Christian Peregin
Sponsor removed from divorce billboard
An anti-divorce message will no longer share space on a giant billboard with electronics company Vision Tech after the name of the sponsor was removed from the Żebbuġ parish's initiative because of the "inconvenience caused".
"We would like to make it clear that the company did not know about the content of the billboard," archpriest Fr Daniel Cardona said in a statement, adding that the parish regretted the inconvenience caused to the company.
The billboard caused a stir on Sunday when pro-divorce Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando was faced with the billboard saying: "Divorce: God doesn't want it." At the time, Dr Pullicino Orlando was walking to a club to hear Mass. The billboard stood on the church parvis opposite the club.
Fr Cordina specified that the parish's campaign in favour of family unity and against divorce had been going on for years in writing, through fliers and billboards.
He added this was a continuation of its long campaign in favour of the Catholic Church's teachings in light of the divorce debate that gained ground recently.
When contacted, Vision Tech manager Jason Grech did not seem too pleased with the free advertising he got when The Times published a photo of the billboard on its front pageon Monday.
"I did not know The Times would publish it. You could have removed it. I never asked for free advertising. If things become more complicated and we need to take legal steps, we will," he said.
He stressed he was not aware of the content of the billboard and was simply approached by the parish to help it financially, something his company and many others did on a regular basis.
He would not take a position on the divorce issue. "I'm not in favour or against divorce. It's not something I need to deal with. There are decision makers for that. I was just asked to sponsor a billboard and I did not know what the content would be."
He pointed out that cigarette manufacturer Rothmans used to sponsor football but it did not mean smoking was good for footballers.
He said he was surprised by the reaction to the advert. "How was I meant to know it would turn into such a hot issue?"
Meanwhile, the planning authority has confirmed the billboard was legal because socio-religious billboards were exempt from requiring a permit, as long as they were not erected for more than 21 days. Since it was placed last Friday it will be legally entitled to remain there until August 5.
The Curia said it had not been asked for its blessing about the billboard and the parish should shoulder responsibility for the initiative.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
38 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Joe Zammit
Jan 8th 2011, 11:38
A simple argument:
The authorities of the Catholic Church have the right and duty to teach what principles are good and what are bad. There is no time limit for this right.
To teach means to impart knowledge through instruction and/or training, part of this instruction states that voting for divorce is grievously sinful.
Therefore, the Catholic Church has the right and duty to teach that voting for divorce is grievously sinful always, also in a referendum, general elections and during a vote in Parliament.
N.B. Article 2(2) of the Constitution is entrenched.
Neville Calleja
Jul 22nd 2010, 08:14
Frankly, I can't understand this crusade. I believe Fr Cardona is a man with a message. He simply went one step further than the blabberers below and stated what he stood for on his church billboard. What dismays me is the chicken attitude adopted by the sponsor and the Curia's statement in response. I understand this was not organised by the Curia but at least it could have expressed agreement - after all, Fr Cardona was simply reminding Catholics of what the Catholic Church teaches and that should have been acknowledged.
In a nutshell, it's a debate and Fr Cardona has every right to engage as any Pop, Dick or Harry below who is in favour. I wish there were more men of principle like Fr Cardona on both sides of the argument.
Gerry Cowie
Jul 21st 2010, 22:53
@Lynn Zahra - are you not acting according to your own conscience, just as Mr Zammit is doing? Whether or not you agree with him, do you not think you have chosen a rather inappropriate quote? "Alas how true"!
victor pulis
Jul 22nd 2010, 10:07
With the difference that Ms. Zahra is not trying to impose her opinion on others.
D.Galea
Jul 21st 2010, 18:57
A great example of the ironic twist where thinking that being too "politically correct" should mean looking good or worse making out more profit from it. If so doesn't turn out to be the case very few would hold stand and not try running a mile away on this rock, so pathetic yet so common.
Joseph Calleja
Jul 21st 2010, 16:47
First of all let's assume the sponsor was not aware of what will be on the billboard, we all donate blindly which is good but then it is the responsibility of the priest to protect his donation/sponsor. So in a way the sponsor is not totally at fault and in good faith took his name off the billboard. So the responsibility falls solely on the priest's shoulders." Meanwhile, the planning authority has confirmed the billboard was legal because socio-religious billboards were exempt from requiring a permit" What constitutes socio-religious? This billboard is in public view and it seems like some people are offended by it, then it stops being socio-religious. Does the church have any right to offend people with their slogans? It would be fine if the church displayed the billboard inside the church but once it is outside in view of the public then it becomes a public matter, and not a church matter. The church has every right to oppose divorce and rightly so but the church does not have the right to force it's believes on the general public and this billboard is trying to do just that.
Randolph Peresso
Jul 21st 2010, 16:04
This is pure bullying against the Church and its sponsors.
David Caruana
Jul 21st 2010, 17:07
Bullying?
Boycotting is everyone's right. Don't you remember when the Church "boycotted" a political party in the past?
What goes around....
A. Vella
Jul 22nd 2010, 07:45
Bullying? What about the bullying the church has been doing over the years? What about the interdett - wasn't that bullying? What about the intolerance shown towards anyone who simply does not share the same believings (pure example is Joe Zammit)? What about the church sticking its' nose in every state argument and matter? Aren't these all bullying?
Come on its' time that in this country the church learns to shut up and let people go nad listen to her only if they want to. Its' time that this country stops being manned by an archbishop or curia, we are not in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia where everything is ruled by religions. This is Malta please - a free EU country.
RMangion
Jul 22nd 2010, 09:40
How do you know that God does not want divorce ?
To get your wedding annuled by the church it still costs you thousands
I think its the opposite, bullying by the church towards those that are suffering in destroyed marriages
Miguel Micallef
Jul 22nd 2010, 09:56
Do you call preferential treatment (even by the law) 'bullying'? They are allowed to put up billboards without a permit. Is that bullying? Or are THEY bullying others?
Hasn't it emerged from the article that the church is on the wrong side here? Why do you continue defending an institution that has been discredited the whole world over (numerous times)?
Malta and the Maltese, always the same. Sigh.
Joe Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 16:01
Constitutional cases are deemed to succumb unless there is the law backing them, including case-law. Divorce is no right at all.
The European Convention on Human Rights is reticent on divorce, so divorce is no right. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights is mum on divorce, so divorce is no right.
Therefore, any argument depicting divorce as a right in view of introducing it in our legislation is flawed right at the start.
victor pulis
Jul 21st 2010, 19:22
The European Convention on Human Rights is not reticent on religious freedom even if according to your reasoning anyone not partaining to the Christian faith is doomed to hell.
Martin Debono
Jul 21st 2010, 15:57
Ha ha. I love that half threat from the sponsor to sue the Times about the photograph. It's just typical of the lack of education of these people who feel they can make up for the mess they got into by blaming the other side. As if taking a photograph of a billboard is somehow an infringement of their rights. Grow up and get real!
Adrian Archer
Jul 21st 2010, 15:32
The church should see the positive side of this divorce debacle....A lot of people...believer and not...are reading the bible for evidence on divorce. If you look at the quotes being written here and in other articles, you'd seed that this is true.
God works in mysterious ways!!!! lol
Joe E Galea
Jul 22nd 2010, 08:02
Dear Mr. Archer, first of all it's only a few and exceptionally one person who is continuously quoting the Bible and that is Joe Zammit, who has nothing better to do in his life than judging negatively everything on earth by 'mis'quoting phrases from the Bible at his leisure.
c spiteri
Jul 21st 2010, 14:34
ITS TO LATE DAMAGE IS DAN
c spiteri
Jul 21st 2010, 15:25
PS NEXT TIME AHJAR THE ADD ON THE TIMES IS BETTER IKOLOK RISPONS AHJAR
Allan Gatt
Jul 21st 2010, 16:14
All Your Bases Are Belong To Us.
Joe Grima
Jul 21st 2010, 21:00
can someone explain to me what on earth you two are talking about?
Peter Green
Jul 21st 2010, 14:21
@Joe Zammit
This is what God says in the bible about divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1-4):
24 If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, 2 and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the Lord. Do not bring sin upon the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.
Did Jesus (God) change his mind after he came to earth a few hundred years later?
Is the Old Testament God different from the New Testament God?
Dr.Lynn Zahra LL.D
Jul 21st 2010, 13:08
@ Joe Zammit:
you wrote "..............Louise, following evil is detrimental to you"
In his book called "Is God intolerant? " the rev.Daniel Taylor reminds readers that Pascal said " the greatest evil is committed by those who think they are acting according to their conscience........" Alas how true!
Mr.Zammit, you would benefit enormously by reading this book - it might just make you re-asses your intolance towards people who have other ideas, and also make you stop quoting the bible to suit your arguments against divorce.
I am filing a Constitutional case against the State demanding the right to remarry .Those who would like to join in this Kawza please contact me as soon as possible.
As an aside, my e-mail account was spoofed yest. after I received an email from google warning me that my account is about to expire, and to submit my username and Password to udate it. As of today all those who are on my email contacts list have received a request supposedly from me, asking for a loan to pay my hotel bills! Please ignore.
I've arranged for a new account and can be contacted by e-mail at :lynnzahra.leagel@gmail.com . Pass the word around
Joe Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 16:54
Marriage is a fundamental right. Divorce is not a fundamental human right according to the European Court of Human Rights and the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights. Divorce is the break up of the fundamental unit of society, as well as the break up of marriage vows and the family.
Gerry Cowie
Jul 21st 2010, 18:27
Sadly, many people have no conscience whatsoever. Perhaps the quote you used was somewhat inappropriate against a man who, no matter how misguided you may feel he is, has a conscience in the first place. You are clearly acting as you are according to your own conscience, so please try to be a little more gentle with this man!
Surely in the action you are taking you are not happy with the ideas of others yourself.
Everybody is entitled to their opinion, surely, in this world of free speech! No doubt everybody uses sources to support their arguments, as you will surely be doing in your action.
All I am saying is that everybody should be playing on a level field here.
Daniel Vella
Jul 21st 2010, 12:31
http://kotaku.com/5591397/this-anti+divorce-message-brought-to-you-by
If I were a foreigner reading about all the bad press we're getting lately, I'd never want to visit here.
Joseph Mizzi
Jul 21st 2010, 14:26
I liked that comment where the Maltese " Id-Divorzju " becomes " I'd Divorce U " in English :)
Gerard Cassar
Jul 21st 2010, 12:27
What a parish priest does it ricochet on the Church. The Church applies disciplenary measures in case it does not agree with the actions of a Parish Priest.. Not taking any action equals consent. In 1960, all parishes exhibited boards condemning the MLP such as the one in front of St. Francis Church Valletta representing people demolishing the Crucifix. The Sacro Cor Church in Sliema appeared scared that photos were taken of its bill boards.It seems that the conscious of certain priests did prick them and told them that they were wrong but insisted on letting the bill-boards appear.
It was all politicaly inspired whatever writers publish.
victor pulis
Jul 21st 2010, 12:27
@Joe Zammit
did civil marriage exist in the time of Jesus? What is the church's view on civil marriage? are couples married in a civil ceremony living in sin according to the church?
Please can you give me some answers to these questions as well as to the others which have remained unanswered by tou?
Joe Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 11:53
In the first chapter of the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah, we read:
“Then the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Before I formed thee in the belly I knew you; and before you came forth out of the womb I sanctified you, and I ordained you a prophet unto the nations.
Then said I, Ah, Lord God! Behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child. But the Lord said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for you shall go to all that I shall send you, and whatsoever I command you, you shall speak.
BE NOT AFRAID of their faces: for I AM WITH YOU to deliver you, said the Lord. Then the Lord put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the Lord said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth.”
Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it’s already guaranteed!
victor rodenas
Jul 21st 2010, 11:23
If after 21 days the billboard is dismantled and the next day it is fixed again in the same place with the same wording..........would that be according to law ?
Mario Farrugia
Jul 21st 2010, 11:44
Yes it would.
Louise Vella
Jul 21st 2010, 11:14
The parish priest of Zebbug is a true cowboy. He put up a huge billboard without the authorization of the Curia authorities. He put the name of so-called sponsors without the sponsor's knowledge. But best of all he spoke in the name of God - "God does not want divorce". No doubt he did not ask for God's permission to speak in his name. There are 190 countries in the world whuch have divorce on their statute books.
If God were so angry, he would long ago have sent fire and brimstone on the world (while sparing Malta of course). In the meantime Malta is lucky to have such a cowboy as Fr Cardona defending God's interests. Bang, bang! You're dead!
Joe Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 12:02
How wrong you are, Louise! There is no need for any permission from the Curia to put up a billboard. That is part and parcel of pastoral work. There was no need of the sponsor's knowledge: the sponsor knows very well that the Catholic Church like Christ is against divorce. Fr Daniel is completely right (you Louise are completely wrong!) when he said God does not want divorce. Christ himself told us: What God has united let no man, no State put asunder. Our rule is not what others are doing but what others should do to follow faithfully God's command on the indissolubility of marriage. Louise, following evil is detrimental to you.
Joseph Calleja
Jul 21st 2010, 14:19
"What God has united let no man, no State put asunder."
Mr Zammit I hate to contradict you again, but please stop misquoting Chirst. I searched and searched but I never found the quote you are mentioning. What Christ said is " What God has united let no man, put asunder." I don't believe that God or Christ ever mentioned the "NO STATE put asunder." These are your words. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Ramon Casha
Jul 21st 2010, 11:05
"Meanwhile, the planning authority has confirmed the billboard was legal because socio-religious billboards were exempt from requiring a permit"
Wow!!! So a church can put up billboards on, say, Valletta's fortifications or anywhere else and not need a permit? Why should the church be treated differently? If it's a billboard then it should comply with whatever planning regulations exist, irrespective of who it belongs to.
Ramon Casha
Jul 21st 2010, 11:02
"I was just asked to sponsor a billboard and I did not know what the content would be."
Note for future reference: Find out what it is you're sponsoring, before sponsoring.
d pisani
Jul 21st 2010, 11:01
Injoranza grassa doppja! Which company what have sponsored such a billboard while knowing in advance its controversial content? The very least the priest could have done was to inform the sponsor about the very controversial message on the billboard.
I could never conceive some people on Malta to be so grossly ignorant. Tal-biki u tat-tmellieh.
Franco Farrugia
Jul 21st 2010, 09:49
Jason Grech knows that The Times merely published a photo of a public billboard - no harm in that and everyone and his granny has the right to take photos of anything that is in the public eye. Grech should be careful where to put his money, in future.