Amabile V. Galea, Balzan
Whither drifts the Church of Rome?
I have been following the recent contributions on the state of the Church in Malta by Fr Rene’ Camilleri, Fr Alfred Micallef SJ and Louis Cilia. All these reflections are well-considered and bear on the very identity of our Church. I sympathise with the way these contributors feel; but I also appreciate the conundrum facing the Curia.
Some people argue that the local Curia is blissfully unaware of the faithful’s current alarming heedless drift. My view is that our leaders are very much au courant of the situation but unable to implement the necessary remedies unless they opt for a radically independent line of action. The problem, as I see it, is far more serious; my concern stretches beyond our shores. The problem lies squarely with Rome: in other words, if Rome drifts, Malta is bound to drift.
Mr Cilia has referred to Vatican II; it is almost half a century since its closure. The much-revered Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini of Milan, a biblical scholar and former head of the Jesuit-run Rome Biblicum, quite some years ago pleaded for a follow-up on Vatican II. As we all know, nobody heeded his plea. Mr Cilia very aptly also quoted John Paul II’s denouncing our rather arrogant claim on the monopoly of the truth. Like Mr Cilia I wonder at times whither my Church is drifting. I ask myself whether we are on the right track: or, are we, in our stubborn refusal to update our Church, behaving in the manner of Dostoevsky’s infamous Grand Inquisitor in side-tracking and trivialising the Lord Jesus?
The wise “strictures” of Frs Camilleri and Micallef should be diverted and levelled against Rome, rather than puny Malta. When faced with such atavistic declarations as Dominus Jesus of the 1990s, the more recent Motu Proprio on the resurfacing of the (Latin) Tridentine Mass, and the covert but relentless undoing of Vatican II, our local Church leaders have their hands very securely tied; “ay, there’s the rub”! This does not absolve our hierarchy from treading carefully and “setting a watch before their lips”, as the recent divorce controversies revealed. My view, for what it is worth, is that my local Church lies in a straitjacket, between the wanton mercy of the local festa-obsessed, superstition-bent village die-hards and the blinkered Rome diktats.
Where lieth liberty, I ask. Cardinal Newman may well give me a reply.
(Prof) Eamon Duffy of Cambridge University had this to say about Bl John Henry Newman, and I quote, “Newman in 1863 wrote ‘This age of the Church is peculiar. In former times there was not the extreme centralisation which is now in use. If a private theologian said anything, another answered him. If the controversy grew, then it went to a bishop, a theological faculty, or to some foreign university. The Holy See was but the court of ultimate appeal. Now, if I as a private priest put anything in print, (Rome) answers me at once. How can I fight with such a chain on my arm?... There was true private judgement in the primitive and mediaeval schools. There are no schools now,... no freedom of opinion. That is, no exercise of the intellect’.” (The Tablet, July 23, 2011, p19).
Cardinal Newman was lamenting the lack of freedom of opinion, which inevitably leads to obscurantism, some seven years prior to Vatican I. His former Anglican independent outlook could not be suppressed. Poor Cardinal Newman! Like the late Cardinal Yves Congar OP, Edward Schillebeeks OP, and the-still-very-much-with us Hans Kung, Cadinal Newman had to taste the wrath of Rome. It was only after Pius IX at long last passed on to pastures new that CardinalNewman was acknowledged and raised to the purple! Was it coincidence? I wonder. Nothing is coincidental in Rome! Newman, Congar, Schillebeeks, Kung and many others yearned for a more open Church, which was precisely the scope of Vatican I’s “aggiornamento”. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose!
The bottom line however resolves itself into just one word, viz. power.
My Church proclaims the inevitability of re-union, ecumenism, female recognition, collegiality, lay participation and to cap it all invites Anglican clergy to join its ranks bringing with them wives, children... and ritual! Yet marriage to its own clergy is most emphatically denied... and so shown the door. A rather lop-sided, jaundiced sort of ecumenism. Oh! what a holy mess!
Popular Stories
In Discussion
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Gerry Cowie
Aug 11th 2011, 20:18
Keep secularism out of Malta! People do not want it, Mr Flynn! The Catholic faith is that adhered to by the majority of the Maltese people. Also, when poking fun at the Church, it is important to get the word right - "tridentine" is the correct word, not "traventine". - but when one is in such a hurry to have a dig at the Church loved by the Maltese people, it is easy to make typing errors! We still have no clear idea why you dislike the Catholic Church so much. Please tell us. We need to understand you.
Mr Evarist Saliba
Aug 11th 2011, 19:29
An interesting assesment of the problems facing the Church today, both locally and the world over.
However, there is a new devolopment that was never faced by the Church before, and this applies as well to other human institutions. In the time of Cardinal Newman local disputes remained local for decades if not more, and moved on to being regional, etc, due to limitations in international communications. With globalisation in the communications media this is no longer the case. What a priest (or any other person) of some standing writes in a far corner of the world today, will soon become a topic of international debate. The response cannot remain local for long.
But the outcome is hardly likely to be adequate globally.
The whole world is still grappling, far from successfully, with this phenomenon
Stefan Limongello
Aug 11th 2011, 16:12
Mr Flynn,
don't get too agitated. Considering that you only comment on religion-related issues, this newspaper is wise enough to keep religion in the secular sphere for fear of losing pearls of wisdom like your comments undoubtedly are :-)
Secondly, please bear with me. English is not my mother tongue so I have to make that extra effort. But at least I understand the command "Submit comment" and know that I only need to press it once :-)
I find it strange that you hate religion so much but then 'watse' your time reading articles on it and submitting comments also.
Mr FRANS H SAID
Aug 11th 2011, 15:18
Too many arguments that seem to be contradictory of each other - BUT
FEASTS are good per se. It is the way they have been taken over. Every person in a prish wants his way and to cause harm to his neighbour. The Maltese Church has a way out, but seems to be afraid. Certain obsolete Monsigniors are so much living in the past that they are not aware that the world is moving at a fast pace.
Rome might be at fault in certain aspects, after all the Cardinals are also aged and antique, but in Malta they still think they can terrorisde the people like they used to do with the "bulletins".
I am going to be frank and open. The Archbishop chosed seems to have been a mistake. He did not have the hard experience of working in problem parishes. I also venture to state that he himself might be biased.
What used to happen 50 (even 20) years ago is passe. Will somebody listen?
BUT Mr Galea, you have not managed to hit the nail squarly on the head. You might even have hit your finger and are now suffering the pain. Take your time to re-examina your arguments. Are you trying to help or cause more confusion.
Still the Maltese Church is livimng in a time warp where many of the clergy are only interestd in causing spite and harm to each other.
William Flynn
Aug 11th 2011, 13:51
You don't understand? And it's not even Latin? Well then imagine.....
Keep religion in churches and off the secular space.
William Flynn
Aug 11th 2011, 13:19
You don't understand? And it's not even Latin? Well then imagine.....
Keep religion in churches and off the secular space.
Mr Alfred Hili
Aug 11th 2011, 11:54
Today's questioning generation expects reasoned arguments rather than dogmatic statements, as the dominance of the church over the lives of people no longer exists.
Stefan Limongello
Aug 11th 2011, 11:32
Dear Mr Flynn,
I didn't quite understand your comment. But what I know is that the local Curia is ignoring pleas made by individual people from different parts of Malta to celebrate this Mass on a regular basis. Is it true, for example, that in a particular parish, there are many red tapes involved just to celebrate one Mass, contrary to the orders from the Holy See itself?
There is also an organisation that promotes this Rite, called Pro Tridentina (Malta) that seems very active although probably little known. Its websites are (hope I am not wrong):
http://www.protridentina.org/
http://pro-tridentina-malta.blogspot.com/
http://pro-tridentina.blogspot.com/
Perhaps you can ask further information from them.
William Flynn
Aug 11th 2011, 10:37
The Curia in trouble? Oh no! Not the Curia; whatever have they done to desrve this? Couldn't have happenes to a nicer bunch of macchiaavellos. Traventine marble goes well with traventine mass and don't motu propriu make nice pearl necklaces?
Stefan Limongello
Aug 11th 2011, 09:23
Dear Mr Galea,
You said "The wise “strictures” of Frs Camilleri and Micallef should be diverted and levelled against Rome, rather than puny Malta. When faced with such atavistic declarations as Dominus Jesus of the 1990s, the more recent Motu Proprio on the resurfacing of the (Latin) Tridentine Mass, ..."
As far as the Latin Mass is concerned, I think you are not aware that thousands of Tridentine Masses continued to be said around the world before the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum of 2007. This was due to permits granted by Pope Paul VI (can you believe this, coming from the same Pope of the Vatican Council II?) and Blessed John Paul II.
Perhaps you are also unaware that in the eighties Blessed JP II requested a commission of 9 cardinals to verify whether the Mass in the vernacular was supposed to replace the Tridentine Mass. The result was that no, the Tridentine Mass had not been intended to be suppressed or replaced.
You would probably be surprised that even Blessed John XXIII was very much in favour of Latin being kept in the Church's rituals.
Four years after Summorum Pontificum, the Vatican has issued the instruction “Universae Ecclesiae” from comments made by bishops from around the world on the Tridentine Mass. Can His Grace the Archbishop publish these comments? Were consultations held with people who are devoted to this rite? Or is it a secret like other reports? As far as I know, the local Curia continues to create obstacles for priests / people devoted to this rite. So much for obedience to the Holy Father! It is a known secret that some Masses have been cancelled and - at least - one priest was jeered by other priests for expressing himself in favour of this Rite. In front of other people!
The current Pope that you subtely attack is the same one that, if it weren't for him and Mgr. Scicluna, the pedophile cases would remain under the carpet or gathering dust at the Curia's Response Team archives.
Most of your article however raises valid points and it's important that more people like you express themselves.