Since in this commentary I usually tackle only one subject at a time I have to refrain from commenting on various incidents, ideas or events. Perhaps it would not be amiss if, from time to time, I try to cover several topics in one go. Let's give it a try.

Who guards us from 'we the people'?

I loved listening to US Ambassador Douglas Kmiec's speech delivered at the Meusac forum discussing the implications of the Irish yes vote in the referendum. Quite naturally, he said things ambassadors are expected to say. However, he also spoke as an academic, and I liked these parts of his speech most.

The ambassador reflected on the way the US Constitution was formulated, and drew a number of parallels on what is happening in Europe with the Lisbon Treaty. He not only pointed out that the US Constitution was the document enshrining the beliefs of 'we the people' but reflected on this statement too.

I paraphrase very liberally his reflections and add mine on top of them. Should 'we the people' be the ultimate justification of every piece of legislation enacted, human acts engaged into, policies announced, etc.? Who should guard us from 'the people'? If the people say paedophilia is right, will it become right? It may become legal but it will never become right.

Believers are privileged as they can refer to a higher authority that lights the path of the people and guards us from any excesses. Non-believers have a tougher route to traverse to arrive at a similar stage.

Prelates and politicians

Some years back the Vatican published a document addressed to Christian politicians. I discussed it with a Maltese politician whose Catholic credentials are impeccable. "The problem with this document," he told me, "is that whoever wrote it knows next to nothing about politics." He then amply explained the reasons for his statement.

I still remember this incident whenever I hear members of the clergy on various occasions, and especially in Sunday homilies, pontificating on so many different subjects, when among their listeners there are people more competent than they to speak on the same subjects.

The Silence of the Lambs could very well double as the title of a documentary on most of our laity. The question 'why' has never, in my opinion, been adequately add-ressed. Whoever manages, for example, to find the reason why the laity are playing third fiddle in the divorce debate would be giving a valid contribution to the Church.

However, let me backtrack to the relationship between prelates and politicians. Last January I had written about the autonomy of Catholic MPs.

I referred to the incident when Alcide de Gasperi decided to ignore the express wish of Pope Pius XII as communicated to him by the highest authorities at the Secretariat of State at the Vatican. The Pope was not amused. De Gasperi was in the right. He behaved as mature Catholic politicians should behave; that is, as a political leader not as an altar boy.

The myriad challenges that our society is facing demands Catholic politicians with a level of maturity similar to that of the post-war beacon of Italy's Democrazia Cristiana.

The Archbishop on the Web

Kull deni ħudu b'ġid is a Maltese version of the well-known proverb 'every cloud has a silver lining'. Our dear Archbishop must have experienced the wisdom of this proverb. His home confinement due to Swine Flu must have provided him with an ideal occasion to put into practice one of the new features of the radically revamped website of the Archdiocese maltadiocese.org.

Prominently placed on the website is a function enabling people to send an e-mail to Mgr Cremona. Many must have sent him good wishes and he must have had more time to answer.

I like the website's new design and content and would like to congratulate those responsible for it. I invite readers to visit it. Sending a message to Mgr Cremona to wish him well and give him your opinion about the Church would not be amiss.

joseph.borg@um.edu.mt