The Church cannot be anything but a political church.

It is a must for the Church to interest itself in the human person, her condition in society, justice, the distribution of wealth and power, the rights of present and future generations. Quite naturally different levels of the Church have different roles in the fulfilling of this mission.

The role of the hierarchy and the roles of church commissions, individual priests and layperson are different though all are inspired from the same spirit.

The Pope, during a speech on the occasion of this year’s Epiphany feast compared the role of the hierarchy to one of shedding light on human experience.

 "The world, with all its resources, is unable to give humanity the light to guide it on its journey. This is clear also in our own day, when Western society seems to have lost direction and is feeling its way forward. Yet the Church, thanks to the Word of God, sees beyond these shadows. She does not possess technical solutions but she has her gaze turned to the final destination offering the light of the Gospel to all men and women of good will, of whatever nation or culture".

At a “lower” level , though, different members of the Church can propose technical solutions. It is important to stress that at this level different members of the Church can have different appraisals of a particular situation and they can offer different and contrasting solutions.

The political role is a core role

However, the political role is a fact, it is a core role and it goes beyond the offering of consolation to those who are suffering. It also goes beyond the preaching for charity. It is a role that militates for social justice and the furthering of the integral development of the whole human person. 

Mary herself had described Christ’s role in political terms. “He has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts. He has brought down the powerful from their thrones, and lifted up the lowly; he has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty.”

The attempt to deny the Church the right to exercise this role through her members at different levels has been on-going in different countries. The Church, say these, should be happy with doing liturgical celebrations, administering the sacrament, and teaching the Word of God as if it was a disincarnate word that has nothing to do with the here and now. For such people the space that should be occupied by the Church is the temple and its sacristy.

It is not only the Catholic Church that is targeted.  The Archbishop of Canterbury,   Dr Rowan Williams, was told to mind his own business when he touched the topic of religion and politics during his Christmas sermon. He defended himself by referring to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer which speaks of “binding together our obligations to God and to one another, in a dense interweaving of love and duty joyfully performed”. The fulfilling of this duty is based on the position that  the problems facing society are just as much spiritual and moral as they are political and economic.

Malta is no exception

As an example of this intolerant attitude in Malta one can point to the criticism levelled from time to time at Bishop Mario Grech who, on more than one occasion addressed “political” issues. What he says is sometimes reported selectively and thus erroneously or in a sensationalised way. Such a speech was the one he delivered some weeks back in Ta’ Kercem.

He spoke, among many other things,  of the emergence of new forms of being widowers or orphans. Marriage breakdowns result in this new state of widowhood. Is not every marriage breakdown a cry for help? Should this cry for help be ignored? Should not society and the Church help in a material, affective and moral way those who want to be loyal to their marriage vows?

Bishop Grech included in his category of orphans those children in need of care which unfortunately is not given because of limitations within our social services, though these are quite extensive.  He gave concrete examples.

Then Bishop Grech “dared” to address the subject of working mothers. His message was essentially one of respect to the choices that mothers make and to the duty of society to respect, defend and help these choices in concrete and tangible ways.

Several of the topics mentioned by Bishop Grech were ignored and his thoughts about working mothers were misrepresented.

I am not saying that Bishop Grech or anyone else for that matter is not the subject of criticism. It is legitimate not to agree with what he says, criticise him and propose different points of view.  However, in the first place, his point of view has to be well represented and respected.

It is the role of the Church to be a critical voice in society by highlighting areas which could be improved. The Church has a duty towards her Founder, humans and society to fulfil this role. A pluralistic society prides itself in being a society where different voices and points of view compete for the attention of public opinion. It is a pity that some of the proponents of the pluralist society behave in such a way as to recognise the right for all voices – bar that of Church people – to be heard.