Divorce will not mean ruin of marriages - Cana movement founder

Dr Francis Saliba

Aug 26th 2009, 10:42

@Martin Spiteri

Thank you for your gratuitous opinions. When I have the time I will resume the search for any shred of evidence that you are among those "others who might be brighter than you think!"

Martin Spiteri

Aug 26th 2009, 00:52

@ francis saliba

try to accept that there are others who might be brighter than you think! and oh by the way you wrote two columns as well previous to mine. Bishops have to obey the rules or the vatican will use the hotline and they will be sacked. In Malta the church cared a fig as to what couples faced way back before 1975. There was only the catholic church to perform a marriage. The Governent found the need to creat a civil marriage act which is a fundamental right. In those days it was considered as a threat. For your information nowadays if one had to choose to marry in a civil way it is possible , but if one chooses to marry in the Church only it cannot be possible. So we are in a " mit tagen ghal gon nar " situation. Do I blame couple to cohabitate? of course I do not. I feel sorry for those couples whose marriage floundered. The church has no respect to their pains and keeps them waiting years.

Joseph Farrugia

Aug 22nd 2009, 21:00

Mgr Vella, first says... "I keep reading that marriages in Malta will disintegrate if there is divorce, but it didn't happen in Italy.”

Then he continues ... “In Milan nowadays, there are more civil marriages than religious marriages and more cohabiting couples than families. While the institution of marriage is facing a crisis, the Maltese family is not, he insists.”

Would the reverend monsignor please clarify these contradictory statements?

Dr Francis Saliba

Aug 22nd 2009, 12:21

@MartinSpiteri

There was no need for two long comments to point out the obvious, namely, that society does not always behave up to the standards demanded by Christianity. What requires proof is that this sad state of affairs is due to those with the duty and responsibility to teach what is right and what is wrong. In my opinion the fault lies elsewhere, mainly with that part of the audience that does not heed Christ’s message and worse still with those who spend their life undermining the attempts of the Church authorities to spread its message by accusing it of brain washing

Martin Spiteri

Aug 22nd 2009, 07:25

@ Dr Francis Saliba
Look at our schools, look at our law courts, look at our hospital and the behaviour of patients with staff. Look at the vulgarity of maltese productions on our tv stations. Just go on a bus to valletta. Go to a band march , listen to a political debate. Listen to some priests discussing the law. Doesnt all this make you sick? And now we have discovered that we need divorce. In my opinion we especially maltese do not need divorce after as a remedy , but we need common sense to realise that there is no marriage in 70% of the cases. Whoever decided to film " cut throat island " in Malta should be awarded an oscar for filming it here. Sadly we are a very sick society. We have the worst illness " ignorance "Arrogance" Superiority complex" it is breeding and increasing and no intention of stopping. We have to go back to basics. We have to teach the church the Government and all other institutions so that they can restart afresh and a new. A new order based on respect, manners, values and social dignity.

Martin Spiteri

Aug 22nd 2009, 07:13

@ Dr Francis Saliba
The Church's duty is to teach , and it has a solemn duty to teach and guide and not brainwash. Just a quick glance at the social situation in our islands leave much to be disired. We are a very small community. whatever occurs is heard throughout the island in a trice. We are an island where social morals are rotten in all spheres. This sounds a bit too generalistic but the truth always hurt. The Church especially in Malta needs a revamp of thought. There are also persons who represent the Malta Church with very high authority , and they do nothing but alienate more people with their bullying behaviour. I was born a catholic, I believe in morals and values. I dispise quotations as if to prove something which in reality is very wrong. We have been told to despise condoms , homosexuality is evil , what we are never thought, is that fundamentalism is evil. The Catholic Church has a tendency like any other community to " impose" unfortunately people do not care any more. Who wants to listen to out dated teachings about issues all the world knows better?

Joe Xuereb

Aug 21st 2009, 17:26

If one considers marriage as mere social construct (to maintain order and rear children, specifically), then, and only then, can one free oneself from the anogst that is togetherness or separation. It becomes yet another ordinary contract with the ending of such as part of the deal. Time was when divorce was granted for just one incidence of infidelity. Civilised countries grew up. And so did the people that inhabit them. No point in making a drama out of a playlet, a passing tableau. Of course people who persist in seeing marriage as binding sacrament (contract) and sexual fidelity as an automatic given, then these people have set themselves up for a very rough ride indeed. With one antidote. Called denial. Very effective. But with dire consequences. But Heaven awaits. And waits. And waits. To me personally, what a Vella or a Cremona or a Grech or a Ratzinger says is entirely immaterial. But that is me. I made my bed and I am prepared to lay on it. Accountable only to myself. Some day selfish. But it works.

Joe Xuereb

Aug 21st 2009, 15:10

To compare priestly 'judgements' with judicial one is extremely shallow. A priest proclaiming on marriage, sex, fornication is not qualified. These matters confern raw living, emotions, feelings, being human. A priest is denied all these. He refers to the copy of a copy of a copy written by fishermen turned erudites, just like that. A judge judges little Johnnie for persisent shop-lifting. Such decisions are arrived at via text-books, up to date ones.
Promising lifelong sexual fidelity is pushing it a bit. Even if the promise is adhered to, regardless of whether sexual union happens or not, there are repercussions especially if the marriage is sexually non-existent.
Monogamy is not a fact of life but an aspiration., a stick with a carrot at the end. One could of course blackmail oneself (fear of hell and all that) into a corner called submission and aspire......aspire. The choice is the individual's. Please look not at me for easy solutions. I am but a humble atheist. Sorry to be the bringer of bad - well, baddish - news. Please do not shoot the messenger. I am feeling rather fragile.

Dr Francis Saliba

Aug 21st 2009, 11:44

What I find most disconcerting is the false accusation by some proponents of the divorce law that the Catholic Church in Malta is “imposing” its will on the State – that is patently untrue. It is only teaching what it considers to be right and what is wrong to anyone who would listen to its voice irrespective of their religious belief or the total absence of any belief. It is a right and a duty recognized by the Constitution of the Republic. The Church adds its voice to the many other voices of other opinion formers helping those who choose to listen to develop an informed opinion that would guide them when they cast their vote in a general election or in any referendum. The attempt to single out our bishops for criticism whenever they try to carry out their duty to teach is most reprehensible and totally indefensible.

Dr Francis Saliba

Aug 21st 2009, 10:38

@MartinSpiteri

One does not take unfair advantage of the lapses of any individual so as to heap his sins on the innocent majority. One does not eliminate laws and their enforcement by the judiciary because individuals fall short of what society expects. One takes specifically aimed remedial measures. No one throws away the baby together with the dirty bath water.

There is a non-religious objection to divorce legislation i.e. it has always led inevitably to a “rabta coff” idea of marriage downgrading it to an easily rescindable contract by mutual consent irrespective of the repercussions on the offspring and on society. That indisputable fact is the basic reason for the insistence that the law be imposed surreptitiously behind the backs of an electorate with different religious beliefs or with no religious belief at all.

louis zammit

Aug 21st 2009, 10:34

MALTA is the state we are born....we have no choice
TH E CATHOLIC church we can accept or leave.......
the state is not the church and the church is not the state....
when so many people here in Malta areSEPERATED its about time the STATE takes care of these people...i think DIVORSE is no more an OPTION but ist a RIGHT from the state to be given...and that why next election this GOVERMENT will lose out..... i have so many family and friends that are seperated.... ..the church has its right to defend its position BUT we have to have our rights from the state....

Martin Spiteri

Aug 21st 2009, 10:27

@ Dr Francis Saliba (2)

I Still find it distasteful for priests to be sitting and judging married couples when none of them have any idea what it means to be married with the wrong person, Their knowledge is only theoretical. IT is unkind and inhuman when they jugde unfortunate couples. And by the way , they are not infallible, What if it was you to be judged in sucha manner? And from experience, how many were given the death penalty by mistake ( civil courts ) Dr Francis Saliba, we need a more human approach from our church and books should be used to learn but experience is the main teacher. I still insist that there should be a body of experienced judges on our tribunals and Marriage is tied only with love. Where love is absent , it is replaced by other emotions and I shudder to think what would! I believe in Marriage and Family values, but for those who do not uphold certain values are not fit to marry in the first place! There should be a tribunal before marriage and not after. I am sure most do not make it.

Martin Spiteri

Aug 21st 2009, 09:19

@ Dr Francis Saliba

Yes I think you have hit the nail on the head, While I find your analogy a bit out of line, I shall take that analogy and put it in perspective. Just look at certain judgements in Malta. Erm do we really have that confidence in CERTAIN judges after what happened some 6 years ago?
But lets get back to the real issue. Being a priest, and while priests have their personal orientations , I would raise my eyebrows. First of all they way marriage law in Malta is based on relgion is discriminatory. There are more cohabitating couple living in harmony than a married ones. The way the church applies the law, shows purely a fundamentalistic approach, while in practice we see that the law is not perfect. The law should guide us and not suffocate us. There are many laws that you know better than me, do not apply in all areas. IF we had to quothe from Christ one sees what I mean to say. The law is there to help and not to crush. besides according to Vatican council docs, the laity should be there to................

Ludwig Flask

Aug 21st 2009, 07:20

"Cana Movement founder Mgr Charles Vella says legislation to introduce divorce in Malta would not mean it would ruin marriages" - this says it all! We as individuals have to be left in liberty to decide whether to divorce or not (may be out of subject, but same applies to abortion). This is a human / spiritual thing thus both state and church have to find some sort of mature compromise. The problem or dilemma which we will face is whether we will be liable or feel sorry to our actions to justified or unjustified divorce, to divorce within a family with children, and so on.

Belle Xerri

Aug 20th 2009, 15:45

Ghalfejn m'ghandniex inkunu bhal pajjizi ohra fl-UE? Ilna zmien twil nippruvaw inkunu bhal barranin (dejjem bil modi taghna) imma il-hsieb dejjem hemm kien. Issa f'daqqa wahda kullhadd qed jilghaba tad-dejjaq. "tal-knisja" ma jridux id-divorzju! Ovvja hux, kull min ghadda minn separazzjoni jew jaf lil xi hadd li ghadda jew ghaddejj minnha jaf kemm tinvolvi flus din is-separazzjoni. Is-separazzjoni hija business tal-knisja u jekk jithol id-divorzju jsirila il-hsara. Jien kattolika kristjana u nemmen f'Alla pero' ma nemminx fil-knisja u fil'qassisin li huma il-vuci ta Kristu! Umbghad ikun hemm kazijiet fejn tfal jigu abbuzati mil-qassisin stess! ahjar ma nghidx erezijiet!

Nahseb li ghandu jsir referendum fuq id-divorzju u il-poplu jaghzel. Jekk hajjti mar-ragel/mara tieghi kuntenta mhux ha niehu id-divorzju hux!! Il-Knisja ma nahsibx li ghandha tindahal u ghandha iddur dawra man-nies taghha, inkuzi patrijiet u sorijiet u tara daqxejn fejnhi il-fidi. Jekk hux fi Kristu jew fil-but!

Dr Francis Saliba

Aug 20th 2009, 06:01

@MartinSpiteri

According to you, priests should be disqualified from sitting on church marriage tribunals because “ None of them has ever been living under the same roof with a wife”. By the same reasoning judges with no personal experience of criminal activities should not be administering justice in the law courts.

Stephen Farrugia

Aug 20th 2009, 03:28

min jibza mid divorzju f'Malta

1) Jibza li l Mara/Ragel ghad titilqu (ghax mhux/mhijiex partner tajjeb)
2) Jibza mil bidla, u nies ekk mux postom f Malta.

Billi jidhol id divorzju , ma jfissirx li kulhadd ghandu jiehdu... dan bhas sigaretti.. billi legali, ma jfissirx li kulhadd andu jpejjep!

c.N.aquilina

Aug 19th 2009, 17:29

@ i-is-Sur S.pace. Għalhekk il-politiku għandu jkun ta' prinċipji sodi u mgħarufa pubblikament mill-poplu kollu.
Għalhekk il-ħajja u l-imġieba tal-politiku hija l-mera ta imġibtu meta jkun jirrappreżentak fil-parlament.
In-nisrani hu nisrani l-ħin kollu u kullimkien, u mhux fejn jaqbillu u xħin jaqbillu.

Steve Pace

Aug 19th 2009, 16:33

@C. Aquilina... You are right in principle , but i beg to differ in practice. Reason.. Very simple. A politician is elected by catholics and non catholics. If he / she wishes to be elected for his / her catholic beliefs only than he should declare what his / her stand is on certain subjects beforehand. No i ask , will our prospective politicians do that ? i doubt it very much .
@Martin Spiteri I Totally agree with you on the interpretation bit. Everyone seems to be so conversant with the bible lately. A lot of quotes are being splashed all over the place to prove their point.he sad thing is that the whole debate is being tackled in the same way the EU issue was tackled.. Those in favour Vs those against ! and Jesus is the referee.
@Mario tabone. What Mr tabone is saying is the crux of it all. But of course, the blind folded will keep on insisting and refuse to acknowledge one simple fact .. That whilst the church's represent the catholics, the state duty is to represent the society as a whole ! How many legally seperated re-unite ? Any statistics ?

Martin Spiteri

Aug 19th 2009, 01:12

What worries me most is the fact that in Malta especially marriage tribunals who decide on annulments are made of priests. None of them has ever been living under the same roof with a wife. They just dictate and apply theory and take a fundamentalistic approach.

First of all applying readings from the bible wont prove anything. I wont try to cause a stir but I have serious reservations on the way and manner the bible was written. I feel sorry for God, he seems that he always gets the blame for inspiring such a defective book. Yet God is perfect. I wonder who I should blame for the authorship.
Marriage can only survive when a couple loves and is committed and is ready for the optimum sacrifice. The total giving of self. One this happens only on one side the other party is the victim. there are many victims in marriages. and the church keeps insisting that a marriage is for life. This is inhuman and should be considered thoroughly bearing in mind that many are living in hell because of the " so called sanctity of marriage " Marriage is only sanctified when there is love.

Paul Galea

Aug 18th 2009, 23:39

The fact that Mgr Charles Vella was the founder of Cana movement does not give him the right to contradict the teachings of the Catholic Church on marriage and divorce.

Everyone knows that the Legionaries of Christ is a renowned order in the Catholic Church. However, Fr Macel Delgado, the founder of the Legionaries of Christ, has been exposed that he was living a double life.

MARIO TABONE

Aug 18th 2009, 22:43

DIVORCE is just a word !!!!
Why do we persist in debating the right or wrong of divorce in a religeous meaning ? Why don't we just think for one moment about the effect that marriage breakdowns has on families especially kids.
Once trust is lost and hatred sets in, no amount of religion or faith helps. We are after all human beings and nature will take its course. When a couple split up, especially if they are fairly young the likelyhood is that they might meet someone else.
I ask you, why should kids born out of wedlock to these couples have to endure childhood being branded in schools as illegitimate. Why should they be treated differently to other kids when it comes to things like confirmation? It's disgusting !!
There are already hundreds if not thousands of so called illegitimate children and the sole reason is that we have no divorce. We however have civil annulments which to me is playing with words. Lets do the sensible thing and legalise divorce, after all divorce itself does not break marriages up but we do !!! Could this be about votes ?

C.aquilina

Aug 18th 2009, 21:33

Jien bħala membru tal-knisja kattolika nemmen li jien għandi dejjem noqgħod u nimxi fuq it-tagħlim tal-knisja imwassal lili permezz tar-rappreżentant tal-Papa f'pajjiżi, li fil-każ ta' Malta huwa l-Arċisqof Pawlu Cremona. Kull diskors li jsir minn kwalunkwe persuna oħra għolja kemm hi għolja fil-ġerarkija tal-knisja,ghaliha din il-persuna la mhix inkarigata biex twassal dan it-tagħlim partikulari huwa dejjem meqjuż minni bħala prużunzjoni, għax ikun qed jaqbeż lis-superjuri tisgħu. Dan iġib konfużjoni.
Rigward il-politiku, jien nemmen li la jien kattoliku, inkun fejn inkun għandi dejjem nimxi ta' kattoliku, u niddefendi tdejjem u kullimkien t-tagħlim tal-knisja u t-tagħlim tagħha anke fil-parlament.
Qatt ma jista jkun, u mhux prinċipju li politiku fuq iz-zuntier tal-knisja jkun kattoliku u fuq is-siġġu tal-parlament ikun ħaġa oħra.

A. Muscat

Aug 18th 2009, 19:40

@MG Buttigieg

You keyed in:

10When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.

Here I see clear discrimination, unjust and double standards from the god of the bible. Why all the blame (of adultery) put on the woman?

c. camilleri

Aug 18th 2009, 18:19

Dear Mons Vell i have just read in an other paper that our Bishop holds opposite views to yours.
Bishop Cremona told members of the project Impenn " that the consequences of divorce made it incumbent on those who believe in the stability of marriage, including the Catholic Church, to share their views with the people.---- The Christian ensured that facts proved his beliefs. They were proposing these facts to society so that society will then reach its conclusion." It seems to me that Bishop Cremona has already indicated to Mons Vella that the way of the church differs from his. He is a member of the church and not a member of Parliament.

GiovDeMartino @Mons C Vella

Aug 18th 2009, 18:06

There was a time when you believed that the use of the safe period bet married couples was a mortal sin unless there was a "valid" reason.

Fenech M D

Aug 18th 2009, 17:52

Jistghu dawk in-nies li jizzewwgu bil-knisja jiddivurzjaw?

Kemm hemm minn dawn in-nies li kitbu s'issa li jixtiequ jiddivurzjaw u mizzewgin bil-knisja, jafu jekk dawn jistghux jizzewwgu?

MG Buttigieg

Aug 18th 2009, 16:16

@Jonshaw
Very simple jonshaw. Divorce not only worried Jesus he saw it as a threat to the natural order. A peep at the Bibble would have clarified matters for you. My surprise is that the good Monsignor is supposed to preach Jesus's teachings and not personal opinions!
Mark 10:2-12

2Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?"

3"What did Moses command you?" he replied.

4They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away."

5"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. 6"But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.'[a] 7'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8and the two will become one flesh.'[c] So they are no longer two, but one. 9Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

10When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."

Dr Francis Saliba

Aug 18th 2009, 16:12

Dr Francis Saliba
With his vast experience here and abroad, the founder of the Cana Movement knows better than anybody else that wherever divorce has been legalized, ostensibly for irreversible breakdown of marriage, inevitably it quickly developed in a “rabta coff” style of marriage, dissolved by arranged mutual consent. Divorce legislation inevitably creates a casual mentality that there is no need to take marriage seriously and to build “marriage on a rock foundation” because of an in-built escape clause to annul that “contract” for the flimsiest of excuses. Apart from religious considerations facilitating serial marriages, pro divorce legislation would impose an added burden on all members of society. In any democracy the public opinion of the majority should be ascertained. Those who object to Christianity ramming its beliefs down the throats of others should readily concede that ramming divorce legislation down the throat of the majority – and also deliberately omitting to ascertain it – would be just as improper.

Legalizing divorce scares me because I do not believe that any intensive preparation by the Cana Movement could possibly reverse that trend. And the Monsignor knows

Richard Micallef

Aug 18th 2009, 15:34

This is the opinion on Malta's foremost expert in marital matters. Enough said and any debate is superluous.

c. camilleri

Aug 18th 2009, 15:20

It would be interesting to know what Father Gouder has to say now after reading Fr. Vella's interview.

Narcy Calamatta

Aug 18th 2009, 14:46

I salute Mons Vella, a friend of many years standing. He is a leader who cares about the future well-being of his fellow citizens. Once again he was one of the first to bring to the discussion table a subject that affects everyone of us. Let us all behave like educated and civilised citizens who act out of love for our children who should benefit from our heritage. Please let us not reduce such an important debate to a quarrel among fireworks' enthusiasts. This is not a matter of taking sides but a challenge to find solutions. Our energies, when united, produce better than when pitted against each other. A priest has a duty not simply a right to share his erudite social research with married people who may only have first hand experience but no global concept of the state of marriage. No powerful institution whether democratically elected or not should impose a priori the right or not to discuss and much less a foregone conclusion. I cannot contribute much except that those who are in a happy marriage know that the grass is never greener. The others should stand up and speak for themselves. Thank you father Charles.

JonShaw

Aug 18th 2009, 14:33

@ MG Buttigieg
Nothing personal - but With Reference to your quote: ''Well divorce will not scare Mgr. Vella!! It did however worry Jesus !!! ''
Can you please elaborate and be factual how the introduction of divorce will ''worry Jesus''?

Anthony Mizzi

Aug 18th 2009, 14:14

Where was the Mgr. in July 1997, when the than Prime Minister Alfred Sant appointed the Commission for the Future of the Family, which was to discuss the possibility of introducing divorce in Malta?

Mgr. Vella was pretty silent than, why the change of heart now?

Was he scared of divorce during Labour administrations ?

Why this show of courage now?

C.Vella

Aug 18th 2009, 13:00

First of all I agree that every one deserves a second chance!

The Cana course is compulsory for us Catholics in Malta to attend, and it might just be a little bit of help building a so-called mature attitude towards married life...so far so good... but what will happen of those couples who expects a child out of wedlock & the church turns a blind eye and let the couple skip the course and go staight to the altar? Are they already-more-mature couples?

Mgr Vella said : "My theory is that while divorce from the Catholic viewpoint is considered a menace to the stability of marriage it does not mean that it's going to wreck marriages."

I think some marriages are a wreck from the beginning and divorce will only be the easiest way out for some couples. Life is ever becoming hectic and bad influences from media and the so-called "modern way of living" are consuming us. So actually the church has got a bigger mission here and some values need to be instilled in society way before couples attend Cana Courses. Maybe this way, the "divorce" will be better defined and properly used when it is really necessary

g.portelli

Aug 18th 2009, 12:17

Why all the fuss and confusion. Mgr Vella was pragmatically stating the obvious. A civil society accepts the right of individuals to seek redress for intolerable pain. The Church is part of civil society and recognises that not all citizens are part of its flock. You only need to look at Sunday church attendance which barely makes the 50% mark for that to become apparent. Mgr. Vella was calling for separation of Church and state. Experience has made the mgr. wiser. Why risk further disengagement from the Church by waging a crusade and branding anyone in favour of divorce as part of the problem. Failed marriages are not post war phenomena they always occurred, couples merely had no right of redress, women more so than men. Maltese men always had the option of absconding, and they did.Migration gave males the opportunity to opt out of a failed marriage. Loyalty to the ‘family’ is a Maltese myth we like to perpetuate. Some choose not to face the facts and family narratives. The Mgr. is merely asking the Church in Malta to refocus its energy and resources in Education for marriage rather than directing its energy at maintaining unrealities which perpetuate misery.

Steve Pace

Aug 18th 2009, 11:50

@Mary Borg - Part 2 - "Whilst we all accept that the church may not bless divorce, it's effort should be focused on preparing people to marry and providing support and not trying to impose its laws on the state" I am re sending you my comment in it integral context. Please do read through bloggers comments before replying. Thank you !

Steve Pace

Aug 18th 2009, 11:47

@Mary Borg. And where is it exactly that i said that the Maltese church shoud accept divorce ? Please do not put words in my mouth. What i said was that MGR Vella's approach is the right approach to discuss such an issue. He stated that he does not agree with it , but at the same time opened his arms . Others like yourself are the prime example of what i meant. Blind folded and completely unobjective. How many times must we state the obvious. The church does not write state laws. It has a duty to guide catholics like yourself. But the state has a duty towards the rest of us .
@MG Buttigieg. By crusade i refer to the continous attack on the civil state. By trying to impose its laws on the state. I hope this clarifies. And regards the until divorce do us part bit, again i say that maybe we shold also remove Seperation so that no one would stand a chance to leave a broken marriage.
It is so easy to sit back and relax and use Christ as a barrier. Thank God none of you so far have gone through seperation !

Joe Borg

Aug 18th 2009, 11:06

Malta is almost the only country in the whole world without a divorce legislation. What we are waiting for?

g bartolo

Aug 18th 2009, 09:14

why does everyone have to make comments and may in the meantime hurt other's people hearts.... Does everyone know what it might mean to the woman who was mistreated by her husband. Does everyone know what this does to the personality of this woman. Does everyone know what heartache this woman goes through. Please stop to answer these questions to yourself and then you might understand the implications and context of this article. Mgr Charles Vella was so right in saying that couples who are getting married lack maturity and responsibility and the "victim" would have been totally unaware of this.

david magro

Aug 18th 2009, 07:38

Mur gibu kieku kien fi zmien il-Labour....Krucjata kien jaghmel Dun Vella .

MG Buttigieg

Aug 18th 2009, 05:50

Well divorce will not scare Mgr. Vella!! It did however worry Jesus !!! It brings ruin to marriages precisely because it undermines its foundation, the principle of indissolubility. Where divorce is legal couples entering marriage will do so knowing that if anything goes wrong they can call it a day and abondon their commitment. And anything can go wrong! It might be that the partner is violent and then it might be that he/she snores in bed. The end line is that they know before hand that they can shirk their responsablity and leave.
@ Steve Pace
Are you sure that the church " condemn, judge execute and stone to death people who have already gone through so much pain and hardship?"
The Church accepts that in marriage things can go very very wrong. And it is compassionate towards the injured parties, the husband the wife and the children. But the fact that things can go wrong does not justify that it sacrifices the principle of indissolubility. Although I am not happy with the example as it conjures the idea of "crusade", this would only mean that in order to win a battle it ends up loosing the war.

Henry S Pace

Aug 18th 2009, 00:12

So Mgr Charles Vella came up with a new concept that divorce is not at all worrying. There must not be any crusade against divorce. Well so the octagerian priest thinks that the church Authorities should stay put because if they do speak they would be leading a crusade. Did the Lord Jesus Christ launch a form of crusade when he spoke to the Jews when he told them that divorce is wrong. ' What God has joined together let no Man separate'. (Mathew 19. 3:6)

This is the truth and the word of the Lord.

Mary Borg

Aug 17th 2009, 23:12

@ Steve Pace
.'Many fundamantilists and holier than Thou will condemm MGR Vella's open views . But one thing is sure. People like MGR Vella work to bring people closer to church as he does not condemn, judge execute and stone to death people who have already gone through so much pain and hardship'

Not condemming, not stoning, and not holier than thou -above all not holy believe you me...but if the Church does gives in to divorce than it is a farce and does not follow Christ's teachings.The state can do whatever it likes but not the Church since the Church teaches Christ's teachings. If the church gives in to divorce. it will be bringing people closer to it you said...not so sure...but if so, what it will be then? Christ's church? No. I'm not condemming just stating facts. Christ had compassion true, so very true, but He also stated no divorce

Steve Pace

Aug 17th 2009, 21:28

@C N Aquilina. No. Mgr Vella is not trying to confuse you. He stated that he does not agree with Divorce. He was clear. His message however is a message of hope to those like many who have belonged to the catholic church for many years and now feel that the church is pushing them aside. His mesage is the real message that the church should have conveyed but was blackened by the fundamantilist empty vessels who make most sound. The church always said that it wanted to support seperated people but the few clergy men who are public figures have managed to supress this idea . It is clear that MGR Vella has his hand on those who have suffered pain of seperating . He is not a statistics expert like MGR Gouder. Nor is he a politician. Thank you MGR Vella. for showing us what Christ's message was . Tolerance, love and understanding .

Steve Pace

Aug 17th 2009, 21:19

What a breath of fresh Air. Indeed Mgr. Vella's age has not stopped him from being in touch with reality .
Many Online bloggers including myself have expressed the same opinion as MGR Vella.However we are mocked , ridiculed and called sinners ! Whilst we all accept that the church may not bless divorce, it's effort should be focused on preparing people to marry and providing support and not trying to impose its laws on the state .
Many fundamantilists and holier than Thou will condemm MGR Vella's open views . But one thing is sure. People like MGR Vella work to bring people closer to church as he does not condemn, judge execute and stone to death people who have already gone through so much pain and hardship . His approach is the perfect approach to discuss the pitiful situation of seperated couples who cannot re-marry. His mention of using statistics as a weapon is also very true. Some members of Clergy seem to be love statistics . Of course it is far easier than having to meet the hearts of people !
With its crusade the church is seriously risking evoking ghosts of it's own past

Pule' Carmel

Aug 17th 2009, 19:18

Language is dangerous, as the richness of thought can never go beyond the assets of one's language. Unfortunately, the more Man and Woman learn to speak ,the more they will utter meaningless statements which can never be verified accurately, and humans will commence running through corridors which will eventually rob them of their reproductive natural instincts and child bearing philosophy to become quantitative calculators, sensing only that which "smart" mechanical robots sense. Nature has, through evolution cultivated consciousness, love, the purity of reproductive relations between Man and Woman etc. As Education Grows, Instinct reduces,and is lesseded to virtual absence and eventualy a couple living in a city will reach the behaviourism of logic algotithms of ARTIFICIAL INTELIGENCE now devoted to STILL STUPID ROBOTS. programmed externally by other selfish human beings whose motive is to make slaves out of robots to increase production efficience . Such ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE in humans will start assisting children to live in childcare centres rather than the bosom of mothers and fathers who are losing their instincive mental yearning for their children.

C.N.Aquilina

Aug 17th 2009, 18:28

Rev. Monsinjur Vella. Inti qed titkellem f'isem il-knisja? Ghax qed tħawwadni flok tghinni nghix il-ħajja nisranija! Ghandi noqqod fuq dawn l-ideat li qed tppriedka Mons? Il-kelliem tal-knisja f'Malta r-Rev. Monsinjur Gouder ma ghandux bżonn jitkellem u jigwidana? Dan mhux diskors perikulus u li jħawwad l-insara? Għalhekk nistenna li xi ħadd mill-kurja Maltija jigwidana!

Ivan Mizzi

Aug 17th 2009, 17:56

We live in a state of confusion - a state that is partly secular and partly not. If it was a real secular state and there was a real seperation of state and church we would not even feel the need for these subjects.

In this country if you are lucky enough to be Roman Catholic you can get married in front of 600 people, have a video and a gazillion photos taken of the event, and then you get an annulment - stating that marriage never took place. Then the state automatically says the same thing.

If you are an atheist - you have to lump it. No way out. Married for life, because the church will not give an annulment, obviously.

Anybody else sees the irony?

Can anybody mention any other legal contract, that once both parties to it being dissolved, cannot be dissolved? What's different in a civil marriage contract?

And nobody has anwered why a priest can get a "divorce" from priesthood, why a layman can't get divorce from a marriage. Aren't both "sacraments"?

maria buhagiar

Aug 17th 2009, 14:45

Annulment worries me more than divorce because when a couple's marriage has been annulled, this means that it had never existed. If there were children from that marriage, what are they told? That their parents had been living a lie? A person coming from a broken marriage, who shows a desire to re-marry, means that he or she still believes in marriage. For those who judge people are want a divorce to start a new life, I ask them to count their blessings if their own marriage is a healthy one; but please remember that every broken marriage has a sad and complex story. Nobody breaks up for fun....and although my own marriage has been a happy one for more than 20 years, I sympathize with those who have their own good reasons to start afresh. Mons was very humane. And yes, why should divorce threaten good Catholic marriages? Or are some of them too fragile to withstand the test?

Joe Xuereb

Aug 17th 2009, 14:39

If anybody told those about to get married the REAL implications of this unnatural union, they would run a mile. As before (by yours truly), monogamy is not a fact of life, it is an aspiration. Aspiration is commitment. Commitment needs a payoff, a carrot. Children and how they turn out? Hardly guaranteed. A permenence in Heaven maybe? Does not wash anymore. Guaranteed companionship/bless? Don't think so. People marry because of 'sheep-follow-sheep' mentality, fear of loneliness, seeming to be a social failure (remained on the shelf), need for a meal-ticket/respectability, blah-blah. And the ultimate blackmail (still happens in rural areas) 'I will let you bed me if you put a ring on my finger (female-speak obviously). And thence starts the stranglehold for him (and her). All for a first night of love and repeat performance thereafter. Until it fizzles out.

M Vella

Aug 17th 2009, 13:07

Big up for Mgr Vella, how refreshing to hear a priest with this approach.

Mark Q John

Aug 17th 2009, 11:40

This message is for all SILENT priests in the Catholic Church.
Are you happy with what Mgr Vella reportedly told the Sunday Times?
If yes - speak out. If not, do tell. But PLEASE do. Despite the avalanche of words from mostly hard working priests in all Maltese parishes in the homilies, panegyrics and all the major activities of the summer festas, they are really noisily SILENT on what matters. The silence of priests in Malta is deafening. Of course, you can afford to stay silent. But that is not what you should be doing.
Catholic priests should never make a statement like the above viz 'Divorce will not mean ruin of marriages', unless they choose to defy the teaching of the Catholic Church to this day. In 1987, on the eve of Argentina's introduction of divorce, Pope John Paul II told Argentina that the legalization of divorce would undermine society, loosen morals, and encourage disrespect for the law. Now we already have this social anarchy in Malta, without locally granted divorce. Should a Catholic priest ever state that divorce will not wreck marriages?

Ray Gatt

Aug 17th 2009, 11:32

@ Teresa Pace - I am a Nationalist, I was born Roman Catholic but not anymore, I do not practice any religion. I've been separated for the past 15 years, I'm cohabiting, would like to marry my partner but can't. You can keep your values, but what about my rights? If Joseph Muscat promises to look into divorce, I'll vote Labour next election.

Stephen Farrugia

Aug 17th 2009, 11:17

Finally some sense!! The clergy doesn't usually understand what it means to have made a mistake, and living life in total agony... I've seen couples split up and the pain they have to go through...makes them curse the church and it's bond.

Divorce should be introduced... as In the clergy, one who becomes a priest can easily come out of his commitment... and if not introduced, then i'll happily suggest that whoever becomes a priest, it's for life, and thus cannot come out of it. ... THAT would make sense i think.

Mandy Micallef

Aug 17th 2009, 10:46

Finally!! someone who has the intelligence to realise that people do not follow rules through imposition but through guidance. Very refreshing.

Government, please take note.

Martin Spiteri

Aug 17th 2009, 10:39

@mgr Vella If I may recall you being stopped waving a poster in Mosta way back in august 1975 " IZ ZWIEG CIVILI JOFFENDI IN NISRANI ". I gather that you were against civil marriage when in Malta there was no form of marriage either that of the catholic church. You seem to have opened your way of thought considerably since then. I am not saying this to invoke any political arguments. In 1975 I did not understand it. Today I consider it a civil right to marry as one pleases. Now I think that for a couple to land itself for life in a marriage that is rotten from its core is UNGODLY and inhuman. I repeat divorce is a very unhappy neccessary decision. like medicine only those who really need it should seek it. I again ask you Mgr Vella where do you stand when we speak of civil marriages?

Andre Caruana

Aug 17th 2009, 10:33

@ M. Zammit
"I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

So when a couple decides that divorce is the only solution they have only to wait for their husband/wife to be unfaithful and commit adultery (unless adultery was the cause that led to them wanting to divorce) and then they are given consent by Jesus Himself to divorce.

Please explain and elaborate the quoted statement from the bible if I understood them incorrectly.

Peter Korsten

Aug 17th 2009, 09:21

Such refreshing views, and from man of the cloth. Now, if everybody else realised that a wrecked marriage leads to divorce and not the other way around, and that indeed Church and religion are personal matters, not state matters, this could be a much more relaxed set of islands.

Marvic Psaila

Aug 17th 2009, 09:17

@ Mary Borg and Teresa Pace

Oh well...it seems that we have agreed upon one point.....that if we want to put our Religion into practice we should follow the teachings of the Bible........and so I did because I have strived and managed to get Church Annulment myself............and I am happy about it...........BUT should I be happy with my situation and stop there? Should I just feel ok and ignore other couples' needs? No way...I have always been taught NOT to be selfish and that's what I keep insisting on.........if a couple who can't get church annulment still want to have a second chance let them have it......If I want to follow the teachings of the RCC so be it, BUT if others don't because they have no choice let them free and live their own life as they desire. We are nobody to impose our beliefs and values on others.
Good day Ms Borg and Ms Pace.........May we all have a life full of peace, love and joy.

silvio farrugia

Aug 17th 2009, 04:19

How refreshing ! One can tell that this monsignor's life is spent abroad.His mind is so open though over the 80.Prosit keep it up and thanks monsignor for being practical,intelligent and having a lot of humanity.

Joe Xuereb

Aug 17th 2009, 01:54

Marriage is just a social construct. Nothing to do with Cana or religion. Once one ascribes to it 'Jesus said this' and 'Moses said that', one instantly starts faltering. It is a social setup that evolved like any other social setup, born of necessity. Get over it.
The union of two people for life is most unnatural. People stay together for a variety of reason of course. Close scrutiny shows that these reasons are rather hollow at best. Like anything else in life, of course differences of opinion will happen. Ride them and avoid divorce some wit said. This is fine if the disagreement is about what brand toothpaste to purchase. If the rift is more serious, this needs addressing and this is were divorce comes in. Treat every problem like it were a toothpaste and the marriage will appear to be the charade it has always been. Sorry for the 'bad' news. It also happens to be true.

Martin Spiteri

Aug 17th 2009, 01:45

Erm for those interested to know that the church has two rare cases of divorce. These two cases are called the pauline privilege and the petrine privilege. This type of divorce is given by the church tribunal on sufficient evidence

Both persons were not baptized at the time of their wedding. Marriage originally not sacramental.

One party has been baptized, but the other remains unbaptized. Marriage remains not sacramental.

The unbaptized person departs physically by divorce or desertion, or morally by making married life unbearable for the baptized person. Just cause for the dissolution.

The unbaptized person refuses to be baptized or to live peacefully with the baptized person. Unbaptized person is asked.

Civil divorce has been granted by the state. Church cannot be responsible for the separation.
Petrine Privilege or a decree in favor of the faith is a provision in the Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church granting a previously married person the right to marry under certain specific circumstances. The implementation of this procedure is reserved to the Pope.

geralda azzopardi

Aug 17th 2009, 00:26

"Instead, the Church should focus squarely on better preparing couples for a healthy marriage, and warns that one of the problems plaguing society is that several of those tying the knot nowadays are too immature."

the problem is not immaturity, its the ability for each and every person to live on his/her own. I think that in the past most people got married out of necessity, or because its the 'norm' to do so after a certain age, inkella 'tibqa fuq l-ixkaffa'. I honestly think that the minority of couples can say they married their true loved one. Nowadays a person can get anything from various sources rather than everything from one person.

So yes, the church should prepare couples not to rush into marraige amongst other things.

Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

Aug 16th 2009, 23:46

Monsignor Charles Vella took a similar stance in 1973 with the decriminalisation of homosexuality. It is a pity that fundamentalist Catholics do not see eye-to-eye with Monsignor Vella. No body is "in favour" of divorce because divorce signals the end of a relationship. It is an inevitable necessity when a relationship breaks down. What Malta has is divorce by the back door through Church annulment. The battle here is who retains control over marriage: the Church or the Church? It is time for the government to act. Keeping up the pretence that marriages in Malta are successful is precisely that: a pretence.
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

John A. Zammit

Aug 16th 2009, 23:13

To; Mario Bezzina: Missieri kien jghid iz-zwieg bhat-trabokk: min hu barra jrid jodhol gewwa u min hu gewwa jrid johrog barra. Joking apart I think that all this hustle about divorce shows that we are not mature enough to accept multi-culturalism. Take for example the case of President Regean; he divorced his first wife and married Nancy; his first wife being a convinced Catholic did not marry again. Nearer to our times; Prince Charles ( Church of England) and Camilla (Catholic) had to marry at the public registry since both churches do not accept divorce; however a service, without the marriage ceremony, was later held at Westminister. His sister Princess Anne had to travel to Scotland and marry her second husband, whom, incidentally, she has now divorced as well, in a Presbiterian Church as the Church of England does not accept divorce. If one is convinced of his/her faith the laws of the land, whatever these may be do not effect him/her in the least. If we would have divorce tomorrow, I still would not leave my wife of almost thirty years as kif kien jghid missieri; it-tieni zwieg baht-tieni ftiet. Thank You

John Borg

Aug 16th 2009, 22:29

First of all Mgr Vella is not saying that it is a BENEFIT to have divorce.

We have to evaluate what effect the introduction of divorce can have on the whole society not on the divorced individuals only.

The Church opposes divorce because it is the opposite to marriage and it was Jesus Christ Himself who taught us that marriage is for life. However this is 2009 and seems that there are a few who think that they can teach us better.

Church and state shall be separate but it's good to have a state that holds Christian values.

Teresa Pace

Aug 16th 2009, 21:37

@ Neville Cachia

Please view the clip and you realise why I mentioned the nationalist political party...it doesn't have to do with the issue of divorce but rather Archbishop Gonzi and the Labour party issue back in the 1960's.

Emma Xerri

Aug 16th 2009, 21:09

@James De Giorgio

It is unfair of you to criticise Dr. Emmy Bezzina about the lack of support from fellow Maltese and hence the lack of votes.

Had Dr. Bezzina the resources that the Church has, especially the power to mould the young minds of children, thereby setting them up for life to blindly follow in its teachings, whether these made sense or not, and even to their own detriment, then we sure would see a lot more people voting for these 'five member' parties.

The truth is only exceptionally intelligent and free-thinking people have the power to escape early childhood indoctrination. Most people, once thus brainwashed, follow blindly like sheep. This 'proves the point' why the Church still has such a large following, and for no other reason.

Dr. Bezzina and others like him, who only have the good of his fellow Maltese at heart, would have had not trouble gaining followers and votes in a liberal democratic country where enforced religious indoctrination was not institutionalized and their was a real and clear separation between Church and State.

v.pulis

Aug 16th 2009, 21:02

In the case of annulments where there are offspring involved will they be considered illegitimate not to use the b word? One can't have the cake and eat it too.

Joe Fenech

Aug 16th 2009, 19:47

M Zammit

Had you been a Muslim one would call you a Taliban !

James De Giorgio

Aug 16th 2009, 19:47

@Emmy Bezzina.
Neither do we need your ridiculous five-members party to tell us about your cloudy views.
Learn to respect others and if the monsignor is 81 years old, it shouldn't be an object of ridicule.

The "anachronistic" insitution's most seemingly outdated policies make much more sense than your rants. I think the votes (or lack of) you get in elections compared to the Church's following on the island and worldwide prove that point.

Joseph E Briffa

Aug 16th 2009, 19:13

Adultery used to be a crime in Malta in days gone by, but now it is no longer the case. This change does not necessarily mean that every married man or woman has extra marital sex. Before, if a married person had extra marital sex he/she would be prosecuted for committing a crime if somebody could prove it in a court of law; now it's no longer the case. Back then, the married person could also risk being blackmailed by the other party. The state moved away from the teachings of the church when adultery was decriminalised. The same thing would happen if divorce is introduced. Today one can't get a divorce in Malta but one can obtain one in other EU states and the divorce act is recognised in Malta. If one is unable to do this, then one has to go for a separation. The only difference between the two is that in the former case one can remarry, while in the latter case one is unable to do so; and can only cohabit with another person. However,the trauma suffered by children is very much the same.

Robert Gatt

Aug 16th 2009, 18:50

@Matthew Borg: It is very unfair to argue that those who agree with the Church's teachings on divorce should simply shut up. That is the greatest menace - some people think that the Church does not have the right to speak out its own views simply because other views stand in opposition to the Church's teachings! The Church has every right - and many times the duty - to speak out on these issues which directly affect us! Whoever does not agree with the Church's views has every right not to comply with them, yet he/she who calls himself or herself a true Christian cannot simply disregard the Church's teachings when making up his or her own mind on an issue like divorce. Thus, two points: 1. A Christian who does not give weight to the Church's teachings on any societal issue when he or she comes to decide upon his or her stand on such issues cannot be called a true Christian believer. 2. Any person, not just those pertaining to the Christian denomination, can never expect that in a society which is plurivocal, certain voices shut up simply because he or she does not agree with them!

Charles Grixti

Aug 16th 2009, 18:06

@A. Muscat

The difference is simple. Annulment is the dissolution of marriage because it had never legally existed and divorce is the dissolution of a legally constituted marriage.

Annulment exists in secular laws too. For instance, should a couple marry and then one party discovers that the other was already married (a bigamist), the injured party would not have to recourse to a divorce but a legal annulment would be given since the marriage was not legally valid. Or if one party finds that they were deceived in as far as the true gender of their partner, e.g. a man marrying a “woman” who was in fact another man.

Legal Annulments are rare. Most marriages are legally constituted and Divorce is the only way to legally dissolve them.

Church Annulments differ from State Annulments in that they follow canonical law, rules and regulation, instead of the secular and democratic laws of the State. Therefore they have no legal standing in ALL Western democracies.

The only exception is Malta, where Church Annulments - the only form of marriage dissolution allowed by the Church, has become law of a Secular State, thanks to a slight of hand perpetrated a few years ago.

Jon Shaw

Aug 16th 2009, 17:44

Finally a refreshing approach. Lets see if the Church/ Curia will now issue some sort of press release to detach itself drom this article....... Yet, on another note, it is not the Church that will eventually have to legalise Divorce by the governement.

c. camilleri

Aug 16th 2009, 17:41

Insomma Mons Vella has a way how to make the headlines. He has already done this in the past. Instead of playing to the gallery why did he not talk this over with his Archbishop instead of unearthing so much ill feeling against the church by those who never saw the church in a bright light. Now what about an other interview with father Gouder.

A. Muscat

Aug 16th 2009, 17:33

@ v.pulis

V.pulis asks an interesting question: Do the laws of God change with time?

According the Bible and the RCC The simple answer is yes.
Amazingly, its all about sex, money and hypocrisy. What I mean is that, if we are talking about sex, probably you would hear 99.9 % of the RCC followers say that Jesus forgave the sinner.
If the case in question is about theft (like what we currently having within VAT department) probably same RCC followers would give deaf ears to what Jesus says and you will hear something like: we are secular country and what religion or Jesus has got to do with that!
As you can see laws of god of the bible changes to suite the circumstances.

Lawrence Micallef

Aug 16th 2009, 17:00

Many people are enjoying a happy marriage. I am sure that theirs was not rosy all the way through. Many of them are glad that when the going was though, they did not find a culture which presents divorce as the instant and natural solution. Yes, many happy marriages are today happy because they survived the temptation of divorce during times of trouble. Yes, divorce is a threat to all existing happy marriages, because everyone will go through a bad phase every now and again. Traditional culture thought us to endure that bad patch and to march on. The divorcist culture will kill a marriage at its weakest point of a scuffle. Divorce is not only an issue between A and B and the children. It is a threat to the institution of marriage.

Mary Borg

Aug 16th 2009, 16:54

@ Ms Psaila
He wants us to be happy happy and live the way you like, ....-no you can't Jesus loves us exactly the way we are Ms Psaila, true, but if we love Him back we should live by Christ's values and teachings. It is from our side and not from his side...the loving part. He loves us unconditionally as we are and whoever we are. I'm not talking about any Church and any denomination here....none at all. He wants us to be happy in living free in Him. Living free in him means bondage free from things that keep us away from him. Bondage free means living the way he taught us how to live.Going against his teachings creates bondage, thus unhappiness.

Neville Calleja

Aug 16th 2009, 16:46

@ T.Pace

Being nationalist has as much influence on this matter as having brown or black hair.

Trust me, your political opinion does not determine all your other opinions - I hope that does not surprise you.

Teresa Pace

Aug 16th 2009, 16:42

Exactly Ms Psaila...the Church is not where you meet, it is the person...you have hit the nail right on it's head! well done. And I'm not judging anyone...I'm just stating what the bible says and if the Catholic Church and other denominations follow the bible, they just have to follow it...that is my point exactly and nothing else. It is up to the person to follow it...and no one is judging you. And as for a perfect marriage, it only exists in fairytales Mr Nicolas Coppini.There is no such thing as a perfect marriage and a perfect family believe me. If the state wants to grant divorce well let it be as such...but the Catholic church and other bible following denominations just cannot give their blessings if they follow what they teach...that was my point.

Matthew Borg

Aug 16th 2009, 16:18

Would M. Zammit kindly stop quoting the bible. This is about divorce being offered by the state. The church and you ultra-religious people should stay out of it and live by their own rules if they so please.

Marvic Psaila (Ms)

Aug 16th 2009, 16:02

@ Teresa Pace,
“Tolerance implies no lack of commitment to one's own beliefs. Rather it condemns the oppression or persecution of others.” John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Ms Pace....you might not be aware that with your judgement you are delivering the wrong message....your comments implies that to be a good Christian one must be intolerant! So please do not continue to send these messages because you are causing harm to the same church you seem to be so fond of ....and let everyone decide for him/herself ....they do not need you or me to take decisions on their behalf.
Ms Pace keep in mind that the Church isn’t where you meet. It isn’t a building. Church is what you do. It is who you are. Church is the human outworking of the person of Jesus Christ. Let’s not just go to Church, let’s be the Church! Jesus loves us all...whether we are single, gay, married, separated, annulled or divorced and He wants to see us all happy! As long as one does not judge or disrespect others, he/she is harmless!

So for God’s sake let’s all live and let live!

v.pulis

Aug 16th 2009, 15:57

Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning."
Does this mean that God gave in to the wish of the people?
Was anyone who divorced in Moses' time punished? In other instances God gave commandments and those who broke them were punished. Why not in this case?
Do the laws of God change with time?
Why are priests allowed to leave the priesthood when it is written that those who put their hand on the plough must never look back?

v.pulis

Aug 16th 2009, 15:46

"I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, EXCEPT FOR MARITAL UNFAITHFULNESS, and marries another woman commits adultery."

Does this mean that divorce is permitted if a wife is unfaithful to her husband? Does this also apply to husbands who are unfaithful? How many Maltese marriages are on the rocks because of this situation? Can these cases be granted a divorce?

charles cauchi

Aug 16th 2009, 15:45

divorsju soluzjoni? forsi ghal min ma jkollux tfal jista jkun soluzjoni, imma ghal min ghandu it tfal specjalment jekk ikunu ghadhom zghar dan ikun iffiser tbatija aktar ghat tfal li il genituri taghhom ikunu id divorzjaw. nispera li niehdu hsieb it tfal u jigu ikunsoltati nies profesjonisti fejn jidhlu it tfal u mhux naqbdu u naghfgu. anki fil qorti tal familja fkull kaz ghandu ikun hemm avukat tat tfal li studja l psikologija tat tfal u anki meta jinhatar l imhallef tal qorti tal familja dan ghandi jintaghzel u ikun prefebilment studja il psikologija tat tfal. gbajt nara tfal ibghatu minhabba l egojizmu tal genitur.

Nicholas Coppini

Aug 16th 2009, 15:22

@Theresa Pace - Let God judge and go back to do your ironing for your perfect happy family! Not everybody was lucky in life dear. Christ also taught the all important value of compassion and forgiveness. Christ did not only bless the Marriage of Cana he also listened to less fortunate people and those who were adulterous and forgave them. Nobody should judge others for what they do on this earth. Thousands of very good christians live yearning for a closer relationship with the church. Give them a chance! It's what Christ did when he was alive 2000 years ago!

Marvic Psaila

Aug 16th 2009, 15:16

self-correction ....@ my own previous contribution

"I was 'lucky' enough to get a civil and a state annulment....." was meant to be ' a civil and church annulment'.

Daniel Goggi

Aug 16th 2009, 15:00

@ Duncan Tanti

So what is really your point in your statement? you got me a bit confused.. Holy communion, Baptism, Confirmation, Marriage, Reconciliation.. They are all sacraments you can have and still get married. Whats your point? I think what you wanted to say is: why cant a priest be married and be a priest just the same? that makes more sense in what you are willing to say no?

And just to make a clarification, a priest is not married to God... usually nuns say they "marry" Jesus figuratively as a manifestation of love, and devotion towards their creed.

I think you are quite confused in what you want to say.. you are trying to justify your creed vis-à-vis people who try and live their creed. What I really would like to point out however is that no one is perfect and everyone has his/her weaknesses/strengths. Two wrongs don't make a right. But as always in life "Ghamel il-gid u nsieh, ghamel id-deni u ftakar fih"..

M. Zammit

Aug 16th 2009, 14:42

"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"

Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.

"Your hearts were HARD" that is why couples seek divorce! Because today few are those who love truly! Think about it... and change your attitude.

Stephen Spiteri

Aug 16th 2009, 13:52

Time and time again I have stated that the official position of the church and the personal opinion of members of it (whether in support of divorce not) are irrelevant to the divorce issue.
It is like stating good Norwegian salmon is best caught when red Indian fishermen start appreciating Sicilian cannoli.

Dr Emmy Bezzina, B.A.,LL.D.

Aug 16th 2009, 13:45

We do not require an 81-year-old Monseigneur appertaining to an anachronistic Institution to inform us about what has been asserted IN THIS COUNTRY for over a quarter of a Century now:MALTA has antiquated Legislation relating to FAMILY LAW because it suits the INTERESTS of INTERESTED PARTIES not the INDIVIDUALS who require a REMEDY for the plight in their respective Private Lives.The State should be sued as a EU Member State for discriminating between LOCALS who have the means to acquire a DIVORCE from any of the other EU Member States and the Citizens who do not have access to such possibilities.

The proverbial hypocrisy in the matter of DIVORCE by such double standard Institutions can hardly be gulped down were it not for the fact that we have to live with it. The People must learn that we must move forward in this Country and three self-centered Institutions are doing more harm to Malta than any good they might have done. Now that at least two VETERANS appertaining to this Institution have come into our long-preached Objective,are they going to be thrown out to the wolves:Welcome Fathers VELLA & SERRACINO INGLOT!

A. Muscat

Aug 16th 2009, 13:44

@ Teresa Pace
“The Church must have a clear state NO DIVORCE because that is what the bible states and thus that is what Christ wants.”

Are you saying that one MUST (blindly) follow what the Bible says?
The Bible says that one can drink battery acid and can’t be harmed, also the in the Bible it says that planet Earth is flat! Do I have to accept that nosence too please?

@ Dirk Urpani

With your reasoning we shouldn’t impose baptism on new born babies and let them decide after they grow up. Am I getting you right please?

By the way I am all for freedom of religions and I see imposing baptism on new born babies is unnecessary for two accounts:
First: According the Bible original sin doesn’t exist.... (Debatable).
Second: imposing baptism is against the freedom of choice.

@ Gitte Borg Grech
Annulment vs Divorce.....can anyone explain the difference?
In my book they are the same.

@ Ian galea
Cheer up. Your baby lost nothing by not being baptized.

Byron Camilleri

Aug 16th 2009, 13:38

At last... A clergyman with guts, unafraid to speak the truth!

Joe Fenech

Aug 16th 2009, 13:32

State and church don't mix. If the church doesn't want to grant divorce, it's in its right, but it has nothing to do with the state.

Should be very obvious!

C. A. Magdi

Aug 16th 2009, 13:17

It would be good if we start having divorce in Malta... see all the people who are separated and can't build up their life again. There are so many people that never reunite after separation, so why force a couple to live with their new partner without tying the knot, if they wish to do so. Not everyone gets annulment and it takes ages for one to do so which is unfair. The church might decide that you don't have enough evidence to get an annulment mostly when one of the couple betrays the other. If a marriage is broken then what?!! Stay alone all your life, or just live with someone out of marriage which the christian values are against as well? Actually this is what the church is making people do. So if there is divorce I guess the church will have less sinners as the church calls them. Divorce won't break marriages, it will just make a person live again if their marriage goes bad. Without divorce people are still breaking up. With it, it won't make any difference to how much marriages will break, but it will prevent torture to a separated person.

Dominic Chircop

Aug 16th 2009, 13:14

I am always amused at how many diehards Catholics there are who want to lecture us on what Christ wants us to do (or rather their own perception of what Christ wants).

Some of them are so vehement in projectjn Christ's views, you would not be amiss inthinking that only yesterday they were having a cuppa with Him.

Saviour A Ellul- Bonici

Aug 16th 2009, 13:04

Mgr Vella has a mine of experience in marital problems both here and overseas as he was always in the thick of it. And yet, at 81 years he can still show the way forward. But something else transpires: the bigotry of the church, state and some other naive institutions.

Teresa Pace

Aug 16th 2009, 12:58

@ Paul Barrett
These are not my values but Christ's values. Whether you want to abide by them or not, is your call. However since the Church's teachings are based of Christ's teachings it should abide by them.

@Gitte Borg Grech
Anullment means the marriage never took place.This is based on various points such as being pressurised to marry,if one of the couple was married before,if there was a physical/mental condition known to a partner but unknown to the other,intermarriages. There are more points, these are just a few. Divorce is divorce when both of them decide to go on separate lives.

I do hope I misunderstood Mgr Vella, I do hope so indeed. Either Christ's church or not...no in betweens. If Christ's church, the catholic church must abide by Christ's teachings.If the catholic church does as Mgr Vella said (or what I understood)it is in deep trouble as it is not abiding by Christ's teachings as it should be.

Nicholas Coppini

Aug 16th 2009, 12:48

This man is a genius! Bravo Mgr Vella; God bless you! what a clear mind, what sensible thoughts and totally balanced, realistic and fair comments. People like Mgr. Vella will surely
attract a LOT of lost sheep back. Keep well Mgr Vella we need people like you.

Ernest Vella

Aug 16th 2009, 12:22

I don't agree completely with Mgr.Vella...the Church cannot turn down her principles by saying they are bound to Catholics....and why not a referendum on divorce....I will not agree on a referendum on abortion....that's a crime...no need for a vote....like Mgr.Vella I neither agree on a "crusade" but at least priest must have the courage to speak and show what Christ and the Church teach.

For who argues that divorce is a medicine...medicine must be given to heal and not to kill someone....heeling medicine for the family must not be seen in divorce, but in dialogue, prayer, respect, love, forgiveness, family theraphists etc....Maybe the Church must continue to prepare in better and modern ways the young couples...but that is always a must.

R. Balzan

Aug 16th 2009, 12:21

@M Zammit: Clearly you have not understood the point being made by Mgr Vella. He is not advocating that the Church should be in favour of divorce but merely stating that there should be a distinction between Church and State - a point which one would have thought is obvious even though judging by the comments here it clearly is not.

Divorce is a legal and not a religious remedy. Whether an individual avails himself of such remedy is up to that individual who will decide in accordance with his or her moral values. Not providing a legal remedy to a citizen on the basis of the Church's moral teaching is wrong. We are (or at least should be) living in a country which respects its citizen's rights, and not in a fundamentalist state where the Church and the State are one.

Or are we just after creating a Christian State following the model used by some fundamentalist Muslim states?

Arthur Muscat

Aug 16th 2009, 12:15

Surprised by what Mons Vella said? Not at all! Others uttered the same opinions before him. Please refer to books written by Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini. Buona lettura!

Kevin Cassar

Aug 16th 2009, 11:56

@ Theresa Pace

Yes I agree that the church needs to say no to divorce, but the church is not the state and there are people who do not form part of the church. So I agree with the Cana founder and I think he speaks with a lot of sense and a lot of confidence that is lacking in other heads of the church. I mean how confident are the bishops on the strength of marriage if they fear introduction of divorce, thinking that if introduced it will ruin marriages?? I do not believe in the church but even if I did and I followed all their rules, I'd rather stay in my marriage because I love my wife than because the church/state forbids me to.

duncan Tanti

Aug 16th 2009, 11:49

So a priest who no longer wants to be a priest can stop being a priest and get married but the common people cant.Why is that?arent we all taught that a priest is married to god??isnt priestship a sacrament too like marraige?come on all you puritans give us a life.

Martin Spiteri

Aug 16th 2009, 11:45

Secondly Divorce has nothing to do with marriage! Divorce is sought only by those couples who tied the knot mistakenly. Those couples whose knot is strong as their love for one another will never seek divorce.
Why should a couple remain tied when their marriage never took off?

Divorce is like medicine. No one takes medicine unless one desperately needs it. Divorce should be available institutionally to those who desperately need it.

Of course a blessed marriage full of love and responsibility will never seek it , and couples who are to be wed, should be put aware that marriage is not about weddings and nice houses and beautiful bedroom moments, but marriage is about the total giving of self from both sides. Marriage will always be the foundation of a sound society.

Divorce is only a necessity which pains the whole family and has serious effects on children. But if without divorce? IT is unfair to deny divorce to those who made a serious mistake when they married.

Paul Barrett

Aug 16th 2009, 11:45

@ Teresa Pace
No one anywhere in the World is asking you to compromise YOUR values - you are however advocating that everyone else should blindly follow your beliefs irrespective of individual circumstances.
There are several hundred people who are trapped in a comparative "no man's land" as far as relationships go. The current marriage has totally failed, they have become legally separated, started a new life but whatever their beliefs, religion, political leanings are currently forbidden by state law from legalising a new relationship. The results are a state imposed ever growing population of illegitimate children.
The current use of annulment - an expensive, long winded way to say a marriage never existed does seem to throw the children of that marriage into limbo and would appear to be really just divorce by another name - but everyone gets their pound of flesh.
Turning a separation into a clear cut divorce (thus allowing re-marriage) will go a long way (but not totally cure) this social stigma which these innocent children will and are suffering as well as actually increase the number of those LEGALLY married - a state which everyone agrees is a key to social stability.

ivan cremona

Aug 16th 2009, 11:41

This by far..... the most honest and truthful declararion i have ever heard from a priest. The local clergy men should sit down together and see this clip and learn . This is the right approach to get people back to the church. The church has become like politics....very careful what to say...when to say and as rightfully pointed out with no distinct leadership because as always votes are a stake.

Well done to Mgr Vella. A true inspiration for all. This is the way to tackle divorce. The question isn't to introduce it to Malta or not as that is obviously inevitable but what is more important is how it is implemented by the church and state and what they comment about it.

On a light note very similar to Da vinci code. Don't fight it.... rather welcome it and challenge it with facts. All of the people i know ....and i know quite a bit , al in our 30s , are very distant from the church. No one goes to mass anymore. Nonetheless all - very very good people with good values and families !

Dominic Chircop

Aug 16th 2009, 11:40

I now hope that the Prime Minister stop avoiding the issue, and act like a Prime Minister of all Maltese,

Up to now, he has simply been perceived as a spokesman for the Curia, when topics such as divorce were mentioned to him.

Joseph E Briffa

Aug 16th 2009, 11:33

Well spoken Mgr Charles Vella....I agree 100%.... Couples don't resort to divorce simply because it is available. ..Divorce is nothing else but a 'clean' way of bringing a failed marriage to an end. This is the same like extramarital sex between two consenting adults. Simply because this is 'available' either in the privacy of one's own apartment or having sex with a sex worker it doesn't mean that all married people resort to it. The need is felt by some and at certain times but not by all married people. In Malta the church is against divorce per se but then there is no outcry if a married couple separate or resort to annulment. These are euphemism of divorce. It's like calling a spade a shovel. I am not speaking of moral isues here; divorce is a mechanism of the state and the two establishments should act independently, otherwise Malta would be another Iran. The question of children involved in a divorce case or a separation is still the thorny question and for them there is no difference whatsoever. Whether it's divorce or separation or annulment of marriage, call it what you will, the children are the unlucky ones.

Charles Allen

Aug 16th 2009, 11:27

Bravo!

M Marenco

Aug 16th 2009, 11:23

Better not to comment ... Non c'e' piu' religione!!!!!

Joe Fenech

Aug 16th 2009, 11:20

Thanks, even if you're stating the very obvious!

M. Zammit

Aug 16th 2009, 11:20

Part 2.

The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry."

Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."

Then little children were brought to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray for them. But the disciples rebuked those who brought them.

Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these." When he had placed his hands on them, he went on from there.

Extract from: Matthew 19:1-15

Carmel Debono

Aug 16th 2009, 11:19

Proset Mons, the problem is that the church in Malta has not kept in line with times while very few clergy men has the liberty to express themselves in public like you did.

M. Zammit

Aug 16th 2009, 11:17

Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"

"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator `made them male and female', and said, `For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"

Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.

I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

Extract from: Matthew 19:1-15

Is Mons another Moses? Mons. couldn't you have gone to the bishop to get funds for Cana marriage counselling instead of the media? When the Church members openly show different opinion in public, it's a sign that Christ and His teaching are not the source of their inspiration.

apgrech

Aug 16th 2009, 11:13

Excellent statements by Mgr Charles Vella who has always worked very very hard to establish good and solid marriages in Malta. His Cana movement bore many fruits which caused couples to reconcile.

I fully support what he has stated except his remarks about Archbishop Gonzi. Gonzi was a leader but he was also interested to keep his "authority" and wanted to be in charge. Gonzi goofed big time. Mintoff was a leader and yes, he too was very stubborn, but he made decisions for the improvement of Malta and was not selfish and didn't seek his glory and power.

Prosit to Mgr Charles Vella and hope the leaders of Church in Malta sit down together and discuss Mgr Vella's statements and, perhaps, with Mgr Vella present in such meeting.

Carmel Attard

Aug 16th 2009, 11:12

Very well said ..Divorce is no threat to marriage. The biggest threat to marriage is when two completely different persons try to make a life together as one! No one is the same, and therefore each has to leave a bit of space for each other. Very important is when one is prepared for the unknown with a movement like Cana, and the Experienced point out the ups and downs of marriage, the compatibility of the bonded couple. Mgr Charles have indeed done a great Job through out the years, and is still showing his worth. Like wise today Malta has a very charismatic open minded Archbishop, We should all be very proud of! As been mentioned, he is no way to be compared with other Bishops of the past. Our Archbishop has jelled most Maltese together, he is a great minder of the flock. As mentioned by Ms Pace, Archbishop Gonzi has done irreparable damage to the church in Malta as he was way out of wack from being a " man of God"!! A great difference from our Archbishop of today who commands respect and understanding.

joseph zammit

Aug 16th 2009, 11:01

Ian galea--
I sympathise with you and with many others in your situation. What fault does an innocent baby has? Be strong within and know that you have not sinned--its all bull!!
I ask the archbishop of Malta or bishop of Gozo or even the Pope himself, to explain this outragious misbehaviour, this so-called stupid church teachings which go against Jesus's love toward one's enemies!!
Be strong within your spirits all you who have suffered--and still are--such injustices.
Oh God, forgive them for they (church) know not what they are doing!!

Ramon Casha

Aug 16th 2009, 11:01

Does this mean he's going to be sacked like the head of the Church's film classification board now?

Adriano Spiteri

Aug 16th 2009, 10:59

The Church should not have a say in this.

Divorce is a personal issue and not a national one.

Holding a referendum on divorce, as an LP EP contestant had suggested, doesn't make sense. One cannot be stripped out of his rights to divorce simply because a majority voted against.

What is worrying is not the fact that divorce will be introduced but the number of couples deciding to separate. Whether divorce is introduced or not, once a couple decides to untie the knot then that's it. It's all about values and morals or the lack of.

Our birth rate is on a decline even on a European level. That signals a catastrophic situation coupled with the current influx of immigration and their own offspring.

Gitte Borg Grech

Aug 16th 2009, 10:57

Annulment vs Divorce.....can anyone explain the difference? For me, they are one and the same - dissolution of marriage!

mario bezzina

Aug 16th 2009, 10:56

marriage is a farce. first few years you get by, the minute you have children, the so called brilliant relationship and this includes sex, decreases by 50 per cent. the problems between them are discussed with friends and not between them. lies dishonesty from one or the other. the solution, irrespective of children, shoud be first the husband and wife should regard themselves as number one priority to each other and after the children. this priority should be continuous without any break. i live by myself and have time to notice a lot of couples and it is a disastor. they do not hold hands, they not kiss, they are not nice to each other. you always find one of them, conducting business while with his wife, talking on the mobile, thinking that he is impressing his wife. these marriages are a drag. in my opinion, do not get married at all. have nice day.

martin saliba

Aug 16th 2009, 10:53

@ Joseph Zammit.

However, Mgr Charles Vella so strongly warns against holding a referendum on issues like divorce or abortion, this shows a double standard talk.

If divorce were to go to a referendum the Maltese church would only have to say that those who vote for divorce are not good Catholics as it has already said something to that effect to our MP's. The church has power over the Maltese vote by threatening their souls as has happened in the past.

Dirk Urpani

Aug 16th 2009, 10:52

I agree completely with Marvic Psaila... Mrs T Pace, Mr Psaila gave you the answer;) No one is forcing you to divorce Mrs Pace but let the others who want to divorce have a divorce. If you believe in Christ do not divorce but let others do what they want to and do not impose your beliefs on other people, who want to have another chance in life;)

Joe Fenech

Aug 16th 2009, 10:46

PHEW....someone from the Church with brains has had the courage to speak!!!


"He also strongly warns against holding a referendum on issues like divorce or abortion and also calls for a stop to what he describes as the "twinning" between the Maltese Church and the State. Watch excerpts of the interview by clicking the link above."

THANKS !

Teresa Pace

Aug 16th 2009, 10:38

1. The action of the Church in the 1960's have repercussions even today. many left the Catholic Church then and now because of what happened between archbicshop Gonzi and the state. No I don't believe that what the archbishop did then was the right thing.
2. A good leader has to have charisma such as the archbishop that we have today.
3. One cannot have a dream in the night and then wake up in the morning and act on it like Mgr Vella said archbishop Gonzi used to do. One has to think the consequeses and above all pray for enlightenment from the Holy Spirit before acting.
4, The Church must have a clear state NO DIVORCE because that is what the bible states and thus that is what Christ wants.

I am a nationalist. I am a Catholic. Above all I am a believer in Christ - DON'T COMPROMISE ANY VALUES

Dirk Urpani

Aug 16th 2009, 10:36

Phewwww.. finally the Church has spoken.. Prosit Mons I agree fully with your point of view.. At least maybe now we wont have to see our government wasting another load of money on a 6th report about divorce...

Marvic Psaila

Aug 16th 2009, 10:34

The worst reconciliation is better than the best divorce...........but if a couple won't come to terms why should their life and future be ruined?! I was 'lucky' enough to get a civil and a state annulment, but there are others whose story is more complicated.....who are we to complicate their lives even more? Who are we to decide for them? They deserve a second chance.... so let them have it!!

Ian Galea

Aug 16th 2009, 10:27

At last one of them talks properly, the injustice is not only caused on or to the individual that is seperated, but also if he or she would have kids outside the marriage. Try to go and baptise the baby and see what the priests say or do, I am seperated 10 years and had a kid outside the so called marriage, we went to baptise the baby and the nice priest said, oh i cannot do it because you are not married, then he said ok, i can do it but with closed doors. As if my son had something to be ashamed of. DO LIKE ME BELIEVE IN GOOD, READ THE BIBLE, BUT DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE PRIESTS AND THEIR CHURCH.

joseph zammit

Aug 16th 2009, 10:13

We are being given the impression that the Church is changing and it is viewing us citizens as mature. However, Mgr Charles Vella so strongly warns against holding a referendum on issues like divorce or abortion, this shows a double standard talk.
In my opinion, the attitude of the church to keep a low profile is nothing more a strategy not to lose more adherents and church goers as these mean money.
What is needed is better education to the people but first the people, majority that is, must undo the religious shackles that bind their thinking.
Having said all this, hope what Mgr Charles Vella said is the beginning of a new day.

Adrian Vella

Aug 16th 2009, 10:11

Proset Mons!! Finally the church is removing it's blindfold and about time too!!! It's about time the marriage between the state and the church gets its own divorce too!!

Michael Mercieca

Aug 16th 2009, 10:08

Very well spoken... We need more people like him in parliament!!!

Klaus Pedersen

Aug 16th 2009, 09:52

Please allow me to comment, as a non-catholic living in Malta, that I find profound wisdom in the words of Mgr Vella and that I have great respect for the ideas behind the founding of the Cana movement. Here you have a man of the Church who has done great work to sustain the institution of marriage, rather than trying to "forbid" the brak-up of marriages.
What makes me wonder is: when even a person of Mgr. Vella's background, and a person of Mgr. Vella's age one might add, can have such a pragmatic approach to divorce and the seperation of state and church, why are we then still in the situation in which we are?

Joseph Schembri

Aug 16th 2009, 09:51

How refreshing to hear such views from a priest who has also reached a venerable age!

I think that he dares say what he really thinks because unlike younger clerics he has got nothing to lose and has achieved all that he ever dreamed of and more. I am sure that the bishop of Gozo will be mighty displeased and I am itching to hear his next outburst.

Godfrey Pace

Aug 16th 2009, 09:51

I am 80 yrs old and have passed through Separation, Divorce (from abroad) remarried
and lived happily since then. This is the first time in my life that I have heard a cleryman speak the honest truth. This man knows what he he talking about. Prosit Mons.

simon cutajar

Aug 16th 2009, 09:33

Oh ! what a surprise ! At last we have somone who Thinks in those who are suffering injustice. I've been separated for ten years and I want to have a family again BUT there are those who stop me ! why ? can someone tell me why ? Can i have my freedom ? I have nothing against gay's lesbians or others and I love them as a human beings. If someone from the politics make it an issue in the next election I will vote him straight away !

A. Mizzi

Aug 16th 2009, 09:23

Heheheh .. Old time crusader Mgr Charles Vella saying legislation to introduce divorce in Malta would not mean it would ruin marriages....hehehehe Times sure are achanging ...heheheheh