S
Shin
Guest
Perhaps Fr. Cutie needs some tough love? And didn’t get enough of it from the beginning?
- Status
N
Norminha
Guest
Yes Brother JReducation, you’re correct!
What kind of Christian will I be if I see the sins of my brother but mine.
Our Blessed Lord told sister Faustina that His mercy is greater than our sins.
He wants us to extend love and forgiveness to others just as He does to us.
We need to approach Him in constant prayer, asking Him to pour His mercy upon us and upon the whole world.
If my Lord is asking me to be merciful, I need to trust completely in Him and have the assurance that He’ll judge Fr. Cutie with mercy because He is the judge of mercy.
I love my priests so much that besides of the rosary and the Divine Mercy Chaplet, I pray a perpetual novena for all priests. My High Priest will bring them back.
St. Michael the Archangel, defend our priests!
St. John Viannie, pray for all priests!
St. Joseph, protect our priests!
What kind of Christian will I be if I see the sins of my brother but mine.
Our Blessed Lord told sister Faustina that His mercy is greater than our sins.
He wants us to extend love and forgiveness to others just as He does to us.
We need to approach Him in constant prayer, asking Him to pour His mercy upon us and upon the whole world.
If my Lord is asking me to be merciful, I need to trust completely in Him and have the assurance that He’ll judge Fr. Cutie with mercy because He is the judge of mercy.
I love my priests so much that besides of the rosary and the Divine Mercy Chaplet, I pray a perpetual novena for all priests. My High Priest will bring them back.
St. Michael the Archangel, defend our priests!
St. John Viannie, pray for all priests!
St. Joseph, protect our priests!
J
JReducation
Guest
You are right, these are writing of the great saints of the Church. But they are not the teaching of the Church. The Church takes these in context.
For example, we know that the citation alleged written by St. Francis was never written by him. First, he would never have written “O priests my brothers.” Our order is not an order of priests nor was our Holy Father a priest. In all his writings he write “My brothers” He only mentions priests when speaking about the honor that is due even to the most sinful priest. Second, the theology in that statement is not Francis’ theology. Our Holy Father’s theology regarding the priesthood and the Eucharist were very different as is evident in all of his other writings and it is not as elaborate as is this passage.
This passage is written by someone else, inspired by Francis, but it is not his. The same may be said about the other passages. They have to be taken in the context of the life of the person who allegedly wrote them. The Church is the only one who has the authority to discern that or in the case of those saints who were members of religious order, their religious communities also have the authority and training to discern what their founders said and what they meant, because they have the entire deposit of spirituality of their founders.
Let us be careful not to do like the Protestants and throw quotes out there without context and exegesis and without certainty of what the proper authorities think about them, whether the Church holds such statements as dogma or commentaries by great saints. A dogma and a commentary are not the same.
Currently, the position of Pope Benedict XVI and the bishops is that a priest in Father Albert’s situation, remains a priest and may not even be suspended from priestly ministry, unless he disobeyes his bishop.
Archbishop Favalora offered Fr. Albert a leave of absence to think and pray and Fr. Albert accepted it willingly. Also, when confronted, Fr. Albert did not deny the truth. Finally, Fr. Albert has been under the guidance of spiritual directors, bishops and enclosed monks for a while due ot his internal conflict with celibacy. We’re not talking about an evil man here. We’re talking about a sinful man.
We’re all sinful. But does not make us evil?
Always go with the voice of the Church. As Vincent de Paul said, “Be children of the Church.”
When we cite, let us cite in the manner that the Church uses these citations. Let us go to the sources and see how the Church interpretes these statements and whether they are true or not. As you can see, the one allegedly by St. Francis is of unkown origin, but attributed to him.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
S
soflochristmas
Guest
soflochristmas;5194496:
I don’t think I was. Mat 18:6 is repeated in Luke 17 and Mark 9, three of the four Gospels. What does the Catechism have to say about the passage?Let us be careful not to do what Fundamentalist Protestants do and begin quoting scripture out of context, without proper exegesis, and without the Church’s interpretation, only to apply it randomly where we believe it applies.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
CCC
2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the 1903
authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who
are scandalized. It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: "Whoever
causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be
better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck
and to be drowned in the depth of the sea."86 (Mat 18:6, 1 Cor 8:10-13) Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others. Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep’s clothing.87 (Mat 7:15)
The Catechism refers to two other scriptural passages in its “exegesis” of these passages. What do THOSE passages say about this subject?
1 Cor 8:10
For if any one sees you, a man of knowledge, at table in an idol’s temple, might he not be encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols? 11 And so by your knowledge this weak man is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died. 12 Thus, sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ.
Mat 7:15
"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? 17 So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. 18 A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus you will know them by their fruits.
Living a Christian Life
Chapter 4: Repentance, The Sacrament of Penance, and the Struggle Against Sin
Question E: What Are One’s Responsibilities for Others’ Moral Welfare?
2. One Should Avoid Leading Others into Sin
Further exegesis:Code:Leading others into sin usually is called "scandal" by Catholic moralists. The word will be used here, but it requires clarification. Scandal has some irrelevant senses. In current English, the word often is used to refer to sins people consider especially shameful, whether or not they occasion anyone else's sin. In this sense, any public disgrace is a scandal. In the New Testament, Jesus, his gospel, and the cross are said to scandalize, inasmuch as they challenge people to faith and repentance, which some unfortunately choose to refuse. Sometimes, too, scandal in Scripture refers to any sort of obstacle presented by one person to another's doing what is right--in this sense Jesus called Peter a "scandal" (see Mt 16.23).*67 Here, however, scandal has a precise sense, concerned with one agent's responsibility for another's sin. In this sense, nobody gives scandal to those who are either already fully determined to sin or entirely unlikely to sin.*68
Pontifical Council for Social Communications
“Ethics in Communication”
Jesus taught that communication is a moral act: “For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render an account for every careless word they utter; for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” (Mt 12:34-37). He cautioned sternly against scandalizing the “little ones”, and warned that for one who did, “it would be better… if a great millstone were hung round his neck and he were thrown into the sea” (Mk 9:42, cf. Mt 18:6, Lk 17:2).
JPII
“To the Youth of the World”
And as for all those who try to destroy your youth by holding out various temptations and illusions, I must remind them of the words of Christ with which he speaks about scandal and those who cause it: “Woe to him by whom temptations to sin come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea, than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin.”(75)
Grave words! Especially grave in the mouth of him who came to reveal love. But whoever carefully reads these words of the Gospel must feel how deep is the antithesis between good and evil, between virtue and sin.
S
soflochristmas
Guest
St. Athanasius Defense Against the Arians, Chapter II
Now if the author of it wrote with an ambition of exhibiting his power of language, such a practice surely is more suitable for other subjects: in ecclesiastical matters, it is not a display of eloquence that is needed, but the observance of Apostolic Canons, and an earnest care not to offend one of the little ones of the Church. For it were better for a man, according to the word of the Church, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the sea, than that he should offend even one of the little ones(4). But if such a letter was written, because certain persons have been aggrieved on account of their meanness of spirit towards one another (for I will not impute it to all); it were better not to entertain any such feeling of offence at all, at least not to let the sun go down upon their vexation; and certainly not to give it room to exhibit itself in writing.
St. Athanasius de Synodis Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia, Part I, History of the Councils
Next, this too was on the mind of myself and my true brethren here, and made us anxious, the impropriety of this great gathering which we saw in progress; for what pressed so much, that the whole world was to be put in confusion, and those who at the time bore the profession of clergy, should run about far and near, seeking how best to learn to believe in our Lord Jesus Christ? Certainly if they were believers already, they would not have been seeking, as though they were not. And to the catechumens, this was no small scandal; but to the heathen, it was something more than common, and even furnished broad merriment(1), that Christians, as if waking out of sleep at this time of day, should be enquiring how they were to believe concerning Christ; while their professed clergy, though claiming deference from their flocks, as teachers, were unbelievers on their own shewing, in that they were seeking what they had not. And the party of Ursacius, who were at the bottom of all this, did not understand what wrath they were storing up (Rom. ii. 5) against themselves, as our Lord says by His saints, ‘Woe unto them, through whom My Name is blasphemed among the Gentiles’ (Is. lii. 5; Rom. ii. 24); and by His own mouth in the Gospels (Matt. xviii. 6), ‘Whoso shall offend one of these little ones, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea, than,’ as Luke adds, ‘that he should offend one of these little ones’ (Luke xvii. 2).
St. Augustine Treatise on the Priesthood, Book 1
For if for him who causes one only, and that the least, to stumble, it is profitable that “a great millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be sunk in the depth of the sea;”(2) and if they who wound the consciences of the brethren, sin against Christ Himself,(3) what then will they one day suffer, what kind of penalty will they pay, who destroy not one only, or two, or three, but so many multitudes? For it is not possible for inexperience to be urged as an excuse, nor to take refuge in ignorance, nor for the plea of necessity or force to be put forward. Yea, if it were possible, one of those under their charge could more easily make use of this refuge for his own sins than bishops in the case of the sins of others. Dost thou ask why? Because he who has been appointed to rectify the ignorance of others, and to warn them beforehand of the conflict with the devil which is coming upon them, will not be able to put forward ignorance as his excuse, or to say, “I have never heard the trumpet sound, I did not foresee the conflict.” For he is set for that very purpose, says Ezekiel, that he may sound the trumpet for others, and warn them of the dangers at hand. And therefore his chastisement is inevitable, though he that perishes happen to be but one. “For if when the sword comes, the watchman does not sound the trumpet to the people, nor give them a sign, and the sword come and take any man away, he indeed is taken away on account of his iniquity, but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hands.”(1)
Now if the author of it wrote with an ambition of exhibiting his power of language, such a practice surely is more suitable for other subjects: in ecclesiastical matters, it is not a display of eloquence that is needed, but the observance of Apostolic Canons, and an earnest care not to offend one of the little ones of the Church. For it were better for a man, according to the word of the Church, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the sea, than that he should offend even one of the little ones(4). But if such a letter was written, because certain persons have been aggrieved on account of their meanness of spirit towards one another (for I will not impute it to all); it were better not to entertain any such feeling of offence at all, at least not to let the sun go down upon their vexation; and certainly not to give it room to exhibit itself in writing.
St. Athanasius de Synodis Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia, Part I, History of the Councils
Next, this too was on the mind of myself and my true brethren here, and made us anxious, the impropriety of this great gathering which we saw in progress; for what pressed so much, that the whole world was to be put in confusion, and those who at the time bore the profession of clergy, should run about far and near, seeking how best to learn to believe in our Lord Jesus Christ? Certainly if they were believers already, they would not have been seeking, as though they were not. And to the catechumens, this was no small scandal; but to the heathen, it was something more than common, and even furnished broad merriment(1), that Christians, as if waking out of sleep at this time of day, should be enquiring how they were to believe concerning Christ; while their professed clergy, though claiming deference from their flocks, as teachers, were unbelievers on their own shewing, in that they were seeking what they had not. And the party of Ursacius, who were at the bottom of all this, did not understand what wrath they were storing up (Rom. ii. 5) against themselves, as our Lord says by His saints, ‘Woe unto them, through whom My Name is blasphemed among the Gentiles’ (Is. lii. 5; Rom. ii. 24); and by His own mouth in the Gospels (Matt. xviii. 6), ‘Whoso shall offend one of these little ones, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea, than,’ as Luke adds, ‘that he should offend one of these little ones’ (Luke xvii. 2).
St. Augustine Treatise on the Priesthood, Book 1
For if for him who causes one only, and that the least, to stumble, it is profitable that “a great millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be sunk in the depth of the sea;”(2) and if they who wound the consciences of the brethren, sin against Christ Himself,(3) what then will they one day suffer, what kind of penalty will they pay, who destroy not one only, or two, or three, but so many multitudes? For it is not possible for inexperience to be urged as an excuse, nor to take refuge in ignorance, nor for the plea of necessity or force to be put forward. Yea, if it were possible, one of those under their charge could more easily make use of this refuge for his own sins than bishops in the case of the sins of others. Dost thou ask why? Because he who has been appointed to rectify the ignorance of others, and to warn them beforehand of the conflict with the devil which is coming upon them, will not be able to put forward ignorance as his excuse, or to say, “I have never heard the trumpet sound, I did not foresee the conflict.” For he is set for that very purpose, says Ezekiel, that he may sound the trumpet for others, and warn them of the dangers at hand. And therefore his chastisement is inevitable, though he that perishes happen to be but one. “For if when the sword comes, the watchman does not sound the trumpet to the people, nor give them a sign, and the sword come and take any man away, he indeed is taken away on account of his iniquity, but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hands.”(1)
S
soflochristmas
Guest
- For ere now some men who have escaped these snares, have been caught by others widely differing from these. For even a neglected appearance, unkempt hair, squalid dress, and an unpainted face, simple behavior, and homely language, unstudied gait, and unaffected voice, a life of poverty, a despised, unpatronized and lonely condition, have first drawn on the beholder to pity, and next to utter ruin; and many who have escaped the former nets, in the way of gold ornaments and perfumes, and apparel, and all the rest, of which I have spoken as connected with them, have easily fallen into these so widely differing from them, and have perished. When then both by poverty and by riches, both by the adornment and the neglect of the personal appearance, both by studied and unaffected manners, in short by all those means which I have enumerated, war is kindled in the soul of the beholder, and its artifices surround him on every side, how will he be able to breathe freely while so many snares encompass him? and what hiding-place will he be able to find–I do not say so as to avoid being forcibly seized by them (for this is not altogether difficult)–but so as to keep his own soul undisturbed by polluting thoughts?
Such examples, therefore, brethren, it is right that we should follow;(13) since it is written, “Cleave to the holy, for those that cleave to them shall [themselves] be made holy.”(14) And again, in another place, [the Scripture] says, “With a harmless man thou shalt prove(15) thyself harmless, and with an elect man thou shalt be elect, and with a perverse man thou shalt show(16) thyself perverse.”(17) Let us cleave, therefore, to the innocent and righteous, since these are the elect of God. Why are there strifes, and tumults, and divisions, and schisms, and wars(18) among you? Have we not [all] one God and one Christ? Is there not one Spirit of grace poured out upon us? And have we not one calling in Christ?(19) Why do we divide and tear to pieces the members of Christ, and raise up strife against our own body, and have reached such a height of madness as to forget that “we are members one of another?”(20) Remember the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, how(21) He said, "Woe to that man [by whom(21) offences come]! It were better for him that he had never been born, than that he should cast a stumbling-block before one of my elect. Yea, it were better for him that a millstone should be hung about [his neck], and he should be sunk in the depths of the sea, than that he should cast a stumbling-block before one of my little ones.(1) Your schism has subverted [the faith of] many, has discouraged many, has given rise to doubt in many, and has caused grief to us all. And still your sedition continueth.
Pope St. Gregory the Great, Book of Pastoral Rule
Whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea (Matth. xviii. 6). By the millstone is expressed the round and labour of worldly life, and by the depth of the sea is denoted final damnation. Whosoever, then, having come to bear the outward show of sanctity, either by word or example destroys others, it had indeed been better for him that earthly deeds in open guise should press him down to death than that sacred offices should point him out to others as imitable in his wrong-doing; because, surely, if he fell alone, the pains of hell would torment him in more tolerable degree.
St. Jerome Against Jovinianus
And I do not say this because I am bold enough to disparage holy men, but because it is one thing to live under the law, another to live under the Gospel. David slew Uriah the Hittite and committed adultery with Bathsheba. And because he was a man of blood–the reference is not, as some think, to his wars, but to the(5) murder–he was not permitted to build a temple of the Lord. But as for us,(6) if we cause one of the least to stumble, and if we say to a brother(7) Raca, or(8) use our eyes improperly, it were good that a millstone were hanged about our neck, we shall be in danger of Gehenna, and a mere glance will be reckoned to us for adultery.
Yes let’s be sure to understand Mat 18:6 in context and with the “mind of the Church”. HE has become a scandal and many people WILL fall away as a result.
Let’s also be sure not to suffer from “clericalism”.
Let us pray for Fr. Cutie.
R
RobbyS
Guest
He has an agenda, all right.…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.
J
JReducation
Guest
S
Shin
Guest
To JR: You claim what I have cited is out of context. You claim that some of what I have quoted is false. You claim the teachings of the Bishops, Doctors, and Fathers of the Church are not the teachings of the Church.
The last is swiftly dismissed. I recall how you respond when you agree with a bishop by the way too, but here we have saints, doctors, fathers and bishops…
You make many claims…
I will set aside the St. Francis quote for this time since it is in the same tenor of all the others, and so in content pure – but perhaps return to it later. It is from a book by a Franciscan Religious, ‘The Works of St. Francis of Assisi’.
The main quotes are however from ‘Dignity and Duties of the Priest’ by St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, the great Doctor of Moral Theology and their genuine nature is undeniably attested to. I hope I don’t need to mention that the Matthew quote is too.
Anyone who thinks these quotations are out of context may swiftly turn their pages to the work, ‘Dignity and Duties of the Priest’ by St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori.
In this work, he cites the Fathers, the Saints, and the all the Church authorities on these matters. You will find I fear, that what I have said is not out of context, but actually, I have been sparing. Some of it is from sections entitled ‘Material for Sermons’.
The prophets in scripture all preached the Word of God given to them. Consider how they spoke.
It is not mercy to fail to preach repentance, it is not charity to fail to preach fear and hatred of sin, it is not just to fail to explain the penalty.
We are sinners, not good men. Those who commit objectively mortal sins, who live in sin, are evil doers, and the source of their malice is clear.
And lest it is too much work for some people to turn to the pages, I will cite a lengthy excerpt without editing to prove the context.
Material for Sermons:
Such the chastisement that the priest that falls into sin merits on account of his infinite ingratitude to God. He owes more gratitude to God than others, because he has received greater favors, says St. Gregory. The ungrateful, as a learned author says, deserve to be deprived of all the favors that they have received. Jesus Christ has said: To every one that hath, shall be given, and he shall abound; but from him that hath not, that also which he seemeth to have shall be taken away? Upon those that are grateful to God he shall pour his graces more abundantly; but the priest who after so many lights and so many Communions turns his back on God, despises all his favors, and renounces his grace, shall be justly deprived of all. The Lord is liberal to all, but not to the ungrateful. “Ingratitude,” says St. Bernard, “dries up the sources of divine favors.”
Hence St. Jerome justly says, “There is not in the whole world a monster to be compared with a priest in the state of sin, for the unfortunate man will not bear with correction.” And St. John Chrysostom, or the author of the “Imperfect Work,” writes: “When lay persons sin, they easily amend. As for priests, once bad, they are incorrigible.” To priests that fall into sin, we may, with St. Peter Damian, apply in a special manner the words of the Apostle: It is impossible for those that were once illuminated, have tasted also the heavenly gift, and were made, partakers of the Holy Ghost, and are fallen away, to be renewed again to penance? Who has been more enlightened than the priest? Who has tasted more frequently the heavenly gifts, and partaken more abundantly of the Holy Ghost? St. Thomas says that the rebel angels remained obstinate in sin, because they sinned in view of the light; and St. Bernard writes that God shall treat the sinful priest in a similar manner, that is, “the priest having become an angel of the Lord, must expect either the reward or the reprobation of an angel.” " Our Lord said to St. Bridget: “I see on earth pagans and Jews, but I see none so wicked as priests; they are guilty of the same sin that Lucifer committed.” And let it be observed in this place, that, according to Innocent III., many things are venial sins in seculars that are mortal in ecclesiastics."
To priests we may also apply what St. Paul says in another place: The earth that drinketh in the rain which cometh often upon it, … and bringeth forth thorns and briers, is reprobate and very near unto a curse, whose end is to be burnt. What showers of grace has the priest continually received from God! And, after all, he brings forth briers and thorns instead of fruit. Miserable man! he is on the point of being reprobated, of receiving the final malediction, and of being sent in the end, after so many favors from God, to burn forever in the fire of hell. But what dread has the priest that turns his back on God of the fire of hell? Priests who fall into sin lose light, and lose also the fear of God. Be hold, the Lord himself assures us of this. If I be a master, where is My fear, saith the Lord of Hosts, to you, O Priests, that despise My name? St. Bernard says that priests falling from on high remain so immersed in their malice, that they forget God, and disregard the divine threats to such a degree that the danger of their damnation has no longer any terror for them.
The last is swiftly dismissed. I recall how you respond when you agree with a bishop by the way too, but here we have saints, doctors, fathers and bishops…
You make many claims…
I will set aside the St. Francis quote for this time since it is in the same tenor of all the others, and so in content pure – but perhaps return to it later. It is from a book by a Franciscan Religious, ‘The Works of St. Francis of Assisi’.
The main quotes are however from ‘Dignity and Duties of the Priest’ by St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, the great Doctor of Moral Theology and their genuine nature is undeniably attested to. I hope I don’t need to mention that the Matthew quote is too.
Anyone who thinks these quotations are out of context may swiftly turn their pages to the work, ‘Dignity and Duties of the Priest’ by St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori.
In this work, he cites the Fathers, the Saints, and the all the Church authorities on these matters. You will find I fear, that what I have said is not out of context, but actually, I have been sparing. Some of it is from sections entitled ‘Material for Sermons’.
The prophets in scripture all preached the Word of God given to them. Consider how they spoke.
It is not mercy to fail to preach repentance, it is not charity to fail to preach fear and hatred of sin, it is not just to fail to explain the penalty.
We are sinners, not good men. Those who commit objectively mortal sins, who live in sin, are evil doers, and the source of their malice is clear.
And lest it is too much work for some people to turn to the pages, I will cite a lengthy excerpt without editing to prove the context.
Material for Sermons:
Such the chastisement that the priest that falls into sin merits on account of his infinite ingratitude to God. He owes more gratitude to God than others, because he has received greater favors, says St. Gregory. The ungrateful, as a learned author says, deserve to be deprived of all the favors that they have received. Jesus Christ has said: To every one that hath, shall be given, and he shall abound; but from him that hath not, that also which he seemeth to have shall be taken away? Upon those that are grateful to God he shall pour his graces more abundantly; but the priest who after so many lights and so many Communions turns his back on God, despises all his favors, and renounces his grace, shall be justly deprived of all. The Lord is liberal to all, but not to the ungrateful. “Ingratitude,” says St. Bernard, “dries up the sources of divine favors.”
Hence St. Jerome justly says, “There is not in the whole world a monster to be compared with a priest in the state of sin, for the unfortunate man will not bear with correction.” And St. John Chrysostom, or the author of the “Imperfect Work,” writes: “When lay persons sin, they easily amend. As for priests, once bad, they are incorrigible.” To priests that fall into sin, we may, with St. Peter Damian, apply in a special manner the words of the Apostle: It is impossible for those that were once illuminated, have tasted also the heavenly gift, and were made, partakers of the Holy Ghost, and are fallen away, to be renewed again to penance? Who has been more enlightened than the priest? Who has tasted more frequently the heavenly gifts, and partaken more abundantly of the Holy Ghost? St. Thomas says that the rebel angels remained obstinate in sin, because they sinned in view of the light; and St. Bernard writes that God shall treat the sinful priest in a similar manner, that is, “the priest having become an angel of the Lord, must expect either the reward or the reprobation of an angel.” " Our Lord said to St. Bridget: “I see on earth pagans and Jews, but I see none so wicked as priests; they are guilty of the same sin that Lucifer committed.” And let it be observed in this place, that, according to Innocent III., many things are venial sins in seculars that are mortal in ecclesiastics."
To priests we may also apply what St. Paul says in another place: The earth that drinketh in the rain which cometh often upon it, … and bringeth forth thorns and briers, is reprobate and very near unto a curse, whose end is to be burnt. What showers of grace has the priest continually received from God! And, after all, he brings forth briers and thorns instead of fruit. Miserable man! he is on the point of being reprobated, of receiving the final malediction, and of being sent in the end, after so many favors from God, to burn forever in the fire of hell. But what dread has the priest that turns his back on God of the fire of hell? Priests who fall into sin lose light, and lose also the fear of God. Be hold, the Lord himself assures us of this. If I be a master, where is My fear, saith the Lord of Hosts, to you, O Priests, that despise My name? St. Bernard says that priests falling from on high remain so immersed in their malice, that they forget God, and disregard the divine threats to such a degree that the danger of their damnation has no longer any terror for them.
S
Shin
Guest
But why should that excite our wonder, since by committing sin the priest falls from an immense height into a deep pit, in which he is bereft of light, and therefore despises all things; verifying in himself the words of the Wise Man: The wicked man when he is come into the depth of sins, contemnth? The wicked man: this wicked man is the priest that sins through malice: into the depth; by a single mortal sin, the priest sinks to- the depth of misery and remains in blindness; contemneth; and thus he despises chastisements, admonitions, the presence of Jesus Christ who is near him on the altar: he despises all, and blushes not to surpass in malice Judas, the betrayer of Jesus Christ. Of this our Lord complained to St. Bridget: " Such priests are not my priests, but they are real traitors." Yes, real traitors, who avail themselves of the celebration of Mass to outrage Jesus Christ by sacrilege.
But what shall be the unhappy end of such priests? Behold it: the land of the saints he hath done wicked things, and he shall not see the glory of the Lord? The end shall be, first, abandonment of God, and then the fire of hell. But, Father, some may say, this language is too terrific. Do you, they ask, wish to drive us to despair? I answer with St. Augustine, “being myself frightened, I frighten others.” Then a priest who has offended God since his ordination may ask, Is there no hope of pardon for me? Yes, there is hope, if he repents and entertains a horror for the evil he has done. Let such a priest, then, thank the Lord with his whole heart if he, too, finds himself aided by divine grace; but he must instantly give himself to that God who calls him. " Let us listen to the Lord," says St. Augustine, “while he is calling us, lest he may turn a deaf ear to us when he judges us.”
But what shall be the unhappy end of such priests? Behold it: the land of the saints he hath done wicked things, and he shall not see the glory of the Lord? The end shall be, first, abandonment of God, and then the fire of hell. But, Father, some may say, this language is too terrific. Do you, they ask, wish to drive us to despair? I answer with St. Augustine, “being myself frightened, I frighten others.” Then a priest who has offended God since his ordination may ask, Is there no hope of pardon for me? Yes, there is hope, if he repents and entertains a horror for the evil he has done. Let such a priest, then, thank the Lord with his whole heart if he, too, finds himself aided by divine grace; but he must instantly give himself to that God who calls him. " Let us listen to the Lord," says St. Augustine, “while he is calling us, lest he may turn a deaf ear to us when he judges us.”
D
DeusVeritas
Guest
I never said Mr. Alberto Cutie (as he now calls himself) is an evil person. Nor do I have anger to the point where I need to forgive him. You don’t understand my anger. It is not anger that is tinged with hate but righteous anger that I as a Christian have the right to feel.
I am not judging the state of his soul and have said repeatedly that I look for God to bring conversion into his heart. I have not condemned him to a judgement of hell in any way shape or form.
The heaviness in my heart is not for myself but for Christ and those who because of weak faith, feelings of hurt due to previous scandals or doubts, have had their weak faith, hurt feelings and doubts magnified because of this scandal. I can only imagine the pain Our Lord must be feeling at so many of His flock straying away from the light of His truth.
And it seems that Mr. Cutie is not taking advantage of his leave of absence very well in order to reflect, for I have seen him do one interview after another on TV just about every single day.
I will pray for him when my heart is moved to do so but at the moment it is not. My prayers are with Christ and His lost sheep who have been deeply hurt by this scandal.
R
rguerra
Guest
The reading from this morning’s mass may be fitting for Father Alberto:
Acts 1:15-17, 20-26
Peter stood up in the midst of the brothers and sisters
(there was a group of about one hundred and twenty persons
in the one place).
He said, "My brothers and sisters,
the Scripture had to be fulfilled
which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand
through the mouth of David, concerning Judas,
who was the guide for those who arrested Jesus.
Judas was numbered among us
and was allotted a share in this ministry.
For it is written in the Book of Psalms:
Let his encampment become desolate,
and may no one dwell in it.
and:
May another take his office.
It is true that judgment is for God alone but it is also clear from the Holy Scriptures, CCC, the writings of the Saints, etc. that there is a price to pay when a priest betrays his promises to our Lord and His Church.
For too long, our RCC leaders have been too lenient on these type of cases, transferring guilty priests from parish to parish, paying out money to hush cases, etc. Enough ! I am sick and tired of all these scandals. In my opinion, the Church hierarchy should take harsh and swift actions against these types of priests. Yes, God Almighty in his infinite mercy will forgive them but we can not tolerate this type of behavior that tarnishes and blasphemies our Church.
Our Holy Roman Catholic Church deserves much better than this !
Acts 1:15-17, 20-26
Peter stood up in the midst of the brothers and sisters
(there was a group of about one hundred and twenty persons
in the one place).
He said, "My brothers and sisters,
the Scripture had to be fulfilled
which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand
through the mouth of David, concerning Judas,
who was the guide for those who arrested Jesus.
Judas was numbered among us
and was allotted a share in this ministry.
For it is written in the Book of Psalms:
Let his encampment become desolate,
and may no one dwell in it.
and:
May another take his office.
It is true that judgment is for God alone but it is also clear from the Holy Scriptures, CCC, the writings of the Saints, etc. that there is a price to pay when a priest betrays his promises to our Lord and His Church.
For too long, our RCC leaders have been too lenient on these type of cases, transferring guilty priests from parish to parish, paying out money to hush cases, etc. Enough ! I am sick and tired of all these scandals. In my opinion, the Church hierarchy should take harsh and swift actions against these types of priests. Yes, God Almighty in his infinite mercy will forgive them but we can not tolerate this type of behavior that tarnishes and blasphemies our Church.
Our Holy Roman Catholic Church deserves much better than this !
L
LUKBAN
Guest
I believe judgement belongs to God alone when it come to the ultimate destiny of man’s soul, but while on earth we judge human actions as right or wrong based on earthly law, policies and regulations instituted by human society. Otherwise, without these measures there will be chaos. In my first reply, I have no idea who is Fr. Cutie until CNN had him on the news. How sad. I gave a very objective comment on his case in my first reply. Now? I think the main issue is trust, honesty and betrayal. I think the parishioners in his parish felt betrayed by his dishonesty because he did not trusted his parishioners that they will understand him. Fr.Cutie is human-may fall in love and may decide to raise a family. But he kept his romantic activities a secret until a nosy reporter caught him in picture in his romantic rendezvous. Sad, he could have told his superior and parishioners and asked them to understand him and asked the bishop or pope for dispensation. I think the whole issue became scandalous because of his dishonesty especially that he is a person wearing a “Roman Collar” who leads a flock. We had a similar case in one of the parish church where I attend mass occasionally. A very young priest probably in his first year in the vocation feel in love with one of the lady parishioner. He told his superiors and the parishioners about it, asked for dispensation and he was released from his vow of celibacy. He got married and probably lived happily ever after. The point is falling in love is not a sin, but be honest with it especially if there is an impediment (vow of celibacy). I don’t know if becoming an Anglican Priest is a solution because it will not erase the stain of dishonesty, betrayal and mistrust in his person. I think the best thing to do is to pray for him and stop crucifying him. He made a mistake, let’s forgive him and Let him decide his own destiny. Probably he need a time out. No matter what happen he will always be a catholic priest till he die (with restrictions), whether he become an Anglican Priest or not or have a family outside priesthood.
S
soflochristmas
Guest
J
JReducation
Guest
This is not a question about the laity’s rights. Those of us who are either religious or priests know that the laity has rights. The point here is one of authority. The question is who has the authority to fix this problem and what authority do they have?
As has been stated by the archbishop himself, Fr. Albert’s behavior is unacceptable.
However, the rules that govern the preisthood and religious men in solemn vows are pretty much the same. The bishop cannot excommunicate him for this. He can only suspend him, if he continues to cause a problem of scandal for the archdiocese.
Given the many interviews that Fr. Albert has been granting, I would not be surprised if that were to happen. If it does happen, Father has brought that on himself. Even calling himself Mr. Cutie is wrong. He is not a dispensed priest. He is on leave of absence. I have not heard him refer to himself as Mr. Cutie, but I don’t disbelieve it. He has done some things thare are imprudent. That’s unfortunate. These imprudent acts, after the discovery of the relationship, can lead to a point where the straw breaks the camel’s back and the archibishop may suspend him. I’m not privy as to whether this will happen. I just know that it can.
As to a dispensation from the promise of celibacy, that’s up in the air. That’s not in the hands of the archbishop. Only Fr. Albert can request it. Niether the archbishop, the laity nor the Vatican can impose that on him. Even if he requests it, the Holy Father has already told those of us who are in solemn vows or are ordained, that it will not happen, except for very grave reason. Grave reason is ambiguous, but it’s up to the Holy See to decide what they consider grave.
For a priest to lose his clerical state the Holy See has to determine that the crime deserves it. A romance is not big enough for this. It is usually reserved for something heinous.
If the Vatican denies the dispensation, the archdiocese is stuck with the individual. You cannot have a priest without an Ordinary. The archdiocese can take away his faculties, but he is still a priest of the archdiocese.
Another option that can be taken by the Holy See, which has taken with religious brothers in solemn vows and with some secular priests, is not to grant a dispensation, but to grant a suspension of the promise of celibacy. When the promise is suspended, the individual is free to join the faithful until such time as the situation changes and the individual can return to his former status. He would continue to be a priest, but would not be in a displinary postion. He would live his life as any secular man, without exercising the ministry. But the door remains open to return.
From the few interviews that I have seen, I believe that Fr. Albert is a very confused man. That’s an understatement. I get the sense that he’s floundering between many options.
My prayer for him is that he makes a choice that is in keeping with Church law. This will allow him to remain in good standing with the Church.
If he were to convert to the Episcopal communion, he would still be a validly ordained priest, but not a Catholic. Basically, he would have denied his faith. There is a difference between remaining an ordained priest and remaining an ordained Catholic priest. He would be in a worse state than the Orthodox priests. At least they are in apostolic and sacramental communion with the Church, even though they are not in communion with Peter. But the Epsicopal communion is an independent entity with no apostolic or sacramental communion with the Catholic or the Orthodox Churches.
This is a very delicate situation and the only person who can make a choice as to what he wants to do is Father Albert himself. Even the Church cannot decide for him.
We can make objective judgments of what we see and what he says, but we cannot make subjective judgments regarding his soul. This is the point that I was trying to make before. Everything that the saints, the Fathers and the Doctors of the Church say is objective, not subjective.
The Church does not apply these statements to the individual, but to the circumstances. Also, we must remember, that what the Fathers and Doctors of the Church teach must not be in conflict with Church teaching, but it is not necessarily Church teaching. A good example are the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Bonaventure. They are among the giants of the Church doctors. But not everything they wrote is a doctrine of the Church. It simply is not in conflict with doctrine and is very helpful in shedding light on the Church’s faith.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
G
Gabriella_San_S
Guest
Father Cutie has been exacted a*** very severe mercy*** by God already by having his sin and shame exposed… now he seems to be calling down God’s justice because he is not only*** persisting in his sin***, but is adding to it by the*** justification of his sin***-clearly the most objective judgment that any of us can render here, is that Father Cutie is unrepentant. He can only receive God’s mercy and our forgiveness as a** public sinner**, if he asks for it, correct?
I believe if any of us could witness some remorse and firm purpose of amendment, we’d all be** judging** him a little less and praying for him a little more.
In this case, it would be very prudent for his Bishop to order him to **stop spreading the scandal ** and compounding it with his self-adulating interviews.:bighanky:
Yes, he is most in need of God’s mercy…now, if he would only pursue it ***wholeheartedly! *** :stretcher:
G
Gabriella_San_S
Guest
You are so very wise. I thank you so much for your clarity and forthrightness on this very painful matter. Yours is the attitude of Christ. Your quotes were perfect and extremely appropriate with regard to Fr.Cutie’s present public posture. Again, thank you.
Pax Christi!
T
Timbothefiveth
Guest
That’s just terrible he might leave the faith for this. I’ll be praying for him.
G
Gabriella_San_S
Guest
J
JReducation
Guest
The issue here is that there is only so much that a bishop can do. If Fr. Albert were a religious, the superior has more authority over a religious than a bishop has over a secular priest. The most a bishop can do is suspend the priest. Rumor has it that Fr. Albert has already incurred a suspension. From that point on, there is nothing that a bishop can do to stop a priest from making public appearances or speaking in public.
Secular priests only owe a bishop obedience on pastoral matters, assignments, and discipline, but never on spiritual matters. The bishop is not a religious superior. Religious superiors have authority over the spiritual welfare and behavior of their subjects, bishops do not.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Secular priests only owe a bishop obedience on pastoral matters, assignments, and discipline, but never on spiritual matters. The bishop is not a religious superior. Religious superiors have authority over the spiritual welfare and behavior of their subjects, bishops do not.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
- Status