Fla.'s 'Father Oprah' joins Episcopal Church

[DeusVeritas]

…according to the **Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Southeast Florida, Bishop Leo Frade. **

In a news segment on CBS4 News in South Florida Bishop Frade spoke of his friendship with Father Alberto Cutie and how they have had talks about his being inclined to switch denominations.

The Bishop said the following **“The issue with him has been a problem with celibacy”

“the Episcopal church will welcome him with open arms and he has to go through our process like any other minister”**

You can watch the video of the news segment here cbs4.com/video/?cid=5 Click to page 4 or type in **“Father Cutie switching denominations?” ** in the search box.

Sigh, I sometimes wish that God would not give me the heart to sense these kinds of things. It seems Padre (Father) Alberto Cutie is doing a media circuit on this scandal and will also be appearing on Monday on the Early Show. Ever since I heard him go against church teaching and say in an interview that science is proving that homosexuality is genetic I knew he was a liberal wolf in shepard’s clothing.

Father Alberto definitely has an agenda here. God have mercy on him.

 

[JReducation]

…according to the **Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Southeast Florida, Bishop Leo Frade. **

In a news segment on CBS4 News in South Florida Bishop Frade spoke of his friendship with Father Alberto Cutie and how they have had talks about his being inclined to switch denominations.

The Bishop said the following **“The issue with him has been a problem with celibacy”

“the Episcopal church will welcome him with open arms and he has to go through our process like any other minister”**

You can watch the video of the news segment here cbs4.com/video/?cid=5 Click to page 4 or type in **“Father Cutie switching denominations?” ** in the search box.

Sigh, I sometimes wish that God would not give me the heart to sense these kinds of things. It seems Padre (Father) Alberto Cutie is doing a media circuit on this scandal and will also be appearing on Monday on the Early Show. Ever since I heard him go against church teaching and say in an interview that science is proving that homosexuality is genetic I knew he was a liberal wolf in shepard’s clothing.

Father Alberto definitely has an agenda here. God have mercy on him.

I don’t think that his statement on genetics and homosexuality have anything to do with his behavior. The fact is that there are geneticists who truly believe that given the right technology and time they can find the homosexual gene. This is only a hypothesis. Anyone can quote a hypothesis. Let’s us not forget that Pope Benedict quoted a Byzantine emperor who maligned Islam, but that was not the position of Pope. He was speaking as an academician. Fr. Alberto’s statement here is an academic one.

His behavior is a moral one. It is completely unacceptable. What makes this situation more difficult, in my opinion, is that he should keep his private issues private. I am reminded of Bill Clinton’s marital infidelity. I have to give him credit for not going around discussing it with every reporter in town. It was an issue between he and Mrs. Clinton.

In this case, Father’s infidelity to the Church should remain an issue between him and the Church. I am uncomfortable with what gives the appearance of looking for public sympathy or public absolution. I am saying that IT GIVES THE IMPRESSION. No one can really judge what is in another person’s heart. That’s a very delicate matter. But I do disagree with the publicity in which he is participating.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[KathleenElsie]

Maybe this is for the best. If anyone can not follow the beliefs of a faith because you don’t believe them to be true, the thing to do is find a place that you think is doing better and go there.

IMHO People need to change their hearts to what their faith actually believes not what they wished it believed. If they can not do this then maybe it is time to move on and at least be truthful about what you are willing to practice in the way of faith.

 

[Ocarm]

It seems Padre (Father) Alberto Cutie is doing a media circuit on this scandal and will also be appearing on Monday on the Early Show. Ever since I heard him go against church teaching and say in an interview that science is proving that homosexuality is genetic I knew he was a liberal wolf in shepard’s clothing.

Just a request for clarification here: does church teaching deny the possibility that homosexuality is genetic? Personally I doubt it is, but I wasn’t aware the church taught that.

I’m also not clear why a genetic cause for homosexuality would be a ‘liberal’ stance. It’s either true or not true, and even though I don’t think it is true, I don’t imagine believing that makes me ‘conservative’. Or does it?

 

[Ocarm]

Maybe this is for the best. If anyone can not follow the beliefs of a faith because you don’t believe them to be true, the thing to do is find a place that you think is doing better and go there.

Of course, clerical celibacy is a matter of discipline, not a belief or a matter of church teaching. But I agree that Father Cutie can’t have it both ways, and needs to make a decision about his lifestyle.

IMHO People need to change their hearts to what their faith actually believes not what they wished it believed. If they can not do this then maybe it is time to move on and at least be truthful about what you are willing to practice in the way of faith.

I agree, with you, and wonder if the issue is that he doesn’t believe church teachings any more, and so should indeed move on; or whether he is simply in disagreement over a policy of the church (clerical celibacy).

Just to clarify, I think he would be entitled to disagree with an issue of discipline; he wouldn’t be entitled to go elsewhere just because it would make his life easier. Leaving due to non-belief in church teaching has integrity, even if it is based on a false premise, but leaving for convenience’s sake because a matter of discipline is challenging would be adolescent. If the only struggle he has is with a policy, he should be willing to work for change (in the meantime having himself laicised if he can’t maintain the discipline).

And all of the above is said in the light of JR’s post, which is that we don’t actually know what he feels and what his heart is telling him. I hope he discerns the right decision.

 

[AliciaCL]

Just a request for clarification here: does church teaching deny the possibility that homosexuality is genetic? Personally I doubt it is, but I wasn’t aware the church taught that.

I’m also not clear why a genetic cause for homosexuality would be a ‘liberal’ stance. It’s either true or not true, and even though I don’t think it is true, I don’t imagine believing that makes me ‘conservative’. Or does it?

The RCC catechism does not “deny” the possibility that homosexuality is genetic. It states that it is “intrinsically disordered” and that they do not choose their attraction. Nevertheless, homosexual actions are wrong and Catholics and all Christians are called to treat them with compassion. We don’t do it very well. It is difficult to act and sound compassionate when the immorality of homosexuality conduct is flaunted as it is. On an interpersonal basis I think we can only behave as true friends, decline to celebrate gayness (which really means gay acts) and pray for them. In public we can vote against gay agenda legislation, profess our faith and that’s about it. That’s tough to do since it seems that gays have been taught that anyone who believes homosexual behavior in inherently wrong and opposes gay marriage is a bigot, “homophobe,” slaver worthy of being hated.
worldpolicy.org/projects/globalrights/sexorient/catechism.html

 

[Vonier]

He’d rather be a celebrity apparently. Our culture, sick as it is, will no doubt reward him for breaking his vows. The Church with be the villain of the piece. What an upside down world we live in. Sounds like he might belong in the Episcopalian handbasket.

If he withdraws from public life and goes to serve somewhere else where only his Lord can see then we’ll know what he’s made of.

 

[Ocarm]

The RCC catechism does not “deny” the possibility that homosexuality is genetic. It states that it is “intrinsically disordered” and that they do not choose their attraction.

Thank you for the response. I’m aware of the church’s teaching on homosexuality, but hadn’t heard that it included a denial of the possibility of a genetic basis. What you’ve quoted appears to confirm that discounting a genetic cause for homosexuality is indeed not church teaching, hence my confusion as to why stating that it might be genetically based is indicative of a ‘liberal’ mentality. Many thanks.

 

[AliciaCL]

Ocarm, I think there is a “liberal” thinking which casts homosexuality is genetic. That equates to “it’s natural,” “it’s uncontrollable,” and thus, oppressive for society to try to inhibit it as in opposing gay marriage. I think there are indeed some many who are confused and lured into it by the current openness, others may have some kind of inherent leaning.

 

[DeusVeritas]

Ocarm, I think there is a “liberal” thinking which casts homosexuality is genetic. That equates to “it’s natural,” “it’s uncontrollable,” and thus, oppressive for society to try to inhibit it as in opposing gay marriage. I think there are indeed some many who are confused and lured into it by the current openness, others may have some kind of inherent leaning.

Thank you ** Alicia for saying much more clearly my sentiments than I ever could.

** There is absolutely nothing in the Catechism of the Catholic Church that confirms,denies or shows any hint of an openness to genetics playing a role in homosexuality.

Excerpt from Catechism

**Chastity and homosexuality **

vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm#I

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,140 tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” 141 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

JReducation, his behavior is definitely reflected in what he says. Many Catholic’s will listen to what he has to say and think to themselves that **“because Father Alberto said this, then this is what the Catholic Church teaches”. ** And in his taking the position to speak about homosexuality as something that scientists are starting to prove as genetic instead of clarifying that this is his opinion only or just remaining silent on the matter is symptomatic of the **Liberalist agenda ** that is infecting many Catholic’s in America. Where instead of following the teachings of the Church, they want the Church to follow what they want.

For anyone (I don’t mean you JReducation) to imply that “no denial” on the part of Holy Mother Church is equal to the Church being open about homosexuality being genetic is to add further confusion on this matter, confusion concerning the teachings of the Church that unfortunately runs rampant amongst many American Catholic’s. Until a clear statement is released by the Magisterium concerning genetic’s we cannot say this or that concerning the Catholic Church’s stance on this outside of the Catechism.

 

[rlg94086]

Thank you ** Alicia** for saying much more clearly my sentiments than I ever could. There is absolutely nothing in the Catechism of the Catholic Church that confirms,denies or shows any hint of an openness to genetics playing a role in homosexuality.

JReducation, his behavior is definitely reflected in what he says. Many Catholic’s will listen to what he has to say and think to themselves that **“because Father Alberto said this, then this is what the Catholic Church teaches”. ** And in his taking the position to speak about homosexuality as something that scientists are starting to prove as genetic instead of clarifying that this is his opinion only or just remaining silent on the matter is symptomatic of the Liberal leftist agenda that is infecting many Catholic’s in America. Where instead of following the teachings of the Church, they want the Church to follow what they want.

For anyone (I don’t mean you JReducation) to imply that “no denial” on the part of Holy Mother Church is equal to the Church being open about homosexuality being genetic is to add further confusion on this matter, confusion concerning the teachings of the Church that unfortunately runs rampant amongst many American Catholic’s. Until a clear statement is released by the Magisterium concerning genetic’s we cannot say this or that concerning the Catholic Church’s stance on this outside of the Catechism.

I think that is a little overstatement on your part. While genetics are not mentioned, the Catechism does say that the “genesis remains largely unexplained.” IOW…the Church does not deny the possibility of genetic/biological origin. In fact, your last sentence contradicts your statement regarding openness. If “we cannot say this or that” regarding the Magisterium’s stance on genetics vis-a-vis homosexuality, then you would have to say the stance is currently open…until it is closed by making a clear statement.
Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

What is clear from the Church is that regardless of the origin of such desires, they can’t ever be approved. “Under no circumstances” seems pretty clear to me. I liken it to many other genetic or “natural” desires that may be found through current or future science.

One could make arguments about a whole host of “natural” desires that we have as human beings. Regardless of genetic or psychological origins, we still have laws and mores which limit the actions that one can take based on those desires. Homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can therefore will never be acceptable to the Church or faithful Catholics.

 

[DeusVeritas]

I think that is a little overstatement on your part. While genetics are not mentioned, the Catechism does say that the “genesis remains largely unexplained.” IOW…the Church does not deny the possibility of genetic/biological origin.

It’s fair for you to think its an overstatement and you’re right but I did so because there are those will go on the “the Catechism doesn’t confirm or deny” train circuit and say that since there is no confirmation or denial then we should be open to the possibility that homosexuality can be genetic ie. normal. That is where I was trying to come from with my statement.

I will admit to be horrible at expressing myself in the written form. Oh well.

 

[rlg94086]

It’s fair for you to think its an overstatement and you’re right but I did so because there are those will go on the “the Catechism doesn’t confirm or deny” train circuit and say that since there is no confirmation or denial then we should be open to the possibility that homosexuality can be genetic ie. normal. That is where I was trying to come from with my statement.

I will admit to be horrible at expressing myself in the written form. Oh well.

Here is where the real problem lies. Genetic does not equal “normal.” If it is found that homosexual desire (regardless of whether it is a spectrum or a fixed inclination) is genetic, that does not mean it is “normal.” There are genetic anomalies. We won’t excuse behavior based on those anomalies. In fact, we may very well try to find a cure/fix for such genetic disorders.

My brother has a genetic, physical disability. He is still human and has the same rights as other humans, but it doesn’t make sense to say that his physical deformities are “normal” and therefore we shouldn’t try to find a cure, does it? If we can find a way to prevent or repair such deformities, then we will.

 

[rlg94086]

BTW…just to pull this back on-topic, Fr. Cutie’s sin was an expression of “natural” desire. I have “natural” lustful desires for women other than my wife. When such “natural” desires rear their ugly heads, I don’t act on them. To do so would be a sin…even though it is “natural.”

PS BTW…today is our 23rd Anniversary…Yea for us! :yeah_me::extrahappy:

 

[Ocarm]

confusion concerning the teachings of the Church that unfortunately runs rampant amongst many American Catholic’s.

Well, I’m not an American Catholic, so I can’t comment.

Until a clear statement is released by the Magisterium concerning genetic’s we cannot say this or that concerning the Catholic Church’s stance on this outside of the Catechism.

We can say one thing with absolute certainty - which is that the Church hasn’t made a clear statement on the issue. Which is what I was trying to establish one way or the other in the first instance.

To argue that someone would be wrong to imply that the Church legitimises the genetic argument when it doesn’t (and I remind you, I don’t find the genetic argument convincing myself) is entirely reasonable; but its no better to imply that feeling there’s some merit in the genetic hypothesis is somehow out of synch with Church teaching, when no magisterial pronouncement exists. I think you do imply this (intended or otherwise) in your statement that:

And in his taking the position to speak about homosexuality as something that scientists are starting to prove as genetic instead of clarifying that this is his opinion only or just remaining silent on the matter is symptomatic of the **Liberalist agenda ** that is infecting many Catholic’s in America. Where instead of following the teachings of the Church, they want the Church to follow what they want.

We might have opinions - and probably most of us do - on what Church teaching should be, along the lines of ‘the failure to teach x rather than y will advance the cause of liberalism/conservatism’ but ultimately those opinions are irrelevant. Obviously the Church doesn’t give any of us that authority.

I think this is probably a side issue to the thread as a whole, and I won’t comment further on this aspect of the topic. Best wishes to you and to the people who responded to my questions.

 

[KathleenElsie]

BTW…just to pull this back on-topic, Fr. Cutie’s sin was an expression of “natural” desire. I have “natural” lustful desires for women other than my wife. When such “natural” desires rear their ugly heads, I don’t act on them. To do so would be a sin…even though it is “natural.”

PS BTW…today is our 23rd Anniversary…Yea for us! :yeah_me::extrahappy:

Congratulations.

My husband and I had our 40th last June. Just a private supper with the kids and a Blessing from the priest.

 

[rlg94086]

Congratulations.

My husband and I had our 40th last June. Just a private supper with the kids and a Blessing from the priest.

40 years! Woo-hoo! :extrahappy: Oh…and Happy Mother’s Day, as well.

Okay…now, we return to our regular scheduled programming.

 

[Ana]

Of course, clerical celibacy is a matter of discipline, not a belief or a matter of church teaching.

I am sorry, I just needed to clarify. Celibacy is not a discipline, it is a calling. I will agree discipline is necessary, but it is g**race that makes it possible. **

Matthew 19:11
Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only to those it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage for the Kingdom of Heaven. The one who can accept this should accept this."(bold mine)

Now it is time for a really bad joke…I’m famous for them.

…Maybe he thinks he’s too cutie to be celibate.

Okay, running before the tomatos hit.

 

[JPUSC]

I hope he switches to an Eastern Catholic or Orthodox Church instead of the Episcopal ecclesial community if he decides to remain a priest.

 

[rlg94086]

I am sorry, I just needed to clarify. Celibacy is not a discipline, it is a calling. I will agree discipline is necessary, but it is g**race that makes it possible. **

Matthew 19:11
Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only to those it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage for the Kingdom of Heaven. The one who can accept this should accept this."(bold mine)

Now it is time for a really bad joke…I’m famous for them.

…Maybe he thinks he’s too cutie to be celibate.

Okay, running before the tomatos hit.

Hi Ana,

What is meant by “discipline” is that it is not doctrine. In other words, the requirement for celibacy in the priesthood could be changed, if the Church decides to change it. In fact, the Eastern Rites allow for married priests (though, to be clear, no one who is ordained can marry after they are ordained) and the Western Rite does have married priests - married Protestant ministers who converted and received permission from the Vatican to become priests.

As far as celibacy for the individual priest, you are correct that it is a calling…and a gift.