I take the opportunity from your editorial of the 18 May 2008, (‘A wake-up call’) to share some reflections on the political and social issues which have to do especially with marriage and the family.
These reflections are based on the teachings of the Church, which Pope Benedict XVI has explained so clearly in the Encyclical Deus Caritas Est, (25 December 2005). Pope Benedict says: “The just ordering of society and the state is a central responsibility of politics… The two spheres (of state and religion) are distinct, yet always interrelated… Politics is more than a mere mechanism for defining the rules of public life: its origin and its goals are found in justice, which by its nature has to do with ethics… [The Church’s social doctrine is meant] to help purify reason and to contribute, here and now, to the acknowledgement of what is just… The Church cannot and must not take upon itself the political battle to bring about the most just society. She cannot and must not replace the state” (n. 28).
“… The formation of just structures is not directly the duty of the Church… it has an indirect duty… the purification of reason and the reawakening of moral force. The direct duty to work for a just ordering of society, on the other hand, is proper to the lay faithful… to take part in a personal capacity” (n.29).
These quotations put in a clear way the foundations for relationships between Church and State in social matters. It also makes clear the individual Christian’s responsibility to contribute in the political and social sphere, obviously in a way that is a logical consequence of his beliefs, otherwise he would be living in a dichotomy between his beliefs and his political stance.
May I comment on parts of the editorial itself.
Although “in a sense it [the family] still is [“a tightly knit unit]) “cracks in the edifice are becoming daily more pronounced”. We agree on the analysis. But anybody who cherishes an edifice would mend the cracks, not widen them. I think that if we believe in the importance of marriage and the family (and I think that no one denies this) then we have to strengthen the family. In this, I think that all forces, social, political and Church, should work together to strengthen the family. This was my proposition, along with other issues like our youth, that I made to our representatives in parliament at the Mass preceding the opening of parliament on 10 May 2008.
I believe, and what happened in other countries confirms my belief, that divorce would accelerate the process of the widening of these “cracks”. Divorce is being presented as a “second opportunity to start a new life”. It may be the case to some individuals, but again, does experience from other countries prove what is being presented to us here? Divorce is considered by some as a right to leave one’s wife or husband and marry another as if the first was never present in one’s life.
During my meeting with representatives of the media this year, I mentioned the possibility of looking at what were the results of introducing new legislations, including divorce, in other countries. The statistics in a country like the UK show that divorce is not a remedy. On the contrary, the situation has deteriorated. According to the Report on the Evolution of the Family in Europe 2008, published by the Institute for Family Policies, the United Kingdom has experienced a fall in the marriage rate of over 33% since 1980. One would have expected more marriages not less, since divorce gives a right to remarriage.
I believe that when the political class urges couples to prepare themselves better for a marital commitment, is not using “patronizing tones” in a pejorative sense. What is wrong with urging couples to prepare well for their lifelong commitment in marriage, especially since we know that stability in marriage is advantageous to the whole of society, especially children? What is lacking perhaps is the political will to be unconventional in taking initiatives to truly help marriage and family relations, rather than just helping (thank God for that also, and the Church is at the forefront to do this) the victims of marriage breakdown.
The editorial’s assertion that “in the present climate, in which half as many separations as weddings taking place annually in Malta” does not seem to be verified from statistics. I am aware that some official sources give this statement, but I am also aware that other official sources give a different picture. Let me give an example. The 2005 census records the total population of over 18-year-olds as 317,925. Of these, 196,323 are married while 13,354 were reported as being separated or divorced. This is by far less than half the number of marriages. Separated persons are 4.2% of the population and 6.8% of those married. There is definitely a need to have a more accurate picture of the situation. For separated persons and their families, marriage breakdown is a tragedy and not just a number in a table of statistics.
Recently we had another set of statistics about the number of residents who have acquired a divorce from abroad. But we need to specify this information more. It was not always mentioned that of the Maltese asking for divorce in another country, in the last seven years, just 13 (5%) were an all-Maltese wedding and the rest were Maltese-foreigner weddings. This is a far cry from the allegations that only the rich Maltese are going abroad for divorce, hence rendering the non-introduction of divorce also an act of injustice between rich and poor.
“To trigger a discussion on the issue of divorce, cohabitation rights and the singles culture”… “allowing for an open debate characterised by mutual respect and acceptance”. Again, I cannot understand this assertion, as if there is some kind of censorship about the issues. I think that the issue has been written about and debated for years now, and perhaps the contributions in favour of divorce have been more frequent and louder: our dialogue is a proof of this.
“Allow family matters to be dictated exclusively by the teachings of our Christian faith and Church”. I think that this is demeaning to those of us who freely believe that a society based on a stable marriage is most beneficial to our society. I think it would be abusive also if someone would say that there are some who “allow family matters to be dictated exclusively by the teachings of our secularist society”. The assertion: “to change the law before inevitable cases before the European court recognize the status of a common law in Malta”, smells also of a patronising attitude, this time by Europe. I hope that the majority – for or against divorce – hold their position and campaign for it because they feel it is the right thing for society and not because of some kind of blackmail.
“The way forward for a discussion on both divorce and cohabitation rights has to be placed on the political agenda, with discussions encouraged within the political parties and via the media as a whole”. Nothing new! It was already on the agenda of a political party in the last elections, and even before, and I am sure that the fact that the main political parties have not proposed it on their Election Documents does not necessarily mean that it has not been discussed. We cannot give the impression that that discussion has taken place only in those countries where divorce has been legalised. Sincere and open-minded discussion could lead also to the population’s conviction that only the strengthening of marriage is a solution. And even this is a positive political decision. It is unjust to present it just as a negative decision!