Gozo Bishop’s comments on Eucharist draw mixed reaction

Mr Joe Xuereb

May 20th 2011, 12:36

Quoting the Mellieħa sage(or is it 'ħabaq'?: 'It is thinly disguised as a panacea for some distressful situations only. In reality, it is a passport for all libertine marriage wrecker/s to impose their desired will on children, an unwilling spouse, and all society without the necessity to prove any just cause' unquote.
A quote within the quote: 'for some distressful situations' - toning down the gravity of the situation, mitigating it to show up the absurdity of divorce, are we now?! Nice try but too transparent for this old cock, doc.
And yet another quote within the quote: '.....an unwilling partner'. Oh yes! Well, if said unwilling partner washed away the brainwashing that is acceptance of degradation as the norm for the sake of a probably non-existent carrot - yes, s/he would be more than willing to stop clinging to an abusive partner. Addiction is notoriously difficult to shake off we all know, even those who dabble on the fringes of the phenomenon and are daft enough to declare such on a public forum. Why, s/he would be prime instigator for kicking out her/his abuser, never mind being terrified of letting him/her go. Beatification anyone?! Convoluted and incoherent?! Not to me it ain't! But then I washed away the brain-washing yonks ago. And my vision from the Xagħri down to the Għadira Corniche is clear and unobstructed by the endemic prickly plants and Grazia Deledda's 'Canne al Vento'.

Mr Joe Xuereb

May 20th 2011, 12:32

Quoting the Melliaħa sage: 'It is thinly disguised as a panacea for some distressful situations only. In reality, it is a passport for all libertine marriage wrecker/s to impose their desired will on children, an unwilling spouse, and all society without the necessity to prove any just cause' unquote.
A quote within the quote: 'for some distressful situations' - toning down the gravity of the situation, mitigating it to show up the absurdity of divorce, are we now?! Nice try but too transparent for this old cock, doc.
And yet another quote within the quote: '.....an unwilling partner'. Oh yes! Well, if said unwilling partner washed away the brainwashing that is acceptance of degradation as the norm for the sake of a probably non-existent carrot - yes, s/he would be more than willing to stop clinging to an abusive partner. Addiction is notoriously difficult to shake off we all know, even those who dabble on the fringes of the phenomenon and are daft enough to declare such on a public forum. Why, s/he would be prime instigator for kicking out her/his abuser, never mind being terrified of letting him/her go. Beatification anyone?! Convoluted and incoherent?! Not to me it ain't! But then I washed away the brain-washing yonks ago. And my vision from the Xagħri down to the Għadira Corniche is clear and unobstructed by the endemic prickly plants and Grazia Deledda's 'Canne al Vento'.

Mr M Vella***

May 20th 2011, 08:45

The Church in Malta does not want to learn from its past mistakes of the 60's when many left her fold,do as i say or you will burn in hell for eternity,if there is a hell you lot will burn for ever and ever for the hurt and damage you have caused to innocent children and got away with it.
Do not think all the people are imbeciles, they have a brain to think with and a pity for the ones who are under the manipulation of the Maltese Catholic Church.
Kollox jidher li hu permess f'isem il-krucjata religjuza
No to divorce means Yes to social chaos.

Alfred Falzon

May 20th 2011, 08:24

The Bishop of Gozo Mgr Mario Grech is not wont to beat about the bush or have recourse to casuistics to push his message through!
He is one who does not hesitate to call a spade a spade whenever the occasion arises, not fearing to be highly critical of seeping corruption and certain politicians who abuse of their power to the detriment of the people!
As a Church pastor he feels he should guide his flock on the road to salvation.
The question whether practising Catholics should be allowed to receive Holy Communion or not may have raised many an eyebrow, and deserves an in-depth assessment of what the consequences could be if taken literally!
It is true that divorce does not only weaken the family structure of our society but leads to further disruption causing untold harm to the innocent children born of a first wedlock who are made to pay dearly for the irresponsible behaviour and malicious whims of one of their parents!
A Christian, or any Maltese citizen for that matter, who still believes that marriage is the cornerstone of society, will reject the divorce bill as proposed in the forthcoming referendum. If the Maltese electorate were to accept a four-year period on trial for a marriage, then let those who are propagating such licenctiousness have their day and enjoy the consequences!
Irrespective of what other countries have done before us, and are now struggling to join the pieces that remain of their society, we Maltese need to learn from their bitter experience and redress what is wrong in our once close-knit society by strenghtening the family and penalising those who attempt to undermine it!
The forthcoming referendum and its aftermath will determine all this, but it will be foolish on the part of the Church to ostracise those who, out of compassion, opt to taste the sugared coating of the pill!
On the other hand, let the shades of the 1960s remain just a reminder of a shameful past when intolerence wrought havoc with those Maltese who stood up to be counted!
And to our esteemed Bishop Mgr Mario Grech we wish him the very best and bid him keep up the good work among all men of good will!

Mr Saliba Francis

May 20th 2011, 06:37

The pro-divorce campaign is clearly based on a deceptive and false propaganda.

Deception 1. The proposed bill is very different from, and superior to, the Nevada style easy, “no question asked” type of divorce that destroys the concept of marriage as a durable and stable union as the foundation stone of civil society. Not true. The proposed is practically the same, except for a longer waiting period, that could be much reduced later.

Deception 2. Divorce is a solution intended as a cure for the tribulations of an irreversibly broken down marriage. Not true. It is thinly disguised as a panacea for some distressful situations only. In reality, it is a passport for all libertine marriage wrecker/s to impose their desired will on children, an unwilling spouse, and all society without the necessity to prove any just cause.

Deception 3. The bill “guarantees” that maintenance responsibilities etc will be honoured. Not true unless unless the taxpayers are trapped into becoming the guarantors.

Deception 4. The Church is opposing divorce for base financial gains. That is not true. The only certain profiteers would be lawyers specializing in this line of business.

Deception 5. The opposition to divorce laws is a return to the deplored situation of the sixties. Not true. The Malta Church hierarchy is strictly restricting itself to its teaching duties in spite of constant harrassment. It is leaning over backwards so as not to be accused unjustly of “imposing mortal sin”. The church hierarchy is being much too prudent in fact, so much so that honest and respected church dignitaries are being maligned and roped in as supporters of the divorce bill even when they strenuously deny that false imputation.

This barrage of deliberate deception should alert the intelligent voters and put them on their guard at the imminent referendum.

Mr Joe Xuereb

May 19th 2011, 23:04

Matthew, of course I'm appreciative of the evolutionist greats but I'm no scientist/biologist. I find it more useful to ask honest questions and seek honest answers, even , and particularly, from within oneself. I believe in the processes of elimination with a dash of straightforward commonsense and theories on plausibilities (which come about over a long period of observation). I've been known to doze off at Richard Dawkins' lectures. And once what seems to many a dangerous step - I am talking of 'thinking outside the box to use a popular metaphor' - is taken, so many things start to fall into place, a kind of continuous journey of discovery. To give an example; the Church is clear about the expcted humility of its adherents. Funny! from my perspective humility now has quite a different meaning to the one played out by the Church. Of course living with the implications of that is not easy but then, nothing worthwhile ever is. Humility now feels like the real McCoy; (I know I don't sound it to many but that's so none of my business) certainly not the pseudo one with a carrot dangling in front of it giving one the incentive to urge on. And who's to say the carrot exists? Which is at the heart of the whole matter.
My opinions Matthew. And thanks for the compliment. There's no law that says one cannot be flippant when being serious. I'm a respecter of laws but a great breaker of the ones that bow to silly conventions. Screw it!

Ms Rita Smith

May 19th 2011, 22:42

Ms Emma Xerri. By the way you are writing you seem to be a very unhappy woman transmitting from inside you a certain rage that only you know why. The church has done and is doing so much good especially in Third world countries You talk of priests' abuse. But they are human like you and me. They sin like you and me but what you forgot to mention is the abuse that happens in our own families. Some are made public and many others are not yet made public. You must have a big grudge against the church. To have peace with yourself maybe you should go to a priest and make a good confession and be at peace with God. Then your rage will be no more and you will be more tollerant and happy.


Rita smith

Mr Joe Xuereb

May 19th 2011, 18:07

Grima, Matthew. I wasn't so much correcting you. I just know it as Chinese Whispers (why Chinese, only god knows).
I get your point about filling any inexplicable void with a god. Very convenient! Very shirking! It works for some but not others.)
I remember catechism, Alla kien minn dejjem (god is from forever for forever, to forever). A bit too metaphysical for a five year-old going six and first holy communion. Learnt by rote of course, parrot fashion. A six-year-old does not ask awkward questions unless there's something in the genes and they turn out to be a gaddafi, a pole or a president. I remember a wonderful metaphor for eternal damnation; a bird comes once a year to peck at a first mountain of a mountain range. Just once a year, no more. When first mountain is 'razed level to the ground', said bird starts on second mountain. And so on until he demolishes the whole range. By which time there will have been many earthquakes and upheavals and tsunamis, creating new mountain ranges. This bird will be forever pecking at mountains. And the heinous crime for all this? Remember, I am 5 going 6 - a nun burning in hell because, her sewing session finished, she discarded a few inches of thread that remained dangling through the eyelet of the needle. What's that parable about it being easier for a camel to pass through the eye of needle than for a rich man to enter heaven? (the nearest he'll get to the place is a ride on the London Eye where camels are not allowed - without sand underfoot they panic and that's dangerous in an enclosed bubble in the sky - but sheiks are).
How did divorce turn into camels? Think! Think! Some men barter their daughters for so many camels to a rich man who has loads of the creatures. AND he can send her away on a whim. Oh well, if she's a Maltese bint she can return home to daddy and tend the camels. Fuq ix-xagħri (on wasteland in the limits of Mellieħa).

Mr Joe Xuereb

May 19th 2011, 13:29

Some have expressed disapproval (and I'm reading fear and near-panic) that a spouse can just walk away from 'the other half' with impunity, ie divorcing him/her, and leave the one left behind distraught and destroyed.
This is how it works. The individual finds a partner, gets married and invests totally in him/her. Totally. Of course they disapprove of 'walk-away' divorce, of being left in the lurch, totally abandoned and destroyed. They want their investment to stay home to prop them up forever. They do not want to be treated as a slave, discarded when a bid for freedom or a fresher partner for his/her partner will leave him/her bereft of life itself, their opium taken away.
The moral of this scenario - and it is current, of 2011, not 2000 years old - is two-pronged:
a) Never invest in another person, certainly not totally. People change, including the investor.
and even more importantly, b) why would any self-respecting Tom, Cikku or Samantha insist on staying with a partner who does not want to be with them? As we say, 'xemx li ma ssaħħanx aħjar il-bard minnha' (loosely trans. 'a fireplace but no fire-logs [ħatab] to burn is of no use and may as well be walled-up).

Mr Joe Xuereb

May 19th 2011, 12:59

@ Matthew Grima (17:04). The game is Chinese Whispers. People sit in a circle. One starts by whispering a word in the right ear of his neighbour on the left. Who in turn, whispers it to HIS neighbour on his left. And so on until the word is whispered in the right ear of the person who started it off. It is interesting to note how the original word has nothing to do with the word as it ended up. This is exactly the same problem as stories written by people years after the event when nothing can be verified. Throw in different interpretations of whatever one ends up with at any given time AND - THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO COMPARE THE CURRENT VERSION WITH THE ORIGINAL. As for anyone writing down what God said, or is supposed to have said - the mind boggles. Of course the defense there is that God revealed what he said by various means and revelations. As for God being the creator of everything and that 'he has no beginning and no end' - sorry! even an omnipotent god must have a beginning. And depicting him as a grizzled old man in the sky to give him more credibility with us mortals, that fact alone adds nothing to the uplifting of the debate above the downright banal.
I doubt I'll live long enough to learn how the whole universe came about. Maybe we will never know, and I do not have a problem with that. For I then have recourse to simple old-fashioned commonsense - plausibilities. A complex universe created by a god who made me in his image - I like that for the opposite is true if it is anything at all - a god who's always been there who promises me an eternity of his company if I'm good* and an eternity of his deprivation if I'm bad; so much for free will! And he's existed since forever. No, I cannot buy that.
*Being in permanent bliss with a god does nothing to excite me. Fear of eternal hellfire is a different matter of course. And it is this that clinches it for people. Subdueing them through fear rather than promised joy.
These of course are my freely-expressed opinions attained after much, and continuing, deliberation. A never-ending search for the truth if one likes. The morals and values in the holy book are good and ridiculously obvious. Which leaves us to deal with this god-given life that was never meant to be easy anyway: not when we're saddled with a god-given consciouslness, a god-given awareness. People need not change anything if they feel happy and satisfied with their status quo.

Mr Joe Xuereb

May 19th 2011, 12:57

@ Matthew Grima (17:04). The game is Chinese Whispers. People sit in a circle. One starts by whispering a word in the right ear of his neighbour on the left. Who in turn, whispers it to HIS neighbour on his left. And so on until the word is whispered in the right ear of the person who started it off. It is interesting to note how the original word has nothing to do with the word as it ended up. This is exactly the same problem as stories written by people years after the event when nothing can be verified. Throw in different interpretations of whatever one ends up with at any given time AND - THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO COMPARE THE CURRENT VERSION WITH THE ORIGINAL. As for anyone writing down what God said, or is supposed to have said - the mind boggles. Of course the defense there is that God revealed what he said by various means and revelations. As for God being the creator of everything and that 'he has no beginning and no end' - sorry! even an omnipotent god must have a beginning. And depicting him as a grizzled old man in the sky to give him more credibility with us mortals, that fact alone adds nothing to the uplifting of the debate above the downright banal.
I doubt I'll live long enough to learn how the whole universe came about. Maybe we will never know, and I do not have a problem with that. For I then have recourse to simple old-fashioned commonsense - plausibilities. A complex universe created by a god who made me in his image - I like that for the opposite is true if it is anything at all - a god who's always been there who promises me an eternity of his company if I'm good* and an eternity of his deprivation if I'm bad; so much for free will! And he's existed since forever. No, I cannot buy that.
*Being in permanent bliss with a god does nothing to excite me. Fear of eternal hellfire is a different matter of course. And it is this that clinches it for people. Subdueing them through fear rather than promised joy.
These of course are my freely-expressed opinions attained after much, and continuing, deliberation. A never-ending search for the truth if one likes. The morals and values in the holy book are good and ridiculously obvious. Which leaves us to deal with this god-given life that was never meant to be easy anyway: not when we're saddled with a god-given consciouslness, a god-given awareness. People need not change anything if they feel happy and satisfied with their status quo.

B. Saliba

May 19th 2011, 10:23

the church has the right to defend its believes point taken.

the question i ask is this, marriage is a vocation like when someone becomes a nun or a priest, so a nun can leave from being a nun and a priest can leave from being a priest- technically speaking the nun is divorcing christ- because she is said to be the bride of christ, but people who are married can then not divorce if their marriage has ended internally (meaning externally is the piece of paper, internally what goes on between them).

Mr Christopher Grech

May 19th 2011, 10:03

@ Walter Volz

When quoting Scripture to Mr Joe Zammit, it does pay to also quote the things that you may not be accustomed to, such as:

From the gospel of Matthew:

23:7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called by men, Priest, Rabbi, Imam, etc.
23:8 But be not ye called priest (etc.): for One is your Teacher, [even] Christ; and all ye are brethren.
23:9 And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
23:10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, [even] Christ.
23:11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.

To find the full letter to priests, one can read it here: http://100777.com/spiritual/lettertoparishpriest

It is shocking to know just how much priests push church politics, rather than what God intended.

VV Bartolo

May 19th 2011, 07:26

yday i was shocked when i got to know, that a person "i know" whose been betraying her husband for ages is voting against divorce :) ... how loyal she is! obviously not to her catholic religion but to her party!!

regretfully i must say that this is all but a political issue and not about religion & our morals!

Mr Alex Buds

May 19th 2011, 04:56

Those voting no, as well as the religious fundamentalists posting on this board, are practicing a vindictive, uncaring, inhuman, and egoistic form of Christianity from the Old Testament which has nothing to do with the spirit of love and forgiveness of the New.

Because their marriage is fine, or they have no marriage, they have no problem with throwing their less fortunate brethren under the bus. Shame on them for they are the truly evil ones.

George Camilleri

May 18th 2011, 23:32

I think it is a time for clear words and strong leadership. Bishop Grech's directness is as refreshing as it is necessary in this foggy climate of ifs and buts and conscience and what-not. My conscience tells me be one with the words of Christ. Pro-divorcists should stop calling themselves practising Catholics unless they are either deceitful or ignorant of their own faith. You just cannot run with the hares and hunt with the hounds. What next? Pro-abortion Catholics; pro-gay marriage Catholics, pro-euthanasia Catholics; non-Church going Catholics... I say, when do you stop being a Catholic?

Mr Mike Rizzo

May 18th 2011, 21:57

@ Gerry Cowie

You are most certainly not on the fence on this issue, so don't pretend otherwise.

Why do you speak of secularists, atheists, and humanists as if they are some lesser beings? They have different beliefs from you, that's all. The way you speak about Catholics versus non-Catholics almost sounds like a football supporter saying that their team is better than everyone else.

Yes everyone, and not just Catholics, have the right to comment on what the Bishop says - particularly because Catholic dogma does affect everyone by virtue of the fact that it is imposed by the state, and also has consequences on wider legal rights such as the right to a lawyer of one's choice.

Christ Muscat

May 18th 2011, 21:08

Intom li thobbu tiktbu d`din is-site kollha ghal genna !!!!!!!!! anzi nahseb beati ha tkunu!!!

Gerry Cowie

May 18th 2011, 19:54

Bishop Grech is often vilified for doing his job. Whether or not you agree with him that is just what he is doing.

The usual secularist, athiest, humanist apologists have added their sarcasm below as expected, and decided to comment on something they apparently have nothing to do with anyway - the Church.

But the people of Malta and Gozo are strong in their majority Catholic beliefs which affect each and every aspect of their lives.

The comments referred to above serve only to strengthen the Catholicity of the people and ensure that there will be a resounding "no" vote at the referendum, with the pro movement having made itself undoubtedly the strongest weapon the anti movement could possibly have!

I am on the fence on this issue and comment merely on the attitude of those who are not desperate to get divorce in Malta but desperate to attack the Church at every opportunity!

The people of Malta are not stupid! They will vote according to what their consciences tell them and nobody can change that, certainly not unless they adopt a non confrontational approach and cease rubbishing the Catholic Church!

Raymond Sacco

May 18th 2011, 19:09

why on earth is religion being dragged into the divorce debate after all?!?!?! divorce will be introduced for civil marriage ONLY! catholic marriages have nothing to do with all this. this is a civil matter and therefore an issue for the catholic church not to meddle in! so who ever want to dispute divorce, please, try to think of some sensible rational arguments about the world we live in and the human lives who inhabit it without reproducing words that are said to have been written down some 2000 years ago!

Henry S. Pace

May 18th 2011, 18:33

'Fr Charlo Camilleri, who last August argued that Catholic politicians can, according to their conscience, vote in favour of divorce if research showed it was beneficial for the common good, said the homily had to be taken in its context.'

In the hot summer months Fr Camilleri said that lay people are doing more harm than good in the divorce issue. Reference to the above quotation I do not agree with this Church Theologian . A true catholic person can never bend his back to accomodate others who go against the teachings of Christ.. Perhaps Fr Camilleri is not aware that the some years back the King of Belgium resigned temporilly from his reign so as not to give his assent to a law that goes against his christian beliefs. A Regent was then appointed.

Mr Tony Camilleri

May 18th 2011, 18:20

JIstghu l-awtoritajiet tal-Knisja ta' Malta jghidulna jekk huwiex veru li fl-Amerika biex xi hadd japplika ghall-annullament tal-Knisja lanqas ghandu bzonn joqghod imur it-Tribunal imma jista' japplika wkoll minn fuq l-ineternet u li dan ilhom jaghmluh ghal zmien twil u mhux issa u sa min-nofs is-snin disghin?
Jistghu jghidulna l-awtoritajiet tal-Knisja ta' Malta kemm normalment idumu l-Amerika beix jiehdu annullament u kemm idumu hawn Malta?
Jistghu jghidulna l-awtoritajiet tal-Knisja ta' Malta jekk it-tagħlim tal-Knisja ta' Malta huwiex l-istess bhat-taghlim tal-Knisja fl-Amerika?
Grazzi.

Mr Anton PIsani

May 18th 2011, 18:11

Mr. Matthew Vella - I do not contest your right to Vote NO. I ask you and others to understand that the question on May 28 is a legal one. I do not agree with Divorce cos I accept its against my religion. But I always believed that the fundamental principles in Our Religion were built on Teaching values not Imposing - that this makes us different from Talibans. Jesus always distinguised between right and wrong, never shied away from defining wrong, and I agree that we should do the same nowadays, but HE never Imposed. We are not being asked if we Agree with divorce or otherwise. The bottom line question next week is whether an individual should have a right to decide his fate - Yes or no. Voting No means imposing our choice and not allowing the individual to choose himself. I do not even consider seperation an option for myself, let alone divorce. Even if this vote could lead a person to sin in future, he should decide. Did Jesus ASK people to follow Him (and leave everything behind) or did He Force them to follow him cause that was good for them. Likewise, we should not force our neighbour to make sure he does not Sin in future. We should try to persuade him not to choose the wrong door (when it comes to the ACT of Divorce, not the referenduim question) but the ultimate choice should always be his. Some tell me that this means being an accomplice to sin - but then, so was Jesus too?

Victor Rodenas

May 18th 2011, 17:34

In a few years time (as happened before)an Archbishop will make an apology saying that it was a mistake that the Church said that those who voted `YES` to the divorce referendum commited a grave sin and could`nt receive Holy Communion.We have been there before ,have`nt we?

Mr Michael Debono

May 18th 2011, 16:34

The Gospel of a couple of days ago quoted the words of Jesus Christ about the Holy Eucharisty(. Saint John Ch VI: If you eat my body and drink my blood will not die and I live in him and he lives in me"
or words to that effect.
The point is this. Jesus Christ did not subject what he said and promised to any condition. Hence it must be the Church that imposed conditions in order to receive the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. The condition is that one must not be living in the state of mortal sin, and even venial sin was added at the Girgenti so called apparitions by a late priest. This is to proof that priests some times err.because of fanatism.
Since the condition has been imposed by the Church, the Church has the power to retract it.
Since it is a condition imposed by the Church could not someone in danger of dead not receive Holy Eucharisty before confession, once this latter condition is imbossible because of the abscence of priest.
There is some sense in the Church position but it could very well be useless if the Church thinks so.
This is being written because Bishop Mario Grech mentioned it indirectly i.c.w voting Yes at the referendum

Harry Saliba

May 18th 2011, 16:26

Joe Zammit
Grow up !!! Get a life and let others live theirs in peace without having to stomach such crap from the likes of you

Victor Pulis

May 18th 2011, 16:25

So according to the Gozo bishop and catholic church teaching the only door to salvation is through that one door. That means that more than 5 billion of the 6 billion humans living on Earth are doomed to hell. Does anyone blame me for not believing?

Mr Joseph Calleja

May 18th 2011, 16:21

Being that Gozo Bishop Mario Grech, who hinted that Catholics promoting divorce legislation are “wolves in sheep’s clothing" shouldn't be accusing anybody. As far as we know Bishop Grech has never been married or maybe not even ever been intimate with a member of the opposite sex. What is the Bishop trying to say? Only he who stirs the pot knows what is in it. (Min igarrab ikun jaf). The Bishop of Gozo was administering and celebrating confirmation to young people and I think he was way out of line instilling hate and disillusioning these youths against the pro divorce people.. He, as a church leader should have stuck to the program of confirmation. I think the Bishop put that foot in his mouth and it is not so easy to pull out. The Bishop is entitled to express his personal thinking but there is a time and a place and this was not the time or place. To the Bishop I say, I don't think the pro divorce people are “wolves in sheep’s clothing”. They express exactly what they mean by pro divorce. Maybe the Bishop has the whole thing turned around. Was the Bishop taking advantage of the fact that he was preaching to young unsuspecting adults? Ignorance is bliss!

Peter Gee

May 18th 2011, 16:07

Mgr. Grech has got some nerve to talk about sheep in wolves clothing in view recent scandals involving alleged sexual abuses by some priests.

Mr Joe Zammit

May 18th 2011, 16:04

Catholics for divorce are false Catholics.

Catholics for divorce are betraying Christ.

Catholics for divorce are pleasing the devil.

Catholics for divorce are living in sin and are on the path to hell.

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

Mr Joe Zammit

May 18th 2011, 16:03

St John the Baptist, who knew sin was a matter of foro interno, repeated to King Herod: It is not lawful to take your brother's wife! Thus he was telling him he was living in sin. He did it although sin belongs to the foro interno!

What about the works of mercy? One of them is to admonish sinners. So, should we keep back from this work of mercy? If I see my brother falling in sin, shall I not admonish him? Does not Christ himself tell us to correct others who are sinning?

When St Peter heard the lie (i.e., the grave sin) from Ananias and Saphira, did he place that sin in their foro interno, and close his eyes? Or he accused them of their grievous sin against the Holy Spirit and God punished them by sudden death for their sin!

Let every voter on divorce whether in Parliament or in a referendum be careful! Playing with divorce is playing with fire. Let us remember that God does not want divorce and this prohibition is for all people, Catholics and non-Catholics, without exception. No conscience can ever justify divorce or voting for divorce. If divorce is a grave sin, voting for divorce is equally grievously sinful. No one is going to deceive God.

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

Victor Pulis

May 18th 2011, 16:00

It is incredible how comments one makes are sometimes interpreted, misinterpreted, mangled and jumbled,” he(Fr. Joe Borg) said.
Fr. Borg was referring to comments he made some days ago. Now imagine someone speaking 2,000 years ago and his words being repeated by word of mouth (no recording equipment or internet, newspapers, t.v. etc. back then) for decades before they are put down in writing and translated into different languages by unprofessional translaters. Both speaker and words taken out of context and time.

Ms S Micallef

May 18th 2011, 15:54

@ Matthew Vella.

You're 24 years old and you seem a little immature. Get off your high horse and declaring who is and is not a Catholic. Just in case you haven't realised yet, you are a nobody and have no authority to make such statements and should realise that it actually goes against our religious values to judge, point fingers and exclude others.

IT IS NOT UP TO YOU TO DECIDE WHO IS CATHOLIC AND WHO ISN'T.

Mr Michael Galea

May 18th 2011, 15:41

Bishop Mario Grech, hinted that Catholics promoting divorce legislation are “wolves in sheep’s clothing”

Does the same saying go for Paedophile Priests ??? They exist in Malta !!

"The one who has no sin shall throw the first stone." Said Jesus

Mr Angelo Vassallo

May 18th 2011, 15:37

@ Jack Vella

L-isqof ta' Ghawdex Mons Mario Grech kien qieghed jitkellem fil-kuntest ta' l-Evangelju li kien ghadu kif inqara waqt il-quddiesa.

KRISTU kien li ghajjar lil min ma jidholx fil-maqjel mill-bieb imma jaqbez xi hajt jew jidhol mit-tieqa huwa BRIGANT - HALLIEL - QATTIEL. U l-BIEB li kien qieghed jitkellem dwarhu huwa hadd hlief KRISTU nnifsu.

Mr Michael Debono

May 18th 2011, 15:34

Michael Debono

This was sent to Mr.Joe Zammit with no reply but it involves everyone particulatly theologians
Could this resoning contribute positevly to the ongoing debate on divorce yes or no?

A billion Catholics. A fine number, but the world population is 6 billions so the Catholics are in a minority and have always been.. However, and this is reasonable to say, that more non Catholics than Catholics are saved- go to Heaven- These include members of other religions. I am basing my reasoning on the fact that Lucifer is constantly at war againsr Christ and tries to attract more people to his evil state. But reason tells us that after all Christ will win, and cannot be otherwise. Don't you share this opinion, that Christ will prevail against Satan, against Lucifer.
Now since non Catholics reasonably outnumber Catholics, in heaven there must be a superior number than Catholics otherwise we cannot say that Christ is winning, which such a negative answer would be a heresy. Christus Vincit!
How do you explain that, if not the fact that non catholics who have their own religion and follow it in good faith are saved. Since these religions admit divorce how can you keep on saying that divorce leads to hell?

Mr Joseph Aquilina

May 18th 2011, 15:30

The major problem here is that the pro-divorce movement has been hijacked by people who for some reason or another (usually most of all peer-pressure) have some form of personal issues with the Church. The Bishop is saying nothing new and what he says only applies to those that consider themselves as members of the Roman Catholic Church. Those that do not consider themselves as so (which seems to be the majority of people commenting on times-of-malta regarding the subject) should pretty simple not be effected. They are free to form their opinion by themselves. That said, those that are Roman Catholics - not because simply baptised but because they truly believe in the values of this institution - cannot just form their opinion and ignore what the Church has to say about the subject. They can vote YES for divorce, but in doing so will automatically make them no longer part of that institution.

It is as if I become a member of a football club but then I go an support another football club!! It does not make sense. People who find themselves in that situation should first of all be honest with themselves and only then an they say if they are in favour or not for divorce.

Mr Alex Buds

May 18th 2011, 15:16

Nobody can hold back progress, although religious establishments have done a mighty fine job throughout history of delaying it.

Sooner or later, whether this time or next, divorce legislation is inevitable.

Mr Louis Cutajar

May 18th 2011, 15:09

Sur Vella, naħseb l-aħjar li is-silta tal-Adultera terġa taqrha u aqrha sħiħa. Kristu mhux biss aċċettha u m'għajjarihiex imma żied jgħidilha ukoll ... "Mur u mil-lum il-quddiem tidnibx aktar." Ħafna drabi l-aħħar biċċa ninsewha.

Ms B Cassar

May 18th 2011, 15:08

Qed nistenna l-ittra ta l-interdett. Isa isqfijiet, naqra zghira ohra jonqoskom, toqghodux tiddejqu, tant rajniha l-istorja ta Malta.

Mhux problema ta, ghalija zgur li mijiex, meta nara dan l-atteggament nisthi nghid li ommi u missieri ghamduni. Isqof Gonzi iehor dan mid-dehra.

Mr James Grech

May 18th 2011, 14:49

I've been in the teaching profession all my life. I used to teach in a trades school for a number of years and way back then, the issue of broken families was already becoming an issue for the school, since students coming from those broken families began having problems of their own. As someone else commented earlier, these students could only be reached if due attention was given to them. So yes I totally agree that children suffer whenever their parents separate, however one cannot make divorce a culprit, more then one can make legal separation the cause of the family break down. Both separation and divorce (and obviously annulment) are the result of a society which is facing problems. Both financially, socially and also spiritually. While government is saying that it is against divorce, it is brushing aside all the financial burden that families are experiencing. For the government divorce is yet another excuse which it can exploit in its favour. For the Church, which has been experiencing difficulties in making its teachings heard, especially to the younger generations, the attitude being adopted against divorce will make it even more difficult to reach out. The Church is sending yet again the wrong message. Instead of preaching hope and salvation, they are preaching damnation and wrongly trying to influence a democratic process from taking its due course.
While divorce may not be the best solution, it will definitely not be worse then separation or annulment. It will provide another possibility for separated couples to re-establish new family. Those that are differentiating between them and saying that while annulment is good, divorce is bad, are those that are factoring in the religious aspect, and thus confusing things.

Deo Catania

May 18th 2011, 14:47

Argument bazwi. Bl-istess ragunar lanqas min jaqbel ma' l-annullament ma ghandu jitqarben. Din il-kummiedja li juzaw l-iskuza 'zwieg li qatt ma kien' m'hi xejn hlief gidba sfaccata. Annullament huwa divorzju bil-barka tal-kurja Maltija. Hafna tejatrini biex taparsi ara kemm ahna nsara. Taghmilx deni lil haddiehor u daqshekk, hadd m'ghandu dritt jindahal la fil-hajja privata u izjed u izjed fir-relazzjoni ta' bejn kull individwu u Alla. Dan Mario Grech ghandu xi super power jew? Mela min hu separat u jghix ma' haddiehor ma jistaghx jitqarben, min jaqbel mad-divorzju ma jistghax lanqas, injoranza grassa.

Ronald Cassar

May 18th 2011, 14:26

Bishop Grech is not doing the Catholic Church in Malta any favours with his comments... These are comments of fundamentalists!!

Mr Jack Vella

May 18th 2011, 14:06

Ma kien ikollok l-ebda setgha li kieku ma kinitx mghotija lilek min Missieri!!!

by Jack Vella - facebook page: Jack Vella (Author & Poet) - Blog: jackvella.blogspot.com

Meta snin ilu kont hdimt il-parti ta' Gesu' kont irrealizajt li l-parti tieghu mhux lakemm tahdimha, ghax ta' Kristu hija parti li ma tistax terga tiinhadem. Gesu huwa uniku f'kull sens. Kull haga li ghamel. Il-Mirakli li wettaq. Imma fuq kollox KLIEMU. Kliem illi ghadu jghodd u jidwi sallum. Bhalma xi kultant jibqa jghodd u jidwi kliem illi jinghad lilna jew minn fommna lejn xi hadd, minn xi hadd jew ghal xi hadd. Imma tiskanta il-hazin dejjem jidher iktar u dejjem jaghmel hafna aktar hoss. Il-bniedem ghandu tendenza li jinsa t-tajjeb u jiftakar il-hazin. Jinsa dak kollu li jkun twettaq u sar biex jinbena grupp, post, nazzjon, pajjiz u jiftakar f'dak li farrak lil dawn li semmejt.



Ibda per ezempju mix-xufiera tal-linja lejlet li dawn ser jigu mgedda jew mibdula minn kumpanija gdida. Zmien ilu kien hemm 508 xarabanks u l-istess ammont ta' xufiera. Minn dawn xi ghoxrin jew anqas kienu jzebilhu l-isem kemm ta' l-ADT u sahansitra t' Alla u l-Madonna u l-ohrajn kollha. Hazin. Dak li huwa hazin trid tghidlu hazin. U hekk kien u hekk huwa. Imma l-hazin taghna huwa li ghalina, li ahna tant gusti li nistaw nittimbraw bl-addocc lil haddiehor, wahhalna f'tal- linja kollha u ghalina huma kollha hziena. Dan huwa hazin ukoll!! Kien hemm min fahhar il-globalizzazjoni meta ahna kellna u ghad ghandna il- generalizzazzjoni!!



Kristu ltaqa ma' hafna u hafna nies illi tista tghid li kienu dell ta' karattru li ghandna jien u int. Huwa kien jaf x'kellhom f'mohhhom. Huwa kien jaf x'ghandna ahna f'mohhna. Kien jaf li ser jissallab ghal dawk il-hziena u ghat-tajbin. Xi whud, kienu ser jindmu u jergghu lura ghat-triq it-tajba. Ohrajn kienu diga hemm. Ohrajn kienu lesti li jintilfu u jigu dannati ghal dejjem. Dik kienet, ghadha u tibqa GHAZLA, li wiehed kien, qed u sejjer jaghmel f'xi waqtiet f'hajtu b'decizjonijiet u azzjonijiet li ser jiehu favur jew kontra tieghu nnifsu w'ta ohrajn. Imma ghal Kristu, ahna kollha l-istess u ghamilna x'ghamilna, l-imhabba tieghu hija tant li infinita bhala kelma m'hijiex bizzejjed!!!



Immagina li jsawtulek xi hadd minn tal-familja. Lest li tahfer???

Immagina li jghajruk u jzebilhuk quddiem in-nies ghal xejn b'xejn. Lest li tahfer???

Immagina li jtuk daqqa ta' ponn u jghidulek aqta min tahilek!!! Lest li tahfer???

Immagina li jobzqulek. Lest li tahfer???

Immagina li jnezzghuk minn hwejgek u gheri quddiem kulhadd inehhu d-dinjita tieghek. Lest li tahfer???

Immagina li jsawtu, jaghtu, jifilgu, jtertqu, jsallbu imbaghad joqtlu lil ibnek. Lest li tahfer???



Ghal dawn il-mistoqsijiet perswaz li hafna minnha ser jghidu LE. Hafna minnha jmorru l-quddies, imma meta jigu affacjati b'dawn it-tip ta' cirkustanzi jzebilhu, jsaqsu u johduha kontra Alla nnifsu. Ghala? Huwa qabel ma pponta subghajh lejk ghax ghandu kull dritt halla lil ghadam kollhu ta' gisem ibnu jitkisser. Halla l-idejH u saqajH imqaddsa jigu ippenetrati minn hadid mahdum mill-bniedem. Halla l-kustat u l-qalbu jigu minfuda minn lanza - sinjifikat ta' gwerra meta gismu nnifsu kien sinjifikat ta' paci, meta Hu nnifsu qatt u qatt m'ghamel xejn biex jigi ttorturat u maqtul b'dak il-mod.



Illum l-istess knisja li waqqaf Hu qeghda tagixxi mieghi u mieghek b'mod differenti, ingust u dak li Hu t'Alla qed taghtih lil bniedem qisu huwa il-krejatur ewlieni!! Irridu niehdu post Alla. U is-setgha li taghna huwa nnifsu qeghdin nabbuzaw minnha u ndawruwa kif irridu ahna u kif jaqblilna. Hemm mijiet hemm barra li jibzghu jitkellmu, jiddejqu, jisthu ghax jigu mghajjra, mzebilha u t-torturati bl-ilsien min haddiehor!!!



L-Isqof t'Ghawdex, waqt omelija li ghamel nhar il-hadd li ghadda, ghajjar lil kull min ser jivvota IVA ghad dhul tad-divorzju - HALLIEL - BRIGANT- QATTIEL.



L-ISQOF TA GHAWDEX!!!!!!!!!!!



Ir-rapprezentant ta' Kristu f'dik il-gzira li jiena tant inhobb. Imma Eccellenza ghidli inti...fejn kont Int meta tfal mir-Rabat Ghawdex, soffrew taht qassisin hutek u ULIEDEK fi Kristu??? Fejn kont int meta ma' widdibthomx u ammetejt f'isem hutek w'uliedek l-izball li sar??? Il-ghala ma' tkellimtx u bqajtu tahbu dak li haddiehor bata??? Ghalfejn meta tridu biss taqbzu ghal batut??? Jaqaw m'hemmx il-poter tal-Knisja fin-nofs?



Imma ahna bhala poplu qatt GHAJJARNA LILEK LI INTI WKOLL QASSIS pedoflu???? Meta fil-fatt m'intix????



Mons.Grech...taqraha il-Bibbja kuljum INT? Mela suppost taf li Kristu qatt ma ghajjar lil Madalena QAHBA!!! Mhux talli, imma talli laqaha kif kienet, bl-izbalji kollha li ghamlet u biz-zwigijiet kollha li setghet kissret u deher lilha wara mewtu u l-qawmien tieghu. Ridha tkun ezempju...u nerga ntenni qatt ma ghajjarha QAHBA...u int li ma' int xejn kieku ma riedx HU, tigi tghajjar lili u lil HUTI - BRIGANTI, HALLELIN u QATTIELA...ara vera qeghdin sew!!! Min jaf jekk habbatx INT l-ewwel wiehed il-bieb hazin u issa ghax indunajt u tridna kollha warajk, ha naghmlulek kumpanija!!!



Il-ghala qed taghmel dan??? Ghalfejn meta suppost kollok imhabba qed tohrog bir-rawgha f'halqek ghalina???? B'liema dritt qed taghmlu dan u ccahdu lilna min drittijiet taghna??? B'liema dritt tiddecidu min u mhux ser jitqarben? B'liema dritt taghzlu nies biex jirraprezentawkom meta dawn stess m'humiex ta' min jafdhom ghax huma stess hadu l-irgiel/ nisa ta' haddiehor? Huma stess zbaljaw u regghu zbaljaw u intom ilqajtuhom f'darkom. Kristu lil midinbin irid lura. Imma din li qed taghmel int m'hijiex proponiment u twiddiba gusta. Din hija theddida. Theddida ghal LIBERTA. Theddida ghal GHAZLA. Theddieda ghal FUTUR tieghi u ta' hafna ohrajn.



Inti f'Kercem meta ghazluk Isqof kont ghedt " Il primo amore non muore e' non si scorda mai". Tieghi l-ewwel imhabba kien Kristu ghax lilhu nnatajt. Min ghandu permezz ta' qassis tghammidt. Imma jekk qassis zbalja jiena dejjem stennejt lil min ghandu l-poter biex jara u jizen kollox imbaghad jghaddi s-sentenza. Imma minn dak li qeghdin naraw u nisimghaw, il-qassisin igawdu minn beneficcji li AHNA bhala nies MIZZEWGA mhux ser nistghu ngawdu minnhom qatt jekk id-divorzju ma' jidholx. AHNA favur ghazla. U l-ghazla hija t-triq li twassal ghal bibien li semmejt inti. Imma t-triq trid tkun hemm biex jiena nasal ha niftah il-bieb. Imbaghad m'Alla u m'Alla biss jiena irrid nirrispondi ghala ftaht dak il-bieb hu mhux l-iehor.



Meta tixorbu l-inbid ftakru li dak huwa d-demm ta' Kristu u mhux flixkun biex tiddamdmu u tfajru u tghajru lil haddiehor BRIGANT - HALLIEL - QATTIEL!!!!!



IN VINO VERITAS



Jack Vella

17.V.XI

George Cremona

May 18th 2011, 13:52

I was present at that particular ceremony and therefore heard very clearly what Bishop Grech said. Bishop Grech was quoting from the Gospel something he is duty bound to do apart that he is endowed with the freedom of speech as any other citizen in Malta and Gozo. Yes he was absolutely right when he said that everyone has the civil right to marry but not everyone has the right to receive the sacrament of marriage. He was absolutely right when he said that those who are not in communion with God, with the teachings of Christ cannot receive Holy Communion. Those who are not willing to follow the Gospel, the teachings of Christ and therefore of the Church which He Himself established cannot be called true Christians.
I cannot understand how or why some people and some of the media pretend to stay in the Church and not abide or comply with its rules. You are either in or out. No one can be both at the same time. So it's not the Bishop's choice, it's mine and yours. You have to choose between Yes to Divorce and disobey or ignore completely the Church's teachings and rules and No to Divorce as a devout catholic. Bishop Grech simply showed the way of Christ and appealed to the Congregation of which I was fortunate enough to be part of, to follow it.

Mr M Borg

May 18th 2011, 13:16

@ Charlie Borg ( 11.56 )

" Why at Fgura Malta ? Hasn't he got enough on his plate in his little Gozo ? "


Since when has the church to ask your premission before holding talks in one of her Parish Centres ?

Do you think that just because you are against the church and in favour of divorce you have some special

rights over the church ?

BIshop Grech was right to talk the way he did, if you do not agree with him , you are free not to go to Fgura on

Friday .

Mr K Littlejohn

May 18th 2011, 13:15

@Mr Angelo Vassallo

Being Catholic or religious doesn't necessarily mean going to church or getting drunk in some village festa. Most Maltese just go to church, and dramatise religion. Its not obligatory to be catholic. I really dont know what's the fuss all about. Stupid campaign from both sides I must say!

Mr Joe Xuereb

May 18th 2011, 13:04

@Matthew Vella (Today 9:49). You are making a lot of fuss about what makes a Catholic and what does not. We are in 2011. So one is a Catholic in 2011. What is the big deal? Bishop Grech used a very powerful metaphor, ie Christ is the one and only door. What if the door is a figment of a fertile human imagination that Man put there to cosset himself against the this terrible dilemma we call life. Ironically, given by god himself. And he gave us the freedom to do with it what we life, as in 'freewill'. With conditions of course. Conditions set down by god himself who set us up in the first place. Do you see what I am getting at Matthew? Or do you prefer to listen to bishops and their doors, sounding like failed carpenters? Of course you have freewill. Of course I am not god and I will not rise from the dead. But at least I am real in the here and now, I can be seen and touched and verified. But don't expect me to walk on water to impress. Or levitate like I were a bed-sheet on a clothes-line, washed clean of blood that proved I was a virgin on my wedding night, flapping in the breeze. Like a dementing banshee fighting windmills perhaps?! Like the Bishop, I am quite good at metaphors, see!!

Cecil Herbert Jones

May 18th 2011, 12:45

And so the debate that should have never been is centred around the Maltese Catholic Church's values. If I am not mistaken the question is whether Civil Divorce should be introduced in our legal code, that is all !!

Mr Angelo Vassallo

May 18th 2011, 12:44

@ David Caruana

How about being elected as our next POPE since you know exactly what the Nazzarene said.

Even Dr Charlie Azzopardi, the Systemic Family Therapist can be papable for the next POPE as he told us on TV that even Christ was wrong when he spoke about divorce. Halluna tridu!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

J Borg

May 18th 2011, 12:43

Can a Catholic in good conscience vote in favour of the introduction of divorce legislation?

This was already settled in the statement by the 7 priests last October which says:
'A Catholic ... may ... in conscience not see why to vote against legislation favouring divorce. This one too has the right and the duty to follow what one's conscience tells one.'

This statement was endorsed by Archbishop Cremona.

Mr Jo Camm

May 18th 2011, 12:40

What I notice in these blogs is that all those who usually speak in favour of the PL also speak against the Church's teachings. They have not changed.

Mr Louis Cutajar

May 18th 2011, 12:38

Rigward il-laqgħa tal-Isqof Mario Grech ġewwa l-Fgura, għall-informazzjoni tal-pubbliku ma kienx hu li għażel li jiġi ġewwa l-Fgura imma kien il-Kappillan stess flimkien mal-Kummisjoni Familja tal-parroċċa li stiednu lill-Isqof biex jagħti laqgħa ta' formazzjoni fuq iż-żwieg fejn wara dawk li jattendu jistgħu jagħmlu xi interventi u mhux answer and question session kif inhu irrappurtat. Din il-laqgħa kienet ġiet ippjhanata kmieni din is-sena u mhux minħabba l-każ li ġara. Din kienet waħda mit-tliet laqgħat ta' formazzjoni dwar il-valur taż-żwieġ u l-familja. Ġie magħżul l-Isqof Mario Grech mhux għal-fatt li hu l-Isqof ta' Għawdex imma minħabba l-fatt li hu studja il-liġi kanonika fejn jidħol iż-żwieġ u ħadem u għadu jaħdem fit-Tribunal Ekklezjastiku.

Benjamin Sant

May 18th 2011, 12:32

bi skuza tal bibbja noqodu niggieldu ad divorzju imbad ninsew li

1) Guda ittradixxa il Kristu u Kristu xorta hallih emm ghall ikla....
2) u xi nghidu al meta Kristu mar jikol ghand Zakkew... ma qabadx ikeccih u jghajru
3) taf il min ghajjar Kristu -- oqbra imbajda?....... aqqas temmen il min!!!!

dawn il 2 stejjer juru li ir religjon taghna biex indendlu d damask tajba u xejn iktar.

Michelle Buhagiar

May 18th 2011, 12:32

We are wolves says the shepherd in royal clothing!

Mr Sandro Cremona

May 18th 2011, 12:19

I know of Wolves in priest's clothing!!! abusing children and minors. Can they receive the Holy Sacrament.. these wolves were never mentioned by the Gozo Bishop.

Mr l Azzopardi

May 18th 2011, 12:10

what about Ghajsielem Mgr Grech? is looking away a sin?

Victor Cauchi

May 18th 2011, 12:02

One thing both Bishops have to learn when all is said and done is the need for more training in Christian faith and less "religious" traditionalism. The local Church has started realising this by raising the Confirmation age. Considering that this sacrament, together with Communion and Baptism were imparted together during the adult Baptism rites in the early Church, when catechument were baptised at a mature age, the raising of the Confirmation age can be interpreted as a return to the times when Baptism was given to adults.

EDWIN DE MARCO

May 18th 2011, 11:58

@David Caruana. Keep talking, some day you'll say something intelligent!

Charlie Borg

May 18th 2011, 11:56

'Bishop Grech will hold a question and answer session on marriage and the family at the Fgura parish centre on Friday.'
Why at Fgura, Malta? Hasn't he got enough on his plate in his little Gozo?

Mrs Lucia Vella Vella

May 18th 2011, 11:55

Iktar ma nisma iktar nitbieghed mill-knisja u nitlef il-fiducja kollha fdwan li taparsi huma qassisin

M F Grech

May 18th 2011, 11:49

May I dare ask who is the Wolf in sheep's clothing? Lest we have forgotten the saga of the night of the 17th September 2007 and the recurring consequences up to this day!!! "He who is without sin should cast the first stone." History will judge us all My Lord.

Michael Hudson

May 18th 2011, 11:40

We seem to be so lost with child like arguments that we have forgotten the very basics. I may be wrong, but my logic tells me to ask simple questions first, like, has a serious study been carried out to identify the main causes of annulments, seperations, divorce (obtained from other countries)?
Why does the church still marry couples, which prior to tying the knot have entered into a public contract to divide the material things, once they split? Does the church enquire about such things? How can you acknowledge a marriage, with a mind already set for seperation.
Has the state investigated other causes, such as families on the verge of poverty, poor education and many other reasons. I'm very sure there are exceptions where failed marriages really need a divorce law, but what we're doing is applying stitches to an injury and not correcting what is causing one to fall and cut himself.
I have personally seen annulment documents from the Curia, where family members where involved and the lies I've read in those documents are astonishing. I'm sure one would do anything to obtain an annulment, but the institution needs to verify what witnesses may testify because there could be serious issues. This I can prove, if anyone is interested.
Lets do things as one should, oh sorry, I forgot we're in Malta and only in Malta!

Mr Joe Grima

May 18th 2011, 11:40

The only fault I find with the Bishop's proclamations is that he failed to ask the divorce movement what he should say!! The divorce movement expect the Church to teach what THEY say, not Jesus' teachings!! And reading from the pro-divorcists about the church being a bunch of hypocrites....well, I don't think that there is any hypocricy in echoing Jesus' teaching. I see more hypocricy in those who proclaim 'responsible' divorce, and that divorce is a human right, .... How can a divorce be 'responsible'? Surely NOT towards the first spouse, and kids! Is abandoning one's vow, responsibility and commitments regarded as being 'responsible' today? And how can divorce be a human 'right', when the children suffer a lot from the parent's decision. Nobody ever mentions the children's 'human rights' in cases of divorce. Probably because of two facts: a: they don't have a vote, and b: they don't have enough money to pay the lawyers!
Joe A M Grima

Peter Gee

May 18th 2011, 11:35

Sounds like fundamentalism creeping in.

Mr Joe Zammit

May 18th 2011, 11:31

Par.2384 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: “Divorce is a grave offence against the natural law…. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery: …”.

‘A grave offence against natural law’ means a grave sin against God who is the author of natural law. So, divorce is a grave sin. Adultery is a grave offence against God as well since it transgresses seriously the Sixth Commandment of God. Adultery denotes sexual acts by married persons outside a valid marriage, i.e. outside a marriage that is valid before God.

Christ spoke clearly of the evil of divorce: “What God has joined together let no man put asunder”. ‘Let no man put asunder’ means ‘let no-one resort to divorce’. This is a command not an advice and it is so serious a command that amounts to a grave sin if it is ignored. Moreover, the fact that it is expressed in the negative clearly shows that it admits of no exception. The Catholic Church, as the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ, has never resorted to divorce in her 2000-year-old history.

Christ was clear also on the evil of adultery and said that, if one divorces his spouse and enters another marriage, one lives in adultery. (Mk 10, 2-12; Mt 19, 2-9). In the first letter to the Corinthians, St Paul says: “Do not be deceived; neither … nor adulterers… will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor.6, 9-10).

Divorce is a grave sin. Par. 1789 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church runs: “… One may never do evil so that good may result from it; …”

On July 13, 1917 the Virgin Mary told the three children of Fatima that “many go to hell on account of the sins of the flesh”. Among the sins of the flesh there is adultery. Padre Pio had regular mystical contacts with God, saints, angels and devils, and used to say that "divorce is a passport to hell". He knew what he was saying and no one could belie him. It is not a joke to go to hell … and to hell for ever!

Divorce leads to hell because it transgresses God’s categorical law on marriage, namely indissolubility. Divorce purports to do what it cannot do, namely to dissolve a validly contracted marriage.

Let no one try to deceive God by planning to live in sin and die in grace. Such a plan will be the devil’s snare. You die as you live!

Mr Joe Zammit

May 18th 2011, 11:29

Conscience is reasoning.

No conscience can contradict the express and clear words of Christ about the evil of divorce: What God has joined together let no man put asunder! No conscience can genuinely go against this clear commandment of Christ on the necessity of the indissolubility of marriage and the intrinsic evil of divorce.

A conscience that suggests divorce to anyone is diabolical. The devil is pleased with divorce. God does not want divorce. This is the clear teaching of Christ and the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church.

If your conscience tells you something against the infallible teaching of the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, do not follow your conscience. Your conscience is not infallible. Your conscience is subject to the teaching of Christ and his Church.

If you follow your conscience in disagreement with the Church, you are grievously stubborn and proud. Your stubbornness and pride will lead you only to hell. All those in hell appeal to their conscience for being there ... for ever... without any hope of redemption... there for ever!

Conscience is reasoning!

Mr Jason Fenech

May 18th 2011, 11:14

What I fail to understand is why people still applaud someone who clearly treats people as if they were little children. You can lead decent and respectful lives independently of what a few funnily dressed men would have you believe. It’s about time people outgrew the childish mentality instilled by religious indoctrination and learned to think for and by themselves. Breaking the chains is indeed liberating.

Mr Louis Cutajar

May 18th 2011, 11:14

Nixtieq ngħid lil N. Buttigieg li ħalla jew ħalliet kumment, li jkun aktar ta' ġid jekk hi stess nhar il-Ġimgħa li ġej tattendi għal-laqgħa mill-Isqof Mario Grech ġewwa ċ-ċentru parrokjali tal-Fgura, milli tagħmel kummenti neggattivi fuq il-patrijiet tal-Fgura mhux biss fuq it-Times of Malta imma anke fuq gazzetti oħra. Din il-persuna tara biss azzjoni waħda biss li hi ħażina imma tinsa u ma ssemmiex il-ħafna azzjonijiet tajbin li jagħmel l-istess patri. Imma dan ma tgħidux. Rigward il-kaz li ġara l-ġewwa l-Fgura l-aktar ħaġa li wieħed ma jqabilx magħha huwa il-fatt li għajjat mal-persuna u l-mod kif qalilha u mhux it-tqarbin fih innifsu. U Tajjeb li lil dan il-patri ma niġġudikawhx biss fuq dan il-kaz biss, tajjeb li wieħed jara il-ħafna tajjeb li jagħmel. Issa l-Isqof Mario Grech huwa car biżżejjed rigward min hu dehen jew le li jersaq għat-tqarbin. Trid tigi min-naħa tal-persuna li ma tersaqx ghat tqarbin u mhux li s-saċerdot ma jqarbnikx. Pereżempju persuna li hi poġġuta taf li mhux suppost titqarben imma jekk waqt quddies titla titqarben is-saċerdot daki il-ħin ma jistax ma jqarbinix, f'dan il-każ tiġi minn naħa tal-persuna li ma titlax titqarben. San Pawl stess huwa ċar fuq dan meta jgħid: “Kull min jiekol il-ħobż jew jixrob il-kalċi tal-Mulej bla ma jixraqlu, ikun ħati tal-ġisem u d-demm tal-Mulej… Min jiekol u jixrob bla ma jagħżel minn ikel ieħor il-ġisem tal-Mulej, ikun jiekol u jixrob il-kundanna tiegħu stess” (1 Korintin 11, 27-29).

Mr C Muscat

May 18th 2011, 11:11

Thawdet sew il-borma!!!
Inhalltu ic-civil mar-religjon u hawn min jiehu kull okkazjoni biex jattakka l-knisja. Ikolli nerga nghid li mal-ftit hazin taghmel hafna tajjeb. Naturalment min irid jattakka l-knisja ma jimpurtahx la mit-tajjeb u lanqas minn min ghandu bzonn dan it-tajjeb.
Il-knisja hi maghmula minn nies bhali u bhalek u tistenna li kulhadd ghandu jkun rispettat u kulhadd ghandu dritt ta' vot bhal kulhadd.
La semmejna l-vot jien ser nghid ghala ser nivvota le:
a. ghax blu jew ahmar tista tkun;
b. id-divorzju ma fihx limitu, tista tiehdu darba, darbtejn, tlieta etc;
c. dwar manteniment ma sejrin nirrangaw xejn;
d. lit-tfal tieghi nixtieqilhom zwieg dejjiemi u mhux ghal 4 snin;
e. ma rridx inbellghu lil min ma jridux; jigifieri jekk parti tridu u l-ohra ma tridux jien ser inzomm dak li ghandi llum;
f. il-ligi bhal din ghanda tghaddi mill-parlament u mhux minn referendum.
Kull min ma jaqbelx mieghi jista jibqa jkun habib tieghi ghax inhossni nirrispetta lil kull opinjoni.

George Azzopardi

May 18th 2011, 11:06

J.M. has already hinted out about this grave situation where with this attitude, whatever the result would be, the main loser in this would be the Maltese church. With this attitude the Maltese church is making a lot of enemies especially from the young generation. They (the Maltese church) still think that we're still in the 1960's.

I strongly believe this will probably end up in more civil marriages.

Mr John Azzopoardi

May 18th 2011, 11:00

It is sad indeed as to what is happening in Malta in the year 2011. WE are still fighting to legalize divorce when we all know well that this is a basic human right. The church will never recover from this and I believe that many people will turn away from the church. The church should preach it's believes, but not threaten or judge. It can only preach what it believes in as a right, but not impose it's believes via threats. That is up to the individual to decide as a basic human democratic right. That is why there is a referendum. The church will do well to unite the people and not divide them. That is what the Bishop is doing. Time out please and do not do any more damage. People should be treated as adults and not little children.

Mr M Vella***

May 18th 2011, 10:54

Christ did not have any belongings in this world, He had no testament, He left no material inheritance; only spiritual ones.The Curia masters are brainwashing the Maltese flock and twisting their minds,Paganism at its best,Harsu lejhom, kollhom dehbijiet, ruzetti, bokli tad-deheb, tronijiet indurati , mitri kollhom hajt tad-deheb, eccetra. X'jidhrilkom minn din eccellenzi reverendissimi ?. U mela d-divorzju jwerwirkom

Mr David Smith

May 18th 2011, 10:48

Why do people, who are not Catholics, have to feel so offended, because a man of the cloth is courageous enough to call a spade a spade? Let's put everything in perspective. Many people in Malta in this day and age are saying that a divorce is a civil right (it is not, but that is beside the point). Many of these same people are saying that they are also against abortion. But all over the world, it is said that abortion is allowed because of the right of a woman over her body. Societal concepts change, and it is only a matter of time before people in Malta start pushing for abortion...because they would say it is a civil right!

Mr Victor vella

May 18th 2011, 10:41

Fl-ahhar qam mill-mewt l-isqof ta` ghawdex. Dan l-issue illu ghaddej ix-xhur issa stembah. X`jghid Kristu kulhadd jaf m`hemmx ghalfejn jghidilna Mario Grech. Immissu Grech qam meta beda l-issue li la il-Partit Nazzjonalista ma ghandu l-ebda dritt jindahal f`xi haga li hija moralment ligi tal-knisja. Issa harget fil-berah l-ippokretizzmu tal-knisja kattolika Maltija. Ara li kieku kien il-PL li hareg bid-divorzju, li kieku Malta u Ghawdex ga huggiega wahda. Izda huwa u siehbu Pawlu ghadu kwieti u muti dwan l-ahhar 10 xhur. Biex imbaghad il-knisja tkompli tohrof l-ippokretizzmu taghha fuq ix-xandir baghtet mara titkellem fuq Mintoff li kien dejjem kontra id-divvorzju. Issa qed jitkellmu fuq Mintoff xebghu jaghjruh u jzebbilhuh sa riedu ssalbuh. Il-Knisja ta` Malta hija il-knisja tal-Farrizzej, ippokretizzmu u tal-poter billi dejjem immanipulat mohh il-Maltin x`kont l-essigenzi taghha u dejjem kienet it-tarka tal-partit Nazzjonalista. Din hija l-istorja tirrepetti ruhha.

Mr Mario P. Sciberras

May 18th 2011, 10:38

As reported in a local paper "Several parishioners walked out of Mass at the Zejtun parish church last Saturday, after Fr Angelo Seychell threatened to withhold sacraments from those who vote ‘Yes’ in the May 28 divorce referendum.


“If there are any of you planning to vote ‘yes’ to divorce, don’t expect to come here the day after and receive Holy Communion,” Fr Seychell warned his congregation during the 5.30pm mass… whereupon a number of people stood up and walked out of Church altogether."

Ramon Casha

May 18th 2011, 10:36

"Fr Camilleri said the Church teachings on the issues of divorce and conscience were clear and he referred to the position paper drawn up in October by seven prominent priests."

What about the priests who denied communion or confession to those who said they'd be voting in favour? Are they representatives of the same church? What about those who are implying or even saying outright that anyone who votes in favour is a sinner and is "not in communion with the church" (excommunicated)?

Mr Michael Buhagiar

May 18th 2011, 10:35

Kull min jghid li huwa kattoliku irid bilfors jisma u jobdi dak li tghid il-Knisja Kattolika u l-isqfijiet taghhom. Min ma jaqbilx ma dak li jghidu m'ghandhux jissejjah iktar kattoliku jew nisrani. In-nisrani irid JOBDI it-taghlim tal-Knisja, inkella m'ghandhux dritt la jircievi sagramenti u l-inqas jipprova jghallem u jxerred taghlim falz bhal ma qed jaghmlu dawk li qed isejjhu lilhom infushom Kattolici Favur id-Divorzju. Il-Kattoliku ma jista qatt ikun favur id-Divorzju ghax ikun qed jisfida l-ligi t'Alla. U min jisfida 'l Alla qed jikkundanna lilu nnifsu. U dan mhux theddid - din hija VERITA' sagrosanta. Il-Kampanja qalilha kontra l-Knisja kattolika ilha gejja. Wasal il-m,ument tal-verita' ghal dawk li jghidu li huma insara kattolici. Min hu ghar-rimi insewh. Halluh jghereq fil-hama tal-hajja tieghu. Dik affarih. Imma Kattoliku nisrani m'ghandhu qatt jivvota ghat-tifrik tal-familji maltin. Id-divorzju hsara jgib lil pajjizna bhalma hemm il-hsara f'pajjizi ohra. Il-Knisja lil Alla trid tghogob u mhux lil bniedem. Huwa l-bniedem li jrid jghogob lil Alla u mhux bil-kontra. finalment il-bniedem jemmen jew ma jemminx f'Alla irid jaghti kont ta' eghmilhu f'din l-art lil Alla.

VV Bartolo

May 18th 2011, 10:32

ma nistax ma nikkumentax meta naqra/nisma certu diskors. naghmilha cara li jien id-divorzju MA JINTERESSANIEX imma ma nistax nifhem kif qieghed jinghad certu diskors.

nhar it-Tnejn kont qed nara/nisma programm fuq l-istazzjon nazzjonali wara l-ahbarijiet tat-8pm li l-mistieden tieghu kien profs. Serracino Inglott. meta gie mistoqsi mill-prezentatur; jekk ma jidholx id-divorzju se jkun hawn iktar koabitazzjoni - x'se jsir umbaghad? il-profs wiegbu li jkollna nemmendaw il-ligi tal-koabitazzjoni.

jigifieri jien fhemt sew? il-knisja hija kontra d-divorzju imma FAVUR IL-KOABITAZZJONI?!?! id-divorzju forsi jerga jghaqqad familja ohra imma l-koabitazzjoni isimha maghha kemm TIKKOABITA BISS!!! jew forsi l-koabitazzjoni ghal knisja ma thollx dak li jghaqqad Alla?? il-Knisja Maltija qed taghmel HAFNA HAFNA HSARA u qed tkun ta' kagun ta hafna Maltin li waqqfu jersqu lejha. min jaf min irid jaghti kont l'Alla meta jigi wicc imb'wicc mieghU jekk hux il-Knisja/membri taghha jew il-Maltin imweggghin?? x'bahar jaqsam hemm bejn kif qed jippriedka l-Kleru u kif kien jippriedka Gesu. "MIN M'GHANDUX DNUB IWADDAB L-EWWEL GEBLA"!!!

Mr Angelo Vassallo

May 18th 2011, 10:27

@ Mr K Littlejohn

First of all your state is not absolutely not true. The vast majority of Maltese and Gozitans are Roman Catholics and this was overwhelmingly shown when the Shepherd Benedict VXI and his predecessor John Paul II made pastoral visits to Malta.

If it is REALLY as you said “nothing to worry about” than why all this FUSS from the pro-Divorce movements? From your calculations you are on your way to a landslide victory, OR NOT?

mario spiteri

May 18th 2011, 10:27

A sure way to make people forget about the child abuse at Lourdes Home!

Gullible people are a must and when they stand up..show then authority..Let's get the stones ready for a public stoning. I thought the Ayotallah came from Iran and nort Sarc Street, Kercem , Gozo!!

Mock the sheep in a wolf's clothing for all its bleatings to sound as howls will only show how scared the sheep itself is of chaging times!

Mario Spiteri

Mr Kyle Boffa

May 18th 2011, 10:15

Imma kif tistghu tibqghu raskom mghaddsa qisu kollox ward u zahar f dal-pajjiz, u kollox idur mal-Knisja..x'hemm daqshekk dificli biex in-nies jifhmu li d-divorzju jekk jidhol huwa hemm biss ghal min ghandu bzonnu, u min ma jridux ma jihdux. Hadd mhu jimponieh fuq hadd, pero qieghed hemm ghal min ikollu bzonnu.

Mr K Littlejohn

May 18th 2011, 10:08

He was speaking to Catholics. Nothing to worry about. Only 35% of the Maltese are Catholics.

Mr William Flynn

May 18th 2011, 10:07

Thank you bishop for spitting it out loud and clear.

For, let’s face it, it was always going to be said one on one by priests to individuals or shouted from the pulpits. And those who can’t think for themselves and were going to succumb to this religious pressure were always going to succumb.

But for the rest who are undecided, confused and who don’t remember the last time the church put their foot in it and fell facedown in it, this is classic behaviour by the Catholic king-makers.

Grech has defined precisely what this is all about; and it's about the ability of the church to control the voting patterns of Malta or at least enough to frighten and sway the politicians into submission for fear of losing their cushy jobs.

On 28 May each and every voter has a decision to make whether to continue with this state of affairs or whether to blow the power of religion over politics in Malta once and for all.

Voting “YES” will not only prevent every Maltese from appearing to be a cretin as a result of a “NO” vote, but it shall pave the way for an early removal of Article 2 from the Constitution.

Consign religious interference in Malta to history; Vote “YES”.
Meantime, is there one who is going to stand up in Parliament and call for the indictment of bishop Grech?

Mr Lawrence Fenech

May 18th 2011, 10:06

Dawn l-annimali kollha ghal go xi farm tajjeb.

Mr Angelo Vassallo

May 18th 2011, 10:02

Il-kwistjoni dwar l-introduzzjoni jew le tad-divrzju f'pajjizna issa saret KRUCJATA, din id-darba KRUCJATA sistematika kontra il-Knisja Kattolika f'Malta u f'Ghawdex. Meta jitkellem l-Eccellenza Tieghu l-Arcisqof Pawlu Cremona u aktar u aktar meta jitkellem l-Eccelenza Tieghu l-Isqof Mario Grech (ghax dan aktar zbukkat) iqumu l-irwiefen tad-dinja kollha. Attakki min kullimkien. Fuq stazzjon televisiv Malti li hareg ghonqu favur l-introduzzjoni tad-DIVORZJU f'Malta qieghed juri dokumentarji tas-snin sittin dwar id-dnub il-mejjet, l-interdett u d-dfin fil-mizbla. Jien nahseb li dawn zgur mhux qed jaghmlu l-ebda gid anzi qeghdin ixettlu l-mibeghda fostna il-Maltin u l-Ghawdxin.

Ghal dawn l-ahhar 25 sena f'Malta dejjem kellna DEMOKRAZIJA TA' VERU fejn kullhadd jghid li jrid anki jekk ikun qed jghid cucati u hmerijiet. Mela hallu fil-liberta` kollha lil dawk li meta jitkellmu jghid xi haga verament bis-sens, fosthom Isqfijiet Cremona u Grech.

Christian Sciberras

May 18th 2011, 09:58

So you expect Catholics to egoistically vote and decide for those non-Catholics or else...?

This isn't being in line with the Church or anything of the sort, it's outright being egoistic. Divorce affects the country, not the Church. The Church can happily go around its business as usual scaring people against divorce after it has been accepted into legislation.

Mr Mario P. Sciberras

May 18th 2011, 09:56

And as Miss Maudie said "but sometimes the Bibile in the hand of one man is worse than a whisky bottle in the hand of another"

Michelle Buhagiar

May 18th 2011, 09:52

How very sad! And what hypocricy from "a shepherd in royal clothing"!!

Mr Matthew Vella

May 18th 2011, 09:49

Well said. I am 24 years old and I totally aggree with the Bishop's speech.

Illum il-gurnata hafna nies jahsbu li huma kattolici ghax immorru l-quddies il-Hadd (u forsi matul il-gimgha ukoll). Imma tkun kattoliku jekk verament temmen u tobdi dak li tghidlek il-knisja u timxi fuq it-tghalim ta Gesu Kristu. Ma tistax tghid li int kattoliku jekk taqbel mad-divorzju, l-abbort or l-ewtanasja.

Il-knisja mhux xi pizza 'quattro stagioni' tiekol il-bicca li tghogbok u l-kumplament thalliha hemm, ma tistax tghazel biss dak li jaghmel sens ghalik u l-kumplament ma taghtix kasu. Il-kattoliku hu dak li verament jifhem it-tghalim tal-knisja u jobdi (mhux ghax bilfors imma ghax jaf li din hi il-hajja tan-nisrani, li taghmel sens).

Ghalhekk jekk int ma taqbilx ma l-affarijiet fundamentali tal-knisja, int ma tistax tghid li int kattoliku u ma tistax titqarben lanqas.

Jekk int Kattoliku prattikant MA TISTAX tivvota IVA, u jekk tivvota IVA int ma tistax tghid li int Nisrani. Jekk mintix Nisrani ghandek id-dritt tivvota kif trid.

Gesu Kristu lill-appostili qalilhom 'Tridux titilqu intom ukoll?'. U l-knisja ghandha tghamel l-istess. Ghanda tkun cara u mhux toqod tibza titkellem. Min ma jridx jibqa Nisrani ghax ma jaqbilx mat-tghalim tal-knisja dan jista jitlaq, hadd ma hu qed izzommhom. Gesu Kristu 'jobzqu' lil-dak il bniedem biered - li la hu kiesah u lanqas shun.

Ma nistghux nibqghu inkunu 'doppja facca' immorru l-quddies, nitqarbnu u nippretendu li ahna kattolici u mbghad nighxu kif jidrilna!!

Mr Jens Budinger

May 18th 2011, 09:40

The result of the referendum will on the face of it determine whether divorce will be possible or not in Malta. However the underlying result will determine the fibre of the Maltese fabric, the backbone of Maltese character.. We will see if the population can still be subjugated by higher morality, and veiled threats. We will have an answer on how far can the population resist the influence of those who seek to sow dissent and superstition amongst us. Ultimately, this should be a test of how free we are as a people, as individuals, to make choices independently, without an party, preacher or person telling us how to think. I don't have high expectations on a yes vote, however, what must be understood is that this referendum is a test of the quality of the freedom the Maltese people have.

Mr Joseph N. Attard

May 18th 2011, 09:36

Whether I am going to vote yes or no, what irks me in the whole matter is the way that many, including some who should know better, are pretending that the Church does not carry out its mission. You may agree with the Church, or you may be vehemently against its teachings, and not only about divorce. You may submit to the Church'e beliefs, or you may ignore, even ridicule them. But since when, in a supposed democracy, does anyone have the right to silence those who do not agree with him?

Mr A. Grech

May 18th 2011, 09:30

The Gozo church only concern, is the financial income, Ask all Gozitan parishes if the Gozo Curia takes a share from all the collectins and a share from every project that is founded by the village people. Then ater all sucrifices done by the Gozitan people did to build the churches (since all these had been built by our money) the Gozo Bishop tells us (the Gozitan People) specifically that they has nothing and everyhing is poperty of the Gozo Curia. We just pay. Just a simple question to the Bishp. Are you concerned regarding the kids of Ghajnsielem? He will surely understand my question?

Alfred Gatt

May 18th 2011, 09:25

I agree with Fr Charlo Camilleri's comments regarding the statement of Mgr Grech. It should be taken in its context. You cannot believe in one thing and then act differently. It is as simple as that. Either you believe or else go your own way. Freedom is the gift God gave us. It can be used for good or for bad. But then everyone is responsible for the consequences of his or her actions.

Mr Mario P. Sciberras

May 18th 2011, 09:20

Another one from the Bible Brigade.
Am I correct in thinking that the following people, amongst others, are going to HELL:
Gays
Condom users
Pill users
IVF patients
Separated couples
Co-habiting couples
Divorced couples
Voters for Divorce legislation
Etc etc.
I am voting for a system that allows the civil law to regulate the aspirations and wishes of every single member of civil society, I AM VOTING YES

Mr Paul Borg

May 18th 2011, 09:13

Naqbel perfettament li "HEMM ILPUP IXXIDHU L-LIBSA TA HARUF" IZDA PERSWAZZ UKOL LI "HEMM ILPUP IXXIDHU L-LIBSA TA' QASSISIN"

Mr Paul Barrett

May 18th 2011, 09:12

Quote: Mgr Grech said those not in line with Church teachings should not expect to receive the Eucharist, Unquote.

or in other words - you take the bread from our mouths and we take the bread from yours.

Mr Michael N Cassar

May 18th 2011, 09:03

While the state has to find a way to govern and address broken families where children are born out of marriage, and while not everybody wants to follow and hinder the message of Jesus according to the Bible. It is only fair to say that it is up to each individual to choose between a life of sacrifice or happiness. All marriages go through hardship and nothing is rosy. Quote Matthew5:27But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Divorce 31 the last line) anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. Oaths 5:33 Second line) do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.

David Caruana

May 18th 2011, 09:02

Imagine you are reading the newpaper and you come across an article saying : "A man walking through Paola Square got out a gun and shot 3 people. All 3 people died before medical support arrived on the place. The man, then walked calmly to a Cafe' where he spent the rest of the day drinking coffee and enjoying the view. No criminal charges have been pressed against the man and he was not contacted by the police."

Wouldn't that be shocking? A man, commiting a crime in broad daylight and no one cares?!

Well, don't be too shocked, here's another one. This time it's real:

"Mgr Grech said those not in line with Church teachings should not expect to receive the Eucharist, a comment which some interpreted as a SPIRITUAL THREAT AGAINST THOSE PLANNING TO VOTE YES IN THE REFERENDUM."

In terms of the General Elections Act, Schedule 14, Section 55: "Every person who directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force , violence , or restraint , or inflicts , or THREATENS TO INFLICT….. ANY temporal or SPIRITUAL injury, damage, harm, or loss upon or against any person IN ORDER TO INDUCE OR COMPEL SUCH PERSON TO VOTE OR REFRAIN FROM VOTING, or on account of such person having voted or refrained from voting at any election….. SHALL BE GUILTY OF THE OFFENCE OF UNDUE INFLUENCE"

Mario Grech should be taken to court, NOW!

Oh, I guess the boys in blue are too busy running after people who dress up as nuns and priests during Carnival.

Oh, and I almost forgot that in Malta Cattolicissima, clergymen who abused children many years ago are still running free.

Henrietta Restall

May 18th 2011, 09:02

I don't know why people are complaining - you can't have it both ways.

If you're a practicing Catholic, and you want to receive commUNION, then you have to be in UNION with Christ and His Church. If you vote for something that is clearly at odds with Church teaching then how can you claim that you have the union.

The Church teaches that there may be valid reasons as to why a couple would separate, but divorce is much more than that, allowing for the possibility of "re-marriage" when there is still a valid marriage bond between the two which is indissoluble.

Bishop Grech is just stating the facts

I

Ms N Buttigieg

May 18th 2011, 09:00

Iktar biza bid-dnub gej nhar il-Gimgha gewwa l-Fgura. Interessanti x'ha jghid, jekk ghamilx sewwa il-patri li cahhad lil dik il-mara anzjana mit-tqarbin? Ha jfahhru tghid jew ha jikkundanah Mons Mario Grech?? U jekk ha jghidlu li ghamel sewwa, ghax skond hu min huwa favur id-divorzju ma ghandux jigi mqarben, imbaghad ha jmaqdar lil Kappillan ghax talab skuza lil anzjana u qalilha li ha jibda jmur iqarbinha huwa??

Iddecidu x'direzzjoni ha tiehdu din il-Knisja, mhux saret qisha knisja tal-biza u thedid bid-Dnub.

Mr D Galea

May 18th 2011, 08:52

To Dominic Fenech

Jekk bniedem irid joqtol u tagħtih sikkina tkun kompliċi tal-qtil ... mela jekk ma għandhiex bżonn id-divorzju, imma nivvota iva għax jista' jużah ħaddieħor hekk sew? Jekk għalija ħażin huwa ħażin għal kulħadd.