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.