Should the Church quote statistics in its attempt to show that the introduction of divorce legislation would be harmful for society?

Archbishop Paul Cremona answers in the affirmative (The Sunday Times, August 23).

He wrote: "While promoting the stability of marriage, the Church also has to show that the introduction of divorce has consequences on this and on society at large, especially children. This is done especially through research and statistics."

The Church cannot understand contemporary society and culture without the help of social science research. The social sciences help it dialogue with those who are of a different faith or of no faith at all. Arguments built on the Gospel would have very little appeal to those who do not believe in the Gospel. Consequently, a common language has to be found on which to build the desired dialogue. In certain cases, the social sciences can provide such a language.

The Archbishop, in the sentence quoted above, referred to "research and statistics". In another part of his article, he refers just to statistics. I assume that the wider context of "research and statistics" is what he must have meant. Statistics is only one tool that is used by the social sciences and, like every other tool, it has a certain validity in certain circumstances. Besides statistics, there are additional tools available to discover other important aspects of our social development.

When the Church uses different research techniques (or refers to the results of different research techniques used by other organisations) to try to understand society or make a point about the human condition, it is taking a risk since it is moving out of its specific competencies. However, this is not only a risk worth taking but also a risk that has to be taken if it wants to remain relevant.

If the Church wants to be taken seriously, it must use the social sciences and their tools judiciously. The Archbishop seems to be aware of this when he writes that the statistics that it uses have to be "scientifically proven". Herein lies the risk I refer to.

Social scientists can tell us when research or statistics are "scientifically proven" much more than bishops or priests. Social scientists can put our minds at rest about the interpretation of the conclusions reached by different studies undertaken in various countries and within the limitations of specific parameters.

In Malta, different people paint contrasting scenarios to describe the current situation of marriage and the family. Martin Scicluna's report for The Today Public Policy Institute, for example, says that the situation is such that the immediate introduction of divorce is necessary. Progettimpenn - the collective initiative of Cana Movement, Caritas and the Family Commission of our diocese - take the opposite position, basing themselves on the statistics they use.

The Church should be brave enough to keep on striving in its quest for truth. I suggest it sets up a commission of renowned local and foreign academics - statisticians, sociologists, and social psychologists included.

The commission should be asked to give us a "scientifically proven" portrait of the situation of marriage and the family in Malta.

It should also inform us to what extent the conclusions reached by studies done in other countries can be extrapolated to the Maltese situation. The commission should be well-funded to be able to commission research itself. Its conclusions should be published.

The results of scientifically-verified research, including statistics, can help us arrive at the true picture. This is a sine qua non condition to hold a serious discussion on such an important subject as marriage and the family.

On the other hand, when unskilfully interpreted, the results of research, including statistics, can deceive us more than damned lies.