Private lives in public places
The bishops have made it clear that cohabiting couples cannot receive Holy Communion but, as Kurt Sansone finds, out the debate also has a grey shade.
Keeping a distance... The Church's stand on cohabitation has led to an animated debate.
Fr Ġorġ Dalli may have created controversy by saying he could not deny Holy Communion to a cohabiting woman but his words echoed similar sentiments by a senior cardinal on divorced Catholics last year.
The former Archbishop of Milan and veteran Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini had urged the Church to find solutions for admitting divorced Catholics who remarried to the sacraments.
"There are some Catholics who are today in an irreversible and innocent state. They have taken on new obligations to children from a second marriage and there is absolutely no reason for going back. Indeed, such a choice would not be wise," Cardinal Martini had said.
His thoughts were published last year in the book We're All In The Same Boat, a compilation of dialogues between him and Fr Luigi Maria Verzé, founder of the San Raffaele University and Hospital in Milan.
Cardinal Martini also made it clear he was not talking about all divorced Catholics because the Church "must not favour flimsiness and superficiality but rather promote fidelity and perseverance".
In many ways, what Fr Dalli said on television two weeks ago has semblance to the words of Cardinal Martini, only the subject was not divorce but cohabitation.
However, the priest's exact words were taken out of context in the debate that ensued after the Xarabank programme, which also prompted the bishops to issue a statement reminding cohabiting couples they could not receive the Eucharist even though they were welcome in the Church.
Fr Dalli was answering a question by programme host Peppi Azzopardi about a woman's particular case when he uttered the controversial words: "I would be abusing my power were I not to administer Holy Communion."
Subsequently, Fr Dalli also drew a distinction between the different reasons that led people to cohabit and insisted he could not condemn a married woman who was abandoned with three children and who found meaning and love in a new relationship.
Faith was a personal relationship with God, he added, and people had their conscience.
These words seem to have been lost in the "circus" that ensued, according to Fr Ġwann Xerri, a Dominican.
"I am quite upset and hurt with the way all this issue is being dealt with. It is very sad how callous and discriminatory we can be," Fr Xerri said.
He refrained from putting cohabiting couples all in the same basket insisting there was no such thing as a "cohabiting people".
"My experience tells me there is a unique individual with her particular history in a unique relationship with another individual, who is also a unique person with a particular history, and their unfathomable personal and joint journey of faith with yet another person, God!"
The personal touch in dealing with cohabiting people was also raised by Fr Paul Galea, senior lecturer at the University's Faculty of Theology, who said prohibition was "certainly not the right way to engage" with these couples.
"Nothing replaces the personal pastoral encounter either in the confessional or in a counseling setting," Fr Galea said.
However, he did point out that prohibition to receive Holy Communion was based on two arguments: upholding the moral teaching and reducing scandal.
"The difficulties arise with couples who presumably live a life like married people without actually being married. According to Christian morality, sexual activity is licit only between married couples. Engaging in sexual relationships before or outside marriage goes against the sixth commandment, if not against the ninth," Fr Galea said.
His concern was also about scandal and the Church being perceived as condoning cohabitation if it administered Holy Communion.
"If the couple is known to be living in an irregular state this could create problems of a pastoral nature by setting a bad example or scandal to those who know them," he said.
He insisted it could also be interpreted as "open defiance" of Christian morality and the priest who, "knowingly or unknowingly, gives them Holy Communion could be interpreted as approving of their behavior".
Fr Galea did call for a different approach, "imbued with understanding and love" to engage with those cohabiting and help them reach a solution that respects both moral law and their conscience.
"People who understand the reasons behind the prohibition rather than feel offended often feel challenged to do something about their situation and try to change as much as it is possible," he said.
The moral dilemma was also posited by sociologist Fr Joe Inguanez, who widened the discussion beyond cohabitation, which he described as a "loaded word".
"Is it correct for a Catholic who is having extramarital sexual relations to receive Holy Communion? Our bishops have given a clear reply. In my view, when anyone appeals to his conscience, one cannot avoid giving very serious consideration to the teaching of the bishops," Fr Inguanez said.
Requirements are not equivalent to denials, he added, pointing out that the Church's teachings have consistently taught that one had to be in a state of grace to receive certain sacraments.
"I think the best way of dealing with people on any matter, but more so in questions of conscience, is through a loving search for truth. The avoidance of truth on the part of either saints or sinners is a way of blocking communication with God and men," Fr Inguanez said.
The Church's stand on cohabiting couples and their eligibility for Holy Communion is bound to remain a bone of moral contention inside the walls of religious officialdom as much as for the flock of people outside those walls.
However, according to Fr Xerri a myriad of issues from the civil regulation of cohabitation to matters of faith and intimate processes are being stitched together, confusing the arguments at stake.
"They are being put in the same electric mixer and from this only something very indigestible can come out," he said.
It is possibly the aftereffect of eating the indigestible that has led to Fr Dalli's words being lost in translation.
What they said
Fr Ġorġ Dalli
"The Eucharist is not mine. I would be abusing my power were I not to administer Holy Communion. What shall we tell this woman... abandon your children and leave this man? If in her conscience she feels Christ is inviting her to participate in the Eucharist nobody has the right to interfere with her conscience."
The bishops
"We wish to affirm that everybody - these couples included - is welcome in the Church... however, the Catholic Church reiterates that those couples who live together outside of marriage are not to receive the Eucharist. The Church does not impose this as a form of punishment but, rather, because their way of living is not in conformity with the Sacrament of Christian marriage."
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
shaun mccarthy
May 27th 2010, 17:31
Welcome in the church - but cannot receive communion . Seems the church want it both ways .What about the innocent party in a divorce or here in Malta a separation............who do not change their beliefs or committment to the church , but are punished and treated like sinners;.
If the powers that be were to have real evidence about people who find themselves in this position and the scare mongering about broken homes , affect on children etc they would find a solution for those that wish to be loyal to their faith. Why can one not beg for forgiveness say in confession and be forgiven like you are ' supposedly' for any other sin you confess to . This problem of broken marriages will NEVER go away and no one GOD included can force people together who no longer want to be .So wake up or over time the churches like they are in many parts of the world willl be more and more empty.
Joe Grima Brussels
May 27th 2010, 16:12
@Ray Sacco.
I totally agree with you, Ray. In fact, I said that is 'the first step...' If they are proved guilty, the state should take over. That makes common sense. I was only answering Ms Busuttil's allegations that she knows of someone who IS STILL DOING IT. And she still has not answered, and still not reported the incident. Maybe she is protecting someone?
As you well said, more should be done than removing them (or anyone with the same tendencies) from one place to the other. What, I ask, has happened to all those who have so far been convicted of such a hedious crime, including parents abusing of their own children?
ray sacco
May 27th 2010, 18:06
@joe grima brussels:
"if they are proven guilty, the state should take over"
but that is the problem in malta! parents and other citizens are arraigned and convicted or proven innocent by the justice system. but clergy members are not, because there is an agreement between state and catholic church which mantains that clergy members who break the law are probed by the church's response team and not by the police! this is absolute interference in our country's civil matters and it is shameful for both church and government to still abide by this agreement!
Joe Grima Brussels
May 27th 2010, 13:33
@ A, Schembri Adami
That's right, and ONE wrong can NEVER become right! That's why the church keeps insisting that cohabitation is wrong. Actually, the church is JUST ECHOING Jesus' words. Since Jesus showed us that it is wrong, no amount of blogging or protesting can make it right.
renald williams
May 27th 2010, 13:17
Wonderful quotes - Faith was a personal relationship with God - a loving search for truth...
to find the truth for a faithful personal relationship with Jesus read His NewTestament.
Il-Katekizmu-tal-Knisja-Kattolika
Pagna-179 Paragrafu-687
Dawk li jemmnu fi Kristu jaghrfuh [lil Alla] ghax jghammar fihom.
Pagna-420 Paragrafu-1709
Min jemmen fi Kristu jsir iben Alla.
Pagna-421 Paragrafu-1715
Min jemmen fi Kristu ghandu l-hajja gdida fl-Ispirtu s-Santu.
Pagna-43 Paragrafu-104
Iskrittura Mqaddsa... l-manteniment u l-qawwa... ghax... tassew hi, il-Kelma ta’ Alla.
Pagna-49 Paragrafu-131
Hemm tant qawwa u sahha fil-Kelma ta’ Alla, li zzomm u tqawwi... issahhah... fil-fidi... tmantni lil ruh... u hi nixxiegha safja li ma tintemm qatt fil-hajja spiritwali...
Jehtieg li l-bieb ta’ l-Iskrittura Mqaddsa jkun miftuh berah ghall-insara.
Pagna-49 Paragrafu-133
l-insara kollha... bil-qari ta’ spiss tal-Kotba Mqaddsa jaghrfu lil Kristu Gesu’.
Fil-fatt min ma jafx il-Kotba Mqaddsa ma jafx lil Kristu.
Pagna-50 Paragrafu-135
Il-Kotba Mqaddsa fihom il-Kelma ta’ Alla... huma tassew din il-Kelma.
Pagna-50 Paragrafu-136
Alla hu l-awtur ta’ l-Iskrittura Mqaddsa... Hu jizgura ukoll li l-kitbiet taghhom jghallmu bla zball il-verita’ tas-salvazzjoni.
Pagna-150 Paragrafu- 572
Iskrittura li ta Gesu’ stess.
Il-fidi mela tigi bis-smigh; u s-smigh bil-kelma ta’ Kristu. Rumani 10:17.
Nitlobkom bil-Mulej li din l-epistola tinqara lill-ahwa… kollha. 1 Tessalonkin 5:27.
renald williams
May 27th 2010, 13:03
wonderful quote - We're All In The Same Boat... New Testament Christians
need Sinless Jesus to be their Saviour from their sins
Min minnkom isibni [Gesu’] hati ta’ xi dnub? Gwann 8:46.
Dak [Kristu] li ma gharaf ebda dnub. 2 Korintin 5:21.
Imgarrab [Gesu’] f’kollox bhalna, izda bla dnub. Lhud 4:15.
Hu [Gesu’]… bla htija, bla ghajb. Lhud 7:26.
Kristu, bhala haruf bla ghajb u bla tebgha. 1 Pietru 1:19.
Hu [Kristu] li ma ghamel l-ebda dnub, u li ma nstab ebda qerq f’fommu. 1 Pietru 2:22.
U li ma hemm ebda dnub fih [Kristu]. 1 Gwann 3:5.
Twaqqaf [Gesu’], u qalilhom: Min fostkom hu bla dnub, jixhtilha gebla [lill-mara l-maqbuda]
l-ewwel. Gwann 8:7.
Gesu’; ghax hu jsalva… minn dnubiethom. Mattew 1:21.
Marija [omm Gesu’] qalet: Ruhi tkabbar il-Mulej, U l-ispirtu tieghi jithenna f’Alla s-Salvatur tieghi. Luqa 1:46-47.
Is-salvazzjoni… bil-mahfra ta’ dnubiethom. Luqa 1:77.
U qalilha [Gesu’]: Dnubietek mahfura… U qal lill-mara [midinba]: Il-fidi tieghek salvatek. Luqa 7:48, 50.
Bin il-bniedem [Gesu’] gie jfittex u isalva dak li kien mitluf. Luqa 19:10.
Salvatur [Gesu’], biex jaghti… l-mahfra tad-dnubiet. Atti 5:31.
Gesu’ gie fid-dinja biex isalva l-midinbin. 1 Timotju 1:15.
Nafdaw f’Alla haj, li hu s-Salvatur tal-bnedmin kollha. 1 Timotju 4:10.
Joe Grima Brussels
May 27th 2010, 12:02
@Maria Busuttil
No, dear Maria, priests who are alleged to have abused children were held from administering the sacraments. I believe that that was the first thing that the bishops did on hearing of these allegations.
You said that they are 'still abusing'. I believe that they were seperated from children as well. If, on the other hand, you KNOW of alleged abuses which, according to you, are STILL GOING ON, it is your HOLY duty to report them. By keeping silent (supposing that what you said is true), you are aiding the culprits, to the detriment of the victims. In that case, you are as guilty as the perpetrators!
A.Schembri Adami
May 27th 2010, 12:54
Two wrongs do not make a right. Only the blunt put all in one basket1
ray sacco
May 27th 2010, 15:36
@joe grima brussels:
the paedophile priests were seperated from children you say! how? by transfering them to another community? by transfering them to some job which does not involve children? are they monitored? if a paedophile is free, knowing that he is above the law, just as the paedophile clergy in malta, there is no stopping him from trying to abuse again. no matter where he is transfered to and no matter what other job he is given! these are sick criminals who should be locked up, regardless of who they are! only the gullible and naive believe that just by transfering and stopping administartion of the sacrament will end the paedophile's craving for child abuse! the catholic church can do what it wants with it's own rules, but when it comes to the civil state, everybody is suppose to be equal!
maria busuttil
May 27th 2010, 11:26
But the priests who have and still do abuse children are allowed to receive Holy Communion and adminster Holy Communion right so unfair so please Bishops think it over one is called happinness the other is called crueltiy to children!!!!!!!!!!