Eddy Privitera, Mosta
Mgr Vella's compassion, not confusion
Following Mgr Charles Vella's interview with The Sunday Times (August 16) on the question of divorce, Mgr Anton Gouder and some other correspondents have reacted in an unconvincing manner to the Cana founder's comments.
Those who were so quick to criticise Mgr Vella and other priests for daring to express their views fail to realise that a government is not only elected to safeguard the needs of the majority, but also those of minorities.
They seem to want to keep looking the other way as if the problem does not really exist. Or if it does, they seem to think it is only the problem of those whose marriage ended up on the rocks, and the State should not get involved because those people are in a minority.
Mgr Gouder and those who oppose the introduction of divorce at all costs offer no solution to those who wish to have a second chance at a relationship within the framework of the law once their previous marriage has disintegrated. All they are interested in is what the Church says about divorce. But the Church is not the State.
Mgr Gouder pointed out that, between 1995 and 2005, both legal separations and divorces in Italy had increased. The same thing happened in Malta with regards legal separation, even though we do not have divorce.
Mgr Gouder thinks Mgr Vella's statement - that as a priest he disapproves of divorce, but as a human he cannot close his eyes to the existence of the problem faced by many who are being denied the right to re-marry - is "another confusing statement". I see no confusion, but rather compassion.
Mgr Gouder seems satisfied that children "born outside marriage" are catered for by the State. But why should they continue to be "born outside marriage" when their parents could get married if divorce were introduced?
The "pain and negative long-term effects suffered by children of divorced parents" mentioned by Mgr Gouder is just the same as that of children of separated parents. I assure Mgr Gouder the effects are even worse on children who live with their "married" parents whose "lifelong commitment" is not one of love and respect, but of verbal and physical abuse.
Mgr Gouder states that "social sciences prove that second marriages are less stable than the first". Obviously, he cannot speak from personal experience. If he were to ask cohabiting couples if their relationship is more or less stable than their first marriage, he would probably find their answers oppose the results he read about in the "social science" report.
Mgr Gouder believes that once divorce is introduced, "marriage does not remain a lifelong commitment". I believe that when a couple decides to get married, they intend for it to last. But how can they foresee certain problems that may arise?
Popular Stories
In Discussion
5 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Joe Xuereb
Sep 13th 2009, 22:56
@ Joseph Meli. You forgot one important reason why people get divorced. They divorce Joseph because they get married. That is the most valid reason for divorce. In comparison, using too much toilet paper or toothpaste as a reason for conflict becomes insignificant. Also, if politics becomes wound up with morality it becomes a Maltese version of Sharia Law. Joseph would be a very happy man if that happened. Tragically, what he is saying is already in place. Joseph is not aware of this so he clamours for more. But many others are not happy. But what does he care. As long as he has his way.
GiovDeMartino
Sep 13th 2009, 20:31
The best argument against democracy is ...to read some of the bloggers below and elsewhere....With apologies to W. Churchill, I think. I will not vote because the warden gave me a ticket; I will not vote bec. hunters were given a long hunting season; I will not vote because hunters are not allowed to hunt all the year round; I will not vote bec. of the influx of ill. immigrants, neither would I because these immigrants are living in bad conditions, I will not vote unless the govt introduces divorce, neither would I vote for anyone who intyroduces divorce.........Povri ministri.
Joseph Meli
Sep 13th 2009, 17:11
@E.Privitera:;Good to note that now the main focal point is that the majority of Maltese Catholic voters would be looking to before casting their vote..in..the next coming..elections have to be 100% sure to whom they would vote and don't blame..them!!
This reminds me of Saint Thomas More, who was proclaimed Patron of..Statesmen..and Politicians, because he gave witness by his martyrdom to the inalienable dignity of the human conscience.[2] Though subjected to various forms of psychological pressure, Saint Thomas More refused to compromise, never forsaking the "constant fidelity to legitimate authority and institutions" which distinguished him; he taught by his life and his death that "man cannot be separated from God, nor politics from morality".[3]
Are our Maltese politicians similar to this said, or are they against our Catholic faith. If the later, they won't be having votes from those who have catholic faith for sure!!
Reference.... [2] Apostolic letter of Pope John..Paul (Second) and from book of catechism No:
1915
Reference.... [3] Ibid 4
Joseph Meli
Sep 13th 2009, 16:55
@Privitera:;Malta have a Constitution which gives the right to speak the Church in Malta. Then with divorce, this reminded me of what Mr Justice Coleridge said in court of what is happening in other countries and this can happen here too, so he said: "I'm drawing for the general attention as to the endless game of "musical relationships", or "pass the partner", to which such a significant portion of the population is engaged." Such terms cannot be left out in our law, otherwise they can go for an appeal and win it. So, he further stated "the nature of divorce are...just..because one presses the tooth paste from one side and not from the other, Others because, the man used too much toilet paper, or he or she went very..often..to..the..toilet, or because his wife left the toilet seat open,
Other divorced his wife/husband..because..she/he..failed..to..buy his favorite sweets or fruits, and many other funny points such as now the wife lost her two front teeth, or in church he often go to sit near our neighbor, or because he was doing too much aftershave or deodorant and the list goes on and on. Is this the kind of divorce suggested?
Joe Zammit
Sep 13th 2009, 12:11
Marriage is once for ever, and out of its own nature excludes a second chance; otherwise it would be an invalid marriage. A valid marriage is always indissoluble!