Archbishop Emeritus Joseph Mercieca
Let God say what's right or wrong
I was happy to see the title Majority Of Students Oppose Abortion (October 15). Unfortunately, however, when I went through the text of the same news item I could not help feeling disappointed and sad.
The report referred to the findings of what statistician Vincent Marmarà described as a scientific survey wherein 395 Maltese University students, randomly chosen, were asked to share their opinion about a number of hot issues.
The survey shows that the large majority of students interviewed, 78.7 per cent, reject abortion. However, 14.4 per cent express themselves in favour and another 6.8 per cent said they don't know.
Moreover, it turns out that, as regards divorce, 55 per cent of the students believe divorce should be introduced, as opposed to 33 per cent who were described as adamantly against.
We also read that the "progressive" student organisation MOVE disagreed with abortion but supported the introduction of divorce, gay marriage, cohabitation rights and condoms on campus and is still discussing its position on the morning-after pill.
This organisation encourages progressives to discuss issues "our conservative society" has been afraid to discuss.
The report quotes MOVE president Godfrey Galea saying: "Progressive is when you believe everyone has every right to live freely and equally without discrimination. Progressives believe everyone should have the right to choose and make their own decisions without anyone or anything imposing what should or should not be done. Progressives do not accept the status quo and believe change serves to renew".
During a debate it was also stated that the condom machine on campus was not only important to promote safe sex but was a symbol of the distinction that had to be made between the Church and the University, which was a secular education institution.
A view of the beliefs as pronounced by MOVE shows that this could be interpreted as an incorrect and wrong appreciation of the Church's views on sexual health education. In fact, MOVE spokesman Byron Camilleri said: "It was worrying Malta still had no sexual health policy and that the Church's views on sexual health education did not respect today's realities when, on average, people lost their virginity at 16".
Yet, it needs to be stated that what progressives appear to understand when they speak about the right to choose and decide what should or should not be done is a gross moral blunder.
However, these progressives bring to light an interesting side of the picture of our times: many young people are today passing through a new phase of social life. They are witnessing quick and deep changes in the milieu they are living; besides they feel they are the product of a more intelligent and creative mind and experience a deep sense of liberty as never before.
Many young people of our day have such a high sense of the dignity of the human person that they feel prompted to act more and more on their own judgment, enjoying and making use of a responsible freedom, not driven by coercion but motivated by a sense of duty.
This demand for freedom in human society regards chiefly the quest for the values proper to the human spirit; it regards, in the first place, the free exercise of religion in society.
Yet, it does not rarely happen that this kind of freedom is greatly and very often abused, as when people feel they can do everything that is pleasing to them notwithstanding that it is morally wrong.
It is dangerous to state that I have the right to do what my conscience tells me to do simply because my conscience tells me to do it or to act in this way. It is dangerous because, this way, in the end it is my conscience, and not the objective truth, which determines what is right or wrong, true or false.
In the presence of such beliefs, as upheld and proposed by the progressives, it would be very useful that these views of theirs be reconsidered in the light and the context of what we Christians hold that Almighty God declared openly to all mankind.
When Almighty God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and forbade them from eating fruit from a specific tree upon punishment of death, God made it clear that no person on earth has the power to decide what is wrong and what is right.
Indeed, no person on earth can ever usurp this power that belongs solely and exclusively to Almighty God.
By straying far from God's will our first parents fell into sin, that is, the wrong use of freedom. Yet, the heavenly Father did not forsake us; he sent his son Jesus to heal our wounded freedom and to restore the disfigured image, making it even more beautiful.
Victorious over sin and death, Jesus affirmed his lordship over the world and history. He is alive and invites us not to submit our personal freedom to any earthly power but only to him and to his almighty Father.
One's conscience must remain in obedience to the law of God, which is not always the easy way. One recognises the weight of the sacrifices and the burdens it can impose.
Heroism is sometimes called for in order to remain faithful to the requirements of the divine law.
I make my own Pope John Paul II's appeal way back in 2002 in Rome: "Young people of the new millennium, do not misuse your freedom! Do not lose the great dignity that God has conferred on you as his sons and daughters! Submit only to Christ, who wants your good and your true joy (cf. Mt 23, 8-10); to him, who wants you to be men and women who are perfectly happy and fulfilled! In this way you will find that only by following God's will can we be the light of the world and the salt of the earth!"
24 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Kenneth Cassar
Oct 30th 2009, 07:15
@ Frans Sammut:
Thanks for your clarification. In view of it, I will unhesitatingly declare that you do have a point. We've had enough talk (on both sides). Now, the government must have the courage to declare whether it intends to propose legislation, or shelve the whole issue.
Regarding Archbishop Emeritus Mercieca, yes, it would seem that he has more guts than the civil authorities (and I say this even though I completely disagree with him on the issue of divorce). However, one must be realistic, and remember that Archbishops are not elected by the people, while governments are. That is one of the problems of democracy - politicians have much to lose if they hold and disclose unpopular opinions. This is one of the many things that makes democracy imperfect - albeit the best option we have.
Frans Sammut
Oct 29th 2009, 16:58
@Kenneth Cassar
No, Sir. You have been abundantly clear. Perhaps the fault lies with me, in that I did not make myself sufficiently clear due to the same reason you mentioned. What I meant was this: the fact that Mr Scicluna presented his findings to Government, it is up to Government to offer its opinion on the findings and make a responsible decision thereon It is in this vein that I said that the opinion of the Opposition is irrelevant. Minister Gatt has gone on record that Government, enjoying a parliamentary majority, hardly needs to take any decision before the same parliament. Now either Minister Gatt was wrong then, or if he was right, the same should apply regarding this issue. Where does the Opposition come into this?
P.S. I must say Archbishop Emeritus Mercieca has a lot more guts than the civil authorities in speaking out his mind. Now Government must choose between Mgr Mercieca and Mr Martin Scicluna, both worthy gentlemen though holding different views. Until Government states its decision - and I repeat this responsibly - it is causing unnecessary disquiet among the people it represents.
chris schembri
Oct 29th 2009, 13:58
I will try (since it is a long document and i do not have much time), that should be interesting and more plausible than the talking snake story. And the paradox mentioned above that we are born with an original sin by the hands of this beloved god source of all love and infinite forgiveness.
Ramon Casha
Oct 29th 2009, 13:36
@Chris Schembri. Yes, evolution is "just a theory", like gravity.
Kenneth Cassar
Oct 29th 2009, 13:18
@ Chris Schembri:
Just a clarification: Evolution is not just a theory. For an exhaustive (over 400 pages) document of evidence for evolution, I would suggest reading Richard Dawkins' latest book entitled "The Greatest Show on Earth - The Evidence for Evolution".
chris schembri
Oct 29th 2009, 12:38
Evolution is still a theory my friend J.M.Meli, but the bible is a whole big story. The greatest story ever told, that is what it is called. And if it is not, for sure it is one on the most fantastic stories.
But like all other stories made by men it has errors, it was written in different times to explain the unexplainable. This has been done in all regions of the world where there was mankind. And when there was no answer, people looked up in the skies to find it in the stars or attributed the events to the divine and the unseen.
Obviously the conclusions made are all lies, made purposely to comfort the questionable minds of men. And just like the church persecuted pagans for believing in the made up stories of Zeus and of Odin; since they were invented, we will disapprove your little story of God dear Archibishop. Though we won't slaughter, massacre or torture anyone for the sake of thier believe like some did...
Just b a religious leader and take care of your own field; spirituality and leave socio-political changes to the ones concerned with it.
Joseph M. Meli
Oct 29th 2009, 11:38
"Adam and Eve" crops up every time the Church wants to IMPOSE its own Doctrines over humanity.
Science has DISPROVEN the Myth that Adam & Eve were created by a divinity.
Man is the product of EVOLUTION !!!
Franco Farrugia
Oct 29th 2009, 08:43
@ Sandro Vella: I don't think that anyone is disputing the right that the Church has to evangelise and to teach. But that right stops there. It should not in any way try and threaten with hell our legislators, because then, that would be abuse!
Kenneth Cassar
Oct 29th 2009, 07:50
@ Frans Sammut:
Perhaps I have not been sufficiently clear (due to word-count restriction).
Laws in democracies are indeed based on compromise or expression of majority views, but in representative democracy, the majority views that count for legislation are those of political representatives (members of parliament). Each member of parliament has one vote.
Therefore, far from being the case that what the opposition thinks is not relevant, in actual fact, what every member of parliament thinks is very relevant and actually vital.
That the prime minister might be undecided does not mean other members of parliament (on both sides) are likewise.
In a healthy democracy, members of parliament are allowed a free-vote. In a dictatorship, the leader always decides. Am I right in believing we are citizens of a healthy democracy?
Ramon Casha
Oct 29th 2009, 06:52
@Dr. Sandro Vella: The Church CLAIMS to be an institution established by Jesus to represent him. The only "proof" it offers is its own interpretation of the scripture which the Church itself collated, edited and maintained for millennia. What makes the Bible more reliable than, say, the Hindu Vedas or the Koran, and what makes you sure that the Church's interpretation of that same verse was intended to establish itself as Jesus' representatives?
This is called a circular argument: "The Church is Jesus' representative on earth because the Church says it is Jesus' representatives on earth, and the Church is always right because the Church is Jesus' representative on earth."
Of course the Church doesn't mind contradicting those same scriptures when it wants to. For instance according to the Gospel attributed to Matthew, divorce IS ACCEPTABLE in cases of adultery (Matt 5:32), and all of the laws of the Old Testament are still binding and will continue to be "until heaven and earth disappear" (Matt 5:18-19).
Carmel Serracino-Inglott
Oct 29th 2009, 02:08
Most of the correspondents quote the testament and understand nothing. The experts, that is the Bishops and those who read well the Catholic Beliefs know that our bishop is right. Our bishops DO NOT IMPOPSE anything but teach us the right way through the help of God ( The Holy Spirit (Ghost). The majority believe and respect the in many ways the minority through the secular government but this does not mean that one can kill. Another example is that the BISHOPS nowadays at least, teach us that divorce per se is not healthy for the family set up. This is logic for where and when there is divorce there is not a healthy family. Now if you divorced the Catholics pray for you to lead a good life. Now a days Our Holy Church does not condemn you to hell because as many say times change but YES most still respect and try to learn from the Bishops letters. Adam and Eve parable means that man ( as many are doing even today and will continue to do so because of our very nature) revolted against God
Who is infinity and that sin could only be redeemed by (cont)
Kevin Cassar
Oct 28th 2009, 18:49
@ Dr Sandro Vella.... Your comment reeks of arrogance and hypocrisy. First of all you are implying that what you believe is the truth without providing any proof whatsoever and expecting all the rest of the people to accept your belief just because you or some book said so. Don't get me wrong you are perfectly entitled to have a belief and to live by it, but to impose it on others is another thing. I give you two fundamental reasons why your statement does not apply to anyone but yourself and those who CHOOSE to accept the same belif. The first is that Islam, Buddhism, Scientology, Hindu etc etc all make the same claim you just did and you cannot disagree that they cannot all be right. The second is that you say you believe in Jesus as God and yet don't exactly follow his teachings. In more than one Gospel Jesus said to people who asked him how to get to heaven - Sell all your belongings and give to the poor and follow me. Now if I believed that Jesus was God, I'd do exactly as he said but I don't. What about you?
Frans Sammut
Oct 28th 2009, 16:49
I fully agree with the following statement: "Democracy, where laws are mostly compromise or expression of majority views (keeping in mind the rights of minorities), though definitely not perfect, is the best system yet devised." I am baffled however by Government's silence on the subject. I, for one, am sufficiently acquainted with Mr Martin Scicluna's views, but am still anxiously waiting to learn what the democratically elected Government has to say on the whole issue. Does it agree or not on the need (or otherwise) of divorce for the people it represents, or better still, has it carried out the necessary research into the people's views and aspirations on the subject. What the Opposition thinks on the subject is not really relevant. It does not have the majority of seats needed in Parliament to enact what it believes is best for the country. What Government thinks, on the other hand, is of the essence. Furthermore if the Government side is undecided over the issue, it should shelve it until it reaches some decision at party level, then either present it in Parliament or else throw it out completely. Its current attitude is creating unnecessary disquiet among the people.
Emanuel Cilia Debono
Oct 28th 2009, 15:54
When the Archbishop Emeritus, Mgr. Joseph Mercieca appeals to God, he appeals to our own consciences. Decisions may be difficult for the individual, especially if one finds oneself in adverse circumstances; but it is the God given duty of Mother Church - a duty assigned to her by her Divine Founder Jesus Christ- to help us reach the certainty of moral truth at all times.
Majority opinions need not necessarily reflect the voice of God, nor do they necessarily conform to the Law of Nature as Divinely inspired in men's hearts. Moral freedom implies a moral responsibility one's part to seek what is right in th eyes of God. God does not force anybody to act responsibly ; however He reasonably expects us to make a genuine effort to reflect upon His teachings , before taking decisions which affect profoundly our own lives, as well as our relationships with others and with our Creator .
The least one expects in the present circumstances is that -whatever one's views- one listen to what the Archbishop Emeritus has to say , with the proper respect that the statement deserves.
Dr Sandro Vella
Oct 28th 2009, 14:46
@ Ramon Casha, who questions the authority of the Church and its moral teachings:
God himself DID make an appearance on planet Earth through his Divine Son Jesus Christ. The Church is not a club, but an institution established by the Divine Saviour to preach in His name.
I remind you that Jesus Christ said to the Apostle Peter: ''I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Matt 16:17-19)
Yes, the Church has the moral authority to teach the Good News to all men and women of goodwill. It is a right and a duty bestowed by God through his Son, and nourished by the Holy Spirit.
Ivan Balzan
Oct 28th 2009, 13:03
Adam and Eve.... come on Archbishop Emeritus give us a break. Are we back to talking snakes and eating apples again.
david camilleri
Oct 28th 2009, 12:13
if your god is so great why would it even care about humans? a perfect god worrying about earthly sagas seems silly to me...
people should be left alone to decide what they wish to do. if a person thinks it is wrong to abort then they may refuse to do it. the church should stay out of politics. its thirst for power over weaker people should be thwarted by the government. unfortunately the government has no back bone. secular politics is the opposition of fundamentalist governments. Malta is well on the way to be a fundamentalist country.
humans created god...god created nothing and has no place in our world.
B Agius
Oct 28th 2009, 11:12
The Archbishop still feeds his flock on stories from the Bible and still appears to accept them literally. Adam and Eve - the garden of Eden etc etc. Enough said. It's funny and strange - Bishops - I notice- tend to write/ preach in ways that they think their flock -or the society they happen to live in- will react. Clearly in Malta they haven't advanced much from parroting bible stories and their link to morality . Bishops in other countries - USA-Canada-Australia- don't seem to peddle this stuff that much. They will be laughed at if they did. They, still maintain a certain line- but the societies they live in have moved on. And they know it. So much for a universal position.
Ramon Casha
Oct 28th 2009, 11:04
Great idea!! "Let God say what's right or wrong"... not a human intermediary. Not even a self-proclaimed "vicar of God". Not a priest, bishop or pope. Not an old collection of folk tales and superstitions either. God himself, in person, making an appearance and settling once and for all who should speak for him in matters of morality. Otherwise it's nothing more than the opinion of a boys-only club trying to decide the fate of the world.
R. Bartolo
Oct 28th 2009, 11:03
You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do.
A. Farrugia
Oct 28th 2009, 11:03
Why the Archbishop had to bring Adam & Eve into the picture again is beyond me. By all means discuss human dignity, respect for one's body and that of others, but please stop discussing this through references to what is obviously a metaphor!
The Creation story is not FACT, it is just a representation of our human weaknesses, and it should be left as such. As humans, we're prone to fall for things that are intrinsically wrong, and at the same time we have the capacity to do good deeds. I suggest the Archbishop should seek to stimulate debate in this direction, rather than rely on Adam & Eve stories!!
One more thing, I take issue with this part: "By straying far from God's will our first parents fell into sin, that is, the wrong use of freedom. Yet, the heavenly Father did not forsake us;..."
I fail to accept that we're born with an inherited sin - I think God wouldn't judge us before we actually act. It's irrelevant to a newborn baby what sins humankind committed - belonging to humankind doesn't make us all the same in my mind.
Franco Farrugia
Oct 28th 2009, 11:01
Once upon a time, God 'said' that the world was flat and people were actually physically tortured for thinking otherwise.
Once, God 'said' that slavery was 'right'. In fact, it was always wrong.
Once, God 'said' that it was 'right' to vote for this Party and not for that one.
Once, God 'said' that some people should be segregated, condemned and vilified.
God says many things but he is very misinterpreted by common mortals!
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Oct 28th 2009, 10:25
Sadly, life is not as simple as His Grace suggests. God's word needs to be interpreted and celibate priests (without experience of life) are hardly qualified to interpret it. After all, we do not have God's word in the original. We have copies of copies of copies of what purports to be the word of God and translations of translations of translations of what some claim to be the word of God. And while it is true that nowhere in Scripture do we find God creating Adam and Steve, it appears God at the very least turned a blind eye to incest. After all, how could Adam and Eve and their children have had other children if not for incestuous relationships? May I respectfully suggest that God probably created other couples? Perhaps same-sex couples also? Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Kenneth Cassar
Oct 28th 2009, 10:11
"When Almighty God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and forbade them from eating fruit from a specific tree upon punishment of death..."
Ehm...no such thing happened, and such talk of Adam and Eve fails to impress the educated and is actually counter-productive. Any good points might be dismissed by association as creationist hogwash.
I do agree with the Archbishop Emeritus that conscience should not be our only guide to moral behaviour. Conscience should be examined by rational thought (that of the thinker, and of others through reading and debate).
However, when one says that we should "let God say what's right and wrong", we end in troubled waters. Even Catholics cannot agree completely on what "God wants", let alone people of other Christian denominations, other religions, or none.
Democracy, where laws are mostly compromise or expression of majority views (keeping in mind the rights of minorities), though definitely not perfect, is the best system yet devised. If we revert back to an age where laws were dictated by people claiming to have exclusive direct communication with God, we are truly in serious trouble. Witness the inquisition and the present day equivalent in Islamic fundamentalist sharia law.