On April 19, 2005, Joseph Ratzinger was elected the 265th successor of Peter as Pope Benedict XVI.

To the surprise of many, seven years and 315 days later, Benedict requested to step down.  He was the first to relinquish the office since Pope Celestine V in 1294.

Benedict was humble and wise to realise that although he was the legitimate Pope he was no longer able to inspire and lead. Notwithstanding his many lifelong accomplishments, he was becoming a liability. Such a realisation propelled him to resign for the good of his Church.

Since his loyalty to the Church and the values it represents were far bigger and more profound than himself, he gracefully stepped down.

It was a bold statement that no one, whatever his status, is bigger than the whole. No one is indispensable, not even the Pope.

Can we learn lessons from such a resignation?

Currently, the Nationalist Party is facing the biggest crisis in its 140-year history.

Its achievements have been many, such as independence, the restoration of democracy, the liberalisation of the economy and membership of the European Union and the eurozone, yet it is currently in a terrible situation. This is also dangerous for our own democracy as Malta must have a strong and vibrant opposition. History shows that a feeble opposition paves the way for a one-party state.

Although there are various reasons for this state of affairs, and not all ought to be credited to Adrian Delia’s leadership, surely his tenure as leader is a major factor to consider?

Although Delia is the legitimate PN leader and was twice confirmed as such, he is turning out to be what Jeremy Corbyn was to the British Labour Party.

Corbyn was also chosen by the party members. But on June 28, 2016 he lost a no-confidence vote in his parliamentary group by an over-whelming majority. Corbyn was not amused.

“I was democratically elected leader of our party for a new kind of politics by 60 per cent of Labour members and supporters, and I will not betray them by resigning.”

He claimed that the vote had no constitutional legitimacy and insisted on staying on.

The rest is history. The Labour Party went on to suffer its worst electoral loss since 1935.

It is now obvious that with Delia at the helm, the PN is not electable, even though the current Labour administration is immersed in corruption and sleaze allegations.

Although Delia may have the support of party members, opinion polls have consistently confirmed that he does not enjoy the trust of thousands of Nationalist voters and other middle-of-the- road voters.

If Benedict had the audacity to resign for the well-being of his Church, why can’t Adrian Delia do the same?

Many are determined that as long as he is leader, they will vote with their feet. Much as the PN is unable to win without the support of the party members, their support is not enough. Splitting the Nationalist Party may be Labour’s strategy but this will surely not serve the interest of the Nationalist Party or our democratic credentials.

Am I to be labelled anti-Delia for expressing such views? The Nationalist Party was always a rainbow of opinions. Has it ceased to be so? Can one remain silent in front of this meltdown?

My party loyalty is neither absolute nor tribalistic but a discerning one. I entered politics to bear witness to my values rather than to follow any personality cult at all costs.

Love me or hate me, you can vote me in or boot me out! The choice is yours but I will not shy away from calling a spade a spade, even if it is an uncomfortable one.

I am not alone. A growing number of party stalwarts and others are urging Delia to take the honourable way out for the good of the party. No one is bigger than the party and no leader is the party, a fine distinction that must be made.

Those in favour of Delia argue that the Delia bashers did not give him a chance. On the other hand, those against Delia argue that he is not a person of integrity and has been involved in too many scandals and half-truths.

In my opinion, both sides may be correct. But both sides did not give peace a chance.

In my article entitled, ‘Taking a leaf from Peter and Paul’ (Times of Malta, June 6, 2018) I had stressed the urgent need for reconciliation, arguing that if Peter and Paul rose above their entrenched positions and sought common ground, why shouldn’t we do likewise?

A house divided against itself cannot stand. Sadly, my appeal fell on deaf ears.

Although Delia has his merits and can be credited with some political achievements, in particular his stand on the privatisation of our hospitals, sadly these are not enough.

If he is unable to inspire and rally the sceptical within his own ranks, how can he be expected to rally the public? Anyone can comprehend this dilemma.

Delia should, therefore, take a leaf out of Benedict’s courageous but humble stance. If Benedict had the audacity to resign for the well-being of his Church, why can’t Adrian Delia do the same?

History will surely judge Benedict as the wise man.

How will it judge Delia’s obstinacy?

Albert Buttigieg, Mayor of St Julian’s