Alternatives, not crusades

One may perhaps justifiably criticise Archbishop Paul Cremona's homily on the feast of the Nativity of Our Lady on a number of points. One may say that the role and participation of the Maltese during the Great Siege and during World War II was presented in a very romantic tone and was analysed simplistically.

One can also say that not all the ideas expressed in that speech were well elaborated and explained - like the Archbishop's point about the culture of well being - leaving them open to misunderstanding.

While we could live with this type of criticism, we do not accept the arguments of those who wrote that the contents of the homily are heralding some latter day crusade, the kind of which we experienced in the 1960s. Nothing in the homily or in its manner of delivery can lead to this type of conclusion. The Archbishop spoke calmly but resolutely. His line of thought was very clear. The Church and its members have the right and duty to present their way of thinking and belief as much as everybody else.

Archbishop Cremona was outlining some of the day-to-day implications of the Christian world view when contrasted with some of the implications of the secularist world view. The Archbishop did not refer to the secular but to secularism or the secularist mentality and world view. The former points to the legitimate autonomy of politics, the economy, created reality and so on from the religious sphere.

The latter is a crusading world view bent on sidelining the manifestation in politics of the religious dimension of man and woman. Secularism presents itself as being value-free, while in actual fact it is anything but. In this perspective, secularism not only becomes a value in itself but the ultimate value. Secularism starts by describing itself as a democratic movement but its de facto denial of the rights of believers makes it undemocratic.

Last Monday Archbishop presented an alternative to the secularism mentality. His alternative is based on Christian values and beliefs. He presented a vision built on the belief in the dignity of the human person, the defence of the vulnerable, the importance of marriage and the family, and the sanctity of the right to life. He was more than justified to do so.

His homily was a service to all society since, as he rightly said, it was nonsensical to believe that only one voice is propagated in a pluralistic society. It is ironic that some of the apostles of secularism and pluralism see a place for all voices but the Christian one.

People who believe in something should propagate it. What Archbishop Cremona said is the logical consequence of this belief. Christians who remain silent and do not actively participate in the public sphere to propagate their beliefs and their way of life would not be doing a good service either to their Church or their country.

The Archbishop presented an alternative, not a crusade. Church members cannot remain on the fence. They should follow his lead. Silence is never a solution.