Archbishop Paul Cremona made a powerful comment when, at an event to mark the World Day for Social Communications, he expressed frustration that the Church did not always feel truly free to express itself.
“In a secularised world, and in a pluralistic society,” he told a gathering of journalists, “all the Church asks for is that it may be allowed to voice its opinion, together with the opinions of the rest of society... This right is never explicitly denied.
“Yet, if every time the Church speaks out, it is attacked on other matters with the aim of being discredited, in such a way that the message it is trying to convey is lost, then this would be the outcome of secularist politics, which does not allow the Church to perform its mission in society.”
Mgr Cremona was evidently careful in his choice of words. But his message was crystal clear and one does not have to wander a long way back in time to come across instances of what he meant. Which does not mean, either, that the Church, both as an institution and via senior exponents and members, have not been guilty of serious mistakes.
“In our society, throughout the times, the Church has never shirked from the responsibility of speaking out, in order that fundamental values may be safeguarded for the common good,” the Archbishop said.
Could he have had in mind the campaign leading to the introduction of divorce in Malta, the debate on IVF and same-sex unions, to name just three instances in recent history?
It ought to be borne in mind that the Constitution defines the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion as being the religion of Malta. It recognises that the Church authorities have both the duty and the right to teach which principles are right and which are wrong and also allows teaching of the Roman Catholic faith to be provided in all State schools as part of compulsory education.
These provisions have at times given rise to controversy on whether, in the circumstances, Malta could be defined as a secular State.
The debate will continue and an attempt by some quarters to revise the relevant clause in the Constitution may perhaps not be too far off.
The Archbishop’s delegate on social communications, Fr Charles Tabone, referred to secularisation and secularism at the same event.
A secularised society, he said, is one where society is autonomous, not necessarily linked to a particular religious belief. Within such a society, one would be able to reason things out rather than limit oneself to a definition emanating from a religious belief. On the other hand, secularism means stifling any reference to religious meaning, not allowing freedom of worship, attacking and ridiculing those promoting their religious beliefs, Fr Tabone said.
He added: “Secularism also prevails when, although given space to air its voice and expressing its opinion on current affairs, a religious institution is continuously criticised, or else its faults or sins are raised in such a way as to lessen or destroy its credibility.”
The Archbishop spoke on the Church’s “desire to make our voice heard, unhampered by those who may wish to slur or silence us in the process”.
Mgr Cremona wishes the Church to be able to play its part in society, nothing more.
But for that to happen, there needs to be a level playing field within the context of a secularised society rather than secularism where the Church is unfairly treated.