Archbishop: divorce motion is 'bolt out of the blue'

Pule' Carmel

Jul 8th 2010, 22:04

I study nature as an engineer and when it comes to dissimilar materials known an P and N material, all I know is the following. When they are brought together, a PN or an NP junction is a diode with its characteristics of rectification , a PNP or an NPN junction is two diodes back to back, or a transistor with differnet characteristics of amplification, anNPNP or a PNPN juction is two transistors back to back, or a thyristor with ability to switching one polarity voltage characteristics, and a NPNPN or a PNPNP are two thyristors back to back or a triac which can switch either part of an alternating waveform. In engineering we have many junctions using a collective use of N, NN, NNN, NNNNNNNNNNNNN.... and P, PPand PPP and PPPPPPPP for structural purposes only, we refer to these junctions as passsive junctions while the PN conbinations, we refer to these as having active regions within their junctions which give rise to remarkable effects. Nature seem to produce many combinations of N only type junctions or P only type junctions or a selection of PN or NP junctions.
All junctions have their uses, one type cannot equal another.

John Chetcuti

Jul 8th 2010, 20:59

The Church has every right to speak failing to do so, renders itself useless.
Everybody has a right to an opinion and express it, whether in favour or against.
The irony of all this debate is that those against divorce are those whose marraige is successful, and those who possibly are not or have no intention of getting married. These are by far, the vast majority of the poulation.
Those "men in search of a younger woman" are not looking for a lasting relationship (by definition, women -like men- get older. Divorce or no divorce is irrelevant. They dont care.
Those who favor divorce, do so simply because they believe in marraige and want a second chance to rebuild their lives. Fact is that this group of people is a minority.
Political parties market themselves to the masses and hence political marketing steers them clearly away from any contentious issues during elections.
Referenda are decided by the will of the majority, irrespectively of the needs of a minority.
This debate will again run out of steam and those in need will reamin wanting. And marraiges will keep breaking down and some men will continue searching for younger women (sic).

Dr Ing Patrick Attard

Jul 8th 2010, 19:27

Nissugerilkom taqraw ittra Pastorali li Kiteb l-Arċisqof Gonzi (1972) kontra d-dikriminalizjoni ta´ l-omosesswalità:

http://patrickattard.blogspot.com/2009/03/lehen-is-sewwa-1972-ittra-pastorali.html

Nicole Grima

Jul 8th 2010, 18:33

Church and State should not mix. Period.

Michae Catania

Jul 8th 2010, 18:25

Nowhere in the article has the Archbishop condemmed the Government for raising taxes and costs of our utilites ( gas and electricity). They were certainly not among the mandate sought by this discredited government prior to the last election. Divorce will only effect the minority of the population. As for the rest being good catholics, will do as the Archbishop wishes. I think the Archbishop will do well to sort the problem of child abuse and allow the civil courts to try the alleged abusers. As for the divorce we have hundreds if not thousands of maltese citizens who are already divorced.

M. Farrugia

Jul 8th 2010, 17:42

@J.Grima, jekk iz-zwieg civili issejjahlu Iz-zwieg ufficjali u dak li isir fil-Knisja cerimonja religjuza qieghed turi diga diskrepanza. Jekk f'mohhok ghandi li z-zwieg bil-knisja huwa ceremonja u mhux sagrament li tkun qed tintrabat bih ghal ghomrok mhux ta minn jiddiskuti mieghek. Dwar għaliex zwieg ifalli hemm hafna ragunijiet oħra u mhux dawk li semmejt inti biss. Illum il-gurnata is-socjeta saret laxka izzejjed u xejn ma hux xejn ghalija. Is-soluzzjoni ghal zwieg hieni u fit tul hija l-preparazzjoni tajba ghal dan is-sagrament u mhux cerimonja kif sejjahtilha inti qabel ma wiehed jidhol għal din ir-responsabbilta. Meta jiena izzewwigt kien ftit wara li daħal iz-zwieg civil. Jiena mort nizzewweg bic-civil sempliciment għax il-ligi tghid li trid taghmel hekk u xejn aktar. Ghalija u għal dawk li bhali huma Cattolici Rumani is-sagrament huwa li jorbot zwieg nisrani u mhux dak civili. Jekk inti ghaddejt min din il-problema u issa tinsab waħdet jiddispjacini hafna ghalik.

Kevin Cassar

Jul 8th 2010, 14:58

To Catholic believers esp. Archbishop Cremona

The Church has a marriage annulment procedure. The Church says that the Catholic marriage is between a man, a woman and God. It annuls marriages in which there is evidence that before the marriage there was some form of dishonesty from one of the couple or both. This really baffles me because it comes from an institution that claims an Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent God. God is not bound by time and space it says, and yet judging by how they make annulment decisions, you would think He is. Since, when a person is dishonest before the wedding, they say that God never blessed the union, while when the person is dishonest after the wedding, God did (join the couple). So was God not aware that some years down the line, one of the couple would cheat???? If He was not, then what kind of God is He? If on the other hand He was aware (because he knows everything) and still made the union valid, He is sort of malevolent. How could a father, allow a son or a daughter to ruin their lives, knowing he could prevent it. Please explain!

Joe Bugelli

Jul 8th 2010, 14:55

A private member's bill, introducing the subject of divorce for debate and eventual vote for ratification is not an assault on the faith but a challenge to the intellect to address a very real issue faced by a mutitude of people. To use an example such as "men seeking a younger woman" is an over-simplification of facts, and frankly does a dis-service to intelligent debate. Causes of marriage failures are as diverse as society itself. The creation of a divorce mechanism, enforced under the law, granted for reasons laid out in law, with due consideration for the care and welfare of wronged parties (when applicable), and only after all attempts at reconciliation are exhausted, should be welcomed by every caring human being, regardless of faith preference. Hiding one's head in the sand does not make a problem go away, and not addressing a growing problem, only helps to make matters worse not only for the parties involved, but society as a whole. Please drop all rhetoric and sit down and develop a document for thorough and honest debate based on fact and with sensitivty to the human elements and leave it up to the Almighty to dispense moral udgement.

charlie Spiteri

Jul 8th 2010, 13:41

Hemm differenza bejn il-liġi ta' Alla li tgħid li Dak li għaqqad Alla m'għandux jifirdu l-bniedem u l-liġi tal-Knisja li fis-seklu 4 daħletiċ-ċelibat jiġifieri li saċerdot ma jistax jiċċewweġ. Il-Knisja tista' taġġorna liġijiet li għamlet Hi stess imma ma tistax tibdel liġijiet li afdalha Alla biex tamministrahom. Jekk "raġel u mara ħalqhom" kif tista l-Knisja taċċetta li jgħixu raġel u żewġ nisa jew viċi versa għax li ma jkunx hemm annullament, l-ewwel żwieġ jibqa' jgħodd bil-weġgħat u s-sagrifiċċji tiegħu.

charles caruana

Jul 8th 2010, 12:51

@Edward Caruana Galizia

Apparently it is you who are both literally and metaphorically living outside Malta in cloud cuckoo land. Did you not even bother to read the rest of the sentence, where the Bishop’s expression is clearly and specifically referring to the fact that neither of the two parties in Parliament had promised such legislation in their last electoral manifesto? How out of touch with a mere sentence can you get?
This is why the opposition leader has tried to lay his cards on the table re divorce before the next election, while JPO, for obscure and enigmatic reasons ‘of his own’ that might eventually be clarified, pre-emptivley sprung the ‘surprise’ on his own party, for whom the bill was presumably a bolt out of the blue. Those who are here naively and sheepishly shouting hurrah or God forbid have not even begun to consider much less fathom the personal and political meanderings behind this move. Here’s something strange indeed.
About your so called PR blunder, I suggest you ask the leaders of both big parties whether they consider it a blunder themselves. You might finally start learning something about reality in Malta

Jack Sparrow

Jul 8th 2010, 11:00

"in most cases abroad, divorce was not sought by people who were suffering, but by people who wanted something else - such as men who wanted younger women."

Situation: An aging man, who has spent his life working his head off, while his wife did absolutely nothing all the time except sitting on her fat bottom and living off him. She's no longer intimate with him, no longer fit, and spends her time watching soap operas and playing tombola. Kids are now adults, and she contributes absolutely nothing to the marriage, even though she is healthy and still capable physically. The man wants to enjoy his hard earned fortune (travel, adventure, etc), but his wife is not up to it, since though she's got the money (her husband's), her mentality is still the same one - uneducated, unambitious and "mitluqa".

Do you blame the man for divorcing her and seeking a new younger wife who is up to standard with his lifestyle and his dreams for which he has so much worked and invested? I do not blame him at all.

Fenech M D

Jul 8th 2010, 09:36

Quote: 'and one expected MPs to act within the promises made by their parties.'

U fejn kien Mons Cremona, meta nghataw is-sensja tat-tarzna, dawk in-nies li tkeccew mill-fabbriki, etc u li kienu mweghda mill-Gvern li hobzhom fis-sod? Dan mhux tghallim ta' Kristu wkoll li taqbez ghaz-zghir?

Two weighs, two measures?

Ha naraw issa jekk il-qassisin humiex se jibdew il-krucjata taghhom kontra JPO u l-partit tieghu.....

La jaf l-Arcisqof li hawn niex li qed ibatu, jghixu ma ohrajn etc u l-Knisja toffri l-annullament li min hu kattolku, ghaliex m'ghandiex thalli lil istat joffri ir-rimedju tieghu lil min irid iholl iz-zwieg tieghu ghax sfaxxa u m'hemmx lok ghal rimedju?

U nixtieq insaqsi lil Dr Gonzi: Jekk JPO ma mexiex fuq il-linji tal-Partit dan mhux suppost li tkecca? Kien hemm hafna nies ohra qablu (fosthom kunsullieri) li qabzu (ftit) il-linja tal-partit u tkeccew jew gelghuhom jirrizenjaw bil-pulit. Allura ma' dan se nimxu mod iehor? X'ghandu specjali JPO? Jaqaw irridu li 'nuzaw' lil JPO bhala scapegoat biex taparsi l-PN kontra d-divorzju imma se jdahhlu xorta ghax ried hekk wiehed MP 'imqareb'?

Jew din xi strategija li se juza' l-partit ghax jaf li jekk Dr Muscat jaghmel mid-diovorzju issue ghal l-elezzjoni li jmiss jista' jirbahha?

David Micallef

Jul 8th 2010, 09:26

'We will not launch a crusade, but we will take part in the debate'

Of course you will not launch one !! You've brainwashed followers enough for the
past few decades. They'll do the job for you !!! It will be the show run by the lay people
where the clergy will just sit back and rub their hands in glee.

"Bolt out of the blue"...i should use this catch-phrase more often now !!!

J Brincat

Jul 8th 2010, 09:18

Whether the Archbisop likes it or not divorce will be introduced in Malta one day like the rest of the world. We are not unique, simply insulated from the rest of the world. But in the near future the cobwebs will be swept away and we wold then realise that we finally live in the 21st century!

Olina Tretyak

Jul 8th 2010, 08:55

Dear Mgr Cremona,

If you ever wanted to save people from forming second families, why you did not teach them how to celibate after separation?

Calling something a sin is not enough, you should teach them how to live without family if you wanted them out of such sin.

For as long as you did not do your duty well enough, and every separated person has kind of relationships - short term or long term - you should accept the situation and let people decide how to bring decency in the situations they are in.

patricia bonello

Jul 7th 2010, 23:57

No crusade against J,P.Orland? It all goes to show how wrong Arcbishop Gonzi was in his crusades against Mintoff during Integration and during the1960 's, and the cynical way the Nationalist Party rode on the bandwagon of the religious crusade against the MLP, especially now that an MP from this Party, of all Party's wants to introduce divorce!

beppe pisani

Jul 7th 2010, 17:32

imma kif jista qassis jindahal fil-hajja personali tieghi????............ahjar jara li biex tihu l-annulament tal-knisja trid thallas eluf ta euro!!!!!!
halluwna nejxu jimporta
stat stat u religjon religjon............in nies ghalehekk adulti biex jaghzlu kif l-ahhjar jejxu huma

joe gatt

Jul 7th 2010, 16:12

Provided one can afford the expence, simple solution for those who seek and badly need to divorce.
Get divorced abroad,
get it recognised locally.
No referendum,
No Reverendu,
No hussle,
No crap.

If I were a rich man (or woman) I would bla bla bla bla blaaa...
and then more bla..bla.. bla..

For most mortals, its, hudu pacenzja (be patient) maybe, who knows, in a 100 years there`l be a change.

Josephine Campbell

Jul 7th 2010, 15:46

Malta should be proud to remain the only country in the world not to legalise divorce and abortion and no, Malta is not the Black Sheep of the EU. We have just lived the Pope's visit and the Pope said so. The official religion of the nation is Roman Catholic, and as Catholic politicians they have to uphold the Catholic values. Who voted for them did so to uphold Catholic values. Who has different views should resign from the Party. Who is against divorce should stand up and be counted, politicians and people alike.

Olina Tretyak

Jul 7th 2010, 15:29

People who are separated, how many of them have new relationships?

In the eyes of Church they all live in sin.
In the eyes of church, they re-marry new partners or not, they still live in sin.

So what's they difference does it make for Church, do they re-marry or not?

It makes difference for society, as re-married person will be considered as one having stable family.

It makes difference for people themselves, as they will feel better in a registered marriage and they can apply on it values which they can not apply on living-in cohabiting.

If re-marrying does not bring people in a bigger sin they are already being cohabiters, but gives them benifits in their social life and stability in their private life, what Church can possibly object?
To remind to Catholics once again that it does not recognise second marriages the same as it does not recognise cohabiting? Reminding received.

Edward Caruana Galizia

Jul 7th 2010, 15:25

" Bolt out of the blue"

What? Does this man not live in Malta? There are so many people in Malta who have been crying for divorce for a while now. How out of touch is this man? Does he only live in a world where people say what the Church wants to hear? I think he has just shown himself to be as clueless as the rest of those conservatives who lock themselves in their rooms and pontificate without actually living in the real world.

Hopefully this bill will act as a wake-up call for the Archbishop.

Here's soemthing strange. It s all well and good that the Church wants to participate in the debate.But it sounds like the Church is annoyed that they were not consulted before. Bolt out of the blue? Why? It s a fair thing to propose in a country that has many people begging for divorce.

"Convinced Catholics have to vote for a stable marriage and against divorce"

I think that is a bit of a PR blunder.

David Caruana

Jul 7th 2010, 15:14

"The first was the teaching of Jesus that marriage was for ever."

Gandalf the White says otherwise.

simon cutajar

Jul 7th 2010, 15:06

Ghax tajjeb int ! Tajjeb kullhadd Mgr .

Michael Grech

Jul 7th 2010, 15:01

THe fact that the introduction of divorce was not mentioned in either of the political parties' manifestos does not amount to a promise not to introduce it, as the Archbishop fallaciously suggests.

But then, all daft arguments will be used to maintain clerical rule over our islands.

Mario Degiorgio

Jul 7th 2010, 14:19

The Government should not allow the church to involve itself in this matter more than it should. The state and the church should be two separate entities in the question of religion. The proposed law should be brought forward to parliament if the majority vote in favour it should pass

joe borg

Jul 7th 2010, 14:15

mela hekk imisshek launch a crusade!!!!!!!!!!!!

mux bizzejjed l-ahhar wahda damet 550 sena, toqtlu tfal, xjuh u nisa bl-addocc. kif tridhom jirrispettawna l-musulmani? u dawk tas-south america?

hafna ma jafux, ghax dawn li jaqbillhom jghidulna, kemm il-miljun ruh qatlet il-knisja. emmen fil-knisja ghax noqtlhok, la darba kkonvertejt noqtlhok xorta ghax mux tar-razza tieghi.

il-verita hi li kull fejn messet il-knisja graw dizastri umanitarji kbar fil-passat. issa qed nippruvaw nirrangaw? mela l-ewwel haga li tridu taghmlu hijja 'BIEHHU KOLLOX U IMXU WARAJJA'.

hadd m'ghamilha din hux? u hadd minnhom qatt mhu ha jaghmila tibzghux!

Sean Grima

Jul 7th 2010, 13:30

JPO is only trying to steal the limelight!

Charlie Spiteri

Jul 7th 2010, 13:16

Il-Knisja titkellem dwar is-suġġetti li ma tistax taċċetta għax dak li qed jistqarr l-arċisqof mhux it-tagħlim tiegħu imma ta' Kristu. Il-Knisja dejjem titkellem dwar id-dinjita tal-persuni u mhux dwar l-edoniżmu. Titkellem dwar il-vizzji u l-virtu u dejjem taċċetta lill-persuni lura kull meta jmorru lura. IL-knisja dejjem taqla' fuq wiċċha. Ma ninsewx li hi magħmula minn qaddisin li fi żmienhom ħafna minnhom ma kienux popolari, anzi kienu jgħajruhom u minn midinbin li meta għarfu l-verita ma reġgħux lura. Ejja ma naħsbux biss fuq il-mumenti tal-lum biss. Inqisu lit-tfal li meta jikbru mbagħad iridu jaraw min hu l-ewwel missier, it-tieni......verament inħobbu bla interess???Jien bħala nisrani u membru tal-Knisja, irrid niddefendi t-tagħlim ta' Kristu fi ħdanha. Għalfejn xi wħud imorru jiżżewġu bil-Knisja mela? Il-Knisja DEJJEM kienet konsistenti matul iż-żmien. Dan ma jfissirx li kif għedt iktar 'l fuq mhux magħmula minn midinbin. Kristu darba qal: Tridux tmorru intom ukoll? Qiskom tridu timponu fuq min imexxi u għandu r-responsabilta tt-tmexxija tal-Knisja?

Ben Dover

Jul 7th 2010, 12:43

"We will not launch a crusade" Well FINALLY the church realizes the more people you kill the less people there are to hand you money at the pews!

g,portelli

Jul 7th 2010, 12:26

@ Alexander Farrugia

The original texts of the new testament were written in Koine Greek the base for modern Greek with Greek Cypriot being closer. Greek was the lingua franca at the time the New Testament was written. I trust the Greek Orthodox interpretation of what is actually written in those texts to be closer and more accurate seeing they did not have to mediate it through a different language. Think of it, 2000 years of uninterrupted access to those texts from the same language with the same concepts. The Orthodox Church, a church existing since the 1st century AD has allowed remarriage I trust it has good theological reason to do so.

Jesmond Micallef

Jul 7th 2010, 11:10

The "marriage problems" phenomenom should be tackled right from where it all starts, the famous 3 words : "Yes I do". This is the background that needs to be tackled here. Do people really know what they are putting themselves into ? Considering this generic outcry here in favour of divorce leads me to think that this is obviuosly not the case. People need to understand that even an electoral vote involves a personal decision, its either yes or no. Divorce is not a solution, far from it. Its just a alienation to what the real root causes are of the "failed or hard case" marriages are. There is already a solution to specific cases called Marriage Annulment.

James Gauci

Jul 7th 2010, 11:06

some ppl need to learn the difference between nullity and divorce...and btw ppl...a priest is a priest forever, there is no dissolution of the sacrament...never...get your facts right before leaving such comments...

Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

Jul 7th 2010, 10:56

So marriage is not to be dissolved but a priest may be excused from the priesthood and allowed to marry even though he promised his life to God. Where is the fairness in all of this? It is clear that those who make the rules do so for their own benefit.

Jack Sparrow

Jul 7th 2010, 10:40

"Convinced Catholics have to vote for a stable marriage and against divorce".

And foolish me I thought that being remarried was more a bit more stable than being a poggut.

Joss Galea

Jul 7th 2010, 09:49

Taf x'naf....li l-knisja fejn jaqbilla taghmel il-ligijiet. L-Ordni Sagri huwa sagrament ukoll bhaz-zwieg...imma qasis jista johrog u jholl dak s-Sagrament li ghamel Alla!!!!

Andrea Portelli

Jul 7th 2010, 09:47

So no divorce, but we'll keep annulment... after all its a good source of income for the curia!

Catholics ; odd little people

Alexander Farrugia

Jul 7th 2010, 09:38

If the government accepts divorce, it would only hold for those persons who married civilly, not for those who married in the Church. If I'm not mistaken, the former group of people are the minority. If you divorce, only the government would consider you as being divorced: the Church will not.

The Church cannot do anything about this: Jesus himself spoke very clearly about divorce. If the Church started embracing divorce, it would be contradicting the Lord's teachings, and that is never an option for the Church.

Edward Demicoli

Jul 7th 2010, 09:36

The Archbishop has a right to instruct Christian MPs how to vote. It is his prerogative. All MPs however have a DUTY towards the citizens of Malta to do the right thing and not ignore the plight of thousands of their constituents who have a genuine and social need for divorce.

g.portelli

Jul 7th 2010, 09:36

Does Mgr. Cemona have the ''statistics' in hand showing that the limbo-like situation for separated couples reinforces the 'family'? Politicians do a lot of things they never promise in their electoral manifestos to the detriment of all as I am sure Mgr Cremona is well aware of. Perhaps the broken promise of the use of cleaner fuel or to lessening child poverty should jog his memory. Further more both the PN and the LP stated their commitment to secular state education however we find ourselves in a situation where the party in power abdicated that responsibility to a religious organisation that refuses to employ gay individuals! Giving the church monopoly over education certainly never was a pre election promise! So much for the promise of a more inclusive society! State and secular private education turn Cinderella! Why not take a leaf out of the Greek Orthodox Church's pragma on irreconcilable relationships instead of deriding democracy and the secular state. Don't the Greeks go to heaven Your Excellency? Really to question the 'moral' authority of an elected MP to sponsor a private member's bill when Malta is a secular state is the limit.

C. Farrugia

Jul 7th 2010, 09:31

Jekk il-Knisja ma taqbilx mad-divorzju, mela mhux suppost taqbel mal-annullament!!

Two weights two measures???

U bl-annullament, jekk parti ghamlet offiza gravi, jew ghandha impediment li jzommha milli tkun tajba ghaz-zwieg, kif allura din tigi lliberata li terga' tizzewweg ukoll???? U t-tfal??

joe borg

Jul 7th 2010, 09:14

so our beloved archbishop is saying that when choosing the 'right one', people have to be cautious because they have to stick to the person chosen for the rest of his/her life.

nonesense, first of all the world, the real world we live in is always in continuous evolution, so people change both in attitudes and personality, so one day you may find that the person sleeping near you is no onger the one you met 25 years ago. second and this is a common fact, nothing lasts for ever, and this is a very common notion.

in the light of the above the church has its tribunal which gives marriage annullation of course at a premium, so should we think that the church doesn't want people going to spend money in the civil courts and spend it in theirs? interesting theory hux?

and what about the government? working for stronger marriages? how can the gorvernment be able to interfere with people's sentiments and oblige them to love for ever?

we are in 2010 the time when priests stood by dying people asking for their land and riches in order to go to heaven has long passed

Ann Cassar Torregginai

Jul 7th 2010, 09:01

To those who say they are Christians but agree with divorce please read Mt 19:3-9, a judgement on our society. Divorce is a violation of God's natural law for everyone (not just Catholics). Man and woman commit to each other when they get married. This commitment is being replaced by a distorted notion of love where it is ok to leave a relationship if it is not making you happy. The reasoning is you deserve to be happy at all costs. You do deserve to be happy but the fallout of divorce is rarely shown. It's impact is almost always traumatic on all parties concerned, especially children. Pope John Paul II used "the plague of divorce" to emphasize the gravity of this attack on the dignity of marriage. The Church is not "out of touch" with relationships. It is simply responding to the mentality of a civil society that is challenging the truth that a VALID marriage is indissoluble.

charlie spiteri

Jul 7th 2010, 08:41

Jien mizzewweg u rabbejna hamest itfal. Tahsbu li hemm xi zwieg bla problemi?! Imma rridu inzommu quddiem ghajnejna li dak li nizirghu nahsdu........u bi tbatija trid tara l-frott. Min ghandu xi agenda kontra l-Knisja u l-gvern zgur li se jiehu l-okkazjoni biex jattakkaw. Imma meta se nitghallmu. Anke t-tfal tad-divorzjati fl-Ingilterra stqarrew li huma jaqblu ma' familja stabbli. Kull rapprezentant tal-poplu jrid jimxi mal-linja tal-partit tieghu u mhux jimxi fuq xi agenda personali ghax inkella jitlef il-kredtu kollu ta' dak li jkun ghamel u qal qabel!!!!Jien favur zwieg b'sahhtu. U biex ikun b'sahhtu trid tahdem ghalih bhal kull haga ohra. Kull imhabba trid tkun mzewqa ma' xi tbatija ghaxi nkella ma tkun imhabba xejn!!!!!!!!

victor pulis

Jul 7th 2010, 08:30

"Mgr Cremona said that in most cases abroad, divorce was not sought by people who were suffering, but by people who wanted something else - such as men who wanted younger women"
In my opinion this is a very unfair statement and an insult to the hundreds of people who are suffering in their marriage because of the actions of their partners.

anton izzo

Jul 7th 2010, 08:21

jien ma naqbilx mad-divorzju imma hej ma naqbilx lanqas li l knisja ma taghmilx krucjata min jaf kieku kien hemm il labour fil gvern kieku ga qamu l-irwifen kollha

a.dalli

Jul 7th 2010, 08:21

Separation agrements or non agreemets are harsher tha divorce. Figures only reflect those that go through our legal system. What about the rest? Visitaion rights - parents using children against one or the other parent. Support most of the time rendering the father bankrupt.
Divorce is the best solution for all including the economy - remarrying involves - wedding arrangements - the industry will again boom. Childrel although visting rights may remain will be resettled within a legal and more durable arrangement.
Off course one can introduce conditions - say divorce may only be granted after 5 years of legaly recognised separation. Yes why not lets debate - Catholics and all

Simon Abela

Jul 7th 2010, 07:56

The Catholic Church, has controlled the people for the last 2000, years. I am divorced this does not make me a bad person. The church need to look at the pedophile problem before pointing fingers to others. When I lived in Malta it was a big sin. I applaud Mr. Pullicino he is thinking outside the box. I don’t condemn gays or lesbians. But surely I condemn any adult that that’s advantage of minors that makes me puke. Children are innocent.
Great job!! Keep it up Pullicino!!

D. Scerri

Jul 7th 2010, 07:12

What about the indissolubility of priesthood? We've seen priests leave and get married...when they had promised loyalty to Christ, the church and the faithful. Two weights, two measures.

Chris Grima

Jul 7th 2010, 07:00

With all due respect to his grace, it is simply something that is so needed in these times. The world has evolved so much since our Lord was here.

Why is it that women always seem to be the 'poor ones'? How many henpecked husbands prefer to stay quiet instead of risking the wrath of his spouse? You have obviously never worked in a factory where women are in the majority. Just hearing young women speak is an eye-opener in itself.

I pity their husbands...

And after all, convinced Christians should not bother about it all, aren't they happy in their marriages?

Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

Jul 7th 2010, 05:54

Working for stronger marriages is not inconsistent with divorce. I support both. Cremona can take the words of Jesus at face value. Nothing forces him or his celibate mates to apply for divorce. For the rest, let them do what they want with their lives, life styles and bodies. It is none of the Church's business. If Pullicino Orland lacks moral authority (he has every legal right to introduce a private member's bill), as is being claimed, what moral authority do bishops, archbishops, cardinals and popes have left when they spend much of the time sweeping abuses against children under the carpet. Now that is a threat to the integrity of the family. No the Church does not have a right to debate the introduction of divorce in Malta. This is a secular matter. The only right it enjoys is to tell its faithful who are decreasing in numbers that it is contrary to the Church's teaching. Cremona would be well advised to continue to keep the company of his newly found ecumenical friends and leave Maltese to fend for themselves.

Joseph Galea

Jul 7th 2010, 04:10

Dear Archbishop. Our beliefs that divorce is not a solution should be put to general vote and not to Parliamentary vote. I am sure the Hon Prime Minister realizes this. And we want to know the Labour Party's views ... not the personal opinion of the Opposition Leader.
Everyone knows the support AD has gathered throughout its years of supporting the introduction of divorce in Malta.
Farewell Dr Pullicino Orlando. We should have listened to Dr Sant after all.

Josef Caruana

Jul 7th 2010, 03:05

I believe that if any member of parliament puts religion before his country he should resign. MPs are elected in order to serve Malta's best interests, and there will come a time when what is best for one's country will not agree with the teachings of one's religion. In such times making a decision on the basis of one's religious conviction would automatically mean a betrayal to the state one has sworn to serve and defend without prejudice.

Whilst the Archbishop has every right to say whatever he wants to his flock, he does not have the right to impose his views on members of our society which are not members of his denomination, or else he will not be doing anything better than the local imam who stated that he would not mind if sharia law was implimented in Malta

Frank Bonello

Jul 7th 2010, 01:25

Such a serious issue should not be decided by Parliament BUT ONLY BY A REFERENDUM! Does Pullicino Orlando know how many HUNDREDS of his voters who are staunch Catholics ever ever dreamt that he would be coming out with the shocking presentation of a parliamentary motion for introduction of DIVORCE.
My friend you will have the reply next election when I feel sure that hundreds of Nationalist voters will skip you out of their list. Knowing the election results Your tears then would not be crocodile tears.

Claire Busuttil

Jul 7th 2010, 00:04

Sur Arcisqof, ghalfejn il knisja kattolika f Malta ma ghandha l ebda fiducja fl insara Maltin???? Inti tahseb li min veru ihaddan il fidi Nisranija se jaqbad u jidivorzja ghalxejn???
Imbaghad hemm haga ohra importanti hafna.....f Malta ma ghandx hawn nies Kattolici biss.....allura dawn ma ghandux ikollhom dritt li jihdu d divorzju???

jscerri

Jul 6th 2010, 23:38

Mgr Cremona should present some statistics regarding the effectiveness of the Cana marriage preparation course, the one I forked out some Lm30 to attend. It would be useful to compare the % separations/annulments to the %of couples in the cana course that stop their relationship before marriage. I bet the difference is not statistically significant and this course is another church run money making scheme...with all due respect to the 'koppji mexxeja'.

ray sacco

Jul 6th 2010, 23:35

"the church wants to protect the vulnerable, such as children."
does the church consider the vulnerable when it comes to annulments? children of a divorced couple are the crop from a failed marriage. and children from an annulled marraige are???????????

shaun mc carthy

Jul 6th 2010, 23:18

the usual scaremongering about what happens abroad etc . ' the State ' should work to improve marriages etc .it says ,,,,,,,,,,,,, .where are the State involved in your marriage ,,,,,,,,,,,,, my marriage,,,,,,,,,,, or anyone elses marriage. I know of many marriages which are much happier the 2nd time around , and the children where involved are also much happier . What about the ' thugs' of husbands who scare the daylights out of their wives by physical violence , control freaks and bullies . Where is the State help then........only reports !! I bet the archbishop would not like it if he was subjected to the violence , bullying every day that goes on in the lives of many married couples .Please tell us how you are meant to stay married to some one who treats you worse than an animal . GET REAL .

MBorg

Jul 6th 2010, 22:37

@ Martin Saliba
Wrong again ! The Bishop was only stating facts. If one asked him about the duty of Catholic MP's in the divorce dabate, he could only give the answer he gave. If you are a practising Catholic you cannot go against the teaching of the church. You cannot be in favour of divorce. If you are a true Catholic you have to respect your faith.

Martin Frendo

Jul 6th 2010, 22:35

about time that such motion is being passed. hey clergy you know what you have to do first to start taking you serious again.. clean up your house from innocent abusers....

C e Taliana

Jul 6th 2010, 22:31

Le mhux krucjati - imma se mmorru kontrih f'kull nifs u f'kull priedka mill-Hadd li gej!

W. Azzopardi

Jul 6th 2010, 22:09

who of those who voted for Pullicino during the last election knew he was in favor of divorce?

Joe Xuereb

Jul 6th 2010, 21:38

Bolt out of the PN-Blues?! About time too!.
It's not a question of right or wrong. I'm thinking of divorce, abortion, acceptance of homosexuality, acceptance of marriage between homosexuals, etc. The church his made its pronouncements on these issues and can not renege on any of them. It has set itself up to fail because, like everything else, we live in an evolving world. So failing it is until one day it will disappear as 'myseriously' as it appeared. Marriage wasn't instituted by god/jesus/canaa. Marriage is a necessary social contruct instituted by Man. As such it is not writ in stone. Get over it.
Children take a long time to rear so marriage IS important. The siring of children's normal. Caring and loving them's normal. What's not normal is turning a natural phenomenon that sets the ball rolling (a couple's falling in love) into an indissoluble contract between two people with no blood ties. Love towards one's child is normal and unconditional. Love between two people, strangers to start with, is different. It's ANYTHING BUT unconditional.
Falling-in-love is Nature's trick to get us going to multiple. Job done, Nature washes its hand of the matter. Look and observe.

Tonio Ellul

Jul 6th 2010, 21:26

Yes, it is true, no MP has discussed this issue with his or her voters whom elected their MP as a representative. This process in essence is outright beyond normal democratic process. Such issues which are outside electoral programmes should be subject to a referendum. Such referenda should not constitute of an outright yes or no, but could provide a few different options clearly expressing the people's diverse opinion on the matter/s. It is then up to the representatives to legislate accordingly to the issues invoved if need be.

walter camilleri

Jul 6th 2010, 20:55

I thank God that I have been very happily married for fortyseven years and never regretted a moment of our life together.

But what is our compassionate, merciful church's position on the abandoned wife with a young family to bring up? Or, for that matter, the abandoned husband? Or the battered wife with an alcoholic husband? Is a celibate priest going to understand problems between the sexes?

As far as I can understand, the Church's position seems to be "Grin and bear it, carry on being beaten and starve, your reward (and your children's) will be great in Heaven". Sadly, it does not hold water, and for my part I do not believe the Lord Jesus, who preached love and compassion, would agree either..

The Church seems to have lost its way on human sexuality, as it has lost the parents of the 1.2 children in the average Maltese family who have declined to pay Roman Roulette.

JJ Creg

Jul 6th 2010, 20:43

If the Church were afraid that Divorce is an excuse for an older man leaving his wife for a younger woman, then it is the Church’s responsibility to teach her flocks about temptation.

Whether divorce is allowed or not, the reality is that majority of separated couples have already raised a second family. Disallowing Divorce is complicating the issue.

People who chose to marry by Civil Contract are put together by a Civil Servant and not by God and so, what has it got to do with ‘No Divorce Is Allowed’ because God said so? Above all, the Church does not recognize such marriage, so what the interference is all about? And, what has Christ’s teaching got to do with non-Believers?

Andrew Farrugia

Jul 6th 2010, 20:40

@ Kenneth Cassar
And you have the cheek to accuse me about labelling people with adjectices when your words are full of spite and bile? What deal? Are you by any chance implying that Catholics should stay out of politics? Dream on, and continue to amuse us with your delirium.

Alex Debono

Jul 6th 2010, 20:22

Dak ghax qatt ma haseb li tal-PN irridu d-divorz... Imma se jkun huma stess li jdahhluh... l-aqwa li kienu dejjem mal-knisja... Ifhem il-knisja taghthom ir-rih ax dejjem kienet favur il-PN... biex hemm ahna ara fejn waslna illum.. tahwid tgerfix ma jiqax... Viva l-pN ,ela ha jkomplu jhawwdu u jgerfxu..

Shirley Caruana

Jul 6th 2010, 20:10

I, a Christian, am seriously disturbed by the authority of the Church over civil matters. The Church must admit to have had too much authority over all for too long and made many huge mistakes, damaging generations.
As sad as 'divorce' may sound, I find it equivalant to 'annullment' so why can the Church dissolve failed marriages and not the state???
The church needs to come to terms with such an issue, which, in my opinion is a strong 'power struggle' issue in such a time where its once authorative voice over all , is losing its power.
Times have changed Dear Church, together with the society's tolerance to a lot of misuse of your authority.

Dr. John Zammit

Jul 6th 2010, 20:05

Viva San Nikola - Is-Siggiewin ighidu li dawk il-guvintur li kienu jixtiequ li jkollhom tfajla biex jizzewguha jduru tlett darbiet ma' l-istatwa ta' San Nikola tal-Pjazza tas-Siggiewi. Issa se jkun il-kontra billi dawk li jridu d-divorzju jduru tlett darbiet ma' l-istess statwa. Dan qed nghidu ghax kumbinazzjoni gara wara li jien zort il-kazin tal-banda San Nikola nhar il-festa tas-Siggiewi u kumbinazzjoni kien hemm Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando u meta ntroducejt lili nnifsi qalli naf min int u ghedtlu li qed nikkonsidra nohrog fuq is-Siggiewi. Inzertajt tkellimt ma diversi zghazagh u skantajt kif xi whud minn familji l-aktar "tal-Knisja" mhux talli qablu mieghi dwar dak li semmejt jien fl-elezzjoni tal-parlament Ewropew (divorzju ecc) anzi talli staqsew lill-genituri taghhom ghaliex fis-snin sittin l-Arcisqof Gonzi kien hareg id-dnub il-mejjet u l-interdett kontra min kien izomm ma' Mintoff.

Ghalhekk nifrah lil Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando talli kellu jkun hu li ma bezghax iktar dwar id-divorzju mhux bhal tal-Lejber paroli biss u jibzghu minn dellhom. Lill-Arcisqof nghidlu: "aghti lil Cesare dak li hu ta' Cesare u lil Alla dak li hu ta' Alla" kif qallu sidu Gesu'. Il-kattolici ma jistghux jiddevorzjaw. Id-divorzju ghal min mhux Kattoliku bhali, u ma jindahalx lil min mhux.

Jesmond Micallef

Jul 6th 2010, 20:01

Foreign societies in which divorce is rampant are based on "hypocritic image", simply - the twisted "love" for the untruth and indifference. Divorce is part and parcel of this hypocritic package. The Maltese Government together with the Church should not let these twisted ideas enter the nations psyche. The Archibishop is completely right in saying that abroad divorce is abused by males, so called "men", who want younger woman in order to satisfy thier yearning for those lost younger days and to feel younger. !!! Germany is an excellent example here. Older men divorce their wives for younger women and these same younger women obviously "love" thier new husbands, most especially when they are loaded with hefty bank accounts, drive nice cars, look and dress well, smell fresh and walk the gentleman way. Good old Maslow must have forgotten something here.....!!

Divorce leads to social ill health, en masse !! Young people and children with emotional disorders are all a by product of this menacing danger. Please keep divorce out of Malta, its way out of order, considering the whole complete picture.

May God bless and protect Malta.

D Vella

Jul 6th 2010, 20:01

To each his own.The Church may have certain views and believers may keep to them.The Church however has no right to insist that everyone including the State should do it's bidding. The State and the Church are two separate entities,or they should be. It's about time that the Constitution was changed in favour of all of the people.The majority,if that's what it is(I have my doubts)has no right to deny certain alienable rights.the pursuit of happiness being one of them.

MBorg

Jul 6th 2010, 19:40

@ Martin Saliba I am afraid, you are wrong. The Bishop is not being " selective in his defence of the Maltese people " His views have never changed. He has always gave his views on divorce in context of the teaching of God and of the church. He has always been very clear, no one can change the teachings of God , not even the Bishop

Joe Grima

Jul 6th 2010, 19:32

The papers have been full of the debate on divorce ever since Joseph Muscat put his commitment to legislation, by a new Labour Government, on the table. So what was the Archbishop doing when he put his two bits in on the subject, sleepwalking?

Sean Borg

Jul 6th 2010, 19:28

Dear Archbishop kindly note that as a lay state and I am proud that I am living in a lay state. Divorce is a civil right. till now this right is not available in Malta. Why? People out there want Divorce as part of their laws and people's decison should be more important than that of the church. Also hope that our law courts will have the final decison re separations, Civil Annulments etc and not the Ecclesistical tribunal. We are living in Malta and not in the Vatican state. I am not against the church but I am against laws that took away peoples voice that after all this country belongs to them.

Cedric Mamo

Jul 6th 2010, 19:22

why does the catholic church feel it has to interfere with politics... there are a lot of people who have different religions, or some who do not follow any religion in particular (such as me... the only reason i'm baptised is that I had no choice in that when i was a baby... [another thing i don't agree on... forcing religion on the people])... Why does the catholic church feel the need to impose it's views of morality on everyone?

A. Borg

Jul 6th 2010, 19:16

Sur Arcisqof,dawk li se jivvutaw favur se jkunu jistghu jitqarbnu jew jien biss l-iswed ghax poggut?

MBorg

Jul 6th 2010, 19:16

To all those in favour of divorce - Wake up. All of you who say " that people have a right to a second chance to get married.- Wake up It has been proved that divorce is a joke, it does not put anybody back into a stable marraige. People do not really want a second chance , once they try it, they want a third, fourth and why not even a seventh. Easy come , easy go. Let us use England as an example. You can get divorce in England however people know that it is so easy to get out of marriage that they are choosing not to get married in the first place but to cohabit. The British government is trying to strengthen marriage and to change the present situation which is ruining the moral and social conscience of the country and causing hardship to many. The Government of secular Britain calls marriage the " backbone of society ". There is nothing appealing in divorce.

martin saliba

Jul 6th 2010, 19:13

Mr. Bishop , you are complaing because someone proposed someting that a lot of people want because it was not promised in the electoral program by the PN. So had it been proposed by someone from the PL you would have said that he / she cannot because he / she is not in goverment. Correct me if i'm wrong but i have never heard you complain for promises that were not kept . You seem to be very selective in your defense of the maltese people.

Vincent Galea

Jul 6th 2010, 19:07

I feel the the pain of every divorced man and woman . We always try to save a marriage,the institution is not a prison. I know men and women who are divorced or separated and are good people, loving parents and would love the marriage to have continued. Marriage, except in cases of gambling, shady business dealings, embezzlement physical or verbal use and alcohol addiction ( Do we need to detail the many ways drug and alcohol abuse can destroy a marriage ? ) is worth fighting for. But more than the parents, my heart goes to children who are deeply affected by the turbulence of two parents who no longer love each other. Let us altogether show our children that love is not fiction but something tangible and real.

M. Grech

Jul 6th 2010, 19:01

To follow on B. Cachia comment, its rather wierd that those with a civil marriage may be considered by the church as cohabiting. Look at it another way, the church annulment rate is something like 15% of cases applied for. Satistically speaking therefore 15% of all church marriages are co-habiting couples even though they may be living in wedded bliss!! Just becasue none of the parties contest the legality of thier marriage does not mean that technicalities which makes their marriage as null does not exist. By denying divorce the church is denying proper closure to those effected. I'm one of them and believe me separation was a last painful resort. And there are a multitude of reasons why marriages fail, not just infidelity. There's abuse whether physical, sexual or last but not least and if not the most devatstaing, emotional abuse. So please give us a break. The church should preach compassion and be careful with the type of religious breed devoid of spirituality that it has fostered on these islands.

Daniel Diacono

Jul 6th 2010, 18:59

Il-knisja tghallem li dak li jghaqqad Alla ma jista jifirdu hadd ... Mela ghaliex il-knisja trid tindahal ukoll fiz zwieg civili ? Zwieg civili mhux zwieg li ghaqdu Alla ghalekk ma nistax nifhem kif il-knisja ma taqbilx mad-divorzju f'kas ta zwieg civili.

wally vella-zarb

Jul 6th 2010, 18:56

"Mgr Cremona said that in most cases abroad, divorce was not sought by people who were suffering, but by people who wanted something else - such as men who wanted younger women." Even if such a preposterous claim were true outside of the world of soap operas, does this man honestly expect wives who were abandoned by their husbands "who wanted younger women" to continue existing in a celibate life? Should they not be allowed redress to a situation not of their own making? Not allowing them divorce and the possibility of a new marriage is equivalent to punishing them for having been wronged.

Adrian Borg Cardona

Jul 6th 2010, 18:51

I think the Archbishop said"bolt out of the blue" because he was not expecting such a move from the 'blue' (catholic) party.

George Gauchi

Jul 6th 2010, 18:44

B. Cachia

Jul 6th 2010, 18:42

From the Church's point of view, those who have a civil marriage only are merely cohabiting or, to put it the old fashioned way, 'living in sin'. I think the Church really needs to explain why it feels the need to defend the indissolubility of civil marriage when it does not in any way recognise it in the first place.

Steve Pace

Jul 6th 2010, 18:34

"Archbishop Paul Cremona said today that the Bill by Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando for the introduction of divorce was a bolt out of the blue since neither of the two parties in Parliament had promised such legislation." Yep Dear archbishop.... The cat is out of the bag a bit earlier than expected.... As to the claim "Asked about the duty of Catholic MPs in the divorce debate, Mgr Cremona said that practising Catholics would be doing wrong not to respect their faith." Any practicing catholic has the right not to consider divorce at any time of his / her life. A politician's duty goes beyond any religious duty. Duties stretch to all sectors of society , irrespective of their beliefs. As a practicing catholic i don't feel in any way i am disrespecting my faith . I am respecting others who don't share my beliefs . as to the usual rhetoric about statistics, i fully agree with Kenneth Cassar's comment "Deceptively misleading. You'd have the same statistics if there was only separation and not divorce. It just so happens that civilised states have the divorce option." Ranier Fsadni also put cold water on this small flame with his research

Karl Consiglio

Jul 6th 2010, 18:21

It was no bolt out of the blue, it's been a long time coming.

C. Farrugia

Jul 6th 2010, 18:16

It is the Law of Attraction in action.......the more you resist something, the more you will attract it!!!

Olina Tretyak

Jul 6th 2010, 18:04

"Convinced Catholics have to vote for a stable marriage and against divorce".

Mgr Cremona. we are all for stable marriages!

How about to DO SOMETHING that we will have less separations? Or you propose to stop separations too?
How about to legitimate children born in second families?

How about after neither government nor church nor society did anything to keep families stable, you would allow people to try gain their stable marriage once again with experience of all mistakes done in a previous marriage?

Ray Buttigieg

Jul 6th 2010, 17:58

With all due respect to our graceful Archbishop, but he is not an elected member of parlament and not a politician. How dare he continues to instigate a state that does not give its citizens their due social rights. We are in the eu today and divorce is a right in all the Christian states including Italy. Why us Maltese are disallowed this right. Who rules this country, the church or the state. The archbishop has everyright to convince his followers not to seek divorce when marriage breaks down and this out of conviction and not force. He and his church has no civil right to prevent the state from legalising for divorce and let people chose according to their convictions and personal situations. The archbishop should utilise his energy to ensure that his clergy live a responsible and examplery life, something that in the last recent months has proven clearly that this is not the case. Well done honourable Pullicino Orlando. I hope his private bill finds the support of free thinking members of parlament. Dear MPs, you owe it to the people of this land. Do not be blinded by religious intolerance and outdatedness

d.attard

Jul 6th 2010, 17:58

i wonder what the tone of the archbishop would have sounded like if it were a bolt from the red. We now wait for the reaction of the parliamentary group. Good luck JPO. Catholics need not worry because no divorce law will oblidged Catholics to divorce. It will continue to be a status quo for Catholics. As to divorce being a force for bad, the archbishop must be joking. Just compare our (ie the only non-divorce nation in the world) statistics with the rest of the world. Enough said. Divorce will help us to sort out the mess that resulted from misguided prohibition.

A.Busuttil

Jul 6th 2010, 17:57

I am happily married for the past 38 years but if I had to vote for divorce, YES I do. I know so many couples who found their true love after a second chance and they would like to get married. Once the Archbishop when he was still on his honeymoon (his first 100 days) said that the church is not going to make a crusade out of divorce. It seems that they will do. This will be a bigger mistake than the because no adays no one is going to take notice of what the church is saying. I am not anti church, I am the opposite but it seems that our Bishops lost the touch completely. even the elderly wants the divorce because they want to see their drand children happy. I suggest to the church to reconsider carefully what they say. Because now its coming from both parties.

Peter Bonnici

Jul 6th 2010, 17:56

With so many maried people arguing in favour of divorce, I feel I've made a great choice in remaining unmarried.

Olina Tretyak

Jul 6th 2010, 17:55

Mgr Cremona, I would like to know exactly what measures you suggest to take to give more strength to families.

The knowledge that if family is not doing well it will end up being legally separated living with new partners (how it exists now), does it give more stability to a family than the knowledge that if they do not fix their difficulties they will end up in a second marriage with other difficulties and need to learn how to fix their problems rather than run away from them to a Family Court for separation?

We are all for stability.
If not enough is done to fix problems in families stability will never arrive.
Hindering people from legalising their second families does not exactly help to fix problems in first.
Your example that men would seek divorce in order to get younger woman and this is not fair on their wives is what I want to address.
1. Men still have all the opportunity to leave their wives for younger women by separation.
2. Pity such society where middle aged woman is not interesting to her husband nor to a future YOUNGER partner in case of separation.

Kenneth Cassar

Jul 6th 2010, 17:55

If, as some Catholic fundamentalists keep hammering, over 90% of the Maltese population is Catholic, too few people would opt for divorce to cause the archbishop any concern.

If, on the otherhand, the 90% is more likely to be less than 50%, what right has the archbishop to speak on behalf of the whole population?

Keep out of politics and we'll keep out of religion. Deal?

M Vella

Jul 6th 2010, 17:52

Mgr Cremona MPs are representing not only catholics but every body in Malta who voted for them,so in Parliament they represent all voters and not the church

Jeremy J Camilleri

Jul 6th 2010, 17:48

Coming from a Party the Church has always supported one must admist that this must have come as a bit of a shock for Malta's bishop...Must be what he meant when he said a bolt out of the 'blue'.

It is reassuring to note that the Church will not go on a crusade....they only go on crusades against certain parties.

Kenneth Cassar

Jul 6th 2010, 17:48

"Its purpose, (the Archbishop) said, was to inform the people on the teachings of Christ and what was right for society".

And you have every right to do that. But I never elected you...you have no right to rule my life and that of those who do not form part of your church.

David Polidano

Jul 6th 2010, 17:47

Let all those in favour of stronger marriage speak out. Throughout the world it's been confirmed that divorce does nothing to strengthen marriage... rather it undermines the very concept of what marriage is all about. Wherever divorce was introduced marriage suffered... less and less people got married as marriage lost its meaning and value. Let us show Mgr Cremona that he is not alone in the defence of marriage.

Mohabf Fahmi

Jul 6th 2010, 17:45

would be amazing if one day in the future in never never land, the church would realize that divorce is a feasible, realistic option, as is the use of contraception. they simply need to realize that now since we have cable tv (which wasn't available in the middle ages) we are privileged enough to choose to bring children into a healthy marriage, and to do something amicable about a marriage that is not amicable in order not to further expose children to animosity between parents, which has been proven to lead to violent traits in their development. one day...we might just blink really hard, click our heels, and find that the church has finally grown up and is more responsible to towards our relationship with the Divine rather than controlling whom we should and should not be with.

e micallef

Jul 6th 2010, 17:42

With reference to the 'bolt out of the blue' I was hardly surprised by the motion. The surprise is in fact why it took so long to be forwarded. The Archbishop needs to wake up to reality. I am happily married but this does not mean that all marriages are so. I sympathize with any person who cannot have a fresh legal relationship with another partner. It's about time we get this divorce issue in line with the rest of the world and not let it drag on for ever. Our sense of insecurity( in Malta), our fear of numerous marriage problems and our artificial and expensive approach to marriage are the real reasons we are afraid of divorce. The Archbishop would be rather useful if he were to combat the hype created in the preparation and over celebration of Maltese weddings and concentrate more on the real meaning of marriage. This can also be another ploy to alienate us all to make us forget all the corruption around us. Like the World Cup this gives us all something to argue about whist the fact remains that nothing changes.

Kenneth Cassar

Jul 6th 2010, 17:42

"But statistics abroad showed that wherever there was divorce, families had become unstable rather than stable".

Deceptively misleading. You'd have the same statistics if there was only separation and not divorce. It just so happens that civilised states have the divorce option.

Try as you wish, the days when people in failed marriages were forced to stay together, is over.

Ramon Casha

Jul 6th 2010, 17:41

"Convinced Catholics have to vote for a stable marriage and against divorce".

That's where separation of church and state comes in. Convinced Catholics should refrain from resorting to divorce, if they want to follow the teachings of their church. However MPs, in their role as MPs, must think of the well-being of the citizens when voting. It's one thing for the church to make its opinion on the matter known, but quite another to instruct MPs on how they "have to" vote.

The only thing that has been shown - both abroad and in Malta - is that marriages are not, never were, and never will be indissoluble. While couples should work towards that ideal, and the state and church do well to help them in that, some marriages still fail. When the only thing that remains of a marriage is a legal document, it's time to call a spade a spade. Divorce does not dissolve marriages. It is the formal recognition that a marriage has already ceased to exist, and provides the legal means for the two individuals in question to move on with their lives.

Joe Galea

Jul 6th 2010, 17:40

*YAWN*

Franco Farrugia

Jul 6th 2010, 17:37

Quotes: 1. 'Mgr Cremona said that practising Catholics would be doing wrong not to respect their faith.' 2. '(The Church) expected that in a pluralistic, democratic society, its right to take part in such a debate would be respected. Its purpose, he said, was to inform the people on the teachings of Christ and what was right for society.' But if the Archbishop really believes in a pluralistic society, he would not have tried to bend the MPs' arms into followig what the Church says. The Archbishop should note that the MPs do not only cater for Catholics but everyone.

E Farrugia

Jul 6th 2010, 17:34

Mgr Cremona, you are a representative of the Catholic Church. MPs are representatives of the people of the Republic of Malta. JPO needs no moral authority to present a motion; he has the legal authority to do so as an MP. You, on the other hand, have no legal authority to state that MPs "have to vote for a stable marriage and against divorce".

Although you and the Church are entitled to your opinions, don't confuse that freedom with the delusion that anybody in parliament is obligated to listen to you.

Scerri S

Jul 6th 2010, 17:32

"appeared to question his moral authority to present such a motion"

Does Mgr Cremona really think that only religious people have the moral authority to propose anyting? Mgr Cremona has the duty to take care of his flock, but he should let Caesar take care of his people. The state is separate from the church. Give up. It's 2010.

Joseph Calleja

Jul 6th 2010, 17:28

"such as men who wanted younger women." MGR Cremona and what makes you think that women don't want younger men? Why are you stereotyping men? It is a proven fact that women are more sexual than men and they have the same needs as men, the only difference is that women are not so vocal about it. I believe that women today are seeking younger men. " MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando for the introduction of divorce was a bolt out of the blue". Don't think so, I think everybody knew it was coming but it was a matter of by who and when. Dr Policino has more guts and integrity than any other politician and for whatever reason he thinks it is time to speak up for the voters. Somebody has too. Besides Mgr this is just an introduction of the bill and not the passage. Time will tell, another saga begins.

Joe Mangion

Jul 6th 2010, 17:26

This is sheer arrogance by the head of the catholic church in malta. It is just unbelievable in 2010 for the Archbishop to determin for us what is good and what is bad. He has all the right to talk about religion but here we are talking about civil rights. And it is up to our Parliament to determine those rights. He says that neither of the two parties in parliament had promised such legislation. So what. Were the high tariffs of water and electricity promised by the PN? Were the high prices of medicine promised by the PN? And what about the environment? Was a power station working by fuel oil promised by the PN? We have now reached a point of no return. This is a social and civil issue. It is not a religious issue and the PN members of Parliament together with the Labour ones should stand up and be counted. Malta cannot continue accepting divorce obtained overseas whilst neglecting such right to those who cannot travel abroad to get a divorce.

Mario Muscat

Jul 6th 2010, 17:25

The Church famous phrase for the last few years was that The Church and The State should work together for a stronger families!! Please can some body tell me if there was any results ?? What plans they have ?? and how they intend to produce stronger families or stop people from getting separated ??? I strongly believe that this phrase is just another trend sentence to keep everybody happy!!!! Please do not tell me by praying because that did not stop my marriage to split up many years ago. The church and the state has been keeping my heart in a prison , enough is enough. Let us live our lives in love and happiness.

Charles J. Buttigieg

Jul 6th 2010, 17:21

This would put the PN in a Catch 22 situation as Gonzi would never allow a free vote and JPO would end up voting alone against his side. The PL members would most probably be given a free vote but it would not garner enough support to pass the bill. JPO made it possible for the real progressive to stand up and be counted. Hats off to JPO.

m.farrugia

Jul 6th 2010, 17:21

Mhux bizzejjed li niehdu sehem fid-dibattitu hemm bzonn li naghmlu kif kienu jaghmlu Isqfijiet oħra. Monsinjur Gonzi lil Mintoff qallu le ghad-divorzju u sa hamsin sena wara ma dahalx. Ma incedux l-armi qabel nibdew il-glieda. Veru se tkun battalja harxa ghax għalkemm iz-zewg partiti ma kelljomx din l-agenda fuq il-programm elettorali fiz-zewg partiti hemm elementi favur id-divorzju. Min ghax jaqbilu, u oħrajn ghax qed ikollhom pressjoni mill-hbieb tgaghhom.

David Buttigieg

Jul 6th 2010, 17:15

"Mgr Cremona said that in most cases abroad, divorce was not sought by people who were suffering, but by people who wanted something else - such as men who wanted younger women.

Therefore, bringing about divorce created an injustice, and hardship, to the wives of such men."

Well, seeing that "such men" will leave their wives anyway, is your solution to force them to stay with their wives at gunpoint?

Your Grace, it's time to wake up and realise it's the 21st century!!!

C Zammit

Jul 6th 2010, 17:13

"Convinced Catholics have to vote for a stable marriage and against divorce". If these so called Catholics are so convinced, what are they afraid of? Is their marriage so strong that the introduction of divorce scares them? So annulment is ok for the church but divorce isn't? It is high time that divorce is introduced and the church should stay out of it!

s vella

Jul 6th 2010, 17:11

i totally agree with Dr Pullicino Orlando. I thank the Almighty that I have a good Marriage, but what about those poor people who's marriage hadn't worked, should they have a second chance. What I ask here, that we r living in 2010 and things have changed so much since the time ot our lord or earth; Why is the universal Roman Catholic Church so much against divorce..is it truly for the teachings of jesus Christ or because it will lose power to disolve marriages, and the money they lose from couple seeking dissolusion of their marriage? Isn't a Dissolusion of a marriage a divorce?

Mario Muscat

Jul 6th 2010, 17:11

I do not accept the church to come out in favour of divorce , but , divorce is a state matter . No matter what the church says people have a right for a second chance to get married . Let the people have their choice and live their lives happy !!!

C Borg

Jul 6th 2010, 17:08

Quote " but the major parties had not, and one expected MPs to act within the promises made by their parties." Only now you are saying this.

Where you in Malta when the Gov just did the contrary of what was promised. Only now you (as a church) talk. You know how many people suffered. Why you didn't talk when you saw that the Gov. was not doing what was promised.

You know what the gov does now. Simply ignore you as he did with all the maltese that confronted him.

Imbasta inmorru nitqarbnu ghand il-Papa....

gaffarena joseph

Jul 6th 2010, 17:08

It is not a bolt out of the blue,but simple something that should had happened years ago.

M. Jones

Jul 6th 2010, 16:58

Bolt out of the blue? Has he not opened the paper in the last years?