Fr Colin Apap’s article, ‘A Church that is relevant’, dwells on two metaphors: a hospital and a miniskirt. On the former subject, he rightly and appropriately quotes the Holy Father and on the latter he passes on his own outspoken comments, quite out of place with a subtle derogatory attitude towards the local Church’s recent past lost battles. He should have stayed on the same lines and quoted the same person.
Before proceeding any further, I would not like my letter to be clothed with a cloak of political connotations but rather to be kept within the ambit of the Catholic Church’s perennial teaching on gay unions, etc. Catholic legislators and, more so, pastors should focus on adherence to specific doctrines and unwavering principles, if they value highly their Christian heritage. Further sensitive cuts to measure Bills can all too quickly stray us into treacherous waters.
The Pope’s immense popularity raised high expectations that the Church would soften its policies on such issues as contraception, cohabitation, divorce and gay marriages.
Pope Francis made it clear he did not envisage changing the Church’s rules and doctrine on such issues but ,rather, discuss ways of applying and explaining them better. Pastoral concern must take into account new situations and what can be done for people.
Wounds created during the divorce debate are only the correspondent’s further imagination. The introduction of divorce has further eroded society’s moral fibre and the bishops had the right and duty to oppose it at the time. They could not do otherwise in order to remain faithful to Christ’s teachings. Nothing more, nothing less! In a friendly atmosphere, with prudence and for his own good, the late Mgr Anton Gauci had written more than once to the then leader of the Opposition, his last letter dated June 2011, that it would be sensible to be careful in our youth, not to take a false step which we would later on in life regret and can never obliterate. This is an open secret mentioned in the booklet ‘Ħafna insara tal-isem bis’ (A lot of Christians in name only).
On the eve of the civil union’s legislation, the famous St Paul’s shipwreck panegyric was a clarion call to call a spade a spade. Whatever Parliament or any law may say, marriage will only ever be the union of one man and one woman. I guess the sermon gained the Archbishop’s approval and Bishop Charles Scicluna spoke about these issues before. But, then, who is a bishop? A shepherd holding a crook, far from the maddening crowd, his words a voice in the wilderness, not an influential teacher.
In the correspondent’s own words, the Bill about civil unions removes the discrimination against persons based on their God-given sexual orientation. This is diametrically opposed to the Pope’s stand that the Church’s ban on contraception and opposition to gay marriage will remain in place. But who is the Pope? A normal person, certainly no superman. But I wish that, on this occasion, he is considered so. His words are not to be ignored once again. So far, this clear guidance has fallen on deaf ears.
The man in the street can be excused for going astray but I cannot imagine a priest, not on his way to Damascus or Via Appia.
Whither goest thou Malta? Have I read that phrase somewhere before?