Fr Joe Borg
Money makes Church go round?
Despite backdrop poster showing smiling people, the record €1.7 loss is no laughing matter. Photo: Photocity, Valletta
Last Monday Mgr Charles Cordina and Mgr Anton Portelli addressed a press conference to announce the Archdiocese’s financial and pastoral report for 2010.
The backdrop poster at the event showed several smiling people. I don’t know what they were smiling about because the reverend monsignors reported that last year the Archdiocese (not the Church) of Malta had lost a record €1.7 million.
It is not a sum one can laugh about especially when one notes that the loss during 2009 was almost €870,000 and that for 2008 was €1m – a cumulative loss of €3.57 million. One immediately understands why the faces of the two monsignors and the lay financial controller were quite glum and, as is to be expected, in sharp contrast to those faces strangely beaming smiles behind them.
Media coverage of the event gave the impression that the Pope’s visit was the cause of the Archdiocese’s financial problems. It is not. Had the Pope not come to Malta, the Curia’s deficit would have been lower; but should we gauge everything from the money perspective?
This was a one-time expense costing €1m. Are there not 200,000 Catholics in Malta ready to pay €5 each to finance a papal visit? It was unfortunate, however, that people’s expectations were misled as the sum quoted before the visit was less than half the sum actually spent.
Media coverage also gave the impression that the Archdiocese is facing a crisis because of losses that are being borne due to its social and charitable work, mainly children’s homes and old people homes. But is this correct?
During 2009 and 2010 these initiatives made a negligible loss of €19,000. If one were to add also the loss made by Id-Dar tal-Providenza, then, one would register a loss of €165,000.
It is true that there was a considerable reduction in donations and collections. This is unfortunate. One should ask whether this was because people were giving less charity or because people were giving less charity in general or less to Church institutions.
Is it mainly a question of marketing or lack of trust in the Church? Perhaps it is a bit of both; however, parishes managed to increase their income in spite of diminishing Church attendance; and that’s a plus for our parish priests.
In 2009 and 2010, by far bigger loss makers were the Ecclesiastical (also known as ‘Marriage’) Tribunals (almost €1 million) and the media activities (a loss of €1.5 million). In both cases the loss is quite alarming.
On the other hand, the value of these sectors has to be gauged in terms of the people serviced, and (in the case of the Church media) the funds raising activities they do.
However, while I believe people can be persuaded to donate more to charitable activities, they will not donate for the tribunals (whose perception is generally bad) and the media activities.
Although the subject of the press conference was the financial/pastoral report, media coverage concentrated on the financial aspects. This is to be expected; more so because the so-called ‘pastoral report’ takes less than three A4 pages.
The way these reports are published does a big injustice to the valuable and extensive work being done by the various entities making up the Archdiocese. Instead of a flimsy leaflet, there should be a professionally-produced booklet celebrating intelligently and creatively the service so generously given by so many members of the Church.
This generosity, more than the monetary dimension, makes the Church go forward.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
11 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Jessica Debattista
Oct 22nd 2011, 15:55
@ Anthony Galea:
It is true that there is a wave of anticlericalism which was fanned to a superlative degree by the reprehensible practice of certain individuals within the Church. To my way of thinking the Church has to reform itself to adapt to a changing society but I do not believe that there is no more room for the Church/religion in Malta.
You might have the impression that many of the Maltese people have become atheists but that could very well be your imagination, or else a desire of a section of Maltese people, who have become too sure and proud of their self importance, to want to do away with religion altogether.
They could be desperately trying to silence a conscience that tells them otherwise and in their agitation, they cannot help but take it out on others who hold with the belief that God does exist.
Yesterday I attended a reading session where we were asked to reflect upon some writings of Marsilio Ficino who was one of the most influential humanist philosophers of the early Italian Renaissance. He was an astrologer, a reviver of Neoplatonism who was in touch with every major academic thinker and writer of his day, and the first translator of Plato's complete extant works into Latin. He was also a priest with an unbounding love for God.
I was particularly struck by the following: “Good Jesus, you who hang here for the sake of our souls, was it really your will to suffer for a corporeal soul? To die for a mortal soul?
Look brethren, listen carefully, I beg you, do you not see? He seems to open his mouth and reply: “Never would I exchange what is so precious for what is so base. No, indeed. God was made man for the sake of the divine soul in man. I died for the immortal soul.”"
Jessica Debattista
Oct 18th 2011, 22:56
The fact that church attendance is dwindling does not necessarily mean that people are leaving the Church. It probably means that people have grown careless but careless does not mean that they do not care. There might come a time when they realize that they need the solace that only the church can give and it would be with renewed fervour that they start to attend the mass and participate in the liturgy.
In the meantime the church is falling back on its income from donations during mass - said donations which are sorely needed to keep the Church going.
I do not dare suggest a church tax such as is the practice in Germany seeing as to how people are not happy with the tax situation as it is. But nevertheless I find that it makes sense to start a new approach about how to collect donations.
Members in any society are required to pay membership fees and if they require a special service from the society they have to pay for it. I do not think that what I am hinting at is something that one should ignore.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_tax Worth a read!
Anthony Galea
Oct 21st 2011, 22:42
I think your hope is false. Malta might as well dispose of article 2, and declare itself an irreligious country-many people are atheist-and of those who still believe in a god, most of them are anti clerical and certainly do not believe in the one true God, but a creator of sorts.
Maybe this is the reality of modern day Malta-abandon its culture, its religion, and come to terms with atheism.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 18th 2011, 06:54
@ Jessica Debattista.
Prof. Pule's comment would be unobjectionable if it emphasized the fact that today's citiizen is so much oppressed by obligatory taxation by the state that there should be a much smaller demand by the Church for funds, contributed on a voluntary basis by its faithful members, to enable it to fill in the gaps in essential social services locally and on top of the Church's world-wide missionary activities in third world countries.
With special reference to education there is the need felt by faithful Catholics to have their children brought up in a Christian atmosphere because to them Christianity is a way of life - not just another subject in the school curriculum like the 3Rs.
Jessica Debattista
Oct 17th 2011, 11:40
A couple of days ago my husband and I were in the living room and the TV was on. It was showing ‘Treasure Island’ – a story we’ve read, watched, talked about, who knows how many times. We weren’t actively watching it for we were doing other things, but we were aware, of course, that it was on. At the point when the treasure was to be unearthed both of us pivoted our faces towards the TV set waiting for the exciting moment. Ben Gun gave the last strike with his pick-axe against the protesting cave wall, dislodging the stubborn rock that did not to want to give. A shower of gold that seemed to go on forever made Long John Silver’s group stand mesmerized, and what’s more both my husband and I seemed likewise mesmerized at the sight of so much wealth.
I realized there and then that we are all brought up on this type of conditioning – that money is everything – we want it - we crave it, and we entrust it to a bank in the hope of it rendering more money. We think it is our security for when we reach pensionable age. We are loth to part with it and we begrudge the little we are prepared to donate to charity.
Prof. Pule’ has made a good point when he said: “I say , they cannot take any more and in their silence it is unfair to keep trying to squeeze more out of the good families who have realized that they too cannot keep up with the depreciation of the hard earnt money of a modern wife and a husband raising children, and hoping for a pension which will never come from either the government or other charitable institutions supported by families in the same difficulties. It has become difficult for the man and woman who supports it all.”
But so has Dr. Saliba’s riposte when he said: “The obvious answer is that they DO have money to give for many activities that have a lot to do with entertainment, holidays abroad, dining out - some could be spared for charitable purposes without excluding Church charities.”
The problem does not lie in the fact that people canno afford to give charity anymore. It is the mentality that has changed!
When we were young we were fed on the beauty of affluence and it made it even more appealing because it was on the othere side of the fence. And yet people donated that little something they could afford because they were raised on values that put great store on charity towards the less fortunate.
When the standard of living rose and society in general became more affluent people became more self centred because now affluence was no longer on the other side of the fence but they actually had the money in hand to pamper to more than just their needs.
Money was no longer something to mesmerize you but it was in hand giving you the power to act out all that you had once just desired. And this is what led to our hedonistic way of living. Parallel to it was the loss of Christian values and what’s more the respect towards the Church.
Mr Emanuel Farrugia
Oct 16th 2011, 22:38
MONEY MONEY MONEY
Matthew 19:23-24
And Jesus said to His disciples, "Truly I
say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter
the kingdom of heaven.
"And again I say to you, it is easier for
a camel to go through the eye of a needle,
than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of
God."
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 16th 2011, 21:34
"For Francis Saliba to say " genuinely concerned Catholics should willingly dig into thier own pockets to mitiagte the problem and the church should provide the means for them to do so" How can they if they have no money to give?"
The obvious answer is that they DO have money to give for many activities that have a lot to do with entertainment, holidays abroad, dining out - some could be spared for charitable purposes without excluding Church charities.
Pule' Carmel
Oct 16th 2011, 19:10
"Charity is injurious more than it heals, unless it causes the recipient to become independent of charity.”
As I see it there are so many charities which demand more and more, as the cost of living rises for everyone and not everyone gets the same pay high rises as Parliamentarians and Court Magistrates and Judges. This means as I see it, that the cost of living rises Ero 5 to the average Christian family is ever decreasing and now with the wife working full time, there are not many wives, as my mother, who spent much time raising her family, and giving charity to others, while my father did his best to keep the family of six children. That family arrangement is now gone forever, due to modern circumstances which the family is finding so difficut to live by.
This week the "Lehen is-Sewwa has a lot of inference to modern people giving a lot of importance in making money than making values! Alpha Beta jitkellem fuq , is-sahha tal flus u termini fuq is sahha ta Ekonomijja.
Kan John Carlo speaks about "Il-kilba ghal aktar flus u ghal aktar gid ekonomiku, sar skop ewlieni ghal kullhadd" and he goes on to say," Id-dizgrazzja hi li hafna belghu l-hrafa li l-flus huma r-rimedju ta' kollox ghax bihom taghmel triq fil bahar." Well the Church seems that it needs money and deems it to be important too.
For Francis Saliba to say " genuinely concerned Catholics should willingly dig into thier own pockets to mitiagte the problem and the church should provide the means for them to do so" How can they if they have no money to give?
All this shows clearly that as the average Catholic is losing his earning power and the wife now goes out to work to make ends meet, all this is being reflected on how much the new family can afford to give and give its money and time away.
I lived in England where I saw the capital value of the churches go unsupported and churches had to close down. Why? because an old idea cannot last forever and one cannot expect that drumming and drumming for ordinary families to give and give is going to last forever.
All I say that the most worrying for the average family is the pension schemes? can they afford to live a good life with the modern pension which seems to dwindle to nothing as the number of children decreases.
Money does not grow on trees for the average catholic and he has been squeezed dry by the central government and other family requirements especially for housing costs and child's education. One cannot squeeze wife and husband any more, Circumstances has caused the wife to go to work to help her husband , on the other hand she had to reduce the number of children to enable the family a reasonable standard of living.
In other words , one cannot queeze Catholic families any more ,and rather than shout it out, they remain silent. It is not use passsing the buck to the genuine Catholics even though they are genuine, I believe we have come to a stage when the average family is more concerned about its own pension where no one will help as charity does not depend on the managers of charity, but the family members who will remain to suffer in silence with all this propaganda to settle accounts by either the government or any charitable institution.
I say , they cannot take any more and in their silence it is unfair to keep trying to squeeze more out of the good families who have realized that they too cannot keep up with the depreciation of the hard earnt money of a modern wife and a husband raising children, and hoping for a pension which will never come from either the government or other charitable institutions supported by families in the same difficulties. It has become difficult for the man and woman who supports it all. Propaganda of giving and giving is making the small man speachless till someone makes him feel ashamed of not giving and dif=gging in to this own cappital assets and savings for this own pension, it is so unfair to keep subtly squeezing the small man and woman into giving what they have not.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 17th 2011, 05:38
No one is expecting contributions from those who cannot afford them. Those who can afford it would naturally contribute if they so wish, according to their needs and according to their set priorites. Christ praised the widow's mite much more that the bigger ostentatious contributions of the rich.
All organisations try to raise funds from their members to promote their activities. It is only in the case of the Church that this normal voluntary activity is criticized as somehow coercive, just as its teaching to those who want to listen is labelled unjustly as an imposition. It is not at all surprising when this critcism comes from someone who dismisses religion as "an old idea". I am certain that genuine Catholics, to whom this comment is addressed, do not share that view.
Pule' Carmel
Oct 17th 2011, 14:07
As far as the "old idea" is concerned I was refering to Charity and not Religion. Religion will stay but it is the idea of charity that has to change.
The poor will always be with us and communism and socialsim and catholism and other religions were tried but this type of "charity philosophy" never worked as the countries which abided by such creeds remained poor, generlly speaking and a lot of people in politics and religions live well off the poor. In Russia many billionaires were generated out of communism and Pastors at the multitude of Evangelical New Churches did well in catering for a new American audience. The Charity I would like to address is a type that has to be shouldered by all Creeds including agnostics and atheists and not only our Church by asking ardent Catholics to fork out more money on a continuous basis which they cannot afford. Education needs to preach that all people should give a better service when possible and not necessarily money for as indicated in Lehen is -Sewwa this week, it is better to go for values than to seek money, this idea alone will limit the distribution of money towards charity, but not all is lost.
As an Engineer I gave consultancy and manual service to many Charities including making lifts and lift doors for vans and special baths and "crane systems" to lift handicapped people and getting the electricity and substation for Arka in Gozo. I learnt how to handle stainless steels and spent 25 years repairing the surgical equipmet that clumsy doctors break due to their clumsiness, and I set special traction systems at St Luke to ensure that the hip joint is pulled at the right vector, something doctors could not do.
So Charity does not belong to any religion any church, it belongs to all people on earth and there is no need to collect money, all we need to do is to educate people at higher levels to repair the tools others break because they are too stuborn to learn how to handle them. Charity to others begin within us in learning how not to break expensive things in hospitals, Charity will be applied when stupid medical consultants do not shout at me when I voluntarily go to repair, laser welders and photographic machine at the opthalmic theatres. They get a surprise when I shout back and just leave them to get on without engineering equipment.
yes we all need to know how charity is applied and coercing money out of the members of your club is the least efficient charity donations, as 50% of what is collected finish up in administration and running managemnt . I personnaly deal directly with those who need charity, but I give the direct service and do not give money so that managment of an institution will look around for someone to give paid services as they cannot handle the final work required to directly help others. It is not money that is really required, it is educating people to learn to give the required service and for others not to break expensive equipment. There are others who charge too much for reading a simple picture on an ultrasounds and X rays, pictures which in my time I read off sonars screens to detect enemy submarines, and to detect failures in welding joints to ensure hospital equipment is relaible. The extra money professional people make is money robbed off the poor and employees. If justice is applied to this world, I wager that the need for charity will diminsh greatly to a level that consciencious Catholics can afford to support.
Francis Saliba M.D.
Oct 16th 2011, 11:38
Three points I would like to make.
First the insistent and dishonest advice, by those who evidently do not have the well-being of the Catholic diocese at heart, for the Church to demolish its capital assets in an ineffective, stupid and senseless attempt to correct the problem of a recurrent deficit, should be ignored with the contempt it deserves.
Secondly, genuinely concerned Catholics should willingly dig into their own pockets to mitigte the problem and the Church should provide easy means for them to do so.
Thridly, savings must not be made at the prohibitive cost of shutting down the Church's charitable institutions, if this can be avoided.