Perspective, PNCC

How can someone so Cutié be so wrong

Let me preface my comments by saying that, in general, clergy in the PNCC are married. The PNCC has had married clergy since the Holy Synod of 1921. Some of our clergy have the gift of celibacy and have lived so all their lives.

That said, I did want to delve into the issues and the drama surrounding the Rev. Alberto Cutié, a former Roman Catholic priest, who left the Roman Church to join the Episcopal Church. If you want to read the details of the drama you can look here (and here, here, here, and here).

I think my readers know my position in regard to forced celibacy. It is wrongheaded and dangerous. It involves a demand on the Holy Spirit for gifts the Spirit gives freely to those whom He chooses. Forcing a promise from a priest without the necessary grace inevitably leads to all sorts of negative consequences, for the priest, for those around him, and in particular for the victims these men reach out to in an attempt to fill the void in their lives. The victims are more often than not left behind as damaged goods.

Here’s how I see the rights and wrongs in this case:

The right

Rev. Cutié did the right thing in leaving the active Roman Catholic ministry and in making a commitment to the woman (Ms. Ruhama Buni Canellis) he was illicitly involved with. He did right in treating her with dignity. He could have used her and cast her off as so many clergy do. He could have abandoned her to financial settlements his bishop would arrange. Rather he regained some shred of honor in not treating her like yesterday’s dirty laundry.

The wrongs

He used another human being: He did wrong in using her in the first place, and that’s what it was, using another person. Holding a position of power and prestige, with broad license to reach out to his community, he put his self interests first – not because he entered into a relationship, but because he entered into a relationship dishonestly. He failed to judge by any positive standard: honor — no, vows to his bishop — no, sin — no, his office — no, his people — no, his God — no. All that mattered was that he fulfill his need to ‘get some action.’ This was selfish, abhorrent, and based on his position — abusive. Again, he recouped a bit in so far as he finally committed to her, but the start shows a certain attitude toward the world. ‘I do it because it feels good;’ without regard for any objective standard of right and wrong.

He left the Catholic faith: He left for a form of Protestantism that’s so out there you can’t even call it Christian anymore. Sure it still has some of the words right, it uses a few of the books, but the essential marker in his new denomination is ‘We believe in anything we define as feeling good.’ The National Post’s religion blog, Holy Post, describes Rev. Cutié’s philosophy this way:

Father Cutié had worked to show the church was in touch with modern concerns.

Which is why he seems to fit in this new denomination. This statement means that he, like his denomination, believes nothing really, except whatever may happen to be a modern concern. Yesterday it was green jobs, today Adam Lambert’s sexuality, tomorrow… who knows.

Rev. Cutié and Ms. CanellisI’m not saying that he belongs in the Roman Church, but if Catholicism, core Catholicism were of any value to him it would have played out differently. If he had any concern for objective truth he would know that he is in need of repentance for the wrongs he committed against his bishop, his people, his vows, and Ms. Canellis. Rather than glory and center stage, he would have made his commitment to Ms. Canellis, and would have gone into prayerful seclusion. Emerging, I’m sure he could have reached out to other Catholic Churches for acceptance. That would have been the choice made by a person caught in his situation who was Catholic in his attitudes, in his core.

Living for modern concerns will leave Rev. Cutié empty in the end. If the National Post article had said: Father Cutié had worked to show the church was in touch with the truth much of the outcome would be different. Rather, what Rev. Cutié is left with is this: What is modern is what is today. If his commitment to Ms. Canellis is to mean anything it will have to set aside today, because tomorrow’s today won’t be marked by a lovely young woman in a bikini on Miami Beach. Today may be marked by the spotlight, but tomorrow’s today will be marked by a failing congregation in a broken down parish, a congregation of needy sheep with their small problems and petty sins. Tomorrow’s today’s will leave Rev. Cutié not quite the cutie anymore and perhaps then he will understand that there are truths that surpass today, a relevancy that is eternal.

9 thoughts on “How can someone so Cutié be so wrong

  1. While I do not agree with your remarks regarding “forced celibacy” (I
    see celibacy as a continuing, grace-filled, free-will decision to direct
    one’s love to the greater Catholic community), I do agree with your
    argument that Cutie “put his self interests first”, “left the Catholic faith”, and is “living for modern concerns”. It is true that “he could have reached out to other Catholic Churches [sic] for acceptance”. But, I
    wonder whether that would be more honest of him. Should a priest choose
    another denomination because it accepts married priests or because he
    truly accepts and believes all that the new church teaches? For example,
    do former Roman Catholic priests who become Polish National Catholic
    priests do so because it is possible to remain a priest and to be married
    or because they have a real religious crisis of conscience and discover
    that the PNCC was right after all? Only they can answer that question
    honestly.

    I will be interested to learn what happens to Cutie in the Episcopal
    Church. His problems may just be starting.

  2. I think it is pretty clear, Thomas, that mandating celibacy for priests confuses two different types of vocations: apples and oranges, at it were. One can be called to celibate/monastic life and not to the priesthood(or the diaconate), and vice-versa. Some few are called to both.

    However, once Fr. C. accepted to be a celibate, RC priest…

  3. Thomas,

    You raise an interesting question about former Roman Priests who come to the PNCC. I know several former Roman priests who fit one of two molds:

    a) those who left the priesthood to get married or to experience a relationship with a woman, they struggled with celibacy and could no longer deal with it and/or

    b) those who tried to live the best of both worlds, acting as a Roman priest and having a ‘bride on the side’.

    I am not going to say who is right or wrong or if either is right or wrong, but it does raise the question as to the sincerity of living the life as a married National Catholic priest or just doing so cause it is the only option at this time.

    Pax

  4. All I can add to your post is:

    To be fair the Episcopal Church is still Christian unless it drops required belief in the content of the creeds, which are in its Prayer Book. Belief is still required but often not enforced as it ought to be among the clergy. Since the late-1700s ‘Enlightenment’ discreet unbelief there has been normal. It’s been more out in the open since the late 1960s.

    I wouldn’t be as harsh about celibacy in the Roman Rite but of course agree it’s just a rule.

    The conservative faction of the Old Catholics in Europe (conservative places like Slovakia for example) seem to fit adam’s description: men who fell in love and married but are really still orthodox.

    I suspect Cutié is vain (a pitfall of his looks?), wanting to keep the high status (particularly among Hispanics?) of the priesthood for himself, and doesn’t have a real calling to minister.

  5. A promise of celibacy which is freely made is not “forced”: no one forced Fr. Cutie to be ordained.

    Furthermore continence for clerics even in marriage is an Apostolic discipline.

  6. Fogey, fair enough on TEC/Anglicanism. I went overboard in my statements and it wasn’t necessary. Of course there are those who believe and believe strongly even in the midst of unbelief.

    As to PNCC priests, I wouldn’t go so far as to say I know their motivations. I can only speak for myself. The calling is given and I can say I have it. I also have a calling to married life. The motivation may be as simple as that, a vocation to both that was thwarted (yes, in part by the man who became a priest, who whether knowingly or unknowingly made a commitment he couldn’t possibly keep in light of the vocation to married life).

    Thomas, to the Fogey’s point, it is a discipline and that’s really all excepting those cases where men are called to that gift (as Fr. Greg notes certain monastics, etc.) The Spirit gives both gifts to many men and the gift of celibacy to far fewer I think. Of course the Spirit doesn’t draw a line of demarkation between the East and the West – those over there, you can have both gifts, you in the West, ‘no soup for you.

    As Fr. Greg notes, Mr. Cutié did make a choice, and just like a lot of folks likely a wrong choice because he didn’t have the grace to maintain it. It may not have been, as it were, given to him.

    Because of my personal challenge in this regard I know that you cannot fight very long against the call or calls you receive. If you fight either call you’re likely to do more harm to yourself and others.

    I do pray for those who have the gift of celibacy. You can see it in the way they relate. They tend to have no baggage in that regard and it’s natural. Calls to vocations are like that. I liken it to the PNCC priest I worked with who went into the Army as a chaplain. You could see that call in him, that he was made for that work. The cost — he didn’t really care, because it is where he was called to be.

  7. An excellent description of continence from the Rev. Roger J. Landry from CatholiCity wherein he states:

    The law of temporary continence, while still an esteemed practice, is no longer an ascetical requirement.

    Also, while Rev. Landry makes a valid point in relation to adjunct issues affecting married clergy, the PNCC does not seem to face those issues to any extreme degree. Even our poorest parishes can support a priest and his family. Of course we live in the West and Cardinal Sfeir faces greater, although not insurmountable (through the traditions of community and family charity and support), difficulties in Lebanon.

  8. A priest named Cutie marries a girl named Cannabis?
    If I didn’t read it, I would not believe it.
    Only in America!

  9. Priestly celibacy?

    “For those who believe, no proof is necessary.
    For those who don’t believe, no proof is possible.”

    Stuart Chase (Writer and Economist, b.1888 (Tragedy of Waste))

Comments are closed.