Tuesday, 1st September 2009
Sleeping with the enemy
To say that controversy about divorce abounds, is possibly the biggest understatement of this century. Even people who are supposedly on the same side of the holy coin are having diverse opinions on the matter. Just like rectums everybody seems to have an opinion, but now it has come round full circle with some of us losing their entire point of view at the cost of those who opine the loudest.
Unless you’ve been living on Mars, and possibly even if you were, you know that the Catholic Church is fundamentally against divorce. According to its teachings, marriage is a commitment that should last until one of the spouses dies. Ironically, none of the Church’s representatives who laid down these rules have ever been married, and therefore none of them have an iota of personal experience of their own. When faced with blinding evidence that shows how cruel or even dangerous it is not to free a couple from each other (entirely), they just revert to quoting the bible and when convenient, statistics. According to the Church there are very few odd reasons why a couple’s marriage should be annulled and thus allowing the two parties to remarry, but not only are the reasons limited to a ridiculous few, but it also takes a lifetime and a fortune to prove and process them.
And now there’s an even more interesting twist to the farce. The Church itself got itself into a tight knot of contradictions, with the Pro-Vicar General Anton Gouder openly criticising Mgr Charles Vella, the founder of the Cana Movement. Whilst Mgr Vella claims not to be in favour of divorce (surprise surprise), he also admits not to be afraid of it because he does not believe that it is the cause of unsuccessful marriages. On the contrary, he believes that it is the lack of preparation that leads to the failure of marriages. An irate Pro-Vicar General, on the other hand, finds convenience in statistics and goes on to quote the divorce rate in Italy which according to him increased by 74% in the past 5 years. He also goes on to say that the social sciences prove that second marriages are less stable than the first.
Mgr Vella seems to be the only member of the clergy not entirely hostile to the notion of divorce. Is it purely a coincidence that he is also the only member of the clergy who has nearly 60 years experience working with families whose marriage is in crisis?
With all these contradictions flying around, and the realities of life zooming in and out of focus, our society seems to be falling within the following schools of thought:
- There are those who believe in the Church’s teachings blindly and will do everything in their power to stay married and to keep everyone around them married. Whether the husband beats the living daylights out of the wife, or the wife fools around with the gardener, these people see no reason for such a couple to move on.
- Then there are those who believe that if push comes to shove and one of the spouse’s or the children’s life is in danger, or perhaps when someone’s sanity is on the rocks, then maybe, just maybe, it might be a good idea to pursue a separation, but, shock horror, should either one of the parties pursue another relationship.
- We then have the totally undecided. Whereas in a normal conversation an unclear opinion would drive me round the bend, in this case it is probably the best of all three evils. At least, just like an agnostic, someone who is not adamant about the matter leaves room for discussion and eventual conviction. Deep down the undecided have been brought up to believe in the church’s teachings, they are genuinely good people who never dared question what they were being taught to be the saintly truth, and yet, they look around them and can identify at least five of their own close friends who had no fault in the breakdown of their relationship and are stuck in it without the possibility of ever severing the legal ties with their non-existent husband or wife. They have friends who despite all their efforts and prayers have been abandoned by their spouses, they have friends who live under the same roof as their estranged spouse with no hope of reconciliation, they have friends who had no choice but to go against their religious beliefs and get into a second relationship without an inch of legislation to protect them, and they have friends who live in fear of what society might say about them putting their and their children’s psychological health in danger.
- Then there are those, who like me, cannot fathom how in this day and age the church still dictates the law. With all the obvious evidence staring us in the face how can a few men with no personal experience whatsoever hold on to the reigns of opinionated power for fear of a relationship catastrophe? And why is it that by simply happening to be Maltese I am automatically assumed to be Catholic and practicing without a choice? Do they not realise that the marriage/relationship crisis started way back when women stopped being entirely economically dependent on their men? Unless some social tragedy throws us back to that situation or a similar one where one partner is somehow dependent on the other, some relationships will continue to fail, more and more people will continue to move on, and in the long run, without the introduction of divorce, there will simply be a drastic decrease in marriages.
So much for trying to keep the marriage statistics healthy!
RSS
Comments
One SHOULD be able to choose whether to divorce or not irrerspective of what the majority say, since frankly, the majority do not have to live within your marriage. This is what most naysayers selfishly do not understand. It is a personal choice. You can agree or disagree but it still remains my/your choice. I and many others want that choice.
It is only because Malta is politically in the Middle ages that we have this situation.
Last point,once the law of divorce in introduced in Malta, who is going to pay for it. We know that it will be huge burden on the goverment finances. Are the pro divorce gentleman ,going to accept higher tax rate for them to finance this law.
This statement is exactly why I disagree with divorce. What I quoted above and the other examples you gave lead me to ask: Why the hell did the wife marry if she decided to start fooling around with the gardener? And shouldn't she be mature enough to know that fooling around with the gardener is not something a married person should do?
My point is, that first someone goes about making mistakes such as marrying and then "fooling" about with someone else, as you put it, and then they start crying for us to bow our heads down and go through absolving their marriage and everything.
You'd think these people had no idea what marriage meant before going through with it.
As to Mr. Farrugia's comment I wasn't aware that one had to be qualified before discussing the subject of divorce. My point is its Government who has not leaglised divorce not the Church - fact!
The church is heavily invested in marriage and sex and so it makes sense that its priests set themselves up as marriage counsellors and sex therapists. What? These roles are best filled by lay people well-versed/trained in human vagaries.
A successful second marriage? A worse one? All depends. A disastrous first marriage is not like a 'frittata andata male' (a flopped mulled wine) requiring less water and more wine for a second success. Training for marriage needs to tell those embarkirg on such a mission what marriage is and how it came about. Viewed thus, I personally am surprised that the failure rate of marriage is so LOW. Marriage works for its dictators, ie church and state, the back-benchers. No consideration for the frontliners, the wedded. And this is both tragic and unfair because the wedded bliss setup is anything but - it is flawed because it cannot be anything else. I regret to say that an Institution doused in water and wine is a non-starter. What is needed is spring water, pure and true, and no wine. Certainly, no vinegar. It sours the whole experience.
We're lucky we're full members of the European Union which allows Maltese to obtain a divorce in several of its member states. And for everybody's information, if a Maltese couple living in Malta get divorced in Italy or England (to give an example), the divorce certificate is accepted in Malta.