Single Catholic divorcees can receive Holy Communion – Curia

James Mizzi

May 3rd 2011, 11:04

“A divorced person (whether they divorced willingly or unwillingly) who is not engaged in a permanent relationship can receive the sacraments liberally,” a spokesman for the Church told The Sunday Times.

So in order to receive the sacraments, a divorced person has to become a hore, so not to engage in a parmanent relationship! Or a paedophile perhaps?

joe falzon

Mar 29th 2011, 21:57

Hell which is eternal damnation due to the eternal separation of the being from God exists and we know this because Jesus the Son of God himself told us. This is the reason why God came among us in the person of Jesus Christ to save us and reconcile us with Him.
We start our salvation from here (in this life) and salvatiion reaches its peak in the Beatific vision (the vision of God forever). As much as there is Hell forever, there is also Heaven forever. This is the teaching of the Catholic Church.

God is love and as a loving father he cares for everyone irrispective of belief, religion, race, etc. In spite of the fact that Hell exists (Jesus also spoke about it), our Christian life is to be built on love and respect towards HIM (God) and others. LOVE toward God and towards others are the key commandments that should guide us to reach God's will for us - salvation.

joe falzon

Mar 29th 2011, 21:34

@Victor Pulis
Whether one goes to Hell or not, depends on the person's deliberate decisions and circumstances. God gave his commandments to enlighten US and help us live our dignity as human beings with full respect towards each other and his creation. Therefore, it is WE who decide to go to Hell and it is WE who decide to go to heaven. That ALL depends on our words and deeds.

God gives us all the means (his grace) to reach HIS objectives which is salvation but he is not going to impose anything on us. He helps us to reach this goal of participating in the Beatific Vision till the last moment of our life but if we keep rejecting his offer till the last moment of our life then there is no one to blame but US. It is futile of blaming others of reaching an unwanted destination if we deliberately decide to ignore the signs. Yes ... there were many circumstances when people lost their life on Earth due to having disregarded their own safety and they lost life on Earth forever. but who is to blame if they knew of the danger and they risked?

Joy Caruana

Mar 29th 2011, 19:49

@M.Bonello Should parents of children born out of wedlock put children interest first and keep loving each other and living together? Or should they split apart, repent of bringing children to this world, so they may go for confession and receive Holy communion? Which normal parent will ever repent of having kids??? Clarify please what in such case is our Christ's teachings? And what in such case is common good?

Joy Caruana

Mar 29th 2011, 16:06

What must separated/divorced person who is in a new relationship and has children from that relationship to do to have the right to go to confess and receive Holy communion?
1.Leave his/her partner and children and live alone.
2.Send out his/her partner and live alone with children.
What will be right choice, may somebody help to choose please?

joe falzon

Mar 29th 2011, 15:48

1. My answer to your first question is this:
Those who cannot exalt themselves try to degrade others.

2. I have already said that everyone is free to decide. But are you implying that the discussions should stop to leave everybody decide without even sharing with others his beliefs? I also lLISTEN to other opinions and beliefs for I know that every person has something good to offer even if it small. Yes ... of course I do also listen to 6 year olds (and I am not ashamed of telling you that I have learned from them also) and that proves that they also definetely NEED to be respected.

Again the concept of freedom is relative to the common good of the society. One cannot drive and break the rules wiithout taking the consideration of others. This is the way civilized people behave. Call it whatever you want (interference, meddling, etc) but the common good of the society NEEDS to be taken into consideration and RESPECTED no matter how much one feels frustrated or not.

joe falzon

Mar 29th 2011, 15:23

@Paul Gauci
YES
provided one satisfies the conditions that I have mentioned: repentence, confession,etc.

Everyone is called for salvation (all Christians, all Muslims, all protestants, all people of different beliefs) subject that they RIGHTLY form and SINCERELY follow their inner voice we call conscience. God has engrained the fundamental rules of what is good in everyone. Again, it's up to US to decide.

@Daniel Vella
Hadd ma qal li l-qtil huwa ahjar mid-divorzju. Dak li huwa hazin jibqa' hazin dejjem u kullimkien hu x'inhu. Lil min thobb ma toqghodx tkejjel x'iweggghu l-aktar, jekk hux daqqa ta' ponn jew daqqa ta' sieq ghaliex it-tnejn iweggghu. Lil min verament thobb tipprova tara kif tista' turih imhabbtek u mhux kif tista' ma ttihx daqqa ta' ponn jew ta' sieq.

Il-missier fil-parabola tal-Iben il-Hali baqa' jistenna lill-Ibnu anke meta dan telqu u berbaq gidu. Anzi meta rega' lura ghax IRREJALIZZA, missieru laqghu ghandu u ghamillu festa.

Meta l-Knisja twassal il-messagg ta' Gesu kontra d-divorzju mhux ghax ser tikseb xi hage hi izda ghal gid tal-istess komunita' (il-gid komuni). L-aktar haga KOMDA li tista' taghmel il-Knisja hi li ma titkellimx. Izda min ma jwissikx dwar certu hsarat jew konsegwenzi, tahseb li jhobbok?

joe falzon

Mar 29th 2011, 13:35

@David Caruana
... so you are contradicting the pro-divorce movement arguments.

You are stating that love doesn't really DIE. There is still the chance of reconciliation. You quoted the life of Elizabeth Taylor.

That is why it is wrong to divorce. By the way ... at what expenses are you going to re-marry? At the expense of your former wife/s whom may have married you in your second chance and NOW still loves you?

Marisa Xuereb

Mar 29th 2011, 13:14

1. Provided they find another woman who is willing to submit.
2. There are human rights and civil rights; divorce is of the latter kind.
3. Certainly. Hence some Catholics will vote against and some will vote in favour.
4. That is entirely up to the Church.
5. What matters is not how many get married but how many stay happily married.
6. Certainly.
7. Cohabitation increased even in divorce-free Malta.
8. What matters is not the number of churchgoers but the life they lead. The death penalty has been abolished in most civilised countries. So, it’s the US that should consider abolishing it. In spite of it, the US still has one of the highest crime rates in the world, just like in spite of the lack of divorce, Malta is still facing an increase in marriage breakdowns.
9. Civilised societies are past martyrdom: people are compensated when they lose property for the common good. No one should be left to suffer without remedy.
10. That is also entirely up to the Church.
11. Most things are neither entirely positive nor entirely negative.
12. Cohabitation and the number of children born out of wedlock increased even in divorce-free Malta.

Paul Gauci

Mar 29th 2011, 12:27

@joe falzon
No need for instructions and quotes.
For simple question simple answer is enough.
Do murderers and other criminals have right to confess and receive Holy communion?
Yes or Not?
Thanks.

Peter Farrugia

Mar 29th 2011, 12:01

This very morning I had a conversation with my girlfriend asserting my decision to Abstein in the vote on divorce legislation.

After reading these 12 points I am convinced that I must vote IN FAVOUR because this insulting and ludicrous misinformation campaign is indigestable even to the most political animal!

joe falzon

Mar 29th 2011, 11:46

@Paul Gauci
Very simple question.

Twegiba:
1. Ahseb dnubietek sewwa.
2. INDEM minnhom.
3. Aghti kelma 'l Alla li ma tergax
4. Qerrhom kollha.
5. Aghmel il-penitenza li jaghtik il-qassis.

Kulhadd huwa mistieden ghall-mahfra u l-imhabba t'Alla izda trid TINDEM. Gesu: 'Dnubietek mahfura ... Mur u la tergax'

Jekk thalli intenzjonalment (GHAX TRID) l-intenzjoni li terga' twettaq il-htijiet tieghek, id-dnubiet xorta ma jinhafrux. Ma jffissir li l-bnedmin ma jirrepetux izda altru tirrepeti bi dghufija u altru b'intenzjoni SHIHA u DIRETTA.

ray alamango

Mar 29th 2011, 11:02

As a catholic person, I find this very confusing, how the church can deny a person to receive holy communion when it wasn’t his/her fault for the breaking up of their marriage. When all his/her efforts were all done to make it work and that this person was left alone to raise his/her family. Now that a permanent relationship is established the church of Christ forgets all his/her pains and denies them to participate from receiving sacraments. To make matters worse and insult these individuals, they go for mass, and find out that the person next to them is a person who betrayed and murdered his partner in front of his kids, and now that he/she is out from jail, can receive all sacraments, get married and live happily ever after. What did these persons do worse than the one next to them?

Paul Gauci

Mar 29th 2011, 10:43

Somebody explain me please if murderers and people commited crimes like stealing, drugs etc may go for confession and after receive Holy communion?
Just wondering...

Melissa Bagley

Mar 29th 2011, 10:32

If battered wives are granted the right to remarry, so too will their abusive husbands.....

So battered spouses are to remained in abusive relationships? No way to start afresh? SICK.

Daniel Vella

Mar 29th 2011, 10:23

@Joe falzon

We criticize not to spite but because the church's position is simply hilarious. You're just so blinded that you can't even see that.

Divorce won't affect church marriages. Divorce won't introduce anything not already present (marriage breakdowns, cohabitation, single-parent families, etc), except that people whose marriage failed can start a new life and be legally re-married. The church doesn't have a say in civil marriage OR divorce.

So can you see why we criticize? I'm not holding my breath.

John vella

Mar 29th 2011, 09:32

yeah yeah.....whateveeeer!! Hahhaha!! Such a joke! :)

Joseph Vella

Mar 29th 2011, 09:29

Just a small comment to our glorious Church leaders - I recently got an annulment, from our courts, of my marriage after being seperated from my ex wife for 20 years and remarried civilly recently. What would happen if I was prognosed as dying - will I be given the last rites?

joe falzon

Mar 29th 2011, 08:32

Part 2 /continue
Per ezempju fil-pastorali tal-isqfijiet dwar id-divorzju, kien hemm hafna punti relevanti izda nhoss li kien hemm wisq tidwir. Seta kien messagg aktar 'to the point' u adattat ghall-pratticita' tas-sitwazzjoni tal-bniedem illum. Min-naha l-ohra jkun ukoll banalita' jekk wiehed jissimplifika b'mod esagerat it-taghlim tieghu bla ma jispjega adekwatament dak li jrid ifisser. Il-kritika tan-nies dwar it-tnax il-punt. Irid jinholoq bilanc fil-lingwagg li jintuza bejn il-kelma miftehma min-nies, l-effettivita' u c-carezza taghha b'mod li n-nies jifhmu verament dak li tkun trid tfisser il-Knisja.

Per ezempju jien bqajt skantat f'dawn id-diskussjonijiet, kif hafna nies ghadhom bil-mentalita' li bhal donnu jezisti xi Alla differenti ghal Kattolici, xi Alla differentii ghal Musulmani, jew ghal xi religjon ohra. Donnu lanqas dak li hu baziku u fundamentali li jezisti biss Alla wiehed, certu nies ma jafu. Jien bqajt skantat kif anke certu studenti universitarji lanqas biss jafu d-differenzi li hemm bejn zwieg, divorzju, separazzjoni u annulament. Mela jekk wiehed ma jafx x'inhuma d-differenzi bejniethom, kif ser jibni decizjoni tajba fil-votazzjoni tar-referendum?

Jista' jkun li jien zbaljat f'din il-kritika tieghi (anzi j'Alla li jien zbaljat) izda minn hafna kummenti tan-nies hassejt li 'there is some missing link between the Church and the people or vice-versa'.

joe falzon

Mar 29th 2011, 08:17

Part 1
Kull min ihobb lill-Knisja ghandu dritt u dmir li jikkritikaha. Il-kritika m'hijiex hazina izda 'healthy' meta ssir bi spirtu sincier u tajjeb. M'hijiex kritika gusta u sinciera dik li ssir minn certu persuni semplicement biex imaqdru jew jiddegradaw l-istituzzjoni nnifisha jew kulma tghid. Jekk wiehed ma jaqbilx, jista' jghid li ma jaqbilx b'mod civili. Naturalmet min jaghmel mod iehor, ma nahsibx li jkun qed jigbed l-ammirazzjoni ta' hadd ghallinqas ta' dawk li jifhmu li persuni civili jitkellmu b'mod civili.

Jien ser nikkritika wkoll lill-Knisja li nappartjeni ghaliha izda ghax inhobbha. Inhoss (jista' jkun li jien zbaljat) li l-lingwagg uzat mill-istess Knisja m'huwiex il-lingwagg li imdorri jitkellem bih il-poplu. Fl-opinjoni tieghi, anke jekk il-Knisja jkollha mitt elf ragun fl-argumentazzjoi li ggib izda nhoss li l-komunikattiva effettiva biex twassal il-messagg taghha ghadu 'l boghod minn dak li wiehed jistenna. M'iniex qed nghid li l-Knisja trid tahsibha kif jahsibha l-popolin izda li tuza lingwagg li jinftiehem u addattat. Kultant certu kliem tqil uzat fit-teologija uzat ukoll fl-omeliji m'huwiex ihalli l-effett mixtieq. Kultant wiehed minflok kelma jista' juza ohra li tinftiehem minn kulhadd u l-messagg ikun aktar effikaci.

Joseph Borg

Mar 29th 2011, 07:55

as long as the divorce is given by the church and therefore they get a share of the case's money ................ than its ok your on the good side of the law

Arthur Soler

Mar 29th 2011, 01:24

This divorce saga reminds me of the Mintoff years when the Curia decreed that anyone who read the Labour Party's newspaper would be committing a mortal sin, and thus risk eternal damnation. But of course, history often repeats itself. It is replete with examples of institutions and individuals who acquire much knowledge, but very little wisdom.

Is it any wonder that the Catholic Church has lost so much relevance and credibility with so many people?

It is so out of touch with reality….and with reason and logic.

gaffarena joseph

Mar 28th 2011, 22:42

All I, can say about what the maltese church said is only one word.
RUBBISH

M Vella***

Mar 28th 2011, 17:38

So according to the church its, staying with your spouse despite it hurts.LOL
RESIST OR SERVE!

Anthony Cardona

Mar 28th 2011, 17:38

My comments on the 12 points: 1. Abusive husbands (wives) should never be granted the right to remarry, they are abusive for a reason. 2. Since there is a right to marry there should be a right to divorce. 3. I do not need anyone to tell me what actions I take may or may not impose on my values. 4. Church should stick to God's laws and not god's representatives. 5. Not only divorce weakens marriage but also other social aspects incl. high cost of living. 6. If someone does not vote may also mean he/she finds no trust in any current political representation. 7. Certain countries' legislative systems abuse divorce by taking advantage of the weak hence arriving to poverty line. 8. Malta has the most churchgoers? Is this a joke? 9. Divorce increases marital breakdown by 20% and what the other 80% represents? 10. I know people who remarry civilly and priests still welcome them to confession and Holy Communion. 11. Church is against certain elements but not its investments in these elements. 12. What is the problem with children born out of a wedlock, they are still citizens of this country hence economical contributors if supported.

Carina Borg

Mar 28th 2011, 17:32

Why is Catholic Church so different in Malta? I am going to visit London every Sunday for mass where no one knows I am a divorcee. I believe in God, but some views here, I simply cannot fathom how they are related to Christian faith or to what God wants. I felt I did the right things when I filed for divorce, my children are happy for me, very faithful to their Christian beliefs to this day. My ex-husband is with a partner now, and I am very happy for him as he has really improved and become a better person. I can speak loads and loads about how I believe I live my Christian life to the full but I will stop here.

Grace Gatt

Mar 28th 2011, 17:32

No to devorce because WHO EVER IS INVOLVED NEED TO amendent what we have now before implenting new law on devorce..

1.Update mediation procedures
2. Intruduce court experts, to check upbringing of children while court case is being From day one seperation case started. We ARE OBLIGE TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN

3. harsher penalities to both parties who lie about the cause of breakup..not end up having mental turture through the process.

4. Maintance given out should be accounted how it is spent not at time YOU have cases being spend on everything but not on the children..

5. in every town apart from the local police station, there should be a substation wth TRAINED police, and socialworker 24/7 hand in hand so that family related problems be handled on the spot . This is most effective way ...

I believe Divorce agenda has to wait before we harm more families as in couples,children, youths alike.. PlS lets unite ,really see what best for our future generations that we are raising. Think the silent cries of our children, which we need to aid to raise them as our future leaders to learn to work as teamwork not in hatred

Daniel Schembri

Mar 28th 2011, 16:49

Most of those 'reasons' aren't reasons at all.
They only show the arrogance and hypocrisy of the church institution.
I find them very non-Christian actually. And do not make much sense, being very short sighted and...again...non-Chrsitian!
Hilarious ...

joe falzon

Mar 28th 2011, 16:32

@David Caruana Semmejtlek 'l allat foloz x'inhuma. M'humiex Alla li jemmnu fih il-kattolici, il-Musulmani jew religjonijiet ohra. Alla wiehed hemm li huwa l-istess ghal kulhadd (ghar-religjoinijiet kollha) izda kull religjon ghandha l-modi taghha kif taghraf lil dan Alla wiehed u altru li nirrispettaw lil Alla (jadurah min jadurah) u lir-religjonijiet' 'l ohra. Il-Kattolici jaghrfu lil Alla permezz tar-rivelazzjoni f'Gesu Kristu, il-Musulmani permezz ta' mezzi ohra, ecc. Id-destinazzjoni li rridu naslu fiha hija wahda u l-istess (Alla) izda kulhadd bil-modi tieghu. Ghalhekk ma tistax tiggudika u tikundanna lil hadd. Dan kollu qalu l-Koncilju Vatikan it-tieni izda jidher li bil-monopolju kollu li jghidu li hawn, lanqas ta' dan xi whud m'huma konxji. Nerga' nghid Alla wiehed hemm; l-istess wiehed ghal kulhadd. Fhimna ghallinqas il-principju baziku u fundamentali tat-twemmin f'Alla wiehed? L-allat foloz li rriferejtek ghalihom huma t-tip li semmejtlek: il-flus, ir-reghba ghal-poter, is-sess, l-ipokrezija, ecc. L-allat foloz li minhabba fihom Mose' kisser il-Kmandamenti. Ghal xi whud dawn jiehdu l-post t'Alla veru u ghalhekk jissejjhu allat foloz. B'Alla hadd ma jidhaq. Fl-ahhar ... le m'iniex jien li ser nghidlek x'decizjonijiet tiehu f'hajtek. Jien nesprimi ruhi bhal kull cittadin iehor (u f'dal kaz bhala nisrani) izda huwa int BISS li tiddeciedi.

joe falzon

Mar 28th 2011, 16:12

@Malcholm Seychell L-ewwelnett jiddependi x'tifhem biha relazzjoni permanenti? Sal-mewt jew ghal-4 snin? Ghax jekk ghal 4 snin m'hijiex permanenti xejn ghaliex dik tigi relazzjoni ghal perjodu temporanju sakemm ma jinqalax xi haga serja u jiddeciedu li z-zwieg spicca. Ghall-Knisja s-sess huwa don moghti minn Alla biex il-mizzewgin isibu l-milja taghhom f'xulxin. 'Ghalhekk ir-ragel jinghaqad ma' martu u jsiru gisem wiehed. Mhux tnejn izda wiehed.' Huwa ukoll l-mod ta' kif tigi l-hajja (prokreazzjoni u ghalhekk ghandu jkun miftuh ghall-hajjja.) Dan ifisser li ebda relazzjoni sesswali qabel iz-zwieg (casual sess) m'hija permess ghaliex tirrendi s-sess bhala sempliciment oggett ghall-pjacir personali u mhux bhala ghotja shiha u serja bejn il-mizzewgin. Ghaldaqstant il-casual sex m'huwiex permissibli lanqas. Naturalment ma jfissirx li l-bnedmin ma jizbaljawx. Izda dik kwistjoni ohra. Il-Knisja tippermetti is-sess b'ghotja shiha ta' mhabba fl-ewwel zwieg tal-mizzewgin (ghallinqas sakemm wahda mill-partijiet ma tkunx mietet u wiehed jista' jerga' jizzewweg.) L-iskop ta' dan, apparti l-aspett religjuz li semmejna, huwa l-harsien tal-weghda tal-fedelta shiha u inkondizzjonata bejn il-mizzewgin. Fid-divorzju tinkiser din il-fedelta' u l-kelma tal-mizzewgin li jhobbu lil xulxin sal-mewt fit-tajjeb u l-hazin, tispicca. Ghalhekk Iz-zwieg huwa kuntratt indissolubli u sal-mewt.

joe falzon

Mar 28th 2011, 15:53

Hadd m'huwa jghid li ma jezistux kazijiet genwini fejn persuna tbati l-konsegwenzi tal-azzjonijiet hziena ta' persuna ohra. Il-Knisja m'hijiex tichad din it-tbatija (anzi tirrikonoxxiha). Id-dilemma tqum kif din it-tip ta' problema tkun tista' tigi rizolta minghajr konsegwenzi gravi ghas-socjeta' in generali. Is-separazzjoni hija wahda mit-toroq sabiex tittaffa xi ftit din it-tbatija; ma jfissirx li tkun nehhietha. Hemm principju moral li jghid li bejn zewg affarijiet hziena taghzel l-inqas wahda hazina. Huwa hazin li persuna tbati? Iva ... Huwa hazin. Izda huwa tajjeb li biex tnehhi t-tbatija ta' persuna wahda jew ftit (minoranza) tikkawza ferita akbar ta' tbatija lis-socjeta' in generali (tolqot il-gid komuni)? Le ... M'huwiex tajjeb. Mela f'dan il-kaz jirbah il-gid komuni. Ha naghti ezempju iehor forsi aktar attwali. Dan l-argument qam meta kien hemm id-diskussjoni dwar il-kontracettivi fejn hafna hasbu li l-knisja kienet iccaqilqet mill-pozizzjoni taghha. Huma hziena il-kontracettivi jekk jimblokkaw il-process ghall-hajja? Iva .. huma hziena. Izda jekk ghandek persuna li ghandu l-HIV u hu promeskju fl-imgieba tieghu u jista' jaghmel hsara lis-socjeta', jibqa hazin li jaghmel uzu mill-kontracettiv biex jevita tixrid ta' mard? F'dak il-kaz le ghax hemm fin-nofs il-gid komuni tas-socjeta'. M'iniex qed nghid li l-kontacettivi m'humiex hziena izda c-cirkostanzi jidditerminaw liema tkun l-akbar htija.

joe falzon

Mar 28th 2011, 15:13

@J. Brincat
Il-Knisja ghandha d-dritt u d-dmir li tghallem u tfisser il-Kelma t'Alla hekk kif irrivelata fl-iskrittura Mqaddsa lill dawk kollha li huma ta' rieda tajba li lesti biex jisimghu. B'daqshekk, m'hijiex tindahal bhalma insinwajt int bil-kumment tieghek. Min verament jixtieqlek il-gid, jghinek tifhem dak li hu ta' gid u dak li jista' jkun ta' deni.

Id-diska tieghek hi daqsxejn differenti minn ta' haddiehor ghaliex dawk li ma jaqblux uzaw kelma aktar ingusta li timplika oppressjoni. F'socjeta' demokratika u civili, mhux kulhadd ghandu dritt jesprimi l-hsibijiet tieghu? Jew forsi tixtieq tisma' biss dak li jdoqq ghal widnejk? Nisperaw ma jkunx hawn min jghid li l-Knisja qed tindahal ukoll meta qed izzomm l-iskejjel taghha biex teduka lin-nies! Jidher li f'dan il-kaz (nittamaw ghallinqas) hadd mhu jghid hekk. Jew nibzghu li dak li qed tghid il-Knisja huwa kredibbli ghaliex mhuwiex mibni fuq x'tahseb hi izda fuq dak li rrivela Alla dwar iz-zwieg?

Int stess qed tghid li jista' jkun li bit-taghlim taghha n-nies qed jitilquha. Mela altru li mhijiex tghallem ghal xi monopolju. Anke lil Gesu' kienu qed jitilquh u meta d-dixxipli qalulu: Mghallem kulhadd qed jitilqek minhabba t-taghlim tieghek.' Gesu wegibhom: 'Tridux titilqu intom ukoll!' Mal-principji Gesu' m'hemmx loghob.

malcolm seychell

Mar 28th 2011, 15:02

so according to mons grech and mons cremona its better to have casual sex rather then have a permanent relationship?????????????????????

j brincat

Mar 28th 2011, 14:37

@M. Vella

Simply because the Church is meddling with our civil rights which are TOTALLY different from her ecclesiastical rights.

But then the Church has not learned from its past mistakes. It is no wonder then that the her faithful are become smaller and smaller as time passes by.

(JB)

joe falzon

Mar 28th 2011, 13:45

@David Caruana
Quote: 'You don't need third parties to get in touch with any god (if you really believe in one). You do not need the church to tell you what you should and should not do.'

I believe that unknowingly, you are right in your comment. Of course ...there is no need of third parties to help you get in touch with god. But please note how you wrote the word 'god' with a small letter which represents a false god. This is what certain people actually do. They resort to adore their own gods which may take different forms such as money, power, hatred, etc. Do you think that the Church is going to help us to adore these 'gods'. Definetely not!

However, Catholics are duty bound to listen to the Church to understand the revelation of God. Please note the capital 'G' for God. There is a great difference between GOD and god. One is the real God - the Almighty ONE master of the universe and the other 'god' is man made god - a false god adorned by those who want to reject the true GOD.

Yes you are right Mr. Caruana.

Audrey Ledgard

Mar 28th 2011, 13:44

no body sees the big picture i guess.....The church should be in favor of divorce to attract more people going to church every sunday and holidays the least.The biggest sin that the church is doing is willingly and with her eyes open saying that they wont accept divorcees living the chotlic life.The church does not understands that no one wakes in the morning and says im fed up married lets get a divorce.there is always a reason for doing so and who passsed from a seperation period knows what a hard time it is to start life again from scratch.Il firda hi kera f kull att anki jekk titlef kelb tkun imdejjeq ahseb u ara.MY belive is that if divorce is introduce there will be more marriages and less cohabitation since young couple are afraid to get married.every one deserve a second chance so why is the church not giving the people a second chance to her people to get married and let the second marriage be catholic.with divorce introduce in this country a partner of marriage will be more carefull as is afraid that the other partner will leave as divorce is introduce.

Don Vella

Mar 28th 2011, 13:07

re point 5: it is not true that divorce weakens the marriage bond, cause such bond could be destroyed due to others reasons, such as lack of communication between partners, lack of attention to each other, lack of cooperation...etc..... Marriage can weaken even if divorce law is not in place....i know what am speaking about cause i know who passed from this experience... Having said that, i would also like to say that church is being discriminatory if not allowing divorcees to take sacraments and this will make people avoid coming to church... God has never judged the samaritan woman, so how can church speak like this.

M Vella**

Mar 28th 2011, 13:01

I cannot stand people who can get annulments for their family, like buying pastizzi......then they don't want other people to divorce
ARROGANCE!!!!

K.Lia

Mar 28th 2011, 12:47

"4) The Church allows priests to leave the priesthood and get married because celibacy is a Church law, not a law of God like the indissolubility of marriage."

Holy orders, like Marriage is a sacrament. In both cases, the person/s involved are bound: as a priest for life or till death does them part. Like all decisions in life it can prove to be the wrong one (whatever the reasons). Priesthood has an opt out clause. Marriage does not. It seems that while all mistakes may be forgiven, choosing the wrong spouse is the only irredeemably unforgivable thing that a person may do.

joe falzon

Mar 28th 2011, 12:28

@M. Vella
Grant me the right to clarify things, Mr. Vella.

The Church is not teaching its views and its regulations. What the Church is doing is communicating the message of God and Christ himself that 'what God joins together in marriage, no man can put asunder'. The Church is just repeating what God himself has already said and what is found in the Sacred Scriptures. No more, no less.

As you rightly said, everyone is free to make and take his decisions but the church is obliged to open the eyes of its faithful about the will of God and the resulting consequencies ... and for Catholics, decisions are to be taken in the light of God's word as revealed through Christ and as interpreted by the Church whom he trusted to convey his message.

C Zammit

Mar 28th 2011, 12:22

“A divorced person (whether they divorced willingly or unwillingly) who is not engaged in a permanent relationship can receive the sacraments liberally,” a spokesman for the Church told The Sunday Times." This is hilarious - so what the church is saying is that a couple in a stable relationship cannot receive communion but people who change their partners as often as they change their underwear can receive communion "liberally". It just keeps getting better!! LOL

David Caruana

Mar 28th 2011, 12:21

The most polite way to protest against this is to self-excommunicate yourself.

You don't need third parties to get in touch with any god (if you really believe in one). You do not need the church to tell you what you should and should not do.

Only sheep need a shepherd - live free!

M. Vella

Mar 28th 2011, 12:11

I can't understand why all this vitriolic criticism against the Church.

The Church is, if you like to describe it in such a way, a 'Club' which has its rules and regulations like any other Club.

If you do not like the rules and regulations imposed then leave the Club, no one is forcing you to stay in the Club.

axuereb

Mar 28th 2011, 12:10

If battered wives are granted the right to remarry, so too will their abusive husbands...so the first wife should just lump it in order to save any future wives from getting battered!!!!!!

joe falzon

Mar 28th 2011, 12:04

@R. E. Saliba
'Bl-istess kejl li intom tkejlu, jigi mkejjel lilkhom. ' jghid Gesu'.
Kulhadd jara min-nuccali tieghu habib. Jekk il-lenti hija mcajpra, facli tibda tghid li kollox imcajpar. Hadd ma jista' jiggudika lil hadd ghaliex hadd ma jaf x'hemm f'qalb il-bniedem. Mhux dak li tahseb fuq haddiehor li jghodd, lanqas dak li tfassal fuq haddiehor izda dak li jkun fir-realta'. Hemm quote li tghid:
'We are not one person. We are the person others' think we are. We are the person that we think we are and we are the person that we REALLY are .

Kull bniedem jidneb u jonqos. Mhux qed nghidlek li d-dnub huwa tajjeb izda hadd ma jista' jiggudika c-cirkostanzi tan-nies. Hadd m'ghandu jaqta' qalb hadd ghax jarah iqerr darba fil-gimgha u jitqarben. Hadd ma jista' jikkundanna c-cirkostanzi ta' hadd. Ma ninsewx li meta nippontaw subgha lejn haddiehor, hemm erba' ohra jippontaw lejna.

N Abela

Mar 28th 2011, 11:58

the 4th argument cracks me up every time i read it! LOL..ha ha

Martina Briffa

Mar 28th 2011, 11:52

What the Curia is effectively saying is that divorcees are no different from separated couples in its eyes and the same conditions apply in both cases (you're fine as long as you don't form a new relationship). The Church has every right to impose what it wants on its willing followers, and I was pleasantly surprised to see that it is limiting itself to just that.

Now the next logical step is that Catholics stop their blind crusade against divorce, which is just a civil matter, and allow everyone the right to live according to their own beliefs and conscience.

To each his own. Thank you very much.

j brincat

Mar 28th 2011, 10:29

Isn’t Malta supposed to be a secular state? Isn’t this enshrined in the Constitution of 1974 when parliament was nearly unanimous on this issue? So why does the church keep insisting in meddling in the civil rights of the Maltese people?

@Joe Zammit

According to the same constitution if now UNLAWFUL to say that anyone who votes in favour of divorce is committing a mortal sin. Not even the church is saying so, although it 'hints' at it. But they are careful not to say breaking the law!

Adrian Bajada

Mar 28th 2011, 09:19

Ha ha . Another crusade has started by the church in aid of the Nationalist [party policy.
I'm not bothered by these tactics since i am not fooled or afraid of Emotional Blackmail.
Msieken min hu. You are these entities target.
Shame on you. Manipulation its called if i'm not mistaken.

joe micallef

Mar 28th 2011, 08:22

So all the divorced people have to stay single or else they are going to hell if they choose to have a family with someone else I don't think any body who get married want to be divorced but some time it happen or if a woman she divorce her husband because he treat her and the children very badly or vice versa for a man and find a man who respect her and her children if she start living with him if he is divorced both of them they are going to hell and even if he is single never married the church want let him get married in church so he is going to hell too because they are not allowed to go for confession and receive Holy Communion .

A. Borg

Mar 28th 2011, 08:11

Funny, almost. By saying this the church has accepted divorce and said no to family life...

Joe Zammit

Mar 28th 2011, 07:56

BORG IN-NADUR: 17 ta' Novembru, 2010:

Uliedi, illejla tajtkom prova ċara. Iva wliedi, għalhekk Ibni Ġesù qed jibgħatni hawn, fuq dil-gżira. Għalhekk għażilt dil-familja kważi ħames snin ilu. Għalhekk ridt lil Angelik u lil Catherine. Iva wliedi, Ibni Ġesù ma riedx jara żwieġ imfarrak. Għalhekk ħames snin ilu bagħatni hawnhekk, nerġa’ ngħidilkom. Ġejt inħabbrilkom minn qabel x’se jseħħ fuq dil-gżira. Kien hawn min fehemni u oħrajn lanqas biss taw widen.

Ftit taż-żmien ieħor se jkollkom għażla f’idejkom intom stess. Oqogħdu attenti x’tagħżlu wliedi. Iġġibux il-gwaj fuqkom.

Fejnhom fil-familji l-imħabba, l-għaqda, il-maħfra, is-sinċerità u t-talb flimkien? Fejnhom? Għalhekk illum kulħadd qed ifarfar minn fuq spallejh mal-ewwel intopp li jinqala’.

Iva wliedi, il-qalb tiegħi u l-qalb ta’ Ibni Ġesù muġugħin minħabba fikom. Jiena muġugħa għax jiena omm li nħoss għalikom.

Akkost ta’ kollox uliedi, jiġri x’jiġri, ibqgħu għidu: “LE GHAD-DIVORZJU, LE GHAD-DIVORZJU!"

U għidu r-rużarju u ġiegħlu lil ħaddieħor jgħid ir-rużarju.

Grazzi talli smajtu s-sejħa tiegħi.

Christopher Troisi

Mar 27th 2011, 22:43

Il knisja uriet injoranza kbira bdawn il punti, izda li tghid li l-knisja ghanda taghlaq halqa ghax mghandiex xtaqsam hi injoranza kbira xorta wahda. Il-knisja qed tghid dak li jigri jekk jidhol id divorzju biex kull min irid jibqa fil knisja, jitqarben u kollox, kull min jemmen fdak li tghid ikun jaf kif tahsiba l-knisja. ghanda kull dritt tghid kif tahsiba l-knisja anka jekk nofs l-affarijiet li tghid huma blenti fundamentalistica u bmohh maghluq, fejn issemmi dak li jrid alla minghajr wisq hsieb ghal dak li tghid. Listess jaghmlu hafna nies meta jifthu halqhom u r-ragunijiet tagghom ghad divorzju huma mahrugin min mohh maghluq u minghajr ebda hsieb. bir ragunament ta hafna nies ghandna nillegalizzaw kull droga, indahhlu labbort u nhallu lil kulhadd jaghmel li jrid u li jghogbu sakemm ma jweggax bmod fiziku (li nwegghu emozjonalment qatt ma qisnih wisq) lil haddiehor. Knisja titkellem bmod injorant tirrifletti l-maggoranza tas socjeta li anka minghajr knisja titkellem minghajr ma tahseb wisq flistampa totali.

Yolanda Guerra

Mar 27th 2011, 22:09

I'm not just in favour of divorce. But also to drive a wedge between Church and State !
RESIST OR SERVE!

edward bartolo

Mar 27th 2011, 22:03

Catholics are not second class citizens. They have their opinions too, and in a democracy, the can vote according to their conscience.

The idea that only atheists can express their opinion in this referendum, is laughable to say the least.

May I remind everyone, that in a democracy, BOTH those who agree and those who disagree have the right to vote.

joe falzon

Mar 27th 2011, 21:53

@S. Calleja
Quote: 'The religion Catholics practice today is quite unrelated to the religion founded by St Paul in the early years of Christendom.'
....but the word of Jesus the Son of God remains the same: LOVE YOUR ENEMY and THOSE WHO TRY TO PERSECUTE YOU.'

True Christians build on God's words irrispective of what others do or say. Why? Because what is good for humanity remains good and what is bad remains bad for everyone. Jesus is the WAY, TRUTH and LIFE.

Bongu. Have a nice day.

jane camilleri haber

Mar 27th 2011, 21:32

2. worse in the most irresponsible of ways. sex outside marriage is irresponsible and amoral because it is giving oneself outside the infrastructure of responsibility and obligations and turns sex into a commodity and not a tool of security and consolation between two lifelong committed individuals pledging their life to each other forever. from the comments it is clear that many people have a hotchpotch of the church, its motivation, its rules as distinct from God's commandments, its idea and beliefs about sex and its place in society some even thinking of the church as if it was some kind of political party, others venturing on to tell us it was founded by emperor constantine!. others have this idea that God is love therefore we can do what we want and its Ok, as if God did not send His Son to reveal His heart to us, what He wants and what He hates. the fact is that although many want divorce they would like to see God wanting it too and are not ready to say clearly that even if God hates it we want it because it serves us comfortably.. or so they think.see dr. schembri adami

jane camilleri haber

Mar 27th 2011, 21:20

1. the church writes to those who would listen, those who don't want to listen are not bound to do so in any way. 2. what the curia said about divorcees who can still participate in Holy communion unless he/she are not in a stable relationship does not mean that divorcees who have a habit of one night stands are eligible while those in a stable relationship are not. what is means is that divorcees (who could have been dragged to the courts and been given a divorce without them wanting it or otherwise)are not exempt from holy communion simply because they have gone through the divorce proceedings, but if they, after having dissolved their marriage open themselves to a new relationship in simulation of another marriage. in another word they start living with a second partner as if a spouse with all that that entails, and this has to be judged against the teaching of the church that marriage is indissoluble. so in the eyes of the church a divorcee having relationships outside marriage is adultery which therefore calls for one's reservation from Holy Communion. divorcees who have one night stands are having sex outside marriage and even

joe falzon

Mar 27th 2011, 21:01

Sabiex wiehed ikun hati ta' dnub, jezistu zewg elementi fundamentali:
1. wiehed ikun irid jaghmlu ('Deliberate decision')
2. wiehed irid ikun jaf li qed jaghmlu ('conscious about it;)
Hemm principju morali li jghid li 'wiehed huwa hati ta' hazen daqskemm ikun fehem hazen' .

Naturalment, fid-diskussjoni qieghed johrog car, kemm hafna huma konfuzi dwar xi tfisser il-kuxjenza. Il-kuxjenza mhijiex semplicement dak li nhossu. Il-qawl jghid 'Kull min jimxi fuq il-hass, jizloq.

Lanqas m'hija kif nirrangunaw u nifhmuha ahna. Kultant jista' jigri li r-ragunar ta' mohhna ma jkunx kompatibbli mat-twemmin taghna. Ma ninsewx li mitt bniedem, mitt fehma.

Ghan-nisrani, il-Kuxjenza trid tkun iffurmata skond it-taghlim ta' Gesu' fid-dawl tal-Kelma t'Alla kif murija lilna fl-iskrittura u spjegat mill-Knisja tieghu. Ghaldaqstant inkunu qed inqarrqu bina nfusna jekk nghidu 'hekk tghidli l-kuxjenza tieghi bla ma niehdu konsiderazzjoni ta' dak li Alla jkun qed jghidilna'. Ghalhek huwa ragunar falz dak li xi whud jghidu li huma nsara u fl-istess nifs ighidu li huma favur id-divorzju. Ghaliex id-divorzju Alla ma jridux u dan qalulna Gesu' stess ukoll.

Ghalhekk huwa obbligu li n-nisrani jinforma ruhu tajjeb halli jiehu decizjonijiet tajba fil-kuxjenza tieghu. Pero' dejjem jibqa' l-fatt li hadd ma' jista' jiggudika jew jikkundanna lil hadd.

Joseph N. Attard

Mar 27th 2011, 20:22

History repeats itself. The great harm done to the church by Archbishop Gonzi in the 60's is being repeated by the Bishop of Gozo. I have a great feeling that it is he, rather than the milder Archbishop, who is forcing the dogmatic, nay, fundamentalistic, attitude being taken by the Church in Malta. The results are predictable, indeed, already visible. The Gozo Bishop has just been shown on TVM, airing his views. The congregation consisted of a few dozen elderly people.

M. Cachia

Mar 27th 2011, 18:02

Il-Arcidjocesi ta' Malta jmessa titkellem fuq il-mijiet ta' postijiet tal-kaxxi tal-loghob li qedin jinfirxu ma' Malta kollha b'rata allarmanti. Dawn huma fattur ewlieni li vera qedin jaghmlu l-Malta tixbah LasVegas u mela d-Divorzju! Imma forsi ma tistax ghax anke fuq iz-zuntieri tal-knejjes isiru l-lotteriji. Barra mil-fatt li l-vizzju tal-loghob qed ikisser hafna familji!

Anthony Roberts

Mar 27th 2011, 17:53

I have known all along that single divorcees can go to Mass and receive Holy Communion and go to Confession. Its only now that the Church in Malta is revealing this. If a divorcee wants to remarry then the decision lies with that person alone. Cohabitation has been going on long before divorce was ever introduced. Illigitimate children have been born through out the ages, divorce had nothing to with that. Divorce has nothing to do with the breakdown of marriage. It is the breakdown of marriages that leads to divorce. Any true Catholic who gets married does with absolutely no intention of getting a divorce but no one can say how that marriage is going to turn out - no one can foretelll the future.

Divorce is a solution that leads to peace because the married partners are no longer living together or tied to one another and this means that where there are children involved the children are no longer witnessing the fighting or the ugliness that broken marriages end up in. They are freed from the tormoil of an unhappy situation. Marie Roberts

David Caruana

Mar 27th 2011, 17:53

"11) The Church is against abortion, CONDOMS, sex before marriage and divorce because these are all NEGATIVE ACTIONS. However, it is in favour of positive actions."

Does the Church consider HIV, Syphilis, Gonorrhea, Herpes, unplanned pregnancies as positive actions?

G Caruana

Mar 27th 2011, 17:46

Can a priest, with a vow of chastity, who then leaves the priesthood and gets married in the church receive the sacraments?

Joe Zammit

Mar 27th 2011, 17:33

Divorce is the dissolution of a validly contracted marriage by a human person. It is always a grave sin. Christ himself has pointed this out to us: “What God has joined together let no man put asunder” (Mk 10.9). The Catholic Church in her Catechism speaks clearly about the evil of divorce and says that “it is a grave offence against the natural law” (Par.2384). So Christ and his Church put our minds at rest about the intrinsic immorality of divorce.

This leads to the question of voting for divorce. Morally speaking, voting in itself is an indifferent act. It becomes good or evil according to the object of voting. Voting for something good is morally good, voting for something evil is morally evil. Besides, abstaining from voting against an evil when an evil is at stake is equally evil.

In our case we have no divorce legislation. So, can one vote for divorce without sinning seriously against God? The answer is definitely “no”, because if divorce is intrinsically evil, voting for evil is also intrinsically evil. Abstaining wilfully from voting against divorce is also evil. It is a grave sin of omission.

Mike F Abbot

Mar 27th 2011, 17:28

wow... this list looks like it's written by school children.

The more the church writes and speaks on this subject the more people are realising how ridiculous and manipulative they are.

point 1 on it's own is pure spite. they don't say , 'if battered wives are granted divorce they can start a new life' - that would be cup half full wouldn't it - can't say anything positive can they? Despite all the crowing about positive actions in point 11.

no, in the churches eyes, they must remain married, remain battered and according to point 9 - they have to put up with it for the good of the rest of us. They forget there is a legal frameworks to deal with domestic violence - but it only works if you encourage people to speak up about it!!

Point 2.. haha, it's not a human right so you can't have it.. so there. Point 10, if in doubt, just threaten.

pathetic, out of touch and just a touch evil. I say evil in that most points strike me a very unchristian. that IS the definition of evil isn't it?

k j Vella

Mar 27th 2011, 17:18

I have two comments to make: 1. The sacrament if priesthood was instituted by Christ and nit man according to Cathecism and 2. If I don't vote is because I do not have a right to interfere in the business of those who want to divorce or those who do not want to. It is a shame the church is stooping to extortionist tactics. After all infallibility was instituted by pope pour because he did not want the papal states to form part of Italy back in1870. So it is pure fiction

Gerard Cassar

Mar 27th 2011, 17:06

The question everybody is asking and nobody replied is:
Do those that vote yes for divorce transgress any comandment. In simple words :Is it a mortal sin?
The Church seems to admit divorce since it does not sanction the non guilty person. In fact it allows this person to partake of all Catholic sacraments if it remains single though divorced.
This question has not been answered.
By non guilty it is meant the person who has no fault to have recourse to divorce such as a maltreated wife/husband who themselves apply for divorce. but do not have any relationship with a third person after divorce. This is admitting divorce.

joe falzon

Mar 27th 2011, 16:08

@Anna Borg
Meta lil Gesu' hadulu quddiemu lil mara adultera, Gesu' ma kkundanahiex. Anzi lin-nies qalilhom: 'Min m'ghandux dnub jitfaghla l-ewwel gebla.' Meta kulhadd telaq minn quddiemu, Gesu' dar lejn il-mara u qalilha: 'Hadt ma kkundannak?' izda Gesu ma waqfx hemm izda kompla jghidilha: 'Lanqas jien ma nikkundannak izda mur u TIDNIBX IZJED'

Mela filwaqt li Gesu' wera u kixef l-ipokresija ta' dawk li jiggudikaw u jikkundannaw lil haddiehor, wera bic-car il-mahfra tieghu. Mhux biss. Ta ukoll il-medicina ghall-fejqan. 'Mur u tidnibx izjed!' Mela daqskemm hija importanti l-mahfra, hija mportanti l-prova taghna li naghmlu r-rieda t'Alla f'hajjitna ... Ghaliex fl-ahhar mill-ahhar x'ikun jiswa jekk nibqghu nghidu li ahna nsara u li nhobbu lil Alla jekk imbaghad ma naghmlux ir-rieda tieghu? Mhux ahna stess inkunu qatt nikkundannaw lilna nfiusna!.

Alla huwa mhabba izda huwa gust ukoll u huwa gust ghaliex huwa imhabba. Min iwettaq gustizzja jwettaqha ghaliex ihobb u jirrispetta. Immagina li kieku ma jkolniex qorti biex taghmel gustizzja ma' dawk li jkunu weggghu lis-socjeta'. Li kieku rebus ikun hawn. Mela l-imhabba u l-gustizzja jmorru flimkien. Jiena nkun gust fl-ghemil tieghi ghax inhobb. Mela meta nghidu li Alla Hu mhabba qedin nghidu ukoll li Alla Huwa gust.

Andrew Paris

Mar 27th 2011, 16:07

The Church keeps changing there rules and still disregards other people as sinners for there ways of life. To me the Church has no creditability until it excepts all as God does in my heart.

joe falzon

Mar 27th 2011, 15:48

@Anna Borg
I perfectly agree with you that GOD is LOVE and that God loves everyone unconditionally irrispective of his beliefs, condition, religion, etc. God permits everyone to exercise his freedom and this is for the simple reason that he wants US to decide on our fate and decisions. He respects our conscience and our decisions.

However, that is only one side of the coin. There is also the other side of it and this is that God is just (GUST) in his decisions. This is the reason why he gave commandments to guide and enlighten us about what is good and what is bad. This means that whilst God loves everyone and invites everyone for salvation but it solely depends on US to decide whether we accept his love, commandments and teachigs or not.

Whilst no one is here to judge or condemn, however the inner voice that we refer to it as conscience tells us whether what we do is right or wrong. That is the reason why, as Catholics, we are obliged to inform and form our conscience RIGHTLY according to the teachings of Christ without being selective.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 27th 2011, 15:35

As has been pointed out in several places among these comments, there are no statistics to support the veracity of several of these twelve points. People are being told what to do, and people will be voting in the referendum, without good information. In principle, without good information provided by the Statistical Office, one should vote for the status-quo.

philip abela

Mar 27th 2011, 15:27

@Maria Aquilina
The things that you have mentioned such as coitus interruptus, etc. were all condemned by the Church. It is not the Church that did not mention them but YOU who didn't listen. Sorry, do not blame the Church for having had selectively decided what to listen or not.

However, I do not blame you. Certain people really need a lot of work to help them to understand. But unfortunately, when the Church tries to explain and repeat, there will be the same people who claim that the Church is oppressing the people by its teachings. Please, decide what you really want because it seems that this is the crux of the marriage breakdown problem that certain people don't understand each other and don't know what they really want in life.

joe falzon

Mar 27th 2011, 15:08

@M. Vella
Your sweeping statement is dangerous for the entire society'. Your beliefs according to your statement is: 'All people have the right to live their lives how they want.'

Are you really being serious in your statement? Do you mean that you disregard the common good society's interest to safeguard your 'right' to live your life how you want? Are you advocating that those who deliberately decide to hurt themselves have their right to live how they want? Don't you realize that there are so many people out there claiming minority rights that could very easily jeopardise the society's civil and human order?

Therefore let me correct your highly irresponsible statement: People have the right to live how they want PROVIDED that their words and deeds are not in some way or another harmful to them, others and to the creation itself. Only irresponsible persons decide to live their lifes how they want irrispective of others! This is the reason why civil countries have laws; not to oppress the freedom of society (as some may interpret it due to their egoism) but to protect it.

Ramon Casha

Mar 27th 2011, 15:06

1.Yes, he can. Of course he can already move in with her anyway. If he's divorced, the new woman might want to know why - what went wrong with the first marriage.

2.It is a right, even if it's not one of the fundamental human rights.

3.Anybody who votes away someone else's rights is imposing values.

4.You and your priests are an internal matter, but it does hint at double standards.

5.Divorce does not weaken the marriage bond. As it stands right now, couples can get annulments or separate, both of which end the marriage in practice if not on paper.

6.If you vote against divorce, you care about certificates more than about people.

7.Same in all countries without divorce.

8.When almost every other country made this step and did not regret it, the likelihood is that we're the ones who are wrong.

9.Divorce decreases marital breakdown.

10.Maybe, but they can still vote in favour.

11.People know that condoms are not bad. Most agree that sex before marriage is good, and so is divorce.

12.Actually they decrease.

victor pulis

Mar 27th 2011, 14:41

Dawn Cummings(1 hour, 24 minutes ago)
Deuteronomy 24:1–4 ???? Can someone explain that to me please?

And what about Deuteronomy 21: 15-17?

Jane camilleri haber

Mar 27th 2011, 14:27

@ paul Barret 7) as to poverty wait and see!two families having one pay to support them!! or do we intend to scrap the maintenance to make it even more liberal!10) the church does not expel anyone from its midst. this is no political party but though everyone is most welcome, it has to keep on teaching the truth which not everyone upholds or wishes to embrace.@roderick spiteri the points aim at guiding the followers to uphold church teachings and in no way do they paint the maltese society @ C saliba there is a difference between the church law of celibacy and the sacrament of holy orders@sabrina borda st paul warns christians to evaluate their lives before approaching the Body and Blood of the lord since he says if one does not differentiate between Him and food he will not go unpunished.

M. Cachia

Mar 27th 2011, 14:25

One point:
If Celibacy is a Religious Law, using the same yard stick, Divorce is a Civil Right and the Church has no right nor duty to interfere! The Church and the State are completely different entities altogether. They should be treated as such and until such time that the powers of be realize this, we will continue to make a mockery of this Civil EU State!

Iz-zmien ta' l-Inkwizizzjoni spicca u miet. Kieku nergu naghtu c-cans, anke dan jerga jidhol!

m. borg (slm)

Mar 27th 2011, 14:19

Point No.2, so the Curia finds it convenient to quote the non-ecclesiastical laws when it pleases her.
Point No.1 very christian of the Curia
Point No. 11 why doesn't the curia condem the government for collecting taxes from condoms, pills etc
Point No-12 how about the curia pulling the ears of a certain frocked profs who prefers cohabitaion to divorce.
Please do not be a bunch of white washed tombs do not equate abortion and divorce in the same sum.
By the way why were thses points issued by the curia and not the bishop himself?

David Gauci

Mar 27th 2011, 14:14

I believe the Church could come up with better points against a divorce legislation. Most of these 12 points are utter nonsense.

Jane camilleri haber

Mar 27th 2011, 14:06

@J Brincat. what does the explanation of the church to its followers about church principles have got to do with the sixties!!@ C Bosch why do you expext homosexual individuals to be refused communion!@ ramon sammut. they could have equally been issued from rome. no more no less. this is universal church principles not local propaganda@J vella. why do you ridicule principles held highly by many in this society ? can't we discuss without turning cynical@paul Barret there is no such right as divorce it is only people who has given it that status. civil rights are based on natural rights. people have a right to love not to break up one's family and cause havoc to one's offspring!3) studies show divorce reduces people's hope to aspire to the ideal of marriage and start opting against it thus increasing cohabitaiton.4) the indissolubility of marriage is not a religious law but a natural ideal stemming from the desire of people in love to give themselves wholly to each other thus needing an infrastructure worthy of such sublime love. 6) what if the issue was education?what infrastructure would they have to support their love when their time comes round?

Nathalie Zammit Alamango

Mar 27th 2011, 14:03

Part 3

I think anyone who was undecided and read the above points will be willing to vote YES because not even 1 of them is realistic.

9) Is definitely insulting - how can anyone compare a piece of land with the suffering of a human being ??? How can the church come up with such a comparison ??

I hope we wont re live the 1960's - where more damage than good will be done .

This all boils down to 1 thing - Choice . I choose to leave everyone at liberty to make their own choices like everything else in life.

I am in favour of a Divorce legislation- it is a right that should be available to those who want it but will never be imposed on anyway one.

Divorce is pro marriage - so let us help even the slightest minority to get a second chance !

Everyone deserves to be happy.

Nathalie Zammit Alamango

Mar 27th 2011, 14:02

Part 2

So we re OK with this happening now and simply turn a blind eye to what ever is going on. This shows the hypocrites & egoism in our country or are we "Im alright f*** jugak" ??

Im sorry I do not think that this is what our Religion ever thought us . I do believe in God - and if I recall his teachings well He also thought us to help & love others which are the fundamental beliefs our Religion.

He who is innocent casts the first stone .

Another thing - related to 4) I never heard this explanation before. To my knowledge, both marriage and priesthood are sacraments.

The difference is that they found a loop hole for priests through this so called - Church law . However, I would like the Church to make it clearer because I was always thought that there is only 1 law - Gods law in our Religion.

It seems that we have been mislead.

J G.

Mar 27th 2011, 14:02

“A divorced person (whether they divorced willingly or unwillingly) who is not engaged in a permanent relationship can receive the sacraments liberally,” a spokesman for the Church told The Sunday Times.

What of those who are involved in temporary relationships?

Christopher Xuereb

Mar 27th 2011, 14:02

Catholic divorcees can still receive Holy Communion and go to confession as long as they are “not engaged in a permanent relationship”, the Curia has clarified.

Does this mean that Catholic divorcees engaging in casual sex are free to receive Holy Communion and go to confession? Would a celibate Catholic divorcee cohabiting with another person fall foul of the prohibition? Is the prohibition to be enforced so that a Catholic divorcee suspected of living 'in sin' with another person will be denied Holy Communion or confession. If so, who will have the authority to withhold the sacraments and on the basis of what proof?

I wonder whether any one of our Catholic luminaries will be good enough to enlighten us

Nathalie Zammit Alamango

Mar 27th 2011, 14:01

Part 1

I think everyone agrees that a healthy marriage would be the idea thing. However, we need to be realistic and face the reality that regardless what the law is or what the church says - marriage is still breaking down, separated partners are still seeking the company of others, eventually building another relationship, children are still born out of wedlock, and a lot of people are still falling below the poverty line.

The difference is that these people who are aspiring for a 2nd chance are doing so with out being protected by the law.

At this point in time, after 29 years of marriage, with all the ups and downs that marriage brings with it, I do NOT need a divorce.

But who am I to deny this right ?

I have loads of friends who went through hell in their marriage but still plucked up the courage to get a separation and tried to re-bulid their life - many were successful and now can boast of living a good life with a new partner - and yes even the kids realize they are better off.

Victor Laiviera

Mar 27th 2011, 13:57

Point 1 says: "If battered wives are granted the right to remarry, so too will their abusive husbands."

This means that the Church is looking at marriage as a kind of prison, wher the abuser is locked up to prevent him from abusing again.

But, like no other prison, in this case the victim is also locked up in the same cell as the abuser.

No 11 is the usual trick - trying to link divorce to abortion. One might expect this from a politician, but from the church, it is a shocking example of vile deceit - from the people who think they have a mission to teach us morals

Patrik Larsson

Mar 27th 2011, 13:50

Can only comment on the summary, not the actual flyer.

1. So, we penalise the woman for her husbands behaviour. Good thinking.

2. Noone has claimed it is a human right, but this doesn't mean it's not a civil right.

3. Same argument could be used to justify slavery. If it's best for society, but detrimental to a few, then it's still justified.

4. God has nothing to do with civil marriage.

5. If this is true, which we don't know it is, does the fact that fewer people marry really weaken the bond. Wouldn't the opposite be true.

6. Character assasination.

7. So, in all countries but the Philipines and Malta, more people fell below the poverty line. Who writes this junk?

8. The one point I can agree about.

9. Complete nonsense. There is no statistics to back this up and I challenge anyone to show it.

10. So?

11. Then the church is also against a battered woman leaving her abusive husband as that is also negative.

12. Again, statistics please?

C.Busuttil

Mar 27th 2011, 13:46

OK those who claim to be non catholics should not benefit from Catholic public holidays such as Christmas, St. Paul, Good Friday etc and instead go to work. They should excommunicate themselves since by voting for divorce they are turning their backs to CHRIST.

A vote for divorce is a VOTE AGAINST CHRIS, insejt li bhalissa mhux nsara imma ma l-ewwel ftit inkwiet jigru lejn ir-Redentur l-isla jmorru.

K Cassar

Mar 27th 2011, 13:45

These 12 arguments really feel like they have been squeezed really hard to be called arguments..... They are not arguments.... and after reading them they make me think clearer than before to vote YES!

M Vella

Mar 27th 2011, 13:37

All people have the right to live their lives how they want.
Viva l-Liberta...Iva ghad Divorzju.

john D

Mar 27th 2011, 13:23

I wonder how many times the Maltese Catholic Church is going to continue to contradict itself. This makes no sense... "not engaged in a permanent relationship".... so.. if a person is divorced and is having 'casual' relationships is allowed to have holy communion. Please!!!! Stop treating us like idiots. So a divorced person who has one partner and wants to settle down and remarry and have children is not seen as a family oriented person, but someone who is in multiple relationships and not monogomus is doing right and can receive the communion.

I am divorced , have one partner for years now, my children are happy in a stable family, not the abusive one I was in. We are a family and if the church doesn't want to accept it fine with me. One point though, I am in peace with God , receive holy communion regularly, and live mylife believing that Jesus has never turned his back on us. Why is the Maltese catholic church imposing these nonsense rules on its people? I am feeling that this church is starting to bee too discriminatory and not like the teaching of Jesus himself!!

maria aquilina

Mar 27th 2011, 13:04

So for the Church it is onlty the condom which cannot be used not to allow a pregnancy to start.What about the pill, the IUCD,coitus interruptus?Are they not against the teaching of the Church?By mentioning only the condom the Church is telling us that other methods are allowed.I think that to control the size of the family the couple has to decide according to their conscience.We have been talking about responsible parenthood for ages now.For parents to bring up their offspring well they have to act according to their pockets as well.It is not possible nowadays to have a large family.

Anna Borg

Mar 27th 2011, 13:02

Dear Church, do you really beleive that our dear Lord, who is the perfect love, who wants us to be happy and wants what is best for us, wants us to live a lonely life, especially when it is because of the decisions of others? Do you really believe that His love is so limited? Do you think that we can ever think that we can fool Him? He knows what's in our hearts and minds. And please remember that no one can judge anyone, except Him. Some of the Church's statements seem to go against what they have always tried to teach us about Our Lord.. he is Perfect Love, he loves us unconditionally under any circumstance.

Robert Callus

Mar 27th 2011, 13:00

By imposing dogma on the State and silencing those who really follow the teachings of Christ the church is losing it's people. I'm not saying the church should change its principles as a PR exercise, but imposing religion on the state isn't even mentioned in the Bible:

http://robertcallus.wordpress.com/2010/03/31/the-catholic-church-needs-fr-mark-montebello/

yaz tabone

Mar 27th 2011, 12:56

.. and people wonder why i refuse to have my son baptised!

Joe Zammit

Mar 27th 2011, 12:52

Padre Pio, who had regular contacts with God, the devil, saints and angels, said more that once that "divorce is a passport to hell". He knew what he was saying and no one could belie him.

There are many people who can give witness to what he said. He could narrate even details of dead persons to their relatives, without even knowing those persons. Before he went to sleep, Padre Pio used to greet Buona Notte to his confratelli (other friars). These answered to him: Buon viaggio, because every night he used to go to different persons all over the world to convert them, and sometimes also to heal them physically.

Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it's already guaranteed!

Dawn Cummings

Mar 27th 2011, 12:47

Many catholics never read the bible, some don't even know that taking the contraceptive pill or performing the coitus interruptus is against the teachings of the church (http://www.catholic.com/library/Birth_Control.asp) which is taught during the course of Cana. They prefer to forget each time saying it's been approved by the Pope by now...so far for the effectivity of this course!

They go and confess each Sunday for their sins, naming the number of the broken commandent like playing the Super 5. But just to sin again till next Sunday's confession..."Well that's why there is the weekly confession" I was told.

The solution? They know too well they are not good catholics but just hypocrites more or less, bending the rules as they please or just forgetting them when needed. So they go and vote "NO" in the referendum to compensate for the lack of really living loving and living their religion.

Sadly they read this leaflet and belief everything it says without questioning the sources or ask for the statistics. In the UK kids are born out wedlock because the single mothers are promised a social housing free of charge...not because the UK have the divorce legislation!

Erin Ciantar

Mar 27th 2011, 12:40

As more people get a proper education, more will leave the fold of the church, and the number of followers the church has will continue to dwindle. Religion is a thing of the past, and is becoming redundant in todays world as we learn that there is no need for a mythical creature in the sky to explain things. With leaflets like this the church is helping the cause and alienating people even faster.

Mark Seychell

Mar 27th 2011, 12:33

Oh, and by the way, Condoms being a negative action????? (point 11).

Need I say more????

Mark Seychell

Mar 27th 2011, 12:28

In order to sum up my argument, the Curia media machine seems to be at it again imposing their blinded views to the stupid people out there with threats of poverty (!!!), a better life for their abusive husbands (!!!), the introduction of the death penalty just so we can fit in the norm (!!!), and not caring about their family and children (!!!)

in order to clarify - (!!!) denotes ridiculous argument

Mark Seychell

Mar 27th 2011, 12:24

9) Divorce increases marital breakdown by 20 per cent. For society’s benefit, sometimes individuals must suffer. For example, people might have to give up their land to make space for an airport. All efforts must be made to reduce their suffering, but the land must be taken for common good.

Great, let's have an individual suffering 'till death does them apart'. Land and airports being compared with this???? Catholic propaganda at its best.

10) People who remarry civilly after a divorce cannot receive Holy Communion or go to confession.

The Pope cannot stop people from receiving Communion if they really have faith, let alone the blinded Maltese priest.

Mark Seychell

Mar 27th 2011, 12:21

6) If you do not vote it means you do not care about the family or your children.

This point shows everything that is seriously wrong with the Catholic Church. How dare you accuse people of not caring of their family and their children if they feel in their conscience that they shouldn't vote???? Shame on all of you who came up with this.

7) In all countries with divorce, cohabitation increased, marriage decreased and more people fell below the poverty line.

So the reason for people falling before the poverty line was not getting married with the church? Well, it certainly couldn't have been any economical factors. [/sarcasm]

8) nothing wrong with Malta being an exception in the world. Unlike the US, it does not have death penalty. Should those things change too?

Nothing wrong with being stuck in the middle ages, but nothing right about it either. Why also chose the most extreme of examples like the death penalty? In this case, the US is in the minority by having it. Also, FYI Malta does indeed still have a variation of the death penalty for treason and the murder of the president.

james grech

Mar 27th 2011, 12:19

It is incomprehensible how such an important institution like the church could stoop so low to frighten ppl in subtle ways. There has to be some economic aspect to all this hoolaboo issue of divorce, which the church does not want to loose on. Why all these rules, cause god almighty came gave us 10 and here we're seeing the number of rules and their interpretations increase from week to week. The main concern for the church has definitely to do with other issues apart from marriage and the strengthening of the family and values. Cause one rules says "In all countries with divorce, cohabitation increased, marriage decreased and more people fell below the poverty line." The church seems to be living in a dream, cause cohabitation already is rampant in Malta, and Government is preparing to launch a law regulating cohabitation. Furthermore we are already experiencing a considerable increase in the number of ppl falling below the poverty line, no statistics have linked this with breaking marriages to my knowledge and this is mainly due to the wrong decisions taken by the government especially wrt standard of living issues. The main issue has definitely to be related to MONEY!

Mark Seychell

Mar 27th 2011, 12:16

1) If battered wives are granted the right to remarry, so too will their abusive husbands.

That's absolutely fine, so let the battered wives keep getting battered just so the abusive husbands don't re marry.

2) Although people have a right to marry, there is no such right to divorce, according to a 1986 judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.

Is it possible to back this argument up with the court case number and the name of the case? Who vs. who? Google has only given me results from timesofmalta.

5) Divorce weakens the marriage bond, leading to fewer people getting married.

It's our choice, you gave up yours when you took your vows, which is a right in itself. deal with it.

Robert Agius

Mar 27th 2011, 12:12

Part 2
8) Do you want me make a whole list of things that prehaps shouldn't be. Divorce and Death penalty? are you suggesting any similarities? how sick!!!!!

9) And who decides the common good? The church would like to dictate that itself wouldn't it. Fat chance! Think about this for a second though....maybe religion should be kept personal and not political - FOR THE COMMON GOOD.

10) Oh my good golly gosh! No holy wafers.

11) Yes, HIV - positive.

12) And?

Robert Agius

Mar 27th 2011, 12:12

Part1

1) If people are stupid enough to fall for the abusive (oh! abusive wives too please) then I guess they should blame themselves for their poor choices. WE however should not punish THEM for their bad choices however.

2) Women had not right to vote in the past according to Law. Does this imply that the law was right or does everything stand still in 1986 (big words coming from people whose main laws come date back a couple of thousand years)?

3) Granted. So do the pro-divorce....can you please inform people not to threaten them with eternal damnation please?

4) So what?

5) So does most of the media in today's world. What do you advise? ban TV, advertising etc.? Or do you really believe that a few sentences in a legislature is more influential?

6) All good. That goes for a YES or NO.

7) Then all good Christians should do their best to help those in poverty....yeah right! I believe a wise man said 'leave everything behind and follow me'....apparently no one did.
Please give us the data however before making absurd claims.

Philip Pace

Mar 27th 2011, 12:03

'Catholic divorcees can still receive Holy Communion and go to confession as long as they are “not engaged in a permanent relationship”, the Curia has clarified.

“The official teaching of the Church states that those who are in a permanent relationship outside the Catholic marriage cannot receive the sacraments in a licit way.

“A divorced person (whether they divorced willingly or unwillingly) who is not engaged in a permanent relationship can receive the sacraments liberally,” a spokesman for the Church told The Sunday Times.

Does this mean that a person can romp from one bed to another, with the risk of producing unplanned and unwanted pregnancies resulting in unwanted babies, be a liabilty to society as society would classify these 'accidental babies' as illegitimate, be burden to the state finances as long as he confesses in order to receive Holy Communion?

Doesn't a permanent relationship more stable than so called 'one night stands'?

Doesn't this statement encourages undecided people to vote yes for divorce?

Am I reading or understanding rightly?

J Brincat

Mar 27th 2011, 11:54

Seems that the Church has learned nothing from the mistakes it did in the 60's which alienated many faithful from its fold.

The sermons go on!

S. Attard

Mar 27th 2011, 11:48

I am sure that people who speak against the 12 points above did not make any effort to try and understand them. The 12 points are wonderful and are backed up by concrete factual data and statistics.

Divorce is the law which supports marriage breakdown. It might help the small minority of people who are abused by their partners, but it will instill a wrong mentality in the large majority of strong marriages and in the marriages which will happen in the future.

Thus, the disadvantages of divorce are far greater than it's advantages.

J.Tonna

Mar 27th 2011, 11:38

Wherever my Religion is concerned, I prefer the advice of our Bishopd than of those down here.

C.Bosch

Mar 27th 2011, 11:36

What about homosexual people receiving the Holy Communion ?

Raymond Sammut

Mar 27th 2011, 11:27

No-one needs to be mean-hearted. It's only the Malta Church. Lucky these 12 pointers didn't come out of the Vatican.

Dr. Geoffrey Schembri Adami Med. Vet

Mar 27th 2011, 11:24

From St.Paul's Letter to the Romans:"To the married,I give charge,NOT I,BUT CHRIST HIMSELF,that if the wife separates from her husband, even for very valid reasons, she must remain single if it is no longer possible for her be reconciled to her husband once again, &that the husband cannot divorce his wife even if he lives separated from her. All of you know about God’s law, that rules over all people as long as they live, even those who reject to live according to His Word &those who do not believe in Him. A married woman is bound by God’s law to her husband as long as he lives. So then, if she gets involved in a relationship outside marriage &gives herself to another man while her husband is alive, she is an adulteress &a great cause of scandal to others, &for this she must answer directly to God Himself".

From the Epistle of St.James Apostle:“The same God who said:‘Do not commit murder’ &'Do not steal’, also said:'Do not commit adultery.’ Even if you do not commit murder or steal, you have become a breaker of God’s law if you commit adultery, just as much as one who murders or steals”.

J. Vella

Mar 27th 2011, 11:22

Sounds like a throwback to Grigori Rasputin's 'sin for repentance' to me.

So basically what (our) Curia is saying is that for divorcees to be able to receive the sacraments, they should seek to avoid having a relationship. They should have as many one-night stands with unprotected sex (as per Art.11) with other divorcees as possible, since having only one partner would constitute a 'permanent relationship'.

Sex with other divorcees would not be a stumbling block to enter the kingdom of Heaven, since according to the same Art.11, sex between divorcees does not constitute 'sex before marriage and [before] divorce' since they have already gone through the notions of both.

Paul Barrett

Mar 27th 2011, 11:22

Part 2


8. It is a matter of opinion on it being wrong that Malta allows legal separation, cohabitation, recognises divorce registered abroad but denies divorce legislation and the subsequent right to a civil marriage.
9. If the availability of divorce increases marital breakdown by 20%, it does not say much for the professed “strong marriage”. Making people suffer, locked in a bad marriage is not of benefit to the common good.
10. Some may consider expulsion from the Church is a reasonable price to pay to have a decent happy and fruitful married life.
11. A positive action is to prevent the spread of STDs as well as admitting that a dead marriage is dead.
12. Malta does not seem to be immune from an increase in cohabitation or the number of children being born out of wedlock. Divorce legislation, if only allowing that the none devout members of the Roman Catholic Church may make use of this legislation if they wish to and then again, only if they wish to do so, obtain a civil marriage can only decrease those living in cohabitation and legitimise any children from the union.

Paul Barrett

Mar 27th 2011, 11:21

Part 1

1. Apart from being sexist (wives beat husbands as well), this is vindictive reasoning.
2. The right to divorce is a civil right being denied to the people by lack of legislation.
3. Catholics who vote for divorce legislation are not imposing their values but understand that a civil marriage is better for society than cohabitation.
4. Agreed celibacy and indissolubility of marriage are religious laws and should not be transposed in civil law on those that do not wish to believe or abide by them.
5. There are many factors that are weakening the marriage bond and marriages are breaking down at an increasing rate irrespective of divorce.
6. If you care about the family and your children you will vote for their freedom to choose for themselves.
7. Blaming divorce for increased cohabitation, decreasing marriages and amount of people dropping below the poverty line is absolute rubbish, it is part of the unfortunate modern trend. The next claim is that it is a cause for global warming!

Vella K

Mar 27th 2011, 11:19

point 11).... so 'Abortion', according to our Church is put on the same level as 'condoms', and 'sex before marriage'...i don't know but I think that at this point .. ... Hell will be a very crowdy place :)....

Point 6)... a 'non-vote' is a vote in itself, which could mean many things... e.g. a person could be personally against divorce, but believes that it should be introduced within the legal framework of a country to help and assist a minority of the population.
As a result, he/she cannot vote in Favour because he/she is against divorce, but at the same time his conscience doesn't allow him to vote Against since he would be depriving a minority of the population of a right, a right to live a better life... as a result a Non-Vote is a Vote in itself... and it absolutely does not mean that one doesn't care about his family....

J Brincat

Mar 27th 2011, 11:10

Seems that the Church has learned nothing from the mistakes it did in the 60's which alienated many faithful from its fold.

The sermons go on!

Sarah Mifsud

Mar 27th 2011, 11:08

So it is morally ok to accept battered women in society but divorce is a huge evil? Are these guys ok? Should anyone even take them seriously?

And what if someone gets abandoned by their partner when they are still in their late 20s or early 30s with no hope of coming back? Should that person lose their right to having a family for the rest of their lives just because some other luckier people have chosen so for them?

s schembri

Mar 27th 2011, 11:07

It is important to highlight the word 'SINGLE'. Those who would seek divorce would be seeking to get married again, otherwise they would seek separation. Once remarried, they will be living in an adulterous state. As a consequence, they will be living in a constant state of sin and cannot receive holy communion, after all they will not be in communion with the God’s teachings.

martin saliba

Mar 27th 2011, 11:03

10) People who remarry civilly after a divorce cannot receive Holy Communion or go to confession.

What happened to your god's teachings regarding the lost lamb ? How can one repent from getting divorced and remarriying if one cannot go to confession ? This shows that as it has allways been that the catholic religion is just a game where the regulations change according to the state of the game at any particular time . Or is this a form of religious blackmail where divorced and remarried persons are being told sin is unforgivable ? Unforgivable by whom , the church or by God ?

victor pulis

Mar 27th 2011, 10:56

) Divorce weakens the marriage bond, leading to fewer people getting married.

The reason for divorce is preciseley to give couples a second chance at marriage.

6) If you do not vote it means you do not care about the family or your children.
That is why it is essential for all those in favour of divorce to vote yes

7) In all countries with divorce, cohabitation increased, marriage decreased and more people fell below the poverty line.
this is happening in Malta right now without divorce. So the problem must lie elsewhere.

8) There is nothing wrong with Malta being an exception in the world. Malta has the most churchgoers. Unlike the US, it does not have the death penalty. Should those things change too?
Going to church doesn't make one a good Christian. How is the death penalty connected with the question of divorce?

9) Divorce increases marital breakdown by 20 per cent. For society’s benefit, sometimes individuals must suffer. For example, people might have to give up their land to make space for an airport. All efforts must be made to reduce their suffering,

Such people have a right to adequate compensation.

A.Magri

Mar 27th 2011, 10:50

“A divorced person (whether they divorced willingly or unwillingly) who is not engaged in a permanent relationship can receive the sacraments liberally,” a spokesman for the Church told The Sunday Times.

I wonder why the Church is so much against persons with failed marriages rebuilding their lives. It's almost like abuse.... no it IS abuse in subtlest form.

victor pulis

Mar 27th 2011, 10:48

1) If battered wives are granted the right to remarry, so too will their abusive husbands.

Anyone dating a divorcee should check the reason he/she was granted a divorce and then decide whether to continue the relationship or break up.

2) Although people have a right to marry, there is no such right to divorce, according to a 1986 judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.

3) Catholics who vote against divorce are not imposing their values. They have a right to vote according to what they think is best for society.
Those who vote no are denying the oportunity to those who wish to divorce hence the NO!

4) The Church allows priests to leave the priesthood and get married because celibacy is a Church law, not a law of God like the indissolubility of marriage.
Then why doesn't the church remove celibacy altogether and let married man become priests or priests to marry and remain active as priests? perhaps we wouldn't have so many cases of paedophilia. It is said that those who put their hand to the plough and look back are not worthy of the kingdom.

Edwin Galea

Mar 27th 2011, 10:48

Point 13) You can avoid all this hassle of conscience and referendums and questions by simply closing your eyes, count to 10 and re adjust your brain into believing that your (20 years, and kids) marriage never existed. Close your eyes again and start counting the years till you get an annullment. Once you get annullment act as if you're preparing for your first marriage and if possible avoid regular contact with your kids cause they might endanger your new frame of mind.

Word of caution: Do not persevere into ignoring a widely recognized fact or event, but only restrict your escapism to your previous marriage, otherwise you'd have a hard time managing simple things like crossing the road or functioning at work.

L. Cutajar

Mar 27th 2011, 10:45

Voting Yes in the referendum is a stab on the back of all children. Let us not be egoistic and look only at what's good for the adult. Let us give children what's theirs, i.e. a mother and a father. Children surely do not want third parties to interfere between their parents by getting married again. If you love and respect your children, vote NO.

Andrew Busuttil

Mar 27th 2011, 10:42

No 1- so battered wives continue to be battered?

Put me off reading the rest.

Anthony Neil Pace

Mar 27th 2011, 10:42

Divorce may not be a positive thing but the benefits out weigh the negative impact, because Divorced couples can make arrangements within the divorce to help each other out. and other things.

I completely disagree with the Curia on this, and it is making me lose faith in the Church. - they are focusing on the negative while calling it's Dictorial acts a good thing.

Church and Government should be kept separate.

Everybody has the right to do what they want to do. The church may have it's rules but must not enforce them like they are a matter of life and death, and there must not be any consequences. - the Peace loving religion is turning into dictatorship thanks to the divorce issue.

With Reference to No1 - That is NOT Fair at all. so the wife should suffer in the eyes of the church?! - No9 Suffering should not be imposed on the residents of an area, let alone a single Wife or Husband.

Rocco Cauchi

Mar 27th 2011, 10:40

No amount of hairsplitting will shatter the scriptural words of the Lord linking one's spritual and temporal life with loyalty to husband or wife. "Have respect for your own life then, and do not break faith with the wife of your youth. For I hate divorce, says the Lord" Malachi 2, 15-16.

mariella caruana

Mar 27th 2011, 10:39

So some children will be brought up by a stepparent with the real parent regalated to visits trying to outdo the stepparent. Very cool for the kids - the backbone of our future generation. Stop this selfishness and concentrate on one family please.

l.theuma

Mar 27th 2011, 10:31

Here I would like to ask: What is the responsability of the partner violating tha marriage bond? Is he/she free as if nothing has happend? If he/she is still considered the real partner in marriage of the the other partner, what are his/her duties towards that partner? Things are being complicated. Justice and rights are to be safeguarded. (sic)

Julian Windsor

Mar 27th 2011, 10:29

I am sure most Maltese are sick and tired of these debates and the dictatorship of the Church. Who are they to say that if you don't vote you don't care about your family or children? Priests and the like never have a family and therefore probably are not capable of real feelings or emotions themselves and cannot presume to tell us how we feel. And same old deranged ideas about who can and who can't receive sacrements. We would all be better off if those who do believe in God communicate direct with their God and not be dictated to to or as they call it 'guided' by the Church.Look at the pain and suffering caused by the Church every day for past two thousand years. I too was brain washed into belief until I grew a brain and science proved to be a viable alternataive. Divorce gave me another chance and I am happier than ever with my current wife.

ialamango

Mar 27th 2011, 10:28

as per point (4) The Church allows priests to leave the priesthood and get married because celibacy is a Church law, not a law of God like the indissolubility of marriage.



What is exactly the differnce betwenn church law and God's law? I always thought that the church's law was written by priests inspired by God's teaching

Am I wrong in this?

Mr.Bart Taylor

Mar 27th 2011, 10:27

Oh goody goody letsall celebrate, the problem with you people you rely too match on religion. Being a good christian is not by just going to church on a sunday and then cheat eveyone else blind after service,...for greed of money or principals,likewise another blogger mentioned below its the family that counts at the end of the day as no one else is going to lend a hand. In my opinion most catholics in your country are a bunch of hypocrites sorry but that my opinion as a foreign British resident, i have never ever in my life heard so much swearing and blaspheming until i came to live here and i am not even a catholic, its ironic realy and i find it rather low class and insulting to their God. May your God go with you.

VV Bartolo

Mar 27th 2011, 10:27

fi kliem iktar semplici l-knisja qed tghidilna; jew tivvotaw kontra d-divorzju jew tigi skumnikati misagramenti!!

u jien nghidlU "Missier ahfrilhom (lil kleru) ghax ma jafux x'inhuma jaghmlu"!!!

G.Caruana

Mar 27th 2011, 10:26

If point 9. is officially said by the Church itself, then this shows that 'Life' - literally boils down to business - no more no less.

S. Calleja

Mar 27th 2011, 10:19

1) Revenge at its best.
2) Divorce is not a universal human right. This is correct. But it is a CIVIL right granted by governments to its citizens.
3) Catholics who vote against divorce ARE imposing their values on the non-Catholics.
4) Whatever.
5) Fewer people are getting married anyway, and it has nothing to do with divorce.
6) Scaring tactic.
7) Correlation does not imply causality. In the Philippines, where there is no divorce, still cohabitation increased, marriage decreased and more people fell below the poverty line. Same is going on in Malta. This is happening everywhere, irrespective of whether there is no divorce or not.
8) The US is one of the few countries with a death penalty. On the other hand, Malta and the Philippines are the only two countries without divorce. You cannot really compare divorce with death penalty in the US. The logic just doesn't follow.
9) "For society’s benefit, sometimes individuals must suffer." This line of reasoning really explains a lot of things about the Church.
10) Fair enough.
11) Like contracting HIV?
12) This is related to (7). Again, correlation is not causality. Lack of divorce does not imply cohabitation will not increase.

Chris Farrugia

Mar 27th 2011, 10:19

Rules of the Club! They have all the right to do it.

That's why I'd rather steer away.

David Wain

Mar 27th 2011, 10:10

Point 4 is pretty convenient, isn't it? What about the promise by the clergy of giving oneself to God for life? If one can renege on that promise, and going by the argument regularly put forward by the Church, the promises made by the clergy when ordained are sure to be "flimsy".

As for the rest, how could anybody under the sun consider these points as providing enlightenment? As for the rounded up statistic of 20%, fact is that the Church is just like any other political institution, mischievously using statistics to "expose" causal links where none exist.

Roderick Spiteri

Mar 27th 2011, 10:09

Min hareg b'dawn il-punti nahseb qed jghix f' fairyland u mhux go Malta!! Din hi kampanja ta' biza u mhux li turi r-realta tal-hajja maltija. It-tnax il-punt imsemmija jezistu diga f'Malta.

Dnub jekk timponi fuq il-hajja ta' haddiehor u mhux jekk taghti cans lil haddiehor jifforma familja mill-gdid!

c.saliba

Mar 27th 2011, 10:02

Point no. 4 ..... so the ordination of priests is no longer a Sacrament now ?

how very convenient for the clergy, they can have it both ways ! Ipokriti !

Yes for divorce for those who need it .

Sabrina Borda

Mar 27th 2011, 09:56

Who would have ever imagined that the religion created in the very name of Jesus Christ would have turned out to be so unseemly selective and shameless as to whom it shares his Blessed Sacrament.

Thank goodness we all learn to know very well that God is greater than any such religion.

J.Aquilina

Mar 27th 2011, 09:53

Quote: "Catholic divorcees can still receive Holy Communion and go to confession as long as they are “not engaged in a permanent relationship”, the Curia has clarified."
So, are one night stands and a little bit on the side permitted?
I know many practicing catholics that condenmed divorce, only until themselves or their loved ones found themselves in a needy situation, then all the rethoric was done away with and cathoicism was sidetracked. A lot of shortsightedness and egoism is being evoked by the NO lobby. Some of the MOST PROMINENT opponents are right, because their loved ones found a way around a broken marriage through a church blessed 'annullment'.
He who is not guilty shall throw the first stone.

anthony bugeja

Mar 27th 2011, 09:52

Do I need to confess my sin if I vote YES for divorce ?

victor rodenas

Mar 27th 2011, 09:49

Divorcees who are in a permanant relationship cannot receive Holy Communion.So divorcees who change their partner periodically can receive Holy Communion because they are classified as single.It makes no sense.

Joe Zammit

Mar 27th 2011, 09:49

Divorce is the dissolution of a validly contracted marriage by a human person. It is always a grave sin. Christ himself has pointed this out to us: “What God has joined together let no man put asunder” (Mk 10.9). The Catholic Church in her Catechism speaks clearly about the evil of divorce and says that “it is a grave offence against the natural law” (Par.2384). So Christ and his Church put our minds at rest about the intrinsic immorality of divorce.

This leads to the question of voting for divorce. Morally speaking, voting in itself is an indifferent act. It becomes good or evil according to the object of voting. Voting for something good is morally good, voting for something evil is morally evil. Besides, abstaining from voting against an evil when an evil is at stake is equally evil.

In our case we have no divorce legislation. So, can one vote for divorce without sinning seriously against God? The answer is definitely “no”, because if divorce is intrinsically evil, voting for evil is also intrinsically evil. Abstaining wilfully from voting against divorce is also evil. It is a grave sin of omission.

Charles J. Buttigieg

Mar 27th 2011, 09:40

This principle equally applies to both parties-the partner who instigated and initiated the legal proceedings as well as to the defending partner. It’s logical therefore for the church to exonerate the defending partner from its condemnation (As long as he\she doesn’t cohabitate or remarry). The strange and illogical part of this notion is to treat the other party the same, ignoring the fact that he\she violated the code of ‘Till death us do part’. Where is the Church’s consistency?

rhuber

Mar 27th 2011, 09:36

No. 6) If you do not vote it means you do not care about the family or your children.

That is what exactly I'm going to do - VOTE YES - cos I love and care about my children!

The rest is all fantasy!