Yesterday the Curia lambasted Minister Helena Dali’s reported speech in Parliament of April 2nd wherein she stated that paedophile priests and paedophile laymen are treated differently and this has to stop.

Minister Dalli seems to have repeated what she had written in her March 28 column in The Times of Malta titled “Matters pertaining to the state”. She most quoted from an article she had written three years ago: “ The situation is such whereby a priest abusing children and teenagers may be treated differently to a lay person committing the same crime in that the former may simply be prosecuted internally within the Church structures“.

This is manifestly not true and a member of the Cabinet is expected to know that this is not true. It was only a few months ago that two priests were handed a prison sentence because of sexual abuse of minors. There is a difference in the sense that priests are condemned by both Church and civil/criminal courts while laymen are judged only by the criminal/civil courts.

I however agree with another point made in the article she quoted from, that is, abusive priests should also be reported to the police.

In the same article Dr Dalli derided the Church/State agreement on marriage that had been reached by the Nationalist government and the Holy See years back and which has now been amended.

On more than one occasion I criticised particular aspects of this agreement. I am happy that these ‘offending’ parts have now been changed.

However Minister Dalli dramatized the situation when it described the accord as an “infamous agreement.” As Minister Dalli noted, this agreement was contested in Court and our Courts decided that it in no violated the Constitution and the European Convention of Human Rights, which affords every citizen the right of access to the courts. This was an agreement with which one could agree or disagree but in no way was it infamous.

I agree with the general drift of the said article. We were told that “the government continues to show that it wants a clear separation between Church and State.” Bully for it. This is how things should be.

Further down Minister Dalli writes: “It seems that the government and the Opposition are finally in agreement that this country must reverse situations which impinge upon the separation of Church and State.” I also totally concur with such a position.

But it takes two to tango, doesn’t it? Therefore isn’t it ironic that on the same day that Minister Dalli was, quite rightly, singing the praises of Church/State separation we were informed that the Government appointed Foundation for National Celebrations asked the Curia to direct churches to ring their bells in joyous celebration of Freedom Day and Independence Day? Does such a thing make sense in a 21st century secular state?

It is good that the state works to strengthen its separation from the Church. Likewise it makes sense for the Church to do the same. Unfortunately the request of the government Foundation was heeded to; a sign that the Church is not jealous of its independence from the state as much as the state is from her.