Making classical music popular

Tuesday will see the start of the fifth International Spring Orchestra Festival in Malta. I met up with its artistic director, 31- year-old, Paris-based composer, KARL FIORINI and found that though diffident in his manner, he certainly does not lack confidence in his music 

I first came across Karl’s work when I heard his arrangement of Gershwin’s Summertime, played by Equinox at the American Embassy. I had not yet met him, but when I heard that he was back to prepare for the festival, I thought that people would be interested to know about the young man who is not only behind the festival, but is making a name for himself in the classical music world.

In September 2004 he won first prize, in an international, composition competition at Boston University in the US, with Alea 111. Then in December of that year, he won another competition in Barcelona with his Trio Lamina for violin, clarinet and piano, the last work he wrote before leaving Malta for London, where he lived for a few years.

Karl believes that “the perception of beauty is in your surroundings” and says his music is influenced by his environment. He graduated in Music in 2002 from the University of Malta at age 22 and started studying for an MA at the Guildhall School of Music and Drama in London two years later.

A chance meeting on the London underground with a fellow musician led to him being asked to compose a four-minute piece for the Bournemouth symphony orchestra in March 2005. “I had to start from scratch and produce the piece in three days. I had told the director that I already had a piece ready to secure the commission.

“Since it had been made very clear to me that unless my piece was good enough it would not be played, I worked most nights to get it right and my sleepless nights paid off, because my composition was chosen and was received very well.

“That was also the year I started experimenting. I had been experiencing stagnation due to getting ensconced in a comfort zone. I needed to start taking some risks with my music. That was when I developed a march, I had written at 13, City of Lost Chances into a piece for clarinet and piano.

“This was the time I was being influenced by jazz and it is audible in this piece. In fact, I am still trying to get away from the stereotypical ‘classical’ genre.” It is Karl’s belief that classical musicians do not use improvisation. He wants to break that mold.

“My instrument is the piano, but I felt I could not reach the level of experimentation I wanted to achieve. That was why I opted for orchestral work,” he told me.

However, despite his achievements, 2005 was a very sad year for Karl, his mother died of cancer amid other domestic problems he was experiencing. He had just finished his Master’s degree in the UK and came to Malta to be with his family.

“I was extremely depressed at the time, but at the end of that year a friend suggested I create a spring festival. I liked the idea and it got me out of the rut, I started working on it and the two years later we had the first festival in April 2007.

“We had string players from all over the world playing five to six performances in a glorious week of music making and the festival has happened each year since then”, he told me.

In 2008, he was commissioned by the European Union to compose a piece for its chamber orchestra. Called Harmonies étendues, it was performed in Granada. He later started thinking again about composing just for piano and that is ongoing.

Although music became Karl’s world at an early age, his first reaction to music lessons when he was seven years old was that he wanted nothing to do with them. His parents were keen that their children would learn a musical instrument, but Karl made the mistaken connection with the after school dutrina classes, which he dreaded, and he was sure he would hate yet another after school activity.

But about four years later his sister Karina started taking piano lessons and his curiosity was aroused, “I sat at the piano and hit the keys for the first time and something happened. I started to see colours. I experienced synaesthesia,” he told me.

He was hooked, so he told his parents that he would start guitar lessons. However, those classes were full so he joined Karina and started taking piano lessons. His first lesson made such an impression that he still remembers not only the month and year but also the day of the week of the event that was to steer his life.

One could say he was a precocious musician because he soon wanted to write his own score. He made up his own notation and wrote his first piece at 11, which he still has, after his first few lessons.

“Mozart was the first composer to fascinate and influence me. It wasn’t just his music but the man enthralled me,” he said.

When Karl gave his first performance at 12 he was so excited that he froze and that recital did not go at all well, he recalls. His teacher had misunderstood his agitation, put it down to nervous anxiety through lack of confidence, and asked him whether he wanted to give it up. “My response was ‘no way’, I had already decided that I wanted to be a composer”, he told me.

“I justified my stance by giving a successful rendition of Mozart’s Al la Turca sonata in A major K331 at the concert the year after. That was when I moved on to the Litz phase and when my obsession with Paris took hold.

“At 15, I took the music option at the Junior College. There as well as at university later, well-meaning advisors asked me what choices of career music would give me? Indicating that a career in music was not very promising with regard to sustaining oneself financially. But life is not all about stability and security, I knew that what I wanted to do was make music,” he said.

Karl eventually moved to Paris in 2008. “When I first arrived in Paris I had no job, in fact I still don’t. I live on commissions. So my advisors, at college and university, might have had a point with regard to stability and security. I had written to all the music conservatories and dance schools. My bread and butter earnings come from accompanying dancers at academies.

“While in London I had worked with the London School of Contemporary Dance and had composed a piece to choreography by one of the dancers. That helped when I was looking for similar work in Paris,” he told me.

“But what about the Spring Festival now in its fifth year. What inspires you to make it happen?” I asked him. “Classical music should be enjoyed by everyone, but many might still have the impression that classical music is elitist and is only enjoyed by the bourgeoisie.

“I want to dispel that myth. I would like sceptics to take the first step. I want to arouse their curiosity. The first concert will be held on Tuesday at Piazza Tignè at 6p.m. The orchestra conducted by Roberto Beltran-Zavala (who has been here before) will present an exciting and enticing programme that includes a performance of Haydn’s 70th Symphony by the Rotterdam Ensemble, Bartok’s Divertimento for strings and Shostakovich’s Piano concerto No1.

“Since the venue is frequented by shoppers and sightseers and the concert is free, I am hoping to whet their appetite for classical music and attend even more concerts at the festival and beyond,” Karl said.

Another concert is being held in collaboration with the Ministry of Resources and Rural affairs at the St Antnin Waste Plant in Marsaskala aimed at the local community on Thursday 28th at 8p.m.

The next day, on Friday the 29th, two concerts are taking place at the Manoel Theatre. Aimed at children the first is at 1p.m. and the second at1.45p.m.

In addition to these grass roots oriented programmes the International Spring Festival Orchestra is also launching a Classical Music Marathon, aimed at young debutantes, at the Sala Isouard, Teatru Manoel, on the final day of the event.

The marathon will start at 10a.m. and will include 10 one-hour-long solo and chamber concerts. Ten established local musicians will also be performing with the debs. The event will end with an orchestral concert at 8p.m. at the Manoel Theatre.

Dates and venues:

Tuesday 26 April, Orchestral concerts, Piazza Tignè at 6p.m., Teatru Manoel, 8p.m.

Wednesday 27, Chamber concert, Sala Isouard Teatru Manoel, 12.30p.m.

Wednesday 27, Pallas Piano Quartet, Sala Isouard Teatru Manoel, 8p.m.

Thursday 28, Orchestral Concert, St Antnin Waste Plant Marsaskala, 8p.m.

Friday 29 Children’s concerts, Teatru Manoel, 1p.m. and 1.45 p.m.

Friday 29 Equinox Trio, Sala Isouard Teatru Manoel, 8p.m.

Saturday 30 Classical Music Marathon, Sala Isouard Teatru Manoel, 10a.m.-8p.m.

Closing Orchestral Concert Teatru Manoel, 8p.m.

Tickets are free of charge but events at the Manoel need to be reserved from the theatre’s booking office on 2124 6389. A non-nominative contribution applies at the Manoel.

pamelapacehansen@gmail.com

 

Read More

MIND THE GAP

VALLETTA'S bridge is falling down, falling down, my fair lady. But unlike London Bridge, from where the rhyme originates, our bridge will not be rebuilt as a bridge. Where we now have a road we shall have a gap (or is it two) instead.

We had it from the horse’s mouth on Friday morning, “Pope Pius V Road, one of the main entry points into Valletta will cease to exist”, Transport Malta's (TM) David Sutton told a news conference.

London Bridge was always rebuilt for what it was intended - to provide access, despite it being destroyed and rebuilt quite a few times, since it started as a pontoon bridge in Roman times. A tornado, fires and time all took their toll through the ages and the last but one was sold to an American entrepreneur and ended up in Arkansas.

Unfortunately, details on City Gate’s history proved hard to find online. But I do know that a Baroque Gate with narrow access was what was there before it was replaced by the current architectural aberration.

It was built with such a large and high opening; reputedly, to let carnival floats through at a time of radical social changes. I think that few regret seeing the current gate demolished. But many do not favour the intended gap.

City Gate acts as an essential bridge, although it does not cross water it is a major artery into the town centre. The road roofing the Gate links Castille to the centre of the town. When that is destroyed access to the top part of town will be incredibly and unnecessarily convoluted. As though it is not already complicated enough to manoeuvre around Valletta now.

Mr Sutton said that about 600 cars drive through Pope Pius V Road (the road to disappear) between 8.15 and 9.15 a.m. daily. Well what about the rest of the day, evening and night? How are residents who live around Hastings Gardens going to get home?

And what about the poor residents who will have to put up with all the increased traffic going through their streets? And it will not just be the 600 going through between eight and nine a.m., but the rest going through the rest of the day not to mention the large influx of traffic when there are no CVA charges in the evenings, weekends and feast days, not to mention the various ‘Nottes’ and other events.

“As a resident, let's hope that car hooting is strictly prohibited inside the city, otherwise when there is a traffic jam, which is to be expected, we will all go mad! Local Council and Police please take note,” commented Ms Elizabeth Aquilina, online.

And it is not just noise, what about the fumes? Anyway, car hooting and amplified moving discos should be banned everywhere. But back to Valletta,
“Traffic from the area near Hastings, which accommodates several residences and offices, will go through St Mark's Street, down a short part of Old Bakery, cross through St John Street, up Strait Street cutting cut across through Melita Street to reach the Biaggo area,” said David Sutton. Since Biaggo are actually steps, I take it he meant driving up St Andrew’s Street to South Street. And you see what I mean about convoluted.

At this point I should say that the Hastings area is where I was born, grew up and where my elderly mother still resides at the bottom of South Street and the top of St Andrew’s.
Why the latter street was turned from one way down to a one way up street not that very long ago does not make any sense since all the cars leaving the much-used car park would exit much easier going down away from South Street and it would also lessen the environmental impact of noise and fumes.

To say that it has become increasingly stressful to visit and help with shopping etc, is putting it mildly. But enough about me. How are people going to get to Windmill Street, which is one way, as is Sapper’s Street and all the side streets in the area?

Access into Valletta will only be possible through St Paul’s Street taking you down to the bottom of the city; S t M a r k S t r e e t in Marsamxett, via the side of the Phoenicia Hotel, at the north west bottom end and through the Grand Harbour entrance past the Mediterranean Conference Centre at the South bottom end. Why do I get the feeling that we are being steered away from the top and herded to the bottom?

Mr Sutton said the routes were decided after various scenarios were studied and environmental considerations (obviously not noise and fumes) were taken into account. Apparently, though not taking one blind bit of notice of at least one Valletta councillor.

“As a council member I would have expected that the relevant ministry and Transport Malta would have met with us councillors to share opinions.

“My concern is that many residents are already having a hard time and the destruction of City Gate will only make their lives even worse.

“I have had many complaints, which I presented at Council meetings, but apparently they fell on deaf ears. Nobody has deigned to listen to these complaints, not even the minister concerned.

“I believe that since the government is always trumpeting consultation, consulting the residents should have been the least it could have done. But obviously there is a great chasm between words and action and we (as Valletta councillors) have never ever been consulted on this issue, or indeed the whole project,” Ray Azzopardi commented online.

The mayor, however, has been remarkably silent. It will probably be great for the people living in the apartments overlooking the proposed new gate. No noise and fumes. That’s a bit of social justice balance redressing, seeing as I believe they are government owned flats. I suppose the Government cannot demolish those flats and build new flash ones to compliment its new palace, or can it? As was done to the Tignè government owned residences.

Is it not also ironic (or rather, as Anne Robinson would say on the Weakest Link “stupid not ironic”) that as we tear one bridge down, leaving a gap in the Valletta bastions, we are building another and bridging a gap in the Vittoriosa bastions?

Knock a major one down and build another away from the madding crowd. Not that Vittoriosa is quiet and rural, but it is away from the hub. We improve access there and restrict it here and round and round we go wondering what next.

Paul Micallef commenting online had this to say:
“Some years ago a hole was made in the Cottonera bastions to make way for a new road. The present Government is now bridging this hole so that the two sides are joined together again.

“In Valletta the Government is going to create another hole between the Putirjal bastions. Who knows, maybe in 30 years time someone will come up with the idea of bridging the gap again.”

In the meantime, apathy seems to reign. I tried to generate some interest on Facebook with the following message: “Can we all in Malta on Facebook do something to stop the destruction of the major access point to the centre of Valletta. The residents', especially the elderly's, needs in Valletta have been completely ignored. It is already unacceptable that when a function is on in Valletta there are no emergency access or exit points.”

Few responded, among them thankfully, Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar, who has shown an interest in pursuing the matter. Admittedly, I do not have that many contacts, I am ambiguous about the whole shebang but to my mind this kind of lobbying is precisely how the network should be utilised.

As someone who is supposedly cautious and only accepts people I really know on Facebook, I have just unwittingly invited an incredible number of people to join me on Linkedin!

While half asleep, I thought I was inviting half a dozen people and was stunned to read that I had just invited over 800 people, while also being told “Only invite people you know well and who know you!”

I am only finding out who I sent the invites to by the responses. While I got some pleasant surprises from friends I had lost touch with, I am sure that many,
who recieved one, wondered why? Well if you are one of them, you now know.

Read More

Solidarity, or every EU Member State for itself?

Passing the buck on the humanitarian tragedy of mass migration has to stop. And it is not just those blaming each other but also those who are refusing to be part of the solution. Why don’t we in the EU learn some lessons from the Japanese?

Their solidarity in the wake of the catastrophically tragic events should be an example to us all. OK, Japan is one nation, but is not the EU meant to unite Europeans as one entity? Is not solidarity meant to be one of the Union’s pillars?

So far EU solidarity seems to only be activated on fiscal issues. But when it comes to humanitarian issues all we get is rhetoric. We are all directly or indirectly responsible, not just the EU, for the reasons why people flee from war, starvation and torture for wanting to have the freedoms we take for granted.

For once I agree with Gozo’s bishop Mario Grech. He has shown concern about the tragedies surrounding migrants taking place in the Mediterranean. “Most of the people were remaining silent, indifferent, or were trying to avoid the truth”, he said.

He rightly commented that more fuss is made about bird shooting than the loss of migrants at sea, adding that those making financial gain from the plight of these people would be answerable to God, as well as society.

Well, I am not sure that the people making substantial financial gains put our God before Mammon and as for society, it does not seem to care much either, as his bird shooting comment demonstrated.

These are examples of our society’s response online: “Wouldn't it be obvious that if you overload a sea-going vessel you are imposing the risk on all the passengers? I mean they bring it on themselves,” said one.

“The birds don't have a voice or a choice. Illegal immigrants do - they can stand up and fight and try build the country they are fleeing leaving other people to try to mop up the mess,” said another.

For the people who got all defensive about birds: It is not that birds should not be protected, of course they should. The issue is about ignoring fellow human beings while making a big fuss about birds.

Besides many were expressing the view that because the tragedies hit the headlines it shows that we care, which of course if one reads the accompanying comments demonstrates no such thing.

There were no comments about the people ferrying migrants in overcrowded, ramshackle boats, while exploiting them financially. How many boat owners and crew has Frontex apprehended? How come these people seem to slip through the net and are still operating?

The latter of course is beyond what the locals could achieve. The only thing we can do is exert pressure on the other EU States to add to that being wielded by our government and MEPs.

As to responsibility, for the reasons leading to the mass migrations, a number of EU countries, the US and others have supplied arms to the countries in conflict and the least they can do is share the burden of people fleeing from the butchery.

The countries who have not supplied arms have still cosied up with authoritarian regimes for other commercial reasons and most of us have all ignored the human rights abuses and plight of the exploited – out of sight out of mind. Of course we all woke up seeing the Middle East uprisings on our TV screens every day.

As to the migratory issue, here in Malta we have had the problem of people fleeing, to what they hoped would be survival at least and perhaps a better life, brought home to us since before we joined the EU.

I remember getting a non-committal response from Günter Verheugen the European Commissioner for Enlargement, just before we joined, when I had asked him what help we could expect on that specific issue from Member States once we were full members.

Quite a few years later in 2007, the European Commission had recognized the "special difficulty" of a crowded island just 200 kilometres from Libya. If we had a special difficulty then what should our position be seen as now.

Although we were told on Thursday that Home Affairs Commissioner Cecilia Malmström “was considering” making a formal proposal to member states to activate the emergency solidarity mechanism, by Friday Malmström was once again arguing that “the numbers are not yet huge” to merit the activation of the temporary protection directive.

Our difficulties are obviously not special enough. The mechanism, under the Temporary Protection Directive, would provide immediate protection and reception in the territory of EU member states and give a ‘breathing space’ for the national asylum systems and promote ‘voluntary’ solidarity measures between member states.

However, the directive cannot be approved unless a majority of the member states vote for it. So far this majority does not yet exist, even though the solidarity measures are voluntary.

“There are perhaps over 2000 refugees from Libya, 800 in Malta - which is a lot for a tiny island, but not enough to trigger this mechanism,” she said. She claimed that there are other ways member states can show their solidarity with Malta. For instance, contributing in the resettlement programme. She was referring to the pilot project in Malta initiated in 2008, which she said “worked well”.

The EC project’s objective was for EU member states would resettle, on a voluntary basis, refugees from Malta. Less than 300 were resettled by the other 26 member states in three years.

It was interesting to note that Malmström also is calling for the “blame game” to stop, but as for her “too emotional” quote, referring to Italy and Malta, one wonders how emotional she would get if all those migrants were landing in Brussels.

And it is not only Malta and Italy that are ping-ponging migrants and getting ‘emotional’ over the issue. The Italian and French interior ministers are also locking horns. They met on Friday after Italy granted temporary permits to some 20,000 Tunisian migrants, which they said would allow them to travel to France.

Things got pretty hot with France warning that it is preparing to close the border with Italy if Rome continues to give temporary permits to the illegal immigrants to cross over to France.

France, that let us not forget had colonised Tunisia, (as the Italians had colonised Libya) said it does not want all those Tunisian migrants and will send those holding the Italian residence permits back unless they also have valid identity papers and sufficient funds to support themselves in France.

The Italians are claiming that France was violating the rules of the EU’s Schengen visa-free zone. But France is not budging “France has every right to send them back to Italy... That is what we will do, ” French Interior Minister Claude Gueant.

However, they have agreed to carry out joint patrols off Tunisia's coast to block migrants headed for Europe, with the French interior minister saying there was no duty to take in boat people. So it is not just migrants from Tunisia that are to be blocked but all boat people. What about those escaping from the civil wars in Libya and the Ivory Coast?
Very humanitarian gestures indeed. Instead of sharing the burden send them back.

Meanwhile, The UN High Commission for Refugees, on Friday, called on the European Union to urgently put into place more reliable and effective mechanisms for rescue-at-sea following the large loss of life in the Mediterranean this week.

More than 220 Somali, Eritrean and Ivorian refugees drowned early on Wednesday morning when their boat capsized some 39 nautical miles south of the Italian island of Lampedusa.

“A longstanding tradition of saving lives at sea may be at risk if it becomes an issue of contention between states as to who rescues whom. That is why we urgently need a more operational and better functioning search and rescue mechanism,” said UNHCR Assistant High Commissioner for Protection Erika Feller.

UNHCR also added its voice to the call for active consideration of concrete responsibility and burden sharing measures particularly among EU member countries. Such measures could include technical and financial support, and the use of the EU Temporary Protection Directive, which aims to harmonise temporary protection for displaced people in cases of “mass influx” on the basis of solidarity between member states.

“Although the temporary protection mechanism established by the directive has not been used yet, it is important for EU countries, namely Italy and Malta in this case, to be reassured that such support and solidarity would be forthcoming should the circumstances so demand” said Feller.

Well the circumstances are certainly demanding support and solidarity. Yet the EU is still dragging its feet and few are coming forward to share the burden. Germany has so far said it was prepared to take a100 migrants from Malta. It also took another 100 migrants from Malta last year. All in all less than 300 migrants were resettled by the other 26 member states in three years.

Unfortunately, the “team spirit” and “co-responsibility", which are meant to be embodied in EU solidarity are becoming more and more intangible.

Read More

That dreaded guilt trip

That awful ‘guilt’ of being bad, we Catholics have all been brought up with, rears its nasty head all over again. With the referendum D Day set at May 28, Gozo Bishop Mario Grech is at it once more, “When the personal judgment of a Catholic disagreed with the teachings of Christ as delivered by the Church, that Catholic would not be free of guilt”, he said at the Xewkija parish church last Sunday.

He was of course talking about divorce. I am not sure how many in Xewkija are mulling over the option, but really the message was intended for a much wider audience. Guilt is something the Church uses to cower the faithful and has nothing to do with Christ’s teachings. It has a lot to do with some of the neuroses Catholics, as well as, perhaps even more, Jews (I am thinking of Philip Roth’s Portnoy’s complaint and Woody Allen’s films) suffer from.

The latest guilt trip is being laid on anyone in Malta who might consider that divorce is not such a bad thing per se and might be what some people will actually benefit from. “Divorce and any legal measures that break down a marriage are intrinsically bad since they go against God’s will”, said Bishop Grech. Hang on a minute though; does not a Church annulment give the green light to ‘break down a marriage’? So is that intrinsically bad too?

What really baffles me is how the anti divorce brigade do not see that Church annulments also sanction the break up of families. I had previously referred to an interesting online comment from Mgr.Victor Zammit McKeon quoting from the Compendium of the Catholic Church, which shows that when comparing state divorce to a Church annulment the result is the same. A married couple is allowed to remarry another partner.

“The Church permits the physical separation of spouses when for serious reasons their living together becomes practically impossible, even though there may be hope for their reconciliation.
“As long as one’s spouse lives, however, one is not free to contract a new union, (and here comes the interesting bit) except if the marriage be null and be declared so by ecclesiastical authority.”

So married couples are allowed to remarry but only when sanctioned by the Church. But surely if divorce breaks up families so do annulments. Yet, last October, during Mass marking the start of the forensic year, Judicial Vicar Mgr Arthur Said Pullicino, the head of the Church tribunals, which examine petitions for marriage annulments, told those attending “those who cooperate in the introduction of divorce, including judges who apply the law, would be “committing a grave sin”.

His message was a bit confused, however, on the one hand he called on members of the judiciary and lawyers to desist from taking part in divorce proceedings and be conscientious objectors, while on the other he said, “The lawyer who takes up the case of the innocent party is doing nothing wrong”. But surely the latter would still be part of divorce proceedings.

Describing the “grave sin” threat as “a medieval imposition”, retired judge Philip Sciberras said “I am a practising Catholic but I believe the state is obliged to regulate such situations by introducing laws. Members of the judiciary should not object to hear divorce cases because of some medieval imposition.”

He was not the only critic other former judges and lawyers condemned the threat. Former European Court of Human Rights judge Giovanni Bonello drew a clear distinction between the civil aspect of marriage and its sacramental dimension.

“Mgr Said Pullicino has every right to say a judge of the civil courts has no jurisdiction on the sacrament of marriage but in our country marriage is also a civil contract. A judge in the civil courts deciding on the dissolution of marriage as a civil contract is in no way entering into religious matters. This distinction has to be made,” Judge Bonello told The Times at the time.

Fr Charlo’ Camilleri, a university lecturer in theology, was another of Mgr Said Pullicino’s critics, “In the context of the pastoral note of the bishops on the divorce debate, I personally find it very imprudent, to say the least, for such comments to be made by a high ranking official of the Church, since on this issue, the bishops never threatened anyone – let alone the judiciary, whose independence is a requisite of the Rule of Law – with sin,” he said.

But, we have had threats from Bishop Grech before, no specifically mentioning “sin” but strong stuff nonetheless. In February last year he linked abortion to divorce “Where the family is united, pregnancy is likely to be accepted and celebrated, but where the family is broken, such as in the case of divorced parents, there is a higher probability that life is refused and threatened.” And although he did not mention sin in his last homily his threat was pretty clear.

“The official stand of the Church is only a prerogative of the local bishops,” Fr Camilleri said, pointing out that the bishops had been stressing dialogue and the formation of conscience over “a divisive crusader mentality”. That was in reference to the Zebbug Parish priest who started his own crusade with a huge poster on his church’s parvis - “Divorce: God doesn’t want it” in July.

In August, the Curia’s Pro-Vicar, Mgr Anton Gouder said on RTK that convinced Catholics who voted in favour of divorce would be going against Christ’s teachings and “this was a sin”, while adding “it did not mean people would be excommunicated from the Church”.

What that means is that the Church does not want to lose followers, but wants them to feel bad if they don’t follow its dictate. The Church has been giving mixed messages over the issue all along. On the one hand it endorsed a position paper on divorce, drawn up by seven of its most prominent priests, which while stating that divorce was wrong, said Catholics could vote for divorce so long as they did this on the basis of a “formed and informed conscience”.

But last Sunday the Gozo bishop made it very clear
“When a Catholic formed a judgment of conscience about marriage and all that was connected to it, he had as guidance the Commandments and Christ’s words. These asserted that any legal measures that break down marriage, such as divorce, as well as adultery were intrinsically bad as they were directly opposing God’s will”, he said.

I loved Ramon Casha’s comment online: “Church: You should vote according to your conscience.
Bishop Grech: Yes, but if your conscience disagrees with me you're gonna burn in hell for all eternity. So, no pressure.”

First of all divorce and adultery are two separate entities and different in that many marriages have survived adultery and it is not always the reason for seeking a divorce. Bishop Grech is hell bent on promoting the fear of God; he said “if one consciously breached moral law, he also breached his relationship with God”.

But whose moral law exactly? Has the bishop got a direct line to God like the parish priest of Zebbug? As far as I know the last time God reputedly had a conversation with a mortal was way back at Mount Sinai with Moses, after he led the people of Israel out of Egypt, when the 10 Commandments were delivered.

Divorce was not mentioned. The 7th Commandment told us “You shall not commit adultery” and part of the 10th “You shall not covet your neighbour’s wife.” That of course should include not coveting your neighbour’s husband as well. Anyway, neither of them requires a divorce to commit and have been going on ever since with or without divorce.

We have had sin, guilt and being intrinsically bad, thrown at us, not to mention the linking of divorce with abortion, same-sex marriage and euthanasia.
A Times letter writer told us on April fools’ day: “Wherever I have travelled, to countries that have legalised divorce and abortion, those working to reverse pro-abortion laws all identify that pivotal moment in their history when they irrevocably weakened the family by legalising divorce.

“They recognise that important event as being the beginning of the downward trend that led to legalised abortion and in some cases euthanasia.
The link between the divorce way of thinking and abortion is there for all who bother to look; it remains an inconvenient link for some but it is there.”

Why does The Times publish such balderdash, or was the date of publication deliberate?

Read More