When times change, change with them
This was my column in The Malta Independent, last Thursday.
The Maltese outpost of the Catholic Church is in financial trouble. I will resist the urge to make wisecracks about Joseph Muscat, the mittilkless and electricity bills, and move on.
But may I just say what a relief it is to hear somebody own up to personal economic woes without blaming it on the government, or demanding that the government does something about it right now?
The irony is that this is one situation where it is clear that the government can and should do something about it, and that the state is very much to blame for those woes. The Church has been crippled because the welfare state, in Malta, has great big gaps which continue to be plugged by religious orders.
In the same way that another social service – this time, social housing – was and is still being provided largely at the expense of private landlords and landowners, through a mix of requisitioned property and rent laws which protect tenants paying risible rent, so the state freeloads off religious orders in the provision of care to abandoned children, the disabled, battered wives and old people.
Oh yes, and schooling, too, because there are thousands of children in Catholic schools whose parents are paying nothing at all.
The historical reason for the religious orders’ provision of these vocational services is that if they didn’t do it, nobody else would have. Babies would have been left to die in the gutter. Widows and abandoned women would have starved. The old and infirm would have tottered about the streets until they died of exposure. Only the children of the truly privileged would have learned how to read, write and count.
But as the welfare state grew, the role of religious orders shrank. Social mores changed too, and reduced that role still further. Fifty years ago there were many hundreds of abandoned children being fed, clothed, schooled and housed by religious orders. Now a baby left on the doorstep, so to speak, is a spectacularly rare event.
Yet still, Catholic orders in Malta have been doing far more than they should. I haven’t checked through the system of each one of the member states of the European Union, but from what I have seen so far, Malta appears to be the only one with absolutely no state provision for the housing and care of abandoned children.
This places a terrible burden on the religious orders, which is barely ameliorated by the financial contribution made by the state. It’s not just the money, either. There are all manner of stresses and responsibilities associated with caring for children.
It is the same with church-run homes like Dar il-Providenza, which looks after the severely disabled. When occasional announcements are made that it has run out of money and that immediate donations are needed to save it, I wonder to myself why this is happening. So what would the alternative be to private donations which keep the home running – putting those people out on the streets?
Dar il-Providenza was set up in the 1960s through private initiative. Before that, there was no residential home for the seriously disabled. Children born with severe disabilities were hidden away by their families like ghosts in the attic. But just because it was a private initiative in the 1960s doesn’t mean that the situation should have stayed that way for the next 50 years.
I find it hard to accept a situation where the state exploits private charity. Private charity should supplement social services and not replace them entirely in some fields or take up a huge part of the load.
The driving idea behind the welfare state is not just to make sure that those who need it are cared for, but also to make sure that they do not have to beg for this care and that they are not made wholly dependent on charity. I cannot bear the idea that even now, organisations are begging for money to help them look after the weak, disabled and abandoned. It is absolutely primitive, and it is humiliating for those who must live off charity.
I am not suggesting that the Catholic Church or religious orders be removed from the equation altogether. That would be pointless and unreasonable. The entire raison d’etre of some orders is community work, so depriving them of it would leave them without a purpose or focus.
But it is quite obvious that they are doing far more than what is fair or reasonable, and the more they strive to make up for the shortcomings of the state in this regard, the more the state sits back comfortably and lets them do it.
What we have here, effectively, is a situation in which the Catholic Church has to call for donations so that the government does not have to levy taxes. Just as with those situations where one person is deprived of his townhouse in perpetuity so that the government doesn’t have to use the anonymous taxes of the many to build a social housing flat, so the charitable donations of the relative few help the religious orders to keep going with the care of the vulnerable.
The key difference is that charity is voluntary and sporadic, and though the Church managed to pick up €9 million in donations last year, the amount falls year on year, and the negative gap between income and expenditure continues to grow.
The Church has been advised to make itself more appealing so as to be successful when trying to raise funds. But surely this is to miss the wood for the trees?
Last year, it spent €10.3 million on wages and salaries, for all the people it is forced to employ to deal with jobs it shouldn’t be doing in the first place, like looking after orphans, old and disabled people, and teaching children who should properly be in state schools.
It should turn those purely functional tasks over to the state and concentrate on its core religious mission. And the state should make sure that it is free and able to do so, by taking up the load itself.
33 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
I would like to pass a comment about freedom of expression in Malta.
Labour is arguing that PBS programmes are biased. I would like to say that not even NET TV is biased. When there are programmes on NET TV they are not biased they bring to the programme two Nationalist and two Labour and the presenter talks in a an impartial way.
The Nationalists are not afriad to be impartial on their own TV station, so why would they bother with bias on PBS? Super One TV programmes are almost all biased. Inkontri has four persons against a token PN politician. I think this is a bad foretaste of what is to come with PBS and a Labour government.
Labouris a BIG PROBLEM and OBSTACLE to our country.
Has anybody ever worked out what sort of income tax rate we would have to pay if the government were to finance the full cost of social services covered by the Church?
We would pay whatever is necessary.
“the church…to deal with jobs it shouldn’t be doing in the first place, like looking after orphans, old and disabled people”
According to their leader Jesus that’s actually what they should be doing, not wasting money on churches and feasts. Still the state should help.
A great article as usual. However, since the Catholic Church in Malta is in the red, why go on a school building spree?
Jo, to eliminate the stress on 11 year old children and their parents perhaps?
So that more children enter church schools immediately at a younger age instead of sitting for a highly competitive exam at an older age?
Another method would be to introduce the Italian otto per mille system, where income tax forms carry the option to redirect a percentage of the amount due for the requirements of the church. The idea is that Italians are willing to pay if they see where it’s going.
There is (or was) a similar system in Germany. You would give a very small monthly payment to your Church (Catholic, Luthern, etc).
It is a great idea. I am all for helping the vulnerable.
Agreed
The Community Chest Fund distributed around two million euros recently, a trend that seems to be on the rise.
The real question is: to what extend should social benefits be given and how to keep it sustained.
I believe that the Community Chest Fund is surrounded with too much hype, and that it is one of the causes of the financial problems of the Church.
A lot of social and business organisations save their donation money to be paid to the Community Chest Fund in return for some advertising during the broadcasting of L-Istrina, the annual live event on PBS.
I do not see why the cases covered by the CCF should not be financed by the State and why those cases should be paid for out of people’s generosity.
However, the Church needs to re-organise its finances.
The model it uses to finance the Dar Tal-Providenza proves to be effective.
It advertises the cause, and the money flows in, because the public knows very well what Dar Tal-Providenza stands for. I think that the Church can do the same with its other homes. The public should be informed about the mission of each home, and then the money will come in.
“Before the advent of Id-Dar Tal-Providenza in the late sixties there was nowhere on these islands where severely disabled children could be cared for.”
The state accomodated a number at the poor house at LImgieret.
There were still a few there in the 1970s, including a severely autistic boy and a young lady with very bad epilepsy.
In those days older children who were either abandoned or who had nowhere to live were sometimes kept at Mount Carmel Hospital. When the Church institutions were full, it was either the mental hospital or the street.
I lived through this. I shudder when I think of the associated suffering.
I am taking the opportunity to put these facts on record.
The problem with state provided services is the sense of anonymity due a tendency to apply economies of scale.
Orphanages and homes for handicapped children managed by the church are found in every major town and village. The philosophy is to provide care and support for the families themselves and maintain a sense of community.
What was has to be underlined is how this model, considered costly, offsets problems usually missed by five year planning.
I forget how many times my parents used to take us on a joint outing to Buskett with children from the orphanage run by the sisters of the sacred heart.
Everyone in Zurrieq considers that orphanage as their own.
The sense of perspective one gets when interaction with these children becomes quasi domestic, is an education in itself. The word charity becomes redundant.
It is one way to make real friends.
Daphne, on Bondi+ this week Lou showed clips of Fenech Adami’s speeches when he was in parliament. To hear somebody so calm using suchy strong language in parliament shows the frightening state of affairs when Labour was in government in the 1980s.
And now they have the nerve to call those years “the golden years”.
[Daphne – When they say ‘golden’, they mean golden for themselves personally.]
History clearly shows that the MLP encouraged violence against Maltese people who didn’t support them. People must be fools to vote for these bunch. Democracy needs an opposition but the old timers of the Labour Party have blood stained on them.
Why are the PN’s communication people doing nothing to educate the people about the MLP?
Easy. Because people have become bored of hearing the same things time and time again and it would only have any effect on the core vote.
On the other hand, it could have an adverse effect on the pale blue voters if they go overboard.
But currently they are mentioning the past and all of that, because their surveys show a lack of interest and a lot of disgruntlement from the core PN vote who are threatening not to vote on election day
Frankly, I still need to think what people are disgruntled about, because they have homes, jobs, cars in their (own) garages and a holiday booked for next summer.
Why don’t we just admit that we’re a nation of “geddumna fix-xghir”,, behaving like spoilt brats? What about all the millions who have lost jobs and homes? We’re still afloat and certainly it is not due to any good luck.
We’ve had it so good for twenty odd years that we’ve come to take this as the norm, for granted.
A real shame.
The church schools ask for pitifully small ‘donations’ – around 450 euros per scholastic year – and some parents refuse to pay even this risible amount.
Essentially the church schools are in the bizarre situation of having to provide a quality education without being able to charge enough to cover their costs.
The lottery system has to go. If the church wishes to take in poor and truly deserving cases then let all applicants be means tested.
Which it previously was.
The lottery system is an insult to meritocracy, as is tampering with a school’s autonomy when it comes to formation.
I find myself able to distinguish who’s been to which college after a few minutes of conversation.
And bring back St.Aloysius’ midweek break. It was crucial in imparting a sense of individual responsibility, camaraderie and ease with others’ differences.
I agree with your arguments. However I feel that there is an element of mismanagement of its resources, because with all that property they should be raking it in.
If it’s about profit and loss then the Church should be run on more commercial lines. Not in terms of compromising its charitable work, but in terms of fully utilising its resources, which appear to be sorely underutilised.
Remember, many properties were bequeathed to the Church on condition that they would not be sold off.
To my mind, the Church should dismantle the Ecclessiastical Tribunal, and return to a judicial process closer to Early Christianity. This way it would save hundreds of thousands of euros.
There is no need for lawyers in religious annulments. People should go there, be asked to give their facts (a good “inquisitor” should be able to extract the relevant information from the parties), the defender of the bond argues why the marriage should be valid, and the learned priests (who sit as judges) decide. Why lawyers should be involved is beyond me. Unless it’s all meant to be a Guelph reenactment, or an expensive ego-trip.
By accepting that the State has sole jurisdiction on marriages, the Church would be doing a real service to its members while saving loads of money.
If the Church informs the conscience of secular judges it would have achieved its aim.
” it shouldn’t be doing in the first place like looking after orphans,old and disabled people and teaching children…”
So what should they be doing, apart from organising village festas?
[Daphne – It’s not the Catholic Church which organises village feasts, but band clubs and fireworks groups. All religions are there to minister to the soul, not the body, Silvio. They looked after the body before the welfare state came into being, out of necessity. The weak and the vulnerable should not, in a developed economy, be dependent on charity for their survival. People need religion for esoteric reasons, not earthly ones. When churches become overly taken up with earthly concerns that should be the preserve of the state, they become just another organisation. That’s why we’re now seeing all these prayer groups and prayer movements that are, in a way, breakaway churches.]If one takes a look at this year’s accounts,the Church had spent something like a million Euro on the Pope’s visit.which was an extraordinary expenses, if it hadn’t done so it would have ended with a small profit..
The church footed the bill of the Papal visit and the country as a whole benefitted from the publicity given on all the major networks . The country was looking at its best then.
Great boost for tourism
But tell me how can you take care of a soul in a body that is dying of hunger and all imaginable diseases. How can you preach the love of God to someone who is watching his children die of hunger?
[Daphne – If you read my article again, Silvio, you will notice that I wrote about how the Catholic Church (as did other religions) stepped in to do these things when there was no welfare state. It still is a primary care where there is no welfare state. But it is the welfare state that should be the default carer, not the Catholic Church or any other charity.]
The Church is in duty bound to educate and not only the soul, but first of all the body. It is its mission and duty, just as it is our duty to help the Church in its work.
I agree that the weak and vulnerable should not have to depend on charity for their survival. But what do you do in the meantime, wait for the government for years and years to decide? Or wait for L-istrina,and watch politicians, rush on stage, to show us how much they care for the needy?
[Daphne – No, you begin serious negotiatons with the government to transfer all these burdens to the proper shoulders of the state, while maintaing everything in a holding position until the transfer can be made. Silvio, it is shocking that in the 21st century, Malta has no state care for abandoned, disabled or homeless children.]
The Church is right in helping the needy. We are wrong in not helping the church enough.
That property was transferred to the State in the early 1990s. In return, the state pays the teachers’ salaries; at least of those teachers who teach main subjects.
Great article
People seem to forget that the Church schools are heavily subsidised by the government. It is true that the donations are not obligatory, but most parents pay the donation, as they should. Some schools have a minimum donation amount, while others leave it up to the parents.
Like any social commentator worth her salt, I find most of what you have to say about the Catholic Church very valuable most of the time.
I think that for someone like me who has Catholic sensibilities, you come up with the best analyses. Fr Joe Borg’s comment is also spot on but then he is a priest – which does not follow, of course, for I have read some dodgy commentary by some priests.
One of the Church’s missions is to minister to people in need. Through this visible activity the Church raises awareness about social injustice.
This leads to having a political role in the classic sense of the word. This is what she is good at.
When the Church went beyond this classic definition of politics, things got very messy indeed.
So no, I do not advocate for the easing of the burden of taking care of the poor (used in the wide sense too), for that would impoverish the Church to no end.
This said, however, the government should not lean on the Catholic Church as a crutch but should be a partner in providing for the people in society who fall through the net.
I agree with the article. There is one idea however which I would like to comment on.
The State should never be the default carer as it should never be the default educator or employer.
I believe these things are too important to leave them for the State to handle.
To the contrary, I believe such things should be done by societies closest to the individual whether it’s the family, church or the local pigeon club. People do feel a sense of belonging and perhaps even a shared identity with these but never with a State which in itself is an artificial thing.
I believe the State should be there as a last resort, when all things fail not as the first resort. If all charity had to be done by the State we would surely be a sad society.
[Daphne – When it is done by the state, AP, it is not charity. That is the point.]
It’s not just the Church.
How many of you know that the Deaf Association was forced to employ signing interpreters, because the government wouldn’t? Without exception, no other country does this. All of them simply cannot believe that the state actually refused to help the deaf directly.
In fact, the government, when Louis Galea was minister of education, closed down the special school for the deaf and arbitrarily shoved deaf pupils into the mainstream.
I mean, what difference would another 3 or 4 salaries have made to the 30,000 already on our payroll?
Unfortunately, because the deaf community is so small, underfunded and resourceless, nobody in power cares and nobody in journalism wants to pick up the horror-story – for that is what it is – and blow it wide open to the public. If anybody out there is interested in doing so, they can contact me.
As in many other sectors, Malta is living an artificial reality, as it were.
It’s the Church which is bearing the brunt of so many social problems.
Indeed, the Church is doing much more than it should.
The Church does have a duty to fill in the gaps, in my view, particularly in view of the fact that it was Christ himself who started filling gaps in his society and the Church should emulate the life of Christ.
However, the situation we are facing is indeed absurd because we are collectively doing what our ancestors used to do with the disabled, the sick and illegitimate children: now we don’t hide the individuals but we hide from our responsibility to care for them.
Besides, I still can’t understand why church schooling, which is private schooling, should be practically free of charge. I know the reasons which led to it but what is the philosophy behind it? The real philosophy?
This is the water-and-electricity mentality (as I call it) which is so rampant in Malta.
We all want to consume as much water and electricity as we possibly can but few Maltese were ready to really foot the bill by paying what is really due for their consumption rather than a fraction due to some subsidy or other.
This leads to artificial financial comfort which becomes unsustainable (for the State and ultimately for the taxpayers). In other words, we are not ready to really pay for what the actual product or service costs but rather what we think it should cost: nothing or pretty much almost nothing.
The same goes for the national social bill: for how long can the Church possibly keep on footing the social bill?
This is artificial and instead of criticizing the Church for its anti-divorce stand (which was, after all, fully predictable given its teachings) we should be thankful as a nation that the Church in Malta is footing the bill and is giving the most vulnerable amongst us a roof, food, clothing and an education, not to speak of medical and psychological care, in some instances.
It’s definitely high time that we assume our responsibility.
Well done indeed for bringing this up. It is yet another big elephant in the room, which we choose to ignore.
I am not against payment of ’donations’ to church schools, but one should point out that the Church in Malta negotiated a deal with the government by handing over its properties to fund the payment of the school staff salaries, so that parents could send their children to a Church school for ‘free’.
It is worth noting that when a church school employee is on maternity leave, the school has to fork out the salary of the temporary replacement of that employee.
As time passed, many parents who are well off (many of them Labour-leaning) didn’t pay any donations to their children’s church schools which needed new computer labs, to upgrade their class rooms, or normal maintenance works.
So some of the schools devised certain ways to raise funds which can be burdensome to the parents. There are other schools which never ask for donations and organise one event in a year, normally some sort of a marathon, where they raise nearly enough money to fund the school expenses.
There was one specific school which did what it liked and even had an extra class for corrupt paying parents, or where the list of ‘lucky’ students was bigger than the ones drawn in the lottery. Ara hallini!
Dar tal-Providenza through Father Martin Micallef’s managment skills trimmed (or rather pruned) a lot of needless expenses.
The introduction of the euro played a part in this deficit, because one rarely sees fifty cents or euro coins in the church collection.
I am in favour of an ‘otto per mille’ system.
Tax payers will instruct the IRD every year to have an established percentage of their income tax directed to this or that voluntary entity which is burdened with a social responsibility, like Arka respite centre, Dar tal-Providenza, Puttinu cares, YMCA, Salvation Army and what have you.
To be fair the Maltese state provides a network of educational and medical institutions, including old people’s homes. It also set up agencies such as Sedqa and Appogg for tackling social problems.
On the other hand it is true that religious organizations provide the bulk and a wide range of social work.
There is nothing wrong that we have church schools and other church run institutions for the elderly, orphans and others in need. Social work is part of the Church’s mission. The Christian belief based on love for others is put into practice.
The State, especially in the current circumstances, as happens in Church schools should subsidise or pay the salaries of the employees of the religious charitable institutions. In the long term it should plan to widen its services and provide for state run care for the handicapped, orphans and other people in need.
An area lacking in appropriate structures is that of young offendors. There was an approved school, but this was closed down. The only institutions available for these persons are prison or Mount Carmel hospital.