The cozy relationship which exists to this day, between the Roman Catholic Church and state in Malta, has gone relatively unchallenged. The arrangement worked reasonably well in years past, when the general level of education in Malta was questionable. Its inhabitants ever subjugated by foreign powers, sought protection and guidance from clerical authorities, who furtively cooperated with government agencies to keep the unsuspecting populace in check. The advent of national independence and an increase in educational levels, coupled with a larger awareness of how other nations thrive freely under democratic institutions, has led to discontent with Malta's traditional ties with the mother church and a desire for legislative reform. The way of the future calls for a stronger secular role in the affairs of state, with a corresponding lessening of ecclesiastical involvement in government affairs. Recent revisions in law regarding property entitlements (Uzufruttwarju) bears strong evidence of a basic shift in public attitudes, away from a previously sacrosanct and all powerful patronizing church.
Since the late 1940's the political base and influence of the Catholic Church in Malta have clearly eroded. It was not always so. Throughout much of Malta's history including the British colonial period , the island's occupiers used the church establishment to help control a restive population. During WWII and the post war period, the British showered Archbishop Michael Gonzi (1943-1976) with pomp and ceremony, much like the superficial glitter they bestowed on Indian Maharajas to encourage them in oppressing their own impoverished masses. The political savvy British turned Gonzi, a mini person with a mega ego, into a colonial puppet. He was ever willing to carry out their bidding in return for trappings of office. Malta fell in line for the good of Empire, at least until nationalistic aspirations under the MLP led to their forced departure in 1964, notwithstanding the Archbishop's political power game. This unholy alliance between church and state, abetted by more than a few locals for self-serving reasons should not have materialized, and is less acceptable today. Contemporary Malta is a liberal parliamentary democracy and as such should maintain a rigid line of demarcation between clergy and laymen, on the order of the great American model of governance. No one wishes to deny the church its rightful place in Maltese society. It should however be mandated to exercise its spiritual rights in a diminished capacity, at par with but not as an integral part of Malta's constitutional government.
The emergence of a more assertive secular presence in Malta is the more remarkable given the preponderance of strong Catholic values shared by its conservative population. The trend is however in lock step with a more permissive and questioning lifestyle observed by other Western countries. There are those who will argue with strong moral conviction against the lessening of restrictive codes of conduct, governing family institutions and civil responsibilities. For them the church remains a bastion of strength and renewed spirituality, a port of haven providing shelter against the onslaught of human license seemingly gone wild. The demographic profile of the conservative element in Malta favoring continuation of a strong elitist church is largely constituted of senior people. They are mostly female, followers rather than leaders, who welcome the embrace of the mother church and feel spiritual security through blind observance of dogmatic discipline. For this dedicated group, religious observance is not a question of choice. It constitutes an imperative.
In most European nations, and to a lesser extent the United States where the practice of religion remains relatively strong, persons attesting inflexible theological certitudes constitute a vanishing breed. The demise of Protestantism in England with its ever growing number of empty church pews, is a precursory sign of events yet to reach Malta's Catholic shores on the same order of magnitude. Church attendance on the island is appreciably declining, more so amongst its younger parishioners. This is not to conjure a lessening of moral values, but simply a distancing between individuals and the formal worship of religion. It reflects a healthy inclination to question authority where rhyme or reason need prevail, consistent with democratic precepts. The contemporary trend affirms a new found link between informed persons of conscience and God. Like Buddhism and Islam, it lessens the need for third party intervention and interpretation of how best to interact with a personal deity. The intercession of highly structured hierarchies with their skewed systems of rank and privilege has no place in modern society. It is no different in Malta, only slower in coming.
When shove turns to push, few Maltese will not stand up in defense of their Catholic heritage. Yet more often than not, they pay lip service to a religion which is increasingly at odds with beliefs shared by the vast majority of its staunchest supporters. Celibacy and the ordination of women into the priesthood come to mind. Married couples are as likely as not to ignore the church's opposition against contraception. In defiance of all logic divorce in Malta remains illegal, yet many couples stay married in name only, while promiscuity and adultery reign supreme. For the affluent class who can afford it, annulment is a convenient alternative. Abortion is banned, making it risky for those who wish to terminate pregnancy using local midwives, doctors or medical facilities. A short trip to continental Europe solves the problem of delivering unwanted children. This widespread disregard by the laity of outmoded church prohibitions, is indicative of Malta's search for greater latitudes permitting individual and collective behavior. Malta is simply emulating the modern world at large, as it distances itself further from Rome. Whether this growing gap is beneficial or harmful to Malta's future in the long term is a matter for debate. What is beyond dispute is that change is inevitable. A most important step required to untangle this mess is to empower secularization of Malta's constitution.
The day when organized religion was the exclusive center of learning, wisdom and power, towards which a poorly educated flock looked up to for salvation, is gone forever. Today it is the church which needs be awakened. Either it changes with the time, else it will be left behind by an enlightened citizenry, far better educated than its own clergy. The surest way for the Church of Rome to accelerate retrogression is to maintain its insistence on dogma. There was a time when declaring the world round was deemed an act of heresy. Believing our world circled the sun earned an inquiring person ridicule or death. This enduring clerical obstinacy towards science and secular sensibilities will ultimately lead to its demise. The papal argument that the church is not out to win a popularity contest is irrational and self-defeating. In Malta as elsewhere change cannot be denied. Television is the greatest instigator against the status quo. It fosters attitudinal changes particularly within Malta's very young, as evidenced by the growing number of youngsters speaking fluent Italian as well as English. Other meaningful engines of change influencing public behavior and mores are tourists and trips taken abroad by Maltese nationals. Taken together these factors form a considerable challenge to a church authority in decline.
The shift towards temporal powers in Malta is not in and of itself a doom and gloom proposition, fraught with unseen danger. Indeed Malta has no other choice but to embrace progress, as the world becomes more alike in observing universal human values. Progress does not come without a price. Maltese society must deal with its side effects to preserve advancement. Even so, amidst this vast sea of change where cultures fuse and integrate, the Maltese can still nurture their ideas and keep a moral basis in life to preserve some degree of national identity. On matters of faith a strong sense of right and wrong must be upheld, else barbarianism will soon take over. Without recourse to a particular religion or belief, people have an infinite capacity for good and evil. This basic human quality requires no particular formal affiliation with a state sponsored church. When all is said and done Malta will not be required to abandon her religious allegiance to the Catholic Church, but only to separate it from the affairs of state. It is categorically improper to legislate any one church as the state religion.
Postscript: This article represents a follow-up exploration of church and state issues affecting contemporary Malta. The first essay titled "New Ways For Old" appeared on Grazio's Malta Virtwali in October 1996.
E-mail to Joseph Vella: vellajoseph@msn.net
|
|
