Group considering legal action against Curia
The group Not in Our Name, founded in June to help people formally renounce their Catholic faith, is considering legal action against the Curia for impeding people wanting to formally terminate their association with the church.
It said in a statement that to formally leave the church, one had to be individually interviewed by the chancellor of the Curia.
Out of the 41 people who contacted the group to leave the church, 23 said they preferred to be in the company of others in the same situation on the date of the interview.
The group asked the chancellor to set up appointments during which it would be possible for him to see three people – one at a time but on the same day.
This had been done on January 10, 2009 when Dr Patrick Attard and another two people had gone through the same procedure.
Such an arrangement was not acceptable to the chanceller
"Not In Our Name considers the Curia's behaviour unhelpful, insensitive and obstructive.
"The organisation also believes that it has exhausted all approaches which would enable it to fulfil its commitment towards people who are interested in defection, and at the same time need support in formally renouncing their faith," it said.
115 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 22nd 2011, 08:02
May I suggest a simple straightforward solution on the lines of the paid advertiments in the daily press by husbands notifying all and sundry that they are not responsible for the expenses incurred by their estranged wives?
The notice would be signed by all the 41 members of the "NOt in Our Name" group - making it more impressive and eye catching.
Mr Martin Saliba
Aug 21st 2011, 12:26
Why make it difficult for these person to leave the church ? Why is an interview necassary ? Is it to keep the statistic of the catholic population at a way off the mark 98% ? This is similar facebook , they say that there are 600 million users but they do not disscount those who have passed away and those with bogus accounts. And yes , i ask questions for the simple reason that i do not know the answers as i wouldn't ask them in the fist place. I am sure that someone will provide me with answers even if there is an attempt , a very unchotholic one , to ridicule me in the process.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 21st 2011, 10:55
@Mr Anthony Borg.
Don’t run away with the idea that the forty-one members of the “Not in My Name” group and associates in Malta are any new earth shaking development in the perennial persecution of the Catholic Church. As predicted by Christ himself the gates of hell have not prevailed against the Catholic Church for two millennia running the gamut from the orthodox Jews through Roman Emperors, uncounted schisms up to the most recent persecution by the Communist atheist states. Just take the “Not in My Name" group with you to the back of the long queue and patiently wait you turn.
David Caruana
Aug 21st 2011, 14:33
One of them will have to succeed one time or another!
The difference nowadays is that there is really no persecution. We were baptised and brought up as catholics like yourself. All we're asking now is to leave this club/faith/association called the roman catholic church.
As I see it, there is no persecution here, just defection. The "crumbling" of the roman catholic church is happening from within and not from any outside force, like the ones you have mentioned.
Mr Angelo Abela
Aug 21st 2011, 15:41
Funny, but I do not remember Christ ever mentioning the Catholic Church. If you are referring to the church founded by Christ then may I remind you that there are many Christian faiths out there and not all of them pertain to the Roman Catholic Church. In fact the Roman Catholic church often was directly against these other Christian faiths (Protestants and Pentecostals to name just two).
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 21st 2011, 16:49
@David Caruana.
If you knew your history you would know that all the "uncounted schisms" were what you would call "crumbling from within" but without the hullabaloo being artificially raised by the local "Not in My Name" in search of deep publicity.
As to your hope against hope that "One of them will have to succeed one time or another!" that is what I meant when I asked you to take your place patiently at the back of the queue.
Luca Mule Stagno
Aug 21st 2011, 17:33
I'm sorry, but persecution at the hands of others? I'd say the Catholic Church is doubtlessly the most guilty party in the last 2000 years when it comes to persecution. Furthermore, these are a minority trying to stand up for their right to no longer be considered part of an organization that they do not choose to associate with. How are they persecuting anyone by standing up for their rights?
It's this sort of BIGOTRY that is actual persecution. You call people who stand up to your organization persecutors.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 21st 2011, 18:49
@Mr Angelo Abela.
Nothing funny at all. Christ established a Church that he did not name but which historically became Roman, Catholic and Apostolic from the times of St Peter himself. Centuries later dissident Christian groups separated from it but at the time of Christ this division did not exist and Christ could not have referred specifically to any one splinter group as distinct from the parent Apostolic Church.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 22nd 2011, 07:49
@Luca Mule Stagno.
Please stop to think for a moment and try to focus on the present day situation as it is evolving around us here and now.
There is no evidence at all of any persecution by the Catholic Church of any other religion including atheism. There is plenty of evidence of hostile intolerance of our Catholicism mainly from a scattering of local resident apostates with an infusion from foreign atheists. There is no obstruction, no persecution and no hostility towards lapsed Catholics but there is a legitimate protest against their crude methods of attracting attention to their display of their hatred of the religion of our fathers and how they are blatantly fuelling hatred towards our traditional Catholic culture.
No one is objecting to any renegade renouncing his faith. The objection is to their false accusation that anyone is obstructing them because the relevant Church authorities will not submit to their diktat as to how they want to celebrate and to publicise their apostasy!
These particular apostates are the real intolerant persecutors - but you would have to remove your blinkers before you can realize it and before you can admit it. That is where the bigotry lies.
C Muscat
Aug 21st 2011, 06:14
The main point that I find missing is what is the meaning of the request of these persons. being registered because our parents requested the Church to baptise us was done out of the free will of our parents. The baptism was done and it does not mean anything in real life. It has a meaning if you want to live as a Christian. If you do not want to care about the church and all that it means nobody else cares. So what is the point of these persons? Bihom u minghajrhom x'inhi d-differenza?
Raymond Sammut
Aug 21st 2011, 10:16
@ C Muscat
You obviously have not followed the thread.
You are right in that the Curia followed the request of our parents. But that does not mean that the Curia owns the information. From a legal point of view, the latter still belongs to the person concerned. Each person should be able to formally request the Curia to delete the information, and Maltese law should require the Curia to follow the request within a reasonable period of time from the receipt date of the request. This is, in general, standard procedure in accordance with privacy laws.
As it stands, the statistic of 98% Catholics in Malta is clearly unrealistic. Yet many in Malta tend to use it to aid any agenda they may wish to lobby for; a familiar social behavior which the Maltese government should address and remedy.
Most importantly is the fact that the Roman Catholic Church claims that Catholicism is Malta's national "faith", and this claim is reinforced by a clause in Malta's Constitution. But if the RC Church (which is essentially the Vatican authority) is to maintain this claim, they have got to come up with the numbers --and that's real numbers and not some statistic taken out of a hat.
Numbers are important in Malta, because Malta is a sovereign nation with a democratic system. NION seem to be taking a stance, and ask the Vatican to acknowledge this fact.
In simple words: some Maltese are beginning to tell the Vatican that they have had enough of Vatican antics in Malta. Please go and take your stuff somewhere else.
C Muscat
Aug 21st 2011, 14:07
@Raymond Sammut Do you mean that what is history we just delete as if it never happened? For information records what has happened has happened. In this case being baptised and whatever other sacraments you (or your guardians) decided to participate (without going into the merits of religion but on civil termsonly) are registered as such. For fairness sake, this does not mean anything in our civil lives as normal citizens; you do not have to pay anything; you do not have to attend anything and you do not have to believe anything...so what is the fuss.
The Church from time to time make a 'censiment' to see how may people attend on a Sunday. Even this does not mean anything. What may be is significant that many churches ask for a special voluntary donation once a month and when the amounts are announced the week after one realise that with this group and without there is going to be no significant change to anything. So they need the fuss not the church.
Raymond Sammut
Aug 21st 2011, 15:19
@ C Muscat --"...what is history we just delete as if it never happened?"
Historically, approx. since 1500, the Curia (through the parish church) maintained public records for the Maltese diocese (later Maltese and Gozitan dioceses) on behalf of the Vatican. The Curia continues to do so until now.
Presently --and for sometime now-- there is a duplication of these records, since the government also keeps records on citizens. For example, if a Maltese person needed a birth certificate, they can get two: one from the Insinwa and another from the Curia. With a bit of luck, the two certificates would contain exactly the same info.
Clearly there is in Malta a duplication of effort in maintaining public records, and to my knowledge, no attempt has been made to combine the two systems into one.
NION members are saying that they wish to have their personal records maintained only by their government, and I think that such a request would most certainly be a civil right.
On the other hand, the Curia --along with all other organizations in Malta-- would most likely not have any right whatsoever to keep information on a person without their consent.
Furthermore, no one can possibly have the right to denigrate NION members for wanting to exercise their right by requesting the Curia to delete their personal information. So some people commenting here should exercise more discretion.
"What may be is significant that many churches ask for a special voluntary donation once a month..."(Muscat)
This is all irrelevant, Mr/Ms Muscat.
This issue is about the Curia (not the church) keeping information on NION members, and NION members are putting the Curia on notice that they do not approve of it. It is therefore a "civil rights" and a "legal" issue.
You seem to be overlooking two important points: (1) Malta is now in 2011 and not in 1500, and (2) the church and the Curia are not the same thing. (1) should be obvious, and as for (2), the church are the Maltese people who want to go to church, while the Curia is agent to the Vatican --two totally different things. Please don't mix "church" with "Curia".
Chris Fenech
Aug 21st 2011, 16:25
C Muscat, maybe for the Church it doesn't make a difference, but for the people involved it clearly matters. To me it matters that I am no longer officially and on paper listed as a member of a Church that teaches people that every baby is born in sin; that fills young children with guilt; that allows priests to continue to work among children when they have clearly already done harm to children; that teaches that homosexual love is wrong and unnatural; that allows women to be subjugated as can be seen from the prohibition of women to become priestesses; that propagates false information about condoms not protecting from Sexually Transmitted Diseases; that by inhibiting the use of condoms allows for poor families to have more children than they can feed thus making them unable to recuperate from poverty and have a proper education; that obstructs scientific research because of some superstitious beliefs like when the Pope told Prof. Hawking not to inquire about what came before the big bang and the fact that this Church is limiting vital stem cell research.
Mr francis darmanin
Aug 20th 2011, 14:46
From some of the comments I've been reading, it appears that some of you guys believe more in the church and in religion than they do in God. Anyone agree??
Mr Daniel Schembri
Aug 20th 2011, 17:49
Hi Mr Darmanin, I think that the most prominent and powerful group of people who believed more in the church/ organized religion than God/ what constitutes good conduct were the clergy in the past and the present official stands of the church. An organization which is based on morals such as tolerance easily falls into contradiction. This is because the prime scope of any organization is its survival (against other organizations and internal schisms) and for this to be fulfilled, it has, as it has done several times, be intolerant to anything which does not strengthen it. That's how what constitutes good conduct and other metaphysical 'truths' become secondary to the interests of the organization itself. So yes, I agree with you.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 20th 2011, 14:04
@ Joseph Cauchi Senior.
Not so simple. They know that they are free to apostasize whenever they like. But they want to make a song and dance about it!
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 15:38
You forget to mention, that if legally possible, we'll make sure that the song is loud enough for all to hear! ;-)
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 20th 2011, 11:57
@David Caruana (20 Aug 2011 at 01.52 hrs)
So sorry to upset you so much at the unearthly hour of 1.52 a.m.! In answer to your question, nothing irks me. If anything, I am rather gratified by those who are so upset by my religious comments that, instead of a reasoned reply, lapse into insults against me personally and against my Catholic faith. These insults do not prove anything at all. They only debase those who stoop to use them. I am sorry that in your fury you delude yourself that your apostasy makes me happy. My reaction is one of sorrow and pity.
@ Albert Borg. (another insomniac writing yesterday at 23.50)
I would not consider 41 furious members of the “Not in my name” group would be any strong proof that atheists and agnostics are a very rapidly growing majority. They do not think so themselves. Otherwise, they would not blatantly seek the publicity of cheap “headlines also to bring attention to the situation …”. Good wine needs no bush!
Mr Albert Borg
Aug 20th 2011, 13:54
Dr Saliba,
the not in our name group is a much larger online community, and i can assure you that the number of atheists in malta is vastly larger. and please, snide remarks as to my sleeping habits are none of your business, thanks. Enjoy living in your little glass bell.
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 15:32
Please do tell us where did you read any insults from my part?
You call us "fools", "delusional", you always try to patronise others with your comments and you even have to comment on the timings of our posts!! But when witty remarks are directed at you or your party/club/religion, you always cry wolf. Boo-hoo doctor!
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 20th 2011, 22:04
@ David Caruana.
You do not understand my plain English - I did not call you or anybody else "fools". I admitted the universal right of everyone to act foolishly as long as no harm is caused to others. You chose to identify yourself as one of those choosing to behave foolishly. Your choice not mine.
David Caruana
Aug 21st 2011, 14:14
Francis,
Ngħajja nirraġuna mat-tfal u daqstant għajjejtni int. "Foolish" żgur li ma kontx qed tirreferi għal kattoliċi bħalek u dil-konverżazzjoni ġiet ovvjament ippolarizzata bejn kattoliċi u dawk li mhumiex (jew li jridu jwaqqgħu "t-tessera" tagħhom minn dan il-klabb)
Hija ovvja għal kull min qed jaqra dawn il-kummenti, x'ridt tgħid int bi kliemek.
Bis-serjeta', min hu l-ikbar iblah (fool)? Dak li jemmen il-fatti jew dak li jimxi ma' superstizzjoni tal-qedem?
Dak li jemmen li bniedem jgħum fl-ilma, jew dak li jemmen li bniedem jista' jimxi fuq l-ilma?
Dak li jemmen bl-evoluzzjoni, jew dak li jemmen f'Adam u Eva?
Isa Dott, bħala bniedem tax-xjenza, mhux suppost hija diffiċli għalik li tasal għall-iktar risposta LOĠIKA.
Min hu l-ikbar iblah issa?
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 21st 2011, 17:13
@David Caruana.
Sissa ghadni ma ghajjejtx ghax ghadni nipprova nispjega lill min ma jridx jifhem. Spjegajtlek diga li jien ma nghajjar lil hadd iblah "fool". Dan ma naghmlux ghax Kristu wissa biex dan ma naghmluhx. Jien m'hiniex fost dawk il-41 li jridu jinqatghu minn Kristu kif ippriedkat mill-Knisja Kattolika. U jekk ma nghajjar lil-hadd iblah, iktar u iktar mhinix ser nobdik lilek billi niggudika min hu l-aktar iblah.
Int ghalaqt il-kumment tieghek bil-mistoqsija "Min hu l-ikbar iblah issa?". Forsi jien hu meta niddjaloga ma min ma jridx, jew ma jistghax jifhem. Imma issa, daqshekk! Sahha!
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 21st 2011, 17:47
"Please do tell us where did you read any insults from my part" (David Caruana)
I quote to you part of your comment (20 Aug 2011 at 01.52 hrs): "Oh, I almost forgot who I'm writing to, Dr.Righteous, valiant protector of the Roman Catholic church."
It may be that you do not even realize it when you are being insolent, or perhaps you suffer from amnesia for recent events. Or perhaps that comment was written by some other David Caruana who suffers from somnambulism seeing that the comment was written soon after midnight.
Mr Joseph Cauchi Senior
Aug 20th 2011, 11:10
So, they want to EXCOMUNICATE themselves!
Good, go ahead!
Who cares?
JC.
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 12:58
You cared enough to comment :-p
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 10:02
Oh my, oh my! Listen to all the haters!
You call it publicity. We call it spreading the good news.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 21st 2011, 11:39
"We call it spreading the good news." (David Caruana)
To the rest of us "spreading the good news" always meant spreading the gospel. the word "gospel" actually meaning "good news". Parvenu copy cats!
David Caruana
Aug 21st 2011, 14:17
Yes yes doctor, I forgot that "good news" has been copyrighted by you guys.
Well, the good news nowadays is that of liberation from outdated dogmas.
Mr Peter Agius
Aug 20th 2011, 08:13
Next, they will be taking the authorities to court to remove crosses from classrooms and public places. Thats all it is... publicity and ego-boosting propaganda. What a load of crap.
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 10:38
"Next, they will be taking the authorities to court to remove crosses from classrooms and public places."
That's right!
But you forgot to mention the removal of Article 2 from the Constitution of Malta (my country as much as it is yours)
"publicity and ego-boosting propaganda"... that's just your own load of crap.
Mr Daniel Schembri
Aug 20th 2011, 07:57
The Church has secured its power through tradition and through an irrational creed which demands unquestioned respect for the 'infallible' institution. It is an organization, which apart from tradition and creed, is based also on moral monopoly. However, whenever you have an organization, and a hierarchy (in this case, a primitive monarchy with the Pope as its king), pious morality is sure to be corrupted by the clergy's deeds. It is thus inevitable that such an organization, with the advent of inquisitive free thought, shall fall. And free thought and inductive methods are more natural than metaphysical methods. It is self evident that the Church has raised questions in the eligibility for the intermediary place between the individual and God, whatever the latter might be. The institutionalization of one's spirituality, in an organization with a history of crimes against humanity, is inconceivable to those who have a basic knowledge of history. The power focused in a selected few (Pope and cardinals etc.) is an anti democratic approach, especially when the doctrine of the organization enthrones their own 'infallibility' in their official doctrine. Belief in Jesus Christ has become incompatible with membership in the Catholic Church, the latter being a prime example of an organization which has deviated from the teachings of its founder; the latter still promoting itself as an intermediary between the individual and God to secure its power.
Joseph W. Galea
Aug 20th 2011, 07:43
He he he, another useless group who is looking for publicity.
If you do not want to belong to the Catholic Church, simply stop whatever religious practicing you are doing. Maybe you should lobby for another referendum and put it to a vote, ha ha ha.
There are some who are PROUD to have excommunicated themselves, some are proud of their children because they refused to baptise their twins. Maybe these people have very little to be proud of otherwise, so they pick up on the Catholic Church, which these days seems to be the past time in vogue.
It seems that with affluence, in Malta certain negativism is slowly being introduced and groups are being created to see who can top who and how much publicity they can garner.
What this group is trying to do is not news because whatever they want to achieve can be done without any fanfare or publicity. The news media should not give them the time of day, let alone headlining them.
You want to leave the Church, get up and leave and good riddance.
Chris Fenech
Aug 20th 2011, 13:09
I cannot understand why you and some other people continue talking about the group wanting to attract publicity. Publicity for what? Those who are managing the group of Not In Our Name are not even showing their names in this Press Release.
The only thing this group is asking for is for all their information to be removed completely from the registers of the Catholic Church. Defectors are presently not deleted from the registers. A note is just written beside their names. Not In Our Name is asking for the names and all information to be removed completely, something which is in line with the Data Protection Act. Unfortunately this is not conveyed clearly in this Times of Malta article.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 20th 2011, 04:08
What is all this fuss about?
"Not in Our Name" should just publish a list of its 23 or 41 members and update it at regular intervals. The only snag would be the loss of cheap publicity in the press created by the shattering news that they are actually "considering" legal action! When they finally stop dithering and actually make up their minds do they expect that their resolve would entitle them to another headline as some resurgent "hot" news item?
The insistence on the en masse attendance of twenty three people would magnify a non-event into a "mass" demonstration hopefully drawing the free publicity afforded by the media in search for "news" about the on-going anti-religion propaganda. Either that, or to infuse some courage into hesitant doubting Thomases who need the boost of being anonymous members of a crowd, no matter how small.
Mr francis darmanin
Aug 20th 2011, 08:16
Dr Saliba
just the same usual stuff from you.. keep things quiet and they might just about go away. Things have changed since the sixties as you might have realised, apart from some mentalities.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 20th 2011, 10:09
@Francis Darmanin.
They "might just go away" if I "keep things quiet" - but that is most unlikely as long as they receive unwarranted free publicity in the media. Unopposed, the anti-religion poison will insidiously produce the intended harm as it did in the sixties, before and after that decade. Is that what you wanr?
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 11:16
Francis, can you explain to us why our wish to terminate OUR OWN membership from your club is considered anti-religious?
You say "unopposed" like my wish to terminate my own membership is something that you can have control on.
If that's the case for you, bring it on dott!
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 20th 2011, 14:01
@ David Caruana
Please collect your thoughts before you start to write.
My faith is not a club. Moreover I do not belong to any club that would accept you - therefore
you cannot terminate your membership to any club to which I belong.
If you understand English you would realize that my "unopposed" refers to false anti-religious propaganda that I choose not leave unanswered - whether you like that or not. I do not oppose your choice of any religion or of no religion at all. That is your fundamental human right. According to my philosophy everyone has the right to be foolish as long as he does not harm others.
C Muscat
Aug 20th 2011, 03:45
Ahna nippretendu li qeghdin f'pajjiz li kulhadd jista' jemmen u jghix hajtu. Imbaghad jigu dawn u jattakaw lil knisja. Sa fejn naf jien, ahna pajjiz tolleranti u ma nafx kif naccettaw dan it-tip ta agir. Dawn it-talin hadd ma qed igaghalhom imorru l-knisja allura ghalfejn dawn l-attakki kontra l-knisja. Ikolli nistaqsi jekk ahniex nippretendu li kull min jemmen jitlaq? Ikolli nistaqsi jekk dawn hux jippretendu li ma jhallux lil min irid imur il-knisja jkompli hajtu bhal kull min jemmen differenti?
Saviour Sam Agius
Aug 21st 2011, 13:34
Fejn qed tara l-attakki kontra l-Knisja? Dan huwa attakk tal-Knisja fuqna. Kif qed tgħid inti, aħna nippretendu li qegħdin nigħxu f'pajjiż fejn kulħadd jista' jemmen li jrid u jgħix ħajtu, però, il-Knisja trid tibqa' tinsisti li dawk li jridu jemmnu li jridu u jgħixu ħajjithom XORTA WAĦDA jibqgħu imniżżlin fil-kotba tal-Knisja. Kif tista' ma tirribattix lura fuq insult bħal dan? Għaliex il-Knisja ma tridx tħallina ngħixu ħajjitna u ninqatgħu minn fuq il-kotba tagħha?
Min jemmen fil-Knisja u huwa Kattoliku, jista' jibqa' Kattoliku kemm irid. M'għandhiex taffettwah ħaġa bħal din. Ma nistax nifhem kif bniedem bħalek jista' jkun irid lil min ma jaqbilx miegħu jibqa' membru fl-istess klabb bil-forza.
Chris Fenech
Aug 20th 2011, 02:59
The press release in its entirety can be found here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/62655590/Not-In-Our-Name-PR-19-08-2011-English
Raymond Sammut
Aug 20th 2011, 11:46
Thanks for the link, Chris Fenech.
Here is the last paragraph of the Press Release dated 19th Aug 11:
"Given the situation, Not In Our Name [NION] is announcing that it has sought legal counsel and will be considering legal means to secure for its members both the termination of membership from the Catholic Church and the removal of all records being held by the Church on such individuals. We believe that it is the right of all our members as responsible adults not to be impeded in any way from terminating their association with the Catholic Church and will henceforth not recognise the need for our members to undergo the Chancellor’s interview in order to achieve such a purpose." Unquote
I think that the TOM headline for its report on this issue is somewhat over-reactive.
Clearly, NION is actually not taking legal action against anyone. They simply want to research on what legal avenues may be available to facilitate the removal of one's name from the Curia register.
Given that, historically, we had not been given a choice on whether we wanted to be on the Curia's register, it's only fair that no-one should have to go into such trouble to have one's name removed. In fact, I think there could be a legal obligation on the Curia's part to immediately remove personal information of persons submitting a written request. With no record, Church membership would then be a moot point.
Nevertheless, I still think that the initiative should be from the Maltese government, which is the highest entity in the land with the constitutional obligation to protect the religious freedom of its citizens. When the Curia prints our name on its register, without our consent, the Curia is clearly infringing on that freedom. The onus is upon the government to remedy this state of affairs in Malta.
Gerry Cowie
Aug 20th 2011, 01:53
Oh, a secularist and humanist dream - and they don't disappoint us below, do they? What a silly organisation this seems to be! Just trying to make a little point in a slightly bigger way!
Raymond Sammut
Aug 20th 2011, 01:10
I think that comments, in general, should be directly related to the issue addressed in the TOM report.
This group is considering taking legal action against the Curia administration. The latter is just that: an administration. This is, therefore, a public affairs issue --not religion. Whether people in Malta "practice" this or that religion, or whether they are atheists/agnostics, is irrelevant.
What is at issue here is that a very powerful institution exists and is active in Malta today. It has existed for centuries. In 1530, for example, this institution established in Malta the Office of the Inquisitor. Those who wish to know about some of the extremes this office indulged in over some 200+ years should consult some of the more detailed Maltese history texts. In most cases, if not all, the victims were ordinary Maltese --indigenous to Malta-- just like us commenting here, while the torturers were foreigners in the service of the Vatican pope.
Only thanks to the secular French, the Office of the Inquisitor was abolished in 1978. The Vatican itself never actually removed it. This office was only one example. It should be enough to make everyone commenting here give a little thought on what this institution really entails. Its pretensions, and its propensity to yell "persecution" at those who dare to stand up to the Curia administration, are totally out-of-kilter.
What offends most, however, is the fact that those who were expelled from Malta in the 16th century were recorded by so-called "historians" of the time as "Jews". They were not Jews. They were indigenous Maltese just like us commenting here. The fact that those Maltese were expelled from their homeland in the 16th century only proves that Malta was not Catholicized until that century. Before then, the Maltese had been a free people practicing whatever religion they wished to embrace: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc. And they were the ones who had built Mdina along with all the towns and villages on the high end of the island.
The hard cold fact is that the real colonizer of Malta was never France or Britain --but the Vatican. Guze' Aquilina wrote at length about Malta "taht tliet Saltniet". We are too quick to recall and condemn two of these three colonizers, but always take foregranted the third one --and we never question ourselves: Why?
I believe that this group are doing just that. They are saying that it's about time that we, as indigenous Maltese and a mature people of a sovereign nation, start to question why.
In my view, the onus should be --at law-- on the Vatican authorities (and not on the Maltese people) to demonstrate to the Maltese government how many paid-up members they have got on their Maltese register. And each of these members --the same as with the electoral roll-- should be 18+ of age and provide a signature along with ID.
Then we should be in a position --a position to which we are all entitled-- to see whether the CIA World "Factbook" could still make the claim that 98% of the Maltese people are Roman Catholic. I am sure that the CIA would like the idea that their "book" is really a fact book and not just a fat book filled with fat lies.
Fat lies do not hold in the Malta Courts, and hence I think that the group would have a strong case against the Curia administration.
Raymond Sammut
Aug 20th 2011, 10:22
Sorry for the typo: year should read 1778 --the year Bonaparte met von Hompesch and presented him with a long list of conditions, one of which was the expulsion from Malta of the Inquisitor. By then, the Maltese people had their reasons for being fed up with the Order --much the same like the many Maltese of today having some very good reasons for being fed up with the Roman Catholic Church. If the Inquisitor could be expelled from Malta some 200 years ago, so can the two Bishops be expelled from Malta today.
Ms Agnes Bezzina
Aug 19th 2011, 23:39
Oh for goodness sake ... grow up!!!
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 09:53
"The mind boggles"
"grow up"
The intelligence in such comments is humbling
Mr John Camillleri
Aug 19th 2011, 22:35
I know of a couple of people who after refusing the Church all their lives, at the end, facing death they wanted the help and reconciliation through a priest.
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 01:43
That won't be me, don't you worry, Mr
Chris Fenech
Aug 20th 2011, 02:56
What does the experience of "a couple of people" has to do with Not In Our Name and their cause?
Mr Wally Vella-Zarb
Aug 20th 2011, 02:58
So does that prove anything? I myself was at death's door on three occasions and during one of them I even had what is sometimes called 'an out-of-body experience'. All I asked for - and obtained - was best medical attention. I shall probably do the same the next time round; it is the only rational request.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 21st 2011, 18:25
@Mr Wally Vella-Zarb.
Some day all of us must find ourselves not at death's door but will actually pass through it. Then, and only then, will the moment of truth be upon all of us - not just bravado nor any temporary "out-of-body experience" resulting from cerebral anoxaemia!
G Hoare
Aug 19th 2011, 22:03
i DON'T KNOW WHY WOULD ANYBODY WOULD WONNA GO THROUGH ALL THE BOTHER.
sO you don't wonna be Catholic anymore ,so just carry on with your life .
Do we need another Divorce, Divorce from the church . To me it seems like waste of time and waste of money
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 01:33
Waste of time for you maybe, but not to us, Ms Hoare
Ms Agnes Bezzina
Aug 19th 2011, 21:55
The mind boggles .......
Mr Kevin Zammit
Aug 19th 2011, 21:06
Issa veru rajt Malta tinbidel ... sad but inevitable. It is about time that we grow up and understand that there are others who have their own mind.
May the good Lord be with you as well :)
Ramon Casha
Aug 19th 2011, 20:20
In every other organisation I'm familiar with, if you want to leave you just don't renew your membership, or at most write a letter or make a phone call and request that they strike you off their membership list. You don't have to face an inquisition.
As for "simply don't go to church", some people just don't want to be counted as members. Most of us were baptised before we could walk or talk, before we could choose whether we wanted to be members or not. Whatever the reason, anyone who wants to cancel their membership should just be able to do it without being made to pass through hoops by an organisation they never asked to join in the first place.
Mr Guido Farrugia
Aug 19th 2011, 19:44
Don't bother with legality Not In our Name group!!!!! Just do it. At the Curia they will provide with a stenciled document, hand it over at the desk along with the baptism certificate and refuse any interview whatsoever, simple. I know, because i proudly did it.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 19th 2011, 20:40
@ Mr Guido Farrugia.
The solution you adopted with misplaced pride is not acceptable to the group "Not in our Name" because your method would not hit the headlines and so it is devoid of the much desired anti-Church propaganda value.
Mr Albert Borg
Aug 19th 2011, 23:50
@ Francis Saliba M.D.
just as much as the misplaced pro-church propaganda. two sides to every coin sir, its good to hear what the other side has to say. we are not attacking the institution, merely distancing ourselves from it - something which is within our rights, but which for some inane reason is proving difficult. yes, we want headlines also to bring attention to the situation and let the others out there know that atheists, agnostics and non-christians are a very rapidly growing majority, one which deserves to be heard and respected within a democratic (supposedly not theocratic!) country!
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 01:52
Why "misplaced"? Oh, I almost forgot who I'm writing to, Dr.Righteous, valiant protector of the Roman Catholic church. What irks you so much dear doctor? You always said that nothing will ever happen to the roman catholic party, erm, sorry, church. So why even bother commenting about this article?
After all, it would be better for you that the false and unworthy catholics like ourselves leave your party so only the pure ones like yourself remain. Isn't that right doctor?
Mr Alex Ciantar
Aug 20th 2011, 03:06
@ Francis Saliba M.D.
No one needs to advertise any anti church propaganda as lately the church is doing a great job on its own......
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 20th 2011, 21:19
@ Mr Albert Borg'
I do not pro-actively make pro-church propaganda, I only react to prpaganda lies against the Catholic Church and other religions - and that makes some people mad!
Marianne Tabone
Aug 19th 2011, 19:11
Ghaliex qeghdin taghmlu dan l-istorbju kollu biex thallu l-Knisja? Kull m'ghandkom taghmlu hu li ma tersqux aktar lejn il-quddies, lejn is-sagramenti u lejn kull haga ohra li ghandha x'taqsam mar-religjon. U awtomatikament tkunu nqtajtu mill-Knisja minghajr bzonn ta' karti u minghajr bzonn ta' dokumenti jew stqarrijiet ohra. Fuq kollox din haga li tikkoncerna lilkom u intom stess, kull wiehed u wahda minnkom, taf li tkun inqtajt. Dak li jaghmilkom parti mill-Knisja mhix bicca karta li tissejjah certifikat tal-Maghmudija. Li jaghmilkom parti mill-Knisja hu l-fatt li tghixu hajja Kristjana kif irid Kristu. Jekk ma tridux taghmlu hekk affari taghkom u affari ta' hadd izjed. Qeghda niehu l-impressjoni li tridu taghmlu hoss fil-media! Ir-raguni?
David Caruana
Aug 19th 2011, 20:54
Għandek żball kbir Marianne! Aħna qegħdin niskomunikaw ruħna sabiex ħadd minnkom ma jiġi jgħidilna li "Malta hija Kattolika".
Il-knisja ilna ma mmorru u għalija l-uniku skop li għalih rrid niskomunika ruħi huwa sabiex meta l-quddiem inkun qed nitkellem favur id-dritt tal-ewtanażja, ħadd ma jkun jista' jiġi jatini s-soltu daqquqa li "Malta hija Kattolika" għaliex uffiċjalment, iswed fuq abjad, jien Malti daqs kulħadd imma MHUX kattoliku.
L-istatistika hija importanti għal raġunijiet legali u governattivi. Il-quddiem niġġildu kontra l-fatt li l-kostituzzjoni Maltija tiddiskrimina kontrina l-Maltin mhux kattoliċi permezz ta' artiklu 2. Jekk hemm bżonn intellgħu lill-Gvern malti quddiem il-qrati Ewropej u persważ li nerbħu.
Imma ħalli nibdew pass pass. Ħalli l-ewwel neħilsu minn din l-istituzzjoni imsejjħa knisja kattolika.
Mr Richard Curmi
Aug 19th 2011, 23:53
Ok David caruana - Biex tkun kuntent il-Kattolici Maltin se jibdew jghidu 'Malta minbarra 41 ruh hija kattolika' u hekk ma tkunux maghdudin fost il-fidili.
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 09:42
Richard,
Il-frott ta' din l-azzjoni ma jinġabarx illum imma aktar il-quddiem ;-)
Anke jekk inkunu 41 biss, dan ikun biżżejjed biex il-quddiem, l-iStat Malti jkollhu jirrikonoxxi d-drittijiet ta' din il-minoranza.
Tinkwieta xejn, il-Qrati Ewropej anke bniedem wieħed jistmaw, aħseb u ara 41
Mr Wally Vella-Zarb
Aug 19th 2011, 18:41
Why bother to give the prelate, chancellor, or whatever fancy title is applied, his 'moment of glory'? Is he that important? Just ignore him and all that he represents and continue with your life as normal if that is what you wish. Nobody asked if you wanted in; nobody needs to be asked if you want out. If they persist in including you in their flock of 'fidili' they are only fooling themselves and nobody else. They stopped knocking on my door decades ago.
Maria Vassallo
Aug 19th 2011, 17:21
Min jichad lilkom, jichad lili.
U min jichad lili,
ikun qed jichad lil dak li baghatni!
GESU'.
Inti PIETRU
u fuq dil-blata nibni l-Knisja tieghi
u l-bibien tal-infern ma jelebghuwiex!
Jiena naghtik l-imfietah tas-saltna tas-sema:
dak li torbot fuq l-art ikun marbut fis-sema,
u dak li tholl fuq l-art ikun mahlul fis-smewwiet.
GESU'.
Ms S Micallef
Aug 19th 2011, 17:42
Oh look it's Maria Vassallo again!
Stop all this pointing fingers and doom and gloom. I'm a fully practising Catholic but i spend my time pointing fingers at these people. I put my energy where it really matters - being a good person.
Pointing fingers and quoting the Bible doesn't automatically make you a good Catholic Maria, it takes a lot more than that.
Mr Wally Vella-Zarb
Aug 19th 2011, 18:54
@ Maria Vassallo
Allura? B'daqshekk?
Ramon Casha
Aug 19th 2011, 20:24
"If you believe," he shouted to them, "clap your hands; don't let Tink die."
PETER PAN.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Aug 19th 2011, 20:49
@ Ms S Micallef.
There is no trace of Ms Maria Vassallo priding herself that she is a good Catholic. It is you who are boasting that you are a "fully practicing Catholic" who spends her time pointing fingers at people and that makes you "a good person" on top of being some newly discovered species of what a "good practicing Catholic" should be!
Mr leo attard
Aug 19th 2011, 20:52
@Ms s Micallef...being a good person is not judging others or making fun of them for expressing their opinion the way they know how
Mr Patrick Zammit
Aug 19th 2011, 17:20
For all those saying these guys are brewing a storm in a teacup, why does the church insist on a one to one?
We were not administered baptism (without our consent) in a secret ceremony just for two.
One of the most stupid thing about Christianity is the notion that an innocent baby is born already tarnished with sin or whatever you want to call it. This idea is so lame. It is the church's way of mass recruiting by scaring parents. We used to be told that If parents do not baptize their innocent newborns, these would go to Limbo until the church decided that Limbo does not exist any more.
How can you be so gullible?
Nathalie Frendo
Aug 19th 2011, 16:48
The church is ashamed to let the truth out. Cowardice at its best.
Mr leo attard
Aug 19th 2011, 16:37
First, i dont see how one can 'formally' stop being a faithful -- once you stop practising the faith and openly renounce it, that's it, you're out. what does one wanting to leave expect to get -- a church leaving certificate? come on, if the group feels the church is putting pressure on those wanting to leave, perhaps the church feels the group's presence will put pressure on the individual, even if it's a ''one at a time'' process. all this is crap! you want to leave, just stop practising!
Saviour Sam Agius
Aug 19th 2011, 16:36
We should be allowed to defect completely from the Church and not to have a note noting our defection next to our name in their registers. We should cease to be listed on their registers altogether. The Church should be subject to the same data protection act that other organisations are subject to. If I decided not to be a member of a pigeon club, the pigeon club can't keep my details without my consent. The Church shouldn't be any different.
On top of all this, they make you go to an interview before defecting. What a cheek! Who do they think they are? There are many things I'd rather spending my free time doing other than having an interview with some Monsignor at the Curia.
Mr leo attard
Aug 19th 2011, 20:33
mr agius, if you dont want to go, then dont go. Perhaps they want to interview to see what is making the person 'defect'. as regards data protection, the data cant be made public or accessible to the public, but it doesnt mean you get rid of it. If a person renounces his citizenship of let's say malta, that doesnt mean the govt should completely erase all records of your birth in malta.... the cheek is that many of these anti-clerics feel that the church has no right to interfere in their way of life yet they feel that they have the right to tell the church how to conduct its business.... like you said, if you are a member of a pigeon club then you follow the club's rules, if you dont want to remain a member then go and set up your own sparrow club and leave the pigeon club alone.
Tim Vella
Aug 19th 2011, 16:33
I'm very proud of my daughter who has decided not to baptise her twin kids... huurahhh!!
Mr leo attard
Aug 19th 2011, 20:38
some say that parents dont have the right to determine the religious bent of a child that is still a baby and unable to decide for itself... But when we dont give the baby a religious 'bent' aren't we deciding the child should grow up an atheist or agnostic? no parent can escape the fact that they are going to influence the child's faith one way or another
Mr Daniel Schembri
Aug 20th 2011, 08:15
Hi Mr Tim Vella,
I am glad to hear that there are mothers who decide not to affiliate their kids with any religion when they can't decide for themselves.
Hi Mr Leo Attard,
The concept of a 'catholic child' is inconceivable. Any religion in an intellectually undeveloped child is artificial. On the other hand, a non religious/ agnostic (not necessarily atheist) child is natural. Normally, before deciding with which party we're siding, we are first not affiliated with any one party, then ideally we do some research on what is available, and unless we're exceptional and we make our own party, we side with one that is already available, if we want affiliation. A decision which is to be taken by adults is being forced and indoctrinated on neonates with no will power. By not affiliating our children with the organization through baptism, we're pursuing the more natural and, it happens to be also, the most rational and respectful (to the adults to be) way of doing things.
Mr leo attard
Aug 20th 2011, 15:32
@Mr Daniel Schembri....Hi, I understand your point but in the practical workings of life it simply doesnt work that way. According to you, we should keep each child a tabula rasa until they are 'mature' enough! Hmmm, how do we judge maturity?.... what about political beliefs? social beliefs? attitudes towards other races and classes? you cant keep children 'blank' until they are mature and then give them a list... In real life children are going to be influenced by the parents' beliefs just like many adults are influenced by media, peer groups et... when they grow up, then they form their own opinions... Cassius Clay became a muslim, richard gere became a buddhist, there are maltese who converted to other religions --they just stopped practising the old one and began the new one without crying out to be knocked off the register completely.....if you raise a child a 'religious blank'. mot probably he'll remain so. you dont click on a switch when he is mature and say go find religion... i see nothing wrong with parents giving their children their religion, just as they give them their language and values --when the individual reaches his mature stage then he can change.... I would like to know what the percentage of those changing is! and how many of them actually change so because of their own convictioons and not because of some outside pressure, or it's fashionable or it makes me feel ''modern and enightened''....very complicated matter
Albert Spiteri
Aug 19th 2011, 16:30
Any person could renounce his parents, formally change his name vow never see them again, burn pictures of his childhood. But if that person looks at his DNA, he see he still is his parent's child. After a human birth nothing can change that basic truth.
Similarly, all Catholics consider baptism as a person's spiritual birth (being born again). Catholics also believe that nothing can completely remove the spiritual DNA that joined a person to his spiritual parent, the Church, at baptism. Catholics have all the right to believe that it is an indelible spiritual seal and that this is true whether the baptism was Catholic, Evangelical, Bapatist or any other denomination, if it was a valid baptism, which most are. It's all the same baptism. Christ only left us one Baptism, and it is for all Christians. This is a legal and constitutional right enjoyed by all catholics in Malta and by the Catholic Church as an institution.
This means that even if all the formalities for officially leaving the Catholic Church have been duly performed and even if the Catholic Curia orders that the Parish Baptisimal register is duly to be noted that that person has so defected - THE FACT REMAINS THAT FOR ALL CATHOLICS SUCH A PERSON'S SPIRITUAL DNA IS STILL THAT OF A BAPTISED CATHOLIC, and no atheistic movement and no BOMBASTIC nonsensical drivle to encourage people to renounce their baptisms by writing a letter can ever change that!!
What I consider worthy of note by the Ministry of the Interior is that Chapter 1, Para 2 of the Malta Constitution still says that the Catholic Church has THEright and THE obligation to teach what is wrong and what is right. "Not in Our Name" has no legal, ethical or popular stand and as such has absolutely no right and obligation to assume that role.
For the record, WHAT IS THIS GROUP, WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? Do they have the right to EXIST AT ALL as a group? WHOM DO THEY REPRESENT? WHO'S PROVIDING THEIR FINANCES? TO WHOM ARE THEY ACCOUNTABLE? They are openly out to destroy a constitutionally recognized institution, the Catholic Church - WHAT IS THEIR AGENDA, HIDDEN OR OTHERWISE??
Ms S Micallef
Aug 19th 2011, 17:10
issa instead of coming out with all these theories, shouldn't we concentrate on that which should really make us Catholics i.e. living as good people, being nice to others, being generous, tolerant etc...
I can assure you Mr. Spiteri that a person can be baptised have Catholic DNA or whatever you call it, go to mass everyday, go on and on about the Church's rules an still be a complete a**hole.
Let us concentrate on the more important part of our religion please.
As for the defectors, who cares? It's their time their using up, its their life! It shouldn't affect your faith.
C Muscat
Aug 19th 2011, 17:17
Good question. Who are these persons? Is this group registered somewhere?
Mr Albert Borg
Aug 19th 2011, 17:19
there is no such thing as spiritual DNA. Don't mix science and magic please, its demeaning towards all those who believe in science.
Victor Pulis
Aug 19th 2011, 20:22
One is born with one's DNA. One is not born a catholic or any other religious denomination.
A religion is thrust on one by one's parents.
Mr leo attard
Aug 19th 2011, 20:46
@ Mr Albert borg...mr spiteri, in my opinion, is using spiritual DNA as a metaphor. what i disagree with mr spiteri is that no organization can really destroy a church which is not a building but the whole body of its believers -- roman emperors and communism failed to do so. the only way for a faith to be destroyed is when all cease to believe....it's better that the half-hearted leave the church, the strong will remain
Mr Albert Borg
Aug 20th 2011, 12:21
a misplaced metaphor - poetic license is being abused too easily. the aim of the group is NOT to destroy harm or demolish the church. we couldn't care less. what we care about is our right to not be associated with it, and denounce the tight grip that the institution is exerting on its (ex?) members. if the church is promoted you don't get a mass of atheists and otherwise-believers complaining. i cannot see why all the fuss by the closeted and narrow-minded maltese populace - another reason to distance ourselves from the so-called church in the end.
Joseph Goerge Borg
Aug 19th 2011, 16:20
What a funny situation, some people bring up old skeletons of interdet and what what not and these want to have a fully written in gold interdiction diploma. Would you like the official phtotgrapher as well and while at it would you like it framed?
M Sciberras
Aug 19th 2011, 16:35
Being catholic has nothing to do with whether one is in favour or not of euthanasia, which itself is a very complex issue that balances the need to protect vulnerable sick people with individual freedoms. Follow the current debate in the uk if interested. You and others like you are only spurred by a visceral loathing of the church, nothing else. Do you know if the state had to take over many of the social responsibilities currently undertaken by the church, it could not afford it? I do not consider myself a practicing catholic and yet recognize this. Grow up.
David Caruana
Aug 19th 2011, 16:19
What a bunch of nonsense in the comments below.
Defecting from the Church officially would give us a better picture of the percentage of Catholics in Malta so when in the future, some issue like euthanasia or the removal of Article 2 of the Constitution comes up we won't be slapped with the wrong statement that "Malta is Catholic".
Anyone who doesn't go to church or does not agree with how the church acts, should apply for defection, otherwise you're not better than a hypocrite.
I take this occasion to once again congratulate the organisers of Not in Our Name for their excellent job.
Keep up the good work!
Mr Evarist Saliba
Aug 19th 2011, 19:26
Choosing one's religion is a personal decision, and the census taken every 10 years is the best way of ascertaining the percentage of inhabitants who belong to this or that religion, or to no religion at all. Of course, this presumes that a question will be included to ascertain the situation.
But, again, I am sure that there will those who will object to such a personal question being included in the census form.
Is the intention behind this campaign the establishment of facts, or to make a public statement against the Catholic Church?
Does this campaign apply only to Roman Catholics or does it apply to persons who would want to leave another religion?
Carmel Serracino-inglott
Aug 19th 2011, 23:51
good work!!!!
David Caruana
Aug 20th 2011, 01:38
If they want to leave another religion, I guess they'd need to go through a different process. The people who joined Not In Our Name are baptised catholics who wish to terminate their membership from this institution
L. Vella
Aug 19th 2011, 16:17
I think you are still considered a Catholic on paper unless you excommunicate yourself from the Church, even though you don't practise the faith.
C Muscat
Aug 19th 2011, 16:07
I do not recall the number/percentage of persons not practicing the faith. I myself there was time that I did not follow any church service or anything of the sort. No one buggered me. We live in a 100% free country as regards religion and church following. Everyone can follow any religion or no religion at all. Why these persons want to invent somthing of the sort? Maybe they have nothing else to do and expect others to follow!!
Stefan Zammit
Aug 19th 2011, 16:07
I don't get it. Logically if you don't believe in god, you would eventually belief that all sacraments you had as a child were void. So why would you want to to nullify a something that happened years before? Cheap publicity. Just do whatever you will. These people are fetching trouble to show off.
Saviour Sam Agius
Aug 19th 2011, 16:40
We don't want to be considered members of an organisation with which we strongly disagree.
Would you be happy if the other political party that you do not support signs you up as one of their paid-up members? I somehow think that many would protest against this.
Mr Albert Borg
Aug 19th 2011, 17:18
Mr Zammit,
the aim of this group is to help people distance themselves from an organisation which was mostly imposed upon them by upbringing, and which we believe does not represent us any more. however incidentally when quoting numbers and statistics the church/curia quotes those non-believers who did not excommunicate themselves as part of its numbers on the island. This is not the case. It is shameful to see how this retrograde society still looks down upon atheists and agnostics as though inferior. we are not ashamed of this, and want to make a stand, the same way that 'christians' have a nag of parading their believes all over the place.
Wilfred Camilleri
Aug 20th 2011, 00:06
Balderdash! These people are delusional! If someone doesn't want to be considered as members of an organization, all they have to do is stop participating in the organizations' activities. Mr. Borg, if you want to distance yourself from the CHurch all you have to do is not go to one! Grow up and find another hobby! One that doesn't make you look like you lost your marbles along the way!
Stefan Zammit
Aug 20th 2011, 14:16
@ Mr Borg, I'm atheist, and the church neither bothers me, nor do I bother it. If you want to show off your atheism just like the church shows off its beliefs, you are no better than they are.
Mr Alex Buds
Aug 19th 2011, 15:52
"It said in a statement that to formally leave the church, one had to be individually interviewed by the chancellor of the Curia."
This is news to me.... which planet are these people living on exactly?
Incidentally I was thinking of switching my diet to vegan. I better go apply for permission with the Chancellor of the Carnivore Society maybe...
victor caruana
Aug 19th 2011, 15:51
The church won't let you go....it keeps up presenting itself at your doorstep to bless your house....if you decline, you will be ticked off by the neighbours....not that they are real catholics themselves, neither.....then they chase your children to get the sagraments.....if not they are blacklisted....they are not even allowed in church school no matter how bright they are....
Just imagine...we catholics are the only people in the world born in sin (original they call it)....why?....so that we feel guilt as we grow up and succumb to church pressjure....now just imagine a new born child who had already committed a sin through ancestors....how crass can one get??????
Mario Spiteri
Aug 19th 2011, 15:50
....well we cannot say we are not living in a humid country, 'cause groups are now "mushrooming" all around us.
Mr Duncan Scerri
Aug 19th 2011, 15:44
Would be more fun to see who can get the fastest ex-communication. Perhaps set up a competition with gold, silver and bronze for the quickest three.
Nigel Holland
Aug 19th 2011, 15:16
It's seem that wherever the Church, or more precisely the Curia, is involved, whether it is at fault or otherwise, we are verging on the ridiculous!
How come that one now needs '... support in formally renouncing thier faith'! People who are convinced that renouncing their faith (or any other thing they formerly believed in or upholded, for that matter) is the right thing to do should just go ahead and do it without any hesitation and fear at all. Or does facing the chancellor of the Curia amount to facing the Spanish Inquisition? I'm curious to know!
Nigel Holland
Mr Carmel Farrugia
Aug 19th 2011, 15:11
Have these people anything to do? If they want to leave the Catholic Church all they need to do is to stop obeying its rules and not to enter a Catholic Church ever again.....Not difficult....
Deo Catania
Aug 19th 2011, 16:00
Really? and who wants to terminate his/her marriage what should he/she do? The divorce which will be introduced shortly only applies to civil marriage.I don't think it's as easy as you are saying.
Wilfred Camilleri
Aug 19th 2011, 15:07
What a bunch of cooks!
Kevin Camilleri
Aug 19th 2011, 15:05
cheap publicity!
you do not leave the church with a piece of paper... but spiritually. Since you are asking for this you have already resigned from the church.
Joseph Borg
Aug 19th 2011, 15:00
i cant understand this issue. If one want to defect from the church is easy by not following the church anymore. Or this people are being forced by their own society to do so ?