• email article
  • print article
  • small text sizemedium text sizelarge text size
  • comment on this article

European Court's crucifix ruling

A new form of censorship - Archbishop

Archbishop Paul Cremona yesterday denounced the decision by the European Court of Human Rights to ban crucifixes in Italian classrooms as a "new form of censorship".

The Nationalist Party and Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat also disagreed with the court decision.

But experts in European law warned against judging the decision rashly and said the reasons and consequences behind it needed to be studied properly before commenting in detail.

Lawyers Ian Refalo and Peter Xuereb said the court's decision naturally had certain implications on Malta too because the island was a signed member of the European Convention of Human Rights. But the extent of this still had to be analysed.They stressed that Italy was appealing the court's decision, so the ban would only come into force if the final decision was confirmed by the appeals court.

Prof. Refalo said that if someone were to make a similar case against Malta it would be likely that the same decision would be made since a precedent had now been set.

But he was unable to say whether he agreed or not with the decision because he first had to study the judgment in detail.

"From what I've read, I can see the reasoning behind it and it's clear that a lot of thought has been put into it. It's not a decision that can easily be arrived at."

Prof. Xuereb felt the decision showed a movement towards a "particular brand of secularism", which will come as a shock to countries like Italy and Malta, although it was the one chosen in a country like France.

"At first glance, this is a rather bold position to take and it is bound to cause some difficulties in its application," Prof. Xuereb added, without saying whether he agreed or not with the decision.

In fact, people who expressed their views on timesofmalta.com feel this case paves the way for similar but more extreme decisions to be taken Europe-wide.

Speaking on PBS programme Bonġu, Mgr Cremona said everyone should enjoy the right to show their faith through images. "What freedom is it to ban everything?" Mgr Cremona asked.

He said the issue was not one between religions but the consequence of a European ideology that wanted to remove all expression of religion, whatever that religion was.

The controversial case was raised by a Finnish-born woman who wanted to raise her two children as non-Catholics in an Italian school. After taking her case to the Strasbourg court she won €5,000 damages as the court argued that the crucifixes violated religious and educational freedoms.

Mgr Cremona said the Church had long declared that all faiths should be free to express themselves. He never felt irritated when he saw women wearing the Burka. What was offensive was that some people wanted to ban all expressions of faith and, in this case, also an expression of a nation's culture. "What if one did not like għana (folk singing)?" he asked.

The majority should have a right to express their beliefs and the minority too should not be denied their rights. Mgr Cremona said that, should such a ban ever be imposed on Malta and he needed to go to hospital, he would be the first one to take a crucifix with him.

The PN said the court should never have got itself involved on this issue and should have left it up to individual states. The PN said it would continue to defend Christian values, even in the way they were displayed in public spaces as expressed in the crucifix.

In Parliament last night, Dr Muscat said that believing in a secular society did not mean doing away with religion. Meanwhile, Italian politicians are also fuming.

"This is an abhorrent ruling," said Rocco Buttiglione, a former Culture Minister who helped write papal encyclicals. "It must be rejected with firmness. Italy has its culture, its traditions and its history. Those who come among us must understand and accept this culture and this history," he said.

The court ruling, which Italy said it would appeal, said crucifixes on school walls, a common sight that is part of every Italian's life, could disturb children who were not Christians. Italy has been in the throes of national debate on how to deal with a growing population of immigrants, mostly Muslims, and the court sentence is likely to become another battle cry for the centre-right government's policy to restrict newcomers.

  • Google Bookmarks Del.icio.us Facebook Blogger YahooMyWeb Digg Reddit Stumbleupon
  • email article
  • print article
  • small text sizemedium text sizelarge text size
  • comment on this article

Comments

Raymond Sammut (2 weeks ago)
Alex Ellul -- "I have always attended lessons in classrooms having religious symbols. These have never decreased my IQ or impeded my learning abilities..."

Alex, neither IQ nor "learning abilities" have anything to do with "thinking". Two persons may both have a very high IQ measure because both have learning skills, but then we find that they think in totally different ways.

I am like you. Throughout my primary education at a public school on Malta I was surrounded by religious symbols. That's how you and I ended up thinking in the same way. As children, we should have been allowed to develop in a neutral environment and allowed to make choices on how we think as our knowledge -- thanks to our learning abilities -- kept increasing. As it is, unfortunately, we have been homogenized to please the will of the State. It is, in my view, a form of national insecurity, which is totally unnecessary. What is worse is that it puts an unwarranted stress on the developing child at school.

Parents on Malta now have the opportunity not to allow this form of imposition on their child by the State.
Joe Xuereb (2 weeks, 1 day ago)
@ Alex Ellul. I have never met an atheist who was intolerant of Christians. But I have met many, - no, I'll rephrase that - Christians are by definition intolerant of atheists. I guess because a believer fears and resents a non-believer for some reason. An atheist transcends such fear so it matters not to him/her whether another believes or not. Simple really. You may have heard the expression, 'setting oneself up to fail'. The believer often does this. The atheist mindset works at a much deeper level because he/she is not fearful of asking questions and seeking answers. So, to recap. No, the atheist is not intolerant by defintion for being an atheist. Of course I can only talk at myself, a staunch atheist. If an atheist is intolerant of believers, then all I can say is that he/she has some issues to resolve still. Please do not make assumptions about atheists. Like, for instance, that they are free to sin to their hearts' content because they have no God, therefore no conscience. How wrong can one be.
Raymond Bezzina (2 weeks, 1 day ago)

In the last paragraph, the above letter says:
"The court ruling, which Italy said it would appeal, said crucifixes on school walls, a common sight that is part of every Italian's life, could disturb children who were not Christians". end quote.

I believe that what is truly disturbing for children is abortion and NOT the Crucifix on school
walls. Therefore, if the european court of human rights truthfully does not want children to
be disturbed, it must rule to abolish abortion.
I, as a Roman Catholic am disturbed, offended and disgusted by the mass murder of
innocent children by abortion, therefore the European Court of Human Rights must rule
against this violation of human rights.
Erin Ciantar (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
@ Dr John Damai

Ladies and gentlemen, please wave goodbye to our culture and traditions, and say hello to the Secular Progressive movement. What a FANTASTIC sight.
Ruby Jenner (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
Well said Raymond Sammut your comment is spot on.
Bertrand Russell (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
People should be informed before commenting haphazardly. The ruling says that in a public place if an individual feels uncomfortable with a religious symbol he/she has the right to ask for its removal. Note the reference to 'public place' - not religious schools for instance; and 'individual' - there has to be a formal complaint for crucifixes to be removed. It is only fair in my opinion.
Alex Ellul (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
@Raymond Sammut: Your comment, quote: "It's sole intent is to bias the vulnerable child on how to think". Then how come I graduated with honours? I have always attended lessons in classrooms having religious symbols. These have never decreased my IQ or impeded my learning abilities or studying etc. In my opinion, your comment is not logical at all. The upward progressive graph of civilization for the last 3 millenia at least has been made in conjunction and in correlation with evolving beliefs in the supernatural. We came out of the caves and flown to the moon at same time that we say THANK YOU GOD for helping us arrive here safely.
Dr John Damai (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
Ladies and gentlemen, please wave goodbye to our culture and traditions, and say hello to the Secular Progressive movement. What a sad sight.
Yvonne Spiteri Ghio (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
We should stick to our guns! We have our traditions and christian values and we are going to keep them. The magiority of the maltese people are Catholics and for sure we do not want outsiders to dictate and command us what we should do. Who ever is offended should leave the country. We do not need them!
Raymond Sammut (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
"In Parliament last night, Dr Muscat said that believing in a secular society did not mean doing away with religion." (Muscat)

Why can't Joseph Muscat show honesty on this issue? This issue is not about "doing away with religion" as he is claiming. This issue is about doing away with a symbol which does not belong in the classroom. It does not belong in the classroom because it does not contribute in any way whatsoever to learning and education. It's sole intent is to bias the vulnerable child on how to think, and clearly this violates a basic human right of the child.
Marion Pace (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
To the Bishop and all protesters like me against the abolishing of the cross from Public places please note that even in Malta in some work places it is being considered a nuisance.
Some time ago they were filming where my brother works and my brother noticed that they removed the cross from his desk. You can imagine how angry he became and made it clear that he was deeply offended. He even risked being sacked from his job.
Frans van Avendonk (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
Just change the constitution and say that Catholicism is the official faith of the state! The judgment will then no longer hold, but please refrain therefore also from criticism on others who made (another) religion their official faith.
T.gauci (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
@Mary Borg

Welcome to Globalization
Alex Ellul (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
@L Galea, while you may be very right in saying that "No foreign court and foreigners should interfere with our traditions and culture", what's happening here is even deeper; a serious threat to one's right to practice one's faith and beliefs.
I believe that legally, atheism should be declared as another form of religion and treated as any other religion. This case proves the intolerance of atheists towards other peoples' beliefs, which in my opinion goes against the rules of modern society. Intolerance should be the only thing that must not be tolerated, otherwise we will be back to another form of apartheid.
Ramon Casha (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
@Mary Borg: If you cannot understand the reasoning behind this ruling, you need to look up the definition of "captive audience"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/captive+audience
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=103006&dict=CALD
John Azzopardi (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
Before you know, they will tell the church to remove the cross from it's churches. Wow, is this freedom. Isn't the ordering of removal from classes by the european human rights courts offending Italian and other people's human right. I think the court is ran by a bunch of liberals and atheist who do not believe in anything and they think they are above the law. Shame on them. The judges should be ashamed of themselves and no one can tell me otherwise.
e.cortis (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
HUMAN RIGHTS form part of our Constitution. There is a European Institution, The Court of Human Rights, specifically sitting to decide on Human Rights cases. We are signatories to the European Human Rights Convention and members of the Council of Europe. So we automatically fall under the jurisdiction of this Institution and its court. We either abide by all it stands for or else opt out of it. It is as simple as that. If you are a member of a club you cannot expect to decide what's good for you and what is not. If you don't like certain obligations, just resign. What if someone demands to introduce an image of BUDDAH or MOHAMMAD in a public place?. Let us not forget that we profess to Democratic and one of Europe's main rights is the right to free religious practice. It is also a part of our Constitution. What will be the authorities' decision ?. And what if the individuals take the case to the European Court and they are given the same rights as Christian images?. Then what ?. Defy the court's decision?. Is it legal?. So, let us be careful before we start condemning.
Galea. L (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
If the judgment is sought to be enforced in Malta or a similar case is brought up against Malta then we should leave the CoE and to hell with their judgments. No foreign court and foreigners should interfere with our traditions and culture.
Mary Borg (2 weeks, 2 days ago)
Jesus is not wanted in public anymore. Because they say, he offend and disturbs children He might as well pack up his cross and go hang up himself somewhere else. It's like the sad story of an abandoned dog that was not wanted anymore by his previous family. First they cuddled and loved him, but when the dog grew bigger they saw in him a menace to their children and booted him out of their home....his home. Like a piece of junk.

Tears.

Poll

Was the budget good for Malta?

  • yes
  • no
  • don't know
  • don't care


View results

Fun Stuff


Play Sudoku