Posted on 05/30/2009 5:02:26 PM PDT by JoeProBono
A popular U.S. Roman Catholic priest photographed frolicking with a woman on a Florida beach announced Thursday he had joined the Episcopal Church to pursue the priesthood in a faith that allows married clergy. "I've seen with my own eyes how many brothers of mine serve God as married men and with the blessing of having their own families," said Father Alberto Cutie, whose removal from his Miami Beach parish prompted public debate about the Catholic Church's celibacy requirement for priests. The charismatic 40-year-old is a well-known religious leader in Miami who dispensed relationship advice on Spanish-language television shows, church radio programs and newspaper columns. He was relieved of his duties at St. Francis de Sales parish in Miami Beach earlier this month after the entertainment magazine TVnotas published photos of him in swim trunks, snuggling and kissing a woman on the sands of a beach in Florida.
Cutie later said he had fallen in love with the woman and broken his vow of celibacy. He apologized for his behavior, but told the Univision Spanish-language television network, "I didn't stop being a man just because I put on a cassock. There are trousers under this cassock."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Lamh Foistenach Abu!
What a disgusting creature. It’s all about me. I mean, I simply fell in love. Is that a crime?
They forced me into the Catholic clergy. I didn’t realize when I was taking a vow of chastity they really meant it. What is the definition of chastity anyway?
Catholics are better off without this creep.
Must be a “King Henry VIII” catholic.
Better to marry than burn with lust. At least he’s not a fag.
But if he were a “fag” he can now move up to bishop.
So, he played the Specter card?
Lamh Foistenach Abu!
I’m just happy one of them actually prefers girls.
LOL you guys are so right.
He's the worst kind of traitor and sounds like a liberal rationalizing his inabilty to live up to his vows or control his trouser snake. Did you read the article?
“Sin boldly”....another adherent of Martin Luther.
Don’t let the door hit you in the rear on the way out.
Might wanna try reading some Paul.
Aren’t you being a bit dramatic here?
There is something entirely unnatural with any person denying themselves sex and/or a spouse to somehow ‘please’ God.
Do you think God thinks any less of those of us who are married?
What a disgrace.
The man is obviously an attention whore. It suited him to be an orthodox catholic priest when he was selling books or getting interviews on EWTN. Apparently it was all an act since he obviously does not believe in the Real Presence, the papacy, apostolic succession or a number of fundamental Catholic doctrines while he was a priest. If he did he would remain in the Church and not be picked up by a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual heterodox sect like a free agent.
Didn’t the church have married priests for hundreds of years. We’re they ignoring Paul?
I verily wouldst smacketh upon it!
The scandal here is not that he left the Church.
He left because he got caught. If he had not gotten caught he would still be living his lie.
The Church has married priests now in other rites of the Church. In the Latin Rite it is very much the exception than the norm. One would have to be married before becoming a priest in the Latin Rite. But taking a vow of celibacy and breaking it and persisting in that sin is akin to cheating on one’s wife in the married state and then persisting in that sin.
I’ll leave to you to read Paul’s commentary on the concerns of those who are married and those who are celibate.
So, is Paul wrong or was the church wrong?
“An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— and his interests are divided.”
It is the above sentiment that the Church also shares that priests should not have divided interests.
The Church in east and west realizes at some point the clergy should abstain from marriage to devote themselves fully to the Lord. In the east they can be married as priests only if they are already married when they enter the clergy. Bishops and higher cannot be married. In the west, generally with some exceptions, they can not be married as priests either.
But beyond that the Church defined what was and was not Scripture and all who attempt to prove them wrong by Sola Scriptura err by first depending on the Church to establish Scripture.
The Episcopal church still expects its priests to wait until marriage to forego celibacy, don’t they?
First of all your posts expose an ignorance (imagine that) of the difference between a practice and a doctrine. A celibate priesthood is a practice within the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church, not a doctrine of the Catholic Church. Unlike the all male priesthood, which is doctrine, the practice of celibacy can be changed.
Since Paul and the Church agree I have no idea how I would answer “so, is Paul wrong or was the Church wrong” except to say both are correct. Both believe celibacy is the preferred state for ordained priesthood as a practice, but don’t exclude those in the married state from entering into it. Most rites of the Church have no restriction against married clergy, while the Latin Rite only allows it as I mentioned in my earlier post.
Your ignoring the traditional poractice of the church which was in contradiction to Paul. If you can’t explain the contradiction just say so, but don’t use modern practice to do so.
It is the traditional practice of the Church, fully conforming to Paul’s observations. The text of Paul concerning this is easily read and understood, but the sick of heart prove denial is not just a river in Egypt.
The traditional practice of the church was to let priests be married. It is in conflict with Paul’s words. For you not to acknowlege that is not an act of faith, it is turning a blind eye to historical accuracy, so you don’t have to admit something unpleasant.
Wrong. You’re talking out your sphincter as usual.
“I have never understood why the Catholic Church won’t let priests marry. There is nothing in the Bible that says they must be celibate.”
i’m catholic and i completely agree with you...and i agree with how evangelicals let their reverends marry...but the one thing stopping me from joining protestants is the fact that they believe that whoever doesn’t believe in Jesus even if they were born in another religion won’t go to heaven even if they are a great person...i can’t accept that
At least that is in the Bible:
John 14:6
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Christianity is different from all other religions. In nearly all other religions, there is a scale of good and bad deeds that you do in life. It is all about what you have done. If you get 51% on the good side, you are in. Except like a salesman who does not know what the quota is, you never know if you have done enough or not enough.
In Christianity, it is what has already been done for you. By sincerely accepting Jesus into your heart and humbly accept a willingness to follow him, you become saved. It is not about what you have done, but what he has done.
And don't confuse what is a "great person" from your Western Christian standpoint for what the world thinks is a "great person." According to the Koran, the only way to be guaranteed a place in heaven (and be a great person) is to die fighting infidels. And that included suicide bombers in pizzerias.
You need to take a step back.
That would be impossible. I am sitting.
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.