The defiant priest

The current controversy of priests and politics is only expected and is bound to go on and on. The only pity is that arguments defer to suit one's political bias.

The responsibility for such a situation, no doubt rests with our politicians and to a lesser extent with the Church authorities themselves. What puzzles me are the absurd arguments brought about by some of our, supposedly, elite class of columnists who allow themselves to be swayed by their political connections rather than by sensible arguments.

One has to exercise maturity and responsibility when expressing an opinion as to whether clerics should involve themselves in politics. While each and every cleric has a right to his political opinion, as a minister of the Church he has to be seen to be above politics, in both the eyes of the Church and the faithful.

It is universally acclaimed that two wrongs don't make a right. So, for heaven's sake, let's depart from this point. Any priest who pokes his nose in politics is in the wrong, whether he carries a blue or red armband. I say this because priests have, of their own free choice, vowed obedience to the Church, which is represented in the persons of our Archbishop and bishops. They are committed to observe Canon Law. How can a priest expect the respect of the faithful when he quotes the Church teachings on some occasions and disregards his duties and obligations to satisfy his fancies?

I find the government to be an accomplice in Fr Joe Borg's defiance of the Church authorities. However, this does in no way exonerate him from any of his obligations to observe the Church's directives. Surely, denouncing the Church's rulings is not in conformity with the Catholic teachings he so often refers to. Had the Church authorities been wrong in their decision, he was still bound to respect that decision.

Fr Borg should have followed Fr Mark Montebello's example of humbly bowing out of the limelight when his superiors disciplined him, some time ago. I am no fan of Fr Montebello whatsoever. But it is in my nature to call a spade a spade. If I am not mistaken, while Fr Montebello was banned from participating in a Super One TV programme, Robin Hood, which dealt with Malta's entry into the EU, Fr Borg was participating in a PBS TV programme, Fuq tlieta toqghod il-borma, which dealt more or less with the same theme.

I was not surprised by Fr Borg's stand on the Archbishop's disapproval of his appointment. He still seems to have an axe to grind with Mgr Mercieca. His dismissal from the stewardship of the Church radio station must have left Fr Borg with a scar, which has not yet healed, despite the lapse of time and despite the PBS consultancy job that landed in his lap soon after he lost the RTK office.

Admittedly, the Curia was not transparent in its removing the then RTK chairman. Though it categorically denied accusations that it replaced Fr Borg because of political pressures from the Labour Party, it never gave any reasons for its action. While the Curia has every right to replace or reallocate its clerics, as it deemed fit and proper, the seriousness of the RTK case definitely warranted an explanation.

The lack of an appropriate pronouncement from the Church authorities with regard to the change in RTK's stewardship, unfortunately, did give rise to some speculation. However, one cannot say whether the Curia's silence actually benefited Fr Borg or the Curia itself. Having said all this, no doubt Fr Borg should have reacted in a more appropriate manner, no matter how irreproachable his activities within the Church media could have been.

It was said, then, that some of Fr Borg's close friends had written to the Archbishop denouncing his removal. It would be interesting for the Curia to find out whether any of those names feature on the new editorial board at PBS.

It was preposterous for Fr Borg to compare his former post at RTK to the political appointment that landed him in trouble. It is equally foolish for him to insinuate that the job description of the two posts is in substance alike.

In the first place the position he held at RTK was far from a political appointment. Neither was it a hotbed of political controversy. If, as has been claimed, he was removed from RTK due to political pressure then it follows that a section of the political spectrum was not happy with his performance. Thus, is he appropriate for the job he has now been given?

Furthermore, he claims that during his last three years at PBS, social justice and catholic teachings guided him. How can Fr Borg possibly say this when the countless protests of bias reporting and other complaints levelled at PBS at the time he was consultant and even now indicate otherwise? Does Fr Borg truly believe he was a success story in his various roles at PBS? When is he going to learn that self-praise is no recommendation?

While Fr Borg should seriously reconsider his position and endeavour to mend fences with the Curia, the Prime Minister should consider withdrawing the appointment in a bid to pour oil on troubled waters. The Prime Minister needs to ensure that his government will not be the cause for further disputes between the Curia and its clerics.

Alternatively, Fr Borg could perhaps seek another sabbatical as he did when he was removed from RTK. Surely, he can think of a few places that could provide him with the ideal venue to reflect on the situation and reconsider his position within the Church.