Church and state not strictly separated

Martin Scicluna was ill-advised to drag in the hugely controversial issue of Strict Church-State Separation as it applies to Malta, in support of his criticism of the President's speech of welcome on the occasion of the recent visit of the Pope to these Islands (April 20).

The character of the relationship of the state of Malta with the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion is defined in our Constitution. It is not one of strict, absolute separation. Nor is the present position of the Catholic Church as defined in the encyclical Deus Caritas Est, one in favour of absolute separation, whatever Mr Scicluna might read in it.

The degree of separation of Church and state Malta has opted to take on since 1974 makes it the duty and the right of the Catholic Church in Malta to teach what principles it regards as right and what as wrong and its message is loud and clear. It is against divorce, against abortion and against euthanasia.

Being a secular, liberal, parliamentary democracy, the population of Malta will have the opportunity to decide if it wants to follow the teaching of the Catholic Church or not at a general election.

If Mr Scicluna wishes to propose some institution other than the Church "to establish moral foundations" in our society (which are different and which break any perceived monopoly of the Catholic Church) he is perfectly free to do so.

Somehow I do not think that his personal views on a preferable morality will shake the loyalty of the majority of the Maltese people in the faith of their forbears.