men in our lives to be holy as well. She did neither and now a man of God has fallen into sin. You should have seen her face at the news conference. It seemed like she was gloating to me. Well one day she will answer for her actions in all of this.
When the news conference was on it was pouring rain here. My catholic friend called me and I told her it was like the heavens were crying. This has been a heartbreaking story all around; from the sin to the scandal to the faithful being mislead.
Pray for the archdiocese of Miami and all of her members. Also pray for our bishop. This scandal has delayed his announcements of who will be accepted at the seminary in the fall and I know two men still waiting on word.
Source is ALWAYS relevant.
I do not disagree.
What I was responding to, however, was a post that said this:
""The article was written by a guy named Jaweek Kaleem. What can ya expect."
I still do not see how the NAME of an author is at all relevant to this -- or any other discussion.
I believe I am correct when I say that two people with the names "Christopher Hitchens" and "Stephen Hawking" have rather pronounced biases against Christians. But I do NOT know that because of Christopher Hitchens' or Stephen Hawkings' NAME. I know it as a result of reading what Hitchens has written on the subject of Christians.
I am completely unaware as to whether or not Jaweek Kaleem has -- or does not -- have any bias for or against Christians in general or Roman Catholics more specifically.
And I cannot judge any bias (or knowledge of Christian doctrine) on the part of Jaweek Kaleem based soley upon his name.
The lunatic contingent minority unfortunately has control of the national machinery (which thanks to the Dennis Canon now controls all the church assets) as well as (more importantly) the seminaries and the right to approve all ordinations.
TEC will no longer approve for ordination ANY graduate of TSM or Nashota House. In effect, the "minority" now controls who runs the church on the national, the diocesan, and the parish level.
You may have a good orthodox rector now, but as soon as he leaves or retires, good luck finding an orthodox man to replace him. There aren't any more in the pipeline.
We found that out the hard way when a man lied about himself in order to get the call from our former parish -- then lined up 100 percent behind Vicki Gene and 815. He did eventually get fired for stealing from the parish fund, but that's another story.
Reason 4,156 why we are no longer Episcopalian.
It troubles me that a Catholic priest who used to be quite sound (they tell me) would rather join a --- such a group. I wish he had decided, rather, to take some time to go on a retreat, consider his life as a whole, think about things with a cooler head, and return to his integrity and his vows.
BTW, I've never been able to understand why a woman would want an unrepentant vow-breaker. But some do.
So eventually, "All Must."
(1) You know the old expression that a man who will cheat on his wife will cheat on his (next) wife. If this fellow broke his vows and made a publicity circus out of it, he might well break his vows again, possibly giving TEC another black eye. Just look at Robinson, who essentially did the same thing.
(2) He didn't become a Catholic layman. If he really, truly believed in Apostolic Succession and the Real Presence, he wouldn't leave the Church. It's true that some Episcopalians believe in the Real Presence (we did), and it's possible to fudge around the Apostolic Succession issue (although not with any real intellectual honesty). But you have to be nosebleed high to believe either one of those, and it doesn't look like any of the folks involved are Anglo-Catholics.
Either he never believed in the first place, or (seems far more likely) he's joining TEC to hold onto his position of prominence and power.
Not a real good bargain for TEC.
It’s a little more complicated than that, but yeah, TEC is promoting a scorched-earth policy against those who disagree with their agenda.
The article was referring to the Episcopal view, not that of the Catholic Church.
It was my understanding that Anglicans do believe in the Real Presence. They don't believe in Transubstantiation the way Catholics do, but they do understand that the Eucharist is more than simply symbolic.
The high-churchers definitely believe in the Real Presence and Transubstantiation.
The low-churchers most definitely do not.
The broad-churchers have no idea what they believe, and probably have never considered the question.
As for which view is the 'official' one, the XXXIX makes it plain:
XXVIII (in part):
Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of bread and wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.
The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner.
I think the authors of the XXXIX were clearly wrong here, and thought so when I was an Ultramontane Piskie, but that's the official position.
The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves, one to another, but rather it is a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death: insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same, the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ, and likewise the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ.
So it's a Sacrament and not merely a commemoration, but they sort of fall between two stools on what the meaning of "is" is. It appears to be symbolic and not actual partaking.
This is further proof that thinking with only the little head leads to Protestantism and/or mortal sin.
The historic Anglican position is actually closer to the Reformed view (which is consistent with the quoted passages). Sacrament, not an ordinance, real spiritual (not physical) presence. If you compare the Anglican articles with Westminster, you can see a common thread.
But I agree fully with your earlier post - current views are all over the board, depending on whether the person in question is high, low, broad, or just holds a social membership in the group.
When we tip-toed across the Tiber, my daughter had just been confirmed in TEC, and then (much to her initial annoyance) had to go BACK to Confirmation Class to get confirmed again.
But she told me that the Catholic class was infinitely superior to the TEC one -- the way she described it (just today, as we were talking in the car) was that "they taught us about what it means to be an adult Catholic, our duties and obligations, and what the Sacraments are and mean." She said in the TEC class they just talked a lot of gas about feelings and individual "faith journeys".
I didn't sit in on any of the Catholic classes -- they had a separate class for "parents of confirmands" that was taught by the scholarly deacon with a turn for history. Lots of early Church fathers and neat stuff, as well as a summary of what the kids were getting next door.
But I DID sit in on one of the TEC classes. Daughter and I after the first ten minutes developed our equivalent of a drinking game -- we started counting the times the 'facilitator' said "faith journey". We quit by the time we got to 50, we were getting the giggles.
Good riddance to another lying, unethical, morally deficient priest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.