Gozo Bishop’s freedom of expression

Yes, Mgr Grech has a ‘right to an opinion’. Doesn’t mean his opinion is right…

Raphael Vassallo 21 May 2012, 12:00am

4 min read

The more Mgr Grech exercises his freedom of expression, the more he will convince a growing number of people that secularism i.e., a clear distinction between Church and State is the way to go.

TWEET SHARE

Gozo Bishop Mario Grech invited a storm of protestation with his remarks last Saturday, and I somehow suspect that was all part of his Divine Plan.

Broadly speaking, Grech's pastoral letter can be reduced to a single equation: 'Family = man plus woman plus children'. And having redefined the 'family' within the context of his own ideological bias; the Gozo Bishop now expects the State to tailor its national legislation to his own, entirely arbitrary definition of that word.

I won't bother grappling with his argument, because even a five-year-old child will immediately spot the flaw. But to strip it down to the basics: the Maltese State has an obligation to legislate on behalf of ALL its citizens... not just the ones that fit into the Gozo Bishop's 'shiny happy family' mould.

That alone should suffice for now; but of course there is much more... starting with the definition itself, which totally excludes married couples without children. Not just the ones with medical issues: also married couples who simply do not want to have children, or who get married in later life, at a time when it is no longer possible without medical intervention (or divine intervention, in the case of Biblical couples like Sarah and Abraham, or Elizabeth and Zachary).

Ironically it also makes mincemeat of the Catholic Church's claims to be a 'family' itself. By Grech's own definition, that's one heck of a dysfunctional family he suddenly belongs to... dominated by unmarried, childless men, several of whom live together in extended units called 'monasteries', 'convents', 'priories', etc.

Meanwhile it has been pointed out elsewhere, but worth repeating: Mgr Grech's simplified family template would exclude even the 'Holy Family' that the same Church venerates so earnestly (unless I missed the part about 'unmarried couples fostering semi-divine children who were conceived without sexual intercourse', etc).

And that's not to mention single parents, same-sex relationships and all sorts of other less traditional family models. But let's leave others to argue these points.

What interests me here is the general reaction, which panned out in a cacophony of the usual knee-jerk (and utterly irrelevant) reminders that... "Mgr Grech has a right to an opinion". This is the sort of thing I have only ever heard in Malta, and I think it tells us much more about how little we understand such rights and freedoms, than anything connected to Grech's sermon.

In most other countries (well, democratic ones, anyway) "the right to an opinion" is taken completely or granted: so much so, that it only ever becomes an issue when that right is actively denied. In fact I see no other reason to even mention it otherwise; least of all in a case like Mgr Grech's, where the same right has very manifestly been exercised in full. (In other words: of course Mgr Grech has a 'right to an opinion'. We all just heard him express one...)

The real trouble, however, is that people who utter platitudes like "everyone has the right to an opinion" nearly always follow them through with the non sequitur that "all opinions are therefore equally valid".

But nothing could be further from the truth. Having the "right to an opinion" does not mean that one's "opinion is automatically right". I've already indicated where I think Mgr Grech is wrong with his definition of the family. I think he is wrong, too, regarding the obligations of the State. But at no point have I (or anyone else I know of) argued that Mgr Grech should not be allowed to express an opinion at all.

That would defeat the entire purpose: you're entitled to freedom of expression, even if you use it to express an appalling load of nonsense.

So when people step in to defend the Gozo bishop on the grounds that 'he has a right to an opinion' - along the lines of: "Oh, look at all those nasty secularists, trying to shut him up", etc. - all they are really doing is illustrating that there is no logical line of defence... forcing them all to resort to irrationality.

Oh and one last thing: it is certainly NOT in any secularist's interest to 'silence' Mgr Mario Grech. On the contrary: the more Mgr Grech exercises his freedom of expression, the more he will convince a growing number of people that secularism - i.e., a clear distinction between Church and State - is the way to go.

So keep them coming, Mgr Grech. The secularist cause needs people like you...

More from Raphael Vassallo

•

Jien nahseb fejn hi rasek? ghax tipprova tlahhaq ma kull kumment fuq hafna blogs u gazzetti ghax ilhom jaqlawlek, ma nafx kif ma ghajjejtx tiddefendi lil GonziPn, siehbek li gab ix-xoghol prekarju ghal shabu l-kuntratturi li jfornu l-Partit tieghek. Jien qatt ma gwadanjajt min fuq il politika ,ifhimni x'jiena nghidlek surmast tal Malti li l-Partit tieghek prova kemm il darba jeliminah u jgib it-Taljan, insejt? Allura kull meta nizbaljaw bil malti, int min daqs dawn nies taqbez fuqna meta thaddan bandiera bl-iswed tal faxxisti, forsi ma tafx ghalfejn hemm l-iswed, qieghed nghidlek jien li gej min Familja nazzjonalista min ta Sliema, niftakar kienu jtellaw il-bandiera kera bl-iswed tal faxxisti, u jien kont nghid imma dawn vera jridu lil Malta hielsa meta shabek gew internati fil gwerra ghax setaw tradew lil Malta, spjegali, ipprova, ikkonvincini? bniedem wiehed biss ghal Malta l-ewwel u qabel kollox kien Dom Mintoff u int tipprova tkasbru , saffrattant bqajt hawn fi zmienu ma siefirtx jew emigrajt bhal ma gara fis-sittinijiet biex int u shabek stanejtu min fuq il Poplu, int ghalhekk tobghodu li Mintoff ghax qatalek iz-z..za.

•

Fejn hi rasek Progress?

•

buskett2011 agree, but that last paragraph the Gozo Archbidhop was totally right to mention precarious work which is splitting families and it is widespread especially in Malta. The message he gave regarding precarious work is a serious issue

•

It seems that the clergy never learns lessons from the past. It seems that they still cannot understand that church and state should be kept apart. The more the clergy tries to impose, the worst its going to be for their image. If the church did not go out full speed ahead against divorce, I still say that it would have been a close call on that issue. However it seems that such pressure is coming from the sister island of Malta since our pastoral chief in Malta is laying back and be more careful when dealing with these matters. He's more wise - less talk and more amicable with the general public !

•

for once i totally agree with you, raphael. the more mr grech speaks the more confirms what really mintoff wanted! sorry but that s the truth! jose bormla

•

for once i totally agree with you, raphael. the more mr grech speaks the more confirms what really mintoff wanted! sorry but that s the truth! jose bormla

•

for once i totally agree with you, raphael. the more mr grech speaks the more confirms what really mintoff wanted! sorry but that s the truth! jose bormla

•

for once i totally agree with you, raphael. the more mr grech speaks the more confirms what really mintoff wanted! sorry but that s the truth! jose bormla

•

Raphael mela insejtni ma gibtomx ergajt il kummenti tieghi, jekk ma ggibomx nikkonsidrak bhal persona non grada , ghax la li jaqbel lilek mintiex qieghed thalli min juri l-ideat tieghu. Tieghek tajjeb , anki meta int tigi, ippressat min xi kummentatur, int trid terga tirrispondih, ghal kull min ma jaqbielx mieghek. Ma nistax nhifmek ghax int il blogger tista timmanuvra u tghazel int il kummenti li jidhru hawn. Hekk zbilanc, x'tahseb?

•

Raphael gib kollox mhux li jaqbillek biss, inkella titkellimx, imissek fahhartu L-Isqof ta l-ahhar paragrafu. Jien bhalek qal affarijiet li ma naqbilx mieghu, jien nahseb li hu Kattoliku fundamentalist Karismatiku li ma nahsibx li qed jghamel gid lil knisja, imma semma l-aqwa wahda tajba x-xoghol prekarju li kisser hafna familji, min hu hobzu mahbuz qieghed jinjora lil batut, u int hekk ghamilt maqdartu f'kolllox, le mhux sew, ghid kollox, urejt li tinsa kemnm hawn nies fqar Malta mindu tela l-PN fil gvern.

•

Inqbad int stess, Lol int mela tohrog jew tawtorizza li johorgu l-kummenti, tajba qgheda, il-bierah bghadlek kumment ta blog tieghek fuq Mintoff fi zmien in-National Bank u sa fil ghaxija il blog sparixxit u ma stajta insiba mkien, mela inti taf min jien ukoll, ara vera mintiex onest, jien bniedem la jien fil politika, bniedem ta triq , il-verita nghida mela tipprova tmaqdar il Mintoff, Alla hares ma kienx hu ghax jien mghandiex penzjoni, mghandiex sptar b'xejn, Mintoff ghallem lil haddiem u fejn seta ta artijiet lil kullhadd biex jibni u jghix. Lohombus b'interessi ta 2% u nhux ta 6 u 7% kif inhuma issa. Mintoff hasen ghal haddiem u tellaw skala, meta tela skala warbuh ghax kulhadd sar sinjur,Il-klikka shabek xoghol prekarju gabu, hajja gholja u kissru kull ma kellu l-Poplu u tigi u tipprova tirredikola lil Mintoff, imissek tisthi. Jien Laburist hrigt min familja nazzjonalista, missieri kien stampatur u kienu jghamlu l-Poplu gazzetta nazzjonalista, il-verita hi li Mintoff halla Lm500miljun fil kaxxa ta Malta u ma seraq xejn. int tinsinwa ghax tigdeb fuq Mintoff u fuq L-Isqof ta Ghawdex

•

Progress - x'qed tipprova tinsinwa, li jien "ma hrigtx" xi kumment tieghek? Ghandek zbal, ta. Zbal kbir. Jien qatt ma zammejt ebda kumment milli johrog imkien. La tieghek u lanqas ta hadd iehor.

•

Pataflun qal li, anki jien ma naqbilx mieghu, imma inti missek semmejta, mhux tipprova tevita, u tmaqdar biss bhal ma ghamilt f'artklu minghajr bazi tmaqdar lil MIntoff. l-istess atitutidini hadd int, ara dik irrispodejtek u int ma hrigtiex ghax int min jaf kemm qlajt kummenti kontra. Mintoff ghamel gid hafna u kulhadd ha l-ftit, L-Isqof ta Ghawdex semma l-ahhar paragrafu fejn int l-anqas biss fahhartu li kellu ragun 1000% fil mijja tax xoghol prekarjat li qieghed ikisser il familji, habib kun onest u semmi kollox bhal ma gdibt fuq Mintoff ghamilt l-istess lil Isqof. Mid dehra int mintiex Kristjan assolut imma Mintoff u kif ukoll L-isqof huma.

•

Although i will never agree with what the church says in anything...I must add that Grech is in line with what our law says. Section 15 of the Marriage Act states that the Registrar will pronounce them as man and wife. So being what the law says he is in line with secular law in this case. If anything, a change in law will permit other forms of marriage. On the other hand, a family without childaren will still make it a family. On another issue, if IVF is evil, so what are children born from IVF considered to be?

•

Tajba din. Mela ghax inti taqbel ma haga wahda li qal fost pataflun ta' affarijiet ohra, kullhadd irid ibaxxi rasu, jiskot u ma jikktritkax izjed. Allura min qed jsikket lil min?

•

Rafel hallih lil Isqof ghax qal affarijiet tajba wkoll fuq ix-xoghol prekarju u mid-dehra nahseb inti tfajt kollox f'baskett wiehed biex tmaqdar kollox li qal. Hu pacenzja u fejn semma tajjeb semmieh ghax forsi ma daqqietx ghal widnejk

•

So according to Mgr Mario Grech, the Holy Family never really existed as one, because Joseph never married Mary. This is another big one like we recently heard from Mgr. Anton Gauci who wrote that saying that Mary was Mother of God is an anathema. Boy oh boy, these ''illuminated'' Gozitans are changing the whole script.

•

bidlafilgvern - my point (seeing as you asked for it) is not about grech's opinion at all, but about Malta's evident inability to understand what 'freedom of expression' is all about. The moment someone criticises someone else's opinion, you get a small army of bloggers, etc, automatically crying 'foul' as if 'disagreeing with an opinion' is the same thing as 'denying others to right to an opinion'. But it isn't the same thing at all. Having the right to an opinion doesn't mean that your opinion can't also be criticised.

•

Kemm ghandek ragun Raphael. Kull darba li nies bhala Mario Grech jifthu halqom, aktar jimbuttaw nies il-boghod minnhom. Ftakar biss li l-knisja hija l-akbar partit politiku u ghandha agenda serja fuq iz-zewg partiti l-ohra. Qabel mhu ser ikun hemm partit fil gvern li ghandu l-bajd jghid lil Kurja "Tindahalx" dawn ser jibqaw jiggvernaw. Prosit JPO ghax ma' jiddejjaqx jitkellem.

•

Raphael, the bishop is more restrictive with his definition of family: 'Family = man plus woman plus children' The man and the woman should also be married.

•

Yes ok, but what is your point, exactly, Raphael? Can the Bishop express the view of his Church, or not? Is the expression of such a view - which until a few years ago was considered to be absolutely non-controversial - legitimate, or not? Why is it that when the Church expresses itself in the way it usually does, in this case defending the traditional family model, some people like you find this "controversial"? The fact that the Church does NOT dictate national policy in Malta has been established last year, at the referendum on divorce, endorsed by an electoral majority.

•

With all due respect. How sad to witness the Maltese experience of having the Roman Catholic Church being represented and led by someone still practicing the religious doctrine of the Inquisition. His energy and Christians Values would be better appreciated by both his church and his country, if they are focused on the illegitimate children born through priesthood urges or the abuses committed within the confines of the Catholic Church.

•

Actually many of the bishop's defenders were posting comments along the lines of "He has the right to his opinion, so you should shut up and stop attacking his views". I think they genuinely don't see the irony in that.