Church's mission is to promote stability of marriage - bishops

Vasilisa Brandenburg

Aug 30th 2010, 16:14

Joe Zammit of Paola... GO GO GO!!!

GOD WILLS IT!!!

david debattista

Aug 30th 2010, 14:35

My Dear Fellow Mr Grech, What you read and like is up to the individual. I love Malta and Gozo too. NOT IN THE SUMMER thank you, it is to hot for us but in winter it is fantastic. I can assure you I read other material too or one would end up nuts. But I can assure you there is something out there, call it what you want but it is there. Since you read Kaku, Hawking, Einstein is it fantasy to think that ET is out there I think not. Wounder if they are in such a mess as we are and if they have divorce.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 30th 2010, 14:14

@ Victor Pulis. I do not want to discuss divorce, (for reasons stated so often) and much less be part of any discussion, elsewhere on this website, which reminds me of the wives of time past, who would do the washing by hand, while they sang insults to their neighbours, who replied back in tune.

But again I invite you to suggest, from your knowledge, means which could be useful to reduce marriage breakdowns. I am not referring to those which have irretrievably broken down already, but others which may be in line.

gaffarena joseph

Aug 30th 2010, 12:32

LEAVE OUR PRIVATE LIFE ALONE.
Let us decide what we do with our private life, like you do yours.
Life is short,so let us LIVE IT TO THE FULL ,.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 30th 2010, 09:32

Where from now ? That is the important question. Separation and any other judicial decision terminating life in common is unpleasant surgery. Sometimes it is unavoidable, especially in cases of violence, physical and moral. Adultery is a question mark. Just remember Hillary Clinton.
No marriage is perfect, and perfect all the time.
We need more support during the long journey. In other countries they have even resorted to the internet to advise how to "repair" a broken marriage. Incidentally, they depict a repairs van coming along when a car breaks down. Rather mundane, but it shows that if your car has some fault or broken down, you try to fix it. What about the media ? We have so many programmes about cooking, but, as far as I know, none on such important matters.

There are people who are shy to show that they are passing through problems or that they have questions marks in their lives. They would not like to show their identity.

I am jotting down some ideas. Others may have more. Prevention is better than cure.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 29th 2010, 23:14

A final word for today. Marriage breakdowns is a headache not only for the Church and other religions. It is becoming a problem for governments.

States have regulated the civil aspects in various ways. Not all countries have the same system that we have. In America, for example, there are different laws for different states. In Louisiana which has followed Continental law, one finds legal separation decided by a court. In other states, it is a private agreement about assets, children and visiting rights, but there is no court judgment.

If one wants to visualise that a marriage breakdown is a trauma, it is enough to watch a recent tv report on Tiger Williams, the golf champion, who was unfaithful and no doubt about it. He was in tears when questioned about his divorce. I have seen similar tears in separation cases.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 29th 2010, 23:03

@ Joseph Micallef. Perhaps neither wives nor husbands were 100%. Some old widows are known to have advised their daughters in marriage difficulties, recounting their own personal experiences, which although perfect on the outside, had its problems underneath.

A sharp observation of the Bishops in the pastoral note is that "even in times of poverty and emigration" the attitude was different. This, I believe, is true. People had a higher index of enduring suffering and psychological pain. Perhaps they had an optimistic view of life, and always believed that tomorrow will be another day. Life was less distracted. It does not mean that there were no hidden scandals.

Society today is open to all sorts of impulses from the outside. I have known several cases (in dozens) of unfaithfulness in a cohabiting relationship. Both men and women. And it is this information that made me say somewhere else that a second marriage, even after an annulment, is not necessarily better than the first.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 29th 2010, 20:38

@ Victor and Ray. For me this is becoming interesting as it is an exchange of opinions., not necessarily in conflict. Victor, your observation that, with cultural and political changes, sometimes "marriage has been the victim" is very true. Ray, if you read some autobiographical writings of Maltese personalities who are no longer with us, you will easily understand the role of the mother in the home. It is true that women were not appreciated for their true worth. We are still far behind other countries in creating opportunities for capable women. Most separation cases today are not on finding guilt in the other partner. They are about the matrimonial home, the common property, and the settling of children. In previous times, many would separate de facto and, having little to divide, did not bother to go to court. I mentioned somewhere in these posts, how a man got to know that his de facto separated wife had two children from another union. The DSS told him, because of children's allowance.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 29th 2010, 19:13

Another observation, over a long period of time, is that a woman takes a long time (and sometimes a lot of suffering) before she decides to draw the line. But once she takes a decision, it is well-nigh impossible to make her change her mind. A man may act on the spur of the moment, but he is more malleable. It is equally true that a man is almost offended at first if someone tries to tell him that he is wrong. Women are also more meticulous and seem to have an intuitive picture of the behaviour of their husband. They are always noticing any small changes in the relationship. Men are more superficial in their assessments. Very often they notice when it is too late.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 29th 2010, 18:51

It is also my perception that many changes have been brought about by what women think. Since the 70's I have seen constant change. Previously wives used to feel dominant in their own family sphere, and whatever many may think, the matriarchal system prevailed. It was only when there was domestic violence or adultery that they felt they had to leave. Secondly, they were dependent on the maintenance of the husband, for themselves and for their children. Today this is the least consideration, especially with reference to the maintenance of the wife. Many factors contribute to this change. Working opportunities and social services made women think about other alternatives. It is rather rare that a woman claims maintenance for herself nowadays, unless the husband is so well-off that she feels entitled to a share of his future earnings. Thirdly, women do no longer bother about what neighbours, and sometimes her own children, say about her. The prevalent mentality is that "I have my own life to live". I am describing change not pointing a finger.

victor pulis

Aug 29th 2010, 16:07

'In Malta, in Ireland, in Italy, in the USA more than 66% of court cases for the ending of their marriage union (separation/annulment/divorce) are set in motion by women.' Precisely my point. Women today are liberated and will not stand for any bullying by violent husbands. That is only one of the ways in which marriage and society have changed. If we do not look at society from this perspective and accept the changes that have happened, are happening and will continue to happen then we are living a dream. Not that it will make a difference. Divorce will be introduced.Perhaps later rather than sooner but it is a certainty.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 29th 2010, 13:22

@ Victor Pulis. "The family structure has changed completely for better or worse because of progress.Women's role has changed and in many cases she is no longer 'dominated' by her husband...."

Rather than losing time on posts which are mere frustrating repetitions (which perhaps fall in the category described by the Bishops as "crusades"), it would be interesting to read more on your assessment of the present situation. No need to quote from books or the past. I would be interested in how you have seen changes, especially in women's role. I would also add "way of thinking". In Malta, in Ireland, in Italy, in the USA more than 66% of court cases for the ending of their marriage union (separation/annulment/divorce) are set in motion by women. Would greatly appreciate hearing your objective personal view.

Joseph Camilleri

Aug 29th 2010, 13:05

"The Church promotes marriage and defends it because this will result in fewer breakdowns," So, the Bishops admit that, with the best will in the world and with all the measures that the State and NGOs can take, there will always be marriage breakdowns. "Fewer" but not necessarily few. So the question remains: What is going to be done for these 'fewer' persons? Should we dump them by the wayside? Can society deny them the right to rebuild their lives, within a legal framework, if not with the Church's blessing? Instead of uttering platitudes about wanting to strengthen the institution of marriage (as if anyone in his right mind wants to weaken it), the Church in its pastoral work should provide a human, and humane, solution or at least stop being an obstacle to such a solution.

Luigi Cassar Manghi

Aug 29th 2010, 12:38

Catholic zealots are causing the Church untold harm. I agree with Fr. Charlò Camilleri who sees the inappropriateness of fundamentalist retrograde interpretations. My spiritual conscience was graciously shaped by the De La Salle Order during my schooldays, and I continue learning from history, other cultures, and natural sciences. I will not let zealot Catholics ruin my harmonious balance of conscience.

The Church has been shown to be fallible. It is skewing away from Christ's words in Matthew 19:9, conceding one exception where divorce is permissible. The Eastern Orthodox Church, whom I cannot rule out to be the true Church of Christ (read about the Great Schism), does allow this one form of divorce. It allows other things that the Catholic Church does not, such as married priests.

The Catholic Church has a duty towards its flock to explain one by one the exceptions to the indissolubility of marriage by means of annulment or divorce, and if it fails to do so it will only harm itself by losing adherents. Every faithful may decide to look elsewhere, and if this were to happen to me I would look to the Eastern Orthodox Church.

JOSEPH ZAMMIT

Aug 29th 2010, 12:10

This divorce law is very ancient indeed and goes way back before people started writing the books of the Bible. It goes back to Babylon, to the code of Hammurabi.
For all those religious minded experts see this link:
http://www.gods-kingdom-ministries.org/divorce.htm

A side note to Joe Zammit—Moses never wrote a word in the Bible. Most, if not all, allegedly believed authors of the OLD and NEW testament were not the real authors—including many letters allegedly assigned to Paul.

Jeremy N Grech

Aug 29th 2010, 11:55

No one is taking from the church the right to promote the stability of marriage, and in that same way no one should take from the citizens the freedom to decide the way they live. Church represents religion and religious people, not the whole lot of Malta no matter if the non catholic's voice on these rocks is 1% or 99%. This is a political affair and nothing related to religion at all.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 29th 2010, 11:46

Again we are, irrespective of the message of the bishops, arguing, as usual on constitutional interpretations etc etc etc.

My opinion is that the bishops were more down to earth. They recognise the diversity in Maltese society, without asserting any pre-eminence, while maintaining their doctrinal and social position.

"The Church is committed to convey these values: for its members who seek its direction, and for many others in society who would like to hear alternative views so as to be able to make a better enlightened choice as responsible citizens. In a pluralistic society there should never be just one opinion voiced and it is a disservice to democracy to try to silence other points of view!"

May I suggest that the full text is read. The above quotation affirms tolerance and respect for contrasting opinions.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 29th 2010, 11:26

I just revisted. It seems that we are again on the beaten track. Consistent with the message, and as all seem to agree that a breakdown of a marriage is not a "victory" in any person's life, I then visited some websites about what they try to do in the UK to repair.

www.marriage-breakdown.co.uk/

They have even a service under the NHS !!!!

I am convinced that we are far behind.

Dr Francis Saliba

Aug 29th 2010, 11:02

@JosephZammit.

The Church did not draft and did not “insert” anything into the Constitution of the Republic. That Constitution allows the electorate to “voluntarily” accept or reject the teaching of the Roman Catholic Religion. Therefore it “goes without saying” that the Church DOES NOT have the “power and dominance on the minds and souls of the Maltese people”.

When the Maltese “people evolve” in the direction desired by you then, and only then, parliament (not the Church) will exert its power to amend the Constitution. Until then you have no proof whatsoever that you are speaking for the Maltese electorate and, whether you like it or not, you will have to accept the Constitution as it is.

Joe Zammit

Aug 29th 2010, 11:01

Divorce is a great social evil, condemned by Christ. It was evil yesterday, it is also today and it will remain so until the end of time.

No MP can vote in favour of divorce. To divorce is evil and condemned by God. God unites a couple in marriage for ever and no one, no State has the right to dissolve their marriage.

Divorce is a grave sin. Helping anyone to divorce is equally a grave sin. Voting in parliament in favour of divorce is grave sin that separates that MP from God and puts him on the way to hell. Divorce pleases only the devil and his followers.

victor pulis

Aug 29th 2010, 10:40

Raymond Bezzina(1 hour, 12 minutes ago)@ Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

You said, qoute " Some things never change ". unquote,

Exactly Mr. Chetcuti, The Catholic Bible never changes, the
Commandments never change, and the teaching of Jesus Christ
never changes.

Divorce was evil then, it is evil now, and it will remain evil always.

Ray read Deuteronomy 21; 14-17 and see how God, that is Moses looked upon marriage, divorce and bigamy in the old testament. Then you can search the old testament and try and find where God, that is Moses spoke against divorce.
The bible was not written by God but by men such as Moses who trived on the people's fears and superstitions in order to control them. And this tactic is still used today as in the current debate on divorce in Malta. Luckily this ploy is not as effective as it use to be.

Joe Zammit

Aug 29th 2010, 10:19

A Catholic is Catholic always and everywhere. So discussing a topic from a civic point of view does in no way mean that a Catholic is on leave from his obligations towards God and his one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. No Catholic can ever accept evil, like divorce, in his civic arguments. After all, Christ condemns divorce always (with no exception!) for our own good.

So the religious argument strengthens the civic argument because the Catholic has Christ enlightening words to convince him or her that divorce is evil and as such is always to the detriment of society.

JOSEPH ZAMMIT

Aug 29th 2010, 10:18

It is high time that we start crusading AGAINST article 2.2 of our Constitution. This is the life line that is giving the church in Malta its arrogant behaviour clothed in niceties. Its prime objective is to dominate our minds and souls, and though this will surely be her own downfall in time, it is our responsibility to end it sooner than later.
People are kept “happy” and “satisfied” in a controlled manner by involving them in annual village festivities; fireworks; auctioning to carry the village statue by paying thousands of Euros---ALL THIS IS PAGANISM, MIND CONTROL BY CHURCH AUTHORITIES---and we are happy being kept deluded…
For the Catholics, and the Church, stop interfering and dominating. Obviously, divorce is not for you, and luckily, in Malta many are non-catholics.
As Joseph Micallef rightly said: “Church annulments are basically Church sanctioned divorce.” Also, it is well known that if one has enough money one can get an easy annulment.

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 29th 2010, 10:14

The discussion seems to be veering away from the subject, and repeating what appeared elsewhere.

It could be a very very fruitful exercise if posts reflect on opinions about the breakdown of marriages. Everyone who gets married is hopeful that it will last, and it is not a lease of limited duration.

Unfortunately, the posts here cannot be anonymous and people would be shy or feel it improper to write their personal stories. All we had up till now as personal experiences was domestic violence, a very serious and dangerous situation. Others may know of stories of friends or acquaintances.

These are the problems that lead to de facto separations, legal separations, annulments, etc. In Malta we already have people with two annulments ! And we have legal separations, followed by cohabitation for a long period, and very bitter battles when the cohabitation was over.

r.cutajar

Aug 29th 2010, 10:05

A very aptly title indeed !
On the other hand the Church at political level should consider talking to all States of goodwill and Discuss Seriously the tragedies affecting the social fabric of to-day's society !
I think that matured decision / policy makers are of Solid Conviction that the traditional family model is the backbone of a healthy society in general
.I am not against any body,opinion or wishes of divorce as this is a very subjective condition on one's life which is different if one is experiencing problems or otherwise
Othe other hand more profound preperatory work should be channeled to educate the young generation when to start forming a marriage / family on which healthy societies would thrive.
On the other hand divorce will have to be there in this day and age for obviouse reasons among which are political issues and the age we are living is of Absolute prsonal freedom of choice and least personal inconveniences

JOSEPH ZAMMIT

Aug 29th 2010, 09:55

Dr Saliba has stated a very disturbing fact which I am sure does a lot of harm to the Church. He said “the only “say” the Church has exercised is through its obligation to teach and the voluntary acceptance of that teaching by the electorate..”
I take this as reference to article 2.2 of our Constitution. It is precisely this article which was inserted in our constitution by the Church and political parties about 40 years back that is damaging the Church in Malta. As the article states that the church has obligations to teach and that the electorate must voluntarily accept its teachings, it goes without saying that the intent of the church was to keep its power and dominance on the minds and souls of the Maltese people.
But people evolve by each generation and many are seeing that the church has always been an evil custodian of our minds and souls.
To vote labor was a sin—way back in the 60’s. Nowadays, our young generation consider that generation as stupid and full of fear, and they are right!

The church is doing much harm to itself—everyone is seeing through its veiled tricky tactics.

Joseph Micallef

Aug 29th 2010, 09:55

@ Dr. Saliba - Quoting "It is this "open sesame" to serial marriages by arrangement between the married couples that undermines the stability of the family much more than declarations of nullity or legal separations."
Do you really believe in your heart of hearts that if divorce were legallised there would be serial marriages? Do you really believe that one would not always strive to make one's marriage work - just as one does presently? With all due respect Sir, doesn't the present situation present an "open sesame" for serial co-habitations then? What's the difference with Divorce if not a civil recognition of one's state - which would make the couple's position more stable as it would be legally binding?

Joseph Micallef

Aug 29th 2010, 09:48

@ Dr. Francis Saliba. Don't you realise that the reasons brought by the Church justifying annulment ie that the marriage never existed, are in fact fictitious!! The sacrament of Marriage exists the moment the couple consume it ie the moment they have sex. The marriage ceremony is just a way to have witnesses of the couple's intentions and it is not the sacrament of marriage itself. In many cases annullments are given to couples who have children and so it is clearn that the marriage was consumed and it existed. So Church annullments are basically Church sanctioned divorce. Only the name is different! Moreover it is well known that if one has enough money one can get an easy annullment. So now what's the difference between annullments and divorce?

M. Grech

Aug 29th 2010, 09:34

We keep hearing about preventive measures and action to strenghten the family but so far nothing concrete has been said. How's the church to strengthen the family? Is it by disbanding the eccleslestical tribunal and banning annulments which have the same effect of divorce i.e. a couple who has been living together parts ways? Or is it by taking a good look how the clergy carries out thier duties, where bar a handful the standard is abysmally low especially during Sunday homilies. Most preasts are not comfortable dealing with contemporary topics and would rather wonder off to the piuos lives of saints who lived centuries ago in what was very different societies and circumstances. Without wanting to sound facetious, the church has a lot of work to do to stop the dwindling congregations and restore its credibility as a haven for people seeking spiritual enlightenment. And marriage breakdowns will be around for as long as marriages take place. Such is the fallible nature of humans. If divorce is veiwed through compassionate eyes, then it will be clear that it is the lesser of two evils and allow those effected to show and experience love again. How about some compassion.

Joe Zammit

Aug 29th 2010, 09:15

Marriage is for ever. Dissolving a validly contracted consummated marriage by a human authority is always a grave sin. No man has the right or the power to dissolve a validly contracted marriage, especially once it is consummated.

Appealing to God's mercy to introduce divorce is diabolical in its very essence. The 'second chance' proposition is a devilish deceit. Christ commands us never to resort to divorce because "what God has joined together let no man put asunder!"

God will award the good and punish those who choose evil, like divorce, and this punishment will be in hell for ever if they don't repent before.

But, let no one deceive themselves by saying that they can offend God the way they like and then they will find mercy in God. God is infinitely merciful but no one is going to deceive him. The millions of people in hell have deceived only themselves!

martin saliba

Aug 29th 2010, 08:31

They asked such contributors “not to distort the love for each person ingrained in the Christian message by embarking on some kind of crusade, even in the case of clear signs of provocation”. Provocation, in what sense , when you remind someone who is calling you evil , of the evils the church is guilty off and is yet to apologise and where it apologised it was a few hundred years too late as in the case of galeleio and unbaptised children going to limbo. But still the first part of the sentence should be heeded by a few of the contributors to the issue of divorce . In my case someone , who i do not know , even went to the trouble of finding my phone number and called to show his dissaproval of my writings . Dose provacation mean when gouder threatens you with damnation ? In anycase divorce WILL be introduced to Malta whether you like it or not. Time is on our side and god is bigger than religion.

Mario Degabriele

Aug 29th 2010, 08:03

Can anyone please explain to me how the Roman Catholic Church accepts to marry a catholic to a non catholic devorced person? Is this not adultery too.

Emanuel Farrugia

Aug 29th 2010, 07:58

We need to be an example to others especially as Europeans. It is very important to use our morality in marriage and we need to work as a team [wife, husband & children].

The Purposes of Marriage
The Catholic Church teaches that the purposes of marriage are for the procreation and upbringing of children and of the mutual welfare and support of the couple. Neither of these can be deliberately excluded.

Emanuel Farrugia former Executive Secretary of Mtarfa Local Council

Karl Consiglio

Aug 29th 2010, 02:33

Promote to your hearts content while those if us who dont share your views get on with our business and have divorce introduced. After that you can keep on promoting. You could be like that info that warns against smoking on a pack of cigarettes.

J.Xuereb

Aug 29th 2010, 00:51

Wake up to reality dear Church. One of the reasons for marriage break ups is your own fault!!

Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

Aug 29th 2010, 00:12

It is everyone's role, not merely the Church's, to promote the stability of marriage but such promotion is not of and in itself inconsistent with introducing divorce to Malta. Is not Church annulment another way of attaining divorce? The Church's opposition to divorce has nothing to do with the stability of marriage. It is all about retaining control and continuing to create the illusion that Catholics are respectful of the Church's teachings. What the bishops are doing is trying to put a positive spin to their opposition to divorce. Some things never change!

Dr Joe Brincat

Aug 28th 2010, 23:38

In reply to some post, (Fr Chiarlo` Camilleri's opinion), I expressed the opinion that the bishops may be seeing these posts and biding their time when it is proper to express their view.

Now they did.

Rather than being negative, they went to the root of many problems. Their main concern is about the stability of marriage and how it affects not only the Church but society in general. An interesting addition to their pastoral note was that when a marriage breaks down, it is not only a disaster for the spouses and their children, but also for their relatives. I know an elderly father whose children got married, have children and all are living separated from their spouses. He almost blames himself for what happened. But can't find any fault on his part.

They are concerned with was is causing the breakdown of the union. What happens later has relevance, but what is most important is was happens during the long trip of marriage.

The bishops have maintained a very balanced attitude. They request one and all to show respect and understanding.

Joseph Micallef

Aug 28th 2010, 23:15

It seems that whenever I ask people like Joe Zammit or Dr. Saliba to indicate to us lesser mortals, the difference between legal separation+co-habitation (totally legal), Church annulments (ie church sanctioned divorce) - and divorce - they just fall into total silence! Maybe they have no argument against what I have been saying - actually there isn't! Marriages are already breaking down, and people are already forming new families - even without divorce. Divorce would only give the cohabiting couple the civil rights as any other married couple! So please whoever you are, Bishops included, stop scaring poeple that divorce would bring about more broken marriages or as someone put it, rabta coff - it is not the case and you all know it!

Emanuel Farrugia

Aug 28th 2010, 21:36

Clear and simple - Canon 1055. We need to read Canon 1055 of the 'Canon Law' to under stand better the meaning and importance of marriage.


Emanuel Farrugia former Executive Secretary of Mtarfa Local Council.

Joe Zammit

Aug 28th 2010, 20:53

There can be no absolute freedom of conscience for the simple reason that conscience does not free one from the law. On the contrary, it is conscience alone which actually binds one to the law of God.

Everyone, of course, must ultimately follow their conscience; this means that they want to do good and avoid evil according to the information received and the formation of their conscience to act in accordance to this infallible teaching of the Catholic Church.

No one can ignore the teaching of Christ as taught by his Catholic Church and invoke the right of conscience as justification of their act.

Joe Zammit

Aug 28th 2010, 20:52

A simple argument:

Behind all sins there is always the devil.

Divorce is a grave sin.

Therefore, behind divorce there is always the devil.

JOSEPH ZAMMIT

Aug 28th 2010, 20:37

Archbishop and bishop’s pastoral note on marriage and the family is a welcome argument to which I strongly concur. There is nothing more beautiful in life than a sound marriage, a sound and loving family where the unit of a strong society takes root. Therefore, as the pastoral says how could one expect the church to not be speaking out for preventive measures by promoting and defending the stability of marriage?
It is understandable that the Church’s mission was (and is) to promote the stability of marriage, insisting on the moment of consent as the focal point of one’s commitment. This is understandable and practical IF humans are perfect. Alas! We are not perfect, and so within marriages serious problems do happen.
To safeguard problem marriages we must all strive to work hard to ‘repair’ the damage and reconcile the partners involved. It is our duty to help failed marriages to heal and steady marriages to become stronger.
However, and here come the issue, if this fails, then what are we to do? Leave broken people suffering all their lives with negative consequences to the children? No! Here, we must introduce—for the sake of the victims—divorce.

Gerard Cassar

Aug 28th 2010, 20:30

It is made clear that these are not contributions in favour of divorce, but for the enactment of legislation that controls such situations as divorce. A call for the introduction of legislation to control cohabitation (sic) is not different from the call for the introduction of legislation to control and legalise divorce; however there has been nil reaction. Why? Strange!
Call for legislation on divorce is not a call for divorce, far from it. Legislation should be intended to counter those who just leave their spouse and go with another partner. Divorce puts some order in such circumstances, legislates for the better of the couple not to give an advantage to the one who seeks to separate whatever it means to the other part.
It is the general opinion that we are confusing divorce legislation with the divorce itself. Even the Bishops letter suggests this. Legislating will not see couples crowding in front of the ad-hoc tribunal. At first, yes there might be a rush from those who are in certain position not unlike cohabitation to have their case legalized, but with time and persuasion the position will level. Persusion and speeches will surely persuade couples to resist such temptations.

JOSEPH ZAMMIT

Aug 28th 2010, 19:59

Mr. Joe Zammit.
please do us all a favor and take some council yourself. Read again the Bishops' pastoral and try a bit of rationality in your comments--I know, it seems very difficult for you, but persist, pray to Jesus to enlighten you and to bring you out of your neurotic fixations of the mind.

Dr Francis Saliba

Aug 28th 2010, 19:53

@CharlesJButtigieg

The Church never claimed any monopoly regarding “the promotion of stability in marriage” – it solicits everybody’s effort to promote that stability. “Rabta coff” divorce laws don’t promote that stability.

No serious person denies that in Malta there is a vociferous pro-divorce lobby. In order to make such an outrageous claim one would have to wear a very thick blindfold on top of blinkers – not only that, but one would have absolutely no respect for the intelligence of the readers of these comments.

Our bishops have the duty to do much more than “emphasize the spirituality of marriage”. The have the duty to teach what is right and what is wrong in the light of the official religion of the republic and that is the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church.

The Church would be showing signs of weakness only if our Bishops were to rashly follow your gratuitous advice and yield to your pressure to forgo its duty and its right to teach. The Church does not interfere with matters of state when it is exercises its rights and observes its obligations under the Constitution.

JOSEPH ZAMMIT

Aug 28th 2010, 19:44

Now this is what I call a sound and logical argument and I agree to it wholeheartedly. In the meantime, for all those marriages that break down, let us introduce divorce for the sake of the suffering victims.

Joe Zammit

Aug 28th 2010, 19:16

Par. 2384 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

“Divorce is a grave offence against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death.

Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery:

If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery, and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another's husband to herself.”

Ian Grech

Aug 28th 2010, 19:08

I guess it is that time of the year when we all applaud and congratulate the Church on a job well done. Three cheers and hip-hip-hooray.

@ David Debattista. You state that 'Did you know that God in his/her infinite wisdom had to differentiate between fallen angles, entities that possessed the knowledge of the ages'. Do you have proof of this?

Paul Xuereb

Aug 28th 2010, 18:52

A pastoral Note worth reflecting upon. For the umpteenth time, our bishops are not even hinting at imposition; on the contrary, the Note is replete with love particularly for those who hold different opinions.
My suggestion is that those of us who, on their own free will, wish to follow the catholic church's teachings on marriage should guide themselves by the bishops' statement.

anthony girard

Aug 28th 2010, 18:51

@Jesmond Micallef

Lovely prayer. I try to live by it on a daily basis.

As for divorce and being Roman Catholic, you should not find any difficulty should your marriage fail...........just don't use it.

ray sacco

Aug 28th 2010, 18:45

the large ammount of failed marriages is a clear proof that the preparation for marriages managed by the catholic church through kana are out dated and useless. and when one comes to think about the catholic church's ancient dogma about sex before marriage, birth control and other issues, one can easily comprehend why! if the catholic church is really interested in genuine counselling to future spouses, it should stop wasting their time in spiritual fantasy and focus on life, love and all their consequences. how can you be taken seriously if you tell a young couple that their marriage will not thrive if you do not embrace god or jesus? the great majority of couples attending these courses consider them a waste of time and attend only because they are compulsory!

sciortino m

Aug 28th 2010, 18:33

I am quoting from a publication by Discern a research institute belonging to the Church in Malta called ‘Towards a Healthy Marriage in Malta. Lecture by Prof. C. Savona-Ventura. DISCERN, Malta, 2007, +18p.’

The report highlights that

* Crude Marriage rate is decreasing
* Rate of Separation Applications is increasing: Separations : Marriage ratio stands at 44.8%
* Rate of Out-of-Wedlock births [= + co-habitation] is Increasing
* Canonical Marriage Rate is decreasing
* Civil Marriage rate is increasing: Proportionately from ~5% in 1980 to ~ 35% in 2005
* An increase of 30 percent in 25 years

http://www.discern-malta.org/research_pdfs/marriage_lecture.pdf

All this is happening without divorce legislation.

J Micallef

Aug 28th 2010, 18:33

The Maltese Branch of the Catholic Church has again shown that it has understood nothing. But maybe it is just creating the momentum, after all the next election is not so far away.

Dear Archbishop Cremona et al, divorce is for persons who are separated anyway.... not for married couples happily living together.

Dr Francis Saliba

Aug 28th 2010, 18:21

@FrancoFarrugia

I do not derive any satisfaction in “pooh-poohing your experience”. Nothing is further from my thoughts! You challenge my comments supporting the Church and some of your contributions evoke a reply. I answer points raised by you. That is not passing judgment on you or anybody else. That about sums it all. As a teacher you should have no difficulty in understanding that.

Because of my long medical career and my wide experience as a family doctor I have had extensive contact with the young inside their family environment - not in the restricted environment of classroom benches. I have also had additional daily contact with their parents. I never felt the need to bring in that experience but some commenters ask for it. No one, not even Dr Brincat, is challenging your right to stick to every single syllable that you have ever written against the Church. But you must accept that your comments show a constant bias against many things Catholic – not just this divorce issue.

sciortino m

Aug 28th 2010, 18:14

The Bishops wrote, 'The Church has always spoken about the beauty and importance of marriage’... ‘Thank God most spouses in Malta still live faithfully this commitment. But now, unfortunately, we are confronted with an increasing number of marriage breakdowns.’

They also wrote, ‘The Church promotes marriage and defends it because ultimately this will result in fewer breakdowns.’

I don’t understand this. The Church has always supported marriages and unfortunately marriage breakdowns increased, yet ‘ultimately this will result in fewer breakdowns.’ How do the Bishops reconcile this?

C Galea

Aug 28th 2010, 17:54

Finally the bishops are realising that the church's mission is to promote the stability of marriage.

Couples should be helped so their marriage does not break down.

What happens when the marriage breaks down irrevocably is irrelevant - separation, cohabitation, annulment and remarriage, divorce... heck you can call it 'table' or 'chair' for all one cares - when a marriage breaks down it's useless crying over split milk because one of the spouses got an annullment and remarried, or a divorce and remarried, or separated and cohabiting.

Sabrina Borda

Aug 28th 2010, 17:46

If it is really so that ; "The Church promotes marriage and defends it because this will result in fewer breakdowns" then, what went wrong?
With all that the Church have tried or ordered us to do then why are so many wanting to be free from a failed marriage?
Was it wrong for the Church to impose such things in the past such as 'No sex before marriage' and especially 'no living together before marriage' ?
People who had to try to conform to these rules know the answer.
It is admirable that the church tries to help but one can only live through something to fully be able to give advice on it. What may seem Ideal does not mean it is necessarily tangible.

It is not just the Church that has made many mistakes but we all have to look at the advice we were given and what we made of it. We all failed together with the Church. Now we all need to start re-building and be wiser about the orders/advice we take or follow. This can be a new era for the Church and all of society to move forward positively.

david debattista

Aug 28th 2010, 17:44

Joe, You are doing nothing but causing harm, pain, and contributing to apostasy. Your definition of God is wrong and the true God lies with the afflicted whom you never mentioned or considered such is the degree of your obsession , and not with you. Did you know that God in his/her infinite wisdom had to differentiate between fallen angles, entities that possessed the knowledge of the ages. So who are you to make absolute statements when it comes to human affairs or are we now to assume that you are omnipotent !

Joseph Calleja

Aug 28th 2010, 17:37

“It implies respecting even those who do not agree with us to a point that one wants in love and humility to share one’s convictions with them without fear, but in convincing love,” Archbishop Cremona and bishop Grech said." Here are two bishops spreading love and humility towards others, even towards us who favour divorce, and yet here you are again Mr Z spreading hatred and condemnation to those who do not agree with you. I guarantee you Mr Z that if I am going to hell, you will be a step ahead of me in that same line, for spreading hatred and judging people and condemning them to hell. So the bishops preach love and humility while here you are still judging and condemning people to hell. Stop cutting and pasting and try to come up with some thing more original.
"what God has joined together let no man put asunder!" Mr Z, I am proud of you. You finally got it right but you forgot your logo." divorce never " Nobody but nobody is forcing anybody to get a divorce. Maybe you are starting to see the light after all. I can hope can't I?

Charles J. Buttigieg

Aug 28th 2010, 17:36

The_Bishops_said_that “.........as_there were those who promoted divorce in a pluralistic society, the Church’s mission was to promote the stability of marriage, insisting on the moment of consent as the focal point of one’s commitment”. That was a statement that should have never been made by two respected Prelates if they respect the people’s intelligence as much as the people respect theirs. It is partly preaching to the converted and party an incorrect statement of facts. The promotion of stability in marriage is not the monopoly of the church but everybody’s. Furthermore, there exist no lobby in Malta to promote divorce, how could there be? To promote divorce is to cultivate a culture of a temporary lease on marriage, and nobody is trying to do that. The quest of the ‘Yes’ element of the debate is for the State to allow a choice to those whose marriage has failed.

The Bishops and the church are right to emphasize the spirituality of marriage but they are wrong to expect a pluralistic State to legislate to enforce a Canon Law. That is also a sign of weakness on the church’s side and a blatant interference in matters relating to a Secularised_State.

sciortino m

Aug 28th 2010, 17:28

Part 2
Cohabitation is the real danger to Maltese society because unlike marriages these relationships and families are unregulated and without protections for the weaker parties. The Church report itself shows that the crude marriage rate has gone down from 8.5 per 1000 population in 1980 to 5.9 in 2005. (report - http://www.discern-malta.org/research_pdfs/marriage.pdf)

All efforts to support families are welcome and desirable but at the same time the state cannot abandon those citizens whose marriage has failed and wish to rebuild their lives. These people need the state to give them the right to divorce and have the state recognise their new families through marriage.

sciortino m

Aug 28th 2010, 17:26

Part 1
The Bishops wrote ‘For decades it has provided services, and still does, for couples with problems ...The Church promotes marriage and defends it because ultimately this will result in fewer breakdowns.’

I am sorry to say but it seems that the Bishops are not even reading their own statistics. The statistics published by the Church itself show that their efforts of decades, have not led to ‘fewer (marriage) breakdowns’. The rate of marriage breakdowns has continued to accelerate over the years. The separation rate has now reached almost 50%. That is for every two new marriages another marriage files for separation.

http://www.discern-malta.org/research_pdfs/marriage.pdf

Many of the people involved in separation will form new relationships and families. Since the state has to date refused to do anything about it, we are seeing a rise in cohabitation and a dramatic increase in children born out of wedlock. Cohabitation has become so common that it is weakening the institution of marriage itself. Many youngsters are choosing cohabitation instead of marriage even though they are not barred from getting married unlike separated people.

sciortino m

Aug 28th 2010, 17:25

The Bishops wrote ‘The Church has helped couples in preparing for marriage, and has sustained them throughout. It has also offered its help when marriages break down. For decades it has provided services, and still does, for couples with problems. It has also provided shelter for children and young people, and victims of violence in the home.’

These services are all welcome but they are in the form of ‘charity’. The welfare of the citizens is the responsibility of the state and not of the Church and rightly so. It is the state which acts on the basis of social justice. The Church acts on charity.

It is the state that regulates maintenance, alimony and the division of assets when a marriage breaks down. These are well regulated where a marriage is involved. On the other hand, the impossibility of remarriage means that numerous families do not have these legal protections. If we truly believe in superiority of marriage over cohabitation, then we should in all honesty permit people to divorce and remarry.

sciortino m

Aug 28th 2010, 17:11

The Bishops wrote ‘The Church has helped couples in preparing for marriage, and has sustained them throughout. It has also offered its help when marriages break down. For decades it has provided services, and still does, for couples with problems. It has also provided shelter for children and young people, and victims of violence in the home.’

These services are all welcome but they are in the form of ‘charity’. The welfare of the citizens is the responsibility of the state and not of the Church and rightly so. It is the state which acts on the basis of social justice. The Church acts on charity.

It is the state that regulates maintenance, alimony and the division of assets when a marriage breaks down. These are well regulated where a marriage is involved. On the other hand, the impossibility of remarriage means that numerous families do not have these legal protections. If we truly believe in superiority of marriage over cohabitation, then we should in all honesty permit people to divorce and remarry.

Winfried Hohmann

Aug 28th 2010, 16:46

There is really no cause for divorce. I can assure you created here in Germany a divorce always a lot of stress. Victims are always the children. Divorce - no thanks.

Jesmond Micallef

Aug 28th 2010, 16:46

I was brought up a Roman Catholic. I have never renounced my faith and never will. My journey so far in this life has had its ups and downs but as I grow older, the more convincing my faith becomes. I hope that humans know what they are doing to themselves. I cannot agree with divorce, to me there is more negative then positive. People should treasure their faith as it bonds them together, evenmoreso in times of crisis.

Here, dear readers, I want to share with you a prayer I have kept in my bible for a very long time:

The Serenity Prayer

God grant me the
SERENITY to accept the things
I cannot change;
COURAGE to change the things I can;
and
WISDOM to know the difference -

Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships
as the pathway to peace:
Taking, as He did, this sinful world
as it is, not as I would have it:
Trusting that He will make all things
right if I surrender to His Will;
That I may be reasonably happy in this life and supremely happy with Him
forever in the next, Amen.

david debattista

Aug 28th 2010, 16:28

Lets make one point very clear, there is nothing more rewording more fulfilling then when a marriage works and functions. Forget all your wealth and all your PHD,s. But when it is dead when love, respect, nurturing of mind and spirit is replaced by infidelity, abuse, hate, children being used as weapons to hurt each other, subjecting children to the trauma of intentional infliction of pain in all its horrid form, then I ask the church as I asked before please, please find a way to provide a way out for the victims irrespective of who it is, especially were there are very young children caught in the middle. Yes by all means try to save the marriage but when it is hopeless please find a way to rectify the situation call it divorce annulment or dissolution of marriage due to so so and so I leave it up to the church but get the children out of the situation or you will destroy their life. NO MORE, NO LESS the responsibility lies with the state and the church, the function of wisdom and power is to nurture and not to harm.

Joe Zammit

Aug 28th 2010, 16:25

Marriage is for ever. Dissolving a validly contracted consummated marriage by a human authority is always a grave sin. No man has the right or the power to dissolve a validly contracted marriage, especially once it is consummated.

Appealing to God's mercy to introduce divorce is diabolical in its very essence. The 'second chance' proposition is a devilish deceit. Christ commands us never to resort to divorce because "what God has joined together let no man put asunder!"

God will award the good and punish those who choose evil, like divorce, and this punishment will be in hell for ever if they don't repent before.

But, let no one deceive themselves by saying that they can offend God the way they like and then they will find mercy in God. God is infinitely merciful but no one is going to deceive him. The millions of people in hell have deceived only themselves!

ray sacco

Aug 28th 2010, 16:24

the bishops hinted as if those promoting for divorce legislation are against marriage stability! they really have no idea what they are talking about! i am sure that nobody marries with the intention of seperating! and i am sure nobody wants to go through hell by ending their marriage, because that is what seperating is all about............pure hell, especially when children are involved. divorce is only a contract which ends another contract. the trauma for all involved would be four years past thence with the legislation proposed in parliament. nobody is proposing divorce las vegas style here! so if these anti-divorce activists want to campaign against divorce, they have every right to do so, but they should not talk non-sense! divorce and marriage stability are two different things!

Dr Francis Saliba

Aug 28th 2010, 16:15

@Micallef &Fenech.

No I am no priest. I am a married doctor with children, grand children and great grand children. Therefore I can justly claim to know the realities of today’s society at least as much as do, probably more. That long experience with society's realities is exactly why I do not support a “rabta coff” type of a fair weather marriage contract in lieu of a stable indissoluble Catholic marriage meant to last throughout the vicissitudes of married life.

@FrancoFarrugia.
My experience is much wider than that of any teacher (I hope NOT of religion) in a Jesuit school. My longer and wider experience differs from yours but I am not so rash as to ascribe that difference to any myopia on my part or on your part. I assess your opinion about divorce laws in the light of your other comments that are so frequently anti-Catholic

Joseph Calleja

Aug 28th 2010, 16:05

“It implies respecting even those who do not agree with us to a point that one wants in love and humility to share one’s convictions with them without fear, but in convincing love,” Does that love mean judging and condemning all those who favour divorce? Maybe those holier than thou condemning and judging those who favour divorce are not representing the church after all. Maybe these holier than thou few have decided to come up with their own hatred crusade and condemn to hell all those who favour divorce. Certain contributors are threatening all MPs and everybody that favour divorce will be condemned to hell. Is this the love you are preaching? Is this what you mean by crusade? There is no love and humility to share one's convictions by these people. Your Grace I am sure you read the letters and comments that go on in this paper and I am sure you know what I am talking about.These people are not spreading love and conviction, but they are spreading hatred and condemnation in the name of the catholic church.

Paul Barrett

Aug 28th 2010, 15:50

Only two people can strengthen a marriage and that is the married couple. Some marriages will not and cannot work, no amount of preparation, pre-planning or outside interference will make an iota of difference. When a marriage has totally broken down the only recourse at the moment is an annulment or separation. The former admitting that that for some reason there was no marriage the latter admitting that the two cannot for some reason reasonably live together as a couple.
Divorce following legal separation does not weaken a marriage that has already disintegrated beyond redemption. It does however allow individuals in any future partnership to take recognised legal responsibility for each other and re-marry. As such this would be good for social stability and even better for any possible offspring from the new relationship who would be born inside and not outside of marriage.

Ramon Casha

Aug 28th 2010, 15:27

Apples and oranges.

There's no contradiction between promoting more stable marriages, and accepting the fact that, despite all efforts, some marriages will still fail. I applaud all efforts made to keep marriages strong and intact, but nobody can deny that people - good people - still sometimes end up with a marriage that only exists on paper, while their real relationship remains unrecognised by the state, to the detriment of all.

Paul Borg

Aug 28th 2010, 14:33

And when the marriage becomes a stalemate ? What could, what should and what would have happened becomes irrelevant. A line is drawn and the two individuals should be helped to suffer as little as possible. The seperation ( divorce ) is not in anyway the business of the church , it becomes a legal matter , and therefore the responsibility of the state. The church goers of this nation who think that divorce is not the answer, should seek the latest figuers of seperations and contemplate on what pain these people are going through till the end of time. Divorce cuts that time to a minimum.

George Cremona

Aug 28th 2010, 14:33

No one is endowed with any right to dictate or impose on others solutions to their problems.
And surely the Church is not doing so in this or any other issue. What the Church is saying is simply what its teachings imply. Its teachings were revealed to her by Jesus Christ who showed the way to salvation to all human beings not only in all that is spiritual but also in temporal matters. A whole man, as Jesus Christ Himself taught, is made of a body and soul. So what is good for the soul, is good also for the body and therefore anything that happens to the body has an impact on, effects the soul. So body and soul should live in harmony and this could be only achieved with God's help and without which nothing can succeed.
Without God's help, problems will not be solved. So why not seek God's help instead of divorce which is the beginning of bigger problems, bigger trouble for the couple, for their children, for the entire society, the whole nation.
This is what the Church is saying to all. No more no less. Take it or leave it. It's up to us.

Karl Consiglio

Aug 28th 2010, 14:33

The Church have and will keep on promoting the things they want to promote over and over, in the meantime lets have divorced introduced in Malta.

martin saliba

Aug 28th 2010, 14:30

They asked such contributors “not to distort the love for each person ingrained in the Christian message by embarking on some kind of crusade, even in the case of clear signs of provocation”. Provocation, in what sense , when you remind someone who is calling you evil , of the evils the church is guilty off and is yet to apologise and where it apologised it was a few hundred years too late as in the case of galeleio and unbaptised children going to limbo. But still the first part of the sentence should be heeded by a few of the contributors to the issue of divorce . In my case someone , who i do not know , even went to the trouble of finding my phone number and called to show his dissaproval of my writings . Dose provacation mean when gouder threatens you with damnation ? In anycase divorce WILL be introduced to Malta whether you like it or not. Time is on our side and god is bigger than religion.

Vincent Ciliberti

Aug 28th 2010, 14:28

Assuming that Pro-Vicar Fr Anton Gouder said in interview on Church radio station RTK that any Catholic who votes in favour of divorce in Malta "would be committing a sin", as reported in local newspapers, how are the faithful to reconcile this statement with that published yesterday by Fr. C. Camilleri whereby he opined "To do justice to the Catholic stand on divorce, over-zealous Catholics of draconian rigidity should consider that, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, while emphasising the principle that “divorce is a grave offence against the natural law”, recognizes that “If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offence” (CCC 2383).Finally, we should put out consciences at rest that, if research showed divorce was beneficial for the common good mentioned also in the Catechism, a Catholic politician can, according to his conscience, vote in favour of divorce.
Surely with such conflicting "versions" eminating from learned church ministers, the faithful are bound to feel baffled and ask whether, in reality, there is coherent teachings in regard to the subject matter

victor pulis

Aug 28th 2010, 14:18

cont.
What we must keep in mind is that there are suffering people out there through no fault of their own. Telling them that they should have thought about marrying before they decided is simply rubbing salt into the wound. Telling them that now they have to spend the rest of their life living alone unloved and unloving is not an answer. Some argue that if the first marriage failed the second is likely to do so as well. Besides being a sweeping statement it bags the question what guarantee is there that the first will not fail? Does that rule out marriage outright? We all say till death do us part but deep inside we all feel that there are a millionthings that could go wrong ns some of them can spell the end. I am writing ths comment not because I need divorce or that the church's teaching is going to influence me when I come to choose but perhaps when someone on the outside draws your attention that your house is in need of some maintenance he can see things you can't when looking out.

Marylu Alosia d'Agostino

Aug 28th 2010, 14:11

Beware the fisherman
Who's casting out his line
Into a dried up river bed
But don't try to tell him
Cos he won't believe you.

Frans Sammut

Aug 28th 2010, 14:10

I, for one, concur with the Bishops that people should contribute positively to the debate. Furthermore I agree that the debate should be kept away from party politics and partisan manoeuvring. The good of citizens/souls should be the ultimate aim of the ongoing debate.

victor pulis

Aug 28th 2010, 14:10

One cannot but agree that everyone not just the church should work to strengthen marriages. I don't think that was an issue. But we must also keep in mind that notwithstanding the efforts made by all, there will be marriages which fail irrevocably since we are dealing with human emotions and they don't come any more complex than love. The world has changed. The family is not the same setup of say forty fifty years ago let alone two thousand years ago. Jesus spoke for his generation. The doctors of the church spoke for theirs and they had no way of imagining what life was going to be like centuries after they had gone. During jesus' time it was anathema to even talk to an unaccompanied woman in the street. Certain muslim countries still follow this rule. In Jesus time a woman who was discovered not to be a virgin on her wedding night was stoned to death. if that rule was applied today we'll run out of stones! Handicapped people were not allowed nside the temple. Today we build ramps leading to churches to make it easier for wheelchair bound faithful.
cont.

Joseph Micallef

Aug 28th 2010, 13:55

"...which is presented as giving the spouse a potential right to consider his/her consent and commitment thus ending one’s marriage." - Why do we always have to see this kind of reasoning repeated - blaming divorce for marriage breakdowns - when marriages are breaking up already through separations (and co-habitation) and annulments?!! Only had there been no legal separations available and neither annulments wouldsuch statements make sense! Please give us better reasons why divorce is bad to be convincing and respect our intelligence! At least the Bishops did speak about against Cruisades. I hope a particular person now gets the message - coming from the Bishops now!

M. Fenech

Aug 28th 2010, 13:38

I understand and agree with what the Bishops said, and i know that they will do there utmost to promote and protect a healty marriage. But when things go wrong and the situation is so bad, are we still going to have people talking against the only legal tool can let them free from the past situation, and trying to have a new opportunity?? I mean divorce must be the last solution for every person, no matter what his religious beliefs are. First and foremost a person is a human being, and all political and religious issues are not so important as the dignity of each and every individual. That's the big problem in Malta about this issue. People are mixing alot of issues together.