Fr Joe Borg
'I believe in what I want to believe'
44%: The percentage of University students who claim to have had sexual intercourse during the past year.
In April 1968, a survey on Maltese university students' religious attitudes and behaviour was held by the Pastoral Research Services and the Association of Theology students.
Among other questions, they asked whether students would like to discuss sex with priests. Forty-four per cent said yes.
In April 2008, the collection of data was concluded for a survey entitled Religious Beliefs and Attitudes of Maltese University Students Revisited - 2009 held by the University Chaplaincy. The organisers did not feel the need to ask students whether they wanted to talk to priests about sex. The students were asked whether they actually had sexual intercourse during the past year. Forty-four per cent said yes.
Customs did change in 30 years!
I think the study clearly shows that University students consciously choose what they want to believe from what is officially presented by the Church. Although 91 per cent of respondents described themselves as Catholics, only a minority consider divorce (43 per cent), premarital sex (24 per cent) and artificial contraception (14.7 per cent) to be morally wrong.
It is interesting that while the majority of respondents approve of premarital cohabitation (73.5 per cent) and the legalisation of divorce (56.7 per cent), most do not want to choose either as their lifestyle. One sixth would consider opting for divorce and only five per cent would cohabit. This is positive.
The topics touched upon do not cover the whole gamut of Catholic morality. There were no questions about attitudes to the environment, social justice and refugees, for example. If such questions were asked, perhaps the survey would have found that the departure from Catholic teaching on sexual morality was balanced by a stronger social conscience.
The University students' answers on sexual morality would not have worried me so much were it not for four factors, two of which result from the study itself. The current study is a repeat of one done in 2005. The results show that figures are sliding downwards, and that what was felt to be wrong then is not similarly felt now. The trend is clear.
The second, and more worrying factor, is the slide in the level of belief in some of the basic dogmas of Catholicism. Today, fewer students believe in the Trinity, in Jesus as the Son of God, in the Incarnation, in the Holy Spirit, in heaven and hell, in Mary as the Mother of God and in the Church, to mention a few points. Belief in the Trinity fell 18 per cent, in the Incarnation by 24 per cent and in the sacraments by almost 23 per cent.
But one can find a silver lining even in this section. A total of 93.5 per cent of respondents believe in God - a decline of "just" 4.5 per cent over the 2005 figure. There is also a sharp increase in the number of those who say their religious practice is a matter of free choice.
The third factor is that if the same survey were to be conducted among other young people I suspect it would register the same trends. On the morality issues, I also suspect that University students' views would be similar to those of the population at large. The Church needs to find out whether this is true or not.
The fourth and most worrisome factor is the follow-up. There will be some 'noise' within the Church about this study but soon everyone will live happily ever after. This is what happened after the 2005 study was published, as well as after the partial results of the Mass census were issued.
On the contrary, the Church needs to strive hard to understand what is happening and adopt a strategy to address it.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 29th 2009, 10:02
@FrancoFarrugia
When you pretend that your comment about “senseless dogmas” is based on “previous church reports commissioned by the church itself” but which you did not identify, something much more serious than “false premises” is involved.
Under the subterfuge of asking Fr Borg questions you are actually intentionally casting slurs on the official teaching of the Church regarding drug trafficking, lying and dishonesty in public life.
Franco Farrugia
Jun 28th 2009, 21:47
@ Mr Tonna: Exactly: Those who WANT to live by the 10 Commandments, which were cast in stone in the desert by Moses ... when?
I don't need to be lectured about the Church's social services through the centuries. But I need to restrain myself in describing minutely how those social services were carried out in recent years. Best to keep that book closed, don't you think?
Tonna J.
Jun 28th 2009, 21:15
@ Franco Farrugia - those who think that there is only one Commandment (love thy neighbour) is very much mistaken. There are ten of them and we should obey them all.
Re - love thy neighbour, do you know that the Catholic church was the founder of the social services. Read through the scripture how the Apostles (2000 years ago) chose people to help those who were mostly in need. Besides the homes for children and the elderly it has.
Franco Farrugia
Jun 28th 2009, 18:55
.....
Hence, the empty pews. Or, what is more alarming and dangerous, the people attending church on saturday evenings and on Sundays, perhaps, not even bothering to sit in the central pews, but preferring the chairs next to the exits, sometimes even newspapers in hand, focusing on everything except on what they should have really gone to church for, not even waiting for the last hymn to be concluded because they would already be in their cars by then ... get the hint, dear Dr Saliba?
Franco Farrugia
Jun 28th 2009, 18:53
@ Francis Saliba - I do not 'comment on wrong premise'. My comments are based on results of previous Church reports - reports commissioned by the Church itself, or 'herself', as dogma would have it. In my original comment, which you and Mr Cowie conveniently misread, I opined that the Church, in the past, laid much more emphasis on pure dogma rather than on how to live a good life on earth, a practical one. I never outlined that the two cannot live together. But after that comment of mine, yes, probably, following both comments that you and Mr Cowie proferred, I would come to that conclusion.
If you think that the contemporary faithful-at-large are going to gulp down all Catholic teachings without question, and accept everything that the CChurch demands its fidili to observe, then, you have a long wait. People nowadays - and especially youngsters - will NOT accept without question. That was in your day and in your social context. It does not exist any longer. ....
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 28th 2009, 18:38
@FrancoFarrugia
It is your unsupported assertion that “the two gentlemen show how much they prefer dogma to anything else”. No one has expressed any such "preference". I merely pointing out that “dogma” and moral behaviour should co-exist as far as the Church's teaching is concerned. You wrote as if one interferes with the other and as if the Church does not preach observance of the Decalogue any more - which is clearly not the case. No one is trying to stop you from expressing your own opinions, your personal priorities and your criticism of the Church but please expect relevant criticism especially if you base your comment on wrong premises.
Franco Farrugia
Jun 28th 2009, 17:45
@ The opinions I have read so far with regard to this article, particularly from Mr Cowie, prove what I have written myself, right. I never stated that dogmas are in conflict with living a good practical life but it's a question of priorities. The very fact that the two gentlemen show how much they prefer dogma to anything else shows what I wanted to mean. Anyway, I doubt whether Fr Borg would wish Mr Cowie to speak in his name. He can do a much better job himself, thank you very much.
The problem that I mentioned and that was subsequently highlighted, is that the Church has always preferred the teaching and upholding of dogma, rather than advocating a good, practically-spiritual life here on Earth and this is now being proved by the empty pews.
So, let us continue enjoying seeing the empty pews rather than being proactive in a practical way. This is the result of instilling in our faithful, the fidili, the fact that the Church is not to be criticised because the Church knows best.
Mr Cowie, it is not I who speak. It is the dwindling numbers! They speak for themselves.
Dr Francis Saliba
Jun 28th 2009, 15:44
This is not a question of either - or.
Believing in the creative, redemptive and sanctifying aspects of the divinity does not conflict with the Christian’s obligatory love towards one’s “neighbour” (meaning the rest of humanity). Loving God with all our might and loving our neighbour (including our enemies) with the same intensity that we love ourselves is the fundamental teaching of Christian Churches from the time of Christ. Apart from its “senseless dogmas” the Church takes an unambiguous stance against lying, drug abuse, and corruption. There is no need to call for an “adjournment”.
What is necessary is that Christians live by their faith.
Gerry Cowie
Jun 28th 2009, 15:01
Franco Farrugia's comments come very clearly under the heading of Fr Joe Borg's article.He seems to advocate "I believe in what I want to believe". His very limited argument of either/or situations is exactly what the author has hilighted.
I think Fr Borg would rather that people believed in all those doctrines the Church teaches and not pick and choose those which they like best. So I do not think he would accept the preferences proffered by Mr Farrugia. Why would Franco Farrugia advocate the end of belief in the Trinity and of Our Lady? He is of course free to see these important things as "useless dogma". But the Church is unlikely to follow his suggestions.
What evidence does Mr Farrugia have to prove that the Church is "cut off from reality"?
Franco Farrugia
Jun 28th 2009, 10:33
But Fr Joe, what would you prefer? That young people continue believing in the Trinity, or believe that it is good to be kind towards people - and not just neighbours? What will you prefer? People believing in Mary as the Mother of God, or those who believe that it is NOT ok to harm people by turning a blind eye at a guy selling drugs in the street? People believing in the Incarnation or people who believe that they have a duty to say the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? People believing in senseless dogmas or people who believe that investigations should continue, notwithstanding how many bigwigs may be implicated?
This is the problem with the Church - it is simply too cut off from reality and the sooner you - plural - start thinking in terms of adjourning yourselves and your outlook on life, the better.