Alex N. Welsh, Qrendi
What it takes to make a marriage last a lifetime
Divorce. Everyone is sounding off on the subject, so why not I? I have been wed for 54 years and marriage has been a great privilege and a pleasure, and has been no problem for either myself or my wife or our family. When I was being brought up (which was in a village in Scotland) marriage was for life and everybody knew it and acted accordingly.
I was only a boy when King Edward the Eighth took up with Wallis Simpson but I can remember how scandalised were the grown-ups. It was followed shortly afterwards by my favourite uncle marrying a divorced lady (a victim of domestic violence). We did not know what to say or think, we were so shocked. It was not a good match, but the war threw us all together, and the marriage lasted the distance with us all on friendly terms. In those days boy-girl relationships were all about marriage, and one did not court a lady unless one’s intentions were “honourable”. You surveyed the field and picked out someone with a similar background and values as yourself. You made sure you both knew each other properly and what your prospective partner and her family expected of the match.
However, love was a necessary component – my grandmother used to say, “don’t marry because you can live with the other person, only marry if you can’t live without them”. If there were doubts it was better to back off even if it was hurtful, rather than risk a lifetime of unhappiness. We come from an age when divorce was not an option – some relationships were better than others but people made their marriages work. The community worked to see that this was so, and was censorious of deviations. That is not to say that there were not scandals from time to time, and occasionally a couple would run away to be together.
I have seen many broken relationships, and in nearly every case the problem has been caused by infidelity. I know the hurt and bitterness that often ensues, and the damage it always does to the children. I have also seen the happiness that a change of partners can bring, though there is often a price to pay for that happiness.
Marriage is a three-way contract, a promise between the two partners and with God, and breaking a promise with God must be a sin. Mention sin and many people start getting hot under the collar and think you are attacking them personally. You are not, but there is no need to be mealy mouthed about it – making love outside marriage is either adultery or fornication and both are clearly sins. It may well be that one sin to prevent a greater sin may be forgiven, or that some sins are not of much importance, it is not for me to say. Everyone has a conscience and they should listen to it.
Treat your partner with respect, consideration, kindness and love. Spend as much time as you can together and share your lives. When you are tired and frustrated do not take it out on the loved one even if he or she may not offer as much sympathy as you think you deserve. Value what you have and do not turn to consolations offered elsewhere – back off at once before any damage is done.
I am a foreigner but I have lived for 18 years here in Malta, one of the last Christian countries to have no divorce, though sadly for practical reasons civil divorce may have to be made available. It is hard for deeply religious people to separate civil and social matters from religious and moral issues, and we should not be afraid to declare what we believe, say, the difference between right and wrong, good and evil. We should all try to live better lives, set better examples and try to help prevent tragedies in our midst.
Most Maltese are on the side of the angels, though, as my wife pointed out, the angels can see both sides of the question.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
37 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
jane camilleri haber
Oct 29th 2010, 11:52
@ JOE Xuerebcontd,for moments when one of them fails but should that failure overshadow all that would have been built? no. do you think it would be weakness on the forgiving part to iron off that failure and give an opportunity to the failing partner to continue the joint venture? dfefenitely not. it only adds to the nobility of his character and the message to the failing partner would be that he/she is too precious to lose if he/she repents and would continue the venture. this would give great energy to the failing person to undo what he/she would have cracked, understand how truly he/she has been blessed and appreciate better the love offered by the forgiving partner. marriage is not about a clinical relationship, static and independent, it is about, merging, dissolving, melting and creating a new entity...... a couple. I auger you understand the difference
jane camilleri haber
Oct 29th 2010, 11:41
@ JOE Xuerebcontd,his head meaning one should do what is best for the lvoed one and not necessarily what his/her loved one asks for at that moment, one should for example discipline a child and create boundaries to his whims even though it might be challenging to the heart of the parent but there the head should prevail. but tell me how will a woman forgive an erring husband or vice-versa unless she/he allows his heart to forgive? will the head with all its rationality and calculations forgive? no so we love with both our hearts as well as our heads, sometimes one takes over a bit over the other according to circumstances. a successful marriage is not made up by a helpless dependent person and a strong independent partner supporting him/her all the time. a successful marriage is made up by two individuals who both understanding their limitations and life's imperfections decide to venture together in faithfulness and esclussivity to enjoy life together, appreciate it as it goes by, giving each other the best company they could offer, laughing and crying together, building each other, appreciating each other and sharing the ups and downs of life. this necessarily calls
jane camilleri haber
Oct 29th 2010, 11:33
@ JOE Xuereb.the kind of relationship you describe is somewhat in contrast with the relationship a couple should enjoy for a fulfilling relationship in marriage. if two people simply live together and have nothing at all to symbolise their oness, what marriage is that? how is it different from the living together of two students who are both away from home but have found the same accomodation and who therefore out of necessity are sharing the same flat?marriage is all about loving, caring, making oneself vulnerable to depend, upbuild the loved one by being tollerant towards his/ her differing character and helping him/her to develop herself/himself simultaneously not to become what would be favourable for yourself, but the best versions of themselves. marriage is completely different from what you seem to imply. and about using your head ...one needs to use his/her head when choosing a lifelong partner much so as mr. welsh suggested, but from the wedding day on no matter how much one uses his head, he will not be able to love, care, cherish, upbuild, give a sense of importance etc to his/her spouse unless the heart is involved. I understand that one needs to love with
Dr Joe Brincat
Oct 29th 2010, 08:20
Mr Welsh's letter is surprising because, as usual, it is the bad things that are reported. It underlines some common sense facts, which are known to all, that it is not the law of the land which guarantees the success of a relationship. People do.
Joe Xuereb
Oct 28th 2010, 22:35
@Jane-Vella-Haber. I don't think you understood much of what I said.
It's often a personality thing. Two 'frightened' people who chance to meet and agree to shore each other up for eternity. Happens. Personally, I couldn't be one of such a couple. Believe me, I've known people who cling, they're needy, they see other people as necessary props and a chosen one in particular as being the answer to all their problems/insecurities. I'd never seek anyone to fill in that role. And I certainly would never promise anybody to be their everything in life, forever. This would be an unrealistic expectation and I so don't do 'unreal'. However, I did say that one can learn to love with the head. Difficult but possible. To the frightened, the thousandth embrace with the same person is, no doubt, welcome on occasions. If I feel frightenedi/nsecure I rely on the person I know best. And that's myself. I wouldn't want anybody as my pack-donkey and I'm certainly not anyone's pack-donkey. Which doesn't exclude the possibility of two people shacking up together as long as they are separate donkeys, or mules. Sorry, but I cannot express it any clearer than this.
jane camilleri haber
Oct 28th 2010, 14:08
continued. I dont understand why you equate the upbuilding of family values in marriage as an abolition of pleasure. I think that the greatest pleasure a couple can enjoy is with each other, when they are in the most secure place, they are in the arms of their loved ones, in whose love they grow as they renew their marriage promises. what is so bad about that. this is the way forward. we should do anything in our power to help this nation gain confidence in the everlasting bond of marriage once more and prepare our future bonds well so as not to lose what they should be expecting from marriage but to work for it and enjoy it. I don't wish us to revert to a society where the marrid couple stick together out of stigma or fright of losing any false sense of security. I anticiapte a time however when marriage is enjoyed by whoever dares go for it. and that means much deeper and wider preparation than we have been having up to now. Mr Welsh give some sound tips for this end
jane camilleri haber
Oct 28th 2010, 14:02
@Joe Xuereb. SO you agree that only where there is a sense of God does society forge a caring and favourable environment for marriage to flourish! so you conclude with me that the problems we are seeing do not arise from marriage itself but from a Godless society. i see nothing appealing in a Godless society. everything is unreliable and all words given in all solemnity are in fact meaningless since there are no moral responsibility entrenched in the person's being.of course i was not bieng subjective it could be the other way round which i did not repeat for lack of space. where there is a happy relationship the couple are meant to become one, and of course they depend on each other for company, sharing, love, sharing of life's cruel twists and also for life's pleaseres and enjoyment. and who says that such a relationship is unhealthy. of course a married couple naturally do become more or less dependent on each other!!! it but not with a dependency which chokes but an emotional attachment which gives security, fulfillment, and a sense of scope in life
Joseph MELI
Oct 28th 2010, 12:13
Many opinions on marriage failures are being often or daily expressed, one agrees on divorce and the others might objects, others say it's a sin or not to his opinion, but then we must all recall or remember what Suzanna Wesley (USA) once said......"Whatever weakens your reason, impairs the tenderness of your conscience, obscures your sense of God, or takes off the relish for spiritual things then it is sin for you, however, innocent it may be in itself" and then also note what John Owen once said "If we do not abide in prayer, we will abide in temptation.
If one does not keep in marriage the following portions, then in my opinion one could never find happiness unless having "Love," "Joy," "Peace," "Patience," "Kindness," "Faithfulness," "Gentleness," and most of all "Self-control." But then I would add with these one has to know how and when to use the art of "forgiveness"!!
Finally one must remove from his/her heart the following bad virtues, such as immorality, impurity, lust, hostility, quarreling, jealousy, anger, selfish ambition, dissension, arrogance, envy, idolatry, murder, sorcery, drunkenness, wild-parties, cheating, adultery, greed, stealing, and lying. Otherwise, trouble will follow any marriage.
Phil Zammit
Oct 28th 2010, 05:29
THANK YOU - Mr. Welsh - for sharing your wisdom and experience.
Every word, every thought you expressed was 'right on' and proven true by the test of time and human experience! God bless you and THANK YOU for choosing to share your life in Malta. You're the kind of "foreigner" (I HATE this word) better for Malta than several thousand indiginous people with their warped mentality towards love and marriage.
I'm a Maltese living in the USA, married for 32 years to a wonderful Montana woman I wouldn't trade for the Gold at Fort Knox - and it gets better every year.
Joe Xuereb
Oct 27th 2010, 22:10
2)Introducing 'moral values' into marriage so it will last. I'd agree if these values were about learning to 'love' with the head (ie through self-knowledge, insights, recognising something's good and nurturing it). Unfortunately most are 'love' marriages, the kind that's instinctive and expressed through the loins/the heart/feelings. These don't work long-term because 'sexual monogamy isn't a fact of life' and there's no way out of THAT sticky wicket.
@CamillerI-Haber. Interesting that you describe deserting partners as 'refuges'. Interesting too that the deserters are men - the one left behind, the female victim. You're not being subjective are you? To ME, this is unhealthy dependence.
Jane! Jane! (the blind Mr. Rochester to Jane Eyre in this most beautiful love story - in the Victorian era, mind!). Quote: 'if the whole of society starts appreciating marriage and offers an environment which nestles it, facilitates it and treasures it'. Yes?!! This would also require the abolition of anything that smacks of pleasure. Any literature apart from Jane Eyre will be banned. Any films and plays - ditto. Malta will have to become a theocracy. And then the Jane-Camilleri-Habers of Malta will be happy and live a contented married life. I think not!
Joe Xuereb
Oct 27th 2010, 21:34
1)The trouble is that in Malta marriage remains valid even after the couple no longer 'desire each other'. This because 'sexual monogamy is not a fact of life'.
Mr. Welsh's letter intrigued me until I came to the god bit.
I get the feeling many British people are devout Catholics and choose to settle in Malta as they see it as the last bastion of their religion. They are prepared to do anything to maintain the Maltese status quo. After Malta, where could they go?
I think that people who stay together get caught up in the habit syndrome. Ups and downs, yes, but they are afraid to contemplate a life without 'their loved one'. The safety of the familiar. It is therefore a personality thing in that it takes a lot of courage to leave a marriage and forge ahead. The 'coward' stays put. Often out of habit. The partner becomes a habit.
I'm sorry if I sound negative. Like anything else, if something is desired enough it will work. But that's not to say that the 'project' will not come up against hurdles. Such hurdles need to be dealt with honestly and realistically. And that's the real test./continued
John M. Grima
Oct 27th 2010, 16:46
No one falls in LOVE by CHOICE,
It is by CHANCE.
No one stays in LOVE by CHANCE,
It is by WORK.
And no one falls out of LOVE by CHANCE.
It is by CHOICE.
gcForte
Oct 27th 2010, 16:12
I have been knowing my wife 42 years which 36 years of them married........I have a happily marriage and a happy family. Our secret is that from these 42 years we argued 40 of them. We are like a good car battery, you have positive ( which some times I will be ) and negative ( which some times I will be ). But the most important thing is that we do not argue by the heart, but with our stupid brains...............Sorry, I have to leave because she is shouting and I must go, otherwise we will start an argument.
Joseph Calleja
Oct 27th 2010, 16:23
You just explained marriage in a nut shell....how funny. You sound like the rest of us. Now that is good solid chemistry for a good and lasting marriage. Remember always remember the magic words are. Yes Dear.
Gerry Cowie
Oct 27th 2010, 15:29
@RamonCasha -I am intrigued by your statement below and wonder what is the thinking behind it:-
"Divorce introduces a new concept to Malta - marriages based on the couple actually loving and wanting each other."
Surely any marriage is hopefully based on the couple actually loving and wanting each other! Do you mean to say that without divorce this has so far not been the case in Malta? Have I missed something here?
Ramon Casha
Oct 27th 2010, 16:17
Yes, you understood perfectly.
While couples get married with love, respect and so on, if the couple break up the marriage remains legally valid. The marriage lasts long after that love and respect is gone, so the marriage is not necessarily based on love or wanting one another.
Perhaps a better way of saying it is that, in Malta, weddings are based on love, respect etc. - but love within the marriage is incidental, however desirable it is to have that situation.
Joseph Calleja
Oct 27th 2010, 15:27
Mr Welsh I enjoyed reading your letter and I too like many other fortunate couples have been married to the same woman for 47 years. When people ask me how we do it, stay married together for all these years, I joke and say. Learn how to always say "Yes Dear". Humorous? But seriously it takes a lot of hard work and understanding to keep a marriage going and it takes two to keep it going, not three or four but two. Every married couple have their ups and downs no matter how happy they both are.Marriage is a lot of give and take and it is mostly give. On the other hand some marriages don't work out for a lot of reasons, infidelity, domestic violence, child abuse, financial problems alcohol or drug abuse, lack of cooperation, lack of trust and a lot more. Divorce is only a sin if you are Catholic and only if you want to believe such a thing. The church has every right to declare divorce is a sin but that should only apply to Catholics. The world including Malta is not all Catholic so divorce is not a sin for everybody.
Raymond Bezzina
Oct 27th 2010, 17:22
@ Joseph Calleja
You said that : quote "Divorce is only a sin if you are Catholic and only if you want
to believe such a thing. The church has every right to declare divorce is a sin but
that should only apply to Catholics. The world including Malta is not all Catholic
so divorce is not a sin for everybody." Unquote.
With what authority do you tell people such things as above. Do you think that you
are an expert and an authority in matters of the Catholic Church more than a priest ?
Mr. Calleja, if you think that God's Commandments are there for Catholics only, you
are grossly mistaken.
Alex Ciantar
Oct 27th 2010, 23:35
@ Raymond Bezzina
You stated "quote if you think that God's Commandments are there for Catholics only, you
are grossly mistaken. "unquote" what do you mean by that? your God (catholic God I presume) has nothing to do with any other God of any other religion or athists for that matter so how dare you shove your relgions comandments down out throats if we do not want any of it your religious rules do not apply to anyone else but you and anyone like you.
with your argument then jews can impose cirmuscision on any one including you becaue that is thier religious belief and Muslims can impose on you not to eat pork etc. etc.
Gerry Cowie
Oct 27th 2010, 15:22
Congratulations, Mr Walsh, to you both!
It would be wonderful if others could emulate your example. Sadly that is not always possible. Perhaps some lucky persons can take note of your own experience and see if it will help them to continue in their marriage where there is hope and desire so to do.
With regard to comments below, I would add that in this whole debate it is incumbent on both sides to avoid sarcastic comment and concentrate on the matter in hand.
It is true that this matter crosses many boundaries, both secular and religious. But there really is no call for some of the comments below.
Again I would encourage all parties to forget their differences and concentrate solely on the subject matter.
I am not taking a stance either way on the matter of divorce as it is a private thing.
Joseph Calleja
Oct 27th 2010, 16:18
"I am not taking a stance either way on the matter of divorce as it is a private thing" .
Mr Cowie that is the best statement anybody has ever made in this paper or otherwise. Very wise and to the point. We should all look at it your way. and you are right, DIVORCE IS A PRIVATE THING. At least we agree on something. But since it is a private thing it should be there available for those who want it, don't you think?
jane camilleri haber
Oct 27th 2010, 12:38
to be ushered in. as for the benefits of divorce.studies show that it will not reduce cohabitation but it will moreover distabilise and impoverish the nation as well as the interested partners themselves. I don't have a solution for the victim, neither now as it is when the deserter leaves and forsakes his responsibility, the children, maintenance etc, nor should divorce be introduced where the deserter leaves, is blessed by the state to go back on his word and enter a second marriage, again promising a lifelong commitment to a second person ( who would be so silly as to believe him/her) the victim still suffers whether catholic or not! let's remember that not both partners might be so lucky as to enter a successful second marriage which studies show fails even more easily . so as I see it, only improving drastically our marriage preparation and feed in some moral code to our morally decadescending society is all that remains as a cviable option
Emma Micallef
Oct 27th 2010, 12:37
It is nice to hear of a couple that have spent so many years together but Mr. Welsh, marriage is good for some and not for others unfortunately. Both parties have to be very committed to each each other and the marriage but other then infidelity there are many other reasons why a marriage breaks down. I agree with divorce in Malta because it is there for people who need it. Whoever doesnt agree with divorce because of faith or any other reason doesnt have to use this law!!! Everyone has a choice !!!
jane camilleri haber
Oct 27th 2010, 12:30
besides putting the faithful partner in an impossible situation where infront of the state she/he is considered single while for the church she/he is married meaning still unable to seek a second marriage, nor the consolation and refuge of a married partner. you might say that the faithful partner's problem! I disagree. when both partners went up the aisle both of them promised to hold and cherish each other forever..then one of them goes back on his word! why should the other suffer? a word is a word ! you might say but is this not the situation at present? married partners leaving the marriage and co-habiting? is not the faithful partner still alone and without the refuge of her married partner.? the answer is yes. so what we should do is not bless the whims of the deserter and dissolve his responsibility but moreover enhance marriage as a nation, and offer better preparations for our future marriage bonds. let's remember also that according to the constitution the religion of the state is the catholic religion which forbids divorce, so before any divorce legislation is passed we need to change the constitution to make way for the irriversible damage to
Kevin Cassar
Oct 27th 2010, 12:27
I enjoyed the article and can agree or relate to most of it. My only objection is to the wrong notion that marriage is a three way contract. It is not. Marriage is a two way contract, regardless if the marriage is a civil or religious one.
The reasons for my objections are obvious when you consider the following:
Is the person celebrating the union in a civil marriage part of the union?
If the answer to the above answer is no, then even if one believes that a religious marriage is done before God, it does not make God part of the marriage.
If God were part of the marriage then you could draw the following conclusions:
God practices polygamy.
Since God is supposedly all knowing, then the marriage would be invalid because one of the parties knew a valid objection to the marriage and did not reveal it.
Congratulations on your 54 years of marriage.
jane camilleri haber
Oct 27th 2010, 12:20
thanks Mr. Welsh for your contribution. yes marriage can be a success if the couple starts taking marriage seriously and prepare themselves well for it starting by heeding the wisdom given for free by yourself Mr. Welshand and if the whole of society starts appreciating marriage and offers an environment which nestles it, facilitates it and treasures it. I don't want to repeat what Mr. welsh says cause that would be irrlevant. I would like to comment however on what K Mifsud commented. catholics are interested in not having divorce legislation in Malta for various reasons. 1. because what catholics believe is good for themselves they wish to see all of society benefitting from namely; the embracing of a lifelong relationship which offers the best possible security to the nation and future generation. 2. because divorce will not just offer a second chance to the victims but it would also erode the principle of an everlasting bond for the whole of society catholics and non-cathjolics alike. thirdly because if a catholic partner lapses his faith and seeks divorce in a civil court, the faithful partner would still be considered married infront of the church and this would create an identity
Joe Zammit
Oct 27th 2010, 11:36
Divorce can easily be described as another form of cohabitation. In cohabitation there is no bond. Also in a marriage including divorce there is no bond because when they want the couple can for some reason or another get a divorce. Divorce is literally another form of cohabitation.
Marriage and only marriage is serious and beneficial to every human society. The two characteristics of marriage are UNITY and INDISSOLUBILITY. Marriage is for ever.
No person can vote for divorce without sinning seriously against God.
Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it's already guaranteed!
William P Flynn
Oct 27th 2010, 12:29
Joe.Zammit
You should travel more. In the real world (i.e. anywhere outside Malta and the Philippines) a Catholic marriage is no different in the eyes of the state than a second or third marriage after one or more divorces.
They are all equal and binding and all sign the same licence. Even if a couple is married by a cardinal, the same state marriage license has to be signed; same as a rock star being married by a celebrant dressed as an alien octopus.
The cardinal and the man dressed as an alien octopus are both nothing but marriage celebrant-agents of the state.
The marriage is a binding contract of marriage made by two people before the state.
Everyone else is a guest or an agent acting on behalf of the state.
Jesus, god, the holy spirit, epistles, StPaul’s letter to the Corinthians and all the rest are just as important at law as confetti.
It is only in Malta where the tail wags the dog, and the state allows an agent of the state, a mere marriage celebrant, the church, to make and break a state marriage contract after a sham court run by celibate old men.
Kenneth Cassar
Oct 27th 2010, 12:29
Your first paragraph can easily be dismissed in a singe sentence: Divorce is not necessarily followed by re-marriage.
As for indissollubility being a "characteristic of marriage", an arbitrary claim does not make it a fact. Marriage is dissolluble in anywhere but Malta and the Philippines, which makes your claim false, at best.
As for divorce being a "sin", believe that if you will, but if you wish to impose legislation on your belief, I would expect some evidence (and no, the Bible does not count, since you would then have to prove that the Bible is actually the word of God). Good luck with that.
As for victory being yours, and already guaranteed, I guess it was also "guaranteed" in Ireland. Enough said.
Joseph Calleja
Oct 27th 2010, 16:08
JZ stop printing the same kantaliena. Stop the cut and paste and stop being so irritating. Why are you so death set that divorce is no good. When you say divorce is a sin, please include that it only pertains to catholics, amen. JZ you have to understand that divorce is not a disease like you want all of us to think. Divorce is a cure for people suffering from domestic violence, physical or mental abuse, a spouse who gets cheated on (infidelity) adultery, spouses who cannot bare to see their children being abused by one of the other parent, or the fact that they are being abused themselves. What do you say to a spouse whose wife/husband comes home drunk everyday? I don't think telling him/her that divorce is a sin will be of any consolation. Divorce is a civil matter. Why is annulment permissible, and not a sin but divorce is? Annulment is another word for divorce. Divorce is only a sin for those who want to believe it is. Divorce can be a good thing. It is the right of every human being to seek happiness.
B. Cachia
Oct 27th 2010, 20:22
We already have cohabitation, so if the problem with divorce is that it's a form of cohabition then it's a non-existent problem.
Incidentally, we also have civil marriage which, in Catholic eyes, is another form of cohabitation. Would you like us to ban this too? Incidentally, last year, 35% of marriages in Malta were civil marriages.
William P Flynn
Oct 27th 2010, 11:27
Mr.Welsh's letter has valuable advice to ensure marriage preparation and recognition of pitfalls – like a marriage safety manual. Certainly everyone should make sure they work hard to avoid trouble; to look out for and recognize the trouble signs; and to know how best to deal with trouble.
There are many elements that make a marriage last and those who have been lucky and have had a long lasting marriage, have their own ideas.
Personally I believe it's the chemistry and having the luck to find your partner.
But if the marriage becomes irreconcilable, that the only thing left is to end the marriage.
I live in a country that has a no-fault divorce regime. But I know of no one who divorced flippantly. I know couples who were lucky the second time and their marriage after a divorce was successful.
Thousands of people in Malta are past a marriage safety manual. They need a new marriage. It is their right to have it.
Parliament is immoral to deny them divorce law.
Joseph Ellul - Sydney
Oct 28th 2010, 08:48
Well said.
Ramon Casha
Oct 27th 2010, 11:16
Congratulations on making your marriage work. Unfortunately however, none of that helps those whose marriage has ended.
Incidentally, marriage was not "for life" when you were being brought up - simply because there has never been such a time anywhere on earth. It may have been a time when couples whose marriage had ended made huge efforts to keep that fact hidden from society - if necessary, to the extent of leaving their village permanently, or even living in separate parts of the same house - but there has never been a time when marriages did not break down.
Malta is the laughing stock of the world - a place where marriage is utterly meaningless, since a "married" couple could consist of the husband living with another woman, the wife living with another man, both with children born of these relationships, who haven't spoken to one another in years and who neither love, respect nor care for each other - in short, marriage is nothing more than a certificate filed at the public registry.
Divorce introduces a new concept to Malta - marriages based on the couple actually loving and wanting each other.
K. Mifsud
Oct 27th 2010, 11:05
Mr. Welsh, I very much enjoyed reading your contribution. You're a wise man.
I think it is not in doubt whether or not divorce is a sin for Catholics---it is. But still, a problem arises because not everybody is Catholic. And non-Catholics generally do not give a rat's lower back about what is or is not a sin for Catholics. Likewise, you probably don't think twice before eating pork or beef, and your wife doesn't wear a veil. You see, everybody lives by their own moral code.
The real question here is whether Catholics should impose their moral beliefs on those who do not share them. If the answer is yes, and if divorce should be illegal because it is a sin to Catholics, then where should we stop? Homosexual relations, sex before marriage, and use of contraception are also sins to Catholics. Should we also make these illegal? You can't make the 'Catholic sin' argument selectively. With that one, one either goes the whole way, or is a selective hypocrite.
I don't think anybody is asking Catholics to get divorced. I think people are asking for a chioce---to either live as Catholics, or not.
John M. Grima
Oct 27th 2010, 16:38
Like Mr. Welsh said. Love, Respect. Kindness and consideration. And here I'll add commitment. These are all natural and non-religious. They are simply the glue that binds a strong marrige, and a good famiily. What's religion got to do with it?????????
Alex Ciantar
Oct 27th 2010, 09:54
Nice letter and all well said.....but what if one part of the marriage does everything by the book (as explained in this letter) but the other turns sour and ruins the marriage to the extent that it is irreparable hence it makes the other part (good) become the victim.......what then? Doesn’t s/he deserve anther chance in life again (a better one even)?