The contribution to the divorce debate by Martin Scicluna (September 9) is as confused and confusing as it is conceited and arrogant.

Having established himself as a champion of divorce who pursues his mission with Quixotian enthusiasm, Mr Scicluna will not tolerate anyone who disagrees with him.

So he starts his piece by labelling a dissenting contributor “a one-man guardian of the Maltese Church” and the Pro Vicar General a “poor accident-prone” soul. He even throws in a swipe at G. K. Chesterton for good measure, placing him snugly into the pigeonhole labelled “arch-propagandist”.

Then he rattles on about the inability of the response team to conclude their task on what he calls “the long-festering paedophile scandal“. What connection this has with divorce one is not fortunate enough to have revealed, presumably not even Mr Scicluna because he fails to make any rational connection between the two issues in his contribution.

Finally, in the very last few sentences he comes to the point he has been trying to make, which is essentially this: Given that it can be shown that driving on the right side of the road is not any more dangerous than driving on the left – indeed, it may even be less dangerous – we should not continue to drive on the left merely on the basis of the religious beliefs of one section of society (even, I would add, if that section happens to be of a considerable size, like a handsome majority). Instead, we should look into driving on the right because that happens to be coincident with Mr Scicluna’s opinion, which is of course a rock solid basis for any decision on the matter.

At this rate one would be tempted to hope for the immediate introduction of a law on divorce if only to be spared more of Mr Scicluna’s contributions on the matter.

The only problem is that the unexpected success could encourage him to shoot off on another mission, return with another pseudo-report with its pseudo-scientific conclusions and expect us all to go along with it because he thinks it is the right thing for us to do and we lesser mortals could know no better.