Remember that old computer game and TV show, “Where in the World is Carmen San Diego?” Let’s play “Where in the World is Walter Cuenin?”
Last week, Fr. Cuenin was in Rochester, New York, along with Fr. Bob Bowers, another infamous Boston priest, visiting Spiritus Christi Parish. Don’t be fooled: Spiritus Christi is not a Roman Catholic parish, but is a schismatic group that broke away from the Church after the Bishop of Rochester told them that they couldn’t have a woman con-celebrating the Mass (among other heresies). This is the home of the infamous Fr. Jim Callan, excommunicated, and his “co-pastor” “Rev.” Mary Ramerman. Oops sorry, their bulletin says that Jesus Christ is the pastor.
Anyway, in last week’s bulletin, we read the following:
Two internationally famous priests from the archdiocese of Boston visited us last weekend and were introduced at all the Masses. Father Bob Bowers, 45, and Father Walter Cuenin, 59, are both in trouble with their archbishop. Three years ago they organized a petition, signed by fifty-eight priests, calling for the removal of Cardinal Bernard Law because of his mishandling of the sex abuse crisis in Boston. Both priests were pastors of prominent parishes known for their inclusive policies toward gay people and women, social justice advocacy, and outreach to the poor. Both priests were recently removed from their parishes amid a huge uproar and protest by the people, similar to what happened at Corpus Christi seven years ago. We wanted them to experience our church and see what can happen years later if they form a new and inclusive Catholic church. Many parishioners encouraged them to start such a community. Boston is ripe for it. Please keep them in your prayers.
First, the information presented here is false. Bowers was not removed from his parish. He willingly took a leave of absence from ministry in a snit after his parish was closed. Cuenin willingly resigned after admitting he took money from his parish that he wasn’t entitled to.
But note the crux of what was written: Cuenin and Bowers were in Rochester visiting a schismatic group, apparently being encouraged to set up their own schismatic pseudo-Catholic church in Boston. What other reason could they have for visiting a schismatic, heretical group? Are they working on reconciliation with the Church? Doesn’t sound like it.
This is what happens when you don’t publicly denounce the heretics in your midst, especially among your priests: You set yourself up for scandal and schism that could take down unwary and unwitting lay Catholics with the perpetrators.
[Thanks to reader Dan for the link.]Technorati Tags: Catholic, doctrine, priesthood, schism
No, I think it’s cheery news, Dom. If these guys won’t straighten up when they feel the heat, I think it’s better that they move out and set up their own ersatz “parishes.” Good luck to them when their “Pastor” comes again on his Visitation.
The old St.-Jean church building in Newton, Paul Shanley’s parish, might still be available, if they want it.
Problem is, Jeff, that we ARE responsible for bringing all people to salvation through Jesus Christ, in His holy Catholic Church. It’s our mission, because it was/is His!
If Fathers Cuenin and Bowers return to this area and do, in fact, set up schismatic ecclesial bodies—which may look a good deal like the Catholic Church to those who have no reason to suspect that they are heretical and schismatic—the fact that they have not received public reprobation or disavowal by the shepherds of the Church could well lead to the loss of souls.
This is the difficulty with being a follower of Christ—we MUST be concerned about all souls, not just those who seem to follow Him with us. And, consequently, this is the danger of heresy and scandal—that it takes not the informed and faithful, but the uninformed and minimally faithful, those most at risk.
I am sad to say that the diocese of Rochester,N.Y.is not the one that I remember growing up in the 40’s,50’s and 60’s. Just look at the Bishop!!St. Michael’s on Clifford Ave. is still beautiful but the school is now a retirement home and the pastor commutes between St. Mike’s and maybe 2 other parishes. The nuns of course are gone.
Nazareth College is no longer a “catholic” school. Many of the other churches have been closed and some as you stated in your blog appear to be catholic but are off the deep end.
I lament but pray for our Church.
Yours in Christ,
JeanneP
Fr. Cuenin certainly would feel at home at St. Jeanne’s in Newton, Fr. Paul Shanley’s old parish.Evidence of this is that he felt very welcoming towards Fr. Shanley’s co-partner in his project of owning the gay bed and breakfast inn in Palm Springs,CA, namely Fr. John J.White and the priests who joined him in his “Companions” venture. In fact he included him in the planning for the Companions program and welcomed him at the Mass held at Our Lady Help of Christians celebrating the Companions venture in the effort to get Catholics to join PFLAG and support same-sex sexual activities. I wonder if his efforts in Rochester will be a continuation of what he was up to in the Boston archdiocese! While Fr. John J. White died in Thailand where he was hiding out to avoid testifying at Fr. Paul Shanley’s trial, I’m sure Fr. Cuenin will find other priests who would have been willing companions in Fr. Shanley’s ventures which were well known to Fr. Cuenin and his companions ,knowledge that was kept secret among themselves while they tried to make Cardinal Law the” lightening rod” for
the same-sex sex activities which they knew were going on. Now Fr. Cuenin and his companions promote these acts under the banner of PFLAG,even encouraging support for such acts at the public schools they visit during Gay Pride Week.No doubt these efforts will continue in Rochester. How twisted can you get!
P.S. Keep in mind that all Fr. Cuenin had to do to find out anything he wanted to know about Fr. John J. White was to ask Fr. Bob Bullock, who co-founded the Boston Priests’ Forum with Fr. Cuenin. It was very clear in the TV documentary presentation on Fr. Paul Shanley, that Fr. Bob Bullock was Fr. Shanley’s supervisor and close friend during
Fr.Shanley’s Street Priest venture. In fact, they shared the same office and Fr. Bob Bullock acknowledged that he often answered the phone for Fr. Shanley , so he must have known Fr. Shanley’s attitude towards same-sex sex. Fr. Bullock ‘s friendship with Fr. Shanley continued up to the time of his imprisonment when he visited Fr. Shanley in prison. Certainly he knew Fr. John J. White and his close association with Fr. Shanley. In light of the close friendship of Fr. Cuenin and Fr. Bob Bullock in their co-leadership role in the Boston Priests’ Forum,
is it any wonder that Fr. Cuenin welcomed Fr. John J. White in the Companions venture in 1999 before the scandals concerning Fr. Shanley came to light?
I hope that Archbishop O’Malley is at least made aware of this, so that it’s on his radar screen. Not to be all dramatic, but I think Father Clark has a point. If he were to set up a Church like this, who knows where it would lead. Martin Luther was just a simple monk, and we know where his revolt led. Were he to establish his own Church, Cuenin could be the cataclyst for a Mass American exodus out of the Church, into a new Protestantism. He’s already a white martyr in some people’s eyes.
Did you notice on their bulletin that they have a “Rev. Mary ______” listed as a pastoral associate? So now they identify a woman as a reverend. Um. interesting.
I followed the link to check out their bulletin and it cites a weekly collection of over $16,000. That’s a lot of dough. Or, well, it’s a lot around here, I don’t know about Rochester. But it surprises me that they have that much financial support.
One of Archbishop O’Malley’s secretaries has been made aware of it.
And the “Rev. Mary Ramerman” is the woman who was con-celebrating the Mass with Fr. Callan which precipitated this schism.
Thank you Fr. Clark for your comment. After 72 years of a Catholic I tend to forget praying for salvation of schismatics etc. Jesus said to pray for our enemies and their salvation. Amen
Does anyone think we will be seeing a lot more of this sort of thing after the document forbidding ordination of homosexuals is released tomorrow?
St. Jean’s Church in Newton was torn down a couple of years ago. On the the main church property at 243 Watertown St. now stand 10 market-rate condos/townhomes, and the new building on the rear of the property at 241 Watertown St (formerly a convent or rectory) has been replaced by 35 units of elder housing.
When the dissenter priest in Rochester set up a separate community, I think the bishop did declare him to be in schism, and probably the same would happen here. Of course, one public announcement isn’t enough to eliminate public confusion over the identity of a small sect.
Will we need to post a billboard on the neighboring property? “The Catholic Church welcomes you. The nearest Catholic parish is St. Lucy’s, 123 Main St., 1 mile west.”
I was dismayed that the reputable Amy Welborn linked to bettnet for Mr. Bettinelli’s report on a schism Father Cuenin and his evil friends are supposedly about to set up.
The report and the hateful comments are filled with distortions: e.g., guilt by association. (Cuenin knew Shanley; but everybody, including the Archbishop knew Shanley in his street-outreach days), insinuations that Cuenin is guilty of theft (actually O’Malley is going forward with a fair investigation and Coyne is apologizing for being assigned to Cuenin’s once vibrant parish).
Neither Mr. Bettinelli nor the comments have anything to say of the criminal behavior of Law and the Philadelphia archbishops (led by Rigali and his predecessors). Since the Vatican hasn’t the slightest understanding of the sins of the Hierarchy, it is unfortunate that the Philadelphia prosecutor could not bring the hierarchy to trial because of the statute of limitations.
At least here in Western Massachusetts our pedophile Bishop fled. That was helpful.
You are free to comment on the merits of comments others have made about Fr. Cuenin and whether they are made in charity or truth.
But you are drawing false conclusions and making misapprehensions about what I wrote. I am simply quoting from what the bulletin of the schismatic parish said. They are the ones suggesting that Cuenin and Bowers are preparing to set up a schismatic church in Boston, not me.
And you’ll excuse my guffaw at your laughable assertion that I haven’t commented on the criminal behavior of bishops. If you’d been to my web site in the past four years it’s been here (yes, FOUR!) rather than the 15 minutes you’ve probably been here, you’d have read hundreds and hundreds (even thousands and thousands!) of words written by me on the subject of the criminal negligence of bishops.
Even so, what the heck does the criminal behavior of Law and the Philly archbishops have to do with Cuenin (who did, by the by, admit to taking the money; check your facts)?
You are engaging in the logical fallacy of the red herring. Your misdirection about the bishops is a non sequitir.
Well, you may guffaw at my laughable assertion that you haven’t commented on the criminal behavior of bishops. I’m glad to know that you have taken a stand against their corruption for four years.
But you sneering is unfair. How was I to know about your stand, having never visited you blog? As I noted, I came to you by accident—a link from Welborn. Now that you tell me of your stand, I sincerely applaud it. So your contempt is misplaced, and not appropriate for the host of a blog like this.
Concerning your report: your description of Cuenin as “infamous” is already a condemnation of the man. At this point, I will only say that Father Cuenin, has made a serious misjudgment by visiting the Rochester schismatics. He risks losing all the moral capital he accumulated as a parish priest and as a leader of the scores of parish priests who supported him. He is destroying himself. How sad.
As for the “red herring” of my “misdirection about the bishops”, my comment about the bishops is directly relevant to Fr. Cuenin, who opposed Cardinal Law. Philadelphia has no Cuenins. As for the alleged theft of money, let’s see what Archbishop O’Malley’s investigation concludes.
How was I to know about your stand, having never visited you blog?
You could have spent some time researching it before insulting and criticizing me. That is the least demand of charity before you sling an accusation at me.
Concerning your report: your description of Cuenin as /www.bettnet.com/blog/index.php?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fbettnet.dyndns.org%2Fblog%2Fcomments.php%3Fid%3D5588_0_1_0_C”>read what I wrote about it at this link.
Once again you have been guilty of lack of due diligence. I would advise that before you go off half-cocked at strangers on the Internet that you take some time to do some research to be sure that your assertions are grounded in reality.
Finally, the enemy of my enemy is not always my friend. Just because Cuenin opposed Law does not automatically make him a great priest. There are many reason he might have opposed him, not all of them honorable or in keeping with Christian moral teaching
What are you reforming, reformer?
There was a news story this summer I think that one of the founders of that “church” had left to become an Episcopalean. (Enrique Cadena) He had issues with some of the things going on, and felt that was a good move. Some things were still “too catholic” for him apparently.
Hello Dom,
Just because Cuenin opposed Law does not automatically make him a great priest.
Well said.
Hopefully Reformer will stick around long enough to learn something about your blog.
As you all know, I’m a Protestant who married into a Catholic family with four Catholic daughters. Walter Cuenin was our pastor for five years when we lived in the area.
I’ve had a lot of exposure to Fr. Cuenin’s theology. He’s come very close (in my well-informed opinion) to the point of departure reached by Fr. Luther.
Now, coming from 500 years of Lutherans as I do, this does not seem reprehensible or even particularly surprising.
But it does, at some point, require one to step over the line and out of the Roman Catholic Church.
I would be astonished if Fr. Cuenin became involved in a schismatic “Catholic” church. But I’m astonished that he apparantly took the money, FWIW.
His theology as I’ve heard it expressed is a protestant theology. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Reformer, I am baffled by your statement, “He risks losing all the moral capital he accumulated as a parish priest.” Are you suggesting Fr. Cuenin earned “moral capital” promoting the annual Gay Pride parade to parishioners and preaching to them IN FAVOR OF gay marriage (and testifying in support of gay marriage to the Mass Legislature)? Surely you jest.