Theologian René Camilleri does not root for divorce and yet has ended up being used by the pro-divorce movement to champion its cause.
It was Fr Camilleri’s comment – that regulating cohabitation is worse than divorce – that landed him in the pro-divorce movement’s good books.
The movement has used Fr Camilleri’s comment to decry what it believes is the hypocrisy of some in the Nationalist Party who oppose giving separated people the chance to remarry but are in favour of a law regulating cohabitation.
Speaking to The Sunday Times, the theologian does not retract his remark but clarifies that “a law equating cohabitation with marriage” would be worse than divorce.
His clarification may be subtle but hits on a fundamental difference between two options that can be taken when regulating cohabitation.
The first route is one that actually recognises the civil union of two cohabiting individuals, giving them benefits normally enjoyed by a married couple. This approach featured in a list of suggestions submitted by Parliament’s social affairs committee last year.
The second route is one that simply regulates the individual rights and obligations of the people involved so as to curtail abuse when the relationship goes sour. The union itself is not recognised.
Parliament does not yet have a cohabitation Bill up for discussion, unlike divorce, but in an interview with this newspaper last year, PN general secretary Paul Borg Olivier said a law on cohabitation would safeguard the distinction between “a relationship developing outside marriage and a relationship based on marriage”.
It is a position Fr Camilleri would be comfortable with: “God forbid government puts cohabitation on the same footing as marriage because if this is the case it is worse than divorce.”
However, he acknowledged that cohabitation is a reality that must be addressed.
“I do not want people in these relationships to simply walk away leaving their partner high and dry. A law will have to safeguard against abuse but it is not the same as saying cohabitation is equal to marriage,” Fr Camilleri said.
He reiterates his position against divorce but argues that the state may be constrained to introduce it to safeguard the social order if too many families are breaking down.
With no studies on the current state of the family, Fr Camilleri is sceptical about the pro-divorce movement’s argument that divorce is necessary for the common good.
“Figures relating to broken marriages being used to justify the introduction of divorce may be blown out of proportion,” he says, insisting that even if society comes to a point where divorce is socially necessary it still does not make it right.
“Even if I am taking a side by saying I am in favour of marriage based on a life-long commitment, as a priest I cannot ignore the suffering of people,” he said, cautioning against a divisive debate that seeks to classify individuals into Yes or No camps.
His cautionary advice may very well go unheeded as the divorce debate picks up and people get caught in the crossfire.
ksansone@timesofmalta.com