Laurence Grech
Undermining a nation’s stability
It is widely acknowledged that an underlying strength of the Maltese nation is its sense of family unity, which until now, is much more closely knit than in other countries. This could be due to our smallness but, certainly, our Catholic upbringing, with its emphasis on marriage for life, has been a strong contributing factor.
Unfortunately, thanks to various pressures, the rate of marriage breakdown in Malta has been growing. The most likely explanations are an absence of full commitment and true, unconditional love between the spouses and – despite the admirable efforts by the Cana Movement over the past five decades – lack of adequate preparation for marriage.
But the introduction of divorce would inevitably accelerate the rate of marriage breakdown, destroy family stability and, thus, deprive the Maltese nation of one of its major characteristics.
This is because divorce would undermine the solemn vows given by spouses at their marriage ceremony, namely: “I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. I will love you and honour you all the days of my life. I take you for my lawful (husband/wife), to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part.”
Indeed, if such vows were to be repeated at a marriage ceremony by one or both spouses who are divorced, they would certainly sound hollow, especially if it is their third or fourth marriage.
Divorce, by its very nature, goes against the indissolubility of marriage and, indeed, questions its very usefulness. For if the couple can separate at will and for no reason (as the divorce lobby in Malta and the Private Member’s Bill is proposing, albeit after four years’ separation), why bother to go through with marriage?
Indeed, this is divorcing for no reason at all: not a question of a woman leaving her husband because of his violent behaviour, or one who deprives her of the basic necessities of life, but for any reason – the husband tires of his wife wants to move in with a female work colleague young enough to be his daughter, the jaded wife leaving her husband for a wealthier man who can keep her in luxury – or for none at all.
Where would that leave society? The divorce movement misleadingly argues they are in favour of divorce because (paradoxically) they are in favour of marriage.
But the truth is that, without its essential feature of indissolubility, marriage would be a sham, simply because commitment between the parties would not be permanent. Morally speaking, there is absolutely nothing to distinguish a second marriage by one or both parties who were previously married and whose spouse is still living from mere cohabitation or adultery, except for recognition by the state.
The divorce lobby argues that were divorce to be introduced, a large number of cohabiting couples would marry and cohabitation would decline. Nothing could be further from the truth. In Britain, the number of marriages celebrated last year was the lowest since records started being kept in the 1860s. Certainly, cohabitation has not declined there but has prospered, with many young couples fearing marriage commitment, despite the availability of divorce. Similarly, more than half of all births are outside wedlock.
And, please, let us not mix divorce with annulment, whether by civil or by ecclesiastical tribunals. Annulment is a declaration that a marriage has never existed because one or more preconditions to make it valid was missing. Obviously, children born to couples whose marriage has been annulled would still belong to their parents but their marriage would have never been valid.
So, what would be the effects of the undermining of marriage stability which divorce represents? They would be, without putting too fine a point on it, shattering in a society like Malta’s.
Some would argue that this is already happening through separations. However, with separations there is always the possibility, even if remote, that the couple would reconcile. Naturally, complications would arise if there are children from a second relationship.
This leads to the very important consideration of why separations occur and how to prevent them. Certainly, the state must make every effort to help married couples and families by providing opportunities for adequate preparation in addition to those given by Cana and, indeed, to support Cana by financial and other means in its sterling work.
The preparation must be the realisation that marriage is a commitment for life, involves sacrifice (to many, an old-fashioned notion) and the giving of oneself completely. This commitment is incompatible with the introduction of divorce.
A happy marriage, especially one blessed by God, brings with it untold rewards, not the least of which is the stability so essential to national life.
I would like to end by quoting from the statement by UK bishops issued on the eve of the general election held there in May last year:
“The future of society passes by way of the family. Families, for better or worse, are the first school of life and love, where the capacity to relate to others, to develop moral character, is founded. The tragic personal, social and economic costs of increased family breakdown are unmistakable.
“Families require financial as well as relational stability, access to affordable housing, and fair conditions of employment that respect family responsibilities. Families have a right to a life of their own, and governments do well when they interfere as little as possible while supporting parents in the exercise of their responsibilities.
“But at the heart of necessary policy initiatives to support the stability of couple relationships, it is essential to support marriage. Marriage brings considerable and measurable benefits to individuals, children, family life and society. It deserves protection. A strong future for marriage is both achievable and desirable.
“Society has a vested interest in supporting marriage as the surest basis for family life. Politicians of all parties should recognise and support marriage as a key building-block of a stable society.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Mr Aaron Vella
May 21st 2011, 00:59
It is funny how much faith Catholics have in the so called "strength of our family" thing. Seriously, if a couple REALLY love eachother not even a Las Vegas style divorce will destroy their marriage. Some poeple should admit, that the church and some "do-gooders", are afraid that divorce will show the true picture that Maltese people are not different from the people of other countries. Problems arise in every marriage, some manage to stay together, some don't. That's why separation and annulments are there afterall. Divorce will not change a thing for those who are happily married, but it will give those people whose marriage has failed to get another chance. The priest who is blessing the newly wed couple should not fear from divorce but make sure they are ready to make sacrifices and love eachother. I believe divorce will pass sooner or later, preferably sooner, and the only weapon against it is BETTER PREPARATIONS.
Gerry Cowie
May 19th 2011, 20:41
I am sure Mr Grech can answer any of the points in the comments below. At least he is not doing what so many of the pro movement's contributors and commenters have done - he has not knocked the other side!
The pro movement will lose if only because there has been so much anti-church talk, sarcasm and plain confrontational comment. It has become the best weapon the anti movement ever had!
Mr Joe Zammit
May 19th 2011, 16:18
Divorce is a step backward. Progressive people back the indissolubility of marriage.
Divorce is a negative step. Progressive people back the indissolubility of marriage.
Divorce is a big injustice. Progressive people back the indissolubility of marriage which is justice according to the word given in the celebration of marriage.
Divorce is to the detriment of all people. Progressive people back the indissolubility of marriage which good for one and all.
Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it's already guaranteed!
Wenzu Vella
May 19th 2011, 14:58
You make it sound that the government should create a UTOPIA just simply to do away with marriage breakdowns, separations, cohabitations, and of-course divorce would become obsolete.I’m afraid life is not so simple Mr Grech.
Mr Marco Cremona
May 19th 2011, 11:42
Number of flaws in the article
1) "introduction of divorce would inevitably accelerate the rate of marriage breakdowns" - where does this come from?
Yes, it may facilitate the breakdown of those marriages which have long since broken down (but the spouses choose to continue to live together because of the stigma of being "separated". But is keeping these 'marriages' together a good thing for the spouses, for society (with one/both of the spouses inevitably ending up suffering from depression, anger and frustration) and indeed for their children. But no, the statistics (of number of marriages) is of paramount importance!
2) "second marriages are hollow". Why doesn't Lawrence Grech tell this to the remaining 99.9999% of the world population (all the world except Malta and the Philippines) including European heads of state
that are in their second marriages - most of which he probably admires (Angela Merkel etc.)?
3) "with the introduction of divorce, the couple can separate.... and divorce at will". Everybody in Malta TODAY can separate at will? Why do some people continue to churn out this statement and not clealy explain that there ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE between separation and divorce in this regard?
Seems in Malta we're only interested in QUANTITY not QUALITY, including marriages. Pathetic !
Only part I agree with in this article is the need to prepare spouses for marriage. Indeed, with all its (empty) emphasis on the family, the state has not invested a single cent in the preparation of spouses for marriage, ever !
(Therefore, thank God for Cana for (partially) filling the void - although Cana courses are only for Church marriages)
Mr Joe Zammit
May 19th 2011, 11:23
Some are mixing up divorce with remarriage. Divorce is not remarriage. Divorce is the dissolution of a validly contracted marriage by a human person. In an annulment there is no dissolution because there is no marriage.
And here is the evil of divorce: you have a valid marriage in which the spouses have solemnly VOWED to remain each other's, to remain faithful to each other in that, and ONLY in that marriage, and then somebody who has no say in that marriage abuses by declaring that marriage invalid.
What God has united let no man, no State put asunder! This is the greatest argument against the evil and the superficiality of divorce. No person, no MP can vote for it without sinning seriously against God! Divorce is intrinsic evil and as such it admits of NO exception! Divorce is always a grave sin that separates the sinner from God and puts them on the path to hell … and to hell for ever!
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 19th 2011, 11:22
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 valid 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 has never resorted to divorce in her 2000-year-old history.
Mr Michael Debono
May 20th 2011, 19:56
Mr Joe Zammit please quote and explain (though you have no right) para. 2383 of the Cathechism of the Catholic Church.
Another point that you are forgetting is that those who apply for divorce but do not remarry can still receive Holy Communion. Hope you don't say that's wrong. It was already declared so.
Mr William Flynn
May 19th 2011, 11:19
How does indissolubility evaporate and the promises repealed by virtue of a Catholic annulment but not by divorce? Annulment is the most dishonest type of divorce of all.
Just how many marriages are annulled by a civil court outside Malta do you think?
It makes no difference how many times we are told annulment isn't divorce; no one with any brains and a shred of honesty would believe it.
Certainly no secular state (and I don't include Malta as a truly secular state) believes it and Catholics in really secular countries are urged by the Catholic church to obtain a divorce before the church even accepts an application. (One wonders what happens if someone is pushed to divorce by the church, applies for annulment and the annulment is subsequently disallowed).
Mr Grech shows he knows nothing about human relations when he asks, "Why get married at all?" if divorce becomes law.
This is like saying why teach children to walk if some people have amputations?
Is he serious saying that separations can be prevented?
Of course society has a vested interest in supporting marriage; but it also has a vested interest in supporting those whose marriage has died.
The world, including the Catholic church, has found that divorce is inevitable for some. The Catholic church had the added difficulty of getting around the indissolubility clause, and (Eureka!) it designed a divorce wrapper called annulment.
Ramon Casha
May 19th 2011, 11:04
Malta does not have indissoluble marriage except on paper. No country has, or has ever had, such a thing. When a couple marry, their vow is to love, respect and cherish one another. When that love is gone and the couple no longer respect or cherish each other, that vow is broken and the marriage is over. No law, or lack of one, can make the slightest dent in this fact. Love cannot be enforced.
It is the lack of divorce that weakens the institution of marriage. In Malta today, the fact that a person is married means that PROBABLY he/she loves and lives with his/her spouse, and any children he/she has is the fruit of that marriage. Probably. For many however it means that there is, somewhere in Malta or abroad, a person whose name is written next to yours on a piece of paper, but the person they live with and love and respect and cherish and have children with, that's someone else, unrecognised by the state. That's what the lack of divorce has done to marriage, turned it into a certificate.