David Torpiano, Floriana
Mgr Vella's inconsistencies (1)
In the light of Mgr Charles Vella's controversial interview (The Sunday Times, August 16), I would like to comment on a more recent article of his entitled 'Skomunika ghal min juza l-pillola RU 486' (Excommunication for those who use the RU 486 pill), carried in Lehen is-Sewwa on August 22. Using some principles Mgr Vella himself set in the interview he gave to Herman Grech as a hermeneutical key to his recent article on Lehen, one is able to encounter various inconsistencies in Mgr Vella's thought.
In his Lehen is-Sewwa article Mgr Vella gives an array of facts and figures regarding abortions in Italy in the last three years. In the interview Herman Grech states that "Mgr Vella insists that the Church should avoid quoting certain statistics in a bid to water down alarming marriage breakdowns." This is the first inconsistency of Mgr Vella - he quotes statistics while telling the Church not to do the same.
Mgr Vella in his article says that Archbishop Rino Fisichella's reaction in Corriere della Sera (July 31) to the green light given in Italy to the abortion pill RU 486, was somewhat mild. While Mgr Fisichella acknowledged that the use of the RU 486 is prohibited by the Code of Canon Law as in the case of a surgical abortion, he stopped short of saying that this Church prohibition is on pain of excommunication latae sententiae.
Mgr Fisichella said that he did not wish to make further declarations. Mgr Vella disagreed with this, saying that "we know what the Church teaches". Mgr Vella is right but he should have known that on divorce the Church's teaching is similarly clear and unequivocal.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (paras 2382-2386) affirms that the Church is against divorce and that Jesus Christ himself abrogated the accommodations that had slipped into the Old Law (cf. Mt 19, 7-9) regarding divorce. Moreover divorce is "a grave act against the natural law, a law which possesses a universal appeal". Are not these declarations of the Church clear enough for Mgr Vella?
Mgr Vella is again inconsistent when he states that he does not fear contraceptive vending machines at the University campus if students have a well formed and informed Christian conscience. Firstly, he should know that not all University students are Christians. What about non-Christians? Moreover, if contraception is intrinsically evil, as the Church teaches in Humanae Vitae, is Mgr Vella able to judge whether the conscience of non-Christian students is formed enough to prevail upon a constant peril to body and soul? Is he in a position to conclude whether Christian students are formed enough to withstand the same peril?
If he discovers that there is lack of formation of conscience among students, will he come on campus to stop students from using the vending machines till they have formed and informed their consciences in a Christian way? If, as Mgr Vella rightly seems to fear, there is a lack of formation among youngsters, why should they be tested before they are prepared?
Mgr Vella ends his article by rightly expressing his hope that RU 486 will never be sold legally in Malta. Had he developed the same line of thought coherently, he would have said, as in the case of the vending machines on campus, that the abortive pill would not trouble him if the Maltese would have a conscience formed according to Christian truths and principles.
I only ask Mgr Vella to return to his old good self. Everybody makes mistakes. We only ought to be sorry and apologise if we acknowledge we did so.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Steve Pace
Sep 1st 2009, 15:34
@Christine Galea... And let's all go to Mdina dungeons and blow off the dust from the marvelous toys of torture ... Let us all put forth those who sin on stakes and burn them alive.
David Torpiano
Aug 31st 2009, 09:35
@ Mr. Wain
Mr. Wain, the Church can speak on two levels, firstly from a Catholic theological position and from a healthy secular perspective according to reason. In its dialogue on divorce and other moral matters the Church is bound to form its members according to the tenets of Catholic faith but it has to seek other grounds to bridge with those who hold different creeds (not to say it does not have the mission of preaching the Gospel to everyone). So the Church does not argue that contraception and divorce are wrong because Revelation tells us so but because they cause personal and social disorder independently from any creed professed or religion one is adherent to. This is why the Church is trying to dialogue also with non-Christians and discover what is common and present in humanity itself. Obviously, the Church has a right to make clear its position and when the time of making choices would come, everybody Catholic or not, Christian or not, will be called to decide and will be free to do so. Is the Church forcing something on someone?
David Torpiano
Aug 31st 2009, 09:28
@Mr. Pulis
I would rather say the 6th commandment is related to divorce and not the 7th. I simply fear you are wrong in your interpretation of scripture. Revelation was given in a progressive manner. If you do some exegetical study you will discover that Moses already started to restrict a free for all attitude the Jews had to divorce and in Matthew's gospel Christ clearly points towards the stability and permanence of marriage. Christ referred in fact to "the beginning" (cf. Mt 19, 8) and he explained that before man started undermining the institution of marriage, God had planned it to be permanent and indissoluble. Christ's abrogation of the imperfections that had slipped in the old law is confirmed when the apostles say "If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry" (cf. Mt 19, 10). I would leave it to the Church to interpret scripture authentically.
Martin Spiteri
Aug 31st 2009, 01:39
@ david torpiano
are we trying to look nice ?
David Wain
Aug 30th 2009, 18:01
David Torpiano, the Church should butt out of the affairs of non-Christians, period. It has got its own sheep totake care of.
Christine Galea
Aug 30th 2009, 16:04
@ Victor Pulis
I never stated that there was anything wrong with quoting Msgr Vella's arguments. I simply agreed with Mr Torpiano's views that such arguments were inconsistent.
victor pulis
Aug 30th 2009, 15:55
Did God contradict himself when he included the 7th commandment and at the same time allowed divorce to be practiced among his people?
Pule' Carmel
Aug 30th 2009, 11:51
When young (1955- 1970) I spent 15 years alone in England. I was much unprepared and confused on occasions and I had to make quick decisions based not on experience but on my intuition. I kept an eye on other people who seemed to be more adventurous and instinctive than I was in the absolute liberty and freedom we had. I learnt a lot from other people, and one lesson was, “That to liberate a home grown canary from his cage is to give him a freedom that is certain death. His inexperience and curiosities and instincts would attract him to the beautiful colours of eagles and hawks, and London was full of them.”
To liberate young people absolutely, is not freedom, if they are thrown in a vortex of national and international insecurity, bewilderment and fear. Every person must first voluntarily learn to think and do more things that is necessary for his own survival. Yes we have to have the freedom to make mistakes, but more often in my experience some of the mistakes we make are irreversible. The education of parents is the most effective as education in schools and elsewhere is failing absolutely.
victor pulis
Aug 30th 2009, 11:44
@Christine Galea
What is wrong with quoting Mgr Vella's comments to further the case for divorce? Unknowingly you are doing the same when you congratulate Mr. Torpiano for his letter.
You must admit that the pro divorcists have a powerful argument in Mgr. Vella's article and would be stupid not to use it to their advantage.
Christine Galea
Aug 30th 2009, 10:49
Rightly said David! Mgr Vella's inconsistencies are evident to all - except to those who choose to take advantage of what he has been saying/writing in the past couple of weeks in order to further their cause.