I am always amazed when supposedly well-read people, like, for example, atheist/agnostic par excellence John Guillaumier, fail to even understand one of the main roles of a newspaper – being also a photo of the realities in which it exists.

In his letter of January 23, he ironically describes the Times of Malta as being “a Church paper” simply because it featured a number of articles about Church-related matters.

Does he not understand that if those topics are an integral part of what makes the current reality of the character, daily lives and beliefs of Maltese society then it is always any competent editor’s duty to feature them?

Or is it, yet again, a case of ‘fools rush in where angels fail to tread’?

Of course, it could also be the case that the correspondent is drastically persisting in his belief that, by writing such letters he stands some one chance in umpteen trillions of ‘changing’ that society!