It is our attitude which must undergo a change and not marriage - bishops
It is our attitude which must undergo a change and not marriage and Christians had the duty to fulfill their mission within society and spread the good news, Archbishop Paul Cremona and Gozo Bishop Mario Grech said in a pastoral letter.
They said that when Jesus was asked about divorce 2,000 years ago, he enlightened them on the beauty of everlasting marriage and highlighted the way this could be achieved.
He explained to them that it was not possible to embrace a value and at the same time concede to a reality which went against that value.
Jesus had tried to show the people how divorce alters the intrinsic nature of marriage.
“Once there is divorce, then one cannot speak of stable and everlasting marriage, as ordained by God from the very beginning: because divorce changes the very nature of marriage
“At no point does Jesus specify any form of condition or manner in which divorce could be instituted – he simply insists that once there is divorce, then there is a shift in the nature of marriage,” the bishops said.
Today, his answer would have been the same: “It is because of the hardness of your hearts”, Mgr Cremona and Mgr Grech said adding that “it is attitude which must undergo a change and not marriage”.
Other countries introduced divorce because they felt it would solve their problems related to marital breakdown, but instead, the problems multiplied.
The bishops said that it was not possible for Catholics to say that they loved their fellowmen unless they communicate to them the message of Jesus.
“We must serve Jesus by fulfilling our mission within society. The world may not accept His word yet it would have heard it… It is not an imposition but a contribution which we are offering to society.”
When faced with the words of Jesus, every Christian had to shoulder responsibility and participate in the mission of fulfilling and protecting His teachings.
“We appeal to all Christians, be it in their calling as Christians as well as in their role within society, to spread the words of Jesus as part of their mission,” they said.
Their whole letter, in Maltese or English, may be read in the pdf links below.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Marsa murder - Police looking...
Update 2: Three arrests after flamingo...
Former Judge Ray Pace found dead
Where’s Everybody staff is given notice
Revealed...the face of a Maltese woman...
Update 4 - Eddie Fenech Adami stable...
Update 3 - Woman trapped as car crashes...
Updated - Two bodies, capsized boat,...
Franco Mercieca doing routine eye ops at...
In Discussion
Update 2: Three arrests after flamingo...
Enemalta seeking minimum five year gas...
Mario de Marco, Zammit Dimech concede,...
Chinese company to study Malta-Gozo...
Updated - PM reacts to Labour anger on...
Franco Mercieca doing routine eye ops at...
No appeals board for first part of power...
Updated - PM comments as Franco Mercieca...
BBC site highlights illegal hunting in Malta
95 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
leo attard
Oct 17th 2010, 19:43
@karl farrugia, I did not say that it was the only reason. i did say that the matter is complicated. I know many, many people that have left their husband / wife and unfaithfulness is there together with other reasons like 'he doesn't take me out', 'he doesn't let me buy the things I want', 'she doesn't cook'......these complaints lead to a slowing down of a sexual relationship...it snowballs.....as soon as they split themajority is with someone else who provides that missing excitement or sense of respect........my comment was just a sarcastic way of saying that in the long run it all boils down to one thing ---- the couple's relationship has lost its excitement and that is what they look for ; i know cases where a marriage was on the rocks after less than 6 months because one of the couple admitted to being gay --- could have admitted that before the wedding.....my research is not books or whatever, it's knowing those who have split up and having heard each side's excuse-- whether violence, being gay, drugs --it all comes down to having lost mutual love, respect which provide 'the excitement'
V.Borg
Oct 18th 2010, 11:03
Well there is no mutual love when one partner is gay. Yes it could have been easier for the other partner if the gay person came out before getting married but you can't question the reasons why until you are in their shoes. If everyone thinks once divorce is accepted that it would be easy to just separate from their partner then why is there separation? People are separating already so again if people don't want divorce then dont get divorced. I would like to know if one day when divorce is legal if a person who is aginst divorce actually gets divorced because of whatever reason. Wouldn't He/She be thankful to us who gave them the right to.
Karl Farrugia
Oct 18th 2010, 14:20
I think the issue here is that our notion of divorce and, alas, the outside world, is too heavily influenced by what the "popolin" picks up from US TV serials and E! Entertainment Channel. They watch the "reports" about some random degenerate celebrity divorces, and take it for granted that it's how everyone does it. Then the geniuses at the Catholic Church butt in, and the average Joe and Maria have a perfect mix of useless information to fuel the ignorance. Taking your example, I think it's the Church that needs to change its attitudes towards everyone and everything, including gay people. It's thanks to their bigoted views on sexuality that stigmatises homosexuals, making them feel obliged to "fit in", and end up getting married. It's NOT as easy as saying it "before the wedding".
leo attard
Oct 17th 2010, 11:21
@victor pulis and martin saliba ----- one more thing, instead of using divorce as a solution, it wouldn't hurt trying to rresolve the cause of conflict and save the marriage. not always possible, i know. still. i can't accept the idea of divorce just because after years of marriage i lost the excitement which a new chick can provide.....it's a very complicated matter that needs in-depth investigation
J.V.Micallef
Oct 17th 2010, 11:38
It depends on the chick.....she may prefer to cohabit, with the hassle of having to go through a ceremony, which failed for her in the first place, and has the experience of how complicated it is to go through the process of separation, annulment and what not. Do you think that married men who separate are really, really anxious to get married again ? They want to go to bed not the Registry Office !
victor pulis
Oct 17th 2010, 12:37
As i said in my comment. Everything should be tried to reconcile the couple before the painful step of divorce is taken as a last resort. But what happens when the marriage is irrevocably broken? I'm sure that when divorce is introduced in Malta it will not be on the model of Hollywood or Las Vegas. It will be as hard (or as easy) to get as unnallment.As for lies and perjury. This could also happen when one files for annullment. The church bases its case on what the partners say. I assure you, The state has an interest to study each case individually.
I also said that the problem is not always another person (or chick as you described her!) There are a million problems which can cause an insurmountable rift between married couples and as you rightly said, it's a complicated matter.
Mike F Abbot
Oct 17th 2010, 13:16
"i can't accept the idea of divorce just because after years of marriage i lost the excitement which a new chick can provide."
i agree with the statement, per se, but think this idea of divorce is part of the problem. There is a massive difference between the need for divorce and peoples attitude to divorce, as this statement suggests.
If we, as a society, makes marriage trivial, we make divorce trivial but the error is not in introducing divorce - the error is in making marriage easy. The church, by the way, happily push people into marriage without giving them time to really see if they can live together. I'm talking about co habitation here - actually LIVING together. So many problems can be dealt with at this point without entering into a binding relationship. The church, on the other hand, would rather people bought a house, got married and then try living together.
So yes, an attitude change is needed but I think it's the church's attitude that needs to change as much as anybody elses.
Karl Farrugia
Oct 17th 2010, 18:34
Your lack of research on the topic is astounding, Mr. Attard.
Research shows that the major reasons for divorce are marital unfaithfulness (i.e. the faithful partner filing for divorce due to the unfaithful partner), financial issues, lack of a sex life, abuse/alcoholism/drug addiction etc. (i.e. a dysfunctional partner), or major life traumas.
Divorce due to "being fed up of my wife/husband" are a very small minority.
I think a comment like yours highlights the deep ignorance this country is living in, and the surprising lack of information the population is given on any given topic that might have a remote interest is someone's agenda.
leo attard
Oct 17th 2010, 11:16
@ victor puliss.....No. each case has to be studied and this opens up the road to lies and perjury and character defamation. divorce seems to evoke a revolving door policy , being granted any time asked for. i am thinking of more in terms of annullment as granted by the church after having studied each case in detail....in case of violence, there is the law.
@martin saliba....edwin formosa has given you my answer and the above applies to you as well
J.V.Micallef
Oct 17th 2010, 11:16
Why say that marriage is as God wanted it ? Who were the witnesses for Adam and Eve ? Who was the priest who officiated at their marriage ? Can you get married in Church without witnesses and the parish priest ? So things have changed.
My conclusion is that since they did not have witnesses, and there was no parish priest, they were simply cohabiting.
Cohabiting is the true answer. No priests, no letters from bishops, no judge, no registrar, no lawyers, no expenses. Just as Adam and Eve. People are understanding and so they are following what was original in the Bible. Cohabit.
victor pulis
Oct 17th 2010, 12:45
And no in laws!!
d.attard
Oct 17th 2010, 10:25
Malta remains the only nation without divorce because it is the only nation that shuns post-reformation humanist values.
Through the divorce process, the Maltese church had an opportunity to join the rest of the Catholic Churches in the world.
For a time the prospects looked good. The church spoke sensibly about its teachings on divorce but recognised a wider context and needs.
Now a complete U turn.
By doing all in its power to see that its beliefs on divorce ... will be pactised in all structures of society... (including schools, i presume, that are partially funded by taxes paid by structures holding a totally opposite view), means that the Church wants a crusade that it knows it will (temporarily) win.
The Church possesses awesome partially public-funded logistical power that is out of proportion to its popular support. A crusade will mean the mobilisation of said power that will also improve, even if for a short while, its popular support.
In these circumstances, i believe that now the pro divorce humanists should lie low and let the maltese church stew in its own juices.
Please do not give the maltese church the crusade it now seems to court.
R. Cassar
Oct 17th 2010, 10:19
How can anyone reason with people who have'nt yet discovered that there are so many sacred texts around the world and all were written and compiled by earthy beings for certain purposes, sometimes good, sometimes bad?
These people should not be intimated with logic and arguments, they will never feel at ease this way and they will simply feel threathened. The only way is to help and and empower certain priests and religious people within the church, who are intelligent and really mean good, but cant say or act openly because of their peers. They should feel supported from outside or from people who dont care much about religion but care about a better world and are tolerant of religion as well. At the moment, I see only antagonism from both sides....and it's a pity.
Charles Sammut
Oct 17th 2010, 09:40
I think that it is the attitude of the Catholic Church and its ante-diluvian prelates which must undergo a change.
victor pulis
Oct 17th 2010, 09:37
edwin formosa(13 hours, 57 minutes ago)
Christians have no right to impose on others and others have no right to impose on Christians.
Well, the others are already abiding by this rule. They are not forcing christians (catholics) to divorce. If they do I would be the first to protest.
On the other hand, christians (catholics) are doing their best to keep others from having the right to divorce. That's the whole issue here.
edwin formosa
Oct 17th 2010, 10:32
They are trying to force Christians to introduce divorce in their country.
victor pulis
Oct 17th 2010, 12:44
How are 'others' forcing catholics to introduce divorce? No one is putting a gun to anyone's head. In a referendum everyone should vote according to his/her conscience, in the case of catholics according to the church's conscience. No problem there. But that the church insists that even non catholics or non believers are bound to obey the church, that's where it gets interesting.
B. Cachia
Oct 17th 2010, 16:21
@ Edwin Formosa: This country belongs to all its citizens and not to some of them only. The rest of the population who do not share your views are not your property or subjects. So no one is taking anything away from you or forcing you to do anything. You, on the contrary, appear to want to impose your own preferred way of life on other people.
d. borg
Oct 17th 2010, 09:14
“Once there is divorce, then one cannot speak of stable and everlasting marriage, as ordained by God from the very beginning: because divorce changes the very nature of marriage"
At the moment there is no divorce, so how do you explain the great number of unstable and certainly not everlasting marriages?
edwin formosa
Oct 17th 2010, 09:59
If at the moment, when there is no divorce, yet a great number of separations occur, what would you logically expect meta flok ghoqda naghmlu rabta coff ghall kumdita ta l-egoisti ?
victor pulis
Oct 17th 2010, 09:07
And who cannot agree with the archbishops when they appeal for more effort to help prepare for and strengthen marriages? Every sane person should strive to make every marriage one, as they say made in heaven.
But then reality kicks in and we realise that unfortunately, marriage, being a union between two individuals can sometimes go wrong and usually one of the couples is the innocent victim who has absolutely no fault in the break up. What is the church offering to, say, that 24 year old woman who finds herself abandoned by her husband for whatever reason (it needn't be for another woman) Probably it suggests getting them together and try to heal the rift. That is commendable and every effort should be made to reconcile them. But again reality kicks in and we know that this is not always possible. What then? There are hundreds if not thousands in this situation. Shall we abandon them with no hope of ever finding happiness and fulfilment not in lust as some kind hearted 'catholics' would put it but in real love? We must face facts and think with 21st century minds.
j quintano
Oct 17th 2010, 21:14
@ victor pulis et al
Why do all of you keep saying that reality is that marraiges are breaking up. Although i cannot disagree with this, i also have to mention that there is also a MUCH BIGGER reality going on ie of husbands and wives work and stay together despite all the difficulties. Do you really think that in healthy marraiges there are no challenges or everyday temptations? yet both husband and wife communicate with each other and try to solve their everyday problems. we as catholics should know better that through Jesus, problems will be solved and crisis will be overcome. from these comments it is clear that we have already GIVEN UP on making marraiges healthy. That is why as i stressed before in another comment, there has to be a good preparation for marraige from both parts. Only through this solid foundations are laid.
victor pulis
Oct 18th 2010, 19:39
@ J Quintano I started my comment by agreeing with the bishops that marriages should be prepared for and strengthened. But I also said that some, not all fortunately, fail and this is the reality. No matter how hard one tries some marriages, and they are on the increase whether we admit or not, break up irrevocably. No amount of prayer or councelling succeed in bridging the gap. The church itself accepts separation as a 'solution' in these cases. It is for such cases that divorce should be an option for those who want to use it. Finally, Now if you want to keep deluding yourself into thinking that whenever one prays one receives you are free to do so. I for one prefer to see the facts.
Robert Callus
Oct 17th 2010, 08:55
Let's assume divorce is a sin, does the bible force Christians not to ALLOW OTHERS to sin?
http://robertcallus.wordpress.com/2010/10/07/divorce-and-maltese-culture/
Raymond Bezzina
Oct 17th 2010, 08:44
@ All members of parliament
Some of the members of parliament are saying that they are
in favour of what they are calling a 'responsible' type of divorce.
How can divorce ever be called ' responsible' when divorce gives
one the right to take another person's spouse ? This is only one
example of the evil of divorce legislation.
It would be much more beneficial to society, if the members of
parliament concentrate on how to have 'responsible' marriages,
instead of what they are calling 'responsible' divorce.
Paul Barrett
Oct 17th 2010, 09:52
And just how do you propose that the Government legislate for responsible marriage.
You really think that the elected Government of the day should be responsible for the daily running of the family home, for the intimate relationship between man and wife. Are you proposing "arranged marriages"?
It is already over the top interference that it is proposed that there should be "responsible" divorce. Why is it that there seems to be so much involvement and oppression on the personal lives and relationship of others - Why make life so difficult for others less fortunate in marriage.
Legal separation already sorts out the split up of the family, all their finances, possessions and welfare of the children. These unfortunate adults are then prevented from forming a new legally recognised family unit by virtue of a civil marriage. This is where the Government should step in and pass legislation to allow (for those that wish to do so) a civil marriage following legal separation with as little bureaucratic interference as possible.
Let adults be adults and take some responsibility for their own life and relationships rather than throw the responsibility of the Government.
victor pulis
Oct 17th 2010, 09:58
Does annullment give the right to someone to take another person'sspouse?
You will answer that annullment annuls(!) a marriage that never was(!) What about the fruit of such non marriage? How is annullment different from divorce in the context of society?
Is separation not a break in the promise made before God that the two shall beas one flesh? The church accepts separation.
renald williams
Oct 17th 2010, 08:19
May the faithful change their attitude, soften their hearts and start reading the Good News. These are the Gospels of Jesus; according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John. May believers read the beauty of Jesus’ enlightened words, and embrace Christ’s values in His Evangelium. May Christians communicate the message of Jesus in Gospels, with love to others. May the Glad Tidings be spread to serve Jesus and His words, without imposing or judging others. Then after hearing it, one can decide if to accept it or not. Peace and health wishes.
Raphael Dingli
Oct 17th 2010, 07:44
Jesus, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and the chruch and all of the bishops and the pope and the priests and all the fundamentalist blind followers - all this and they are irrlevant - they are all irrlevant - this is State issue not a religious one. So get on with it.
edwin formosa
Oct 17th 2010, 10:12
Even if this is only a state issue (which is not) the chruch and all of the bishops and the pope and the priests and all the fundamentalist blind followers are certainly not irrlevant. They are at least citizens as the church haters who want us to legalize their immoral lifestyle.
Raphael Dingli
Oct 17th 2010, 07:38
"Once there is divorce, then one cannot speak of stable and everlasting marriage.." Says Paul Cremona. This comment implies that without divorce all marriages are stable and everlasting. What a load of codswallop - or should that be godswallop :). get over it please.
Caroline Said
Oct 17th 2010, 02:12
what a load of rubbish to claim that the introduction of divorce within civil society will lead to the breakup of the family! Muslim society has always permitted divorce, conditionally ,and muslim societies arent falling apart. Classic case of letting others think for you;relinquishing free thought so that one isnt culpable for ones own decisions. The Church says it is so, so it must be true, Regardless of the fact that the Church has often been proven wrong. One example: Mary Magdalene was branded as a whore for centuries. Today she is not...opps sorry, we got the wrong Mary.
William P Flynn
Oct 17th 2010, 00:50
Jesus also spoke of the "millstone around the neck" and the "eye of the needle".
Why have these two bishops not dealt properly with their business; the cases of the allegations relating to child raping priests before them? Why are they defying Vatican rules and not reporting rape cases to police?
Why are they living in palaces like Herod instead of like Jesus?
Why is the Republic of Malta allowing the church, a marriage-celebrant, a mere agent of the state, to annul state marriage-contracts at the order of some vicar-priest- ecclesiastical judge? Annulling state marriage contracts should be the sole responsibility of a secular family court free from any religious input.
A state that takes orders from a mullah, ayatollah, or priest is a Theocracy. Is a Theocratic Republic of Malta what we want our country to be?
Stop the fantasy, stop the rot. Divorce law is everyone’s right. And remove that ridiculous Article 2 from our Constitution.
The bishops, like naked emperors, display a big target for ridicule. These inane, limp circulars make even Catholics just shake their heads in disbelief.
How many would still be going to church by the time the divorce vote comes. Well done, bishops.
edwin formosa
Oct 17th 2010, 10:23
Yes Mr Flynn, we shall remove that ridiculous Article 2 from our Constitution and put your odious letter instead.
j.quintano
Oct 16th 2010, 22:36
i guess the stance of the church on divorce was clearly expressed by our bishops in this letter and i totally agree on this. They couldnt have put more clearly DIVORCE WILL BREAK THE FAMILIES. Today being a father and a husband, i realise the importance of unity and communication within my family. It is this, the foundation of all relationships. talking about wheter voting for divorce is a sin or not shows that we are still immature in our Catholic beliefs. Jesus did'nt give us his teachings so as to welcome us to heaven or send us to hell. His teachings help us to be happy in our lives. if a wife and husband separate it is all the family that will suffer and Jesus does not want to see us desparate or angry. HE LOVES US AND HE WILL CRY WITH US IF HE SEES US SUFFER. This is the basis of our religion; understanding that Jesus loves us and wants the best for us. THE SOLUTION TO FAMILY PROBLEMS IS NOT DIVORCE BUT BETTER PREPARATION FROM BOTH PARTS BEFORE COMMITTING THEMSELVES. The understanding that though married life is tough it is also
BEAUTIFUL.
Paul Barrett
Oct 17th 2010, 00:19
An excellent comment and very well expressed. However unfortunately not everyone is able to take the strain and marriages do unfortunately flounder. For those couples that have been unable to overcome the difficulties there is currently only the possibility of annulment or legal separation. It is the latter that is the current problem, they need and deserve a further chance of the happiness that can be found in marriage. The current doctrine leaves the legally separated individuals as outcasts from society based on deep rooted fundamentalist religious beliefs imposed by spiritual fear on the many to the detriment of the few. Yes the mentality has to change as society has changed. Separated individuals must be allowed the option to find happiness and marry again as a right and for the good of social cohesion.
The real question to be answered:
Is Malta a secular state or still ruled in spiritual fear exclusively by one branch of the Christian faith.
leo attard
Oct 16th 2010, 22:03
why do we need divorce? couples are already breaking up and finding new partners. what needs to be explored is its effects on the children. i often hear that divorce is necessary because it's unfair to have children living in a house with quarrelling parents. Has anyone ever conducted a survey to see what the children want? How many children would adopt for parents to go their separate ways. as far as i know, the trauma of children being separated from a parent outweighs the trauma of seeing them quarrel..,for whom is divorce more convenient --- for the child, or for the parents who end up with another partner?
martin saliba
Oct 16th 2010, 22:48
What about couples without children. Would you grant them divorce or would you conjure upanother lame excuse ?
edwin formosa
Oct 17th 2010, 02:39
Leo tell martin saliba that ' the trauma of children being separated from a parent ' is far from a lame excuse.
victor pulis
Oct 17th 2010, 09:11
Would you prefer to see a mother being beaten black and blue every night by her husband? Would you prefer to see a father with another woman?
Would you prefer to have a father who beats you up for just opening your mouth?
Does annullment solve these problems?
Alfred Gatt
Oct 16th 2010, 21:52
Our bishops, in their duty as shepherds of the faithful and with direct resposibility to Christ, have now given us, Catholics, the direction to follow. As they said: 'It is not an imposition but a contribution to society.' The way forward now is to see how the institution of marriage is strengthened further and assistance given to those whose marriage is in great difficulties. There is no marriage which does not have its difficulties. To those who were married in the Catholic Church I urge them to remember that God is with them in times of pressure and must never forget that God is there to help them overcome their difficulties. Keep Christ in your marriage.
edwin formosa
Oct 16th 2010, 21:47
The Pastoral Letter shows that whichever way the issues of "conscience", "lesser of two evels", "common good"..........are presented, a true Catholic can never condone divorce if he sincerely heeds Jesus' own description of divorce.
smifsud
Oct 16th 2010, 21:42
my view is this ..DON'T GET MARRIED unless your are really really sure that you BOTH want it and BOTH WANT to make that COMMITMENT TO EACH OTHER NO MATTER WHAT !!,,,if your not sure DON'T GET MARRIED!!!...simple as that...ONCE YOU COMMIT YOU CANT AcQUIT !!!!
David Pulis
Oct 16th 2010, 22:30
Its not up to you nor the Church to deny the right to civil remarriage if one decides to do so (i.e divorce)
J QUINTANO
Oct 16th 2010, 22:42
YOU ARE 100 PERCENT RIGHT
I. Galea
Oct 17th 2010, 09:40
If you think that couples get married with a plan to break up after 5 years, you need to wake up and smell the coffee. Most people ARE committed when they get married, but tough times are not always easy to handle. Domestic violence, Child abuse, Gambling, Addictions, these are just to mention a few of the things we can't have guessed before marriage. A spouse going through hell despite making that commitment should not have to endure all that misery just because of a stubborn religion with regulations well past their sell-by date.
Joe Zammit
Oct 16th 2010, 21:09
What begins and establishes the family, and therefore the human community, is marriage. In marriage, male and female form "one flesh" (Gen. 2:24;) by means of a bond which joins their souls (a duty of mutual love) and their bodies (a right to the acts proper to conjugal life). Male and female unite in marriage through a free act of mutual self-giving which is by its nature IRREVOCABLE.
The essential ends and properties of marriage proceed from its author, God Himself; thus the institution of marriage exists by natural law. The marriage contract gives rise to the intimate community of life and love which belongs to marriage. Although this contract proceeds from mutual consent, the marriage bond pertains to natural law because the consent only actualizes a potentiality given to nature when it was created.
Therefore, on the basis of mutual consent, the marriage bond is established by natural law; that is, by God Himself (Matt. 19:6). It follows that marriage is INDISSOLUBLE. And since God made of the two, the male and the female, one flesh, marriage is also monogamous, i.e., a union of one man and one woman.
B. Cachia
Oct 16th 2010, 21:38
That, of course, is the Catholic view of marriage. However, remember that poeople should be allowed to choose your view of marriage of their own free will, not have it imposed on them.
JOSEPH ZAMMIT
Oct 16th 2010, 21:47
And Lo and behold, the oracle of Malta has talked.
I wonder why the hundreds of million Christians in Europe do not see it his way? Can they be wrong and only he is right?
Divorce will become law as it is a right. To dissolve a marriage should not remain the monopoly of the church and the Maltese, like their European cousins, are starting to understand the issue.
Divorce or not, couples will still separate. The only interest the church has against divorce is not what Jesus preached, but the income money it will lose from annulments.
Divorce will become a law like in Europe and in Catholic Ireland.
Paul Barrett
Oct 16th 2010, 22:19
Wow Joe, a new script - well done. Can't wait until you finish reading the Harry Potter books.
edwin formosa
Oct 17th 2010, 03:14
B.Cachia people should be allowed to choose any view of marriage of their own free will, not have it imposed on them. But when views regarding marriage are to become laws of the country then everybody has the right to be involved. We are speaking about the future of our families. And if most of us want to adhere to the traditional view, then democracy comes in. Mhux ha nhallu ivvizzjati,falluti, kappriccuzi u bla sinsla morali jaddattaw il-ligijiet ta pajjizna ghall-kumdita taghhom. Dawk li qed jinqdew b'kazi doloruzi ta vittmi ta abbuzi fiz-zwieg ghal l-iskop ta mohhom, mhumiex il-vittmi imma l-aggressuri.
victor pulis
Oct 17th 2010, 09:17
Joe come down to earth and speak in a language that is realistic. No idyllic vision will erase the fact that marriages sometimes break down irrevocably. That is why the church accepts separation which is not according to Jesus' teaching. To abandon each other is also a sin according to the gospel. The commitment is broken even by separation. The couple is no longer 'one flesh' Not to mention the catholic form of divorce that is annullment. An invention of the catholic church to serve as a loop hole for Jesus' commandment.
B. Cachia
Oct 17th 2010, 10:12
@ Edwin Formosa: Yes, Catholics have the right to be involved, obviously. However, the laws of the country should not impose a specific religious view on people nor, I think, are Catholics in any way obliged to attempt to ensure that other people are bound to live the Catholic way of life because they have to by law. In religious matters people should be allowed by law to choose freely. To start with, remember that only 65% of marriages in Malta are currently taking place in the Church at all (Demographic Review 2009).
As for the motivations and situations of those 55%+ of the population who currently appear to support 'Irish' divorce legislation, I really don't know and cannot speak for them. The tendency, however, is that support is stronger among those who are younger and better educated. The numbers alone should make it quite clear that they are not some marginal group but the mainstream of our society.
Jesmond Micallef
Oct 16th 2010, 20:58
Bulls eye. The title of this news item is enough. The bishops couldn't have said it in a better way. The only truely progressive stand here is to protect the concept of marriage in the first place. Marriage is a confirmation of commitment between two people and so it should remain. Divorce is the complete opposite to this.
Andrew Farrugia
Oct 16th 2010, 20:44
It is quite funny and paradoxical really; we have some philosophers manque' who rant and rage against the tyranny of the Church and at the same time show concern about dwindling numbers of adherents to the Faith, bemoan the fact fewer people are attracted to Jesus Christ, and express (false) regret that when divorce is finally introduced the Church will be a defeated institution. Are these people for real? And what if some people continue to drift away from the Church? Is truth measurable according to majorities or numbers? And didn't i hear or read somewhere that sooner or later the wheat will be separated from the chaff?
edwin formosa
Oct 16th 2010, 22:00
It is neither funny nor paradoxical really, Andrew. It is hypocricy and hatred for the Catholic Church because it is the last bastion of hope against a materialistic world that craves immorality at every step not only divorce but homosexuality, abortion, radical feminism, contraception, embryonic stem cell research & cloning.....
Raphael Dingli
Oct 17th 2010, 07:48
@edwin - be serious edwin - is there anything that the curch orders or suugests that you do not agree with - have you not got your own brain? or is it a case of the church telling you to jump and you responding by asking - how high?
C.Brincat
Oct 16th 2010, 20:40
Jesus also said that it is more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God than it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. This didn't stop the clergymen to accumulate an astronomic amount of wealth to bulid for example the Vatican (which symbolises the refute of His words).
My point is that the church shouldn't speak for us. Firstly, the church decides to interfere with legislative decisions simply to manifest it's power and secondly how can they have their say when they never have experienced a marital life in the first place?
I just think that is fundamentally dumb.
Caroline Said
Oct 17th 2010, 02:04
@C.Brincat...well said! nail hit on head! bishops and other eccleasiastical reps hard-elbowing people to spread the word of Jesus and obey his teachings when they themselves dont practice one of Christ's principal teachings: beware of acumulating wealth! Individual priests may not accumulate weath but they are part of an institution that does.Can any person claim to be a vegetarian when they have a lifetime membership to an Angus Steakhouse restaurant chain?
R. Cachia
Oct 16th 2010, 20:16
Our church leaders are supposed to lead, and to protect the church in Malta at least. Pity they are lost and can only react to this issue by getting on the defensive, coercing behavior, quoting from the bible and putting fear and sin as the motivation.
If only they were wise enough like some individual and particular priests, and focused on love and tolerance towards others first and foremost and at the same time happily kept spreading God's word.
Divorce will be here sooner or later, the Church should have prepared its fight for that moment after introduction and not a fight opposing its introduction. It is making sure that when divorce will be introduced, she will start life as a defeated institution, and of course its adherents will dwindle even faster. If on the other hand it preached tolerance and love and truly respected others without labelling or coercing, it would have been much easier for people to get attracted to Jesus Christ.
Pity that history repeats itself and these two people wont learn.
Joe Zammit
Oct 16th 2010, 21:12
Who can say have more love than Christ? Notwithstanding this, he ordered (not advised) us never to resort to divorce because divorce is evil, divorce goes directly against God's plan in creating marriage. This is love. Those who advocate divorce hate society and please the devil not Christ. Divorce is harmful to one and all.
Paul Galea
Oct 16th 2010, 19:45
This pastoral letter can be understood by all men of good will.
It gives a vey clear answer to the questions being raised regarding the Christian’s duty in the context of the divorce debate.
I. Galea
Oct 16th 2010, 19:17
“Once there is divorce, then one cannot speak of stable and everlasting marriage, as ordained by God from the very beginning: because divorce changes the very nature of marriage.
Why don't you tell that to a victim of domestic violence. Unstable marriages have existed long before divorce came into existence. And with divorce, stable and everlasting marriages will also co exist, as they have done in every other country in the world.
If you don't agree with divorce, just don't go for it. Whilst most couple's marriage has worked out hence their belief that there's no need for divorce, others are going through hell and deserve to start life again on a fresh new page.
I strongly believe the church is not doing itself any favours by being such a bully about this issue. The church should accept the FACT that as human beings, we will always have different attitudes...and so why should people suffer an eternity of misery just because their spouse has the wrong attitude about marriage?
Joe Zammit
Oct 16th 2010, 21:16
God has created us and he has created marriage. So we have no right to tell how marriage should be. God said that marriage is only between one man and one woman and for ever. This applies also to broken marriages. Marriage is for life, also is your marriage has failed. No man has the right to break God's plan on marriage. Otherwise he would only be ruining themselves. Let us all lovingly accept God's plan on marriage for the good of all of us and of the whole of society!
Paul Barrett
Oct 16th 2010, 22:10
@ Joe Zammitt.
No (battle) plan survives the first contact. Your interpretation of God's plan does not seem to be working for a large number of couples either. Time to change the plan and adapt or die.
I. Galea
Oct 17th 2010, 09:27
Well I'm not Catholic, so please refrain from shoving your beliefs down my throat. Thank you.
victor pulis
Oct 17th 2010, 09:27
Joe God did not create marriage. Marriag is asocial institution created by man when he started forming communities. There are many forms of marriage in the world not just the christian model because each community adjusts according to its culture. In genesis we read that everything that God created is good so why do marriages break up? Usually they do because of one of the partners. The other is an innocent victim. Can't you bring yourself to pity and empathise with this victim? is your god so heartless as to abandon these victims? That is one reason why I don't believe in your god. If I had to imagine God it would be as a loving, merciful entity who understandsand doesn't punish the victims. Your kind of god is one bent on punishment fear and indifference. Telling the victims to lump it and stick it out alone until they die is no solution.It is just adding to their misery.
N.Cortis
Oct 16th 2010, 19:15
I cannot understand why the bishops,and members of the clergy are so worried about the introduction of divorce in Malta!!!!! Do all of the above trust the christians?????A christian knows that when he /she marries,the bond should be" till death do us part"!!! But for heaven's sake-----if a married couple cannot go on living together for valid reasons-----who are you to impose on that couple not to get a divorce????
The church cannot for any reason impose on others what they want-----as if they are more powerfull than the government!!!!! The bishops and the clergy should continue to preach the religion----but for god"s sake,governing Malta is not your pigeon!!!!!
The bishops and all should tell the faithfull "WHEN DIVORCE IS INTRODUCED IN MALTA,ALL THE FAITHFULL SHOULD REMEMBER THAT MARRIAGE IS FOREVER,AND CHRISTIANS SHOULD REMEMBER,AND DO THEIR BEST TO STAY UNITED AS THEY HAD VOWED ON THEIR MARRIAGE DAY".
No body is saying that all married couples are going to divorce by the introduction of this law!!! But please let those who need it make good use of it!!
Let us all be real----divorce and no divorce---when a marriage is broken,---the couple go on separate ways!!!!!!!
Anton Portelli
Oct 16th 2010, 19:42
Agreed with you 100% Mr. Cortis. At the General election we voted for the elected Members of Parliament to govern the country not for the bishops. We voted YES in the Eu referendum so that we would have the same civil rights as all the other EU citizens not to remain slaves of the Maltese bishops. The bishops have a right to preach their teachings to the faithful catholics but have no right to impose their teaching on everyone whatever his or her beliefs and feelings are. If the majority of the Maltese are catholics they and the bishops do not have the right to impose the catholic beliefs not even on the minorities.
Joseph Calleja
Oct 16th 2010, 19:15
Cohabitation increases risk of marriage failure
Thu, Mar 4, 2010 (HealthDay News) -- Living together before going to the altar increases the risk that the marriage will fail, says a U.S. study.
And since two thirds of Maltese men and women prefer cohabitation, what does that tell you? Unfortunately men and women do not want to go into a binding contract where there is no way out. These are facts. Neither the Catholic Church nor the government can stop this. If Malta does not accept divorce the alternative is not much brighter. Look around you and I am sure you know somebody that is cohabiting. As a matter of fact these numbers are growing everyday. It won't belong before these numbers reach fifty percent with or without the approval of the government or the church. Statistics also show that three out of five marriages also end up in divorce. At least divorce can keep some kind of uniformity.
I. Galea
Oct 16th 2010, 19:31
Oh dear...Well then I suppose my fiance and I are doomed. Maybe if I kick him out it will help salvage our future marriage. Thanks for the heads up!
Ms P.M Graham
Oct 16th 2010, 18:53
One of these days the Catholic Church is going to waken up and remove its rose tinted spectacles and realize why their numbers are dwindling all over the world, and they are.
For the most, what has appeared in print lately regarding the issue of divorce is tantamount to blackmail and praying on people's faith, which is wrong whichever way you look at it.
Letters like this latest one are in my opinion going to push people away from the Catholic Church and that is incredibly sad. Allow people to make life decisions for themselves.
It's the attitude of the Church that has to change. Priests/Bishops etc have absolutely no idea what married life entails far less a broken marriage so they need to stay ................ OUT of the debate.
B. Cachia
Oct 16th 2010, 18:53
No Catholic would disagree with the Church's concept of marriage. However, it applies only to those who choose to be Catholics. It should not be imposed on anyone by law.
One must also keep in mind that as of 2009 only 65% of Maltese marriages are taking place in the Church. The rest are civil marriages. Many others are simply cohabiting. In this context, attempting to impose Catholic values on all and sundry makes less sense than ever.
JOSEPH ZAMMIT
Oct 16th 2010, 18:41
The Bishops said “We appeal to all Christians, be it in their calling as Christians as well as in their role within society, to spread the words of Jesus as part of their mission,” –but that is the mission of the church. Has something gone wrong, may I ask?
The Bishops said: “When faced with the words of Jesus, every Christian had to shoulder responsibility and participate in the mission of fulfilling and protecting His teachings.”—but this applies not only to divorce, but also to living in poverty-of-the-spirit and being in the world but NOT of the world. Jesus said many things that put the Church to shame.
The Bishops said: ““At no point does Jesus specify any form of condition or manner in which divorce could be instituted”. With all due respect, this is either a lie or a slip of the pen (or keyboard). How can you possibly say so?
OMG! I’d better call it a day.
Joe Zammit
Oct 16th 2010, 21:17
Our dear bishops are completely right in what they have said.
T. Cardona
Oct 16th 2010, 18:38
Please can any learned preacher explain what the following lines mean.
Matthew 5:32
But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for unchastity, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.
Matthew 19:9
I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another woman commits adultery.
Is divorce acceptable on grounds of unchastity?
edwin formosa
Oct 16th 2010, 19:13
No it isn't. The Gospel is Matthew Mark Luke and John.
M. Farrugia
Oct 16th 2010, 19:32
Please look in Matthew 19.6-8
"What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.
Richard Galea
Oct 16th 2010, 18:37
Well...The true Catholics need to follow their universal Christian conscience....not their own make-shift personal one......as recently have been suggested.....If they want to remain true followers of the Roman Catholic Church......
This can only be attained by the guidance of The Holy Spirit......
To be a REAL catholic is definitely not for the faint heartened nowadays.
It is about time to close ranks and be counted.
Mike F Abbot
Oct 17th 2010, 13:01
sounds like a call for fundamentalism...
Albert J Mifsud
Oct 16th 2010, 18:36
Having lived in England for over thirty years, I certainly agree that divorce is harmful to the individual and to society, let alone to any children in the family. However, it is absurd for the Church to interfere in the way that it is doing. After all, the Church approves numerous divorces, but calls them annulments - there is no difference, simply an invented excuse. The Church has been losing followers in Europe and Malta year after year. These antics, especially recently trying to 'blackmail' parliamentarians and the judiciary with the threat of sin, simply serve to increase the perceived irrelevance of the Church in today's world.
edwin formosa
Oct 16th 2010, 21:11
There is a big difference. No, not simply an invented excuse at all.
maria formosa
Oct 16th 2010, 18:32
Thumbs up for this well explained pastoral letter from our bishops. there s no further need of further comments or so called clarifications from enlightened clerics or seasoned politicians. Sensible maltese catholics worth their salt abide by what our bishops said..
Anthony Paris
Oct 16th 2010, 18:24
It is very useful and appropriate that the Church should tell us what Jesus said about divorce, 2000 years ago. "Jesus had tried to show the people how divorce alters the intrinsic nature of marriage". Is there any certainty as to whether Jesus was specifically referring to "divorce" as opposed to "annulment". Was there Civil and Canon law at the time? We know He said "What God brought together, let no man put asunder" We also know several respectable and normal married couples applied for and were granted annulments by the Church. Is there any information as to when an annulments became available? Was it also 2000 years ago? Since the Church is quite rightly asking people to "vote" with their conscience, it is very important that any available facts that shed light on this issue of dissolving marriages, should be published.
JOSEPH ZAMMIT
Oct 16th 2010, 18:20
The real issue was not addressed at all, because the Church has no argument at all. All European Christian countries have the law of divorce, then, are these less Christian then the Church in Malta?
1) No one marries to get a divorce.
2) Jesus simply insists that once there is divorce, then there is a shift in the nature of marriage,” the bishops said. Doesn’t this also apply to annulments by the church?
3) Divorce is an effect of a marriage gone wrong/astray where innocent victims are the outcome. Efforts must be made for reconciliation, however, when these fail, then divorce is legitimate.
4) If divorce is a sin then church annulments are too—both results are the same.
5) do the Bishops consider that all of the other European Christians where divorce is a law, are wrong?
6) “Jesus had tried to show the people how divorce alters the intrinsic nature of marriage.” Then, logically, so does annulment? What is the difference?
7) The Church is responsible for her faithful by instruction and not imposition and/or scaremongering. Moreover, a large percentage of Maltese are not catholic and do not need to abide by the catechism of the church.
R Spiteri
Oct 16th 2010, 18:13
how about some quotations about what Jesus said with respect to poverty, and leaving our worldly possessions to follow him, and respecting and loving our neighbours, and not waging wars and pressures simply for power on this earth? Sorry, forgot the bible is just a menu and you can pick whatever verse you like depending on your appetite. So let's keep figuring what Jesus said about divorce....wow!
Jon Shaw
Oct 16th 2010, 18:05
A good percentage of the people who are in Favour of divorce being introduced in our legislation is because they want to be married to their partner and within the current legal scenario their situation blocks this option. Hence divorce, can for these individuals, assist in creating the stable relationship and family framework they want. Is it rocket science or is this aspect being completely and conveniently ignored to just portray the 'ugly' aspect of divorce per se.
Paul Barrett
Oct 16th 2010, 18:03
First and foremost not all Christians are of the Catholic faith and therefore many Christians are spreading the word that there is a life outside the Catholic Church and its arcane restrictive laws.
A second point is that two thousand years ago life expectancy was a great deal shorter than today. Living with the same person two thousand years ago "until death do us part" was far less of a challenge than it is today.
A third point is that marriages will sometimes fail; the current trend is that they are increasing in number as expectations fail to match reality. Some marriages are granted an annulment but many more are granted legal separation. In the latter case, with the increase in life expectancy, we are left with a growing population of adults who, are prevented from marriage purely on religious grounds by an outdated mentality and a social situation that could not possibly be contemplated two thousand years ago.
Legally separated couples must be allowed the choice of another chance at married life, secular state legislation is required and now is the time it must be done before the current impasse gets out of hand.
Edward Camilleri
Oct 16th 2010, 17:48
Christians have no right to impose on others. They can refuse to apply for divorce and instead apply for annulment! a hell of a difference does it make!
Christians have no right to impose on others. They can refuse to apply for divorce and instead apply for annulment! A hell of a difference does it make!
We do not want to hear what Jesus has said and what he hasn’t, it’s all hearsay. What we are sure is that the church has obliterated thousands of old documents so that its story was massaged according to its wishes.
Joseph Calleja
Oct 16th 2010, 18:41
It makes a lot of difference. Annulment is controlled strictly by the church and it cost a lot of money, not to mention annulment makes it like nothing ever happened, not even kids. What we call a clean slate. On the other hand divorce in not controlled by the church and you can get married again. And if done right, like for instance No Fault Divorce, where a couple both agree to divorce, it cuts down on the expenses tremendously. You might even get the chance to remarry again and find happiness ever after with somebody else. Sometimes divorce is good..
Big difference between annulment and divorce.
edwin formosa
Oct 16th 2010, 18:58
Christians have no right to impose on others and others have no right to impose on Christians.
Ramon Casha
Oct 16th 2010, 17:43
"Other countries introduced divorce because they felt it would solve their problems related to marital breakdown, but instead, the problems multiplied."
No, they didn't. Marriage breakups have been increasing everywhere - WITH OR WITHOUT divorce.
When divorce gets introduced in Malta, marriage will still continue to break apart, but this time some of those couples will be able to marry the person they're living with. If we're lucky the rate of marriage breakdowns will decrease when divorce is introduced - as happened in Ireland.
Ramon Casha
Oct 16th 2010, 17:40
"Once there is divorce, then one cannot speak of stable and everlasting marriage, as ordained by God from the very beginning: because divorce changes the very nature of marriage"
This is ridiculous. The FACT is that there are already marriages that are unstable, and marriages that are not everlasting without divorce. There have been such things since before Jesus, and never has any society managed to make all marriages last forever and remain stable.
Divorce does NOT change the nature of marriage because the nature of marriage depends on the couple who are married and NOTHING else - not the church, not the laws, nothing. Once a couple no longer love each other, no longer live together etc., that marriage is over, notwithstanding what the certificate might say.
"At no point does Jesus specify any form of condition or manner in which divorce could be instituted"
Sorry, but that is quite frankly a lie. His words "except in the case of marital infidelity" specified just such a condition. Whether you translate that as marital infidelity or fornication or anything else, it remains a condition under which Jesus accepted divorce.
Joe Zammit
Oct 16th 2010, 21:18
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.”
Ramon Casha
Oct 17th 2010, 05:47
@Joe Zammit: Fine, then Catholics should not get a divorce if they agree with the church on this.
Please choose the reason of your report below: