Here’s another example of how Christians embrace and promote “absolute” moral standards right up until the moment they don’t:

—– A Priest in Love: Photos Rock Miami Beach Church; “Padre Oprah” Doesn’t Want to Give Up Either Woman Or Church (Dan Harris/ABC News; May 10)

MIAMI: Father Alberto Cutie, known as “Padre Oprah,” the nationally known Spanish language television host, advice columnist and bestselling author of the book “Real Life, Real Love,” is creating quite a stir as he appears to be getting a dose of real love himself.

A Mexican magazine ran pictures of Father Cutie cuddling with a woman on a Florida beach and kissing her at a bar.

In an interview with the Spanish language network Univision, Father Cutie said that despite the scandal the photos have created, he doesn’t want to give up either his collar or the woman he loves.

He told Univision, he loves the woman and has liked her since he met her. [He has since admitted to having a two-year affair with her.]

After the photos appeared, the Archdiocese of Miami immediately removed him from his duties as a priest at St. Frances de Sales church in Miami Beach.

Today his parish held its first Sunday mass without him. One parishioner said that the real reason he came to the services was to support a brother in faith, a community leader and a person who has asked the community for its help and prayers.

Alberto Gomez, another parishioner, said he was not there to support Cutie.

“What he did was wrong, the way he did it, but I agree that priests should marry and have kids,” Gomez said.

The scandal is reigniting the long-running debate over priest celibacy. Critics, including some priests, argue that celibacy is at the heart of the church’s problems, including the shortage of priests and the sex abuse scandals.

The Vatican has never wavered on the issue and most active priests agree with its stance.

“I think there is something very healthy and holy about something that makes you wholly available for people and for ministry and for what you really believe, where if you were married with kids, you could not be as available,” ABC News religion correspondent Father Edward Beck said.

Cutie says he’s not ruling out marrying and having children with the woman in the pictures. She has been identified as Ruhama Buni Canellis, a 35 year-old divorced mother.

Before the scandal, Cutie whose parish is in the flashy South Beach community, was never a renegade and never argued against celibacy.

He once wrote: “Many parents today are hesitant to encourage their children to follow a priestly or religious vocation. They fear it will be too difficult, too lonely.”

It is unclear what Cutie’s future role in the church will be. He has said he would be a priest until he dies, but also understands he can’t be a married Catholic priest. This scandal, however, has definitely reignited the debate over priest celibacy in the Catholic church.

—– Poll: Cutie’s Popularity Still Strong, Most Catholics Oppose Celibacy Rule (David Smiley & Robert Samuels & Luisa Yanez Lyanez/The Miami Herald; May 10)

Despite declaring he is not ashamed of being with the woman he loves, the Rev. Alberto Cutie remains highly popular among Miami-Dade Catholics, who overwhelmingly oppose the church’s long-standing policy of requiring a celibate clergy, a poll conducted for The Miami Herald over the weekend has found.

Among the poll’s findings:

A substantial majority — 74 percent — of those surveyed, including Hispanics and non-Hispanics, oppose the Roman Catholic Church’s prohibition of priests marrying or having any type of sexual relations. Only 22 percent said they supported the prohibition, while 4 percent said they were unsure or gave no answer.

That majority was even larger — 81 percent — when those polled were asked whether they thought priests and nuns should be able to marry because the “celibacy requirement for Catholic clergy is antiquated and no longer viable.”

”In rejecting one of the cardinal tenets of church dogma, Roman Catholics in Miami-Dade now believe that church policies on celibacy from the 12th Century no longer make sense for the 21st Century,” said Fernand R. Amandi, executive vice president of Bendixen & Associates, which conducted the poll for The Herald.

The poll’s results are based on responses from 400 Miami-Dade Catholics interviewed Friday and Saturday. The sample is representative of the county’s Catholic population by ethnicity, age, gender and geographic distribution. The margin of error is plus or minus 5 percentage points.

The poll also shows that the public’s perception of Cutie, who is no longer leading his Miami Beach parish, has not been severely damaged by the scandal that engulfed his religious life after a magazine published photos of him with a woman on the beach, including one with Cutie’s hand inside the woman’s bathing suit. Another photo shows the couple kissing at an unidentified terrace bar.

Those polled were asked:

“Taking into consideration everything that you know about Father Alberto Cutie, do you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of Father Alberto?”

Of those questioned, 78 percent said they had a favorable impression, and 10 percent said it was unfavorable, with 12 percent who were uncertain or had no opinion.

”The scandal has not had a serious impact on Father Cutie’s popularity at all,” Amandi said. “The figures that he has are figures that would be the envy of any elected official.”

Sixty-four percent of those polled believed that Catholic priests do not adhere to the celibacy vow throughout their lives….

Among those polled was Carolyn Hatfield, a 63-year-old real estate agent from Aventura who was raised in the Roman Catholic Church. She said Cutie had done nothing wrong.

”The church’s stand is antiquated, and it’s time that these priests were allowed to live a life that we all are entitled to live,” Hatfield said. “It served its purpose in the church all those years ago, but now people want to have a life and a family.”…

William Dayoub, a 72-year-old retired salesman from Coconut Grove, said the Catholic Church’s celibacy requirement is hundreds of years behind the times and other priests should follow Cutie’s lead.

“They should rebel and say, ‘No. This is enough,’ ” he said.”

—– Defiant Cutie Doesn’t Create Any Sympathy (Myriam Marquez/The Miami Herald; May 9)

Be a man, take it off.

I’m referring to Alberto Cutie’s priestly collar, which he wore during a sit-down interview on the Univision network Friday, often showing himself as defiant as any teenager caught in the act.

Except Cutie is a 40-year-old man who has now admitted to being in love with a 35-year-old divorced mother he has known for 10 years.

”I regret hurting others by my actions,” he said, “but I will never ask forgiveness for loving a woman.”

Such blasphemous bluster. ¡Ay, que macho! No regrets because, as the cliche goes, love means never having to say you’re sorry. Even if he broke his vow to his church to remain celibate?

Is there not a smidgen of remorse for not coming forward to his bishop when he first fell for this gal — instead of embarrassing himself, his girlfriend and church with photos from paparazzi?

I don’t disagree with Cutie’s challenge that the Catholic Church, which has been losing priests for decades in the United States, needs to reconsider its centuries-old rule that demands chastity of priests and nuns.

The church’s delay in cleaning its ranks of pedophile priests the past two decades has turned away many Catholics. We believe that allowing priests to marry — as the Eastern churches are allowed to do and still answer to the Vatican — would attract many fine candidates to the priesthood who could understand firsthand the ups and downs of marriage and become better pastors for it.

And, yes, Cutie has been under intense public scrutiny since pictures of him and his lady cuddling — and then some — on the beach appeared in a magazine. But it’s Cutie’s manner, his in-your-face way during the exclusive interview with Aqui y Ahora anchor Teresa Rodriguez, that should give people of any faith pause.

Because humility was not on display. There was no act of contrition. Righteous indignation? Oh, there was plenty.

Among Cutie’s zingers:

“Guilt? Do I feel bad, horrible? No. I am a man. Under this cassock there are pants.”

But what’s in the head, padre? What’s in the heart?

In Cuban, we call such showcasing sinverguenza, shameless.

No matter how much pressure he’s under, Cutie, who wrote an advice column for our sister paper, El Nuevo Herald, has long been accustomed to the public limelight through his television and radio shows and a book tour. No one wants him to pretend remorse, but a little grown-up contemplation would be good. He’s obviously lashing out at church elders, but in my far-from-holy book, he’s not winning friends and influencing those who want to understand.

It’s as if the money-making priest — a cash cow for the church — thinks he’s invincible.

My sympathy for his inner struggle so boldly displayed — tell me he didn’t really want to get caught? — has morphed into disgust. Cutie could have said all that he said without the attitude and certainly without the collar. He could have said that he is contemplating joining the Episcopalian Church while the Catholic hierarchy figures out what to do about priests and marriage (not in our lifetime, I’m afraid).

Instead, he acted like a victim who had no control over his pants, er, priestly robes. He showed little empathy or respect for those who embrace church teachings without question. Just sinful pride.

Please, take off the collar, sir. Go snuggle with your main squeeze, pray, have kiddies.

Just get a new life.

So, once again we find that someone who has studied and been steeped in Christianity the most, someone who became a leader in his church and regularly acted as a moral guide for others, has been living immorally himself by his own holy standards.

When that immorality was revealed, did he offer a full and humble confession and offer to do penance? No. He wants to have his sin and his morality, too. The rules of the church that he vowed to uphold and obey are the rules that he believes need to be changed now that he’s discovered that they’re just too gosh darn difficult for him to follow.

And are his Catholic parishioners shocked and disgusted by this self-serving shift in “gOd’s law”? No. Apparently some 80% still have a favorable opinion of Cutie. And more than 60% apparently think that the violation of the vow of celibacy is common among priests like him and nothing to get excited about.

According to a story in yesterday’s USA Today, “Last week, more than one hundred people gathered outside St. Francis de Sales parish in Miami Beach, waving posters and chanting their forgiveness for Cutie.”

There’s your “absolute” moral standard in action.

A standard that often seems to boil down to this: “Atheists can do no right (no matter how well they behave); Christians can do no wrong (no matter how terrible their actions).”

To say that this sort of thing is getting old is an understatement….

UPDATE: On April 15 I posted an entry about Fernando Lugo, the current president of Paraguay who now admits that he fathered a son while a Catholic bishop. Since I posted that entry, the situation seems to have only gotten worse….

—– Second Paraguay Love-Child Claim (Candace Piette/The BBC; April 20)

Paraguayan president Fernando Lugo has received a second demand to recognise the paternity of a child.

President Lugo, who is a former bishop, shocked the country last week when he acknowledged a two-year-old boy as his son.

The Pope released him from his vows of chastity only last July, two years after he renounced the priesthood.

The 27-year-old woman making the latest demand says her six-year-old is the son of Mr Lugo.

In a press conference, the woman said her relationship with the then Bishop Lugo had begun in 2001, when she had gone to him for help with trying to contact the father of her first child.

The woman, from a very poor background, said she had wanted help with getting financial support for her child.

She said Mr Lugo had sent her money until the boy was two years old, but the money had stopped coming.

She also said he had asked her to keep quiet about the issue during last year’s election campaign, which he went on to win.

In a statement, the president’s office said he was prepared to act within the bounds of truth, and that he had established a special team to deal with the legal cases that might emerge around this subject….

—– 3rd Woman Accuses Paraguay’s President Of Fathering Child (The Dallas Morning News/The Associated Press; April 23)

ASUNCION, Paraguay: A third woman came forward Wednesday claiming Paraguayan President Fernando Lugo is the father of her child – a 16-month-old boy she named after Pope John Paul II.

The paternity claims have embarrassed the government and put opponents on the attack. But in Paraguay’s macho culture, political analysts say the idea that the former Catholic bishop has fathered multiple children may make him appear to be a strong leader.

The latest woman to claim a child with Lugo is Damiana Hortensia Moran Amarilla, 39, a divorcee with two adult children who said she met Lugo after he gave up his church leadership position. Unlike the two other women, she says she has no plans to sue the president.

Meanwhile, a Paraguayan newspaper reported that the first woman to come forward, his former parishioner Viviana Carrillo, 26, moved into the president’s home along with her 2-year-old, whom Lugo acknowledged is his son.

Benigna Leguizamon, an impoverished soap-seller who accused the president Monday of fathering her 6-year-old boy, filed a paternity suit in Ciudad del Este on Wednesday, asking for DNA tests.

Other women could come forward as well, according to one of Lugo’s former church colleagues.

There’s a bumper sticker out there that says Christians Aren’t Perfect, Just Forgiven.

This seems as good a moment as any to ask “To what extent does the belief that they’re forgiven give Christians a ‘Get Out Of Jail Free!’ card in their own minds and thus worsen their behavior?”

It also seems as good a moment as any to ponder the extent to which Christians feel free to look down upon or even slap less imperfect non-Christians on the grounds that *they* aren’t forgiven for *any* of their transgressions, however minor. After all, if you believe that the all-knowing supreme judge isn’t going to forgive someone, why should you? And if you believe that this all-knowing supreme judge is actually going to cast those unforgiven sinners into eternal hellfire, can you really believe that he’s going to hold it against you if you merely snub them or hate them or treat them unfairly in a debate? Can you really believe he’ll hold it against you if their anti-gOd antics prompt you to lie to them, or censor them, or oppress them, or even kill them? How can he? You’re forgiven for *everything*! Certainly he’ll forgive you (maybe even twice as fast) if you believe you’re acting in his defense – right?

(For more about this danger, see the analysis of antinomianism that I posted on March 18, 2006. It’s a danger that comes to mind whenever I see Christians holding themselves and their leaders to a more lenient moral standard than they seem to hold others to.)