I consider myself a judicious practicing Catholic. 

I might not be one of those who goes by the book from beginning to end but I do contribute to my share of rituals, have a strong nearness and an interest in the social teaching of the Church and consider myself as having a sturdy albeit multifarious relationship with Jesus Christ, in my opinion one of the biggest revolutionary personalities the World has ever seen.  He intrigues me with the positions he takes, with his strength of character, with his social persona and commitment to the cause.

Then again I must admit that I do have a problem with one or two sacraments, with some of the teachings that the Universal Church considers dogmas - but so what, who wouldn't have a diverse stance in an organization one's been brought up in and thoroughly betrothed?

In spite of this the Universal Church seems to be moving forward.

I must say that orchestrated or not, the demeanor of Pope Francis intrigues me. 

He is such a personality, a media magnet, a straightforward facade - bigger than life.  He seems to have a refreshed way of looking at things, guided by a theology that is centered and approximating the person and not the other way round.  He tries to understand the contexts, the cultures, the narratives and the history of the people he leads. 

This Universal Church with all the complexities it represents, with the secrecy that embeds the Vatican, with all the drifting away of what should be Christian in the way 'head office' operates, with all the financial and abuse scandals it carries in its conscious - seems to be, for the first time in many years, appraising where it stands and trying to go forward.

But the feeling I get once I start thinking about the Church in Malta is converse - it is a sad, wretched and full of anguish.

Whilst Pope Francis takes on the World with his Renault 4 our Bishops travel in pricey cars, live in pretty residences and palaces and enjoy the VIP treatment that seems to be embedded in every page of our protocols.

Whilst Pope Francis continually challenges the World and all the Christians to open up to others, our Bishops remain deafeningly silent.  One example that comes to mind is the 'no-comment upshot' to the Government's and Opposition's position to send back a tanker in the middle of the Mediterranean because one of the sailors was suspected to have Ebola symptoms (that turned out to be fallacious).

Whilst Pope Francis talks about engagement in the community we have parish priests and other religious who speak to the congregation as if they were a group of dense and dim-witted people that need to be told-off.

Heartrending indeed. 

A Church in Malta that got excited with what looked like a carefully selected Archbishop Pawlu Cremona was a let-down on many fronts.  This bloke has hardly taken-off, a situation compounded further by his medical condition but then still floats around, compelled to read sermons on the big occasions but absent for the most part. 

We got Bishop Mario Grech who still thinks that convictions and forcefulness, the 'this-is-how-it-is-argument' and tone have to be retained, a pitch that irritates and where people from time to time find themselves wanting to kick the prayer kneelers. 

And then there's Bishop Scicluna who has a destitute way of communicating that seems to leave people with more questions than answers.  The best media ploy that he manages to slide in as he sits comfortably during Xarabank is that he admits guilt when confronted and quoting the Bible when the push comes to shove.  And what about getting a nice picture as he locks the field glasses on to his eye balls watching 'the protected birds' (whilst the rest of the species can 'duck' themselves) - I'd better not comment on that one.

The Church seems to be tying a rope around its own neck. 

As attendances dwindle and we point the fault to hedonism, post-modernism, secularism, individualism and so many other 'isms', rather than asking why people are being pushed out because let's face it, it is no longer stimulating to go to Church.

The liturgy is boring, most of the priests are a complete debacle, don't have a clue on how to preach, are detached from reality, tedious, lackluster and uninteresting. 

Women are put to the side and the best roles we can think 'for them' is to press the enter button on the computer (for the power point) as the priest reads the Vangelu. 

It is a Church that hasn't got any grounding, is not located in communities, is not socio-politically engaged, sits on the fence and has a major problem with its identity. 

It is a Church focused on 'how it looks' rather than 'on what it says', has a problem with matching parish to priest, has no programme of engagement in the communities, is not interested in communities of practice, is drifting away from young people and making it a point to isolate, control, keep down a couple of priests and religious who are trying to do things differently. 

The Maltese Church is in meltdown.  The Curia is rendered down. 

The people in the Curia think that they have a God given right to do things as they please. 

Well people in the Curia;

• Can you tell me how I can persuade my children to come to Mass when it's as monotonous as they come?
• Can someone in there tell me how I can assure young people that the values propagated by the Church are still relevant?
• Can you tell me how I can explain to my daughter why men can have roles in the Church that a woman can never attain?
• Can someone tell me how the Church can be helpful as my wife and I go about trying to raise our kids, work our balls-off and still see the Church as a relevant institution that is there to support us rather than tell us what wrongs we've done?

I bet you're lost for words!

So there you go, let me tell you what my crystal ball is saying. 

I promise you that in 20 years time we will be talking about a society that had a Church - the ball is now in your court.