So the Curia wants us to believe that it did not order priests to hold “mass meetings” against divorce during the feast of Our Lady of Sorrows. It implies that it was just a coincidence that priests all over Malta and Gozo used the occasion to speak against divorce – they were not told to do it, it just occurred to their collective brain.

You can pull the other one, if you like.

The Church (in Malta) had said that it did not want to involve itself in the debate on divorce, but now it seems that it has changed its mind. When asked for comments following a series of calls from people who were “disgusted” with the way such a sacred feast was manipulated by the Church, the Curia’s PRO said last week that the “Church and its members, as persons who are interested in the family, must enter the divorce debate”.

Now this same PRO has taken leave of absence from his full-time job to lead the anti-divorce campaign’s media machine. Officially, he’s not working for the Curia until the referendum is held. But, to me, it shows that the Curia and the anti-divorce movement is one and the same thing. Hand in hand with the government, that is.

When the issue of divorce kicked off last July, the Church had said that it did not want to go on a crusade. What happened last Friday week – and what will presumably happen each time priests have the chance, including today, Easter Sunday – was clearly the opposite of what the Curia had previously said it would do.

It will even organise what will be known as the family day – another chance for a mass meeting that will be addressed by the Archbishop – just two weeks before the referendum is held.

The United Nations established 15 May as the day for the family in 1992, but no Family Day celebrations were ever held in Malta. It has taken the Church 19 years to organise something on the day, and coincidentally it will happen on the eve of the referendum on divorce.

And they told us that it has nothing to do with the campaign for a “no” vote.

You can pull the other one again, if you like.

It could be that the Curia is afraid that it will lose the battle and has resorted to a change of tactics, moving on from the status of an observer with an interest to one that is directly involved in the issue. It is a stand similar to that taken by the Nationalist Party, which is campaigning hard against divorce through its media.

They are campaigning for a “no” for different reasons, but both stand to lose heavily in the eventuality of a “yes” win. And, let us not forget, the “no” camp has one hurdle to overcome, while the “yes” camp has two – as a “yes” victory in the referendum will not be enough for divorce to be introduced. If divorce does make it past the first obstacle, it would still need to be approved by Parliament, and some Nationalist MPs have already said that they do not care what the people vote for. Very fair indeed.

A victory for the yes camp will be a big blow to the Church, as the last bastion of Catholic Malta will fall. Likewise, the PN will be a big loser, in political terms, if the divorce referendum goes through.

The thing is, a victory for the Church and the PN – the masterminds behind the rich “no” campaign – will take Malta back decades. It would mean that we have not moved on, that we are still anchored in a past that is on the history books in other countries. We speak of making leaps forward, and are proud to compare ourselves with Europe when we achieve better results. Well, we have been left behind on this one because if we fail to take the chance that has come our way, ours will be a return to the past.

Let’s go back to the feast of Our Lady of Sorrows. The Church knows that thousands attend the services on the day, and the attendees include hundreds who do not turn up for any other Church occasion during the rest of the year. The sorrows endured by Our Lady make Her human, and many people identify themselves with the pain and suffering She went through. Much of this suffering is linked to personal difficulties, including marriage breakdowns. The procession is seen as a chance for repentance, prayer and goodwill, and for many it is as close as they get to the Church and religion.

The Church took advantage of this situation, knowing that there won’t be another time – until the referendum takes place – that the churches will be as packed as they were on that day. There may not have been an email issuing an order to priests to speak against divorce – for fear that it might have gone astray – but I am sure that there were tacit guidelines for what priests should do and say on the day.

It could have actually backfired on the Church, as there were many who complained that the Church had made it obvious that it was using the feast of Our Lady of Sorrows to pass on its message against divorce. That many of them took the trouble to phone newspapers – as they did with The Malta Independent – to express their “disgust” at the way the Church exploited the feast is also highly indicative of the negative sentiment that was aroused by such behaviour.

What was surprising is that many of the calls came from people who profess themselves as being devout Catholics and regular churchgoers. It annoyed them that priests were blatantly ignoring the significance of the feast, and using if for their own purposes and reasons. It irked them that they showed no respect towards those who did not go to the service to hear a lecture about divorce, but to spend time in prayer. And the ones who were hurt the most were people in difficult situations, as they are seeing the Church closing the door on them.

Divorce, it must be repeated, is not a matter of faith, but a civil right. People who get divorced will not be able to remarry in Church; so divorce will not change anything for the Church.

But it will change the lives of people who are stuck in a broken marriage, perhaps one in which they are being abused physically, emotionally or sexually, and who seek the chance to move away from the sorrow of their failed relationship.

[email protected]