Martin Scicluna, Valletta
Divorce - the do-nothing apologists
Some three weeks ago, I challenged Roamer, who had commented disparagingly on the think-tank report, 'For Worse, For Better: Re-marriage After Legal Separation', of which I am the lead author, to answer four questions:
What are his solutions to the rising tide of broken marriages in Malta? Should a particular religious view on marriage prevail? Do our legislators have a duty and a responsibility to seek solutions to this problem which are in the interests of justice and the common good of society as a whole?
And does he acknowledge that giving legal recognition to second relationships, which are marriages in all but name, by permitting remarriage after legal separation, can only advance the institution of marriage, not weaken it?
I have been abroad on business, but my attention has been drawn to Roamer's reply of June 7, in which he fails to answer a single one of those questions. Instead, he quibbles, as is his wont when presented with arguments which he finds difficult to refute.
When somebody bases his criticism of a comprehensive report on a false reading of what it says, or a total misunderstanding of the legislative proposals made in it, or an inconsequential listing of reports not covered by my bibliography as a way of distracting from having to refute (or, horror of horrors, concede) the over-riding arguments for change it deploys, it is a tacit admission either that he is too intellectually bankrupt and incapable of deploying counter-arguments to support his own case, or too intellectually lazy to do so.
Worse, following in the footsteps of that arch-propagandist Chesterton, Roamer could not resist dragging the totally unrelated question of abortion into the argument.
At least, Fr Joe Borg in his piece, also of June 7, attempted to justify his position by repeating his plea for "a thorough and serious examination of the state of marriage and the family" before, as he says, not excluding arriving at a position where "in a particular social situation, divorce could be seen, even by practising Catholics, as the lesser of two evils".
What is it that he does not understand about the 160 per cent increase in the number of broken marriages between 1995 and 2005.
What more evidence does he require that marital breakdown is now a fact of Maltese society before, in justice, in compassion and in charity, he feels that something should be done about it?
Popular Stories
In Discussion
52 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Joseph Meli
Jul 23rd 2009, 10:14
@Lino Apap: The Government and other institutions interested in this matter, such as the Church, have to study in depth so as one would be more careful before one can consider the introduction of divorce in the Maltese islands.
Good to mentioned is also that the European Court for Human Rights in a sentence dated 18-12-86, in the case Johnston & Others vs Ireland, Johnston & others lost their case, because the Court did not find that Article 8 of the Human Rights obliged the country (in this case Ireland) to introduce divorce or to help the adults to better recognize their relationship.
One of the Judges was a Maltese, and the same thing can probably be stated in the case of Malta when we are stating that divorce is a civil right and out constitution gives a clear picture of our actual Christian/catholic faith. Then the case has to be taken into consideration to all these fact before one should act.
Joseph Meli
Jul 23rd 2009, 10:12
@ Lino Apap: This is nothing to do as you wished: According to the Social Affairs editor, namely John Carvel of the Guardian on 28th March, 2008 stated: “In a recent report from Office of National Statistics it showed that the number of marriages in 2006 was the lowest for 110 years and this indicated a pattern of social upheaval.” he further stated “more than 45% of marriages will end in divorce and another 45% in the death of one of the partner, and only 10% would make it for their diamond wedding anniversary in 2068.” In the report it also stated “the chances of relationship breakdown are even greater for cohabiting couples who have chosen not to marry (and this fact is already happening in Malta too)”
Due to divorce, children of such parents are more likely to finish up in this situation and the state would be in a burden with the ever increase of further criminality acts. So would this be good for our Government expenses. Lets try first to find a better solution than opening for a divorce case without first trying to solve the differences of the couples as other countries did!!
Lino Apap
Jul 21st 2009, 17:46
@Joseph Meli - I did not ask you for a history of the Catholic Church becuase this is NOT the issue here. Divorce is a civil matter and has NOTHING to do with faith or religion. I am not afraid of stating my beliefs for the simple reason that they are not in question here. You say and I quote "I..do..not expect others to impose other form of social systems on others that goes against our religion". Sorry, but I and others are NOT imposing anything on anyone. It is you and your ilk who are imposing their beliefs and the dogma of their faith onto others and not the other way around.
It is you and people like you who stand on your holier-than-thou pulpits and judge others simply becuase they either do not share your religious beliefs or even do not interpret the same religion in the same way. Come on Mr. Meli come off your high-and-mighty throne and learn to live and let live - practise some of the humanity, forgiveness and neighbourly love that people like you preach so assiduously!
Joseph Meli
Jul 18th 2009, 14:22
@Lino Apap: (Continuation..from...page....two:....This...is...my final.page..three)............................But, do understand that even if you had been married in Civil, both couples do make a pledge to respect each other through loyalty, love and kindness and through some sort of devotion...Am I correct or not. However, since you had shown readers that you are afraid to state if you are a Catholic or not, but it is a fundamental duty of the Church to reaffirm strongly, what the synod fathers did, in the doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage is quite clear. All those in our times must consider it to be too difficult or indeed impossible to be bound to one person for the whole of life. To those that had been caught up in a culture that rejects the indissolubility of marriage and openly mocks the commitment of spouses to fdelity, I just pity him. Their is only ONE..GOD..to which..when one leaves..this..world...for...the..other...must...be...ready...to...face...him.
The Church rightly has its own position, so I do believe that religion is a personal matter and if I'm Catholic, it's up to me to analyses the ten commandments to observe, but..I..do..not expect others to impose other form of social systems on others that goes against our religion.
Joseph Meli
Jul 18th 2009, 14:14
@Lino Apap: (Continuation..from...page....one:....This...is....page...two)..............The..Ecumenical...Council of the Roman..Catholic Church considered to be one of the Church's most important councils, the excellence of the celibati state was reaffirmed, concubinage condemned and the validity of marriage made dependent upon its being performed before a priest and two witnesses, although the lack of a requirement for parental consent ended a debate that had proceeded from the twelfth century. In the case of a divorce the right of the innocent party to marry again was denied so long as the other party is alive, even if the other may have committed adultery.
In Marriage both couples pledge their love, loyalty, and devotion to each other, as long as they are both alive. I presume that who ever had done this pledge in church when they got married, is until death do us part? But, even if you had been married in Civil, both couples do make a pledge to respect each other through loyalty, love and kindness through devotion.Since you are afraid to state if you are a Catholic or not, but it is a funddamental duty of the Church to reaffirm strongly, as..the...synod fathers did, the doctrine of the indissolubility of..marriage.....(Contined on page three)
Joseph Meli
Jul 18th 2009, 14:06
@Lino Apap: It's useless of..writing back to back again, this..would never end, because I did reply to you..quite clearly, that if marriage..had been..consumed in a Catholic..Church, it means that one must have made "an act of marriage, witnessed by the Father, and could not be dissolved to suit..mankind's wishes..or..to his..carnal..nature..with the..loss..of knowledge of God, the Father. What God has joined together, let no man shall place asunder" Marriage in the eyes..of God..is a..covenant which the husband&wife make with..each..other..and..with God as their..witness.
In the definition in the Wikipedia on divorce it also states that in many European countries had institutions similar to the "marriage of the acceptable sentence". In 1566, the edict of the Council of Trent was proclaimed denying Catholics of any form of marriage not executed in a religious ceremony before a priest and two witnesses. Council of Trent (Latin: Concilium Tridentinum) was in the 16th century Ecumenical Council of the Roman Catholic Church. Considered to be one of the Church's most important councils, the excellence of the celibati state was reaffirmed, concubinage condemned and the validity of marriage made dependent upon its being performed before a priest and two witnesses,........(To be Continued......)
Lino Apap
Jul 16th 2009, 13:23
@ Joseph Meli - With all respect, my beliefs are none of your business because I am NOT discussing religion. I am discussing divorce. Wikipedia defines divorce as the "dissolution of marriage" and " is the final termination of a marriage, canceling the legal duties and responsibilities of marriage and dissolving the bonds of matrimony between two persons". This is what this discussion is all about and NOT God, religion, bibles and what have you. The whole argument is about the LEGAL and CIVIL (as opposed to religious) dissolution of a marriage, a marriage that would have been dead at the Separation stage which ideally should occur 3 to 5 years BEFORE the final act of divorce. I guess one could interpret divorce as a legal certificate that the legal bond between the couple has now been dissolved and the couple can go their separate ways and re-marry should either one of them so wish.
Pray tell me what is so bloody wrong with that - from a legal point of view!
Joseph Meli
Jul 15th 2009, 16:13
Living in a Free Democratic Country...Malta, as..Catholics, guided by none other than the Holy Bible for our lives. As Catholics, d'Holy bible is an inspired book of God written by prophets through Gods' Holy Spirit. The first 39 are called the Hebrew scripture, and the other 27 books are the Greek scriptures. If we are supported by a theocracy as stated by you, then the bible would still be our guideline, being..Catholics, but you have still..not..told..us..unless you profess Atheism??? because from your stand, it's giving us this impression!!!!
The holy bible has a written set of "rules" which as..Catholics..In Deuteronomy 6: 5, 6, & 7, we should love..the..Lord..our..God..with all of our heart, soul, and might. Teaching these words to our children, and specifically how to do this.
In the following post I did explain quite clearly as to which is more lawful in the constitution or that the bible is our guide, since we are Catholics and rule by the constitution. If you are not, then that's your problem, but still you have a right to express yourself against, but then we still also have our rights to which we can express ourselves of how to live.
Lino Apap
Jul 9th 2009, 13:30
@Joseph Meli - it is not I who is not understanding you. It is you who cannot distinguish between the Catholic ritual or sacrament of marriage and the CIVIL institution. Divorce is a CIVIL dissolultion of marriage - nothing more or less. Once a couple has separated and has been so for a number of years, (clearly evidencing that the marriage is dead) it is useless to consider the marriage as existent from a civil and legal point of view. This will not affect the position of the Church which will continue to view the marriage as a valid one. Divorce will simply allow the State to (a) recognise the fact that the marriage no longer exists and (b) allow the parties to go their separate ways (subject to conditions like alimony and child support) and live their separate lives. The difference between you and me is that while I am quite willing to accept your position not to recognise the CIVIL concept of divorce, you on the other hand want EVERYONE to follow your beliefs regardless! I'm sorry but you have to realise that we are not living in a democracy and not a theocracy!
Joseph Meli
Jul 9th 2009, 12:30
Lino Apap: My replies had been given many time. If you...are a...Catholic, I repeat...NO...to DIVORCE, No to Co-habitation, and NO; NO..to..things not accepted within..our religion. I think that I'm wasting my time in my replies,,because you..are..failing..to..understand my..replies. As to the building comparison, one has to sort things out and..remember that..both..must..have taken the oath before God on the alter, that..is in..His..presence, both committed one-self to each other. As regarding LOVE, I explained what one has to consider to be in tune to love.
As I had replied some weeks ago, it seem that we are going back to square one as you failed to understand my replied, because the solution within the majority of our married couples who's marriage had failed is just the same as those in other European Countries and all of these failed in marriage because partners had lack of knowledge regarding their relationship dynamics, and sadly one can recall that they must have ignored the purpose and that they where not willing to apply the time and spend money to grow their relationship, yet the majority when they fail, they blame God.
If..one..wants..to..have..a..great..relationship..one..must..pay..a..price. As..for..the..formula for..marriage..success, see..my..other...replies.
Lino Apap
Jul 7th 2009, 18:24
@ Joseph Meli - In reply to #1 of 11 comments - nobody wants to marry again and again and again as suggested. Most probably, separated couples wanting to divorce their estranged spouses wish to achieve closure on a dead relationship and to legalise their marital status, thus ensuring fair and just treatment by the State. In case you are unaware, cohabiting couples are constantly discriiminated against by the State in matters relating to testamentary rights of partners and children, social services, fiscal and now even rent laws. Because to add insult to injury, separated couples wishing to remarry are not only forbidden to remarry but as if that is not enough, they are also discriminated against by the State.
Re your building analogy - we are not talking about resorting to divorce when there are faults and cracks - divorce comes in when the building has collapsed like a bulldozer to remove the rubble! Please come into the real world - No sane perons will divorce at the drop of a hat; a separation of at least 3 years will be necessary before anyone can apply for divorce.
Get real Mr. Meli
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:56
@LINO APAP::.:::> But If..God..does..not “witness” a marriage..as to..what I am..understanding from your..point..of..view, and if this..is..not approved by Him, it doesn’t matter who we have to perform the wedding. But It could..be a justice of the peace, a judge, pastor, priest or whoever.
If God does not approve it, it’s not approved! Pope John Paul in Familiaris Consortio #15 marriage is a Holy Matrimony, blessed by the Father and must not be dissolved to suit mankind in his carnal nature, while disregarding the knowledge of God.
Now..families (as..in..Humanae...Vitae..Pope...Paul..VI said)..that..many..families..world-wide are getting...annulments, but God..is..not..accepting certain annulment if they had got their annulment without any due cause, or on a before-hand partners' agreement so..as..to..get their...annulment..in..the..eyes..of..God..they...are...still...married!!!.
The state’s governing laws pertaining to age, citizenship, family relationship, or sex may approve the marriage. But these laws only govern a man from the outside. The Bible, God’s Word, governs a man from the inside, because it “...is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul [where a couple is joined together] and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:54
@General: In the opinion of many psychologist have reported recently that the majority of marriages are needlessly failing in success, just because their marriage partners have little or none as to lack of knowledge regarding relationship dynamics.
Most couples, sadly to say, are ignorant on purpose because they are not willing to apply the time and spend the money to grow or develope their relationships. Therefore, when their relationship fails, many are blaming God. However, God does not save relationships, He does saves individuals. So..if..you..want..a..great..relationship, you..must..pay..a..price!
During a meeting they came out with a Formula that could produce a Happy Marriage if followed:-
But for any couple that want to have a happy marriage, BOTH MUST:
1. Kill self—selfishness. The beginning of dying to self is learning how to give.
2. Learn some relationship techniques. If you want fruit, you must learn and cultivate techniques.
3. Understand the make-up of the opposite sex. Males and females are different. Learn the differences!
In their report they all agreed that these three necessities are the core and foundation of a happy marriage. EVERYTHING in the relationship will ALWAYS have these three ingredients in it. .....more on p/2
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:54
@Lino Apap: Re-consequences of divorce: we have to remember or evaluate what are the consequences on the state regarding children of divorced families bringing further financial expenditure on d'state. Not forgetting burden or the rights of woman that finds herself alone without a partner, d'ex-husband would still have to support her w/maintenance money, besides that of..his..new..partner..and maybe further children from his second wife. How on earth..he..is..to..cope..up?
British reports issued by Dr...Patricia...Morgan, British..Criminologist; The Social..Affairs editor, namely John...Carvel of the...Guardian on 28th..March,..2008; and Rt. Hon...George Iain Duncan Smith PC., MP. who listed about 190 recommendations to problems of social decay, like...high...crime...rates, low...aspirations, low...educational attainment, & high dependency would come on...the state. We had many murder case..such...as...that...mother...of..his...married...girl...friend...at Vittoriosa/Cospicua and the most recent case reported yesterday 1st or 2nd July.
Then one must also bear in mind not only the good that divorce could make, but also the bad things that could implicate within our families, especially with regards to future children. In reference to the well being of the Children and to the consequences that separated or divorced parents might induce to their children, due to their separations or in this case to divorce if ever introduced.
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:53
@Lino Apap: You stated "Give to God what is God's" Well let me say that I quite agree with you, but remember what you stated, that "we should give unto God what is God's" Since God is the original planner of marriage He created a divine marriage having been instituted by God Himself when He performed the first marriage on sixth day of creation. He...brought together Adam and Eve as husband and wife.
I had NO intention to MENTION GOD's things, but since you mentioned it than remember that God's creative work was not complete until He made woman. God could have made Eve from dust of the ground, but chose to make Eve just from man's flesh and bone. Thus this illustrated for us that in marriage man and woman symbolically are united into one, a mystical union of the couple's hearts and lives.
So..the..covenant of marriage was made by God in which the husband and wife make with each other and with God on the Alter [if they get married in Church]. They pledge their love, loyalty, and devotion to each other as long as they both are alive as husband and wife...What..happened...to...this...covenant...!!!!
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:52
Regarding..to..what..you said "that a change in the Constitution is needed asap as regarding what religion we have"....continuation 2.
Document further stated “same..is..true..for..the..freedom..of..parents..regarding..education of their children; it is an inalienable right recognized by the Universal..Declaration..on..Human Rights. In this context, it must be noted that well formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals of Catholic faith.”
Bear in mind that not only the good that divorce could make, but also the bad things that could implicate within our families, especially with regards to future children..paying..for..two..wives..(ex-wife..and..new..wife..etc). In reference..to the well being of the Children and to the consequences that separated or divorced parents might induce to their children, due to their separations or in this case to divorce if ever introduced.
For this reason a full professional study with members coming from the Government, the opposition and other professional members approved by the Government Authorities, including that of the Catholic Archdiocese to investigate the actual impact and other implication or complications that divorce could impose on our future families, before the state...was to implement this in parliament.
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:50
Regarding..to..what..you said "that a change in the Constitution is needed asap as regarding what religion we have" this has to be approved by parliament first. But don't forget that the prime duties of all our Parliamentary representatives, especially since they had taken their oath..as..seen..television..on the cross or..on..the..Holy Bible as Christians or as a Catholic, then it should be their prime duty to be made aware, that they must observe what the "CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH," says.
They must clearly understand that "their participation as Catholics in Political life, they must note that a well formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts for example the fundamental contents of our faith and morals."
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:50
You stated that "Many people agreed that this should be changed asap and to any reference as to religion - any kind of religion - be removed." Do you have any statistic of this large amount of people that want our religion out of the constitution of Malta.This is news from...you.
Well, I have quite..a...few...members...of..the Maltese....parliament from both side whom I know..but they..all..told me that to have our religion removed from the Constitution they need at least 3/4 votes which is rather impossible.
If you think that there are a majority of separated persons, I think you are mistaken. I am in agreement that they have enlarged, but someone need to offer them some help, but not the solution of....divorce?
The Census report 2005 suggests that in the total population, individual with a history of a failed marriage [separated/annulled/divorced - and not remarried] about to 4.0% of the population aged 16 years or more. That is 1 in 25 of the population in Malta today. In yer 1995 this was 1.7% that is 1 in every 59. While in 1985 it was similar at 1.1% that is 1 in 91.
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:48
In the Maltese Islands, mostly on newspapers some where in favor, while the majority are against divorce, but have we considered what is the main factor of this problem, cause even if re-married some problems would arise again and again, and as many always said this would always remain in problematic situation, unless we first need as to understand what was the cause to these break-up? If you have a slight problem in the building foundation, you'll first get a archtect to solve it first and we won't go to demolish the whole property to build a new one. What...can...one...do to minimize this factor in the near future?
If the country intends to legislate on divorce, first one should make further studies to see if this would implicate citizens of the Maltese Islands into a larger pitfall and other expenses to the state of Malta. Therefore, if this is introduced it may results in bad further situations. So those involved in this matter has to understand it's implications too. It is good to understand that many countries after having introduced divorce, they had other consequences, so what are ours if we..legislate? Are.we.still.Catholics ?? or.are.we.a.natiion.of..unbeliever's?
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:47
As Catholics we know through the Bible the original plan of marriage is instituted by God Himself when He performed the first marriage on the sixth day of creation when He brought together Adam and Eve as husband and wife. God's creative work was not complete until He made woman. God could have made Eve from dust of the ground, but made Eve from man's flesh and bone. This illustrated that in marriage man and woman symbolically are united into one, a mystical union of the couple's hearts and lives.
So God intended marriage to be the pattern for all future marriages and was confirmed again by His son Jesus Christ. If one is going to be married, one must be willing to keep the commitment that makes the two of them as one. Marriage should be more than friendship; it should be oneness. Jesus Christ endorsed the original concept of marriage [see...Matthew Chapter...19: verse 3 to 6] and thus marriage was blessed by God as the only chosen human relationship. Then the problem of modern society is simply because they either have neglected their religion or are no longer of the Christian Faith, which are quite few!!![Only...one...in...ten...see...marital...breakdown..and...in..eight...years...time..]
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:46
We need more profound teaching courses and..seminars..for...those...about..to.get married... to be taken up by all those who intend to take up God's covenant of marriage.
The covenant of marriage made by God is in fact a covenant which husband and wife make with each other and with God on the Alter if they get married in Church. In marriage they pledge their love, loyalty, and devotion to each other as long as they both are alive as husband and wife. They have to accept each other unconditionally, to share in each other's pain and failures, to rejoice in each other's victories and accomplishments. Yet in Malta many are those that are not taking note of these marriage pledges that they had taken on the alter and in the presence of God Himself, but for every single argument they try to find all sort of excuses to separate, while..not..knowing..what...forgiveness..is!!
This kind of love is important and necessary for the modern marriage covenant so as to succeed, and which many young couples these days have forgotten or being totally ignored from their marriage success, maybe they are not learning this during their engagement months or years...Let's..look...into....this...problem...first.....
Joseph Meli
Jul 5th 2009, 18:45
The problem with separated persons is not by the introduction of divorce so as to be able to marry again, and maybe again and again. We must remember that we are Catholics? Am I correct, if so what was the statement that two give on marriage day before God on the Alter?
If one have a problem with his marriage, it would be the same as that when a building develops some unexpected fault. In this case we don't go to demolish it, but get an architect to see why and give us further advice how we can support, or repair or maybe try to eliminate any dangers to be a safe place to live in. In marriage one has to do the same when his marriage had broken down.
It is our duty to to see how one can save his marriage, therefore, one does not put a broken marriage towards further destruction, but we should study what has caused it to arrive at the separation stage, and then together plan how together they can repair the differences and re-support their marriage.
Finally, being..a..catholic..island..written on..our constitution, such a..law is difficult to be approved..as..it..goes..again..our..constitution..too.
Lino Apap
Jul 5th 2009, 09:37
@ Joseph Meli- "If God does not approve it, it’s not approved!" And pray who are you (or anyone else for that matter) to say which marriages are approved by God and which are not? I know some couples who married in Church (approved by God?) whose marriage is a relationship from hell and other couples who simply live together (because they cannot marry) who have a healthy relationship, as a reusult of both partners having gone through the trauma of failed "approved by God" marriages perhaps? One cannot generalise- marriages are not "approved by God" simply because they take place in church before a priest as Pope Paul said. Or are you now saying that marriages taking place before a Rabbi or an Imam or before a JP are not valid marriages because they are not "approved by God".
The fact of the matter is that it is the strength of RELATIONSHIP between the two people in the marriage that should win God's approval and NOT before whom or where the marriage took place. Moreover, if that relationship is bad or non-existent, the marriage is DEAD and should be acknowledged as such, hence the need for divorce.
Joseph Meli
Jul 4th 2009, 12:53
LINO APAP::.But If..God..does..not “witness” a marriage..as to..what I am..understanding from your..point..of..view, and if this..is..not approved by Him, it doesn’t matter who we have to perform the wedding. But It could be a justice of the peace, a judge, pastor, priest or whoever.
If God does not approve it, it’s not approved! Pope John Paul in Familiaris Consortio #15 marriage is a Holy Matrimony, blessed by the Father and must not be dissolved to suit mankind in his carnal nature, while disregarding the knowledge of God.
Now..families (as..in..Humanae...Vitae..Pope...Paul..VI said)..that..many..families..world-wide are getting...annulments, but God..is..not..accepting certain annulment if they had got their annulment without any due cause, or on a before-hand partners' agreement so..as..to..get their...annulment..in..the..eyes..of..God..they...are...still...married!!!.
The state’s governing laws pertaining to age, citizenship, family relationship, or sex may approve the marriage. But these laws only govern a man from the outside. The Bible, God’s Word, governs a man from the inside, because it “...is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul [where a couple is joined together] and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).
Lino Apap
Jul 3rd 2009, 06:49
@Joseph Meli (obviously): Marriage is NOT the sole property of God (or the Church for that matter). Since time immemorial there has always been some form of marriage in all known cultures. Even in darkest Africa or the deepest Amazonian forest, tribes who have never heard of God have some form of marriage ritual. So please acknowledge that the concept that God is the "original marriage planner" is completely wrong. However, I realise I'm wasting my time because you refer to the story of Adam & Eve as if it actually happened! Oh pleeeeeeease!
The consequences of divorce are the same as those of separation. No more, no less. A separated husband will have to pay maintenance to his estranged wife for her upkeep (if she doesn't work) and for his children from her. If he starts another relationship, yes he will also have to support this woman and their child. But this is where ends. With the absence of divorce, the new partner and their child do NOT have any rights whatsoever because legally the man is still "married" to his estranged spouse. This is the injustice of thesystem preferred by the Church. Anything but the D-word!
Joseph Meli
Jul 2nd 2009, 16:45
@Lino Apap: Re-consequences of divorce: we have to remember or evaluate what are the consequences on the state regarding children of divorced families bringing further financial expenditure on d'state. Not forgetting burden or the rights of woman that finds herself alone without a partner, d'ex-husband would still have to support her w/maintenance money, besides that of..his..new..partner..and maybe further children from his second wife. How on earth..he..is..to..cope..up?
British reports issued by Dr...Patricia...Morgan, British..Criminologist; The Social..Affairs editor, namely John...Carvel of the...Guardian on 28th..March,..2008; and Rt. Hon...George Iain Duncan Smith PC., MP. who listed about 190 recommendations to problems of social decay, like...high...crime...rates, low...aspirations, low...educational attainment, & high dependency would come on...the state. We had many murder case..such...as...that...mother...of..his...married...girl...friend...at Vittoriosa/Cospicua and the most recent case reported yesterday 1st or 2nd July.
Then one must also bear in mind not only the good that divorce could make, but also the bad things that could implicate within our families, especially with regards to future children. In reference to the well being of the Children and to the consequences that separated or divorced parents might induce to their children, due to their separations or in this case to divorce if ever introduced.
Joseph Meli
Jul 2nd 2009, 16:23
@Lino Apap: You stated "Give to God what is God's" Well let me say that I quite agree with you, but remember what you stated, that "we should give unto God what is God's" Since God is the original planner of marriage He created a divine marriage having been instituted by God Himself when He performed the first marriage on sixth day of creation. He...brought together Adam and Eve as husband and wife.
I had NO intention to MENTION GOD's things, but since you mentioned it than remember that God's creative work was not complete until He made woman. God could have made Eve from dust of the ground, but chose to make Eve just from man's flesh and bone. Thus this illustrated for us that in marriage man and woman symbolically are united into one, a mystical union of the couple's hearts and lives.
So..the..covenant of marriage was made by God in which the husband and wife make with each other and with God on the Alter [if they get married in Church]. They pledge their love, loyalty, and devotion to each other as long as they both are alive as husband and wife...What..happened...to...this...covenant...!!!!
Lino Apap
Jul 1st 2009, 21:24
@ Joseph Meli (contd) - I could be wrong. Like I said I'm no lawyer so I stand to be corrected but that's the way it seems to me. Be that as it may, the statement that establishes a State Religion is totally out of place and unwarranted in this day and age, regardless of how many people want it. You also quoted the four things God wants from marriage - I am not arguing about this. I thought we agreed to have a "civil discussion on divorce". I am not interested in the religious aspect - it does not come into it. Divorce is all about the civil nature of marriage and only comes into play once the marriage (the relationship between the two persons making up the marriage) is dead and buried. Yes the Catholic marriage must live on like a rotting corpse, but the civil marriage (which is a civil contract after all) can be (and should be) terminated once there's clear evidence that the relationship making up the marriage is has irretrievably broken down. Give to God what is God's and to Caesar what is Caesar's Mr. Meli - civil marriage and divorce belong to Caesar.
Lino Apap
Jul 1st 2009, 21:09
@Joseph Meli - I am no consitutional lawyer but Section 66 (Qualifyed Majority section) states that " Subject to the provisions of this section, Parliament may alter any of the provisions of this Constitution and (in so far as it forms part of the law of Malta) any of the provisions of the Malta Independence Act, 1964". It then states that "In so far as it alters (a) this section; or (b) Section 1, subsection (2) of section 2, subsection (1) of section 3,........."a bill for an Act of Parliament under this section shall not be passed in the House of Representatives unless at the final voting thereon in that House it is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the members of the House." Section 2 subsection 2 states that "The authorities of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church have the duty and the right to teach which principles are right and which are wrong". This is therfore clearly entrenched and requires a 2/3 majority (not 3/4). However Section 2 subsection 1 that states " The religion of Malta is the Roman Catholic Apostolic Religion" does NOT appear to be entrenched. I may be wrong but.................
Joseph Meli
Jul 1st 2009, 20:21
@Lino Apap:::Regarding..to..what..you said "that a change in the Constitution is needed asap as regarding what religion we have" this has to be approved by parliament first. But don't forget that the prime duties of all our Parliamentary representatives, especially since they had taken their oath..as..seen..television..on the cross or..on..the..Holy Bible as Christians or as a Catholic, then it should be their prime duty to be made aware, that they must observe what the "CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH," says.
They must clearly understand that "their participation as Catholics in Political life, they must note that a well formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts for example the fundamental contents of our faith and morals."
Therefore, if a member puts up a bill in favor of the introduction of divorce, it would be their moral prime duty not to vote in its favor, unless they had first made a declaration (a) in a public place or (b) in the media and finally (c) or write a declaration to the speaker of the house, that now he/she has/have a different..faith..or..religion....continued...no.2
Joseph Meli
Jul 1st 2009, 14:16
@Lino Apap: You stated that "Many people agreed that this should be changed asap and to any reference as to religion - any kind of religion - be removed." Do you have any statistic of this large amount of people that want our religion out of the constitution of Malta.This is news from...you.
Well, I have quite..a...few...members...of..the Maltese....parliament from both side whom I know..but they..all..told me that to have our religion removed from the Constitution they need at least 3/4 votes which is rather impossible.
If you think that there are a majority of separated persons, I think you are mistaken. I am in agreement that they have enlarged, but someone need to offer them some help, but not the solution of....divorce?
The Census report 2005 suggests that in the total population, individual with a history of a failed marriage [separated/annulled/divorced - and not remarried] about to 4.0% of the population aged 16 years or more. That is 1 in 25 of the population in Malta today. In yer 1995 this was 1.7% that is 1 in every 59. While in 1985 it was similar at 1.1% that is 1 in 91.
Joseph Meli
Jul 1st 2009, 13:55
@Lino Apap:God intended...marriage..to..be..permanent..and gave 4..reasons..for..the importance..of..a..solid..marriage.
These...four (4) reasons are:- (1) forgiveness; (2) compassion; (3) submission and finally No. (4) must be able to show some respect.How can one applies for separation or to say divorce when one had not tried first these four reasons to his marriage life.
All the above constitutes the formulation of what "LOVE" is, so when we demonstrate these character traits [characteristic] and others we are essentially turning these words into loving action between husband and wife. If none of these are made available, you have no basis of Love.
This..decline..in..marriages (annually fallen by one third) and marked a big rise in the numbers of lone parents families. Those brought up not by both parents were more likely to have experienced educational problems, some in drug addiction, others in alcoholism problems, or in serious..debt..problems, others in..unemployment too.” This problem..could also be seen..in..Malta.&.Gozo...too....John Carvel on Guardian 28th March, 2008 stated further..“In a recent report by National Statistics, it showed marriages in 2006 was lowest for 110 years and this indicated a pattern of social upheaval.” he..said..“more than 45% of marriages will end in divorce..and another 45%..in..the..death of..one..of..the..partner,&10% for their diamond..wedding anniversary in..2068.”
Lino Apap
Jul 1st 2009, 05:43
@Joe Meli - re the Constitution - Many people agree that this should be changed asap and any reference to religion - any kind of religion - be removed. No-one is forcing you to do anything. If you don't believe in divorce because you are a practicing Catholic, you need not apply for it. It is you on the other hand who is forcing your beliefs on others whether they be unbelievers or not. Do not think for a moment that all those supporting the introduction of divorce are unbelievers or atheists! When legislated for, divorce will be there to be used by anyone wanting to use it. If you are a staunch Catholic and your marriage breaks down, simply live your live according to your Faith. But you sholdn't expect to force others to live in the way you chose simply because you are staunchly Catholic and others aren't.
Lino Apap
Jun 30th 2009, 19:20
@Joe Meli - Agree on what marriage is supposed to provide - stability and safety for the children together with a host of other things for the children AND their parents - let's not forget the parents because marriage is primarily about the union between two persons. If this union is compromised, then so is the marriage. And this is where divorce comes in; it is the failure of marriages that brings about divorce and not the other way around. Look around you - almost everyone knows of someone whose marriage has broken down - sometimes it's friends, sometimes it's family. But (and the figures prove this) the number of marriage breakdowns has grown to substantial proportions and the State cannot continue denying those people whose marriages failed the right to re-marry. Mostly one gets married with all the goodwill in the world and intends to "act like an adult" but marriages do break down regardless of this and most times marriages break down irretrievably - and this is where divorce comes in and not the other way around. We can debate the definition of civil rights but this point is secondary to the main issue which is divorce.
Joseph Meli
Jun 30th 2009, 17:16
@ Lino Apap: You stated in your first blob as if you cannot have others to comment against your idea of divorce, when you stated "we shall have the usual choruses of "we need courses before marriage", "covenants with God", "God condemned divorce", "divorce is is the root of all evil", etc etc etc.
This is a civil and legal right as given to us in the Constitution of the Republic of Malta being part of the who are members of the Roman Catholic Apostolic faith to express what is right and what is wrong, especially if things are against our religion or faith as per page 9a, and what ever your religion is.
If married in a catholic Church you must have been a Catholic at that time, but since you where married when you where Catholic, Catholic laws applied to you before God. Now in civil you can do what you like, but at least respect us, just as we respect you and none of us had condemned you for your or others' situation. We know you are all suffering, but now we need first to solve such problems(as..you..commented)...not enlarge them.
Joseph Meli
Jun 30th 2009, 16:45
@Lino Apap: O.K. let have a Civil discussion on the 'Divorce matter," only - part two:::::> One does understand that a Civil Right is an enforceable right or privilege, which if interfered with by another gives rise to an action for injury by the other. However, in court they consider a civil right in the freedom of speech; of the press; of assembly; the right to vote; and the freedom from involuntary servitude (like slavery); or the right to equality in public places, but not to be re-married.
One has to understand that Marriage provides stability (for children), and marriage provides security for them (children) too. So Marriage forces us to act like adults and commit our commitment. It does not point a gun to anyone's head to force anyone to accept it, God especially. We must remember that not everyone who marries is religious anyway, but if he or she had been a Catholic during their marriage day and had married in Church, then he/she must abide by it's law. If two agree to and make plans for an annulment, in the eyes of God, even though he obtained annulment, in God's eye he/she are still married.
Joseph Meli
Jun 30th 2009, 16:23
@Lino Apap: O.K. let have a Civil discussion on the 'Divorce matter," only, but first of all what does our Constitution of the Republic of Malta says? Well, in Chapter 1 verse 1 (2) (1) in page 9a it say that the religion of Malta is the Roman Catholic apostolic Religion [It does not mention any others - Agree] Now in 2 it says that the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church and this includes all those who are or have the catholic faith, but especially Church leaders such as priests, bishops etc., have the duty and the right to teach which principles are right and which are wrong.
Since this right is in our Constitution, who-ever tries to enact a divorce law, this would be against our constitution, therefore, against the principles of our Catholic faith religion that has other rules which a Catholic has to observe, and this is in the ten commandments that God gave us to observe. If you are an unbeliever, I cannot force you, but on the other hand you cannot interfere with my believes too. In other words, the Maltese Civil Code cannot be made to suit one and..not..the..other..for..the..fact..that..it..goes..against..the..constitutional..rights. on Civil.....Right...see..the..other...blog......
Lino Apap
Jun 29th 2009, 19:23
@ Joe Zammit, Joe Meli et al - Can we please have a civil discussion without bringing religion into it? We all know that for Catholics, divorce is a no-no. Great, good for you. However the country is not made up exclusively of practising, devout Catholics such as yourselves. Moreover divorce is a civil right that should be made available to those needing and wanting it. This has nothing to do with scantily-dressed nubile young girls in the village square, Mr. De Martino. There is a high and ever-increasing number of failed marriages. Part of the fall-out caused by this is that there is an ever-increasing number of previously-married people starting new long-term relationships that develop into families. These people wish to regularise their relationships by marrying their respective partners but cannot do so because Maltese Civil Law is lacking in this regard. This is basically what all this is all about and Mr. Scicluna and the members of the Group advocating the Government to legislate for divorce should be congratulated for clearly being responsible people having their feet on the ground unlike those burying their heads in the sand and refusing to accept the problem and acting upon it.
Joseph Meli
Jun 29th 2009, 14:40
Well,,,What did Jesus Christ endorsed as the original concept of marriage [see Matthew Chapter 19: verse 3 to 6]and thus remember...that....marriage was blessed by God as the chosen human relationship. The problem of modern society is simply because you/they either have neglected your...or.their religion..or..are..no longer...of..the Christian Faith, which are quite few. However, then more profound teaching courses and seminars need to be taken up by those intending to take up..God's...covenant...of..marriage.
Made by God is in fact a covenant which husband..&..wife make with each..other..and..with God on the Alter if they get married in Church. In marriage they pledge their love, loyalty, and devotion to each other as long as they both are alive as husband and wife.
Both accept each other unconditionally, sharing in each other's plain..plan and failures, to rejoice in each other's victories and accomplishments. Yet in Malta many are those that are not taking note of these marriage pledges that they had taken on the alter and in the presence of God Himself, but for every single argument they try to find all sort of excuses to separate.
They just don't know what forgiveness actually...is, don't..know...how...to...pray and never use the Holy Bible..
Joseph Meli
Jun 29th 2009, 14:38
British Criminologist Dr. Patricia Morgan, a effected an important study in the UK...USA, but in this most important report she stated that after making her studies in U.K...United..States..of America she discovered a clear link between the breaking-up of families and criminality.
In her National Development Study held in the United Kingdom in the year 1975 on 18,000 young children before they became sixteen years, the majority had already appeared before the court for some criminal offense.
The result on boys was as follows:-
8 % those who lived with natural parents (divorced)
16 % coming from single mothers.
19 % coming from women living with another man (divorced or separated)
70 % of those in prison came from families without a natural father (broken families)
As we all know from news on television or newspapers that criminality in the Britain....&...Malta....too, had increased enormously.
The reason was that the year 1975 she quoted this because it was near the year when divorce was recently being introduced in other European countries too. Then the Social Justice Commission of the UK with its Chairman the Rt. Hon. George Iain Duncan Smith PC., MP.confirmed..this.
Joseph Meli
Jun 29th 2009, 14:36
Good to note that the Rt. Hon. George Iain Duncan Smith PC., MP. listed also 190 recommendations to address such problems of social decay, like high crime rates, low aspirations, low educational attainment, & high dependency on the UK and this can be applied to Malta too.
Since the early 1970's there has been a decline in marriages (annually fallen by one third) and marked a big rise in the numbers of lone parents families. It was also reviled that “those not brought up by both parents were more likely to have experienced educational problems, drug addiction, alcoholism problem, serious debt problems and also unemployment too.”
This problem could also be seen also in Malta as in the report he also stated “the cohabiting parents with young children were more than twice as likely as married parents to split up, regardless of age, income and other socio-economic background factors.” Is this a local problem too? Can anyone who is an expert investigate this matter? Because if we know that this is creating a huge quick-sand area of the family, do we accept such things to our families? Or we have to take all necessary precaution?
Joseph Meli
Jun 29th 2009, 14:35
John Carvel on The Guardian 28th March, 2008 stated: “In a recent report by National Statistics, it showed that the number of marriages in 2006 was the lowest for 110 years and this indicated a pattern of social upheaval.” he further stated “more than 45% of marriages will end in divorce and another 45% in the death of one of the partner, and only 10% would make it for their diamond wedding anniversary in 2068.”
In the report it also states that “the chances of relationship breakdown are even greater for cohabiting couples who have chosen not to marry (and this fact is already happening in Malta too)”
Since1970's there has been a decline in marriages (annually fallen by one third) and marked a big rise in the numbers of lone parents families. It was reviled that “those not brought up by both parents were more likely to have experienced educational..problems, drug...addiction,....alcoholism...problems,...serious debt problems, also unemployment too.” This problem could also be seen in Malta & Gozo...too.
In “the cohabiting parents with young children were more than twice as likely as married parents to split up, regardless of age, income and other socio-economic background factors.”
Joseph Meli
Jun 29th 2009, 14:33
The fact that many couples live together without the legal commitment of marriage surprises few in our morally dysfunctional society. What is surprising is the number of professing Christians who choose to live together without the benefit of marriage.
Churches and families are increasingly faced with the question of how to respond to these individuals who believe their personal commitments to one another are morally equivalent to legal marriage. This is fundamentally a biblical issue. Genesis 2:18-25 describes marriage as a divine institution. God presented Adam with Eve and established the first marriage.
Genesis 2:24 is the basis for all future marriages: “This is why a man leaves his father and mother and bonds with his wife, and they become one flesh.” When Jesus was asked about grounds for divorce, He quoted this verse with regard to a legal, binding marriage relationship (Matt. 19:5).
God revealed the law to Moses on Mount Sinai, there were many regulations regarding marriage. A man who seduced a virgin and had sexual relations with her before marriage was required to pay the father of the girl and..required..to..marry..her..if..the..father..permitted (Ex. 22:16). Sexual..relations.with..a...virgin...betrothed to another resulted in death by stoning of both parties (Deut. 22:23-24)
Joseph Meli
Jun 29th 2009, 14:31
In Matt Chapter 5:Verse 32....it says...[quoted from...New Living Translation - Life Application Study Bible] It is to be understood that the keeping of vows and promises is important as it builds trust and makes committed human relationship possible.
In Matthew...Chapter...19:..Verse 2 to12 it says...."On this conflict on divorce, Jesus focused on marriage rather than divorce. He pointed out that God intended marriage to be permanent and gave four reasons for the importance of marriage. So Jesus made God's ideal very plain. At creation He (God) approved one kind of marriage bond, that is man to woman, so they then become one flesh, one before GOD.
Therefore, in Moses Days and that of Jesus, the practice of marriage fell for short of God's intention.The same is today as Jesus said that Moses gave this law only because of the people's hard hearts, but permanent marriage was God's intention, but because of sinful human nature made divorce inevitable. Jesus in 19:09 said "and I will tell you this, whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery."
Joseph Meli
Jun 29th 2009, 14:28
In Matthew...Chapter...19:..Verse 2to12 it says...."On this conflict such as on divorce, Jesus focused on marriage rather than divorce..... He pointed out that God intended marriage to be permanent and gave four reasons for the importance of marriage.
These four (4) reasons are forgiveness; compassion; submission and respect...........How can one applies for separation or to say divorce when one had not tried first these four reasons to his marriage..................All the above constitutes "LOVE", so when we demonstrate these character traits [characteristic] and others we are essentially turning these words into loving action........................................................................................................................................
Resentment in my opinion is a very powerful emotion. So, anyone who harbors this terrible emotion shouldn't be trying to make rational decisions for themselves or their marriage. One would even venture to say that most separations or divorces are because of unmet and unfulfilled emotions, which is what this emotion is.....Then this can literally control a person, what they say, or what they do, and how one does behave. Unfulfilled people are the biggest resentment holders because they don't speak up assertively to get their needs met.
Joseph Meli
Jun 29th 2009, 14:24
God told the woman that her husband will rule over her. In the NT: Eph 5:22, 1 Corn. 11:3. The Apostle Paul (1Corn 7:3-5) stated “The wife’s body does not belong to her alone, but also to her husband.” He also stated that the wife needs to satisfy her husband’s sexual desires, as part of her duty.
"The act of marriage blessed by the Father must not be dissolved to suit mankind in his carnal nature and loss of the knowledge of God. What God has joined together no man shall place asunder." - Our Lady on December 28, 1974
"Are..you..so..blind..that..you..do..not recognize the..acceleration of sin among you? Murders abound, thievery, all manner of carnage, destruction of young souls, abortion, homosexuality, condemned from the beginning of time by the Eternal Father. Yet sin has become a way of life. Sin is condoned now, even unto the highest judge of your land and your lands throughout the world. As you have sown so shall you reap. Sin is death, not only of the spirit, but of the body. Wars are a punishment for man's sin, his greed, his avarice." - Our Lady of the Roses, August 14, 1981
Joe Zammit
Jun 29th 2009, 08:44
Martin, you have slipped again on dry land!
What you have said and the way you said it clearly prove that you are in favour of divorce. To add insult to injury, you preferred to put the cart before the horse. Instead of seeing what the situation is and then come to a reasonable conclusion, you tried in vain to make your flawed sources and unconvincing arguments fit your purpose.
Martin, divorce is evil and if you are against evil, you MUST be against divorce. Christ himself tells you clearly that divorce is evil. This means that divorce is to the detriment of all people, of all individuals and of all society.
GiovDeMartino
Jun 29th 2009, 04:59
With so many young half naked beauties roaming our streets, I'm not surprised that there is such an increase in broken families. spend half an hour in your village square -not necessarily on the beach - pay a visit to any village festa etc....and judge for yourself. Of course the majority of males favour divorce!!!!!!!!!
George Debono
Jun 29th 2009, 02:22
@ Joe Tabone-Adami – you say
@“Regarding the alleged '160% increase' in marriage breakdowns in a decade - and, therefore, the 'necessity' of legalizing divorce - one would hardly think of legalizing heroin and cocaine simply because statistics could show an alarming increase during an equally long period”
@ “destroy a flood-dam - should this develop cracks and structural faults” etc etc
Che centra????
…….. These analogies are totally unrelated. You are mixing apples and oranges. Not the way to conduct a debate at all.
@ 'increasing popularity' …if what ?? marital marital breakdown ??? EH??
Ditto - Che centra???
What nonsense…. marital breakdown isn’t fun - Joe. Neither is the loneliness that follows (and it is women who are the usual casualties).
Stick to the point.
G
Joe Tabone-Adami
Jun 28th 2009, 16:52
This piece repeats an aversion - almost neurotic and obsessive - to Chesterton's thought. May I suggest that proper reading of that man's writings will show him as no common potterer in pseudo-ethics - still less as an 'arch-propagandist'.
Regarding the alleged '160% increase' in marriage breakdowns in a decade - and, therefore, the 'necessity' of legalizing divorce - one would hardly think of legalizing heroin and cocaine simply because statistics could show an alarming increase during an equally long period. On the contrary, it seems that Governments, even in the 'divorce -accepted' world, are firmly and unequivocally bent on eradicating abuse and combating drug-trafficking. It is not the frequency or the 'increasing popularity' of a particular habit that gives it objective 'correctness' and acceptability.
I do not think it will enter into anybody's mind to simply destroy a flood-dam - should this develop cracks and structural faults - and consequently let disaster loose, in order to do away with the necessity of remedial measures, however laborious, to strengthen it. It is precisely such measures society needs to avert a cataclysm in marriages. Isn't this what 'the common good of society as a whole' requires?
.
Lino Apap
Jun 28th 2009, 14:11
Well said Mr. Scicluna! Hear hear!
And now we shall have the usual choruses of "we need courses before marriage", "covenants with God", "God condemned divorce", "divorce is is the root of all evil", etc etc etc.
maria camilleri
Jun 28th 2009, 13:04
Brilliant! Someone managing to speak sense with rational arguementation !
I had read Roamer's comments on the report and thought them baised and to be based on his subjective views rooted in the the Catholic faith and not on objective SECULAR arguements on which legislation should be based !