Catholics for Divorce call for pro-vicar's resignation
The Catholics for Divorce Movement has called for "the immediate resignation of pro-cicar general Mgr Anton Gouder and the Archbishop's delegate for social communications Fr. Charles Tabone O.P.
Thanking all Catholics who voted 'Yes' in yesterday's referendum, the movement also called for a formal pledge that the Ecclesiastical Regional Tribunal would be reformed without delay.
Steps, it said, should be taken immediately to initiate a broad based exercise to draw up a new social-oriented pastoral plan.
"At this historic, delicate and crucial moment in time our Holy Mother Church in Malta and Gozo needs to pluck up its courage and face the future with humility and steadfastness.
"Tested facile, obsolete and spiritualistic pastoral actions are clearly no longer an alternative.
"What the Holy Spirit of God is plainly showing us is the need to no longer rely on alliances with the throne, and to uphold a Messianic ethic which announces to the poor, the outcasts and the downtrodden of these islands the liberation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
"It is the duty and responsibility of all to us ― hierarchy and laity ― to heed the Spirit of God.
"We, as Catholics, are ready to help our spiritual shepherds in any way we can," the movement said.
83 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
James Camilleri
Jun 12th 2011, 00:04
Dear Mr Debattista
Sorry for not answering your before. First of all may I congratulate you on your baby daughter. Children bring such joy in an already happy relationship between two people who love each other. So enjoy your daughter because they grow up so quickly.
Secondly why shouldn’t we be civil towards each other just because we disagree.
You brought up a lot of issues which would take me for ever to answer. So I will limit my self. You said that the church is prone to making mistakes because it is made up of human beings. Yes I agree with and accept that. I understand that individual people make mistakes. The mistakes I tend to disagree with are the ones committed by the church as an institution. I would not blame the church for the sins of an individual priest or nun but I do blame the church for sins committed as a church even though as you say it is made up of humans.
Please do continue to write if you feel like writing. But since this is a public forum you might wish to do it privately. So if you wish to you might like to look me up on facebook and we can continue discussing over there.
Best wishes to you and your family
juanita debattista
Jun 3rd 2011, 21:38
Dear Mr Camilleri,
I would like to state that this is not Juanita speaking now but her husband Ray as she is busy with our baby daughter. I thank you for your civility in discourse as many of the IVA supporters have been less then gracious and quite often insulting and the level of hatred towards the church is staggering. I will concede of course that there were things said that should not have been from both sides. Of course on such a sensitive issue and with such short notice for a bill of this kind it is easy for people to get carried away. I would like to comment on a couple of your points. I totally agree that the church has made some mistakes and some grevious ones in the past, but it's a given that the church is not perfect and I have never yet met a priest who says it is, but what it most certainly true is that it belongs to Christ and instituted by Him. Just as you and I make mistakes and ones that we later repent of. The church is prone to the same but Christ was not. If we believe that He was Lord and God than his word should be irrefutable, but of course His words must be interpreted. Unfortunately in the multitudes of schisms that have occured within the Universal Church, the interpretations of scripture has left a distorted view. In Greek in which the Gospel of Matthew was originally written the word 'PORNEIA' is used. In protestant bibles this is interpreted as unfaithfulness and in catholic bibles the translation has it as an illicit marriage. An illicit marriage constituted marriage within the first two degrees of family. Both Romans and Greeks at the time commonly had fathers marrying daughters and brothers marrying sisters and and there were even Roman emperors who married first degree relatives. Protestantism due to the liberalisation of the Word of God and in some cases to suit their own fancies have decided to change the meaning. "Heaven and Earth will pass away but my words will never pass away" Matt 24:35. It is also of some importance to note that God in no way asked Abram to lay with Hagar but rather he did so at the insistence of Sarai as is clearly written in Genesis 16 1-4. In fact God wanted Abram to prove his faithfulness and trust in Him that the Almighty would keep His promises, which he did with his willingness to sacrifice his only son believing that God in His love and mercy could turn even this for good. What absolute faith! The next point is the one about priests taking wives. Funny how people often site this. It is most cetainly because peole do not know the roots of what they are commenting on. In no place in the bible has it been mentioned that priests cannot take a wife. Indeed, in the time of Jesus it was commonplace. Nowadays the church holds that priest should not marry in order that he will be free to devote his mind and heart wholeheartedly to Christ. This is not to say that in a time to come that this will not be changed, because simply it was not something that was forbidden by Our Lord. The church is presently still considering this, but as is its want it meticulously studies the situation before taking any action. The Eastern (including Orthodox) churches can have married priests.
I would welcome further dialogue with you as it is good for us to get things out in the open so that at least we have understanding of each others views. That is very healthy.
Your brother in Christ
Ray
James Camilleri
May 30th 2011, 23:24
Dearest sister in Christ Juanita. No it is not a joke being catholic and pro divorce. There are many catholics all over the world who are in favour of divorce as much as there are catholics in favour of the use of contraceptives. But while contraceptives are used privately, divorce is a public affair. So it is more worrying, newsworthy etc etc. Being catholic does not necessarily mean following the church's teachings and interpretations blindly. The church - made up of men and women like you and me - might after all be wrong in some of its teachings and some of its interpretations. I am not saying it is - all I am saying is it might be wrong. Knowing people who are in pain and empathising with them (not tolerating because that is not really a christian value - to tolerate is to live with someone you do not really agree with or like) but sharing in someone's pain and wishing there was something that could be done for them. So yes I was in favour of divorce and was pained by the church's way of handling things. Not for being against divorce - that would have been out of character and deviating from what it holds as its correct interpretation. But for the very negative comments, its terrorising of people about sins etc etc. Yes its apology was very lame and hurt more because it revealed that it was conscious of what it had been doing. The IVA movement came out cleaner on this account since it never never called anybody names as did some of the clergy. And as to resignations i should think it should be the bishop of Gozo who should resign. His homily went completely against christian teaching and was more in line with medieval bigotry and not "dehen" of a christian church shepherd.
juanita debattista
May 31st 2011, 16:49
My dear bro in Christ james..While I appreciate your response may I point out the following...
1 The very meaning of the word Catholic is 'abiding to the teachings of the RCC'..anyone who volontarily falls short of this is NOT a true Catholic
2 The fact that there are many people who call themselves Catholics yet favour divorce,contraception,gay marriages etc etc doesnt justify your argument.. these still defy the teachings of Christ..If you want to play a game of football then play by the rules or play as you like but then dont say you re playing football
3 Divorce is wrong not because the Church says so but because marriage is a SACRAMENT INSTITUTED BY cHRIST HIMSELF.. If Christ was in favour of Divorce He would have stated so as clearly as He emphasized the importance of the sacrament of marriage
4 Re Church terrorizing people that divorce is a sin.. Marriage is a Sacrament instituted by Christ.. Divorce is the abuse of this union so yes it is a sin ..
James Camilleri
May 31st 2011, 23:55
Have to answer ms juanita. I have once again to disagree with you. Not agreeing with everything the church teaches does not make you less of a catholic. The church as an institution wants a status quo in things and it is generally catholic laymen who "help" the church move forward. This has happened all throughout church history. For one I will mention the fact that when Galileo came out with his theory that the world was round he was punished by the church for saing sinful things. Does the church today say that it is still sinful to state this scientific fact? No. The church today barrs priests from marrying and it would be sinful for a priest to get married. However up to the Middle Ages priests could get married. This was stopped when the church realised that a lot of its property was being left to their heirs which were outside the church and so the church was losing out economically. What is a sin today was not a sin then. So what is sinful and was isn't is relative and depends a lot on social mores etc. If you read the Bible correctly what Jesus says about divorce is that it is wrong to divorce one's wife (or husband for that matter) except when one's wife has commmitted (or husband) has committed adultery. So I believe that yes Christ does allow divorce. And had he lived today most probably be would add wife beating (or husband bashing etc) to his exception. The church does not accept this. But I still believe it. I am sorry if this is not in agreement with church teachings but I still consider myself a christian no matter what the church say. I donot have qualms about it and my conscience does not give me any pangs.
2. Yes marriage is a sagrament. So is taking Holy Orders. Yet priests and nuns can be divorced from the oaths they have taken. So if divorce in marriage is a sin because it is a sacrament so is divorce from holy orders because it is a sacrament as well.
3. As to football yes the game does have its rules but so many different teams play in different ways and so many referrees interpret things differently. For ex. for a referree an action is a foul for anither referree the same action isn't. So it is all a question of interpretation.
4. And if we are going by the Good Book. So many things were allowed which today we consider a sin. God for ex permitted that Abraham take his slave as his concubine so that he could have a child by her. Do it today. It would not just be a sin but a criminal offence.
Bud Moureaux - Flanders (BE) & Xemxija, SPB (MT)
May 30th 2011, 21:43
To all Maltese citizens!
"A new Malta has been born."
"This is the beginning of a more secular society!"
Having witnessed the charade by the Church, the conclusion is obvious. We should now strive for two things within the shortest possible time,
- first, the separation of State and Church, i.e. abolish Article 2 of the Constitution and
- secondly, the correct delineation between Church and State, excluding any interference whatsoever by the Church in State affairs.
Therefore, to this effect, let's start
(1) A FaceBook group.
(2) Set up a Movement with an appropriate name, e.g. No more State within the State; Malta-Secular YES, Malta-Church NO, ...
(3) Organize the necessary lobbying work for putting all this into laws to that effect.
In the past weeks leading up to Saturday's referendum, the Maltese voters have learnt how the Church has been scaremongering and lying to their flock and they have witnessed the utter hypocrisy the Church has shown by their belated apology. The voters are now much better armed to resist the Church's dirty tricks in the next campaign.
The correction of the relationship between the State and the Church in Malta 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 citizens will effectively be able to decide for themselves without fearing to be bullied by Mgr. XYZ 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.
Maltese voters are mature, conscientious people. They have shown it last Saturday, the D-Day for Divorce legislation. So, let's go for it, under the motto 'YES, we can do it!'
Bud Moureaux, partially residing in Flanders, BE and in Xemxija, SPB, MT.
Albert Spiteri
May 30th 2011, 18:18
The Catholic Church is not a private club run on the fancy of a select few!
The Maltese curia cannot invent its own set of morals and mortal sins to fit its political agenda.
It cannot be allowed to lie to prove a point.
It cannot be allowed to blackmail people with the sacraments and threaten the gullible with mortal sin over issues that are strictly social and political!
The Catholic Maltese curia cannot place itself over and above the laws of the country and usurp people's constitutional rights for an unhindered and unshackled participation in its democratic life as free democratic citizens and nationals.
The Maltese catholic curia cannot with impunity be allowed to hijack the Church of Christ and identify Christ with an extreme-right political gang with a hidden political agenda!
Thank the GOOD LORD the Maltese people have finally put aside their partisan blinkers. Thank the GOOD LORD the Maltese people have upgraded their appreciation of what’s GOD’s and what’s Caesar’s and appreciate that religion never goes well with politics.
juanita debattista
May 30th 2011, 15:25
'Catholics for divorce..'.. Are you serious?! The very meaning of the word Catholic is ' abiding to the teachings of the Church' What Church may I ask does this movement belong to?? A better name for this movement should be.. Catholics for divorce at Only-in-Malta.com!! This is hilarious..thanks for the joke :-)
Mr Joseph Cauchi Senior
May 30th 2011, 13:49
Some anti-clericals are saying that the Catholic Church in Malta is irrelevant, as according the referendum results testify.
Well, it’s good to remember that the Yes vote was only 37.69% of the eligible voters!
If 37.69% is considered a majority, then what about the remaining 62.31%?
JC.
Mr Matthew Grima
May 30th 2011, 15:34
So I guess the "Le" vote won the European referendum JC?
The people who are eligible and wanted to voice their opinion did so, and the majority of those voted in favor. The rest weren't prepared to voice their opinion, so their opinion is rendered useless. If the result had been the other way round, there would be no talk of such numbers.
Ms D Galea
May 30th 2011, 13:11
Ha iddumu tisservew bil- koppla tal- Vatikan , sinjuri skuzi-kattolici favur id-divorzju?
L ghawdxin ghamlu sewwa, ivvutaw skond dak li hu ahjar ghal buthom.
Mr l. theuma
May 30th 2011, 11:40
Din m' hix impożizzjoni fuq il-Knisja? Il-Knisja kapaċi tmexxi lilha nfisha.
Gerry Cowie
May 30th 2011, 11:23
But surely the majority of Maltese voters are Catholic! How ridiculous to thank all Catholics who voted yes!
As for shepherds (please note correct spelling) and sheep, it is time for anti-Catholics to maybe pick up their bibles and look more closely and learn more about the context of shepherds and sheep in biblical times. Stop the gloating and the sarcasm and try to understand more about that which you mock!
victor caruana
May 30th 2011, 08:15
Why call for resignatins? The church is becoming irrelevant by the hour. A case in point was the divorce referendum. We were called a country marooned in the middle ages. These are the same people who allow the Borg in-Nadur lunatic corner, not because they believe in it, but because they thrive on ignorance and fear...and supported of an ex Catholic Action leader, who may have been himself massively brainwashed by the church. We are free now.
Mario Mallia
May 30th 2011, 07:55
Why are people wasting their time replying to such nonsense? Thank you "Catholics" for Divorce, for providing some Monday morning entertainment.
Jason Borg
May 30th 2011, 07:45
L-opinjoni tagħkom hi tagħkom biss - tippruvawx iċċappsu lil ħaddieħor biha.
Paul Sammut
May 30th 2011, 07:13
It seems that the church clergy has not learnt from past mistakes. They were insensitive and tried to impose like what foundamentalists do in other religions. The church clergy (not the church as such) and the No campaigners were so arrogant in their approach that they seemed ridiculous and looked really out of touch of reality. But what hurt me most was when I was called 'traditur' and 'Brigant'. Then to add insult to injury the clergy apologised at the very end of the game. Never thought that they would plunge so low down in society. For the Yes campaigners it was a blow beneath the belt, and an insult to those who unfortunately were scared to vote yes even though deep down in their hearts and conscience they wanted to. But all in all, - after I heard the debates, I chose yes. Deborah was so honest and convincing. Besides being couraguoes, she was so down to earth and brought forward good arguments. Well done Deborah. By the way, although I voted Yes I would never go for divorce as this goes against my teaching, because at the end of the day I try to be a good catholic. What I do not want is to be a foundamentalist. - P Sammut
Adrian Gouder
May 30th 2011, 06:58
"What the Holy Spirit of God is plainly showing us....", Oh my goodness, now some think they can interpret the Will of the Holy Spirit! A completely new level of sheer arrogance is now in our midst, is what I see.
Ms G Schembri
May 30th 2011, 06:50
The Church is there to lead and not to impose. The sooner this is understood by all the better. Some things done or uttered by members of the clergy hurt the faithful, being right and being arrogant are not the same thing.
Catherine Caruana
May 30th 2011, 05:47
The fact that the bishops asked an apology for what they did ,goes to show that they were wrong in what they were doing but still with their full knowledge they did it.Isn't that a sin committed by people who should set us an example.????
Mr Joseph Cassar
May 30th 2011, 08:33
You got it all wrong, apology does not mean there were wrong, wrong are those who interprete the chuch teaching in their own way, it is obvious what media you listen to since you are just repeating what the left and anticlerical media has sad in the last weeks.
Mr Joe Gatt
May 30th 2011, 01:31
`The Catholics for Divorce Movement has called for "the immediate resignation of pro-cicar general Mgr Anton Gouder and the Archbishop's delegate for social communications Fr. Charles Tabone O.P.`
`I would say that even the 3 Bishops should resign IMMEDIATELY`
Leave well alone I say, they should continue their hell bent mission. They are doing an excellent job of eliminating tyranny and dictatorship in Malta.
Simply by their actions
Mr Mario P. Sciberras
May 30th 2011, 00:20
"but they have absolutely no right to dictate to the Church and to the faithful how to run the Church."somebody said (see below). If it interfere with my life I have a very legitimate right to tell them what to do. Also more importantly, our politicians should have the guts if not something else, to review the laws of Malta to ensure that they are in conformity with a country that is secular. As a starting point they should amend the law in so far as it relates to the Curia's tribunal precedence over the civil one. In the final analysis it must be shown that this country is run by an elected parliament not by self appointed power hungry fallible men belonging to the catholic church of Malta.
J. Schembri
May 29th 2011, 23:38
Amen and we will replace the curia with The Catholics for Divorce Movement!
Viva l-PL.
maria grech ganado
May 29th 2011, 23:30
I am going to call NOT on the local branch of the Catholic Church, but on the highest authorities in the Vatican to restore the spirit of Vatican Council 2 to the Church. Vatican Council 2 actually called on each individual Catholic, cleric or lay, to expose those who did anything within the Church which conflicted with the SPIRIT of the Gospel.
That was not I, it was Pope John 23rd and Paul 6 - the havoc it created caused apparent disorder, as ALL reformation must, but the disorder would have marked only a transitory phase. As it is, the suppression of the decisions of Vatican Council 2 is showing signs of being a real threat to the Church in general.
I have looked for the original documents on Internet to copy and paste from Dignitatis Humanae and Gaudeum et Spes, but I found only interpretations of the documents, and NOT the original ones. I am not saying that they are not on Internet - I am merely saying that I did not find them
Mr Stefan von Brockdorff
May 29th 2011, 23:19
nista nkun naf x qed tistenew ahh? Min jilghaqilkom saqajkom? Jekk tridu twemin kif jghogob lilkom u skond ma jaqbel lilkom morru vintaw twemin ghalikom ghax hadd m'hu ha jinbidel ghal pjacir taghkom!! Xi stenejtu lil tal knisja jghidu? Dak kollu li jmur kontra il bibja...il ktieb ta regoli li jimxu/nimxu fuqu? ... dan qisek qed taghid tmur tahdem ximkien u timponi lil boss tijak jghid dak li jaqbel lilek u jekk le tqactu il barra...qedin sew ehh aw malta, kultand tal misthija nghid li malti! Mela issa li ghada taghkom ukoll ha tibqghu gejjin bil paroli fil vojt, ghadkom mhux kuntenti!!
Mr Robert Gatt
May 29th 2011, 23:09
If there's somebody who should resign, it's the members of this so-called movement "Kattolici Iva ghax Dritt"!!!! I voted No in the Referendum, yet I have my due respect for all those campaigning for the introduction of divorce on the basis of civil grounds. But with regards to this so-called movement "Kattolici Iva ghax Dritt" (sic), what right does this movement have to speak on my behalf as a Cathilic? What right does this movement has to take a position in the name of the Church, when the Church's teachings are in direct contrast to the "teachings" of this movement? What right does this movement have to spread incorrect messages to Catholics? The word of Jesus Christ was one exclusively against divorce, and no twisting and turnings of HIs Word can ever make it seem that Jesus Christ was in favour or that Jesus Christ recommended that we vote in favour. Whoever voted in favour had every right to do so, but calling oneself Catholic and at the same time taking pride in stating that your vote was Yes is symptomatic of false Christianship. You cannot call yourself a member of a club and then turn upside down its rules. Period.
rose ann
May 29th 2011, 23:01
YOU GOT YOUR DIVORCE, NOW GET OVER IT AND STOP MOANING PLEASE !!
Ivan Vassallo
May 29th 2011, 22:55
Protestanizmu r-rizultat tà certi interpretazzjonijiet tal-Koncilju Vatican II.
Mr John Camillleri
May 29th 2011, 22:50
We would like Carmel Hili as BIshop.
Steve Zammit
May 29th 2011, 22:48
Catholics for Divorce Movement...are you serious??? You're going too far now
Think what you want, but Christ made it clear He is against Divorce. Read the Gospels, or do you only preach and practice what suits you best?
The results came out. I respect the majority opinion but now this is getting sick.
Mr Matthew Grima
May 30th 2011, 11:31
"Read the gospels"?
"Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery." (Mt.19:9)
Even the gospels have an exception for divorce.
Mr Claude Sammut
May 30th 2011, 13:56
@ Mr Matthew Grima - Please quote the correct bible, that is not the bible the Roman Catholic church abide by!
'It was because you were so hard-hearted, that Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but it was not like this from the beginning.
Now I say this to you: anyone who divorces his wife -- I am not speaking of an illicit marriage -- and marries another, is guilty of adultery." Mt 19:8-9
Mr Joseph Cauchi Senior
May 29th 2011, 22:39
Who are these people?
Why is the media giving them any exposure?
They are nothing, just ZERO.
The Times should use its space for more worthy things and not just for charlatans!
JC.
Mr M Borg
May 29th 2011, 22:21
Stop making fools of yourselves ! Who do you think you are ?
As if anybody will take any notice of what you want or say.
You call yourselves Catholics ?
What a joke !!
Mr Matthew Grima
May 30th 2011, 11:28
You took notice of what they said, hence your comment.
fredu debono
May 29th 2011, 22:20
intom tghidu li intom kattolici. kattoliku jien ghax obdejt lill-isqfijiet u vvutajt le. kburi li vvutajt le ghax naf li l-quddiem mhux se nkun hati tat-tahwid li se jkun hawn bid-divorzju. nirringrazzja lill kurja kollha talli ma bezghetx u qalet il-verita sagrosanta kif inhi. issa min ivvopta iva jaghmel ezami tal-kuxjenza jekk ghandu kuxjenza.min ivvota iva kien servili ghal dik il-persuna li ghal iskop personali taghha ghax ghandha bzonn id-divorzju irrikattat biex isir hekk.
Ms Lynn Zahra
May 29th 2011, 22:17
@George Darmanin:
But the Church representatives did NOT spread the complete WORD OF GOD during this referendum, and nothing you say can change that. Apart from the despicable, anti-Christian act of calling those who want a clear separation between State and Church , wolves, which many like myself, find unforgivable, the Church hierarchy wilfully HID from the laity the fact that Jesus makes an exception to divorce where the union is bad. See Matthew 19:9 .
Mr John J Borg
May 29th 2011, 22:09
why not call for the pope to resign as well..lol
this so called victory is no victory at all, divorce is the breakup of marriges, which normally ends up with one winner and lots of loosers, whilst `divorce` was needed to sort out many pending legal matters, unfortunately it will facilitate `no fault` breakups......time will telll
Mr Jo Meli
May 29th 2011, 22:07
The Catholics for Divorce Movement is RIGHT in their decision to call for the resignation of Anton Gouder and my old classmate at St Albert the Great College, Valletta and Pawlin Charles Tabone.
To these two I must add mario grech from Kercem, Gozo.
Thank you folks to remind us Maltese that in the Catholic Church DO exist people like you, The Catholics for Divorce Movement, who are PRO-PEOPLE in their outlook and VISIBILY show COMPASSION for those in need.
Mr Joseph Huber
May 29th 2011, 21:56
The "I am holier than thou" principle has given birth to practically all schisms throughout history. Is there one in the making in Malta?
Keith Grech
May 29th 2011, 21:54
Fr Charles Tabone is a man for all seasons. I find this statement baseless to say the least.
If anybody has any doubts what this man is made of just come to the congregation on Sunday at 7pm, Sliema and see for yourself.
Keep up the good work!
David J Cassar
May 29th 2011, 21:45
Catholics for divorce........WHAT AN OXYMORON !
Why not also Catholics for abortion.......or how about Catholics for bigamy.......
Please shape up and cease to be ridiculous.
On the other hand if the word 'Catholics' is used in the context of being open mined......liberal than it is just a weak attempt to fool the public in general.
P Borg
May 29th 2011, 21:44
The Yes vote has won because the Church was too afraid to speak. We have become a society which fears calling the spade a spade, where 'a la carte' Catholicism prevails. Mons Grech was right all along. Matthew 7:15 "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves."
Mr Tommy Vella
May 29th 2011, 21:42
Please show us your credentials!
You did not want the official church to interfere with our conscience in declaring whether voting for divorce is a sin, yet you had the gall to send us a leaflet into our homes telling us that it is not a sin to vote for divorce.
I would not have minded a leaflet inviting me to vote for divorce, but a leaflet saying that it was not a sin to vote for divorce was proof of the respect you do not have for other peoples's consciences.
Joseph Debono
May 29th 2011, 21:39
I would like to thank our church leaders for the guidance they have given us through these difficult times, for calling a spade a spade without fear of being out of synch with what the majority was demanding. In the heat of the campaign there were isolated mistakes that could have been avoided and the bishops were right to apologize. Even this is a sign of leadership. On the whole I am very positive about these last three months. The church together with many persons of good will took the opportunity to write and give evidence of what marriage is all about. We all could build on this positive message and seek ways how to strengthen marriages. The church has no time to loose on what the state powers decide on marriage in the coming months. This stage is now over. What I see as a challenge in the near future is how the church will deal with couples who marry after divorce and who wish to stay in community with the church. It is imperative that the church prepares itself for these situations and offers good guidance.
Ms Kristina Cassar
May 29th 2011, 21:26
This is beyond DISGUSTING!!! Who are they to speak for all the Maltese Catholics??
Mr GEORGE S DARMANIN
May 29th 2011, 21:22
You call yourselves Catholics? Who are you to represent me and other Catholics?
You have the right fot different views, but if you want an a la carte menu, don't seach for it on the Holy Book. Its' only the Truth that you'll find there.
Mons. Gouder & my good friend Fr.Charles did their sheperdly duties right.
The fact that the people spoke, shall not change the views of the Church. The Catholic Church's job is not to seek popularity, but to spread His Word. Not selected words, but ALL of them, even those words that hit under the belt.
Ramon Mangion
May 29th 2011, 21:28
Yes, the church has the right to say its opinion but not IMPOSE OR SPREAD FEAR....
M Ellul
May 29th 2011, 21:29
Not selected words. Really? Here are some words that you probably didn't hear or read:
If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house.
Deuteronomy 24:1
David Caruana
May 29th 2011, 21:47
Sour grapes!
Mr A Cardona
May 29th 2011, 21:57
While i agree with what you said i would however appreciate that you show me where in the Bible is mentioned to use fear to deliver a message? While there i would appreciate also your view on the "sorrowful" message given to the electorate AFTER the voting has ended. I never thought the church is 100% perfect as its made of humans but isn't that a cowardly act???Isn't that hypocrisy just to gain advantage? If they were serious they would have apologized BEFORE not after.
Do you believe this was fair on us? Being treated like children.... if we do not do our homework we will end up punished! It was plain blackmail. If that is the picture of the God they want us to make us believe in, sorry but they are wrong... seriously wrong. At least that is not the God i believe in. Many were just not going to vote but could not stand it any longer that ended up voting yes to show their disgust and protest against the way the church is acting.
Mr Mark Cutajar
May 29th 2011, 22:10
All words of the bible? Like these fine words here?
"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man. She must be quiet." (1 Timothy 2:12)
"Happy those who seize your children and smash them against a rock." (Psalm 137:9)
Should we follow these teachings too? If not, then it is selected words.
angelo cilia
May 29th 2011, 22:48
Our beef is that your Papist church wants to do more that spread his word, it wants to control our secular government and non catholics with its brand of gobbledygook.
The romanists can never seem to understand what separation of church and state really means.
This is not Malta of 1884, those brainwashed generations are all now bones thrown into an ossuary or charnel house long ago.
Andrew Zammit Manduca
May 29th 2011, 23:03
Yes they are Catholics.... Since because they are your friends it show nothing, for me they can all resign together with both archbishop. its time to learn that the people are not scared by their threathing or make scared about the babaw!!!!!!!!! In the same scenario why the archbishop is there to represent me and the other catholics....... this referendum has showned up a lot of things. its time to start opening our minds and LEARN
Mr Paul Barrett
May 30th 2011, 01:05
The only problem is that the Shepards have lost control of their sheep - perhaps they need some new sheep dogs.
Mrs pat bayliss
May 30th 2011, 02:17
well said George,
unfortunately it is the sign of the times, Jesus said you are either for me or against me...
Mr R Calleia
May 30th 2011, 02:54
what a paradox ! And who are you? You still don t get it do you? This arrogant kidnapping of Jesus Christ and God s teachings by people like you made this result happen. I might agree that calling for resignation might be far fetched but a medieval dogmatic mentality such as yours is now thankfully past ! The good book your brag about was complied by Jews ( Torah old testament ) and the new testament by a Pagan Emperor, Constantine.Now, do You call yourself catholic ?
Matthew P. Zammit
May 29th 2011, 21:22
Nahseb qed inhawdu lin-nies u nisgwidaw lil kull min hu nisrani u lil min qed jara dan l-artiklu.
Hemm ghalfejn noqghodu nikkwotaw kull darba bhat-tfal kliem Kristu jew qed nitkellmu fejn habat laqat l-aqwa li nidhra tajbin. Naghmluha cara li Kristu qal li Alla ma riedx id-divorzju u fidi soda soda tghidlek li dak li mhux tajjeb ghalik mhux tajjeb ghal garek.
Minkejja li d-divorzju ghadda xorta rridu naghmlu dawn l-affarijiet cari u mhux noqghodu nistennew li haddiehor jitlob apologija. Jitlob apologija min ipprova jhammeg il-Knisja ghax id-diska ma daqqitlux ghal widnejh. Min ma joghgbux jaghlaq halqu u joqghod ghar-regoli li ghandha l-Knisja bhal kull istituzzjoni ohra.
Kristu iva Divorzju iva hija l-farsa li qed nghixu. Id-divorzju ghadda - nithassa lil min isir vittma tieghu ghal kapricc ta' haddiehor!
Mr Joseph Micallef
May 29th 2011, 22:19
How long will you continue with this charade of depicting Divorce as the cause of broken marraiges (vittma, kapricc)!! Jekk hemm vittma issir vittma mas-saparazzjoni mhux mad-divorzju siehbi - dahhalha frasek ta! Divorce is not the cause of marriage breakdowns - its just the recognition that the marriage is over and that the partners can re-marry (civil marriage). Some people just keep depicting divorce for what it is NOT whatever anyone else says - whatever facts are brought to them! I repeat - divorce is not what one gets if one has trouble in one's marriage - its separation that breaks up the marriage and separates the couple. Then should they wish -they can opt for divorce....only when the marriage has already been dead for 4 years!
Mr Jo Camm
May 29th 2011, 21:10
Do these people want to become our Bishops themselves??
Kemm hawn min jara kbir.
Mr Tony Borg
May 29th 2011, 21:09
What unadulterated nonsense! As if Mgr Gouder and Fr Tabone occupy their posts in the Curia and perform the tasks assigned to them by the Archbishop as a result of the "will of the people"! These supposed "Catholics" for divorce have no idea what the Church is all about, and no idea of the Church's social history either. By the way they are behaving they are simply confirming -- if confirmation was ever neccessary -- that they are in fact firmly placed outside the Church. They are perfectly entitled to place themselves so, but they have absolutely no right to dictate to the Church and to the faithful how to run the Church.
Mr Paul Barrett
May 30th 2011, 01:02
Quote: but they have absolutely no right to dictate to the Church and to the faithful how to run the Church. Unquote.
Ummm - but was that not what the Church and the Church faithful have been trying to do to the rest of the population, irrespective of others faith.
I have no idea if these members of the Catholic Yes movement are right in what they have suggested but I know what the Church and their faithful followers have been threatening over the last five months and more has been totally wrong.
Anyway, according to the numbers that actually voted No in the referendum, the Church services should be a lot shorter - that is if the Church does not retract on their threat that anyone who abstained or voted yes was no longer entitled to receive communion.
Mr FRANS H SAID
May 30th 2011, 08:05
no - only from the interpretation
Mr Michael N Cassar
May 29th 2011, 21:05
Oh is the above implying that we should differ from the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ now that a yes vote has been achieved????.
Mr Pierre Portelli
May 30th 2011, 07:44
Mr. Cassar, What you and others here are referring to are Catholic teachings. Teachings like those e of the Catholic Church on marriage, divorce, separation & annulment are not Christian nor are they biblical but in fact in many cases are diametrically opposed to Christ's teaching or Biblical ones. True, what this group are saying is absolute trash, the Catholic Church like all other churches is not or should ever be a democratic organisation. Catholic born people who find their beliefs or their conscience in conflict with Catholic teaching are free to seek elsewhere. Catholicism is only one of many Christian sects. There are many that are much closer to the Bible and the Christ's true teachings. Catholic authorities will of course officially continue to count you in their number but that is only one of their tricks to make themselves look more powerful & influential than they really are...
Mr R.E. Saliba
May 29th 2011, 20:58
"no longer rely on alliances with the throne"
You want us to turn Protestant? Fat chance
angelo cilia
May 29th 2011, 22:02
Don't knock being protestant, it beats all that papist gobbledygook .
Mr James Cauchi
May 29th 2011, 23:01
Nice catch. Mr. Saliba.
Sounds like an Inter-faith dispute - but this may be considered a consequence to the nature of the catholic church campaign in the last election. The surfacing of splits is inevitable.
While some commentators may be of the opinion that the leadership of the catholic church gravely erred in their approach to the referendum, it should be the catholics who feel comfortable with the teachings of the church who should have say on the matter, not externals such as myself - our rightful (figurative) jurisdiction extends as far as the civil boundaries, including the preservation and enhancement of our civil rights where appropriate or necessary.
This statement by the Catholics for Divorce Movement does appear to throw some doubt upon the claimed religious identity of the group when taken in the light of the statement expressed within this article. If they are indeed not truly Catholic then it is hardly their place to demand resignations.
The plot thickens.
vincent a galea
May 29th 2011, 20:49
I would say that even the 3 Bishops should resign IMMEDIATELY aftrer their APOLOGY... SUCH ADMITTANCE OF GUILT !!
How can they ever FACE the people of these Islands AGAIN !!!!!!!!!
I am sure that even the POPE will accept their RESIGNATION after this "BRUTTA FIGURA" and such a disservice to this Catholic Nation throughout the whole CAMPAIGN !!!!!!!
Mr Michael N Cassar
May 29th 2011, 21:16
Vincent a galea Apologize for What? For teaching the word of God, or for having man made religion; excuse me, you got what you wanted now let each person choose the road of his life.
vincent a galea
May 29th 2011, 21:45
But Mr Cassar... you got it all WRONG.... !!! They have ACTUALLY ALREADY APOLOGISED last night !!! Remember ? And unashamedly they told the media not to publish their ADMITTANCE of GUILT before 10.00 pm after the voting ends !! Until the last minute they were trying to hoodwink us !!!
I have not asked for an APOLOGY (the bishops did this already!) I have asked for their RESIGNATION !!
I dont consider the outcome of the REFERENDUM "getting what I want"... It showed that the people cannot be fooled any more!
Is HYPOCRISY GOD'S TEACHING AND THE WORD OF GOD ????
I am sure that I am correct when I say that GOD does not want "OQBRA 'MBAJDA" And no amount of BIBLE thumping will convince me otherwise !!
Mr Tommy Vella
May 29th 2011, 21:47
The bishops still enjoy the respect of real Catholics. As a matter of fact, speaking for myself and a lot of people I know, we have more respect for them now than before this whole thing started. We support all that they said and did without any reserve.
Mr Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
May 29th 2011, 22:15
Catholicism a la carte OK. Catholicism a la carte has been there for centuries. Currently Catholicism is a la carte for the priests. They can leave the priesthood, breach a vow with God and marry. Those who are married cannot breach a vow they made to anotehr man. Clearly the victororious make the rules to suit themselves.
Mr Joseph Micallef
May 29th 2011, 22:20
Mr. Cassar - they already apologised!
Mr John J Borg
May 29th 2011, 22:21
in my honest opinion there was no need for an apology ...at least not for telling us CATHOLICS the right way to choose......its like joining a club, you either follow the club rules or you are not with the club...
T CURMI
May 29th 2011, 23:48
I suggest you read the Bishops' statement (rather than what was said about it). The Bishops did not admit guilt. They apologised if hurt has been caused by any member of the Church...and they said they gave their forgiveness to the people who have hurt them.
Paul Sammut
May 30th 2011, 08:09
exactly, - that's what the Yes Movement wanted,everybody to choose the road of his life and not impose ! - PS
Mr Denis Pace
May 29th 2011, 20:47
Catholicism -a la carte-
Mr d. attard
May 29th 2011, 20:09
Sensible guys, well done for providing a more balanced view of what being catholic is all about.
Ms Rudi Mcbeal
May 29th 2011, 20:08
Dear Catholics for divorce, you're going to get what you wished for - now GET OVER IT and stop stamping your feet. Either you're Catholic or you're not - you can't have your cake and eat it. The sooner you accept it the better for you.
Mr Jo Meli
May 30th 2011, 07:34
Am NOT thank you !
Patrick Mulholland
May 29th 2011, 20:05
So the wolves in sheep's clothing have finally shed thier cover. Are these guys serious? 2000 years of Catholicism and we're waiting for these "leaders" (haha) to set the church right! Go ahead for another split.