The quintessential question

In an impressive speech delivered at the Lambeth Conference in July 2008, the Chief Rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks, under­lined the crucial role of religion in society. He stressed how society, if it wants to survive, needs bonds of reciprocity and trust.

He pointed out that when religion wanes and there is nothing covenental to take its place, relationships break down. Marriage grows weak. Communities atrophy. There is spiritual poverty in the midst of material affluence. It doesn’t happen all at once but slowly, gradually and inexorably. Societies without covenants and the institutions needed to inspire and sustain them, disintegrate. Ultimately it leads to a loss of freedom itself.

His words are relevant in the highly charged debate that has marked the prelude to the forthcoming divorce referendum. Owing to the Church’s predictable position on marriage, a tsunami of deep seated animosity has been let loose generating more heat than light.

Undoubtedly, marriage breakdown is a reality and has always been. Yet, is divorce the answer? Irish columnist, David Quinn, asked the same question on March 21.

Mr Quinn gave us a remarkably clear picture of what happened in Ireland, also pointing out in no uncertain terms how the claim of the pro-divorce lobby, that divorce will reduce cohabitation, has failed miserably.

In 2006, just 10 years after divorce legislation, cohabitation in Ireland shot up 400 per cent with the concomitant increase of children born out of wedlock.

Mr Quinn made other pertinent comments stating that “the introduction of divorce sent out a very powerful and important signal, namely that marriage as traditionally understood was simply one lifestyle choice among others”.

He added: “Thus, everyone in Ireland who was married was now in a different kind of marriage, legally speaking, and many Irish people since then have been divorced against their will. It is harder to cancel a hire purchase contract than a marriage contract”.

In all fairness, the pro-divorce lobby should recognise these facts and realise the well-founded fears of those who oppose divorce legislation.

What happened in Ireland has happened elsewhere and we cannot claim ignorance of the con­sequences. It is also an undeniable fact that many of those who champion divorce will usually campaign for the introduction of same-sex marriage, abortion and euthanasia.

This is not surprising. Individual rights divorced from responsibilities open a Pandora’s box that lets loose with irreversible consequences so-called “rights” that will undermine our culture irreversibly and weaken irrevocably the basis of our society, the family unit.

Good intentions are not enough. Too often wrong and far-reaching decisions are taken with a good conscience. But we must make the difficult effort to discern the reliability and long-term impact of far-reaching decisions.

This is the quintessential question that faces our people. Will divorce legislation safeguard the integrity of the family? Is it even a just solution?

Mr Quinn summed it up eloquently. “Those who say the introduction of divorce will not affect those who don’t want to divorce are wrong. It changes the nature of marriage for everyone and makes victims of those who are divorced against their will.”