Customer Review

30 of 39 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Trying to be Honest, January 4, 2011
This review is from: Dilemma: A Priest's Struggle with Faith and Love (Hardcover)
Depending on your point of view, Cutie's tactic in this book will have different resonances. He apparently makes very broad charges against the Catholic Church, and he is a very believable person to be making them because of his intricate involvement with the Archdiocese of Miami at high levels of administration of important branches of their "mission", like radio. Yet, he apparently demurs on being specific as to names, except broadly on the former Archbishop. This may strike the critical reader as a bit suspicious, because if you are going to make an assertion you better have the courage to back it up with detail. But the critical reader might be forgetting then that part of the very dilemma someone like Cutie would be facing is the very real "Guess Who, Don't Sue" aspect. So the choice might have been whether to make the observations at all, if for prudential reasons you cannot be specific given the very formalized venue of a published book. In this regard, I think Cutie's forthrightness is to be appreciated very much, even though he does not seem to name names. Especially since it must be clear that he could have! The other aspect that the critical reader might home- in on is the sense of great opportunism in the story he presents. Such a critical reading would quickly highlight the fact that the sort of double- life he describes, which after all effected him personally more than anyone else, may not have been the most salient difficulty on an ethical level. To be more specific, if Cutie had such profound insights into the ethical difficulties of the Roman Catholic positions on moral issues going quite far back, then the advice he dispensed by very public means, and the moral conundrums for others who might have heard such orthodox- sounding advice would leave the reader with a quandary as to some culpability on his part for potential anguish caused others. Cutie seems to deal with this by expressing a general sense of disappointment in himself. But it is all very broad, from every report. I am certainly not suggesting that this lovely guy should spend a lot of his time in self-recrimination, far from it. He is already doing the world a lot of good with the level of honesty he has achieved. And further, there may be a more important yet tawdry explanation for some of his travails. I am referring to what should be obvious to any candid observer of the Catholic Church. That is that a very handsome guy would surely have a quite vexed path in the Catholic priesthood. Since so much of his story has become public, by his own intent, I think it is crucial to focus on this matter. Many who have passed through the arms of the Church, and had something others found attractive, will be able to sympathize with what this guy must have had to navigate. For few can have had quite the difficulties of a guy with potentially movie-star appearance, and photo- congeniality. I attended the same seminary in Miami as Cutie, and I well remember the general type of seminarians that occupied the place, and I can only imagine what the guy went through. In a way this can only have increased when he got into the priesthood, because if my experience with many priests in Miami taught me anything it was that a de facto covertness was expected. In fact one of my strangest memories about that time in my life is how many conversation actually started with the very words: "Don't tell anyone, but..." So having endured so much of this in his adult life, I think the critical reader can cut this man some slack if he is still giving some obeisance, conscious or unconscious to this psychological set-up. I think it is in this sense we should parse the very strange fact, given his recent revelations, that just last year on national TV he was still referring to the Church as "a wise mother." From this perspective what looks like opportunism may have been at bottom a simple attempt to salvage some from his predicament: handsome beefcake amidst the salivating clerical wolf-pack. This is a potentially very disempowering psychological set-up for a guy, and certainly could have caused hard to distinguish traumas. When looked at from this perspective I think we can see that some of the man's choices become more ethically legible in a positive direction. But however one construes the matter, it is clear that now he is doing a solid good for society by trying to be honest. Personally, I am grateful to him.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
Name:
Badge:
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
 
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in
 

Comments

Tracked by 2 customers

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 15 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jan 6, 2011 4:45:13 PM PST
And what is Alberto Cutie's Gospel message? That if you fall in love you should break your vows to indulge in a sexual relationship with that person? Where is that in the Gospel? Maybe Alberto Cutie could have handled it differently by loving Ruhama chastely. Love is not a sin. We can express love in many ways. I love a priest very much. I am a happily married woman with four children. If I were to love this priest in any way other than chastely, I would hurt many people that I love - and that is a sin. How does a person love someone chastely? Well, my solution was to commit to praying for my beloved priest. I pray a Rosary for him and his church every Sunday morning. I make a prayer pilgrimage to his church (which is an hour drive from my home) each First Friday and I pray for him and his church in front of the Blessed Sacrament when I get there. I do not and have never gone to him for confession. The maximum contact I have had with him is to shake his hand after Mass when I go to visit him about five times a year. Love is what makes prayers loud. I believe my prayers have helped him be a good priest as he in turn has helped me be a better Christian. Maybe what the world needs, instead of a book about Alberto Cutie giving in to temptation, is a book by a priest who did not give in to temptation but succeeded in being what he was called by God to become - a Good Shepherd. My beloved priest could write that book but he is much too humble to probably even consider it. All he cares about are the people God has placed in his care. He seeks God's glory, not his own - which is one of the reasons he is so loveable.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 6, 2011 5:54:20 PM PST
I don't want to argue with you at all. There are, and I have met them very beautiful, overall attractive people, of course in the larger not-just-looks sense, who became priests and are very inspiring. They are an inspiration and their choice of celibacy is a curious and special gift to those around them. I acknowledge this as a real possibility. But your love for this priest, which I find honestly touching, betrays also a sense that most are not that way. I was "in" for five years and I interacted with a few great priests, but I could count them on two hands, maybe one. One was my spiritual directory for a time in Miami. Another was a Spanish professor. The other was a biblical professor in graduate school. They were unaffected and very real, and honest. An inspiration as human beings. I thank God for them, because without them, the experience would have been overwhelmingly negative. But the sad news is that generally the priesthood seems to attract the dregs. I don't mean to be cruel, but the time is long past for dissembling on these matters. In my adult life, after I got out of the seminary, I met a so much better level of person intellectually, personally , and morally. That fact speaks for itself.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 6, 2011 6:59:15 PM PST
Perhaps what those priests needed were people who knew how to love them in a way that would help them be better priests/Christians. I always thought that the Apostles would not have been able to do their jobs without Mother Mary and the other women praying for them. Love makes prayers loud and I have felt a most beautiful feeling come over me when someone I love is praying for me be they male or female. Its like being a dry plant that all of a sudden gets a watering can full of water poured over it, it goes into your whole soul and is a most remarkable experience. I think that when priests fall for the temptation of committing sin by a sexual act - they close the door to ever discovering this amazing form of love.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 6, 2011 7:56:02 PM PST
Let me try to translate what you have said, in an orthodox Catholic way, in a way that would make sense to, I believe, a lot more people. If we do not live in a authentic web of connectedness, with prayers and fine energy sent our way, we lose out. We are prey to very base people, and debasing actions in life. But here is the difficult part. There must be a more or less honest and integral ambience for that connectedness. It is not easy to find in the world today. When and if we find it we should be mightily grateful to the ultimate power in the universe as we might see it. For all the same "ducks in a row" in a bad or dishonest organization produces a different result.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 7, 2011 8:18:33 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 7, 2011 8:20:34 AM PST
NH wrote: "Its like being a dry plant that all of a sudden gets a watering can full of water poured over it, it goes into your whole soul and is a most remarkable experience. I think that when priests fall for the temptation of committing sin by a sexual act - they close the door to ever discovering this amazing form of love."

Would you provide examples from the book that contradict and others that support your conclusion that "...they [priests] close the door to ever discovering this amazing form of love." I am asking to re-frame the discussion by citing passages from the book as a way of grounding us in a common denominator of the text.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2011 9:32:18 AM PST
Here is an excellent cherry on this cake. The views which show the importance of being earnest, from the very mouth of a young man who attended the same seminary that Alberto Cutie and others like myself did in Miami, St. John Vianney College Seminary. He has posted his views on his website called Catholic Omnia which mostly contains extremely earnest repititions of the Catholic Catechism. I think what is crucial to note in this young man's take on things is that his criticism is based on the notion that "it is not our place" to question Church teaching at all in any way. This "it is not our place" notion really is striking, and speaks to the current state of Catholic intellectual life generally. Further, it is very striking that in terms of the gay issues in the clergy which Cutie addressed so forthrightly, this young man's only real argument against it is to marvel that someone is "making the argument", in other words breaking the code of silence into which all seminarians are de facto initiated. But we will let Mr. Thomas Pringle, former seminarian, speak for himself:

"Response to Padre Alberto and his Dilemma
January 3rd, 2011 Tom Pringle

Father Alberto Cutie preaches | Credit: AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez
Just when we thought we had heard the last of Father Alberto Cutié (a.k.a. "Father Oprah"), he makes his presence known once more in a rather desperate attempt to gain more than the typical 15 minutes of shame...I mean fame. Not surprisingly, he is coming out in defense of his own actions, but, then again, I guess that's human nature and I shouldn't be so critical. However, when, in your attempt to justify your actions, you attack someone or something else, that's where I, and many others, take issue.

Before we get into what "Padre Alberto" is saying now, let's review; shall we?

Father Alberto Cutié was ordained a Roman Catholic Priest in 1995 for the Archdiocese of Miami. During his years of priestly service in the Catholic Church, Padre Alberto quickly became somewhat of a "rock star" as the host of several nationally and internationally syndicated television and radio programs. (Don't worry, I'm not praising the accomplishments of the man here; it's a simple fact.) His international reputation, in my humble opinion, definitely had a role in his demise as a Catholic priest.

You might recall: towards the beginning of summer 2009, pictures of Father Alberto were uncovered by a popular Mexican celebrity gossip magazine that caught him in a rather compromising position with a woman on the public beaches of Miami. Remember, as a Catholic priest, Cutié promised to carry out his ministry while living in a state of celibacy, which means not getting married and remaining chaste.

When Father Alberto was confronted by the Archdiocese, he did not deny the relationship with the woman. Instead, he professed his love for her and his desire to leave the priesthood. Now, if that was the case, that's how we all should've left it! Cutié should've have quietly left the priesthood and prevented any further scandal for a local church that has, unfortunately, had its share of scandals over the years. But, that's not how he left it.

The magazine cover that started it all
A few days after his meeting with Archdiocesan officials-staying true to his name-Father Oprah made his rounds on the morning television shows. On the CBS Early Show back in May 2009, regarding celibacy, Cutié stated: "I think it's a debate that's going on in our society, and now I've become kind of a poster boy for it. But I don't want to be that. I believe that celibacy is good, and that it's a good commitment to God."

Wow...maybe an ounce of humility does exist in Father Oprah. Oh, wait...maybe not. Jump to the present day.

Tomorrow, January 4, 2011, Father Alberto releases his new book, Dilemma: A Priest's Struggle with Faith and Love. (He's trying to make another buck off of his story. Is there a movie deal in the works too, because that would make him a rather large sum of money and cause an increase in fame?) I am not critical of him releasing a book. After all, it's his life story and he can publish it if he wants. However, what I am being critical of is what he actually writes in the book about the Church, the priesthood, and celibacy.

{On a side note: I tend to reserve judgment on these kinds of things until the book is actually released and I can read the passages for myself, but this calls for an early response.}

In a recent article in the Miami Herald, it is explained that the book details exactly how Father Oprah feels about his decision to leave the Church: "Cutié vehemently defends his decision to leave the Catholic Church and shares his increasing disenchantment with it over 14 years as a priest."

My response: Father, if you felt so disenchanted, why didn't you take that to your spiritual director? As a former seminarian who studied in the Archdiocese of Miami, I know for a fact that spiritual direction is valued in that local church. If he was having such a problem, it was his responsibility to examine that in the spirit of prayer and reflection.

Let's give him the benefit of the doubt, though. If Cutié did take this issue to his spiritual director and no solution came from those talks, then he should have taken it to another priest-a brother whom he trusted and respected.

The article goes on to quote Cutié's new book:

Secretly, Cutié writes in the book, he had come to doubt much of the church's teachings as early as 2003, after several run-ins with church hierarchy and after a growing disillusion with `bishops too concerned with their own images' during child sex-abuse crises.

Hmm, that's an interesting comparison from someone who was plastered all over the Spanish language television stations while he was a priest. After all, you don't get a name like Father Oprah from your parishioners. If Cutié had issues with certain teachings of the Church, should he have continued on in ministry? As a priest, it is his role not to object to the teachings of the Church, but to believe and teach them through the eyes of faith. However, we cannot do this without the help of the Holy Spirit (CCC 179).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

180: "Believing" is a human act, conscious and free, corresponding to the dignity of the human person.

181: "Believing" is an ecclesial act. The Church's faith precedes, engenders, supports, and nourishes our faith. The Church is the mother of all believers. "No one can have God as Father who does not have the Church as Mother." (St. Cyprian)

182: We believe all "that which is contained in the word of God, written or handed down, and which the Church proposes for belief as divinely revealed." (Paul VI | Credo of the People of God §20)

As Catholics, we believe that the Holy Spirit began guiding the Church on the Feast of Pentecost. Therefore, everything handed down from the Apostles and bishops since then has been divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit. So, it isn't our place to object to the teachings of the Church because we simply disagree with them; objecting to those beliefs means objecting to the role of the Holy Spirit. (Granted, I am no theologian, just sharing information from the Catechism.)

According to the Herald article, Cutié then goes on to make his most erroneous claim in the book. He cites celibacy and the recent clergy sex abuse scandals as the reasons for the dwindling number of vocations in the church. Okay, stop right there! This is where I have my biggest issue with Fr. Alberto.

In the last several years, the number of young men studying at the Archdiocese's St. John Vianney College Seminary and at St. Vincent de Paul Regional Seminary in Boynton Beach has been extraordinary! Last year, SJVCS saw numbers it had not seen in 35 years! That's after the revelations of clergy sexual abuse and with knowledge of the requirement of clerical celibacy. How do I know this?? I was one of the nearly 80 men studying there.

The young men-and sometimes not so young men-who are studying to be priests are in the seminary because they want to make a difference in the world. They want to give everything they have to the Lord. When a young man enters the seminary, he doesn't know he is going to be a priest. (I'm a perfect example of that.) Young men go to the seminary because they feel a tug on their hearts that they cannot ignore; they desire to serve the Church.

As I have stated before, celibacy is a way to make the Kingdom of God present here on earth. If you read Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body, you will see that those who choose celibacy for the Kingdom share the same vocations to love as those who marry, but manifest this vocation in a different manner. Furthermore, celibacy is not a rejection of sexuality, but a living out of the deepest meaning of sexuality-union with Christ and his Church (Ephesians 5:31-32).

In order for a young man to first discern a call to the priesthood, he must first discern a call to celibacy. If celibacy is something that the Lord is OFFERING as a GIFT and the young man is WILLING to ACCEPT, (notice my words here) then the priesthood may be for him. That is the bottom line. I would ask Father Cutié to refrain from making judgments on something he couldn't handle or accept.

When he entered the seminary some 22 years ago, Father Alberto knew what the requirements were for priestly ministry. He obviously had no problem with those requirements then, nor did he take issue with them during the first years of his priesthood. The minute he began having doubts about celibacy should have been a sign for him to have a serious chat with his spiritual director.

Another claim that Cutié makes in Dilemma regards the sexual orientation of many Catholic priests and bishops: "There are so many homosexuals, both active and celibate, at all levels of clergy and Church hierarchy that the church would never be able to function if they were really to exclude all of them from ministry."

Are you seriously making that claim, Father? This just goes to show how disenchanted Cutié became with the Church. The big question, which I have no answer for, is why?

Ultimately, we are going to have to wait to read the exact claims and explanations made by Father Alberto in his new book. Needless to say, though, you won't find me running to the bookstore to buy a copy of it tomorrow. It is my belief that Father Alberto saw his name slipping from the limelight and couldn't handle that. This book is just another desperate attempt for him to get additional attention and cause further scandal for the Church.

Grow up, Padre Alberto! Your 15 minutes of fame are over!

Note from TP:

If anyone thinks I have been a little overly critical or judgmental of Fr. Alberto, I do apologize. While I do respect Father Alberto as a human being and as a Catholic priest, I do not respect the choices he made. The opinions and thoughts I share above are my frustrations with someone's total disregard for the Church. That's where I take issue with Father Alberto.

If, by chance, Father Alberto is reading this, I wish to tell him that he is in my prayers.

May God bless all of you and may He continue to send the Holy Spirit to guide and strengthen the Church and each one of us."

There is a further significance to this young man's remarks. Namely that he raises, almost reflexively the notion of famous homosexual Andy Warhol, of the now- proverbial "fifteen minutes of fame". And this case is indeed very revelatory of broader themes of that very issue. And therefore further revelatory of intricate ideas of public image as they touch on religion in general, and the Catholic religion in particular. Catholicism, as many have noted, even Catholics themselves, has a real image problem today. (Websites like the American Papist with gadfly Thomas Peters seem to concentrate on nothing else). Partly that seems based on an intrinsic contradiction between Catholic spirituality and modern society. Much of Catholic spirituality is based on the virtue of Suffering, of course in a redemptive context. Without getting into theological nuances, to put it mildly, this is not an attractive virtue for casual public attractiveness for a religion in society. Thus a a seeming very stringent tight-rope must be walked by Catholic apologists. They want to defend the Church's view of Suffering, but they don't want to make it unappealing. A tall order, to say the least, in the contemporary context. Enter a tall, handsome priest, preaching the orthodox view, to an audience (Latin America) where there still might be some resonance for such views. But this goes, then, to the very question of "why" this particular priest?? A relatively short time ago I had never heard of Father Alberto -- and I am someone who watches Spanish TV. His phenom status had eluded me. But I have watched some clips from his show on Youtube and elsewhere. It is very striking just how average his advice seemed to me in terms of the Catholic context. That is, it seemed precisely like what one might hear at an average parish, no worse, and no better. Nor did he display particular "charisma" looking at it critically. Despite the moniker given to him apparently, he did not have remotely the clever faux-casual invasiveness of Ms. Oprah Winfrey, laying bare people's lives according to her rather predictable assumptions in life. No, in every single way that I could determine, this was an average priest from an average parish. Except one. He was very good looking; and what's even more important, photographed extremely well.

This whole Cutie Affair is ripe for a real Ockham's Razor explanation. On this view, Cutie's looks were "used" to smuggle in the contradictions intrinsic to the Catholic view in contemporary society, and make them palatable in some way because they were coming from a good-looking guy. With this in mind we can understand better how all of Cutie's statements reveal a sense of the trauma of the whole thing for him. It is not just how he was treated after the scandal broke. Rather it is because someone who repeatedly and consistently identifies himself as someone with average clerical desires of being a parish priest, was transmogrified in the maw of over-arching Church ambition into a sort of freak. I am not saying that there is anything whatsoever freakish about the guy personally, quite the opposite. But that he fulfilled a role of grand ambition, not his own, but the Church's. Of course, real life and love got in the way. But the fact that there seems to be so much more to this story than what has been said, is made more agreeable if we look at this whole matter under these strictures of Ockham's Razor. The man deserves his own privacy for those things he wishes to keep private. His public trajectory, on this reading, is a symptom of the very vexed ambitions of the Catholic Church in contemporary society. And the ultimate failure of his career in the Roman Catholic Church speaks vastly more about the Church's grand and often implacable ambitions, than about his own.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2011 3:15:36 AM PST
Thomas Pringle added a parenthetical paragraph to his 03 January 2011 entry in "Catholica Omnia" concerning Father Alberto Cutie: "{On a side note: I tend to reserve judgment on these kinds of things until the book is actually released and I can read the passages for myself, but this calls for an early response.}"

"...But this calls for an early response." Why? Does Mr. Pringle [age 22 or 23; graduated high school in 2006] perceive an imminent threat to the Church or her ministries and mission? Is there reason not to exercise patience as would exemplify humility in Christ? Perhaps Mr. Pringle wishes to make a personal confession to unburden his own soul.

My conjecture about confession came to mind as I read six more recent entries in "Catholica Omnia," immediately following his post about Cutie, which copy and paste sections from the on-line Catholic Catechism concerning the "Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation" [Article IV, chapters iv-ix]. Such immediate juxtaposition of catechesis about repentance after admitting personal reticence to comment before examination gave me the impression that the soul of the writer suffered torment. Had he been tormented by his self-admitted rush to judge Father Alberto? Mr. Pringle alone can answer these questions.

Indeed, the focus of Mr. Pringle's entries from the Catechism is on the individual penitent. However, Peter Fuchs has implied an expanded view of confession and repentance in his comment concerning Father Alberto.

One cannot read anything in the on-line Catholic Catechism about the Church, "qua" institution, having been called by Christ to confess her sins, do penance and seek reconciliation. Yet, to borrow Fuchs's latent assumption about the culprit or sinner, the Church as a whole --as a system-- has sinned. The Church is the sinner. Evidence for my claim appears in a comment that Fuchs makes about Father Alberto, who "...was transmogrified in the maw of over-arching Church ambition into a sort of freak."

Fuchs continues: "I am not saying that there is anything whatsoever freakish about the guy personally, quite the opposite. But that he fulfilled a role of grand ambition, not his own, but the Church's." I would not expect anyone of Mr. Pringle's age group to comprehend the implications inherent in my assertion that the Church has sinned, even as any one individual inside the Church has sinned. Nevertheless, I believe that Fuchs has implied the same.

There are threats, by way of this statement, to a prevailing ecclesiology in the Roman Catholic Church. As my book review suggests, there exists an "objective disorder" in the systemic Church--a phrase that I borrowed and then paraphrased from a 1986 pastoral letter, and she must confess her disorder in repentance. Said another way, the Occam's razor applied to the many issues of abuse depicted in Father Alberto's memoir would be simple honesty. Cutie chose to be honest. Let's encourage one another to follow suit.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2011 10:27:33 AM PST
Thank you again Mr. Freeman! (Whom I wish to make clear I do not know, have never met, and have no prior contact with. Lege: this is not a tag team!)

Were it not for the fact that he chooses to run a public website, and harangue people like Cutie, I would not feel it fair to focus on Thomas Pringle. But he is very helpful as an exemplar of what is in fact happening to young people in the Catholic Church. I can say honestly, and with considerable personal experience, that a young seminarian- type like Mr. Pringle would NOT have been like this young man a quarter of a century ago. Even when I recall the most CONSERVATIVE seminarians, there was still a general sense that one had to in some way support one's orthodoxy with some thinking. The idea that it should just be precluded entirely with "it is not our place" was not even present amongst the most right-wing guys I knew in the seminary. And of course Mr. Pringle's simple mirroring of the Catechism on his website should be seen in precisely this light.

All this has to be distinguished strongly from the right, and the beauty of people holding a strong religious convictions for their own reasons. That is inviolable for anyone, and it is a grave matter, in my view, for anyone to mess with that. The issue is really a matter of emphasis. And it is in the area of emphasis that the Catholic Church apparently has changed almost beyond recognition in a mere twenty five years since I left. I was busy with a different career for much of that period and thus had scant time to look into what is happening. But now it is very much on my radar. And I am shocked.

I think Mr. Freeman shows real integrity in his views on the matter, as a devoted Catholic. But, in fact such views should not need to be singled out for special approbation. Every single organization on earth has problems, occasional creeps , and corruption. Members of such an organization must always have the maturity to expect real healthful change. That is a given, because we live on this planet, and aint't nothing perfect. But the question is does the organization have the maturity to self-correct?? That is really the issue. Granted, even with that, all organizations have the right of sui generis forms of correction, because wisdom tells us that sometimes in life the "cure is worse than the disease." But can anyone realistically say that with what has happened with the Catholic Church. In this regard their repeated attempt to write everything off as just an epiphenomenon of a larger corrupt society is really besides the point ultimately. The question is. again, whether an organization has some sui generis form of self-correction. the sad and dangerous fact is that apparently they do not on a systemic level. It boils down to considerations as simple as the following. If in the past they had leaders who encouraged corruption, do they now have al least somewhat better ones, who can at least improve the matter?? Well, we can gauge this by the very words of even the most right-wing conservatives mouthpieces like Raymond Arroyo on EWTN, who with George Weigel, has repeatedly bemoaned that no bishops were forced to resign because of the abuse scandal. So, don't my word for it, take theirs. They seem to have chosen a path of retrenchment and revanchism over any real meditation on the tragedies of recent years. I think Mr. Pringle's tendencies are just a manifestation of this much broader matter. The entire Cutie affair appears to have struck a nerve because it seems to have highlighted the real kinks in the revanchist machine they have been trying to tinker-with and oil -up to get it really purring. Because Cutie had so much name and face recognition, his story took on a meaning vis-a-vis the revanchist machine that it could not have had otherwise. In this sense, please note, their flamboyant over-reaction to the change-of-life of one priest is proof that his importance to them was 99% PR, or propagandistic in the old church sense. They felt they had achieved what all right wingers are dying for: they always desperately want to appear current and with-it and hip, even if they are preaching something very restricted. Alberto Cutie was their showdog. The guy, to his credit, woke up to the fact that the doing tricks for the Archbishop is not what he wanted. Good for him. And anyone who disparages him for it, is really, in my view, heartless.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2011 7:20:37 PM PST
I disagree with your post. Alberto Cutie was given the same job that previously belonged to Archbishop Fulton Sheen, a renown television Catholic preacher who is being considered for beatification. I don't think he was set up to be a "showdog" as you describe. He was sent to do what Jesus sent his disciples to do - Preach the Gospel. Why are the people of the Archdiocese so upset with Cutie? Because, like Judas, when he could not get his own way, he sold Jesus and his message out for money. This book, Dilemma, is his thirty pieces of silver. Silver made at the expense of all the priests (good and bad) and our decidedly good Archbishop Favalora.

Posted on Jan 9, 2011 7:53:21 PM PST
E. Tucker says:
I've not yet read the book, but am looking forward to it.

To throw a little levity into this. Fr. Cutie is what we semi-jokingly term as "Father-What-A-Waste". I'm sure he did have a 'vexed path' because of it.

As a (mostly) practicing Catholic, I believe that the church *does* need to change. The financially based policy of celibacy does not serve the church well in this day and time. Like many converts, Mrs. Heise appears to know her Catechism very well, but this isn't the dark ages, and if you blindly follow the 'rules' of the Church without question, you might as well go back and live during that time.
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›

Review Details

Item

4.4 out of 5 stars (147 customer reviews)
5 star:
 (105)
4 star:
 (19)
3 star:
 (8)
2 star:
 (1)
1 star:
 (14)
 
 
 
Used & New from: $0.01
Add to wishlist
Reviewer


Location: Washington, DC

Top Reviewer Ranking: 30,798,355