Ray Azzopardi, Xemxija
Secular values, absolute truths and modern trends
Raphael Dingli, in his contribution In The Secular Way (June 9), speaks about what he terms secular values. He states that “individuals in a secular state have no right to impose their morality on others”. He also says that “Malta is a secular state and that religious beliefs should have no part in the political process.” He comes to the conclusion that “there are two consciences battling each other... the religious conscience and the democratic conscience”.
One wonders how does the above reasoning fit in with what we have entrenched in article 2, Chapter 1, of our Constitution, the highest law of our land, where it is clearly stated that “the religion of Malta is the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion” and “the authorities of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church have the duty and the right to teach what principles are right and which are wrong”.
Does not our religion – the Catholic religion – enhance our society and our way of living? Are not the teachings and dogmas of the Catholic Church there to help us – sinners – follow what is beneficial for us as human beings and what is good for society at large? Why should there be any conflict between the religious conscience and the democratic conscience when one is there to guide us towards what is right? Does everything go in the name of democracy? Should we be free to do what we want in the name of democracy? Does right and wrong depend on one’s way of thinking? Are there no more absolute truths for which Jesus Christ came on earth to proclaim and which the Catholic Church goes on teaching? Should secular values take over religious values in the name of freedom? Are not people like Mr Dingli imposing their “beliefs” on society at large and thus restricting our way of living in the name of secular values?
Pope Benedict XVI, when speaking about the dictatorship of relativism in a conversation with Peter Seewald in the book, Light Of The World, states emphatically that “certain forms of behaviour and thinking are being presented as the only reasonable ones and, therefore, as the only appropriately human ones. Christianity finds itself exposed now to an intolerant pressure that at first ridicules it – as belonging to a perverse, false way of thinking – and then tries to deprive it of breathing space in the name of an ostensible rationality”. Why has, here in Malta, the debate for or against divorce turned out to be an outright attack against the Church in general and our spiritual leaders in particular? Why were those of us who kept on insisting that we were against divorce, seen as a threat towards democratic principles when what we publicly professed was simply the safeguard of the indissolubility of marriage and the good of the family at large?
The more secular Malta becomes the more the teachings of the Catholic Church are needed. Because human nature is weak, because we are prone to sin (should I dare mention the word sin!), because of the false notion of freedom that some are trying to promote we need the Church to keep on teaching absolute truths. We want Malta to remain Catholic and follow the teachings of the Catholic Church not because of a fundamentalistic outlook or because we want to impose our beliefs on others but because we strongly believe that what the Church teaches is good for all human beings whatever their religion.
If by stating that Malta is a secular state Mr Dingli implies that we have to renounce our religion and become areligious, then we have to stand up and declare loud and clear that we do not want Malta to be transformed to such a state.
Pope Benedict warns Christians when speaking about the pitfalls that society finds itself in when losing the sense of God and abolishing all standards. In such a situation, the Pontiff remarks in the same interview with Peter Seewald, “... man is not capable of truth (and) ... he would not be capable of ethical values, either. Then he would have no standards. Then he would only have to consider how he arranged things reasonably for himself, and then at any rate the opinion of the majority would be the only criterion that counted”.
Let us, as a society, not be carried away by these modern trends of relativism and secularism. Let us, no doubt, be an inclusive society where everyone can live free of oppression and practise one’s religion but not at the cost of jeopardising absolute truths and abolishing the distinction between what is good and evil.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
12 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Charles Sammut
Jun 29th 2011, 17:39
The Catholic Church is the last organisation to presume the absolute monopoly for deciding what is right and wrong. It's shameful history of oppression and repression should have been enough to get it outlawed wherever civilisation, human rights and dignity are cherished, promoted and protected.
This shameful article in the Constitution needs to be expunged, and soon. No normal person needs the Church to make up his mind as to what is right and what is wrong. On the contrary, history has shown us that evil people have been using what the Church teaches to find loopholes to let them have their way without ruffling their conscience. Annulments are one such example. And in any case, if you do transgress, you can always confess, say 3 Hail Marys and feel at peace again.
Victor Pulis
Jun 29th 2011, 09:19
“the authorities of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church have the duty and the right to teach what principles are right and which are wrong”.
Isn't this also true of all other religious denominations in Malta? Do we or don't we have freedom of worship?
The teachings of the church's dogmas are not all there to help us 'follow what is beneficial for us as human beings and what is good for society at large' The dogma of the immaculate conception? The dogma of the assencion into heaven with body and soul to mention just two? How are these 'dogmas' helping us to live better lives? Which religion tells you to do evil? Goodnessis not the monopoly of the catholic church or of any other faith. One can be an atheist and live an exemplary and altruistic life believe it or not.
Gerry Cowie
Jun 27th 2011, 20:12
Excellent letter explaining Article 2. What are secularists so afraid of that they want to get rid of it? Only one or two of them ever make a fuss! Their constant denials of the Catholicity of the majority of the people is there for all to see! Secularism is full of dangers to human life and uses the idea of personal freedom and the twenty first century to try to legitimise everything! Nobody can prevent people's beliefs from influencing their decisions.
Joseph Camilleri
Jun 28th 2011, 08:27
I don´t really know how long you have been among us here in Malta, but I somehow think you are incorrect in stating that 'only one or two' make a fuss. In fact, the divorce referendum showed a great majority in favour of a change in mentality. In return, I ask you: what are Roman Catholics in Malta afraid of? Malta is not a Catholic country; Malta is a secular country but is not at the moment being administered in that manner - that is the truth. Secularism poses no dangers to human life; personal freedom is a right of every citizen to have. I don't know from which country you come from, but certainly, you need to update yourself with modern trends. You're out of synch with the rest of the planet, I am afraid.
Joseph Camilleri
Jun 27th 2011, 19:17
The writer puts various questions. Here are some answers:
The Constitution only gives the Catholic Church a privileged status in allowing it complete freedom to teach. It stops there. Then, comes the freedom of the State to legislate for all citizens, whether they are believers and adherents to the Catholic religion, or not.
As to the various questions that he puts in the third para., the answer for most of the questions is in the negative. Indeed, dogmas help but they stop there. Catholic dogmas and values are there for believers to follow them in complete freedom. But again, the State is a lay state, secular to the core, and the legislators have to be completely free to legislate for one and all.
'Are there no more absolute truths...?' This is a question which in my opinion everyone should ask oneself. To give my penny's worth, I think there ARE a few absolute truths but CONTEXT is extremely important. One cannot simply focus on a 'truth' without seeing the 'context' in which that truth is being put into practice. Therefore, in my opinion, the number of absolute truths has really dwindled.
'You are not allowed to take the life of someone'. That is an absolute truth, also based on the words of JC. However, if you happened to be in Rwanda and you see a militiaman about to rape your daughter, what do you do? Turn the other cheek and offer him your son, when he's done? But Mr Azzopardi would tell you that not taking a human life is an absolute truth. Go figure.
'Are not people like Mr Dingli imposing their “beliefs” on society at large and thus restricting our way of living in the name of secular values?' The answer is again, no. First, Mr Azzopardi still makes out that the 'majority' does not want to live according to secular values and a recent referendum, in fact, proved otherwise. Second, even if it were not that case, Malta is not a Catholic taliban country and we ARE a secular state, and by having even a minority of citizens living in a secular way (?), there is no imposition on the pseudo-majority not to live their own religious (?) way.
I will avoid answering Azzopardi regarding divorce - acqua passata.
I repeat: the teachings of the Catholic Church are needed - but for those of us who want to follow them. And that's the end of it. How the State is run, cannot be influenced by those teachings.
'We want Malta to remain Catholic.' Malta is not Catholic. And yes, Mr Azzopardi: hate to say this but you're a fundamentalist of the same calibre as those Islamists who cut off Americans' heads on television.
No, there are those who want to renounce their religion, and good luck to them; there are others who do not renounce their religion but still want to live in a society, free of religious domination. Too much to ask?
Regarding the concluding para., the very last statement is full of innuendoes. Again, there are hardly any 'absolute truths' anymore. Even the concept of 'evil' is not common anymore. For Catholic zealots, for instance, homosexuality and living as a divorced person amounts to 'evil' - it certainly is, in the eyes of the Catholic church. Should, therefore, the State make laws to hunt down and put in prison divorced persons and homosexuals? Hardly. But that's how Azzopardi's last statement can be interpreted. Even cohabiting is evil, according to the Church. If Azzopardi had a son or daughter that goes off to live with someone else as in a relationship, would he want the State to send the police, put them in prison and take them to prison?
I think not.
riccardo borg
Jun 27th 2011, 17:48
The problem with people is that few know that the laws that guide us and we follow are built on the laws of the church, any church whatever religion such as Christian, Islam, Hindu, Buddhist, etc.
One may not want to follow the religion but one is obliged to follow the laws of the land and in so doing one is following the Laws of God.
Mr renald williams
Jun 27th 2011, 15:57
Without judging anyone but many teachings and dogmas of the Vatican are opposite to what Jesus tought and preached. Read the Gospels www.tecmalta.org/blata.htm Peace and health wishes to all
Mr Rudy Sollars
Jun 27th 2011, 15:15
While taking into consideration that religion still plays an important role in the identity of some Maltese, it must be understood that while metaphysical concepts are entirely personal, policymaking must be done with principles that are accessible to all citizens, religious or not. Taking all this into consideration the Preamble of what is now the law binding European Constitution reads:
“DRAWING INSPIRATION from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, from which have developed the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law,
BELIEVING that Europe, reunited after bitter experiences, intends to continue along the path of civilisation, progress and prosperity, for the good of all its inhabitants, including the weakest and most deprived; that it wishes to remain a continent open to culture, learning and social progress; and that it wishes to deepen the democratic and transparent nature of its public life, and to strive for peace, justice and solidarity throughout the world,
CONVINCED that, while remaining proud of their own national identities and history, the peoples of Europe are determined to transcend their former divisions and, united ever more closely, to forge a common destiny,
CONVINCED that, thus 'United in diversity', Europe offers them the best chance of pursuing, with due regard for the rights of each individual and in awareness of their responsibilities towards future generations and the Earth, the great venture which makes of it a special area of human hope,
DETERMINED to continue the work accomplished within the framework of the Treaties establishing the European Communities and the Treaty on European Union, by ensuring the continuity of the Community acquis,
GRATEFUL to the members of the European Convention for having prepared the draft of this Constitution on behalf of the citizens and States of Europe
Mr Patrick Zammit
Jun 27th 2011, 13:42
"Does not our religion – the Catholic religion – enhance our society and our way of living?"
No, it does not.
Religions have supported slavery because it is written in holy scripts (ie it is the word of god) that slavery is good and should be promoted. Europeans, encouraged by the bible and various popes, fine tuned this disgusting trade and exported it to their colonies.
Women have been suppressed and victimized because holy books, claiming to be the word of god(s) have specifically promoted the idea that women are inferior to men and that they are only good for looking after children, the home and pleasing men.
It was (and still is) religion that tries to hinder progress by claiming that the world is flat, condoms are harmful, the sun orbits the world, everything was 'created' etc just because some imaginary god, pope (or whatever) said so.
Phil Humphries
Jun 27th 2011, 11:08
Thankfully, education is no longer the exclusive preserve of the wealthy and the Church. Everyday people now have the ability to form their own opinions and the right to make their own decisions.
Teaching our children right from wrong and how to be good, honest and responsible citizens is the DUTY of all parents; it is not the responsibility of the Church (however much it might wish it were so ). Parents must protect their children from all forms of danger and abuse, including brainwashing.
If educated people still need religion to think for them, then so be it. But if 'Absolute truths' are absolute truths, then why do they need to be packaged in organised religion ?
Ramon Casha
Jun 27th 2011, 11:01
Article 2 is not entrenched. In fact 2 of the 3 sections referring to religion in the constitution only require a 50% majority in parliament to correct. The glaring untruth that Malta has a religion, and the corruption that gives the church a right and duty to teach morality (a duty which it has consistently reneged upon) can be fixed.
Regarding your third paragraph, that's a lot of questions to answer, but in brief... No, Catholicism does not enhance our society. No, the teachings of the Catholic church are there to benefit itself and not society or humanity. There is a conflict between religious and democratic values because religion is not democratic (eg, you don't elect the pope). No, you're not free to do what you want in democracy. Yes, right and wrong do depend on one's way of thinking. No, Jesus did not come to proclaim anything. Individually you can have any values you like, but civil society requires secular values.
A secular state does not mean that you have to renounce your religion - quite the opposite. A secular state does not care what religion you believe in. You're free to have your faith, others to have theirs, and it won't make any difference to the state because it is the state that has no religion.
Mr Patrik Larsson
Jun 27th 2011, 08:44
"Does not our religion – the Catholic religion – enhance our society and our way of living?"
No