Fla.'s 'Father Oprah' joins Episcopal Church

[Gabriella_San_S]

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

I need to respond to your words here, dear Brother in Christ, with all due respect…
That perhaps the secular priest doesn’t owe his obedience to his bishop in spiritual matters, though that seems very far fetched, but I would assume he does owe it to God by virtue of his vows and to his flock.
The issue here is so much more than Fr.Cutie’s suspension or not…if his Bishop cannot silence him, than the laity can surely stop giving him a platform for his disgraceful attitude and behavior. He has become a public menace. May God take swift justice for the sake of His Bride the Church!

 

[kentuckyliz]

If Fr Cutie goes over to the Episcopalian church, is his priest-seducin’ squeeze going with him? Or is she just going to move along to the next priest she can seduce?

You gotta wonder about those priest seducers. I think they get their jollies out of doing it. This one is particularly bad, she arranged a photographer to produce some evidence to bring the priest down. Yii.

 

[Roy5]

A COUPLE QUICK COMMENTS

1. When I first read about Fr. Cutie, my sympathy was with him. He is a normal man with normal desires, and it's sad that the Church doesn't permit him to marry the woman he loves.

 2. Marriage of the clergy would do a lot to cut down on scandal, and also attract thousands of fine young men who would make worthy priests. Normal men need normal and healthy outlets for the good-given gift of the sex drive. 

 3. The most tragic aspects of sex scandals in the Church have been two: (a) the way the hierarchy hid the problem, even denying that it existed; (b) its toleration of pedophiles who should have been convicted of sex crimes just as other citizens would have been. 

 4. The sex scandal has done enormous damage to the church and the fallout continues. It has helped destroy the 'Going My Way' image established by Bing Crosby years ago.

 5. If Dr. Cutie becomes an Episcopalian, fine. It's a good Christian group, even though I would find it hard to become one myself - for a variety of reasons. It's a short jump for most Catholics, however, and the local Episcopal Church here is full of ex-Catholics, many of them divorced and remarried, some gay or lesbian, but others who simply want the freedom of thought when it comes to matters doctrinal. 

 6. I saw the film on the workhouses to which unwed mothers were confined in Ireland, often for life! What an outrageous contradiction to the gospel of love that Christ gave us! It boggled my mind. Why did good Catholics accept and even cooperate with such infamy?

 

[DeusVeritas]

A COUPLE QUICK COMMENTS

1. When I first read about Fr. Cutie, my sympathy was with him. He is a normal man with normal desires, and it's sad that the Church doesn't permit him to marry the woman he loves.

 2. Marriage of the clergy would do a lot to cut down on scandal, and also attract thousands of fine young men who would make worthy priests. Normal men need normal and healthy outlets for the good-given gift of the sex drive. 

 3. The most tragic aspects of sex scandals in the Church have been two: (a) the way the hierarchy hid the problem, even denying that it existed; (b) its toleration of pedophiles who should have been convicted of sex crimes just as other citizens would have been. 

 4. The sex scandal has done enormous damage to the church and the fallout continues. It has helped destroy the 'Going My Way' image established by Bing Crosby years ago.

 5. If Dr. Cutie becomes an Episcopalian, fine. It's a good Christian group, even though I would find it hard to become one myself - for a variety of reasons. It's a short jump for most Catholics, however, and the local Episcopal Church here is full of ex-Catholics, many of them divorced and remarried, some gay or lesbian, but others who simply want the freedom of thought when it comes to matters doctrinal. 

 6. I saw the film on the workhouses to which unwed mothers were confined in Ireland, often for life! What an outrageous contradiction to the gospel of love that Christ gave us! It boggled my mind. Why did good Catholics accept and even cooperate with such infamy?

In all charity I ask did you come here to contribute to the discussion or to make a laundry list of what Joe or Jane Catholic has done bad? There are plenty of ‘bad deeds’ that been done by the faithful of other Christian denominations as well or do you only like to point out the plank in your brother’s eye?

Additionally, the Eastern Catholic rites do have married priests. No one forced Mr. Cutie to become a priest and he had the option of becoming an Eastern Catholic priest. He could of come clean with his Bishop about his relationship and struggles with celibacy. That’s called being a man and owning up to your actions.

I suggest before you cast your laundry list of stones and ask why did Catholic Joe or Jane not do this and that, that you first study alittle on the priesthood in the Catholic Church and not expect every single Catholic to be accountable for the actions of other Catholic’s.

 

[soflochristmas]

A COUPLE QUICK COMMENTS

1. When I first read about Fr. Cutie, my sympathy was with him. He is a normal man with normal desires, and it's sad that the Church doesn't permit him to marry the woman he loves.

Roy, which church do you belong to that allows unmarried people to put their hands down a women’s pants before marriage? I’ve heard of protesting the Catholic Church but this takes throwing out the gospel to new levels.

 

[soflochristmas]

A COUPLE QUICK COMMENTS

     2. Marriage of the clergy would do a lot to cut down on scandal, and also attract thousands of fine young men who would make worthy priests. Normal men need normal and healthy outlets for the good-given gift of the sex drive.

I seem to remember reading about married clergy in various non-Catholic churches being arrested for molesting girls and boys as well as comitting adultery. Are these things not considered “scandaleous” in your church? I’m trying to figure out why you would think being married and doing these things is NOT a scandal.

 

[soflochristmas]

A COUPLE QUICK COMMENTS

 2. Normal men need normal and healthy outlets for the good-given gift of the sex drive.

Was Jesus asking men NOT to be normal, healthy or exercise their "good [sic] given gift of the sex drive?

Mat 19:11-12 “…whoever can accept this [celibacy] ought to accept it.”

Mat 19:29 “And everyone who has given up houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands for the sake of my name will receive a hundred times more, and will inherit eternal life.”

Was St. Paul asking men NOT to be normal?

1 Cor 7:7-8 “I wish that all were as I myself am [celibate]. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.”

1 Cor 7:27 “Are you free from a wife, do not seek marriage.”

1 Cor 7:32-35 “I want you to be free from anxieties…unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord…the married man the interests of the world…his interests are divided.”

1 Cor 7:38 “So that he who marries his betrothed does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better.”

1 Cor 7:40 “But in my judgment she is happier if she remains as she is [celibate].”

1 Timothy 5:12 “…and will incur condemnation for breaking their first pledge.”

Rev 14:4-5 “These are they who were not defiled with women; they are virgins and these are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They have been ransomed as the first fruits of the human race for God and the Lamb. On their lips no deceit has been found; they are unblemished.”

 

[redrosetea]

From my favorite priest the Rev- Know- it- all, a faithful catholic priest…I guess Fr Cutie is the only person that ever had urges, the poor guy!

There is some famous priest from some tropical

country, Fr. Cutey, or some such, who was recently

caught smooching a bikini clad ingénue on a beach.

Good Grief! For a week, one would have thought

that tragedy had ceased and the press was bored!

So many empty-headed, hair-helmet news reporters

thought the incident called celibacy into question.

The poor fellow should be allowed to marry.

Fr. Cutey himself said that celibacy should be

optional. My thought about the incident was a bit

different. Celibacy isn’t the modern problem, chastity

is. The air heads who tell us what to think, be they

elected or anointed, don’t want to do away with

celibacy. They want to do away with chastity. If

Fr. Cutey were allowed to marry because he has,

well, “urges,” how many times should he be allowed

to marry in order to satisfy his natural “urges” if the

object of his “urges” puts on weight and develops an

irritating facial tick? All this from the progressive

media that believes one should, in all fairness, be

able to marry one’s pet iguana.

Marriage is not about urges. Both celibacy and

marriage, in the Christian understanding, are about

sacrifice. They are both ways in which we are called

to pour our lives out in love for others.

 

[redrosetea]

soflochristmas;5199390:

You are a gifted teacher! I hope you are working with the youth who need your wisdom so much.
I have a deep devotion to God’s Divine Mercy, and yet this scandal causes me such grief when the sin is public

and there is** no apparent remorse.** It sends such a terrible message to the young.** All** can be forgiven…but repentance is must and penance and restitution where indicated.
We must **all **be open to correction and accountability. But especially if our sin is a **public scandal. **:crying:

I watch a clip of him, he not only showed no remorse he acted quite happy about the way things still stand…There was no mention of marrying this woman , nor that he loved her…He only spoke of his strong attraction to her

He once held that same attraction to his other bride, the church, and he was an unfaithful bridegroom

We are all sinners to be sure, but we don’t all get on national TV and look for absolution, without being sorry, not caring about how our spouse is sullied in the process

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

A COUPLE QUICK COMMENTS

1. When I first read about Fr. Cutie, my sympathy was with him. He is a normal man with normal desires, and it's sad that the Church doesn't permit him to marry the woman he loves.

 2. Marriage of the clergy would do a lot to cut down on scandal, and also attract thousands of fine young men who would make worthy priests. Normal men need normal and healthy outlets for the good-given gift of the sex drive.

I heard a very wise priest address the issue of celibacy by pointing out that the vow in and of itself does not cause the deviant behavior. That’s like saying that the vows that are taken in marriage are the cause of adultery.
A “normal man” with “normal desires” is not permitted to have relations with a minor, with other men, with another man’s wife, his own children etc. etc. That logic is just nonsense.
Lifelong fidelity to a spouse is where the gift of our sexuality is expressed according to God’s plan!
Because you are not a Catholic, friend, you may not understand many things about the Church that Jesus Christ founded. Don’t you see that is why She suffers so much persecution in this world? You don’t hear much about other denominations in the news, do you? Only the One, True Church! But Jesus promised us… …
"the very gates of hell will not prevail against it…" May His justice come swiftly!
Peace be with you!

 

[CatholicLife]

He was suppose to be in a “spiritual retreat” but was caught in a luxury beach in California.

 

[JReducation]

I need to respond to your words here, dear Brother in Christ, with all due respect…
That perhaps the secular priest doesn’t owe his obedience to his bishop in spiritual matters, though that seems very far fetched, but I would assume he does owe it to God by virtue of his vows and to his flock.
The issue here is so much more than Fr.Cutie’s suspension or not…if his Bishop cannot silence him, than the laity can surely stop giving him a platform for his disgraceful attitude and behavior. He has become a public menace. May God take swift justice for the sake of His Bride the Church!

The issue is that secular priests do not make vows. Many people don’t know this. Secular priests make a simple promise of obedience to the bishop. This does not give the bishop control or authority over the interior life of the priests in his diocese. Canonically they are secular men. The bishop is responsible for their spiritual welfare, but is not their religious superior. He is their pastoral superior. There is the canonical difference between a bishop and a religious superior.

We all owe God obedience. We also owe obedience to the moral law of the Church. That has never been a question. The problem is that often people believe that bishops have more power than they have they have over their clergy.

I think the media is giving him the platform. My problem is that he is using the platform. But who can stop him?

As to justice, we leave that to God. The Church does what she can do in these cases and then waits, especially now that Pope Benedict has informed bishops and male religious superiors that they may not dispense, expel or excommunicate priests or religious brothers, because of the need for priests and consecrated men. He has also said that he will not grant dispensations, but wants every priest and brother to pray over their situations and work through a reconciliation. The only religious getting dispensations these days are religious sisters. Nuns in solemn vows are not getting dispensations either.

Our Holy Father wants us all to pray for unity and reconciliation. This came out very clear in his letter to the bishops concerning the SSPX bishops and priests and in his letter to the major superiors of men and to Congregation on the Clergy.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

He was suppose to be in a “spiritual retreat” but was caught in a luxury beach in California.

The pic were not taken in CA. They were on the beach around the corner from his parish. Fr. Albert was the pastor of a very afluent parish on Miami Beach. The whole incident was caught on cemera a few miles north.

For those who are wondering about the woman involved, I would not be too ready to throw stones at her. They are both adults and both know the Catholic Church’s position on celibacy.

They were friends for 10 years and the romance is two-years old. Father also did say on the Spanish language network that he does love the woman. He was asked about marriage and his response was tentative. I assumed, maybe incorrectly, that he is thinking about the options that the Archbishop gave him. None of them included marriage. That option is never offered to any priest in this situation.

The usual options are:

1. Incardination into another diocese that may want to take him.
2. Leave of absence up to five-years and return to the diocese.
3. Religious life, if a religious community will accept him

Unless a priest commits an action that is criminal, he cannot lose his clerical state. Of course he can never lose his priesthood. There is no such thing as an ex-priest. There are dispensed priests, but they remain priests for life. A dispensed priest may join the ranks of the faithful and receive the sacraments, including marriage. However, he must agree not to celebrate the sacraments, except in cases of life or death. If he does, the Eucharist and Baptism are valid, but ilicit. He may not validly absolve, except in case of life and death.

He can only be excommunicated if he commits a schismatic act, for apostosy, and for defiance of a papal order. There are a few other situations that don’t happen too often.

Hope this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Roy5]

A FEW MORE POINTS

** 1. “Normal urges” do not include such perversions as pedophilia, incest, and such**. And I also - of course - oppose infidelity (I was a faithful husband until I lost my beloved wife through the enormous sadness of her death. I’m sure she’s in heaven.) While I am pained that there is so much divorce, I do believe that divorce should be available. How many millions of Catholics have been alienated because their marriages fell apart. They did not go through the church divorce court (often a farce - their marraige was fine at the outset, but personalities, circumstances or whatever changed). When they remarried they automatically were ex-communicated. Ridiculous penalty when what they need is understanding, support and gradually a new love relationship. Instead, they are made to feel like lepers. So many leave the church, some to become Protestants that are less punitive in cases of divorce. Let God decide whether the divorce was acceptable. If their communion is invalid God will know and respond accordingly.

 **2. Whenever non-Catholics take issue with Catholic policies, lo, "we don't understand".** Both of my parents had Catholic antecedents - an ancestral uncle was an Archbishop - and I'm inclined to think I understand but simply disagree.

** 3, It’s true: Protestant clergy have had their problems, too,** although the Boston study that first unearthed this whole scandal reported that their problems have been much less. One major difference is that a hierarchy doesn’t exercise the same power over Protestant rank-and-file, and without such a hierarchy offenders did not receive the protection that priest-pedophiles and others received in past years. Most Protestant clergy are married, which is another key factor. They have an outlet for their God-given instinct to reproduce. That, after all, was the first commandment in the Bible: “Be fruitful and mulriply…” In this area, the Protestant clergy who have fallen seem to be largely store-front types, frankly, that is self-proclaimed ministers who haven’t attended seminary and such. As you know, Protestantism is such an amorphous term that it can apply to about anybody who claims to be a preacher, educated or not, legitimate or not.

** 4. But I don’t want to appear to be a basher. **My main interest is turning religion from a divider into a uniter. That’s why I give attention to these forums. I admire much about Catholicism, such as its health service and attention to the poor. Yes, I cannot accept some of its teachings, just as I do not accept many teachings espoused by conservative elements within Protestantism. I am not a Biblical literalist like most evangelical Protestants, and certainly don’t believe that Jehovah commanded Joshua to kill every inhabitant of Jericho or orderered Saul to annihilate every last Amalekite. Think of all the babies in the womb that would have murdered? Do you accept such Biblical atrocities as God-initiated?
**Again, God bless the whole world** - no exceptions. I try my best to follow the example and teachings of Christ, though turning the other cheek and loving my enemies is tough sometimes.

 

[soflochristmas]

Roy, I didn’t see any answers to my questions. Do you make a habit of avoiding direct questions on forums?

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

A FEW MORE POINTS

** 1. “Normal urges” do not include such perversions as pedophilia, incest, and such**. And I also - of course - oppose infidelity (I was a faithful husband until I lost my beloved wife through the enormous sadness of her death. I’m sure she’s in heaven.) While I am pained that there is so much divorce, I do believe that divorce should be available. How many millions of Catholics have been alienated because their marriages fell apart. They did not go through the church divorce court (often a farce - their marraige was fine at the outset, but personalities, circumstances or whatever changed). When they remarried they automatically were ex-communicated. Ridiculous penalty when what they need is understanding, support and gradually a new love relationship. Instead, they are made to feel like lepers. So many leave the church, some to become Protestants that are less punitive in cases of divorce. Let God decide whether the divorce was acceptable. If their communion is invalid God will know and respond accordingly.
.

Well then, Roy, Fr.Cutie doesn’t fit your “normal” definition. He committed a great infidelity and persists in defending himself partly because of well-meaning(?) dissenters like you who keep excusing him for having “normal” urges.

Jesus Himself condemns divorce right in the Gospel-and whether you take His words literally or not-the Catholic Church does.
And you are right in saying that non-Catholics and( many Catholics) still don’t understand the annulment process and other teachings, so **please do a little more careful study **on it before you misrepresent something you are ignorant about.
I’m sorry that your Catholic heritage ended up in schism.
May we all be one, as Jesus prayed, someday… God Bless you.

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

The issue is that secular priests do not make vows.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

You mean that celibacy is not a vow?

 

[JReducation]

A FEW MORE POINTS

** 1. “Normal urges” do not include such perversions as pedophilia, incest, and such**. And I also - of course - oppose infidelity (I was a faithful husband until I lost my beloved wife through the enormous sadness of her death. I’m sure she’s in heaven.) While I am pained that there is so much divorce, I do believe that divorce should be available. How many millions of Catholics have been alienated because their marriages fell apart. They did not go through the church divorce court (often a farce - their marraige was fine at the outset, but personalities, circumstances or whatever changed). When they remarried they automatically were ex-communicated. Ridiculous penalty when what they need is understanding, support and gradually a new love relationship. Instead, they are made to feel like lepers. So many leave the church, some to become Protestants that are less punitive in cases of divorce. Let God decide whether the divorce was acceptable. If their communion is invalid God will know and respond accordingly.

 **2. Whenever non-Catholics take issue with Catholic policies, lo, "we don't understand".** Both of my parents had Catholic antecedents - an ancestral uncle was an Archbishop - and I'm inclined to think I understand but simply disagree.

** 3, It’s true: Protestant clergy have had their problems, too,** although the Boston study that first unearthed this whole scandal reported that their problems have been much less. One major difference is that a hierarchy doesn’t exercise the same power over Protestant rank-and-file, and without such a hierarchy offenders did not receive the protection that priest-pedophiles and others received in past years. Most Protestant clergy are married, which is another key factor. They have an outlet for their God-given instinct to reproduce. That, after all, was the first commandment in the Bible: “Be fruitful and mulriply…” In this area, the Protestant clergy who have fallen seem to be largely store-front types, frankly, that is self-proclaimed ministers who haven’t attended seminary and such. As you know, Protestantism is such an amorphous term that it can apply to about anybody who claims to be a preacher, educated or not, legitimate or not.

** 4. But I don’t want to appear to be a basher. **My main interest is turning religion from a divider into a uniter. That’s why I give attention to these forums. I admire much about Catholicism, such as its health service and attention to the poor. Yes, I cannot accept some of its teachings, just as I do not accept many teachings espoused by conservative elements within Protestantism. I am not a Biblical literalist like most evangelical Protestants, and certainly don’t believe that Jehovah commanded Joshua to kill every inhabitant of Jericho or orderered Saul to annihilate every last Amalekite. Think of all the babies in the womb that would have murdered? Do you accept such Biblical atrocities as God-initiated?

  **Again, God bless the whole world** - no exceptions. I try my best to follow the example and teachings of Christ, though turning the other cheek and loving my enemies is tough sometimes.

Maybe the value of celibacy was not clearly explained to you. As a religious brother bound to celibacy until death by a solemn vow and a widower, I can tell you that celibacy and marriage both have their crosses and blessings.

Celibacy is not for everyone, neither is marriage. Therefore, the call to any state in life where celibacy is part of the bargain is not made to everyone, but only to those who receive the grace to live it. This is what Christ and Paul were referring to when they said that those who could, should. They knew that not everyone can, because not everyone receives the same gifts. Remember the parable of the talents.

That being said, I can tell you from personal experience that every Christian has a moral duty to do what is necessary for the salvation of his/her soul. For some of us, that means to embrace a life of celibacy. It is the means and the path that Christ gives some of us to achieve the mystical marriage between the soul and the Divine. Others receive a different path.

If we examine the first century Christians we find that Paul was celibate, as was John the Evangelist, John the Baptist, Mary the mother of the Lord, the Lord himself, and many other first century Christians. Celibacy has been part of the life of the Church since its foundation.

Those of us who embrace celibacy do so freely. No one forces us to become priests, monks, friars, religious brothers or religious sisters. There are also human conditions that require a life of celibacy, such as homosexuality. Sometimes celibacy is imposed by ones sexual development, such as the case of homosexual people and other times it is a moral duty, such as the priest or religious who must respond to Christ’s call for the salvation of his soul.

Those of us whom Christ has called to live in intimacy with him, through celibacy, have a moral obligation to follow the path faithfully. When we fall, we have the same obligation as any other sinner to get up and keep going. Throwing in the towel is not an option when you have been called by Christ to follow him down a particular path. It is not up to us to choose the path. Christ chooses the path. We are free to respond or decline the invitation to follow him down the path that he chooses for us. Nonetheless, as our holy father Francis said, “woe to those who do not do penance, who choose not to live a life of conversion to Christ.”

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Liraco]

Let God decide whether the divorce was acceptable. If their communion is invalid God will know and respond accordingly.

So then would it be ok to let people “gamble” on whether they’re committing adultery or not and let God tell them during judgment? The point of not allowing divorce and remarriage without a declaration of nullity is to make sure that they’re not sinning in the eyes of God. I wouldn’t want a church that allows people to bend the rules as they please because they feel it’s right. Divorce rates are so high because people don’t take marriage seriously anymore. Divorce is the easy escape to those “testing” marriage like abortion is the easy escape for the promiscuous.

As sister Rossalind Moss put it, Fr. Cutie is disordered in his passions, because even if he might have been married to that woman there’s no guarantee he’d be faithful to her. In fact, Fr. Cutie was already married to the Church and was indeed unfaithful to the vows he made. He’s got no excuse, and it’s sad to see his weakness used as a way to fault celibacy in the clergy.

Being a Catholic Priest is a sacrament and a serious commitment, just like a sacramental marriage isn’t to be taken lightly. If he knew he was going to be weak he should have asked the Lord for strength, but seems to have instead turned away from Him for a woman.

the local Episcopal Church here is full of ex-Catholics, many of them divorced and remarried, some gay or lesbian, but others who simply want the freedom of thought when it comes to matters doctrinal.

It’s sad to see people say “I’ll follow you Lord, but I’ll do it my way” as opposed to the right way which is the Church He founded.

@Soflochristmas: try to be less abrasive and confrontational please. Ask nicely:thumbsup:

 

[JReducation]

You mean that celibacy is not a vow?

Secular priests, also known as diocesan priests or institute priests such as SPXX or FSSP, Maryknoll, Opus Dei, Christ the King and several others, do not make a vow of celibacy. They are secular men. They make a simple promise of celibacy the day they are ordained deacons. This promise can be dispensed by the Church.

The Church has dispensed it for married ministers who convert to Catholicism and become priests. They may be married, as long as the marriage takes place before ordination. The Church does not require celibacy for priests in the Eastern rites. They too must be married before they are ordained deacons. You may never marry after ordination.

In the case of religious, those who belong to a religious order or a religoius congregation, we make a vow of celibacy, not a promise. A vow is a deeper bond to live in communion with Christ as the only spouse. Our religious family replaces our biological family. The community is my family, just as the wife and kids is the family of the typical Catholic.

If a religious brother, monk or friar violates the vow of celibacy he can receive absolution and continue his life. The vow is not terminated because one sins against chastity. The sin is confessed and you go on, as with any other sin. However, if you persist in the sin, such as living with a person in a relationship, you incur an automatic excommunication.

A secular priest does not incur an excommunication because he persists in living with someone. He is suspended, but he remains within the physical Church. This is possible, because he has not made a solemn vow. He has made a promise. He is still in a state of grave sin. This is the key point here.

When you make a vow of celibacy, you not only give up marriage and family, but you also take on a new family, the religious community that you have joined. When you do something like Father Albert did, you not only injure yourself and the people you serve, but you also commit an sin of grave injustice against your religiious community. Your community has the right to claim your love, your fidelity, your life, your cooperation and participation until death.

There is the difference between a promise of celibacy and a vow of celibacy.

By the way, secular priests do not make a vow of obedience either. They make a promise of obedience to the local bishop. Religioius make a solemn vow of obedience. This places more demands on the person and requires a detachment from self, self will, and self determination. Secular priests give up some self determination in terms of assignment and anything regarding their ministry. They retain control over their spiritual life, control over their self-will in matters that are not related to ministry, and self-determination in terms of the spirituality that they choose to follow.

As a Franciscan, I can’t choose to follow a Benedictine spirituality. I can admire and use many of Benedict’s teachings, as long as they are not in conflict with Franciscan tradition. I cannot decide for myself what to wear, how much money I need, what I have in my room, when I leave or enter the house, where I go and with whom, when I take vacation or where, how often I visit my family, even though I’m a widower and father of two adult children. I cannot make commitments or promises without permission. I cannot decide to change my job or my ministry. I cannot decide if I want to be a priest. Those decisions are made by my brothers and superior. I simply obey. The only control that I have is over matters of conscience. This is the case for every religious in a vow of obedience. The religious community has statutes that explicitly state what the person can do on his own and when he must get permission. The intensity and situations vary from one religious order to another.

For example, in my community, I would not be able to go to the beach and meet a woman. I would have to get permission to go to the beach, in the first place. Father Albert does not have that kind of vow of obedience. As a diocesan priest, he is free to decide with whom he associates, where he goes in his spare time and with whom. The bishop can set some guidelines, that is always his right. But bishops have to be very careful not to set so many guidelines that they turn secular priests into religious. They must protect the priest’s secular status.

I hope this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF