Archbishop Paul Cremona
Promote stable marriages, strong families
One of the things that stood out clearly in the last general elections was that both major political parties promised the electorate that they all stood for defending the family. It was a promise which was very welcome for the Maltese population at large.
Even within the discussion for or against divorce, contributions to the media on the subject begin with the proviso that all are in favour of strengthening the family.
However, a real discussion on how to strengthen the family, and the State's possibilities of intervention in this regard, have been lacking. If this discussion does not also focus on practical issues, I am afraid that all these words will remain no more than wishful thinking and will render no more than lip-service to the family. It will also remain lip-service if no definite and proactive plan is decided upon and actuated.
In the past, both the parties in government and opposition have made suggestions with regard to the family, and these were, and are, most welcome. These centred mostly on financial matters and family-friendly policies.
However, no clear positions have been taken to strengthen the moral fibre of the people who enter into a stable relationship in marriage. Maybe our social policy can be innovative in this, maybe even being a pace-setter for other countries.
I would like to contribute to this discussion with some ideas and suggestions.
The first step is to have a clear idea and firm will to have strong and stable families. We also have to be clear about the fact that this cannot come about in any other way than through a stable marriage. To achieve this we need to invest in the education of our children and youngsters, especially helping them to understand and live values and skills needed to achieve stability in marriage. These are different from any other interpersonal relationship.
Education towards stability in marriage goes further. It requires understanding the seriousness of a lifelong commitment, of converting conflicts into love, rather than backing away. Is this being covered in our lessons, both on the social and on the religious levels?
A serious education is also needed to help young people convert their experience of family life to present-day circumstances: based on mutual respect rather than on a cosiness which rests only on the knowledge that your spouse will not leave you whatever your actions; and on the fact that when both spouses go out to work, household chores have to be divided, whatever the upbringing given in the context of a working husband-housewife marital set-up.
The second thing is that sexual education has to be connected to love if we believe in stable relationships. The messages launched by some departments are to have 'safe' sex. But do these messages help to integrate one's sexual instincts to be directed towards a future of stability in marriage?
Two considerations on this issue: is it possible that when we approve of casual sex, we are telling young people not to be involved on a personal level, because it will hurt so much when the partner leaves so easily? Is it possible for a young man to look at a woman as a possible life-companion when pornography has made him look at a person of the opposite sex as an object of lust and, perhaps worse, when girls are accepting this role?
The third is that in our society, young people are continuously being bombarded with images and messages. This may mean that most of our youngsters do not get the chance, and perhaps do not even have the ability, to reflect on and choose among these messages.
Is it right to tell young people to enter into a stable relationship when all the messages lead them elsewhere? Is it just to leave them on their own, to find the strength from their own moral fibre, without providing them with other messages which will help them to take other decisions? Could the State, if it believes in stable marriages, help convey messages in this respect through the media?
I remember years ago in England, seeing on TV victims of accidents talking about their experience and campaigning for safe driving. Could we have an innovative campaign whereby people, spouses or children who have passed through marriage breakdowns, speak about their suffering, thereby perhaps helping others understand better the consequences of their actions? Perhaps we could hear a woman talking about the consequences of her husband's unfaithfulness and their separation destroying her dream; or a young child, the victim of a marriage breakdown asking: "Doesn't anybody speak about my rights?" This would help some to find a deeper motive in love to overcome some difficult situations in married life.
12 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Jean-Pierre Aquilina
Aug 25th 2008, 08:38
Archbishop Paul Cremona's conmments make interesting reading, and I fully agree with his views.
I believe that education to consider seriously commitments, particularly marriage, should start at the school age. Cana courses, unfortunately, are delivered too late - when the couple have entered into the commitment to get married. Such courses should be delivered to our teens - so that they can understand the true values of a relationship. At a time when the media has taken over the minds of our childre, I believe that this would be a step in the right direction to counter those negative messages which the media are bombarding our children with.
On the point when both spouses work, it is worth noting that society in general has not adjusted to this phenomenon, placing undue pressure on the married couple. As things stand, the female partner has to be a wife, mother, bread earner, housewife, etc, and the male - just a husband and bread earner. I ask both the Church and the state to educate society in order to help such couples, thus leading such couples to a healthier marriage.
Kenneth Cassar
Aug 25th 2008, 08:18
I shall limit my comment to one sentence, since much has already been said about the rest.
I wish to point out that, while certainly well-intentioned, the suggestion to have separated spouses on TV speaking about (or against) their "deserted husbands/wives" is very dangerous, to say the least.
Ramon Casha
Aug 25th 2008, 06:06
I agree with most of Paul Cremona's article. There are many things that can be done - by the church too, in its churches and schools - which will help promote stable families. For instance schools should steer children away from the old family model in which household tasks are the wife's domain and employment is the husband's. Why shouldn't boys also learn how to boil an egg or take care of household accounts? How about the church trying to use its influence to steer society away from weddings that cost so much? Some couples are taking out bank loans for their wedding party. There are many things that can cause a relationship to fail, including financial issues, infidelity, spousal abuse and others. Take spousal abuse for instance. I'm fairly sure that in some cases this can be seen coming in school bullying - something that has never been taken seriously by schools.
J. DeGiovanni
Aug 24th 2008, 20:14
Like the Good Shepherd that he is, our archbishop cares for his flock. He cannot remain passive when confronted with so much suffering resulting from broken marriages. What he is saying comes from the heart of a truly compassionate father who cares for those entrusted to him.
When solving a problem one does not simply try to solve the resulting effect without diagnosing the cause. Treating the effect alone, would never really solve the original problem. Secondly, if you start your reasoning from a false premise [e.g. that casual sex does not affect the person’s ability to love in the true sense of the word], then the resulting solution will be always false as well. The archbishop is pointing out some of the main causes leading to marriage failure. Our society has accepted a hedonistic mentality and even the thought of speaking out against these causes e.g. easy access to porn, smacks of intolerance and loss of personal freedom. Our society is sowing the wind and reaping the whirlwind. A solution that does not go to the root of the problem will always be a false one. Divorce will not solve any problems. It will simply multiply existing ones.
Christine Galea
Aug 24th 2008, 17:50
Archbishop Cremona's insights are wise and humane. May I respectfully suggest that the campaign which he is recommending will also include personal witness from spouses who, with God's grace, have made a success of their marriages and who form part of 'happy' families; as well as even stronger witness from other couples who have struggled and are still struggling in their relationships- and who in spite of that - are fully committed to their marriage. Their stories could also serve as a motive to people who may be considering an easy way out of their difficult situation.
Joe Tabone-Adami
Aug 24th 2008, 17:25
Thank you, dear Archbishop Cremona, for your fatherly and sage contribution. Regarding the suggestion in the last paragraph: the Maltese adage goes "staqsi lil min hu mgarrab". How right and appropriate! Some of us will surely remember Elisabetta Gardini who in the early or middle nineties used to co-host a RAI programme called "Europa, Europa", if I remember correctly. She vanished from the public eye and last year re-appeared in a TV programme discussing family matters. Her marriage, she explained, had gone to the rocks - and added that the utter misery she had been through as a result she certainly wished no one would have to face. Incidentally, Ms Gardini was no superficial or frivolous show-girl. I concluded that she knew what she was talking about. Many more certainly did.
d.attard
Aug 24th 2008, 17:04
Dear Mr Farrugia,
Your impression that
Governments, since 1987, have seen to it that University is easily accessible to one and all, and with stipends!!!!
is wrong.
Re marriage with no frills, this is stated to endorse the Bishop's wise opinion that reflects reality:
Quote: ... young people are continuously being bombarded with images and messages. This may mean that most of our youngsters do not get the chance, and perhaps do not even have the ability, to reflect on and choose among these messages.
Is it right to tell young people to enter into a stable relationship when all the messages lead them elsewhere? Is it just to leave them on their own, to find the strength from their own moral fibre, without providing them with other messages which will help them to take other decisions? Could the State, if it believes in stable marriages, help convey messages in this respect through the media? UNQUOTE
Franco Farrugia
Aug 24th 2008, 16:12
A valid point made by the Archbishop is the following: '(family life) ... based on mutual respect rather than on a cosiness which rests only on the knowledge that your spouse will not leave you whatever your actions;
May I say, how appropriate, too. Too many husbands and fathers believe in this - that howevermuch they mistreat their wives or partners, they will not be left alone; however much they are unfaithful, their partners will never take that step.
And it is this that I find somewhat contradictory in this article: so, the Church deems it appropriate for that union to continue, even when that 'mutual respect' is already gone.
All of us, well-meaning persons, want to have stable marriages and strong families, but this simply is not reality. No matter what ANY government does, there will be unstable marriages and weak families, and for these, the best way, even for the children themselves, is for the partners to live apart, and consequently, for those who require it, to get divorced, so as to have the possibility, however hypothetically, to start afresh.
To have 'stable marriages, strong families', to my mind is like wishing to live in a fantasy world.
Franco Farrugia
Aug 24th 2008, 16:07
So, after having read what Mgr Cremona had to say, do we conclude that
- we have to somehow close down the Internet and preclude a good portion of content from reaching our Maltese users, the same way China does?
- we have to re-enact laws which forbid any citiziens, young and not young, from receiving pornographic content - again, government censorship?
- we have to start a programme in schools whereby students are brainwashed as to what constitutes a real family, according to the Catholic Church, when in fact we know it is a reality that men and women are living within various other family structures which one simply cannot ignore?
- we have to get approval of the Catholic Church in order to promote sex education?
Franco Farrugia
Aug 24th 2008, 15:58
@ d. attard - Forgive me, but the example you bring, is flawed:
At 22 and with all those qualifications, Miss X probably also has a degree - Governments, since 1987, have seen to it that University is easily accessible to one and all, and with stipends!!!!
Armed with a degree in education, your Miss X can easily find a job in the education sector, thus earning a very modest salary to start with (continuing up the ladder to become a slightly modest salary!) and having less than 50 hrs a week, and certainly having more than 600 euros a month.
Being such an educated young woman, I am sure that your Miss X will realise that she doesn't need, oh, so many frills in her marriage as to cost her 21,000 euros and decides to follow her and her partner's list of priorities - perhaps even to the point of having a mere family banquet after her nuptials! Certainly, not amounting to so many thousands of euros!
CERTAINLY, YOUR MISS X IS NO CANDIDATE TO THE 'QUICKLY-WORKING GROWING POOR'.
So, ... your point you were making?
David Wain
Aug 24th 2008, 11:43
Is our learned archbishop actually suggesting that the health department stops its safe sex campaign?
d.attard
Aug 24th 2008, 11:35
How to strengthen marriages:
Protect members of society from practices harmful to the individual.
Miss X is a 22 year old lady who is keen to marry and set up a family. She has 12 O levels 4 A levels with top marks, and als has work experience.
yet the only work she can find is as a teacher on a 'self-employed' basis. This means she works 50 hours a week, having no holidays and no sick-leave etc, earning Lm260 (Euro 600) a month 'in season'.
Inquiring on organising a no-frill marriage festivity, she realises that the marriage festivities themselves cost Euro21,000.
She is not a member of the unemployed community but she is surely a candidate for the quickly-growing working-poor.
Her only option is to drift and possibly become a single mother when she nears the 30 year old mark.
So when Government boasts of low unemployment, who stands to point at the real issues?