Whereto, Malta? -- 'Il fejn, Malta?

 

It’s not easy being Maltese today wherever in the world you reside, seeing your country’s name splashed all over foreign news items, without background photos of the Grand Harbour or the Gozo Channel.

 

I cannot be a regular writer of a newsletter read by thousands in our diaspora, and ignore the unwordly matters that are being discovered from one day to the next, or from one hour to the next.

 

I am very conscious that this column might irritate die hard supporters of the two parties, that is those for whom loyalty to the party trumps that to the country and to truth.  This is a risk I am ready to take.

 

Although the allegations of corruption against Mr Schembri and Minister Mizzi have long been made, after the revelation of their involvement in the Panama Papers, the alleged involvement of more than one person from the Office of the Prime Minister in activities related to the murder of the journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia was for me shocking to the Nth degree.

 

The story of a gift of a work place paid by the government, given in such a flippant way and without due process as seems to have happened for witness Theuma, and the payment of wages apparently without the need for doing anything at all, was ugly in its demonstrated arrogance of who was pretty sure these matters would never see the light of day.  Naturally this is not an isolated incident, and administrations of whatever colour do this, however for those who have never had the slightest benefit of a similar process, that is the majority of Maltese, how can they not ask how the hell do that some people manage to get on such a gravy train?

 

Nevertheless, my biggest question marks regard the Prime Minister himself, Joseph Muscat.  This is a person who, after so many years of a Nationalist government, completely changed the face and fortune of the Labour Party, and was the leader behind a complete renewal and notable developments especially in the economic and social spheres, where the country’s economic growth is the envy of the European Union and laws on the rights of minorities are considered to be at the cutting edge not only in Europe but the world.

 

In a contrast almost unbelievable to behold, first we had the breaking news of the Panama Papers, where no plausible reason was provided where two persons at the forefront of government had set up accounts in Panama, with the Prime Minister chosing to retain their services, which was a risky political decition.  They could easily have been suspended until investigations be undertaken following which any necessary decisions could be taken.

 

Then, Muscat chose to remain involved in operational matters related to the investigation into Caruana Galizia’s assassination, for example as a recipient of secret service information and considerations for the concession or otherwise of pardons to accused people, and this after he had initiated libel proceedings against the journalist, so therefore his conflict of interest is clear.  Not only that, but he permitted Schembri to also receive secret service information when Schembri also had libel cases against Caruana Galizia (which have now been dropped).

 

Here, Muscat could simply have passed on any role concerning any considerations related to the investigation to the Deputy Prime Minister, Chris Fearne, and not permit anyone who had a conflict of interest (including himself) to have any involvement, so that justice not only be done, but be seen to be done.

 

Finally, the decision by Muscat not the resign fortwith but to wait until January also troubles me.  It was said this was done due to the selection process for the new PL leadership which will be contested between two people, and this process needs to be completed before the resignation occurs.  I don’t buy this explanation – after all, in Malta a Deputy Prime Minister is already appointed, and his work is to be ready to take on the role of Prime Minister when the latter is not in a position to do so.  I do not understand why this would not be applicable if Muscat in fact resigns immediately, regardless of when the PL leadership changes.

 

Although it is extraordinary that more than one person in the Office of the Prime Minister is implicated in the murder, the political crisis Malta is going through in my opinion is squarely due to these principal decisions taken by Prime Minister Muscat.

 

It is true that the Nationalist opposition is taking advantage of the situation.  What else would you expect?  This crisis could have been managed much better and attenuated if Muscat hadn’t taken the decision to concede absolutely nothing to the questions and accusations that were being made by the opposition, its sympathisers and other members of civil society.

 

As the ex Prime Minister Alfred Sant observed recently,1 it is a mistake when facts, being raised by those who are not objective or who might militate in an opposing party, be summarily dismissed and considered necessarily to be a partisan invention.  He observed, correctly in my opinion, that any allegation from any source, including those not genuine, should be investigated.

 

Partisan persons there are aplenty, and acts of violence are happening – insults, egg throwing, threats etc.  These acts of violence are to be condemned.  It has to be said nonetheless that confidence in institutions and the integrity of the office of the Prime Minister has been undermined by what has and is still happening.

 

There are those who interpret the Prime Minister’s actions as indicative that he also has something to hide.  I do not have such an impression on the man, however the three particular decisions I mentioned in this article are of concern to me and I do understand why others might interpret them differently.  Time will tell.

 

My last word and appeal, not only to the Maltese diaspora but also to those still living in the fair land back home, comes from another ex Labour Prime Minister, Dom Mintoff, whose many example of rhetoric to his followers or the country would be ended with the words ‘Malta first and foremost’.  Malta, not the party.

 

-----------------------------------

 

Mhux żmien faċli tkun Malti llum tkun fejn tkun fid-dinja, tara ‘l isem pajjiżek imċappas fl-aħbarijiet b’ilsna oħra, u mhux fi sfond ta’ ritratti tal-Port il-Kbir jew il-Fliegu t’Għawdex.

 

Ma nistax inkun kittieb regolari ta’ fuljett li jinqara minn eluf fid-dijaspora, u ninjora l-ħwejjeġ ta’ barra minn hawn li qiegħdin jinkixfu minn ġurnata għall-oħra, jew minn siegħa għall-oħra.

 

Jien konxju li din il-kolonna tista’ turta lil min huwa partiġġan taż-żewġ naħat, jiġifieri dawk li għalihom il-lealtà lejn il-partit tagħhom jiżboq il-lealtà lejn il-pajjiż u lejn il-verità.  Dan huwa riskju li lest li nieħu.

 

Għalkemm l-allegazzjonijiet ta’ korruzzjoni kontra s-Sur Schembri u l-Ministru Mizzi ilhom magħrufa, wara r-rivelazzjoni ta’ l-involviment tagħhom fil-Panama Papers, l-involviment allegat ta’ iktar minn persuna waħda mill-uffiċċju tal-Prim Ministru f’attivitajiet relatati mal-qtil tal-ġurnalista Daphne Caruana Galizia għalija kien xokkanti għall-aħħar.

 

L-istorja tal-għotja ta’ post tax-xogħol imħallas mill-gvern, mogħti b’mod daqshekk flippanti u mingħajr proċess xieraq bħal ma jidher li kien għax-xhud Theuma, u l-ħlas apparentement mingħajr il-bżonn tat-twettiq ta’ xejn affattu, kienet kerha fl-arroganza ta’ min jidher li kien pjuttost żgur li dawn l-affarijiet qatt ma kienu se joħorġu fil-miftuħ.  Naturalment dan mhux każ iżolat, u gvernijiet ta’ kull lewn għamlu dan, imma għal min ma bbenefikax minn proċess simili, jiġifieri l-maġġoranza tal-Maltin, ma jistgħux ma jistaqsux dak kif anke llum hemm minn jgħix fis-sakra u min mejjet għal qatra?

 

Madankollu, l-ikbar mistoqsijiet li għandi f’rasi jirrigwardaw lill-Prim Ministru, Joseph Muscat.  Dan huwa l-persuna li, wara tant snin ta’ tmexxija Nazzjonalista, bidel kompletament il-wiċċ u l-fortuna tal-Partit Laburista, u kien il-mexxej wara tiġdid sħiħ u żviluppi notevoli speċjalment fl-oqsma ekonomiċi u soċjali, fejn it-tkabbir ekonomiku tal-pajjiż huwa l-għira tal-Unjoni Ewropea u l-liġijiet tad-drittijiet tal-minoranzi huma meqjusa minn ta’ quddiem mhux fl-Ewropa imma fid-dinja.

 

F’kuntrast bilkemm jitwemmen, l-ewwel kellna l-istorja tal-Panama Papers, fejn l-ebda raġuni plawsibbli ma ngħatat għalfejn żewġ persuni fil-quċċata tat-tmexxija tal-gvern kellhom kontijiet fil-Panama, u l-Prim Ministru Muscat għażel li jżomm is-servizzi tagħhom, li kienet deċiżjoni politika riskjuża.  Faċilment dawn setgħu ġew sospiżi sakemm isiru investigazzjonijiet u wara jittieħdu d-deċiżjonijiet neċessarji.

 

Imbagħad, Muscat għażel li jibqa’ involut fl-operat tal-investigazzjoni tal-assassinju ta’ Caruana Galizia, per eżempju bħala reċipjent ta’ informazzjoni minn servizzi sigrieta u kunsiderazzjonijiet għall-għoti jew le ta’ maħfriet lin-nies akkużati, u dan wara li huwa stess kien għamel libell kontra l-ġurnalista, u għalhekk huwa ċar li kellu kunflitt ta’ interess.  Mhux biss, imma jidher li ppermetta wkoll lil  Schembri li jirċievi informazzjoni sigrieta relatata mal-investigazzjoni, meta Schembri wkoll kellu każijiet ta’ libell kontra Caruana Galizia (li għadhom kif ġew irtirati).

 

Hawnhekk, Muscat seta’ sempliċement jgħaddi r-rwol ta’ kunsiderazzjonijiet li għandhom x’jaqsmu mal-investigazzjoni lid-Deputat Prim Ministru, Chris Fearne, u ma jippermettix lil kull min kellu kunflitt ta’ interess (inkluż hu innifsu) milli jkollu x’jaqsam, biex il-ġustizzja mhux biss issir imma tidher li qed issir.

 

Fl-aħħar, id-deċiżjoni ta’ Muscat li ma jirriżenjax minnufih imma li jistenna sa Jannar ukoll tħassibni.  Intqal li dan sar minħabba li l-proċess ta’ għażla ta’ kap ġdid tal-PL se jkun kontestat bejn tnejn min-nies, u dan il-proċess irid jitlesta qabel ma r-riżenja ssir.  Din l-ispjegazzjoni lili ma tinżillix – wara kollox, f’Malta Deputat Prim Ministru huwa diġà maħtur, u xogħlu hu li jkun lest li jagħmel ix-xogħol ta’ Prim Ministru meta tal-aħħar ma jkunx fil-pożizzjoni li jagħmel dan.  Ma nifhimx għalfejn dan ma jkunx applikabli jekk Muscat fil-fatt jirriżenja minnufih, jinbidel meta jinbidel il-kap tal-PL.

 

Għalkemm huwa straordinarju li iktar minn persuna waħda fl-uffiċċju ta’ Prim Ministru jkunu implikati f’każ ta’ qtil, il-kriżi politika li għaddejja minnha f’Malta fl-opinjoni tiegħi hija biss ir-riżultat ta’ dawn id-deċiżjonijiet prinċipali li ttieħdu mill-Prim Ministru Muscat.

 

Huwa veru li l-Oppożizzjoni Nazzjonalista qiegħda tieħu vantaġġ politiku mis-sitwazzjoni.  X’tistenna li jiġri?  Din il-kriżi setgħet ġiet immaniġġjata ħafna aħjar u mmewta kieku Muscat ma ddeċidiex li ma jikkonċedi assolutament xejn lill-mistoqsijiet u l-akkużi li kienu qiegħdin jintefgħulu mill-oppożizzjoni, is-simpatizzanti tagħha u membri tas-soċjetà ċivili.

 

Bħal ma osserva l-eks Prim Ministru Alfred Sant riċentement,1 huwa żball li meta fatti li jiġu mqajma minn min ma jkunx oġġettiv jew ikun militanti ta’ partit oppost, jiġu mwarrba minnufih u meqjusin neċessarjament li jkunu invenzjoni partiġġjana.  Osserva, korrettament fl-opinjoni tiegħi, li kull allegazzjoni minn kull sors, inklużi dawk mhux ġenwini, għandhom jiġu investigati.

 

Nies partiġġjani hemm bil-kif, u atti ta’ vjolenza qiegħdin isiru – tgħajjir, tfigħ ta’ bajd, theddid eċċ.  Dawn l-atti ta’ vjolenza huma kundannabbli.  Irid jingħad madankollu li l-kunfidenza fl-istituzzjonijiet u fl-integrità tal-uffiċċju tal-Prim Ministru ġiet imsejsa minn dak li ġara u għadu jiġri.

 

Hemm min jinterpreta l-aġir tal-Prim Ministru bħala indikattiv li huwa wkoll għandu x’jaħbi.  Jien m’għandix dik l-impressjoni fuq ir-raġel, imma t-tliet deċiżjonijiet tiegħu li semmejt f’dan l-artiklu jħassbuni u nifhem għalfejn ikun hemm min jinterpretahom mod ieħor.  Iż-żmien itina parir.

 

L-aħħar kelma u appell tiegħi, mhux lid-dijaspora Maltija biss imma wkoll lil min għadu jgħix f’din l-art ħelwa, tiġi minn eks Prim Ministru ieħor Laburista, Dom Mintoff, li ħafna mill-eżempji tiegħu ta’ retorika kemm lill-partitarji tiegħu jew lill-pajjiż kienu jintemmu bil-kliem ‘Malta l-ewwel u qabel kollox.’   Malta, mhux il-partit.

 

 

1http://inewsmalta.com/blogarticle.php?ID1=33949, retrieved 9/12/2019

1http://inewsmalta.com/blogarticle.php?ID1=33949, retrieved 9/12/2019

The Rubbish Dump -- Il-Miżbla

 

As we know, as per its namesake this is a place where rubbish or other discarded material is disposed of.  It was no small a shock for me as a young boy to find out that its Maltese translation, Il-Miżbla, was the common name of a place where people were buried.  It was a shock as I had been taught that people were buried in cemetries.

 

Titbits of information gleaned from this location and that enabled me to build the mosaic of its history.  These poor people were in fact buried inside a cemetary, but in a location unconsecrated by the Church, and separated from the consecrated part by a wall.

 

It was a location at the Addolorata Cemetery known as “for profanes”.  In it were buried those who had not followed the Church’s teachings, or newborns who had died before having been baptised.

 

This became better known in 1961, when the Catholic Church had interdicted the entire executive of the Malta Labour Party (now the Partit Laburista), and even declared that it was sinful to print, write, sell, buy, distribute and even read its newspapers.1

 

Initially I understood this was all a result of a hatred by Dominic Mintoff, MLP leader, of the Church, and his desire to destroy it, and so these were steps that were necessarily taken for the Catholic Church to defend itself.

 

Later I understood that the story was more complicated than that.  Firstly, there was an animosity no less profound by the leader of the Catholic Church, Archbishop Gonzi, who was convinced that Mintoff was extremely left wing, a Communist and atheist.

 

Secondly, there was the political question of the country’s proposed full integration with the United Kingdom, which Mintoff was initially in favour of.  Archbishop Gonzi had opposed this for a number of reasons.  One was the fear that British laws on civil marriage and divorce would be applied to Malta, which then did not have them.  He feared that integration would mean such matters would be just one of the future introduction of progressive and anti-clerical ideas that would weaken the influence of the Church on the Maltese people.  There was also the fear of the Church being subjected to a higher level of taxation.

 

This all led to Gonzi supporting the Nationalist project under George Borg Olivier for Independence, probably calculating that the interests of the Church were better served with a moderate (read non-Labour) government in Malta.  There were reports of priests refusing absolution to those not promising not to vote for the MLP, and some primary school teachers interrogating their students on their parents’ political views.

 

Fast forward 50 years, we find Archbishop Scicluna visiting the Addolorata Cemetery on the 3rd November 2019 and blessing tombs that had been considered as being in a dump, where the erstwhile wall dividing the two areas no longer existis.  Moreso, Archbishop Scicluna asked for forgiveness for the wall that had been build to separate the dead.2

 

It has not been the first archbishop who had asked for forgiveness for this, as in 1988 Archbishop Mercieca had also done the same, although then he had not given his blessing to that part of the cemetery.

 

It warms my heart to see the leaders of my Church showing this type of humility.  I’m not cynical and have no doubt they are genuine.  Today, the same persons who perhaps in the past had blamed the situation with conviction on Mintoff, his party and supporters for the tricky situation they were in with reference to the Church, today might struggle to justify what took place in the past, in the name of God.

 

If you think about it, the most that can be said to have been achieved by Gonzi, with his interdiction and directives issued, was to prevent the MLP from being in government in the sixties for 10 years, and halted the march towards civil rights like divorce and others by 50 years.  Nevertheless, this right and others objectionable to the Church like same-sex marriage are now the law of the land.

 

Furthermore, the process of secularisation has well and truly reached the shores of Malta, there was no need for integration with the UK for this to happen.  The Maltese people, or at least some of them, still are going to mass and hearing sermons from the pulpits, but also read newspapers, go to schools and universities, and use the internet, and have a plethora of choices from which to form their opinions and value judgements.

 

As Mintoff observed at the time “The priests will know that sooner or later the wind of change will also reach Malta’s shores”.  Prophetic words.

 

----------------------------

 

Bħal ma nafu, din il-kelma tfisser post fejn jinżamm jew jintrema ż-żibel jew xi rmixk ieħor.  Kien ta’ xokk mhux żgħir għalija ta’ tifel li kont meta ndunajt li f’Malta kien ukoll l-isem ta’ post fejn kienu jindifnu xi nies.  Kien ta’ xokk għaliex kont tgħallimt li n-nies jindifnu f’ċimiterju.

 

Nisma’ ftit minn hawn u ftit minn hemm bdejt nibni ftit ta’ mużajk tal-istorja.  Dan in-nies imsejkna fil-fatt kienu ndifnu ġewwa ċimiterju, imma f’post li ma kienx ikkonsagrat mill-knisja, u maqtugħ mill-parti kkonsagrata minn ħajt.

 

Kien il-post fl-Addolorata li kien magħruf bħala “tal-Profani”. Fih kienu jindifnu dawk li jew ma mxewx mat-tagħlim tal-Knisja, inkella trabi li jkunu mietu bla ma laħqu ġew mgħammda.

Dan kien sar aktar magħruf fl-1961, meta l-Knisja Kattolika kienet ħarġet interdett kontra l-eżekuttiv tal-Malta Labour Party (illum il-Partit Laburista) u anke dikjarazzjoni li kien dnub li jiġu stampati, miktuba, mibjugħa, mixtrija, iddistribwiti u anke moqrija l-gazzetti tagħha.1

 

Fil-bidu fhimt li dan kien kollu riżultat tal-mibegħda ta’ Duminku Mintoff, kap tal-MLP, kontra l-Knisja, u r-rieda tiegħu biex jeqridha, u dawn kienu passi meħtieġa li ttieħdu biex il-Knisja Kattolika tiddefendi ruħha.

 

Iktar tard fhimt li l-istorja kienet iktar ikkumplikata minn hekk.  L-ewwelnett, kien hemm animosità xejn inqas profonda mill-kap tal-Knisja Kattolika, l-Arċisqof Gonzi, li kien konvint li Mintoff kien xellugi estrem, Kommunist u ateju.  

 

It-tieninett, kien hemm il-kwestjoni politika tal-integrazzjoni sħiħa proposta mar-Renju Unit, li Mintoff fil-bidu kien ħadem favuriha.  Gonzi din kien opponiha għal diversi raġunijiet.  Waħda kienet il-biża’ li l-liġijiet Ingliżi taż-żwieġ ċivili u d-divorzju jiġu applikati għal Malta, li dakinhar dawn ma kellhiex.  Din beża’ li kienet tkun waħda biss mill-introduzzjoni ta’ ideat progressivi u anti-klerikali li jdgħajfu l-influwenza tal-Knisja fuq il-poplu Malti.  Kien hemm ukoll il-biża’ li l-Knisja tkun iktar suġġetta għal tassazzjoni.

 

Dawn kollha wasslu lil Gonzi li jappoġġja l-proġett Nazzjonalista taħt Ġorġ Borġ Olivier tal-indipendenza, għax aktarx ikkalkula li l-interessi tal-Knisja jitħarsu aħjar bi gvern moderat f’Malta (jiġifieri mhux Laburista).  Kien hemm rapporti ta’ qassisin jirrifjutaw l-assoluzzjoni għal min ma jwiegħedx li ma jivvutax għall-Partit Laburista, u li xi għalliema tal-primarja interrogaw lit-tfal tal-iskola fuq il-veduti politiċi tal-ġenituri tagħhom.

 

Illum, madwar 50 sena wara, insibu lill-Arċisqof Scicluna jżur iċ-ċimeterju tal-Addolorata fit-3 ta’ Novembru 2019 u jbierek lill-oqbra meqjusin li kienu fil-miżbla, fejn il-ħajt li kien jifred parti minn oħra issa ma jeżistix.  Iktar minn hekk, l-Arċisqof Scicluna talab skuża għall-ħitan li kienu nbnew biex jifirdu l-mejtin.2

 

Mhux l-ewwel arċisqof li kien talab skuża ta’ dan, għax fl-1988 l-Arċisqof Mercieca kien ukoll talab skuża ta’ dak li kien sar, għalkemm dakinhar ma kienx bierek dik il-parti taċ-ċimiterju.

 

Jien iqawwili qalbi nara l-mexxejja tal-Knisja tiegħi juru umiltà ta’ dan it-tip.  M’iniex ċiniku u ma għandi l-ebda dubju mill-ġenwinità tagħhom.  Illum, l-istess persuni li forsi fil-passat kienu waħħlu b’konvinzjoni f’Mintoff, il-partit u s-segwaċi tiegħu għas-sitwazzjoni mwiegħra li kienu spiċċaw fiha fil-konfront mal-Knisja, illum ilaqalqu xi ftit biex jiġġustifikaw dak li sar fil-passat, f’isem Alla.

 

Jekk toqgħod taħseb ftit, l-iktar li jista’ jingħad li nkiseb minn Gonzi, bl-interdett u d-direttivi li ngħataw, kienet li żammew lill-MLP milli jkunu fil-gvern fis-sittinijiet għal għaxar snin, u mewtu l-mixja ta’ drittijiet ċivili bħad-divorzju u oħrajn b’50 sena.  Madankollu, dawn u oħrajn oġġezzjonabbli għall-knisja bħaż-żwieġ ta’ persuni tal-istess sess issa daħlu u huma l-liġi tal-pajjiż.

 

Iktar minn hekk, il-proċess ta’ sekularizzazzjoni wasal Malta wkoll u bill-kif, ma’ kienx hemm bżonn tal-integrazzjoni mar-Renju Unit għal dan.  Il-Maltin għadhom (uħud minnhom) jisimgħu l-quddies u l-priedki mill-pulpti, imma wkoll jaqraw il-gazzetti, imorru l-iskejjel u l-universitajiet, u għandhom l-internet, u għandhom viżibilju minn fejn jiffurmaw l-opinjoni u l-ġudizzju tagħhom.

 

Bħal ma osserva Mintoff dakinhar ‘il-qassisin għandhom ikun jafu li llum jew għada l-irjeħat tal-bidla jaslu fl-ixtut ta’ Malta wkoll’.  Kliem profetiċi.

 

 

1Priests and Politicians: Archbishop Michael Gonzi, Dom Mintoff and the End of Empire in Malta; Simon C. Smith; University of Hull;

2https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/archbishop-blesses-mizbla-tombs-and-asks-for-forgiveness.746760, retrieved 27/11/2019

1Priests and Politicians: Archbishop Michael Gonzi, Dom Mintoff and the End of Empire in Malta; Simon C. Smith; University of Hull;

2https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/archbishop-blesses-mizbla-tombs-and-asks-for-forgiveness.746760, retrieved 27/11/2019

Better without religion? -- Aħjar mingħajr reliġjon?

 

Recently I was listening to a program on ABC RN, with this title (without the exclamation mark).  To tell you the truth, although as you know I’m critical in no small way of part of the beliefs and practices of the church I belong to, I was shocked that someone could say such a thing.

 

Naturally I do know many people are atheist (that is the lack of belief that a God or some supreme entity exists, or belief that God does not exist), agnostic (meaning the existence or otherwise that a divine entity cannot be proven) and others.  Although not all religions have a God or gods, having someone argue that man would be better off not having a religion shook me to the core, not least as in my life I have always seen the good that can come out, and in fact does, by people or organisations with religious inspiration (of all types).

 

I state this without denying for a single second the scandals and sordidness that can be committed, and in fact are, by people or organisations with religious inspiration (of all types), a denial that unfortunately is made by some whose faith cannot be described otherwise than blind.

 

The program was in fact a repetition of a broadcast made in 2008 from the series Big Ideas, whose format consists of a debate by a panel of two or three speaking in favour of a motion, and the same amount against, with a vote of the audience being held at the start and the end of the program to determne whether there was any shift in opinion and if so in which direction.

 

The arguments that impressed me most were the list of fights, wars and similar actions that were carried out throughout the ages inspired, at least in part, by religious beliefs.  We all know about many examples of these: the conflict between Protestants and Catholics in North Ireland (Christian), head chopping of people not sharing the same beliefs (Muslim), the ruthlessness of Buddhists against the Muslim Rohingya population in Myanmar rendering the latter stateless, the Jewish occupation of the lands of Palestine and others.

 

On a lower yet still serious level one could add the discrimination against minorities, such as immigrants who are likely to have different beliefs than the long established (if not indigenous) residents of the place, or those having a different sexual orientation; the shunning of people who have changed their views about their faith and in fact end up isolated from their community’s cultural and social apart from religious ties.  Naturally, this discrimination is all justifiable by beliefs.

 

I have to say all this is true.  Nevertheless I have never accepted, and won’t start doing so now, that these actions or attitutes are necessarily representative of the religion that one embraces.

 

Anyone having his eyes and ears open, and is ready to listen, will realise that in each religion there is a warm and vigorous debate, sometimes carried out in private, about how words and events written in the holy books are to be interpreted, this hundreds or thousands of years after being penned.

 

For example, Islamic terrorists mention that the Quran permits the killing of those who are not Muslim, and we have seen the cowardly result of this belief.  On the other hand, more conventional brances of Islam declare that this is a perversion of the message, which was written during a time of persecution of the Prophet and had only identified 5 tribes of the time.

 

I had also mentioned Buddhists in Myanmar and their participation in the crisis of the Rohingya, with the murder of many of the latter and their banishment to Bangladesh in the last few years.  Buddhism is a religious tradition minimally associated with violence, after the Buddha had condemned the killing or injuring of other people.  So how could I see participants in this massacre of Rohingya as representative of Buddhism?

 

No, the carrying out of bad acts by some, even by many, even when carried out in the name of a religion, does not reflect on the religion but on the perpetrator.

 

It is enough for me to note the many good deeds carried out by others with religious inspiration – charity, dedication of causes for the good of humanity, the oft-heroic struggle against discrimination and in favour of the weak and downtrodden, and often the ones benefiting from such deeds do not even have the same faith.

 

I do not wish to imply that these positive actions are the prerogative only of those that are religious.  I recognise that those having no religion can also have a sensitive humanity, be generous and do good in society.

 

Those embracing a religion are not any less.

 

-------------------------

 

Dan l-aħħar inzertajt programm fuq l-istazzjon tar-radju ABC RN, b’dan it-titlu (mingħajr il-punt interrogattiv).  Biex ngħidilkom id-dritt, għalkemm bħal ma tafu jien kritiku mhux ftit ta’ parti tat-twemmin u tal-prattika tal-Knisja li nappartjeni għaliha, ħassejtni xxukkjat li wieħed jista’ jasal jagħmel stqarrija bħal din.

 

Naturalment naf li hemm ħafna persuni huma ateji (jiġifieri n-nuqqas ta’ twemmin li Alla jew xi entità suprema teżisti, jew it-twemmin li Alla ma’ jeżistix), anjostiċi (jiġifieri li l-eżistenza jew le ta’ entità divina ma tistax tkun ippruvata) jew oħrajn.  Għalkemm mhux kull reliġjon għandu Alla jew allat, li wieħed jargumenta li aħjar bniedem ma jkollux reliġjon daħħalni daqsxejn f’qoxorti, mhux l-inqas għax f’ħajti dejjem rajt it-tajjeb li jista’ jitwettaq, u fil-fatt jitwettaq, minn nies ta’ ispirazzjoni reliġjuża jew organizzazzjonijiet direttament reliġjużi (ta’ kull tip).

 

Dan nagħmlu mingħajr ma niċħad lanqas għal sekonda l-iskandli u l-ħniżrijiet li jistgħu jitwettqu, u fil-fatt jitwettqu, minn nies ta’ ispirazzjoni reliżjuża jew organizzazzjonijiet direttament reliżjużi (ta’ kull tip inkluża tiegħi), ċaħda li sfortunatament issir minn xi wħud li l-fidi tagħhom ma tistax tiġi deskritta ħlief għamja.

 

Il-programm fil-fatt kien repetizzjoni ta’ xandira li kienet saret fl-2008 mis-sensiela Big Ideas, li l-format tiegħu jkun dibattitu fuq panel ta’ tnejn jew tlieta min-nies jitkellmu favur mozzjoni, u l-istess ammont jitkellmu kontra, u jittieħed vot tal-udjenza fil-bidu u fl-aħħar tal-programm biex jinstab jekk kienx hemm min bidel l-opinjoni tiegħu u jekk iva f’liema direzzjoni.

 

L-iktar argumenti li laqtuni kienu l-lista ta’ ġlidiet, gwerer jew azzjonijiet li saru matul iż-żminijiet li kienu ispirati, tal-inqas f’parti minnhom, minn twemmin reliġjuż.  Ilkoll nafu b’ħafna eżempji minn dawn: il-ġlied bejn il-Protestanti u l-Kattoliċi fl-Irlanda ta’ Fuq (Insara), il-qtugħ tal-irjus ta’ min ma jħaddanx it-twemmin tiegħu (Musulmani), il-ħruxija tal-Buddisti tal-Myanmar kontra l-popolazzjoni Musulmana Rohingya li spiċċaw mingħajr stat, l-okkupazzjoni Lhudija tal-artijiet tal-Palestina u oħrajn.

 

Fuq livell inqas imma xorta gravi wieħed jista’ jżid id-diskriminazzjoni kontra minoranzi, bħal immigranti li aktarx ikollhom twemminijiet differenti min-nies stabbiliti (jekk mhux indiġeni) tal-post, jew dawk li jkollhom orjentazzjoni sesswali differenti; it-twarrib ta’ persuni li jkunu bidlu l-fehma tagħhom u li fil-fatt jispiċċaw maqtugħin minn rabtiet kulturali u soċjali minbarra dawk reliġjużi.  Naturalment, dan id-diskriminazzjoni kollha tkun ġustifikabbli mit-twemmin.

 

Jien ngħid għalija, jekk irrid inkun sinċier ngħid dan kollu huwa minnu.  Madankollu qatt ma aċċettajt, u miniex se nibda issa, li dawn l-azzjonijiet jew attitudnijiet huma neċessarjament rappreżentattivi tar-reliġjon li dak li jkun jgħid li jħaddan.

 

Jekk wieħed ikollu għajnejn u widnejn miftuħa, u lest li jisma’, jinduna li f’kull reliġjoni ikun hemm dibattitu sħiħ jew jaħraq, kultant fil-moħbi, dwar kif għandhom ikunu interpretati kliem u avvenimenti li jkun miktuba fil-kotba mqaddsa, u dan mijiet jew eluf ta’ snin wara li jkunu nkitbu.

 

Per eżempju, it-terroristi Islamiċi jsemmu li l-Quran jippermetti l-qtil ta’ dawk kollha li mhumiex Musulmani, u rajna r-riżultat viljakk ta’ dan it-twemmin.  Mill-banda l-oħra, fergħat iktar konvenzjonali tal-Islam jistqarru li din hija perverżjoni tal-messaġġ, li kien inkiteb waqt żmien ta’ persekuzzjoni tal-Profeta u kien jidentifika biss ħames tribujiet partikolari.

 

Eżempju ieħor li semmejt huma l-Buddisti ta’ Myanmar, u l-partiċipazzjoni tagħhom fil-kriżi tar-Rohingya, bil-qtil ta’ ħafna minn tal-aħħar u t-tkeċċija tagħhom lejn il-Bangladesh f’dawn l-aħħar snin.  Il-Buddiżmu huwa tradizzjoni reliġjuża mill-inqas assoċjata mal-vjolenza, wara li l-Budda kien ikkundanna l-qtil jew il-feriment ta’ persuni oħra.  Allura kif nista’ nara lil min ipparteċipa f’dan il-massakru tar-Rohingya bħala rappreżentattivi tal-Buddisti?

 

Le, it-twettiq ta’ azzjonijiet ħżiena ta’ wħud, anke ta’ ħafna, anke meta mistqarr f’isem reliġjon, ma jirriflettix fuq ir-reliġjon, imma jirrifletti biss fuq min iwettqu.

 

Biżżejjed nara tant opri tajba li jitwettqu minn oħrajn b’ispirazzjoni reliġjuża – il-karità, id-dedikazzjoni għal kawżi b’riżq l-umanità, il-ġlieda kultant erojka kontra d-diskriminazzjoni u favur il-batut, u ħafna drabi dawk li jibbenefikaw minn opri bħal dawn ma jkollhom l-istess fidi.

 

Ma rridx nimplika li dawn l-azzjonijiet pożittivi huma l-prerogattiva biss ta’ min huwa reliġjuż.  Nagħraf li min m’għandux reliġjon ukoll jista’ jkollu umanità sensittiva, jkun ġeneruż, u jagħmel ġid fis-soċjetà.

 

Min iħaddan reliġjon ma għandu xejn inqas minn dan.