There is nothing more progressive and liberal than protecting human life – Bishop Galea-Curmi

There is nothing more progressive and liberal than protecting human life – Bishop Galea-Curmi

Homily by Bishop Joseph Galea-Curmi for Mass organised by the LifeNetwork Foundation in memory of abortion victims around the world 

Today, we are commemorating the precious human lives which were cut short during their development, and thus could not be born. They never had the opportunity to show the world their potential. We mourn the loss of these unborn lives, because human life should always be cherished. Their loss is a great loss for us all. It is not only a loss for those who believe in Christ, but also a loss for all those who, in one way or another, value human life from its conception.

However, today, we also mourn with those who took the decision to terminate human life in its early stages. There could have been so many reasons for them to do this.  They might have found themselves in a situation where they could not understand fully what they were doing, and what the consequences would be. Perhaps they faced great hardship and did not find the support they needed. Instead of finding people to help them, they could have been under pressure to terminate human life. Whatever the reason, may they now find people to support them as they go through the process of forgiveness in order to arrive at complete healing. May those who made this wrong decision find the help they need to be able to start afresh, and work fervently in favour of life.

Whoever wants to end human life in its early stages is not progressive but regressive. It has been said correctly that the strength of a society is measured by the progress of the most vulnerable.

Protection in Society

We are also here today to renew our commitment to work actively in favour of life, even when we are faced by a mind-set that is promoting a culture of death. We should remember that, when slavery existed, this mentality was commonly accepted. By time, thanks to the involvement of courageous people, a number of societies understood the injustice involved, and began to work wholeheartedly against slavery, rejecting the concept completely, because it went against human dignity.

Today, in various parts of the world, there is a mentality which accepts and promotes the ending of a human life which has been conceived, but not yet born. It is a widespread mentality. We hope and pray that the time will come when, just as different societies saw the error of their ways and worked wholeheartedly against slavery, they will do the same in the case of human life, that is, become fully aware of the reality, and work passionately against the idea that someone can end another person’s life.

Progressive and liberal

At times, it is said that if one is progressive and liberal, one must advocate for the right to choose to eliminate human life that has started, but has not yet been born. However, if you take the time to reflect on the meaning of progressive and liberal, you will realise that there is nothing more progressive and liberal than the safeguarding of human life.

We pray for consistency where the cherishing of life is concerned … Anyone who is begging for help because he is drowning, literally or metaphorically, should also have his or her life safeguarded.

What does it mean to be progressive? It means that you want progress; you want people to move ahead in life. I presume it means that you would want progress for everyone. A person is progressive when s/he can guarantee that the few cells that are present at the beginning of human life can continue progressing. On the contrary, whoever wants to end human life in its early stages is not progressive but regressive. It has been said correctly that the strength of a society is measured by the progress of the most vulnerable.

What does it mean to be liberal? It means that you treasure liberty, and that you do not want anyone to obstruct liberty. This implies that we should respect everyone’s liberty to develop and have a better life. When there is human life at an early stage, being liberal means allowing it to live, not eliminating it.

A Prayer

Today we ask the Lord to strengthen our resolve to value life and protect it from all danger. In a special way, we value the life of the most vulnerable, those without a voice, those who depend on others completely.

We pray for consistency where the cherishing of life is concerned – that is, from the moment of its conception to its natural death, and in its every stage. Anyone who is begging for help because he is drowning, literally or metaphorically, should also have his or her life safeguarded.

We pray that doctors, nurses, and those who work in the health sector, will always be faithful to their mission of upholding the value of life, as is their duty, and to do this even when it means obeying their conscience and saying ‘No’.

We pray especially for those mothers who are facing difficult situations, that they may find the help and support they need for the protection of life, and that they never end up victims of abusive systems.

We also pray for our country, that it will never succumb to the pressure against life but will be a country that accepts and appreciates every human life, creates awareness about the value of life, and has laws that protect and safeguard life.

Joseph Galea-Curmi Auxiliary Bishop, Archdiocese of Malta

 

This is an article from The Archdiocese of Malta Website 

Ref:  https://church.mt/there-is-nothing-more-progressive-and-liberal-than-protecting-the-human-life-bishop-galea-curmi/

A call for diversity and more transparency

A call for diversity and more transparency

The Equality Bill as presently formulated has several shortcomings

The quest for social justice, equality and the adherence to fundamental human rights has always been embraced by Church schools. As many students can attest, our schools safeguard and promote these values – which is why we welcome initiatives such as those included in the draft legislation Equality Bill 96 and 97.

We are stakeholders in the national effort to promote equality but we are also educators with a mission and a duty to uphold our school ethos and tolerance. We work hand in hand with those hundreds of parents who send their children to our schools to learn about our Christian faith and our ideals. We want a law which respects diversity, not one which is oppressive, imposes a bland uniformity on all and leads to persecution by prosecution.

This is the reason why we put forward proposals to Parliamentary Secretary for Equality Rosianne Cutajar. The Equality Bill as currently formulated has several shortcomings, several of which threaten freedom of religion and freedom of expression. The Venice Commission (European Commission for Democracy through Law) has also commented unfavourably on certain aspects of the draft equality legislation which shows that we are not the only ones to voice concern about it. The Independent Schools Association has also presented its amendments to the bill. Sources from other faith communities are also very concerned.

Our proposals to the parliamentary secretary Rosianne Cutajar were primarily twofold. In the first place, we want to continue our mission to promote and celebrate our particular school ethos by being allowed to employ persons who respected that ethos, particularly in the leadership roles within our institutions. School leaders are the interpreters of faith to the community. It is not discriminatory to expect the leaders of our schools who will perpetuate that ethos, who are not hostile to it and who will fashion a framework around that Christian ethos.

We want to retain the freedom to engage such educational leaders in this crucial role. We cannot understand why the parliamentary secretary is so adamant in closing the door to this eminently reasonable suggestion. The leaders of a political party, of trade unions are expected to embrace its ideals, so why are Church school educators and leaders being denied this right? Why is this being described as discriminatory only when Church schools wish to engage leaders who reflect and perpetuate their values? It is ironic to see that legislation, which is supposed to promote equality, is actually discriminatory in effect.

If the law is enacted as formulated, Church schools will have next to little choice as to whether to engage persons who are openly hostile to their values. This is utterly disrespectful of the hundreds of parents who wish their children to experience religious values and norms in a communal educational setting. There are parents who wish to send their children to Church schools specifically for this reason.

We want a law which respects diversity, not one which is oppressive and imposes a bland uniformity on all

Relegating religious values to a 40-minute slot during a religion lesson is not what the parents wish for their children. Such values are imbibed during all lessons, activities and extracurricular outings and yes – we would like to be able to engage people who are willing to participate in these holistic activities. We don’t understand why Cutajar continues to describe this as discrimination. We are hurt to see her thinly veiled attacks on us, describing us as “the privileged few” and portraying us as being hostile to the LGBTIQ+ community.

It is a known fact that members of this community form an integral part of educational communities – even at senior management level. We value them and appreciate their contribution just like anybody else.

We also asked the parliamentary secretary to introduce a clause to allow persons to register a conscientious objection based on belief, creed or religion to perform, participate, endorse or promote any measure. This was deliberately misrepresented as a request for a licence to discriminate.

It is nothing of the sort. On the contrary – forcing people to participate or endorse acts to which they object because of deep moral objections is undemocratic and despotic.

The right to conscientious objection is recognised in many democratic states. In the Declaration on the Importance of Strengthening the Fundamental Right to Freedom of Conscience made in Brussels, on April 21, 2016. Members of the European Parliament stressed that freedom of conscience is a fundamental right that needs to be protected everywhere.

Only recently, 14 associations representing various medical specialities called for the inclusion of a conscientious objection clause in a new law on equality, currently before parliament. The associations stated that “Doctors should not be faced with clinical situations where they are forced to act against their ethical convictions or be deemed liable if they exert their freedom of conscience.” Like us, their support for the introduction of a conscientious objection clause is also motivated by the implications of the supremacy clauses included in the bill. These will allow the new law to override criminal and civil laws if a matter of legal contention arises.

Despite these repeated pleas to listen to reason and experts in the field, our suggestions have not been taken up. The process by which the bill is being passed through parliament is obscure and not transparent. It is a pity that stakeholders’ concerns and suggestions are not being taken on board. We are ready to continue promoting non-discrimination in good faith. We hope that our proposals will not continue to fall on deaf ears.

Fr Charles Mallia is Delegate for Catholic Education; Fr Jimmy Bartolo is Rector of St Aloysius College and coordinator of the Church Schools Association; Claire Bonello is representative for Church Schools Parents’ Associations; Sr Rachel Frendo is Provincial of Augustinian Sisters and vice president of the Council for Religious Major Superiors.

This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/a-call-for-diversity-and-more-transparency.818551

 

At the mercy of equality – Miriam Sciberras

At the mercy of equality – Miriam Sciberras

As parliamentary committees reconvene after the summer COVID-imbued break, the Equality Bills discussion rears its ugly head again.

Why should equality laws cause worry and concern to the ordinary law-abiding citizen?

Why have so many people – educators, doctors, employers, organisations, parents, faith groups, schools and NGOs – sounded warnings over such a seemingly innocuous positive legislation?

The dual Bill legislation 96 and 97 is set to change our Maltese landscape like nothing else before.

Vague definitions that include harassment will pose a threat to peaceful people who dare express an opinion on any of the protected characteristics.

Pitching in both sexual orientation and religion together as protected characteristics in these Bills will obviously lead to an escalation of controversy at some point in time.

All Christians, including Catholics, have clear teachings on sexual conduct which no law can change. This has never been a problem until now because people are free to believe, to reject or to embrace their faith and live it in the public square as they deem fit for them.

The Equality Bill makes a mockery of religious freedom by relegating it to a barely tolerated issue– Miriam Sciberras

If Bill 96 sails through without including an overriding clause on religious freedom and conscientious objection, faithful believers will be sued and will be at the mercy of a police state where they will be suddenly under a gag order if they fail to endorse what they do not believe in.

There will be an obvious conflict established by the new law, and the hierarchy of rights will be challenged.

Treating people with respect, tolerance and love of neighbour can never mean endorsement, support or approval of behaviour that goes against their conscience or faith.

Imposing acceptance or endorsement in the name of equality is unacceptable. Threatening people into compliance is tantamount to brainwashing and Marxist indoctrination.

This moral code, which has been the backbone of families and our country for centuries, is now at the mercy of an ‘anti-discrimination law’, which ever since its evil inception was targeted at believers and marketed as a desirable quality. In fact, anti-discrimination laws worldwide do not allow religious freedom and conscientious objection because that is what they are targeted to exclude.

One look at the aftermath of equality laws in other countries shows that peaceful law-abiding citizens are being persecuted for simply living out their faith.

People have been taken to court for wearing a cross around their neck; pastors preaching the Gospel have been sued; children have been taken from their parents if the letter failed to endorse hormone treatment of their minors; midwives have been struck off the register for failing to assist in abortion procedures, and doctors struck off the register or paediatricians sued; writers have been questioned by the police over the publication of leaflets on human sexuality; and schools have been forced to close unless they change their curriculum. These and so many other examples are there for all who want to look up and see what’s in store for us unless we get some serious amendments in these Bills that will make living with them acceptable.

We are moving from freedom as a way of life to freedom as an exemption under these laws.

This is very serious for those who cherish journalistic freedom of expression and religious freedom in the public square.

Religious freedom as a pre-eminent right will now fall under exemptions. How can one relegate a cherished value set in our constitution to an exemption? Exemptions imply bare tolerance that can be removed over time.

The Equality Bill makes a mockery of religious freedom by relegating it to a barely tolera­ted issue. This is a very dangerous subtle attack on the Church in Malta, on faith and on all believers.

The time to speak out is now.

 

Miriam Sciberras is chair, Life Network Foundation Malta.

This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/at-the-mercy-of-equality-miriam-sciberras.818071

Love Louder – Jeff and Jennifer Christie

Love Louder – Jeff and Jennifer Christie

If I had listened to you,

I wouldn’t have woken up this morning with five year old toes in my face.

There wouldn’t be light up Batman sneakers in the shoe rack,

or goldfish crackers swimming on the floor of our SUV.

If I had listened to you,

I wouldn’t know all the words to the Paw Patrol theme song,

or the names of the Bubble Guppies.

I wouldn’t have seen Frozen in the theater.

Twice.

I have a few more stretch marks,

A little less money,

less time,

and more fine lines around my eyes.

If I had listened to you,

I wouldn’t know the tug of little arms around my neck,

sticky hands tenderly patting my face,

random requests for mommy snuggles.

If I had listened to you,

the phrase “beauty for ashes” would be one dimensional,

healing would have been a slow, uphill climb,

and so much pain would have so much less purpose.

I have a little more patience,

and a little less pride,

less selfishness,

more faith in the Great I AM.

If I had listened to you,

to the world,

to the doubt and the fear,

I’d miss hearing a croaky morning voice tell me he misses me when he’s asleep.

But I didn’t listen to you.

I listened to love.

The heart of God,

the motion of mercy,

the song of grace,

the soul of the mother that I already was and was destined to be again.

Sounds of love, louder than the anxiety, drowning out the agony.

Louder.

I listened.

I followed.

And just look what I got.

Life with no regrets.

Jennifer Christie

Of nothingness, DNA and embryonic life – Patrick Pullicino

At the centre of every strongly held anti-life (pro-choice) belief is a desensitisation to the wonder of not only life, but also of being, and even of existence. I would, for a moment, like to try to put the wonder of our simple existence into some perspective.

There is a hierarchy of existence on earth. At its pinnacle is human life with our ability to love, think rationally and distinguish good and evil – the supreme gifts.

Below us are mammals and other animals that have many of our animal characteristics and have DNA that maintains their species-specific continuity over time and generations.

Plant life is yet a further step below, with DNA but without the complex brain that movement and animal interaction requires.

Below this, inanimate objects or chemicals are not alive but they too have existence and a function in the world.

At the lowest end of this scale is the vacuum of space. It has no discernible things within it but it is not ‘nothingness’ as it is still part of the cosmos and is able to transmit light and electromagnetic waves.

So this brings us to nothingness. It is difficult to conceive of nothingness as it is outside of our experience. It is insightful to try to do this, however, as although individual human beings are made up of chemicals, our existence as individuals literally was ‘nothingness’ before we were conceived. We did not even exist as empty space.

This puts human conception in an entirely different light. Human embryos, however short-lived, are individuals that never previously existed. They are unique. Yes their DNA gives them the blueprint for their growth but that DNA is not necessarily unique, as identical twins have the same DNA.

It is not the DNA that gives individuality, it is our spiritual soul that is the core of our existence and of our individuality. Our body and DNA are just the ‘earthen vessel’ that holds our unique, created existence.

Individual human life when seen in the perspective of nothingness is all the more wonderful. Who but God can create out of nothingness? So every human conception, whether lasting an hour or a day or a hundred years, is in this deep perspective, a miracle.

Does the fact that many embryos die before birth devalue either human life or individuality or the preciousness of each and every embryo? No! How can it?

The practice of IVF and surrogacy has desensitised us to the astounding miracle of conception, set against the backdrop of the nothingness we came out of. And in-vitro fertilisation is not and could never be ‘creation’. 

 

I have previously called for the setting up of Malta as a centre for prenatal foetal medicine and intrauterine surgery

 

When a species becomes extinct, it has returned to the void out of which  it was created . Creation from that void of nothingness is true creation that only God can perform.

It is not only illogical but arrogant in the extreme to state that because many embryos die when they are still a few cells, therefore all embryos do not deserve protection.

Who are we to ask why God created these individuals? Maybe the majority of us die at an early stage to protect us from being contaminated by the errors and evils of the world that engulf us.

Rather than devaluing all embryonic life on the basis of the high loss of early embryos, we should cherish and protect embryonic life even more and pursue research to help reduce this early embryonic loss of human life.

It is wonderful that in Malta abortion is illegal. However, we cannot accept this bare legal minimum and must engender a wonder and respect of preborn life in society. 

I have previously called for the setting up of Malta as a centre for prenatal foetal medicine and intrauterine surgery.

As the only country in Europe that does not allow abortion, Malta could set up a prenatal medical centre with full surgical capabilities and take referrals from the rest of Europe and rapidly become a European and world leader in this area.

Patrick Pullicino, Catholic priest in London and retired NHS neurologist

https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/of-nothingness-dna-and-embryonic-life-patrick-pullicino.809727

Certainly more, never less – Konrad Borg

I refer to the article by Aleksandar Dimitrejevic entitled ‘No, we are not our DNA’, (July 25) . The author’s premise is the scientific observation that a large proportion of pre and peri-implantation embryos are lost.

The disconnected and one dimensional conclusion he draws from this significant embryonic death is that the human genome is not enough to qualify an embryo for human value (and therefore, ultimately supports the author’s view that it is permissible to abort it).

The scope of this article is to explain why I consider such a superficial analysis to lack both scientific depth as well as logical coherence. 

Our genome defines our biological identity. If we could analyse the DNA of an embryo, we would know whether we are dealing with a biological male or female, as well as knowing what they would eventually look like, even at an early stage of development. There are no ‘blank’ embryos. This defined biological identity will express itself progressively through the pregnancy and after birth, as we acquire more of the features that are ‘written’ in that code.

While we are more than our biological sex and physical appearance, they are certainly an integral part of who we are as human beings. In addition, embryos are more than their DNA. They are a complete and complex organism, whose cells are rapidly multiplying and specialising into various tissues.

In the majority of the cases where embryos are lost at an early stage, this is largely attributable to significant chromosomal abnormalities (Macklon et al, 2002). The fact that they were not viable because of a life-limiting genetic condition, has no bearing whatsoever on their intrinsic humanity.

At six weeks of pregnancy, there is more than 90 per cent chance that the baby will survive

In simple terms, they died early in their development because of a genetic condition. It may be beneficial to the mother that she is unaware of this early embryonic death since this will mitigate the psychological distress of miscarriage later in the pregnancy. The fact the author concludes that their unacknowledged death strips them of moral value is merely a reflection of his personal views on human worth rather than a logical conclusion based on the evidence. 

At six weeks of pregnancy, there is more than 90 per cent chance that the baby will survive since the risk of miscarriage at this stage is 9.4 per cent (Tong et al, 2008). Sixty-five per cent of first trimester abortions happen after six weeks (CDC, 2016). Therefore, more than 90 per cent of these terminations occur on viable embryos who would have probably survived till birth. So even from a purely utilitarian perspective, justifying abortion on the basis of early pregnancy loss is not only illogical but misleading.

Of course, there is an ethical dimension that clearly differentiates abortion from early embryonic death. Abortion is an intentional intervention that actively brings about the demise of these embryos, the majority of which are viable and would have otherwise been born. We become the agents of their avoidable death.

On the other hand, early embryonic loss, as a result of natural causes is largely an unavoidable consequence of chromosomal abnormalities. From an ethical point of view there is no comparison between the death of non viable embryos by natural means and the termination of viable embryos by induced abortion.

As an advocate for women’s rights, it is surprising that the author does not perceive how insensitive his words may be to mothers who have suffered a miscarriage. It is no comfort to these women, or their partners, that the author uses the miscarriage that grieves them to disqualify their son or daughter from being considered human at all.

Additionally, if the author wants to engage in a serious scientific discussion, he should not divert from science. His references to God and religion in an attempt to ride on anti-Catholic sentiment are as irrelevant as they are distasteful.

As an identical twin, I would like to conclude by agreeing with the author when he writes that we are certainly more than our DNA, while emphatically stating that we are never ‘less’ than our DNA.

Konrad Borg, consultant in emergency medicine, member Doctors for Life

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/certainly-more-never-less-konrad-borg.809157

Let politicians know that society wants to protect the life of the unborn, marchers told

Sunday, December 9, 2018, 18:13 by Ivan Martin

 

‘Malta will eventually be made to hold a referendum on whether or not to introduce abortion’ — pro-life movement

 

The forthcoming European Parliament and local council elections were an ideal opportunity to let politicians know that society wanted to protect the life of the unborn, and that life started from conception, pro-life demonstrators in Valletta were told on Sunday.

A sizeable crowd took part in the march in the afternoon, held “in defence of the unborn”. The fourth annual March for Life was organized by the Life Network Foundation.

The demonstrators, who included civil society, priests, nuns, the head of evangelist movement River of Love, and even former Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi, gathered in front of Parliament holding placards that read; “love the most vulnerable”, “be a voice to those who have none”, and “love them both”.

Foundation chairperson Miriam Sciberas told those gathered how Malta was changing faster than many would like. Foreigners were changing the island’s demographics, fake news was pushing agendas onto society, and national discussions were all staked in favour of special interests.

In all this chaos it was hard to focus on the essentials – the values “that make us Maltese”.

The introduction of the Morning After Pill was being followed by mounting pressure for Malta to move towards introducing abortion.

“They ask why we are not like other European countries, why we are different,” Dr Sciberras said.

This, she added, was made worse by a manipulative media.

She said Malta will eventually be made to hold a referendum on whether or not to introduce abortion as political parties cannot deal with this hot potato themselves.

She urged those gathered to make their position clear with politicians.

The European Parliament and Local Council Elections were fast approaching and this was an ideal opportunity to let politicians know that society wanted to protect the life of the unborn, and that life started from conception.

The foundation, she said, was working to provide a chat line for expecting mothers and those who had gone through with abortion, specialized councillors, financial assistance, and even a shelter for homeless mothers.

In closing, Dr Sciberras said Christmas was a celebration of birth and the born child.

Earlier the crowd heard from US speaker Jennifer Christie, a victim of rape who raised a child which she insists has always been a gift.

She said many had asked her what it was like raising “a rapist’s child”, to which she has always answered she was raising her child and God’s child.

Her son, she said, was not a reminder of rape but a reminder of “the joy that can come from darkness”.

Ref: https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20181209/local/let-politicians-know-that-society-wants-to-protect-the-life-of-the.696354