Roamer’s column

Well, not quite, but sometime today we will probably have the result of the referendum on divorce. The subject has filled thousands upon thousands of newspaper column inches, flung opinions into cyberspace and back and taken up considerable air time.

Much of what was written, spoken, was repetitive; some of it unedifying – take Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando’s unseemly and grossly intolerant outburst at a meeting held by the No With Respect for the Future movement, a meeting he was reported to have hijacked; other some, meretricious, deceitfully nuanced, irrelevant or downright incorrect.

Surveys were conducted, some employing dubious methodology, others suggesting that the result of the referendum was too close to call.

Misco International, probably the only professional organisation in this field, came up with information, drawn from a sample of 800 respondents, that 71 per cent of Maltese believe that the introduction of divorce would have a negative impact on children.

Little wonder the pro-no-fault divorce lobby shamelessly declared that children should be kept out of the discussion. Nine per cent thought that divorce would have a positive impact on society. It will be interesting to see how that worked out in the polling booths.

Opinions were flaunted that had as much as sequitur as the preposterous idea that because a fly flies all that fly are flies. Consider this Martin Scicluna absurdity, which appeared last Wednesday in The Times:

“I hate to think how EU ambassadors resident in Malta are reporting back to their capitals about (Tonio Fenech’s) faith-based judgments on divorce. Given that Malta’s involvement in the crucial negotiations to save the eurozone from collapse lies in his hands, his credibility among other EU states must raise grounds for concern.”

Quite apart from the singular rudeness and as Italians are wont to say: Ma che centra? What on earth has the finance minister’s faith-based take on divorce to do with any contribution he makes to a discussion on the eurozone? Unless, of course, one has reached the weird conclusion that the collapse of the eurozone is connected to the collapse of the family.

And when we take even the most cursory look at the use made of statistics, mendacious claims were made by the Yes to divorce group – and put to rest by its No to divorce counterpart; such as that, this year, there were more civil marriages taking place than marriages in Church. False on two counts. Out of 404 marriages, 56 per cent took place in Church and from the remainder, 226, only 24 couples were made up of a Maltese man and a Maltese woman.

And consider the reference made, out of context, by the Yes movement to show that part of a speech made by Mgr Charles Vella was in favour of divorce. Quite apart from any dissimulation there may have been in using this as part of the movement’s advertising campaign, it is interesting that what a priest says in favour of divorce can be used, or misused, by the movement but what a priest says against divorce must be regarded balefully, a sign of religious bigotry. Whom the gods destroy...

And what effort was not made to keep the Church out of a discussion in which it had a perfectly legitimate interest.

If a priest said something the Yesses considered untoward, what veiled threat was not made that the Church, this time, not the priest, was employing the threat of fire and brimstone; worse, that the Church was perilously close to bringingmortal sin into the discussion? (“Nearly a mortal sin” is how Lino Spiteri put it; define that, if you can).Crusade? Pur-lease.

To go back to the beginning; it is not all over bar the counting. Whether the referendum returns a Yes-to-divorce verdict, which I doubt, or one that expresses itself against the introduction of divorce, which I think will be the case, the real debate on marriage and the family will begin.

By this I mean that the catechesis on marriage and the family will become, must become, the centre of the Church’s mission.

If the family is the state-within-the-state, the foundational building block of society I believe it to be and the Church knows it is, bishops, priests, parents, government, lay society – children and youths in particular – well-formed catechesists, all these need to appraise and re-appraise the contribution they are called upon to make; and to take a long, hard look at themselves and rediscover what for too long has been taken for granted.

In short, whatever the result of yesterday’s exercise, there is a requirement for the wake-up call to shake Church, state and society out of their stupor.

Dead in the water

It has been a busy fortnight in the life of Barack Obama; what he did with it was another matter. He gave a couple of speeches on the Middle East and paid rare tribute to Hillary Clinton, who has indicated that she will not be running for the Presidency next year, thus allowing him to declare that he “believe(d) that she will go down as one of the finest Secretaries of State in our nation’s history”. Even Clinton would hardly dare to say that on her own account.

He held top level talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, about which, more later. He visited his ancestral roots in Ireland – where else? – and was accused of “naked electioneering”; which it was.

Still, he is not the first US President to do so; after all, there are more than 30 million Irish voters in the US of A.

He then enjoyed a state visit to the UK, state banquet and all; played ping-pong with David Cameron, served barbecue stuff to families of soldiers who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, addressed both Houses of Parliament in Westminster Hall and acknowledged, finally, that a “special relationship” existed between his country and Britain – more than that, actually; this relationship was “essential” to both countries; and flew to Deauville for a G8 summit.

Whether there is any uniqueness in the relationship between the US and Britain is a moot point; the kinship demonstrated over the past two-and-a-half years is something else again. Consider the challenges presented by Muammar Gaddafi even if, no thanks to Obama, the endgame appears to be in sight.

The President has been almost scandalously aloof from this crisis; he has relinquished not only the leadership required of him.

He has actually withdrawn gunships ideal for the success of the mission from the battle zone. This means Britain and France do more and more as the US does less and less.

But worth remembering that as the words “special relationship” are mouthed by Obama, there was little specially friendly in America’s backing of a resolution by the Organisation of American States calling for negotiations over the sovereignty of the Falklands; and only this year the President went overboard at a joint press conference with the French President, declaring that, “We don’t have a stronger friend and stronger ally than Nicolas Sarkozy, and the French people.” For Cameron that must have gone down like a lead balloon. Let’s play ping-pong, Barack.

And who packed Churchill’s bust, a gift – on loan – to the Americans in the wake of the 9/11 attack, sent it to the British Embassy and also failed to host a British prime minister to dinner – but presented him with 25 DVDs?

At the end of it all, what remains of any substance, and that in danger of death in the water, were his Middle East speeches, in which he pronounced “a new chapter in American diplomacy” and came up with his demand that Israel must recognise the 1967 borders; this on the eve of a visit to the States by Netanyahu, at whose hands the American President deservedly received short shrift.

A return to 1967 lines, he told the President publicly on television, was “indefensible”.

And later, in a speech to a joint session of both Houses of the US Congress, he reiterated this even more emphatically: “Israel will not return to the indefensible boundaries of 1967”.

While Obama played ping-pong with Cameron, Netanyahu was receiving standing ovations (two dozen of them it was reported).

From the Palestinian side, the American President’s jaunty exercise into the Israeli-Palestinian minefields also received its comeuppance, “positive” on the matter of the 1967 borders but “regrettably insufficient...(and) contradictory”.

Articulation attracts acolytes;it is no substitute for makingserious policy decisions andcarrying them out. Take a lookat what is happening in Syriaand American-EU foot-dragging in dealing with Basharal-Assad, who has been farmore inimical to westerninterests than Gaddafi.

Take a peep at Bahrain. Recall American pussy-footing when the Egyptian evolution took place at the start of this year.

As for Iran, which continues to pose the most difficult challenge to peace in the Middle East, the American leadership still has no idea what to do about that country as it works on its nuclear ambitions, helps Syria and any enemy of Israel.

Back in the US, Obama will discover that be it the Middle East, be it the resignation of George Mitchell, his special envoy to that area, be it the economy, be it the electioneering he is eager to embark upon and the one billion dollars he hopes to collect to remain at the White House, be it unemployment, be it the deficit and the national debt (think trillions) – the future is grim.