Pro-Vicar criticises Mgr Vella on divorce

Lino Apap

Sep 17th 2009, 18:24

You’re welcome Teresa Pace. There is however no Church divorce - only State or civil divorce because the Church insists on the principle of the indissolubility of Marriage. This is fine as long as the Church maintains dogma within the religious sphere, without insisting on imposing it on the State. Although the civil act of divorce does not mean anything to you, rest assured that it is important for many, so it’s unacceptable that Maltese citizens are deprived of this choice by the Church, when fervent Catholics may simply NOT apply for divorce when it’s introduced. Once certain prominent members of the clergy continuously, vociferously and hysterically attempt to prevent the State from introducing reasonable divorce legislation I can see nothing wrong with other members of the Clergy, (who are just as important but less visible), quietly and calmly voicing their opinion to the contrary, together with their belief that the role of the Church should be to build stronger marriages rather than prevent the victims of failed marriages from attempting to rebuild their lives. After all, Prevention is better than Cure, especially when in the case of the Church there is no cure for a failed marriage.

Teresa Pace

Sep 17th 2009, 14:17

Thank you Lino Apap for explaining. At one point was mixed up if the clergy were talking either about Church divorce or state divorce.State divorce for me means nothing-since the proper marriage took place infront of God then it doesn't mean a thing.Let me speak about myself-I got married in a Church and got married by the state.If divorce was to be introduced and I apply for state divorce,I would still consider myself as married as my real marriage took place infront of God...the other bit,state marriage,I did it out of duty to the state...doesn't mean a thing for me.However,even if the clergy had state divorce in mind I just don't agree with them...personally I don't agree with the way the clergy talked about divorce.Since they do not have no say over state,the best thing they would have done is not to comment or at least support what the Church teaches,what Christ teaches without going into their personal opinion regarding state divorce.

Lino Apap

Sep 16th 2009, 19:10

@Teresa Pace - I think you're missing the whole point about divorce when you talk about moving from one marriage to another and finding the same problems all over again. Using this argument, then we may as well not have separations becuase this is really the point where the marriage breaks down, usually irreconcilably. Divorce would only follw a few years down the line, sometimes for the now ex-spouses to re-marry or simply to draw the line on a failed relationship and move on. As things are now, separatees (to coin a word) are living in a twilight zone - certainly not married in fact but still married according to the Law. This is why the country needs to introduce divorce legislation. People cannot live their lives tied down to a dead relationship and having the State declaring something that is completely contrary to what is the actual real-life status of a person. Moreover, those with fervent religious beliefs will NOT have to get divorce and/or re-married. They will have this choice but it is unacceptable that because of some people's religious beliefs, other are forbidden from having this choice - Bible or no Bible.

K. Scicluna

Sep 16th 2009, 09:19

Listening to Gouder is like going back 50 years in time. It's ok for the people who have money and can pay and get an annulment but not ok to get divorced? Totally agree with Mgr. Vella. We need divorce, foreigners laugh at how way back we still are when we tell them we still have no divorce.

Teresa Pace

Sep 3rd 2009, 12:35

@ Johann vella

No marriage is perfect...each marriage has its own problems...thus if a person divorces one person and marries another...surprise (or not)...there will be other problems. I am not talking about abuse here....abuse stands on its own and has to be dealt on it's own...but other marriage issues...so many issues...one tries to get away from them from the first marriage only to find a repeat in the second marriage....thus in such issues counselling is advisable to try and save the marriage

Teresa Pace

Sep 3rd 2009, 12:30

@ Johann Vella

I was defending my points it was other person then me who starting debating the bible, the integrity of Jesus as God etc. I used the bible quotes to show what Christ taught and thus what the Church teaches about divorce.

As for counselling there are various places to go...yes certain priest did undergo couselling courses (certain underlined), then there are marriage counsellors, there are social workers and therapists....a wide variety from where to get help.

What can I say, I do not judge people who separated and who are even living with other partners, coz I understand the problems and the pain some of them have gone through, through experience..... I understand them....but still the Church can't give way to divorce...if I want to leave my husband I can't divorce through the Church....I can seperate from him, I can go to counselling and I can even try for annulment...but not divorce through the Church. Civil divorce is another issue...since I don't give much importance to civil marriage neither do I give importance to civil divorce as for me real marriage took place infront of God

johann vella

Sep 3rd 2009, 11:34

@ Terese Pace
not the way you put it. this forum seems ,thanks to you, to be now about bible quotes and who knows the bible best.
totally out of point.
seems that you think that a person who married a drunkard,who abuses her if front of the kids and totally disrespects her for ten years should stay with her or his spouse has two choices-stay married or else go for counselling to a priest,a person who has no experience I would say in running a family. right?
or else find solace in reading and using bible verses to sooth said person.and read another verse..and another.. and another.

A. Muscat

Sep 2nd 2009, 23:01

@Teresa Pace
...maybe another time...this forum is about divorce

Point taken. Please let us keep divorce debate out of any Biblical reference then. May my God, your God and Jesus’ God guide us all to the right path..

Teresa Pace

Sep 1st 2009, 23:03

@ A Muscat

...maybe another time...this forum is about divorce

A. Muscat

Sep 1st 2009, 20:31

Part 3

@ Teresa Pace

Further, the verse clearly states that Jesus was the "WAY" to a mansion. He did not say that he is the "DESTINATION" which would be the case if he were God. What else would we expect a prophet of God to say except "I am the 'way' to God's mercy"? That is his job. That is what a prophet does. It is why God chose him in the first place; in order to guide to the mercy of God. This is indeed confirmed in John 10:9 where Jesus tells us that he is "the door" to "the pasture." In other words, he is the "prophet" who guides his people to "heaven" (please see also Jn. 12:44).
Finally, please read carefully and remember
"Not every one that says to me(Jesus); 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of my Father, who is in heaven."
Matthew.7:21
Should you need any further explanation kindly consult a priest!

I know the debate is a bout divorce but since the Church stand for the book we must first understand the book.

A. Muscat

Sep 1st 2009, 20:26

Part 2

@ Teresa Pace

Jesus says that in God's mansion there are "many" rooms. Jesus was sent to guide to only one of them. The countless other rooms were reserved for other tribes and nations if they would obey their messengers. However, Jesus was telling his followers that they need not worry themselves about the other rooms. Anyone from among his people who wished to enter into the room which was reserved for them could only do so if they followed Jesus and obeyed his command. So Jesus confirmed that he was going to prepare "a" mansion and not "all" the mansions in "my Father's house".

A. Muscat

Sep 1st 2009, 20:20

Part 1

@ Teresa Pace


"I am the way, ...no one comes to the Father, but through me."
When reading this verse, for some reason some people see in it a confirmation of the Trinity. Although I can not see how they can read either an explicit or even an implicit reference to the Trinity in this verse.
There appear to be many who when reading this verse interpret it to state that Jesus is God and that no one shall enter into heaven except if they worship Jesus.
The popular perception that this verse claims that Jesus requires our worship in order for us to receive salvation is not the intended meaning of this verse. However, in order for us to recognize this fact it is necessary to study it's context.
If we were to back up a little and read from the beginning of this chapter, we would find that just before Jesus spoke these words, he said;
"In my Father's house are many mansions (dwelling places); if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a mansion (a dwelling place) for you."
John 14:2

Teresa Pace

Sep 1st 2009, 19:33

@ A Muscat Jesus said, 'No one can get to the Father except through me' Makes me wonder what kind of god you adore. But then another time...this debate is about divorce

Teresa Pace

Sep 1st 2009, 19:16

Dear A Muscat, 1 for A Muscat 0 for Teresa (as someone said before) . Think whatever you like. To have the complete relationship there must be teachings laid by the bible as well. How are you to know a person, in this case Jesus,if you know nothing about Him? If I want to know about Queen Elizabeth I I look her up in the history books.If I want to know about Jesus I look Him up in the bible.Teachings taken from the bible are Christ's teachings and thus lead us to Him. Jesus is the son of God and was not just a human like you so much like to depict Him. The Church teaches Christ's teaching by means of the priests ....and anyway this forum is about divorce.

A. Muscat

Sep 1st 2009, 18:34

@ Teresa Pace Thanks for your answer. I too believe that the relation between God (The creator) and His creations (everything and all human including Jesus) must be a direct line. The relation between the creator and his creation must not have any form of interference from Priests, Popes, Son or a daughter no peoples at all just us and Him. We are almost in same page on this point. Cheers.

Steve Pace

Sep 1st 2009, 16:21

@Teresa Pace -- It is not the bible which is the problem.., It is the so many different interpretations it has been given over the last 2000 years that probably baffles some of us .

Teresa Pace

Sep 1st 2009, 15:55

@ Johann Vella

....and yes I do find solace in the bible...not just during in marriage problems but in all problems that crop up

Teresa Pace

Sep 1st 2009, 15:38

@ Johann Vella

There are no fairytale marriages...no perfect marriages...no perfect families....mine included. I wouldn't say minority of the people have huge problems...I would say the majority.

Steve Pace

Sep 1st 2009, 14:27

@MGR Gouder... The very fact that you give us such an opportunity to discuss such a topic is so admirable .. You may think you are actually helping your case by shoving statistics down people's throat in a bid to convince us that you are the One and Only perfect messenger of truth. Little do you realize that you have unleashed the bitterness and anger people have against people like you who feel much more comfortable on a pedestal of Marble posing as the knight in shining armor of the Maltese Church Party. You are so good at statistics and yet you have never managed to answer one very simple question.. What is the percentage of legally seperated couples who re-unite ? You want to stop the bleeding after the cut has been made. Is it not better to substantiate the ever increasing number of useless documents on strengthehing the families by actually starting to do something before marriage rather then after ! That is ytour duty and right after all ..

Martin Spiteri

Sep 1st 2009, 13:24

@ Fr anton gouder (2)

I followed you on tv when you crushed homosexuals. Mind you I must admit I dislike those fantastically minded show offs who want to tell the world how one should be, I dislike that flamboyant declaration. I believe in human rights and not laws and condemnations. I believe that there is space and room for all in this unity and diversity. I believe that love is the cure for this world, yet all we are doing we are creating more laws and more prisons, instead of creating more love and more education. What will Malta benefit by prohibiting divorce? do you think that the churches will fill up? Do you think this will stop youngsters from having early intercourse and getting pregnant? Do you think that by stopping divorce people wont separate, cohabitate and commit adultery? That is a negative approach. The answer lies in teaching education and a new start in this cancerously sick society. blocking is not the answer. Divorce is not a solution it is a necessary medicine which has to be used only by those who need it. Those who have a sound marriage do not need it .

Martin Spiteri

Sep 1st 2009, 13:16

@ Fr anton gouder

I welcome your slightly warmer words , and your declaration that you are human. That is a very positive remarks. Being human you said you have feelings. Does it occur to you that others do too? Did anyone tell you that you are considered to be high handed arrogant and haveno style in public relations? Do you know that above all you are a priest. Do you know that a priest has to be that light which illuminates and not condemn? Do you know that the reputation which has been built throughout the years of your office is shocking. But since you declare you are human I shall declare that I am human too. We are all humans and we seek to learn to understand and the rest of the prayer of the Poverello. Fr Anton , there comes a time when you have to put aside your books put your hands on your face and think.
You should ask a very simple question. " Where have I gone wrong? " not that you are a bad person but the way you deal with us is not kind and leaves us hurt and vexed..............

Johann Vella

Sep 1st 2009, 11:06

@ Gouder. It seems you are the only intelligent person commenting here.Scientific Facts? Condoms not being 100% reliable? ok granted... but you refused to answer about a 14 year old having sex and the precoutaions theses hould take.'dont do it' is sure what you are going to preach.
well ,the reality is that 14 years olds are having sex.
people who cannot remarry due to pressure by the church on the state not to introduce Divorce 'have feelings' too but that to you it seems is not important... as Long as we quote the bible and have people like Therese Pace who apparently have nothing better to do that quote a phrase adequate for every comment written here.
@ Therese Pace. It seems you have a wish for me.I have one for you. hopefully you never go through what a 'minority' of the population is going through (as someone stated below),hence an unsuccesful marriage.
But it seems if you were to you will find solace in the bible. well some of us don't... and some of us think it is a HUMAN RIGHT to remarry by state.Stay out of it
only in malta.com literally.

gaffarena joseph

Aug 31st 2009, 21:41

Dear Father Gouder,
Ask those that have been waiting for years for a serious debate.Father charles,knows well the feelings of such couples,he worked and lived with them.Our life is very short,and a couple cannot wait all these years to be declared annulled.
Divorce at the moment is the only solution for a new relationship,can the church =think of a better option.Why not have a serious debate with them,,and not what father borg wrote about this subject.Father Borg and company are never going to live the saga that these couples are living.Why not make a serious debate with Father Charles,why you ignored what he suggested.For the love of God,please try to listen what the others have to sayOur life is very short,we cannot let these couples suffer all those wasted years,we have to find the right solution, no matter if this will be sour for our religion.Remember that gone are those days that the church had that grip on our lives,we have to live for to day.

Teresa Pace

Aug 31st 2009, 20:53

@ A muscat

I have given you a reply with quotes from the scripture and otherwise including historical and archaeological sites proving that Christ is God in previous debates - if you would like a reminder no problem will forward them again. For me there is just a word called faith...I believe...and I have experienced the beauty of His love...as in personal experience no books, no priests, no people just me and Him.

A. Muscat

Aug 31st 2009, 20:33

@ Teresa Pace Thanks for your answer. I have opined about divorce down here. Divorce is a civil right. Period. I try not to digress the debate into a theologian issue as it may not please many (including Church leaders). Every body is free to have his/her god in any form, this forms could vary to include adding a deity to a cow, a stone or claiming nonsense as a divine. When the debate is about God, the Just, almighty (not mighty) and supreme I appease no one and I must draw a line. I am still firmly believed to ignore a god that says: "The birth of a daughter is a loss" (Ecclesiasticus 22:3). The bible has much beautiful literature but I fail to see a god in the bible. To condense could you please tell me why you think Jesus is God?

Fr Anton Gouder

Aug 31st 2009, 20:09

Perhaps we can return to the subject and put forward arguments and counter-arguments. Most inputs have been about anything even remotely connected. A litany on insults and insinuations. I am a human being and have my feelings, but I can live with these, so long as I believe that I am honest and work for the common good. Not even one intervention contradicted through research and studies one single aspect that I have written. Perhaps, it is because I have used these research and statistics judiciously, as hinted by Fr Joe Borg in his article. Let's turn to a serious debate.

Teresa Pace

Aug 31st 2009, 19:50

part 1 was a reply to Martin Spiteri

Teresa Pace

Aug 31st 2009, 19:49

part 2 If the state wants to legislate civil divorce it may do so, but the Church has every right to defend what it believes in. The Church has every right to air her opinion and educate people regarding divorce. The Church cannot go against Christ's teachings...I stated this before but this goes with what I wrote in the first part of my comment. I agree that many people are in much pain due to marriage problems or due to the fact that they are separated and living alone because divorce is not allowed by the Church....but it is not in ability to give solutions and within the church there are two solutions - counselling and annulment

Teresa Pace

Aug 31st 2009, 19:42

part 1 Malachi 2:16 - "For I hate divorce, says the LORD the God of Israel, and covering one's garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless." Mark 10:2 - And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" Mark 10:4 - They said, "Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to put her away." Mark 10:11 - And he said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; Mark 10:12 - and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery." Luke 16:18 - "Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery. Except for the first quotation taken from Malachi, the other quotations are taken from the new testament ie words spoken by Jesus himself. .

Teresa Pace

Aug 31st 2009, 18:15

@ Johann Vella I am not out to make a show of what i write - i write and I defend what I believe. I am not trying to impress Fr Gouder - if Fr Gouder, the archbishop or the pope or any priest or pastor or rabbi or whatever go against my believes I will outrightedly tell them so. I was just answering A Muscat when he asked me, that I should ignore that kind of god...I simply replied what kind of God I adore...that is all. I wish that you and everyone else will find Christ in their lives and live with Him on a personal level...I also wish this to myself as I have a long way to achieve the personal relationship with Christ...but I know that once I reach that relationship there is nothing else I will ever want! I do not have to impress anyone as I answer only to God

A. Muscat

Aug 31st 2009, 16:16

@ Joseph Meli

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.

I have a different point of view, please let me give explanation.
God could create out of nothing (Adam)
God could create a woman out of a man (Eve)
God could create a man out of a woman (Jesus)
God could create males and females that could make families and produce children.
God also could create Infertile or barren females and males.

God is supreme and powerful. God is the only creator of every thing.
God does what He wants, whenever He wants to whomever He wants.
My understanding is that God works with one order: BE and it BE.

victor pulis

Aug 31st 2009, 15:03

"was it possible that the cana courses when run by Mons. C.Vella where not giving a solid..foundation to those marriages of those time?,@ Joseph Meli

This is an incredible statement against Mgr Vella now that he seems to have fallen out of favour with the bible thumpers. the incredible service the cana movement was doing until late was never doubted. Now all the failed marriages qeueuing for annulments are being put at the doorstep of the cana movement.

victor pulis

Aug 31st 2009, 14:56

If I am debating this topic with someone who still believes that woman was made, (not created as created means made out of nothing) from the rib of man then I may as well end my comment now. In the book of genesis we also read that woman must be subject to man. Do you think that is conducive to a successful marriage nowadays? Do you believe that a woman's place is in the kitchen and washing floors as you seem to imply in another comment. Do I have to mention individual nmed through history? Where do I start? from the hundreds of egyptian tombs we have discovered where husband and wife are buried together? from the Romans who even had wedding rings specially made which tradition is still used today? You need to read other books beside the bible. you said that God intended marriage to be for ever and yet he allowed his people to practice divorce in the time of Moses. Do God's laws change with time? And how about the number of wives allowed to a man? Solomon had hundreds of wives/concubines yet he 'walked' in the way of the lord!

Guze Xerri

Aug 31st 2009, 14:47

Why is the Roman catholic church against divorce only in Malta and the Philippines ?
Spain , Italy, Ireland, Poland are all predominantly Roman catholic countries and all have divorce laws as befits a civilized modern nation.
Why is Malta governed by Canon Law?
What is the purpose of a legally elected government if its controlled lock stock and barrel by any unelected outside entity?
Why is the Roman catholic church in Malta concerning its self in purely civil law matters
Enquiring minds want to know.

Martin Spiteri

Aug 31st 2009, 14:33

@ c busuttil

okay lets go for quothes. I dislike most of the bible because the authorship is blamed on God. Through logic and reason such a God does not exist . So when you say what God joins let no man unjoin I smile . The jews created a God that has made them the chosen people? Do you believe that there is a Very unjust God who exclusively discriminates his own creations? Whom the jews considered as enemies they were branded as evil and had to be slain. I do not believe in such a God and when you quothe be carefull of quotations that accuse God of injustice. God is omni present omnipotent and etc etc, and if he was personally to join a marriage using his love no marriage would be absolved because what is bound by true love as I said earlier is never dissolved. So interpreting your quothe , what God trully binds with love will never be untied. Love binds. In many marriages God is not there, only carnal and worldly thoughts occur in such. There is no binding . Only those who trully let God bind their marriage are sound.

Joseph Meli

Aug 31st 2009, 10:06

@Theresa Pace to P. Pulis:::> What you wrote to P. Pulis about the love of God, I quite agree with you and add "Where there's no love, put love and you will find love" In marriage, same motto has to be applied, both couples must compliment each other, the wife for her cooking and the up keeping of the house, the man for his time working (unless wife too) to get his wages, and for his work in the house.

If both don't complement each other and just avoid being together, then trouble will arise, because they did not put love where there was no love, otherwise they would have discovered further love.

Joseph Meli

Aug 31st 2009, 09:53

@Victor Pulis:::>You stated "You make it sound as if marriage is the monopoly of the catholic faith." Well I can proof this as it was written in the Holy Bible book (scripts), but from your claim can you proof who was the other Civil person that performed it before the origin of man, and with documents please....

Joseph Meli

Aug 31st 2009, 09:47

@Victor Pulis:::>As you said marriage was instituted well before Jesus, and Jesus talked and condemned divorce. As regarding when marriage was started we have the only reference the Holy Bible which states.... the original plan of marriage is a divine marriage having been 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 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 God intended..marriage to be the..pattern for all future..marriages..relationship and this was confirmed again by His son..Jesus Christ. So if one is going to be..married, one must be willing to..keep the commitment that makes the two of them as one. Therefore, marriage should be more than..friendship; it should be oneness.

In fact 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.

Joseph Meli

Aug 31st 2009, 09:36

@JosephGaffarena:::> You stated that the Church wants in the dark ages, and that better to concentrate on the long list of annulment. Well I say, was it possible that the cana courses when run by Mons. C.Vella where not giving a solid..foundation to those marriages of those time, or maybe because some might have left..God..from their lives, or maybe they where not practicing catholics and they neglected their religion and daily prayers.

If one makes a survey on this[prayers], this would result in more than 95% due to these factor. But I just recall what they told us, that..those..that..pray together stay together, and could it be that case? or maybe these couples fight and don't recall what forgiveness..in..life..is? Is everyone perfect ?

Rev. Dr. Joseph Mizzi stated in his letter (today30th) "Cana Movement publicly confirms the principles which have.motivated it since its inception; that of promoting and working in favor of healthy marriages; meaning the formal union of love..between a man and a woman, open to life, with vow "till death do them part." Such union..is the foundation of every family and the fundamental ingredient necessary for the good and prosperity of..every society."

J Micallef

Aug 31st 2009, 09:28

The decisions (and positions) that have been taken this year by the Curia, (mainly by Mgr. Gouder et al), and those that are in the pipeline, will mark this year in history as one of the worst years for the Maltese Church - the year that will lead to the secularism that it wants to avoid.

What Mgr. Gouder seems to be failing to realise is that nowadays secularism is no longer a convenient choice but a right, and the majority are not willing to sacrifice it for the views of a Diocese which is ever becoming more puritan.

The Church is in the wrong battlefield - the battlefield of Church vs State - a battlefield where today there is no contest and where the threat of interdiction or sins will no longer work. A wise choice for the Church would be to seek to attract youth to its folds (even through secular means) and give them a solid Catholic formation.

Instead the Church seems to be opting to a puritan philosophy, effectively scaring away more and more young people, especially those hailing from working class families.

J Farrugia

Aug 31st 2009, 09:09

DIVORCE IS AN EVIL. If all these bloggers care to understand really what they are saying, that is dump your children to God knows whoever will be the next parent, then yes IT IS A HUMAN WRONG. And what God has UNITED, LET NO ONE - NO ONE not even the STATE, PUT ASUNDER (DISSOLVE).
I cannot even say that divorce is a necessary evil - IT IS NOT. It leaves casualties badly maimed for the rest of their lives, even their own children. And we already tasting their children's successes (sic)!

Alexander Bonello du Puis

Aug 31st 2009, 08:11

The knives are out for Mons.Vella but he has probably done more to restore some credibility in the RC Church's thinking than Mons Gouder, well know for his blinkered philosophies. In any case, the issue is one concerning the state and the less we see of ecclesiastical meddling the better.

A. Muscat

Aug 31st 2009, 02:02

@ Martin Spiteri
‘Christ despised the law which was used to crush human beings who were struggling with unnecessary burdens imposed by the law.’

"Think not that I (Jesus) am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled, FULFILMENT of Law of Moses."
Take note of the word fulfillment please.

Martin Spiteri

Aug 31st 2009, 01:35

@ teresa pace

I repeat Christ was disgusted by the law that crushed human beings and those traditions. For your information Christ criticised divorce because it gave only rights to males if you read correctly. Christ was disgusted when they brought him the alleged adulteress. He was shocked at the way they accused her and condemned her! He saw in them how they applied the law to safe guard their male interests " u kien jaghjarhom oqbra imbajda " hypocrites. Today Christ is screaming hypocrites at those who play the church and who think they can dictate and use the law to achieve their way. Christ does not believe in a rotten set up. Christ s set to speak about a union based on love and commitment not a union to safe guard the authority of the church at the expense of misery of certain unhappy situations. Those whose marriage is sanctified by love wont even dream of divorce. Those who seek it because they never had a marriage. There are cases when the church refuses to marry because it predicts failure, and rightfully so especially with moslems.

C.Busuttil

Aug 31st 2009, 01:16

@Martin Spiteri

You like to quote or should I say misquote when its convenient to do so from the Bible. Now you put words in the mouth of God when God clearly said 'What I have joined together, let no man put asunder". Its useless to say that one has been tricked into marriage, adultery, etc etc As a catholic you have to carry the cross like Jesus, wether you like or not. According to what Jesus said this world is just a passage for the other. Don't like it, You have the option to get out of the Catholic Church maybe you will find Islam very convenient for getting a quick divorce. Its useless to take the issue with Fr. Gouder or the Catholic Church they are following what God has said, Don't like, blame God. Besides stop depicting God as if he's ready to accept everything, God is mercy and love but you have to obey HIS laws.
@Fr. Gouder
I hope you understand from this blog that some people want reforms within the church but they want these reforms just to suit their needs. Its useless to make reforms to please them they are materialistic people

Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

Aug 31st 2009, 00:06

Good on you Monsignor Charles Vella. It is a pity people like Gouder are appointed to represent the Church. The Maltese people can no longer be taken for fools and it is high time for the Catholic hierarchy to wake up to this fact. The reality is that many Maltese are not Catholic and they have a right to divorce. Even those who are Catholic have the right to decide whether to follow the Church's teachings. What is the Church afraid of? It is afraid of evidence that no one takes it seriously anymore.

L Cardona

Aug 31st 2009, 00:01

I am of the opinion that the state should go one further and legislate for 'Civil Marriage Annulment' instead of Civil divorce.

This should be more convenient and less offensive to the Pro-Vicar.

Kulhadd ferhan!

Jessica DeBattista

Aug 30th 2009, 23:29

@Nikita Zammit Alamango: "Who, in the right state of mind, would enter into a marriage relationship with the thought of getting out of it ?"

You'd be surprised, if you were to ask around, to find how many young couples are actually of that very mentality. In fact, I am aware that they discuss the issue of separation in the eventuality that their marriage does not work out.
You must be out of touch in these matters I'm afraid!

johann vella

Aug 30th 2009, 21:55

Teresa pace, stick to the argument if you want your comments to be read seriously and not try to impress Pro Vicar Gouder. what has you finding Christ got to do with our comments?
KEEP YOUR OPINIONS TO YOURSELF,both Gouder and Teresa. tHIS IS NOT YOUR ISSUE.If we want preeches and Bible lines we can either attend mass of buy ourselves a bible.
Let the government hear the people speak. cos if we can't quote the bibles (which i personally have better things to do),we who are separated or want another chance AT HAVING A LEGAL FAMILY are still GOD'S CHILDREN.
quote that

Martin Spiteri

Aug 30th 2009, 21:39

@ fr gouder (2)
Marriage occurs when two freely know and accept heart body and soul the bond which is sacred. When one of them hasnt got the faintest idea that marriage is a total commitment , then that marriage is a failure. The church humiliates us at the tribunal . They take years. That is a death sentence to be subjected to that sick tribunal which does nothing but frustrate people. I have no pity for these couples who take marriage lightly, but to keep them joined just because God has bound that bond, i find it a complete farce. God binds only with love, and when love is not present then God is not present and end of story. The church has a duty to teach and not block. Divorce is a medicine needed desperately by sick marriages which havent failed but never even started. A real marriage based on true love will survive any storm. In subjecting the whole state to be denied of a civil right , reminds me of the spanish inquisition. Then some pope will apologise in 400 years time and tell us sorry we did not know. Is this our loving church?

Martin Spiteri

Aug 30th 2009, 21:30

@ fr gouder (1)
I am really delighted that you address me here and give me some quality attention because I feel really squashed by your behaviour. I would like a more humane attitude towards us human beings. Yes you do nothing but quothe the law. all you do when you speak is bring a bundle of papers and you just point out and quothe. Christ despised the law which was used to crush human beings who were struggling with unecessary burdens imposed by the law. Il ligi tghid li is sibt ma tistax tahdem, Kristu qallhom jekk jaqalek il hmar fil bir is sibt thallih hemm? it is one instance where the law does not bind. Fr gouder it would make the church more appealing if it would start to look at the social problems in our time. I fully agree that there are couples who do not deserve to be married in the first place. Min jaghti kaz it tnedijiet? HADD!!!!! there are good people who are tricked into marriage . should these be condemned to a life of misery because we just impose the law? Marriage is valid only when the couple freely ............to be continued

Catherine Psaila

Aug 30th 2009, 20:12

I completely don't agree with Mgr Gouder's is saying because after all everyone is living his or her life the way they want with or without divorce, so why they can't have divorce? My question is if there is domestic violence or one of the couple is cheating, what they have to stay together! It is a shame to thing that God create us to living not to be slaves for no one.

I just say one think who have money will have a divorce but who didn't have will have to stay as they are! Even the church thinks for money...!

victor pulis

Aug 30th 2009, 19:47

@Joseph Meli
You make it sound as if marriage is the monopoly of the catholic faith. May I remind you that marriage existed long before jesus was born and that there are millions of non catholics indeed non christians who are happily married. Why? because marriage has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with love. And sorry to burst your bubble but prayer doesn't solve every problem. In fact the reasoning is that if you pray and get your wish God has answered you but if you don't get what you prayed for then it was not in your interest. How's that for a win win situation?

Albert Zammit

Aug 30th 2009, 19:46

bir rispett kollu lejk sur pro vigarju generali, int kif tista titkellem fuq iz zwieg meta ma kontx mizzewweg.kif tista tghid ic canga hiex tajba jew inkella hazina meta int qatt ma doqta.sa fejn naf jien s -sagramenti huma seba'. imma ghalikhom li biex tippriedkaw u tparlaw fil vojt huma sitta. is sitt wiehed huwa l -ordni sagri u s seba' zwieg. mela min kien mizzewweg ma jistax jerga jizzewweg skond l - intellingenza taghkom ghax thobbu tikkmandaw u tmexxu in nies min imnehirhom.ara is sitt sagrament , dak tiksruh kif tridu intom , kemm il soru telqet u zzewwget. kellna qassisin li telqu u zzewwgu . naf qassis li telaq , harab ma wahda rega lura u dahal qassis , u akjtar tard lahaq kappillan ukoll. mela il knisja take away jew?insomma kif jghid it taljan , chi commanda fa la legge

Joe Vella

Aug 30th 2009, 19:36

@ A Muscat
‘"The birth of a daughter is a loss" (Ecclesiasticus 22:3). If I were a female I must protest and totally ignore this type of god.”
I liked it
Teresa Pace = 0 A Muscat = 1

lolllllll

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 19:35

@ P Pulis

not going to preach....God does all the work for you to love Him all you have to do is to sit still and accept. I learnt it the hard way....by trying this and trying that...then someone sometime told me this....sit still and accept...that's when I felt His love, that's when I gave Him all. You don't have to do anything to earn his love...He loves you anyway...just accept it

victor pulis

Aug 30th 2009, 19:24

@Teresa Pace
You make it sound so simple. We all know what filing for annulment (divorce Catholic style) means.if it is a case of adultery(fornication) will a couple's non/marriage be annuled?if there are children involved will the become illegitimate in the eyes of God and the church since they were born 'out of wedlock'? What if the curia decides that there is no ground for annulment telling the unhappy couple to grin and bear it until death does them apart and they go to heaven to reap their rewards? As for reporting any violence to the police. Gee! that sure puts my mind at rest!

victor pulis

Aug 30th 2009, 19:14

@John Zammit
How many cohabiting couples do you know who were buried without holy rites and in unconsegrated ground? I know of cases where the priest in a locality suggested cohabiting couples to attend mass and receive holy communion in different parish where they are unknown 'not to be the cause of scandal'

P.Pulis

Aug 30th 2009, 19:12

@ Teresa pace
Mamma mia what faith!! Funny quoting from an Israeli King who while finding the time to write fantastic psalms, sent a man to his death in order to take his wife.
But then faith is gift and you are one of the luck ones. On my part I rely on constant searching for the real truth ( not just on what is selected for me from birth). Most of what you quote needs to be examined (and sometimes corrected) in view of the historical context of its occurance and evolution. Space here is too limited to expand.
Please don't preach and pray for me to discover the comfort of 'salvation' without feeling the discomfort of discovering alternative truths.

Joseph E Briffa

Aug 30th 2009, 19:08

I do not agree with Mgr Gouder's statement that people will tend to take marriage lightly if they know they have a way out through divorce. In the first place, when most people get married, divorce, annulment or separation is the last thing they would be thinking about. There is of course a difference in people's thinking depending on one's age. The younger ones don't seem to imagine that they will ever have problems in their married life and enter marriage with the complete belief that their marriage will be a success.. In the case of more mature people these are more inclined to be aware of the possibility of their marriage failing at some point in time due no doubt to their experience of having seen other marriages breaking down . Despite this, even mature people enter married life, in the belief that their own marriage will probably be a success. The point I'm trying to make is that people entering married life do not give a thought about separation, annulment, divorce or whatever in much the same way that young healthy people do not give a thought to the ailments that will afflict them in old age.

Joseph Meli

Aug 30th 2009, 19:07

@JosephGaffarena:::> You stated that the Church wants in the dark ages, and that better to concentrate on the long list of annulment. Well I say, was it possible that the cana courses when run by Mons. C.Vella where not giving a solid..foundation to those marriages of those time, or maybe because some might have left..God..from their lives, or maybe they where not practicing catholics and they neglected their religion and daily prayers.

If one makes a survey on this[prayers], this would result in more than 95% due to these factor. But I just recall what they told us, that..those..that..pray together stay together, and could it be that case? or maybe these couples fight and don't recall what forgiveness..in..life..is? Is everyone perfect ?

Rev. Dr. Joseph Mizzi stated in his letter (today30th) "Cana Movement publicly confirms the principles which have.motivated it since its inception; that of promoting and working in favor of healthy marriages; meaning the formal union of love..between a man and a woman, open to life, with vow "till death do them part." Such union..is the foundation of every family and the fundamental ingredient necessary for the good and prosperity of..every society."

Nikita Zammit Alamango

Aug 30th 2009, 19:03

@ Teresa

I am as much as a catholic as you are however all these quotes are becoming fundamentalism. Yes that is what the Bible says, and I do not have other Gods but one. However, when it comes down to reality, to being practical, to day to day lives - everything is totally different.

Can you have the guts to tell those words to a women who has been beaten for 10 years ? Can you have the guts to tell that to a man whose wife cheated on him ? Can you utter any words to a women who has been verbally abused ?

Every case is its own story. The church should give its view but the matter is purely a personal decision.

simon galea

Aug 30th 2009, 18:59

I fully respect the Catholic Church and its teachings, a respect which all religions should enjoy by us all. Having said that, all religions should distinguish between civil law and church laws. I fully understand that the Catholic Church sticks to its guns by not introducing divorce in canon law but on the other hand the same Church should respect the state and not exert pressure for divorce not to be introduced in the civil law. What about if the state exerts pressure on the Church to change some its fundamental teachings?
I believe that everyone has the right to practice ANY religion he/she chooses freely and every religion is free to teach what feels right (within parameters- e.g. no religion should be permitted to instigate religious hatred). If a person wants to follow Roman Catholic teachings and chooses not to divorce, he/she has the right to do so. But for heaven's sake let us be tolerant and let everyone live his/her life. If I want to divorce, I'd expect that my desire be respected.
The contradiction of it all is that us Roman Catholics are the first to condem the sharija law practised in a number of Islamic countries.

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 18:50

@ A Muscat

I love God the Father with all my heart...he is Abba father; I will never stop adoring Him and will never stop loving Him...for he knew about me from the beginning of creation and my name is engraved on his palm. He sent His son Jesus for me so that I can be saved if I accept Him.He loves me more than I can love myself...so how can I ignore such a God? He is my all

Paul Barrett

Aug 30th 2009, 18:49

I am a little perplexed by the references to "marriage preparation".
Is this now mandatory? It wasn't when I got married 38 years ago - (yes, here in Malta in Church), we had no preparation, lectures or anything else - we were in love, knew what we wanted and went for it.
Either two people get on well together or they do not. Perhaps too much preparation, too high expectations and too much interference can do more harm than good.

Jeremy J Camilleri

Aug 30th 2009, 18:47

Why are people discussing Catholic Marriage, when divorce is purely a civil matter?

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 18:45

@ A muscat

Gave you a reply to that on another blog

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 18:43

@ V pulis

Yes I consider it very stressful - people very close to me are passing through the same experience. I suggest that such a person concerned should go to a priest and ask if there is basis for annulment and let him guide this person to start the procedure such as suggesting where to go. An immediate police report is advisable for the protection of this person

A. Muscat

Aug 30th 2009, 18:20

@ Teresa Pace
‘...I am just stating that if the Church is Christ's church than it has to abide by what Christ says and full stop’

.. "The birth of a daughter is a loss" (Ecclesiasticus 22:3). If I were a female I must protest and totally ignore this type of god.

Have a good evening. Albert

gaffarena joseph

Aug 30th 2009, 18:10

Father Gouder, better if you concentrate on the long list annulment cases that the church have.
Some of them are outdated now.Father Charles,outlined the difficulties that we are encourtering,and he was more than intelligent on his views about divorce.Father Charles,done more than enough to our country regarding marraiges.Why the church in malta have this negative attitude, and want us to remain in those dark ages..
s

victor pulis

Aug 30th 2009, 18:05

@Teresa Pace
...but if he lives a double life it would take its toll on him and consequently on the Church including us.
Do you consider living in a house with an unfaithful and perhaps violent spouse stressful? Does it take its toll?

Adrian Vella

Aug 30th 2009, 18:04

Its about time that the church stops interfering with state matters. We are living in 2009 and not 1950's, those times are long gone. Wake up Curia and get your most recent update!!!!

John Zammit

Aug 30th 2009, 17:48

One thing that Mgr. Vella failed to mention in his two interviews is how does he act in
Milan when divorced couples present themselves to particiapte in holy sacraments? Co-habiting or married after a divorce is obtained, according to the teaching of the Church, is still adultery. Therefore, I hope that after campaigning for the introduction of divorce would not these same people, start blaming the Church for not giving sacraments to divorced couples. Mgr. Vella ought to be well aware of the suffering and pain experienced by divorced Catholics, especially those advanced in years, who are precluded from recieving the holy sacraments. I am a convinced Catholic and therefore whether the State introduces divorce or not is of no conern to me. What I canot accept is the fact that a priest who no longer belongs to the diosese of Malta, comes for a holiday and creates such a polemic and I hope inadvertently, let himself be used by those who do not lose a chance to attack the Church on whatever issue. Mgr. Vella you are experienced enough to should have known better.

Joseph Meli

Aug 30th 2009, 17:45

@Nikita Zammit Alamango: Members of..religious Orders make three vows, those of obedience, poverty and chastity only. These are explained in Canon..Laws as follows:

"Life consecrated through profession of the evangelical..counsels is a stable form of living, in which the..faithful follow Christ more closely under..the action of the Holy Spirit, and are totally dedicated to God, who is supremely loved. By a new and special title they..are..dedicated to seek the perfection..of..charity in the service of God's Kingdom, for the..honor of God, the building up of the..Church and the salvation of the..world. They are a splendid..sign in the Church, as they..foretell the heavenly glory." (Canon Law # 573 §1)
Diocesan priests..make no vows as a lifetime priest. For ordination, they freely..make promises of..celibacy and obedience to their..Bishop. The Catholic wedding..vows may be a simple call and response..between the priest and the couple. The priest reads the..vows and the..bride or..groom will reply by saying....."I do."

In Catholic..wedding vows, the priest asks the couple..whether they have made the choice to be wed through their own personal free will, also about the..willingness to be faithful to each other and acceptance..and..willingness to have..children and bring them up together and until death do us part.

Anthony Magri

Aug 30th 2009, 17:23

Part I .Regarding divorce some put forward the case of priests or religious persons who return to the statute of lay person.
Hereunder are some thoughts about the matter as are generally known. Professional persons can be more conversed in the matter.
To become a priest one has to pass through years of trials(training) to see whether one gets used to the demands of priesthood. These are the Seminary years. During these years the incumbent is under surveillance of superiors ready to advice and who finally sanctions his decision
As for religious orders, monks or even nuns, they have to pass through what is called novitiate always under supervision. They are subject to the advice of superiors with whom they discuss their problems. It is after passing through these years of trial that they may make temporary vows (this applies only to non priest religious orders as far as I know) followed by perpetual ones a couple of years later. Hence these spend years purposely intended for preparation before taking the final plunge of perpetual vows.

Michael Neville Cassar

Aug 30th 2009, 17:16

I honestly cannot understand why all the fuss, if you do not like to merry with the church rituals don’t get married. Just sign the peace of paper or go in front of a judge, NO PRIEST OR POPE OR BISHOPE can alter in any way the blessing and word given to God except God Himself and that’s it, Full Stop.The state must recognize the couple are living together as man and wife that is all that is needed.

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 17:15

@ Johann Vella

....and here we go again.I am not judging,I am not miss know it all, I am not holier than thou, I am not throwing the first stone and above all I am not giving advice...I am just stating that if the Church is Christ's church than it has to abide by what Christ says and full stop.Let the state do what it like but Christ's Church just cannot as it has to abide by Christ's teachings which are stated in the bible.

Above all just as you are free to air your opinion without me calling you names or belittiling you so shall I expect the same from you. ...I can air what I believe in

Joseph Micallef

Aug 30th 2009, 17:14

People like Pro-Vicar General Anton Gouder, and those who bring his same arguments, seem to equite divorce with marriage breakdown! How convenient! As if without divorce marriages are not breaking down in Malta! Divoces is only a way to give seperated individuals to re-marry (civil marriage obviously). It is legislation to end a marriage because marriages are already being ended as things are - call it seperation or annulment! This type of reasoning is twisted logic at its best!

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 17:09

@ Victor pulis

not sorry for the priest...but if he lives a double life as I said before, it would take its toll on him and consequently on the Church including us.

People have a habit of manipulating words or understand what they want and not what it was intended to be said.

As a state, basically as the state law, I don't care what they decide...i don't care if they introduce divorce.I don't give much importance to state marriage...what is important to me is when the marriage takes place infront of God...when it's God who is binding the union...true marriage takes place infront of God...the other it's just legal stuff. When one gets married as far as I know, one has to do the legal stuff as in state then marry infront of God.Basically the marriage infront of God is what is important to me. If people want to divorce the state marriage it's up to them....but if they got married infront of God they just can't get the divorce from Him...and that is my point I hope I won't be misinterpreted yet again

Johann Vella

Aug 30th 2009, 17:04

@ Teresa Pace
oh thanks.wow. you should really start giving advice to judges and politicians.Maybe,just maybe,in this day and age,logic prevails over a book.Certain people are fighting to give Killers in jails a second chance,and when I bring out my argument that I deserve a second chance at living legally with a second wife,you bring out your bible.
maybe I dont believe in the bible. the problem is our goverment is depending too much on people like you who believe and quote the bible word for word. meta jaqblilkom.REMEMBER- my problem is with the state who should bring what was promised when we voted in the referendum- being a european union citizen with EU rights.
Qas il-qassisin ma jimxu kelma kelma mal bibbja.
who are you to judge and give advice to? your knowledge of the bible?

Marco Galea

Aug 30th 2009, 16:47

id-dritt? id-dritt huwa li kulhadd ghandu jkollu second chance.

Shaun Camenzuli

Aug 30th 2009, 16:45

@ Antoine Azzopardi
fl opinjoni tieghi il punt tieghek huwa invalidu. x ghandu x jaqsam qtil ma li jerga jkollok cans ghal hajja ma persuna ohra ma haddiehor ghax ma tkunx sibt xorti ma persuna?!
Totalment turi l injoranza li hawn fuq is-suggett.u l brainwashing.
Ir-rabja lejn Gouder huwa ghax huwa wiehed min-nies li qed jaghmlu l hajja ta nies separati aktar difficli u aktar iebsa.Pero fil-fatt kif issemma hawn taht hu u l knisja qed ibatu.ghax in-nies imgerrhin m humiex qed jersqu lejn il-knisja ghax mhux ihossuhom milquwa.

Trevor Lorenzo Mizzi

Aug 30th 2009, 16:38

Why is Malta paying attention to this tennis match between these two members of the Roman church? ( Gouder vs. Vella).
They represent the same entity that is butting its nose in a matter that does not concern it.
A real government of the people would and should have long ago told the Roman church to stop interfering and to go away . The same government would have completed the unfinished marriage act of 1975 with a proper divorce law once and for all.
The People of this nation have to demand that Malta STOP BEING A THEOCRACY.
It is not the 19th century anymore.

Joseph Camilleri

Aug 30th 2009, 16:33

It is a sign of the times when priests cease to quote the Bible or Church dogma to oppose the legalisation of divorce. It reflects their awareness of the decline in Church authority. They have now taken on the role of a sociologists and refer to research studies in an effort to prove their anti-divorce stance is right. But as anybody who has dabbled in social sciences knows, the findings of sociologists are of dubious validity. For every research concluding that something is white, one can find at least another research concluding it is black. Besides, statistics are notoriously unreliable and have been linked to ‘lies and damn lies’. The increase in divorce is one of several aspects of modern society and therefore one can easily 'prove' that the increase in the rate of divorce is positively correlated to its legalisation – or for that matter to the increase in the average salary, the life span or the consumption of meat. The anti-divorce lobby have retreated from the untenable ground of dogma to the slippery ground of sociology. One push from a present or future political leader is all that is needed now.

A. Muscat

Aug 30th 2009, 16:32

The state of affairs in Malta regarding divorce goes against the European Charter of Human Rights and discriminates against Maltese citizens who have married partners of the same nationality.

Divorce is not a good thing. It is the least bad of two choices. One is to stay with a partner even though the marriage has broken down irretrievably, or one partner is abusive towards the other. The other is two breakaway and start again. With divorce, at least you can get married again if you so wish. For a lot of people this is very important because they breakaway completely from an unhappy past. Divorce is the only way to safeguards women’s right and dignity which are two issues the anti-women god of the bible doesn’t acknowledge.

Billions of peoples never heard or belief in any form of Jesus or even had the pleasure of having a god during their marriage ceremonies are happily married and enjoy the right to divorce.

The Church is getting more civilized and moving forward! Had this debate been two centuries ago Mgr Vella would have ended on a king size stake during the week end

Jeremy J Camilleri

Aug 30th 2009, 16:22

Oh well...if the Catholic goodie goodies are against divorce, I guess they ll just not avail themselves to it when(not if) if becomes available...............

I am sure people like the Pro Vicar will adhere to his principles and not make use of divorce when this is introduced...

Sometimes I wonder if the people who so vehmently oppose divorce do so because they're in an insecure marriage and are terrified of the consequences of divorce.........

victor pulis

Aug 30th 2009, 16:19

Do you know of one case where a priest sought dispensation and he didn't get it?If so, do you think that the said (sad) priest would do his duty in a proper manner? Of course it is not easy to leave the priesthood, just like it is not easy to leave someone you loved or was loved by. Who said that divorce should be easy ala Las Vegas? So you are feeling sorry for a priest who is caught in the priesthood against his wishes yet you do not feel pity for the hundreds of couples who are going through hell and sometimes living in fear of their very lives. may I state that I am happily married and am not defending my case but I know of couples who are suffering. We are dealing with the most mysterious and powerful of emotions which is love. Those who do not want to use marriage to get out of their hell are free to do so but there should be a way out for couples of different thought.

Nikita Zammit Alamango

Aug 30th 2009, 16:13

@ Tereza Pace

"I rather have a priest who once he feels he is not happy as a priest to leave the priesthood, then having a priest who is forced in the priesthood and thus this double life takes its toll on him and he won't live his priesthood well having a toll on himself"

Same argument stands for a married couple. I would rather be in a family of divorced parents, than having parents who live under the same just because there is no other choice, or because they have to but in reality lead completely separate lives, including a double in many cases !

I understand that you might be against divorce, and I accept your opinion. But you cannot force your belief on a married couple who are going through hell.

And vows are vows, regardless who takes them. Whether it is a married couple or a priest. By the way i never said Malta should become a Las Vegas - procedures for Divorce should be made accordingly.

Claire Busuttil

Aug 30th 2009, 16:09

The church is more than welcome to give it`s opinion, afterall it is also it`s duty to preach to IT`S FOLLOWERS.
............BUT it does not have any right to impose or press on the government, about laws effecting all the island, catholics and non.

Lino Apap

Aug 30th 2009, 16:03

Finally we are getting somewhere - Ms Teresa Pace states "Let the state do what it will...if it wants to legislate divorce let it do so....then it's up to the people whether to make use of it or not." Mgr. Vella to his credit also recognises the fact that the State must legislate for divorce. He does not like it but he is honest enough and human enough to recognise the writing on the wall. Martin Scicluna and the TPPI think tank also strongly advised the Government to wake up from its sweet slumber and act by introducing much-needed divorce legislation. This has nothing to do with the church - we are not discussing the religious ritual - we are talking about the CIVIL state of marriage. When a marriage has irretrievably broken down, the State (not the church) MUST recognise this FACT and allow the couple to apply for divorce if this is their wish. It is useless for the State to keep alive this farce of legally separated couples who are de facto living their separate lives but who are kept de jure tied to each other like corpses in formaldehyde simply to avoid upsetting the Church.

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 15:51

@ Johann Vella

well don't get married. St Paul does state in the letter to the Corinthians if I'm not mistaken, it is best to remain single but if you can't remain celebate (due to passion) then it is best to get married. The bible, which is the word of God, says what God joins together let no man seperate but as far as I know says nothing about leaving the priesthood...and here I stand to correction if i'm wrong. That is the word of God re marriage...up to the person if they want to abide by God's word or not.Just dont expect the Church, who teaches God's word, to go against it...if the Church does go against God's word it is indeed in trouble and is not the Church Christ intended

Antoine Azzopardi

Aug 30th 2009, 15:51

Jiena sincerament ghadni ma fhimtx ghalfejn din ir-rabja ezagarata kollha lejn il-Knisja u persuni bhal Mons. Gouder. F'lehha ta' berqa ninsew id-demm kollu li xxerred ghal-liberta ta' l-espressjoni u f'gieh dan l-istess dritt, irrid kemm jista' jkun malajr insikktu lill-Knisja Kattolika li mhux dritt ghandha, izda dmir li titkellem.

Kulhadd jikkwota n-numri u nuzawhom bhala difiza "ghax hafna qed jisseparaw". B'kull rispett, l-ewwel u qabel kollox hawn hafna aktar li ghandhom zwieg b'sahhtu u allura r-regola tal-maggoranza lanqas biss tidhol, anzi, aghar u aghar, lanqas hi kwotabbli ghax in-numru ma jiggustifikax l-ghemil. Jekk kulhadd joqtol, il-qtil ma jsirx dritt ghax hafna jaghmlu hekk.

Ejja naraw li hadd ma jbati ngustizzji pero qabel nikkwotaw il-kelma "dritt" ahjar niccekkjaw x'inhu DRITT u xi jwassal ghal dan. Zgur li d-divorzju huwa sejha li qed taghmel settur tal-popolazzjoni li l-media qed tonfoh minn warajhom u mhi xejn ghajr buzzieqa ta' l-arja li malli titniggez tinfaqa', kif qed naraw diversi jinfaqghu kontra l-Knisja u l-persuni li f'isem il-Knisja ixandru l-Kelma u l-Verita.

Johann Vella

Aug 30th 2009, 15:43

@ Theresa Pace
But the priest DOES have a choice and stay in the Good Lord's good graces if he decides to leave. A person who was unlucky in his choice of spouse does not have that luxury as things stand.
And by proclaiming marriage in church is different than dedicating your whole existence to the lord.

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 15:35

@ Nikita Zammit Alamango
Still it is not easy to leave priesthood. There are long procedures. One cannot just wake up in the morning saying,'Oh I had enough of being a priest..I served Christ enough.I served the Church enough' Things are just not that easy. On the other hand I rather have a priest who once he feels he is not happy as a priest to leave the priesthood, then having a priest who is forced in the priesthood and thus this double life takes its toll on him and he won't live his priesthood well having a toll on himself, on the Church and even on us

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 15:31

@ Ms Nikita Zammit Alamango

Even as things are now, people have no commitment towards each other and enter marriage lightly.Let alone if they know divorce is the next easy thing to do...let alone if they know they have a way out. Things start getting choppy in marriage...no need to solve them there is divorce.I am no theologian, but trying to reason the other part out about priests giving the go ahead to leave the Church if they want to. In the bible there is written,...and the man shall leave the parents and go and live with wife and they shall be one...and later on 'what God joins together let no man separate'...not the exact words but the meaning is there. However when a person becomes a priest, he is giving his life all to God,he will serve no other and has no attachment to the world...not even a wife..he serves Christ and the Church...there is nothing written in the bible(as far as i know) that once a man of God (as in priest cos everyone can be a man of God provided they follow Christ teachings)always has to be a man of God as inpriest

Johann Vella

Aug 30th 2009, 15:22

Something is seriously wrong here.
the pro vicar seems to have a very clear vision about his issues. i find it funny that he resorts to sciences at his leisure on the 'second marriages are less stable tha the first' issue, whilst blatantly ignoring other science and stating on national television that condoms are not 100%safe. Imagine a 16 year old who is having sex regularly( cos yes,16 year olds ARE having sex) using the contraception proposed at family planning.
Seems like you are running the show vicar.... very wrongly. the reality is that more marriages are failing,If I were in your shoes I would spent less time trying to make coabiltal families situations less difficult and see exactly why so many people are not seeking the roof of the church.maybe YOUR stance on divorce is one of them.
move on with times is what I would suggest.

Joseph Camilleri

Aug 30th 2009, 15:03

GOUDER!!
who are you to dictate if i can get married again by law? who do you think you are? Great opinions. You want to quote science statistics?? aren't you the one who so said on XARABANK condoms are not '100% safe'!!!!???? maybe influencing a younger generation badly in the process?!
never have I heard so much crap coming out of a single mouth.
why is Archbishop Cremona giving you so much power?
I dont even bother what you say.
Do you people against divorce (cos Christ said so 2000 years ago!!!!) not realise that so many people are in pain and are spending ridiculous amounts of money in courts and so many lawyers are getting rich in the process??
why should I not have the right like ALL EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERS? MELA META RRIDU EWROPEJ?!?!

Fr Anton Gouder

Aug 30th 2009, 14:50

I'm battling with nobody. I try to engage in a dialogue in a very civil way. When I disagree with someone (Mgr Vella in this case) I am not against him personally. And I believe, it works the same from the other way.
This is not a battle to be won or lost. As Mr Bugeja said, we must seek the will of the Lord both in content and in the mannar.
Mr Martin Spiteri said that I quote the law. Can he be so gentle and tell me where I did this?

Emanuel Cilia Debono

Aug 30th 2009, 13:58

I have no doubt that Mgr Charles Vella is being misunderstood. Some criticism levelled at him is undeserved.

He is not in any way pleading the futility of resisting divorce nor on the need for divorce legislation . It appears however that he rightly insists that people (including administrators, politicians and ordinary citizens) should be prepared to act freely and responsibly, in the light of an informed conscience, guided by Faith and reason and by the teaching of Holy Mother Church.

He is recommending that while Church authorities should continue to be informed and to inform the faithful on the subject of marriage ,they should refrain from imposing solutions or be seen as imposing them from above.
.
A key issue in the problem of failed marriages is inadequate preparation. I have my doubts whether many of young people today are really prepared to enter into an indissoluble form of sacramental marriage. The increased number of Church annulments is perhaps an indicator.

Short preparatory courses are not enough these days .Many of our children need to be first taught to understand and appreciate the moral values on which the Christian family is built .

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 13:54

Let the state do what it will...if it wants to legislate divorce let it do so....then it's up to the people whether to make use of it or not. But and a big BUT, the Church can never give the blessings to the divorce of such people....so pretty much the situation remains the same as it is now. one can marry again by civil marriage but in the Church only once. If the previous marriage has been annuled then yes the couple can marry in the Church. The situation remains pretty much the same as it is now

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

Aug 30th 2009, 13:48

I personally via this Medium congratulated [Mgr] CHARLES VELLA for being enlightened and accepting REALITY. DIVORCE is already with us and soon it will have to be legally provided for by our House of Representatives,otherwise let THOSE who disagree,move out as MPs because I have no qualms to refer to them as HYPOCRITES as it is their OBLIGATION to represent all OPINIONS in a lay State as MALTA. In GERMANY recently, the Supreme Court of the Federation gave a poignant judgment in asserting that any citizen of an EU Member State who declares that they are residing in Germany [ nothing to do with Domicile ,Habitual or Ordinary Residence ] is entitled to obtain a Divorce from a German Court. THANK YOU GERMANY for indicating to insular countries like MALTA what the way forward should be.But then read on how absurd Malta can be to give consideration to a MAN who has chosen by declaration and profession CELIBACY as his mode of Life and has the brazen face to dictate to other individuals what mode of Life they want for themselves.

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 13:33

@ Martin Spiteri

Christ disliked the law...Christ disliked traditions....but it was Christ himself who said no to divorce...so if one is a follower of Christ one has to obey Him and do what He wants and not what people want

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 13:17

Fr Vella you can have all the people in the world in your favour...if an action is wrong, if what is said is worng in the eyes of God, it still remains wrong even if the whole world is behind you. I would rather please God by doing what is right and have the whole world after my neck, then doing what is wrong in God's eyes and have people saluting me as a heroine.

Teresa Pace

Aug 30th 2009, 12:43

Well said Fr Gouder. Fr Vella, God's word is a double edged sword...there cannot be shades of grey but black and white...either with Christ's teachings or not...if the Church follow Christ's teachings then it's Christ's Church if not then simply it is not. There just can't be shades. I do agree with Fr Vella however, that the Church should concentrate with preparing couples better for marriage.

Nikita Zammit Alamango

Aug 30th 2009, 12:38

With all due respect to the clergy and the curia - I would like to ask Mgr Gouder what he thinks about the fact that a priest can in fact break the vows they take through a sacrament with God.

If becoming a priest is a sacrament , like is marriage. I ask; why can one be broken and the other not ? Aren't they both bound by God ?

Definitely, Mgr Vella did not contradict himself when he said that marriage preparations should be strengthened but divorce should be allowed. I cannot understand the argument of Mgr Gouder when he says that if divorce is allowed, couples will take marriage "preparations lightly"... Who, in the right state of mind, would enter into a marriage relationship with the thought of getting out of it ?

This is absolutely ridiculous! Divorce is a civil right and even if the people in favour are a minority, that right cannot be denied ! We cannot have a population where the majority imposes their belief on others.

Happily married couples will not opt for divorce. It is those who are suffering who eventually will !

Edric Micallef Figallo

Aug 30th 2009, 12:09

"While as any other body, the church has it's right for freedom of expression, it is very unethical that it lashes against its own members on civil issues. Civil issues because Mgr Vella talked about civil marriages not Catholic ones. Had he talked about Catholic marriages the church authorities would have had the right to criticize him, but this was not the case." - Robert Callus

Unethical? Hardly so, the clergy consent to this to start with by becoming clergy. Plus, the Church has full right to criticise him and anyone else even on civil issues.

If anyone thinks otherwise, I hope you are not one of those that justly parade for NGOs and their rights to speak on this and else and then expect the Catholic Church in Malta, much more than an NGO, to shut up. Even moreso, it doesn't seem mons. Anton Gouder was speaking out officially in the name of the Church was he, it was his personal opinion to which he is entitled. Even if it wasn't, the Church has the right to speak up especially when some clergymen could give the wrong impression that they represent the views of the Church.

Paul Barrett

Aug 30th 2009, 11:57

The sanctioning of divorce need not effect anyone that does not actually seek it and therefore no devout Catholic need have any fear as they can always, as an individual, refuse to accept it in their belief.
There are however one or two people that are less devout of other religions/beliefs who honestly admit that their current marriage has irrevocably failed and need to move on; legalise and legitimise a new relationship in a second marriage and are currently prevented or at least inordinately delayed from doing so in Malta through lack of clear cut, swift, none bureaucratic legislation.

Carmelo Nenu Aquilina

Aug 30th 2009, 11:48

@Monsinjur Vella: Jien jidhirli li kull saċerdot u kull persuna kattolika għandhom dejjem jiddefendu t-tagħlim tal-K nisja Appostolika Romana, li huwa t-tagħlim ta' Kristu.
Bħal ma tabib u kull maħluq huwa obbligat dejjem li jiddefendi il-ħajja ta' kull persuna sa l-aħħar nifs! Bħal ma kull arkittet u kull ċittadin għandu jiddefendi dejjem l-ħolqien kollu "L-Ambjent" bla ebda eċċezzjoni. Bħal ma avukat għandu obbligu li dejjem jiddefendi lil kull akkużat sa l-aħħar mingħajr biża jew favur u bl-akbar abilta! Hekk ukoll kull Kattoliku Ruman huwa fid-dmir ta' obbligu li jiddefendi t-tagħlim ta' Kristu sal-mewt bħal Martri Qaddisin Monsinjur Vella! Inħeġġeġ lil Maltin biex nitolbu għalik Reverendu Monsinjur!

A. Mamo

Aug 30th 2009, 11:46

"The more the things change, the more they remain the same". Who is this Anton Gouder? Is this the same person with an impressive appearances in the popular tv show 'Xarabank"?
According to Mr Gouder, once divorce legislation is introduced, couples would take their marriage preparation more lightly. Does this mean that preparing to being a priest means 'light preparations'? Because, quite a few number of priests change their direction in a few years and GOT MARRIED! What a joke! A priest can get married, a married can't have a second chance. BE DOWN TO EARTH PLS. Having said that, I would like to congratulate Mgr Charles Vella. The difference between him and that Gouder is because Mgr Vella feels people's cry. He is not always in a posh office doing secretary work.

Robert Callus

Aug 30th 2009, 11:31

While as any other body, the church has it's right for freedom of expression, it is very unethical that it lashes against its own members on civil issues. Civil issues because Mgr Vella talked about civil marriages not Catholic ones. Had he talked about Catholic marriages the church authorities would have had the right to criticize him, but this was not the case.

If he changed his position from 1956 it could hardly be called a U turn. Society has changed a lot in 50 years and laws should reflect to the present social realities.

Alexander G Farrugia

Aug 30th 2009, 11:09

This is part of a reply by the Direttore of the Bollettino Salesiano to a question (BS Luglio/Agosto 2009). Makes an interestin read:
"Per quanto invece attiene alle questioni etiche, c’è bisogno di una pacata riflessione, senza pre/comprensioni, né anatemi preventivi. Personalmente, sono contro il divorzio e tutto il resto... Questo non significa che non voglia la tutela dei diritti di chi non la pensa come me. Credo, perciò, che uno Stato non possa far leggi che discriminino categorie di cittadini. Sarebbe uno stato razzista. Per farla breve: a me non interessa che nell’ordinamento dello Stato ci sia il divorzio. Se sono cattolico e... “credo nel mio credo”, so che un amore scelto e consacrato è “per sempre”. Punto e basta. Certo, come cattolico mi batto perché quella legge non passi, ma se passa non mi fa paura, né mi indigna più di tanto; so che io non ne farò uso perché appartengo a una Chiesa e lo Stato non è una Chiesa. Né posso pretendere uno Stato fatto a immagine della mia fede; pretendo uno Stato che cerchi di tutelare il bene dei cittadini."

Martin Spiteri

Aug 30th 2009, 10:54

Here we have a battle by two high officials of the church. I both dislike them for the way they interpret religion. We have fr gouder who dishes out the law, and the other one who just loves to dance to the music of the day. we have a fr gouder who just adores the law, and whatever it takes the law must be obeyed. In that way he is safe because he just quothes , " that is the law" how very jewish! Christ disliked the law , because it diminished the freedom of the human being. The law is not perfect , so gouder expects those imperfections to burden those situations because there is no solution for them. His behaviour is far from being cristian. Christ had a few words about the law obsessed. And had a few examples which ridiculed the very law which pained man so much. Here we have a repetition. On the other hand mgr vella loves to dance to the music of the day. he is correct in many things he mentioned , I wish he had those ideas in his head way back in 1975, when he was fanatically opposing civil marriage!

Dillon Bugeja

Aug 30th 2009, 10:53

It is contradictory in terms that monsignors are at odds!! Monsignors must be at one with the will pronounced by the Galilean Master. His words are crystal clear and no sparks of greyish sidelines are found!!! Whereas respecting inner reflection, I just pray for a simple fidelity in respect for the true and only leader: Christ!!