Fr. Cutie to Become an Episcopal Priest

[josie_L]

except that Holy Orders is a sacrament, which creates a real change of the spirit, right?

According to Father Sirico (on World Over) Father Cutie has excommunicated himself by leaving the CC, so therefore he can longer validly perform communion or any other sacrament.

 

[Writer]

What do you base this statement on?

He was a validly ordained Roman Catholic priest, yes, but once he converts to Episcopalian, is he still considered a Catholic priest? Do Episcopalians have valid form and matter? Is his intent to consecrate a reflection of Catholic intent or Episcopalian intent?

As far as I’m concerned, he is no longer a Roman Catholic priest.

On EWTN’s World Over last night, the priest being interviewed described him as in effect excommunicating himself when he knelt before the Episcopal bishop to break his Catholic vows.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

I can’t believe he would LEAVE the Church???

Isn’t there some way to stop being a Priest or to be relieved of his duties somehow so he could marry his girlfriend and remain Catholic just not as a Priest?

Yes, there is a process he could go through to be released from his vows. If he were released, he would live as a lay Catholic. A former pastor of mine did this. He is now validly married in the Catholic Church. He and his family attend another parish. He has no ministry in the parish. He may not administer the sacraments except in a real emergency situation (for example, giving absolution to a dying person at the site of an accident). Apparently Fr.Curie wants to continue to live as a priest and be married although he vowed to be celibate. If he had converted to the Episcopal church because he believed it to be the church that Christ founded and then he married, that would be the act of a man of integrity. However, the present situation seems to be one of convenience.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

According to Father Sirico (on World Over) Father Cutie has excommunicated himself by leaving the CC, so therefore he can longer validly perform communion or any other sacrament.

That was the original question. I think, according to the theology of the Latin rite, he still has the ability to consecrate the Eucharist and forgive sins (valid) but not the right to do so (licit). He has excommunicated himself but he is still an ordained priest since Holy Orders (like Baptism) imparts a permanent character to the soul.

 

[josie_L]

That was the original question. I think, according to the theology of the Latin rite, he still has the ability to consecrate the Eucharist and forgive sins (valid) but not the right to do so (licit). He has excommunicated himself but he is still an ordained priest since Holy Orders (like Baptism) imparts a permanent character to the soul.

Yes, but he is a married (or will be married) Priest does this not change anything? I mean he took his vows before God as a Catholic priest vowing celibacy and broke them, won’t this affect the “permanent” character of his holy orders? And for that matter was Luther also able to perform valid communion; I mean if every Priest who left the RC was able to still go about their priestly duties (validly), what would keep other priests from leaving the RC? Anyways, I don’t know much about this, except that, as per what was said on World Over, Cutie is no longer an RC priest.

 

[Religio71]

According to Father Sirico (on World Over) Father Cutie has excommunicated himself by leaving the CC, so therefore he can longer validly perform communion or any other sacrament.

Yes he has excommunicated himself by leaving the Catholic Church and joining the Episcopal Church. However, this does not affect the validity of his sacraments. Something that is valid produces the desired result. So excommunication does not affect the validity of the Eucharist. It does mean that his sacraments will be illicit. This means that he is not authorized to celebrate the sacraments. So, he can validly consecrate, but he is not authorized to do so. This is similar to the previous situation with priests of the SSPX.

However the difference between the SSPX and Father Cutie is that the SSPX still believe(d) in the Real Presence/Transubstantiation, performed the Tridentine Mass, etc. So they were still essentially Catholic. Father Cutie will now be an Episcopal priest, meaning there are different liturgical services, and various beliefs on the Real Presence. How does this affect his ability to consecrate the Eucharist? It seems that if he no longer believes in the Real Presence, he won’t be able to consecrate the Eucharist, even if he still can. If he does believe in it, then it could be that he would be giving Episcopalians a valid but illicit (in the eyes of the Catholic Church) Sacrament.

 

[GKC]

Yes he has excommunicated himself by leaving the Catholic Church and joining the Episcopal Church. However, this does not affect the validity of his sacraments. Something that is valid produces the desired result. So excommunication does not affect the validity of the Eucharist. It does mean that his sacraments will be illicit. This means that he is not authorized to celebrate the sacraments. So, he can validly consecrate, but he is not authorized to do so. This is similar to the previous situation with priests of the SSPX.

However the difference between the SSPX and Father Cutie is that the SSPX still believe(d) in the Real Presence/Transubstantiation, performed the Tridentine Mass, etc. So they were still essentially Catholic. Father Cutie will now be an Episcopal priest, meaning there are different liturgical services, and various beliefs on the Real Presence. How does this affect his ability to consecrate the Eucharist? It seems that if he no longer believes in the Real Presence, he won’t be able to consecrate the Eucharist, even if he still can. If he does believe in it, then it could be that he would be giving Episcopalians a valid but illicit (in the eyes of the Catholic Church) Sacrament.

Again, intent inheres in the individual, not in the liturgy or the institution. In the discussions over Apostolicae Curae, this point is made clear. It matters not whether he is performing the confection as an Anglican, or as a RC. If his intent is the minimum that the RCC requires, which is to do what the Church intends (and that, whether he believed it or not, which is why an atheist can baptize, in the classic example), he meets the RCC requirement for valid intent. And there is no reason to suppose he would not, as an Anglican believe precisely what many Anglicans affirm on the Real Presence: Trent, Session XIII, canon 1 (and, in the mirror image of this, there is no way to know if he really affirmed the Real Presence as an RC, which is why the act is taken to demonstrate the intent). And again, there is nothing in the Anglican rite which is not valid, as shown by its adoption (and not even in its most orthodox form), by the RCC, in the Anglican Use/Book of Divine Worship. Your assumptions are incorrect, as to the RCC position on form and intent. Now, if he tried to confect the sacrament using rice cakes and beer, then invalid matter. And if he made up a ritual on his own, invalid form. And if there was a reason to suppose that he was not intending to do what the Church does (that is, a reason to make a determinatio ex adiunctis to the contrary), then invalid intent. Otherwise, a valid and illicit Eucharist. Because there is a valid minister, operating illicitly.

It is why a schismatic, or apostate or heretical or excommunicated bishop may still validly consecrate and ordain, conveying valid orders, assuming he was himself validly consecrated (see Ott, p. 458).

GKC

Anglicanus Catholicus

 

[GKC]

Yes, but he is a married (or will be married) Priest does this not change anything? I mean he took his vows before God as a Catholic priest vowing celibacy and broke them, won’t this affect the “permanent” character of his holy orders? And for that matter was Luther also able to perform valid communion; I mean if every Priest who left the RC was able to still go about their priestly duties (validly), what would keep other priests from leaving the RC? Anyways, I don’t know much about this, except that, as per what was said on World Over, Cutie is no longer an RC priest.

Nothing, according to the RCC, affects the permanent character imparted. It is indelible, he is a priest forever.

GKC

 

[GKC]

According to Father Sirico (on World Over) Father Cutie has excommunicated himself by leaving the CC, so therefore he can longer validly perform communion or any other sacrament.

He may no longer licitly do so. Sacramentally, his priestly character is permanent, though.

GKC

 

[GKC]

That was the original question. I think, according to the theology of the Latin rite, he still has the ability to consecrate the Eucharist and forgive sins (valid) but not the right to do so (licit). He has excommunicated himself but he is still an ordained priest since Holy Orders (like Baptism) imparts a permanent character to the soul.

Yes.

GKC

 

[SpiritMeadow]

It is so wonderful to see so many Catholics expressing such concern for what goes on in the Episcopal Church. The fact that you worry about our Eucharist is deeply appreciated by us all.

 

[Religio71]

it isn’t really concern for the Episcopal Church but concern for one of our [former] priests.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

It is so wonderful to see so many Catholics expressing such concern for what goes on in the Episcopal Church. The fact that you worry about our Eucharist is deeply appreciated by us all.

I assume that is said ironically. But now that you have entered the discussion, do you think the Episcopalians who spare a thought for Fr. Curie are happy about his becoming an Episcopal priest?

Here is someone who was not faithful to vows he freely took. Now it’s ok with the Episcopal church for him to marry. If he should later prove unfaithful to the marriage vows how would they view him? Still OK?

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Yes, but he is a married (or will be married) Priest does this not change anything? I mean he took his vows before God as a Catholic priest vowing celibacy and broke them, won’t this affect the “permanent” character of his holy orders? no

And for that matter was Luther also able to perform valid communion; yes

I mean if every Priest who left the RC was able to still go about their priestly duties (validly), what would keep other priests from leaving the RC? their belief that this is the church Jesus founded and their faithfulness to their vows

Anyways, I don’t know much about this, except that, as per what was said on World Over, Cutie is no longer an RC priest. he can no longer act as one because he has left the church (excommunicated himself)

 

[aicirt]

I am glad he has found love, and glad he has found a way to go, but I do thank it sad that he couldn’t remain a Catholic Priest, and still have his wife, but I do not run the RCC, so it’s not my choice, I just voice my opinoin.

Last night, a priest, interviewed on THE WORLD OVER, EWTN, said no priest in the history of theRoman Catholic Church has been allowed to marry. There are those who had wives and became priests but no man once a priest has been allowed to marry.

Because of the differences between the Episcopal Chruch doctrines and Roman Catholic, I don’t know how he can embrace it. I would imagine if he stayed Roman Catholic, he would not be able to receive the sacraments but could attend Mass.

 

[Hesychios]

…Because of the differences between the Episcopal Church doctrines and Roman Catholic, I don’t know how he can embrace it…

That is my thought as well.

Isn’t a priest typically the most theologically astute person in a community? If he was really in agreement with TEC theologically, he should have made the move long ago. What does this say about the nature of his ministry as a Catholic?

 

[SpiritMeadow]

it isn’t really concern for the Episcopal Church but concern for one of our [former] priests.

What exactly are you concerned about regarding him?

 

[Claire_from_DE]

That is my thought as well.

Isn’t a priest typically the most theologically astute person in a community? If he was really in agreement with TEC theologically, he should have made the move long ago. What does this say about the nature of his ministry as a Catholic?

Maybe he was sincere and theologically correct to begin with. I think the devil targets priests and we need to pray for them and support them in their vocations.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I assume that is said ironically. But now that you have entered the discussion, do you think the Episcopalians who spare a thought for Fr. Curie are happy about his becoming an Episcopal priest?

Here is someone who was not faithful to vows he freely took. Now it’s ok with the Episcopal church for him to marry. If he should later prove unfaithful to the marriage vows how would they view him? Still OK?

I think it was said with a question as to what exactly is at work here. I sense, and I am ready to be dead wrong, that some RC’s hope very much that Fr. Cutie cannot convect a valid Eucharist, presumably because they don’t want Episcopalians to have any such claim to this. Perhaps I am wrong. Otherwise I’m at a loss as to why there is all this extraordinary interest in a subject that should be of no real concern to a RC.

As far as I can discern from the Episcopal world, based on blogs, it seems most are taking a wait and see attitude. Fr. Cutie cannot practice as a priest in TEC for a year. He will be lay only. If at the end of that period, he is deemed appropriate for full duty as a priest, I assume that that would be proper. I cannot judge from afar that is certain.

I would agree that Fr. Cutie should have asked for release from his vows, or announced his intent to leave the church before being “caught.” Of course, many Catholic priests have not been faithful to their vows as we know, and most were not initially at least removed from priestly duties.

I see no essential ipso facto conclusion that because he did not follow his vows of chastity (presumably) that he will be at greater risk to be unfaithful in marriage. That is akin to comparing apples and oranges.

You are quite right, it is perfectly fine for a priest in TEC to marry. Most are. Our last priest, who retired left the RCC to marry and was a priest for 30 some years before his retirement. We loved him dearly. Both of our priests at present are married. One to another Episcopal priest and the other, our new rector to is married to someone in business. Both have grown children.

If a priest is unfortunate enough to have a failed marriage, I’m sure mostly we would feel sad. I can’t tell you what steps are gone through on the diocesan level regarding that. I’m not sure if a divorced priest can continue or not frankly. Divorce under any circumstances is sad indeed. We are all failed humans to one degree or another. We recognize that and have sympathy for anyone who is suffering in this manner. Jesus teaches that divorce is not acceptable. Like other things, we do our best, fail sometimes, and are forgiven and do our best not to repeat our failings.

 

[aicirt]

That is my thought as well.

Isn’t a priest typically the most theologically astute person in a community? If he was really in agreement with TEC theologically, he should have made the move long ago. What does this say about the nature of his ministry as a Catholic?

Absolutely! From EWTN, he seems to have done all this in one month. I think the Episcopal Church would want to interview him regarding his commitment. I would be thinking this is a little too convenient and wanting to be an Episcopalian should involve more than being able to take a wife.