Christian Peregin
Divorce exam question ‘within the syllabus’
The question on divorce in the religion O level which students sat for last week was within the syllabus, the Education Ministry said yesterday.
Questions on the Christian attitude towards marriage have been included in all exam papers for the past nine years, including topics like divorce, cohabitation and indissolubility, a spokesman said.
The question read: “How should a Christian answer to the statement: Divorce would be justified when mutual love is no longer present between the married couple.”
The Yes for Divorce movement on Saturday complained about the question, saying teachers told students they would fail if they argued in favour of divorce legislation.
When contacted yesterday, a spokesman said the ministry looked into the matter and found that the question was within the syllabus.
“According to the syllabus, religious knowledge offered by Matsec is based on the teaching and doctrine of the Catholic Church,” he said.
“The ministry has nothing to do with the setting up of exam papers. An independent board, the Matsec board, is responsible for the setting and correction of the SEC exam papers. The examiners are approved by the Matsec board and ultimately by the Senate of the University.”
Asked if the question was fair in the current circumstances, he said: “The ministry feels that those who set the examination question should always be sensitive and judicious in the way questions are set.”
He did not say whether students were meant to give the Christian view on the act of divorce or its legislation but said: “In their replies, students have to show whether or not they grasped the issues covered in the syllabus of religious knowledge. The marking of the exam paper is based on these criteria.”
Speaking yesterday, the Marriage Without Divorce movement said it had nothing to do with the examination. The exam question had been drafted in January when the referendum had not yet been announced. Campaigner Anna Vella pointed out it was just an exam question in a religion paper and religion, like all subjects, had its syllabus and regulations.
Dr Vella cautioned that such issues were being blown out of proportion and were deviating from the real issue – that on Saturday the public has to vote as to whether they wanted the proposed divorce Bill to be enacted.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
34 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Clayton Silvio
May 25th 2011, 06:40
Religious studies should be ligically based on religious teachings, thus require religious answer for a question. Why is it so hard for such a logical point o be grasped in Malta???
Today's humanly gods have many to give to this world, starting with self destruction!!!! We are killing what made us humans- Basic Values and Reason!
Mr andreas bone
May 25th 2011, 01:08
yes off course they had NOTHING to do with this, very believable, the question just happened to pop up in the paper, a case of perfect timing i guess.
Mr M Spiteri
May 24th 2011, 23:24
Ha ha. What a coincidence! Everything this PN government does or says has a purpose.....and the majority of the Maltese are stupied enough to believe what the government feeds them.
Has anyone asked why has the government not published the white paper concerning cohabition......what does GONZI have to hide......or who does he want to please? If the people have to decide how to vote next Saturday, shouldn't they be aware of teh full picture....this is deceit by the institutions of our country.
Gerry Cowie
May 24th 2011, 19:42
Suffice to say the usual anti church comments are all the anti divorce movement need to guarantee a "NO!" vote. If only people could conduct this campaign on the matter in hand and not treat is as an opportunity to knock the church and the religion of the majority of the Maltese people, not pour out scorn and sarcasm and disingenuous comment and specially chosen statistics, then they might carry people with them. This deliberate attitude of ignoring the obvious is what has led to the pro movement becoming the best tool available to the anti movement! Well done!
Vanessa Grech
May 24th 2011, 16:23
“The ministry has nothing to do with the setting up of exam papers...
oh sure they are SET UP!
Mr Christopher Higgans
May 24th 2011, 14:27
Those who do not believe in the Roman Catholic Faith as it is in the syllabus had the choice not to sit for the exam. If I am not mistaken the students themselves and their parents opted for the exam and no body forced them to do so.
Mr Ronald Cauchi
May 24th 2011, 14:18
May I ask what the right answer would be?
Mr Marius Zulgis
May 24th 2011, 13:47
This attitude is completely puritanical and ought to be condemned outright by the vatican. God is supposed to be love, not brainwashing young malleable minds.
Bud Moureaux - Flanders (BE) & Xemxija, SPB (MT)
May 24th 2011, 13:32
May I suggest to read
Divorce And Remarriage From The Early Church To John Wesley by David L. Snuth (Fall 1990).
The link: http://www.theologicalstudies.org.uk/article_divorce_snuth.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
For over 2 years, I have been closely following the ongoing divorce debate in Malta in all possible media and through contacts with Maltese friends and relatives.
Divorce in most cases is not at all an easy way out but a realistic way to end the suffering of a marriage broken down beyond repair, both for the spouses and their children.
Therefore the only sensible and courageous choice for Malta to make is:
(1) To introduce a well balanced civil divorce legislation, respecting the rights and interests of all parties concerned, the spouses and their children.
(2) To separate State and Church, i.e. abolish Art.2 of the Constitution immediately.
This is already 50 years overdue. An untenable situation will then finally cease to persist. In this way, Malta will become a real secular society where Maltese effectively can decide for themselves without fearing to be bullied by Mgr. XYZ or Mr JZ and consorts. The Church in Malta should restrict its role to its teaching and advice to its own flock, i.e. Catholics, but refrain by all means from scaremongering and dictating what others should or shouldn't do.
So, next Saturday, the right choice is IVA - YES!
Mr William Flynn
May 24th 2011, 12:42
Might someone say how passing this religious test would qualify anyone for ..what job? what trade? what profession?
50 years ago I had to pass 2 religious exams to get a government job the GCE and "The Local".
The Local was much harder and was a sieve in order to pass only the "suitable" ones.
Believe it or not I passed.
I thought those days are far behind us; but maybe they aren't.
Mr Robert Agius
May 24th 2011, 12:37
They should change the subject from religion to Catholicism. Since when is religion solely Catholic? Either that or the whole syllabus needs to be changed.
Mr Joe Borg
May 24th 2011, 14:12
You are absolutely right.
Deo Catania
May 24th 2011, 11:32
The question read: “How should a Christian answer to the statement: Divorce would be justified when mutual love is no longer present between the married couple.”
The answer: YES divorce would be justified, what is marriage without love? I wonder who came up with such a stupid question.
Mr William Flynn
May 24th 2011, 10:35
The right answer to this question is," An intelligent Christian should answer this question no differently to an atheist or any one else".
There is likely no religion more strictly Christian than Puritanism; they allowed divorce if one spouse was dissatisfied with the other.
Thomas More (known as St Thomas More by those who believe in fairy tales) and Puritanistic in his habits, agreed that if there is constant disagreement and trouble in a marriage divorce should be allowed.
A Catholic paradox that they should worship a saint who was for divorce if a marriage dies…..
Mr C Muscat
May 24th 2011, 10:32
We create problems out of nowhere. This is religion as an academic subject. The teachings are straight forward especially in this case. It does not force you or anyone to concur with the teachings. Religion is mainly a way of life based on the teachings of Christ that make you and God friends in love. All other teachings are probably only academic.
If you are writing on a book like we used to study Shakespeare you have to answer according to what you learn but you do not live according to what you read.
I am not interested in this accident; but it irks me that maybe a teacher tried to help and some parent expecting to be a professor just decides what should be the answers.
Mr Aaron Vella
May 24th 2011, 10:32
Simple, they should have answered:
"Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it's already guaranteed!"
...And Full marks! :)
Mark Thorogood
May 24th 2011, 11:10
"after all the question ask for the view of a catholic" - no it doesn't - it says the views of a christian
S. Maniscalco
May 25th 2011, 10:59
I understand the difference between catholic and Christian - but my point still stands irrelevant of my mistake.
S. Maniscalco
May 24th 2011, 10:23
With all this attention given to divorce right now, those who sat for this exam should be considered lucky, just state what the church and Le movements are saying and you got full marks!
Writing in favor of divorce in such an exam is obviously something stupid to do after all the question ask for the view of a catholic. When I sat for my religion o level exam a few years ago, we had similar questions which not everyone agreed with, and a question on divorce was obvious the predict this year.
If you don'want to abide with the syllabus, your choice should be an easy one - don't sit for the religion o level exam!!
Saviour Sam Agius
May 24th 2011, 10:07
Who are they trying to fool? This is anything but "Religious Knowledge". What's in a name? It's Religious indoctrination and it should be called so. Changing the name to hide this fact doesn't really help. It's a shame we have state schools indoctrinating kids. That's the church's job and it should be left separate from education.
Salvu
John Fenech
May 24th 2011, 09:54
Matsec
Why is it that we must at every chance create controversy? As the regard the MATEC the question referring to marriage had been the same for donkey’s ears. It is a question to be answered by students, who are not eligible to vote. Or should censorship be evoked? Leave the question out because the parents are going to vote! So how could this question influence the outcome of Saturday’s grand event?
The answer to the question about marriage does not necessary condition the outlook of how the student will evaluate the union of marriage. In fact I am sure, that several thousands who will vote yes this Saturday, had sat for MATSEC exams and answered the question about marriage.
MATSEC Examinations:
SEC Syllabus (2011): Religious Knowledge
3. The highest Values in Life
(a) The values of Jesus: love as the highest and fundamental value; love towards God and neighbour: forming one’s priorities.
(b) The Christian attitude towards work, sexuality and marriage.
http://www.um.edu.mt/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/83453/SEC25.pdf
General Regulations and Syllabuses
http://www.um.edu.mt/matsec/code/grs
Mr edward ciantar
May 24th 2011, 09:35
disgusting syllabus!
Sean Caruana Webster
May 24th 2011, 09:15
Our (strong) religious beliefs prohibit divorce, fair enough and acceptable. The Christian faith has a set of rules- let God decide on judgement day how good we were at abiding by them!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is still not fair on students to be told they will fail unless they show disagreement in their answer! This is anti- democratic and goes against the Maltese system. If such actions are tolerable, questions should then be to the point and not dealing with opinions. It's more worth it asking students a few quotations here and there from the Bible so as to keep the exam neutral in these cases. If agreeing to divorce breaks the rules of religion, then imposing it goes against democracy!
And still, with all due respect, since divorce has become a current hot issue, there are definately ways to eliminate the question- unless it's intention was to use it a sort of trap!
Mr M Farrugia
May 24th 2011, 09:51
@Robert Cassar, Nistaqsi inti Kattoliku Ruman, inti mghammed, inti l-uliedek ghammidhom meta twieldu. Jekk ir-risposti ghal dawn id-domandi huma iva allura ghaliex uliedek ma ghandhomx jattendu ghal lezzjonijiet tar-religjon. Jekk tahseb li uliedek ma ghandhomx jattendu ghal lezzjonijiet tar-religjon informa id-dipartiment tal-edukazzjoni dwar il-hsieb tieghek. Iva habib din hija il-biza ta hafna Kattolici li wara dan it-test li talbu l-minoranza jkun hemm oħrajn fosthom it-tnehhija tar-religjon kif tixtieq inti, l-abort, l-euthenasija zwieg bejn nies tal-istess sess. u affarijiet oħra. Dan kollu nitolbuh f'isem il-progress u biex inkun vera Ewropej.
Robert Cassar
May 24th 2011, 12:08
Yes actually I agree to all what you have said below. Id dinja timbidel kuljum. So do we. I understand that your opinion is not the same like mine but that is why we have to give a chance to all but religion in my opinion minders progress.
Robert Cassar
May 24th 2011, 08:57
Why should religion be imposed on kids at school? This should not be in any curriculum.
I have two young kids and I am sending them to public school, why should I allow them to attend such religion non sense classes? If they want when they are grown ups they would choose what religion (if any) they want to follow however it should not be imposed on them. In Malta it seems that there is no space for other opinion with regards Religion. I was forced to learn religion when I was young and it more put me off about it. Since I was of young age I realized that religion is a pathetic invention to control absent minded people! By the way I do not follow any Religion now
Mr David Buttigieg
May 24th 2011, 09:29
It's not compulsory, if you feel the need to you can have your children excused from religion lessons!
Mr Robert Agius
May 24th 2011, 12:43
Mr Buttigieg, some people call such indoctrination brainwashing... imagine children being taught Nazi principles in the same fashion. I wonder what people would have to say about that....or should one wait for their parents to excuse them from Nazi lessons?
Gary Grima
May 24th 2011, 16:56
Mr. Cassar you said that you were 'put off religion' because it 'was forced on you while you were younger'
That is a childish reason. Would you forgoe vegetables for the rest of your life simply because your parents made you eat them when you were younger?
Parents [are supposed to] do what they believe is best for their children both because they love them and also because [they should] know better. That is why they are called parents. By your argument your own children can turn around an scorn you for cutting them off from their heritage and their traditional religion. How would you react to that?
If you do it because you genuinely believe nothing should be forced on them then I assume you would be perfectly fine with it, but is that the best way to raise children? Parents [are supposed to] set the example for their children. What kind of exmaple are you setting? That somehow Catholism is made utterly fallible, invalid, irrelevent and [since you go so far as to imply by what you said] apparently evil!?--simply because you weren't in the mood to contemplate it when you were younger?
Furthermore to your statement 'religion is a pathetic invention to control absent minded people'
I find that a grossly ignorant statement about Western Religions, at least, and more specifically Catholicism! (I do not know enough about far east religions to say) If anything Catholicism makes an effort to get us to think deeply about our actions and choices and to always watch out for any lacking on our own parts as well as others and to help each other with those lackings and flaws. You said you were 'forced to learn religion' did you actually read the Bible [and actually spend a significant amout of time thinking about the implications and intricacies involved in what it talks about]?
Finally in regards to the point which has spurred this discussion:
I can [and have] list a couple of links off hand to surveys conducted in the USA demonstrating the link [or lack there of] that divorce has with happiness, since I am sure the USA is an example looked to by many in Malta as evidence of us somehow being 'behind the times'
http://peterfox.com.au/family_survey.htm
[the page summarizes the results of a national survey conducted by the University of Wisconson]
http://www.americanvalues.org/html/r-unhappy_ii.html
[this page references a national survey links to the results are provided]
Gary Grima
May 24th 2011, 17:16
It would indeed be a problem if Nazism was so widespread among a people
Because Nazism is a baseless, unjust, blind abhorrence and hatred of specific, arbitrary things, qualities and notions. Nazism is a variety of fascism that incorporates biological racism and anti-Semitism. The attitude of fascism toward religion has run the gamut from persecution, to denunciation, to cooperation, but it’s typically anticlerical.
Nazism IS NOT a religion that encourages and promotes love, peace, justice, selfless action, self-sacrifice, self-evaluation, etc
Spreading of one is not the a parallel of spreading of the other and I will thank you for not making any kind of comparison between the Catholicism and Nazism for they are nothing alike!
Mr Robert Agius
May 24th 2011, 20:21
'...promotes love, peace, justice, selfless action, self-sacrifice, self-evaluation, etc' I hope you see some contradiction with real life...
My point is that it is still indoctrination. One can teach love, peace etc. without the need of religion.
Gary Grima
May 25th 2011, 15:03
You can try to spread them that way, but doing so that way just makes it less likely that they will be accepted, upheld and considered important. America has tried doing that for many years now the general consesus is a lack of care about other people. Why? Because what you are poposing is like cutting off the flower from the plant. By seperating such qualities, as we both mentioned, from their moral roots they shrivel up and die. They become a list of commands: do this and this but not this and that is called justice or fairness etc. It's an uninvolved shorthand which doesn't hold water. But if you are so eager for it why don't you try living in such a country for a while and see first hand how much you like it. And I"m not saying to be belligerent. I'm serious! Go give it a shot! Get a better idea of what it is you asking for, especially if you take issue with our country being catholic or trying to be catholic. Because I am very well aware that real life is a bit different but isn't because of what the Bible teaches. it is because of people like you who have a different set of priorities. Ultimately ones which are selfish-which is the opposite of selfless but if that is followed purely things break down pretty fast so instead of trying to be selfless people try to create a morbid hybrid one that allows selfish action but somehow incorporates 'selfless action' [because it isn't truly such now] as a lesser important by product.
Mr Paul Barrett
May 24th 2011, 08:57
Quote: The question read: “How should a Christian answer to the statement: Divorce would be justified when mutual love is no longer present between the married couple.” ........................................
“According to the syllabus, religious knowledge offered by Matsec is based on the teaching and doctrine of the Catholic Church,” he said. Unquote.
The question is ambiguous in that it asks "How should a CHRISTIAN answer the statement........." A Christian could answer the statement both for and against divorce as there are different branches of the Christian faith with different views on divorce. The question should have read "How does a devout Roman Catholic answer the statement............".
Saviour Sam Agius
May 24th 2011, 10:08
Didn't you know that Roman Catholics have a monopoly over the term "Christian", or so they seem to believe.