Letters: 31 January 2016

Blind faith in Jesus despite doubts

I am jealous of Mr Guillaumier’s (MaltaToday, 17 January) easy access to correspondence space in the papers and his witty nutshell style of irreverent philosophy.

To express my opinion, I require a lot more space, which is not always conceded. What follows, therefore, cannot possibly express fully my humble point of view of mother Teresa’s letters’s “confessions vis-a-vis her faith”.

There are two kinds of ice: thin and thick. You can have enormous faith in thin ice, and you drown. You can have little faith in thick ice and it will hold you up just fine. It’s not the strength of faith you can muster that matters up front. It may be weak, like a sesame seed but the faith must be invested in something solid.

That’s what mother Teresa manifestly did in dealing with doubt. Her only object of faith, Jesus, was solidly supported by the evidence of history, archaeology, literature and experience. Though having doubts in faith, she really did believe in the certainty that God would help her in her doubts.

Her fundamental trust in Jesus progressively became stronger, more confident, surer and more steadfast because it had been refined through the purifying fire of doubt. Ultimately despite obstacles, challenges and questions, her faith not only survived, it also thrived.

Fully conscious that doubt and faith can co-exist, she did not have to fully resolve each and every obstacle between her and God, she lived an authentic faith in an overwhelming devotion to duty, to a heroic degree and “until it hurts”. 

As the Church proclaims, God shows his potency at its mightiest exactly where there is weakness. (Martyr’s Mass liturgy).

Was she inspired by Christ’s words? “As long as you did it for one of these, the least of my brethren, you did it for me.” (Mat. 25:40) She took the rational decision to put her trust in Him and held her peripheral objections in tension until the day when they were resolved by her very gargantuan humanitarian work with the poor and sick. In her own words: “As to my heart, I belong entirely to the heart of Jesus.”

John Azzopardi, Zabbar

Muscat wrong to praise Falzon and Mallia

Corruption is an old way of life, it’s been here since man was created, and one has to be alert all the time about it. The authorities have to wake up and do their best to eradicate it, before it eradicates our nation entirely.

Unfortunately two independent watchdogs presented reports that do no honour to some of our representatives in Parliament and Mr Saviour Balzan (24 January, 2016) tried to sugar-coat these acts by reminding us of the scandals under Nationalist administrations, which he mentioned one by one.

I have no need to be reminded of such, because I still remember everything: Tonio Fenech’s trip on a private plane to see Arsenal play. Why did Mr Balzan not remind us of that blessed clock worth no more than €500 which a friend of the former minister donated to him? I remember how corruption was blared out, and it would have been so, had the clock not been so cheap.

And what happened to these people? Nothing, they just change places in Parliament, moving from the front to the back, waiting to be called up again, as they will – but not all. The only one I know as a gentleman, Dr Joe Cassar, was sold a used car at dirt cheap, and then had works worth a few thousands done at his home, and he resigned from parliament and the PN.

It was wrong of the Prime Minister to praise Manuel Mallia and Michael Falzon last Sunday, after they were made to resign by Muscat himself; how can he tell the country he is ‘sorry from the bottom of [his] heart’ for them? Muscat is the prime minister first, not the leader of the party; he should take care of the national interest, not the party’s.

But no comments from Mr Balzan? I would be sorry if he loses credibility.

Joseph Muscat, Mosta