Crosses instead of cribs for Christmas?

The debate about the presence of the Crucifix in public places is not new for Malta. I remember there was such a debate during the Mintoff era. I don't remember whether the grand old man of Maltese politics removed the Crucifixes from government offices, or just hinted that he could do that or it happened that people suspected he wanted to do that.

I distinctly remember, though, that the subject was hotly debated. The Times of Malta (I think it was still legal to use the word Malta at that time) concluded the discussion by publishing several letters on the same page. The intended title was to be "Crucifixes in public places." Unfortunately, the "l" was left out from the word "public" and the heading had a totally different meaning, undoubtedly very different from that of the sub-editor who devised it.

This year the debate has been revisited with a vengeance.

The enlightened Chaplain

Timesofmalta.com on October 21 published a story titled "University denies crucifixes are being removed." I was overjoyed to read the comments of the University Chaplain, Fr Michael Bugeja SJ. We need more level headed priests like him. I don't know of many who would have given such a precise, concise, balanced and enlightened answer. Read on if you missed it.

"University Chaplain Michael Bugeja said the rumours arose because while crucifixes hung in most of the older lecture rooms, the newer ones never had them.

Fr Bugeja has no problem with the current situation. "I don't think it's an issue. We don't need one in every room. We have many crucifixes around the University, even in the offices. As it stands, it shows a sense of openness to all religions," he said.

"We have a healthy balance where the Christian community does not impose itself of the others, and where the non-Christian community does not impose itself on us. I think this is a very positive sign."

Fr Bugeja also argued that if students needed a crucifix in every classroom to celebrate their faith, he would start to question their intentions."

The war of the comments started immediately and Fr Bugeja was the target of some of commentators. One even said that she doubts his intentions! Reading some of the comments, scared me to death. There is so much fundamentalism around - religious and secular as well.

This was just the appetiser for what was to come ... ....

Banning the Crucifix

The seven wise men who sit on the bench of the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg showed that they share none of Solomon's wisdom while dispensing justice. I criticised this decision in my comment to TVM on the same day the misguided and appalling decision was delivered. I described it as a shameful decision. On that subject I will also comment in my column in The Sunday Times.

Here I would like to comment on some of the similarly shameful comments that were written beneath different news items published in timesofmalta.com. Crass ignorance, bigotry and intolerance are the order of the day. Read on.

R. Zabbar wrote: It is an EU law not to hang any religion symbol in public rooms, so if you accept European money, you need to accept the European law.

Douglas Bagnall "Now you are finding out what you really voted for and why we English do not want it but have had it forced on us by Blair and Brown."

I will not comment on the atrocious use of the English language but on the factual incorrectness. It is not true that there is such an EU law. It is not true that the decision was taken by the EU.

The European Court of Human Rights is an institution of the Council of Europe and not of the EU which had nothing to do with this decision. This mistake was also made by our national TV station which said that the decision was taken by the European Court of Justice! A similar mistake was made by ANSA which said that the decision was taken by the highest court of the EU.

A certain Paul Bonnici said that the "Muslims must be very happy now" and Charles J Buttigiegwrote that the Court succumbed to Islamic treaths. It seems that they do not know that the court case was not instituted by a Moslem but by a Finnish atheist.

Charles J. Buttigieg solemnly suggested that "We should erect a mega crucifix near the breakwater to serve as a notice to Muslims and other denominations that we are a Christian Country and if they get offended by the sign of the cross it's just hard luck to them." Should Mgr Cremona book the date for the blessing of the ultra-Christian monument?

A certain Deo Catania said that Malta would be better if we got rid of all the Muslims. What about Maltese Muslims, don't they have the right to stay in their own country as much as you have?

This is just a very small sample but enough to prove my point.

Cribs and Crucifixes

Usually at this time of year, we Christians would be thinking of the cribs that we should use for Christmas time. We are today discussing the Crucifix instead. In fact, both are very closely related. One led to the other. Both of them show Christ - God and man - at a particularly vulnerable moment in His life. Birth and death are two vulnerable moments for all of us.

Christ turned these vulnerable moments into salvific ones. He saved us through the vulnerability He assumed but which we humans unfortunately abused. The vulnerability of Christ turned out to be His greatest strength as through it He saved us. His vulnerability triumphed in His Resurrection.

It is shameful that His vulnerability is being exploited by and crucified again by the seven judges of Strasbourg. However, we act in a more shameful way when we do not live according to the words and actions of Him who was born and died for us.