Catholic Church attacked in Cutié’s book

REMEMBER Fr Albert Cutié? He’s the handsome priest who sent shudders through the Catholic Church in 2009 when he abandoned Catholicism and married his sweetheart, Ruhama Canellis.

Well, tomorrow Cutié  – now an Episcopalian priest – has book out, and more hand-wringing is expected from the Roman Catholic Church, for it is reported here that “parts of it offer a scorching indictment” of the Church.

Albert Cutié

The book is called Dilemma: A Priest’s Struggle with Faith and Love (Celebra; 320 pages; $25.95), and in an interview with Time magazine, Cutié admits that by leading a double life as famous pastor and furtive paramour:

I not only disappointed others but also myself.

But Cutié’s tell-all saves its harshest censure not for the gossip rags (which he all but thanks for outing him) but for the Catholic hierarchy’s retro hypocrisies – especially celibacy, which he claims is a vow violated by many if not most clerics (some promiscuously) as they combat the loneliness it can breed. The church, he says is:

Disconnected from the very people it was meant to serve.

And he writes that it acted more distressed by his peccadillo than by:

The truly criminal, outrageous and blatantly immoral behavior of paedophile priests.

Commenting  on “the fallen priest’s” defection and his book, Jimmy Akin, writing for the National Catholic Register, said:

Fr Cutie was caught on film allowing Buni Canellis to amorously wrap her legs around him and also putting his own hand down Buni Canellis’ swimsuit to fondle her behind. Both of these actions were clear violations of his moral and canonical obligations.

And he pointed out:

Clerics are obliged to observe perfect and perpetual continence for the sake of the kingdom of heaven and therefore are bound to celibacy which is a special gift of God by which sacred ministers can adhere more easily to Christ with an undivided heart and are able to dedicate themselves more freely to the service of God and humanity.

Meanwhile, we learn from this report that three British Anglican bishops who are converting to Roman Catholicism have taken holy communion at Westminster Cathedral, alongside three ex-Anglican nuns.

25 responses to “Catholic Church attacked in Cutié’s book”

  1. Mike says:

    Sounds like religious swinger parties, doesn’t it.

  2. Broga says:

    These three Anglican deserters are doing Rowan Williams a favour. I heard some interviews with RCs and they didn’t want them either. I tried, successfully, to avoid all the religious bullshit over Christmas. This was easy as my entire family, including children and partners, are all atheists. However, I caught one toe curling ten minutes on the Radio 4 Sunday programme and this involved some woman whining away about “People of Faith” whatever they are. These types they invite on the ever so superstition drenched BBC live in a fantasy land where:

    People of Faith are wonderful people doing wonderful things;

    Atheists are evil bastards although I note that even Rowan Williams and others are now throwing in, “and those of no faith.” They can’t quite say “atheists” or if they did they would have to wash their mouths out with soap;

    The hell inflicted on thousands of abused children by paedo priests is very much in the background in this fantasy land. On the ten minutes I heard one of them was talking about the amazing “presence as a force for spiritual uplift” – or some nonsense like that – of Ratzinger.

    In their world the churches are growing in strength when the opposite is happening. With the help of that haven of licence funded superstition they are able to create their fantasy land. Whatever, happens the atheist opinion must be kept at bay. This is important as any light let in on the claptrap and on the ears of the audience and the entire phony structure fractures.

    The most terrible threat they have is the Internet. Founded of reason the “attacks dogs” of atheism continue to advance. Of course the “attack dogs” are also a phantasy as what atheists want is a fair chance to offer an opposing view.

  3. Graham Martin-Royle says:

    Ah yes, the very moral catholic church (spit spit), the church that excomunicates people who actually save lives (the current scandal over abortion at a hospital in the U.S.) rather than those who ruin lives (the current scandal over pedo priests and the catholic church’s cover ups and obstruction of justice worldwide).

    Why oh why are there any people still adhering to the perverted teachings of this most corrupt of institutions?

  4. Pete H says:


    I get a little bit irked at being referred to by the religious as someone “without faith.”

    I have faith. I have faith in my wife, who is my best friend, who looks after and cares for me and makes me happier than I’ve ever been. I have faith in my family, who have always supported and loved me. I have faith in my friends, who I know I can rely on always. I’m even – after a lifetime of disappointments – starting to have faith in my beloved Tottenham Hotspur.

    So I am not without faith. I just don’t believe in a sky fairy.

    Referring to us as “people without faith” has conveniently negative connotations. I suppose it doesn’t sound as good to them if they had to call us “people who insist on having evidence for believing stuff”, or “the undeluded”.

  5. Daz says:

    I can understand how someone brought up as a catholic would stay in the church. What I can’t understand is how someone who’s seen it from the outside, with all the bigotry and plainly stupid pseudoscience, could convert to it. Well, the same goes for any religion, but especially when moving from a ‘milder’ one, so to speak.

    Mind you, that pales into insignificance beside scholars who describe how the Abrahamic religions formed from earlier, more ‘primitive’ beliefs, how little evidence there is for any of the Jesus stories etc, yet still remain christian. Must be a form of schizophrenia.

  6. Angela_K says:

    The catholic – we are always right and never wrong – church making pronouncements on subjects of which they don’t understand; the same church that says it is OK to kill an adult but not a foetus. Old ratzi must be rather miffed that one of his own dares to criticise.

    The word faith has been hijacked by the religious to make their dogma sound fluffy and less threatening; I think it was the odious closet mary-worshipping Tony Blair that brought this new meaning into common parlance. It is a shame the religious just can’t be honest and say they have religion – but then religion and honesty don’t go together.

  7. barriejohn says:

    You’re right, Angela. The great spinmeister ALWAYS used the word “faith”, as “religion” has, quite rightfully, such negative connotations. What really amused me was that at the same time as the Roman Catholics were holding their bloody welcoming party for the erstwhile heretic bishops (stolen from under the very nose of poor old blathering Dumbledore), Il Papa was announcing a grand conference to promote inter-faith harmony, amongst other things – hahahahaha!!!

  8. Daz says:

    What they have is blind faith. That is, unlike faith in one’s family and friends, for instance, which is faith based on experience, they base their beliefs on nothing but warm fuzzy feelings and wishful thinking. I agree with Pete H. By implication they’re saying that all faith is blind, and then calling us faithless. It’s probably sloppy use of language, rather than an intentional slur, but I still don’t like it.

  9. Broga says:

    @Pete H. I thought I would check out the definition of faith in my dictionary. 1. “strong or unshakeable belief in something, especially without proof.” Coming in at the fifth definition is: 5. “complete confidence or trust in a person or remedy etc..” The root of the word is from the Latin fides: trust, confidence. There are definitions relating to systems of religious belief.

    The BBC will only allow “people of faith” (regardless of how muzzy headed, patronising and bigotted on Thought for the Day. However, if the primary meaning of faith, from its root, is trust and confidence, they are selectively banning secular views whose trust and confidence is at least as much and often more than the meandering bores to whom the offer an open door.

    Yet again, a highly selective decison by the BBC religious mafia to permit would suits them and to ban what they dread: a rational, candid and, I have no doubt, interesting comment.

  10. mikespeir says:

    “…allowing Buni Canellis to amorously wrap her legs around him and also putting his own hand down Buni Canellis’ swimsuit to fondle her behind.”

    So, he was making out with a grown woman instead of little boys? That’s just sick!

  11. Anonymous says:

    Is it time for the Catholic Church to start resorting to straight-up conspiracy theories? We are witnessing the death throes of this institution, people.

    Family Mass held in Madrid as Bishops claim UNESCO plan to make half the world homosexual

  12. Anonymous says:

    barriejohn, well, here’s the response to the Pope’s grandstanding:

    [Al-Azhar, Ahmed al-Tayeb, Egypt’s top Muslim cleric] criticised Pope Benedict’s call for world leaders to defend Christians as meddling in his country’s affairs. The call amounted to “unacceptable interference in Egypt’s affairs,” he said.

  13. Don says:

    So he left the RC church, pity he didn’t get a proper job.

  14. barriejohn says:

    Anon: Those reports are almost funny! I particularly liked this bit:

    He launched a harsh attack against the current situation in Spain and in Europe, declaring that Christ had lived in times of historic blindness, and that we were now in one of those times.

    Now where have I heard that before?

  15. David Anderson says:

    “abortion and euthenasia are of more concern than unemployment.”
    Archgillpollas Varela.

    That´s because the coño lives his life in luxury. Come and live with the real people and see what concerns them.

  16. Both of these actions were clear violations of his moral and canonical obligations.

    Unless of course Buni Canellis was 9 years old at the time – in which case it’s perfectly acceptable behaviour for a catholic priest.

  17. Don says:

    Actually, Buni looks quite sweet.

  18. Har Davids says:

    It must be tough to be a religious ‘leader’ in this century, with people being able to make up their own mind and losing their fear of the ‘Almighty’. UNESCO’s nefarious plans to make people gay? Desperate times if you can’t really bash Jews any more; all that’s left is women and gays, and even they’re fighting back! Unity is strength and that’s why Ratzinger wants some inter-faith dialogue, pushing some common agenda on the EU level.

  19. barriejohn says:

    This is an exerpt from his speech, which gives a flavour of what he was really driving at:

    In other areas we see more subtle and sophisticated forms of prejudice and hostility towards believers and religious symbols. At present, Christians are the religious group which suffers most from persecution on account of its faith. Many Christians experience daily affronts and often live in fear because of their pursuit of truth, their faith in Jesus Christ and their heartfelt plea for respect for religious freedom. This situation is unacceptable, since it represents an insult to God and to human dignity; furthermore, it is a threat to security and peace.


  20. NeoWolfe says:

    Pete and Broga,

    Your debate about the definitition of “faith” is certainly valid from a denotation perspective. When one says, “I have faith in you”, it connotes that “I have confidence in you,” something derived from past experience and evidence.

    Obama has used the term, “those without faith”, but, in a context that accords their opinions equal respect. On the point of personal relationships, trust is something that is built over years, and destroyed with a single betrayal. I know that when fundies refer to us as “without faith”, they are subtly insulting us, but I wear the mantle proudly, because they think we are the devil’s victims who have shut our minds and hearts to the holy spirit, but I know that I am a skeptic and freethinker, and that what we KNOW will save the world, while what they BELIEVE will destroy it. And I believe in sanity, not the devil.


  21. Robster says:

    What is it with sex, churches and religious dogma? It’s though it’s the only important thing on the face of the planet. The churches seem to have offices full of people in cardigans working hard at making sex about as appealing as an hour long sermon. There’s teams of pious twits hard at work finding stuff about sex to condemn. Humans need sex, to reproduce and to enhance relationships. It can of course have its drawbacks, but it is a big part of human nature. Clerics of any religious flavour need to find another enemy. Every utterance the religiously deluded make, contributes to the perception in society that they’re all a bit silly and need a pat on the head and an ice pack.

  22. Great Satan says:

    “Celibacy is a gift from God”- well the big imaginary guy in the sky can keep that gift to himself – sounds like a good advert for atheism if you ask me !…and all done so you can “adhere to Christ” his son, I’ll pass on that offer thank you very much, Buni Canellis sounds quite a foxy lady(as Jimi Hendrix sang) and a much better bet for experiences of hightened perception !

  23. Newspaniard says:

    Haven’t I read somewhere that celibacy is a relatively new concept for the RC bunch? Weren’t their juju men allowed to marry and have families at one time in the not-so-distant past? Of course, I’ve prolly got it wrong (again)

  24. Garlic says:

    No, Newspaniard, that is correct. It was a later innovation, but I can’t remember WHY it was imposed. It’s pure dogma.

  25. JohnMWhite says:

    @Garlic: I believe there were various theological excuses about marrying oneself to Jesus entirely and not being divided in loyalties between what’s good for one’s family and what God/Jesus would want. However many see this as a front, because at the same time the church was deeply concerned about church property, like the nice palaces bishops might have, being retained in the bishop’s family rather than by the church, and were worried about having to pay priests enough to look after their families as well as feed themselves.