Catholics hit out at Bishop's poor choice of words

The pro-divorce Catholic movement has reiterated its position that voting ‘yes’ during the divorce referendum “is not a sin” and said whether one is “morally in favour or against divorce is beside the point”.

The movement, ‘Catholics: Yes because it is a right' has said the referendum issue has been totally sabotaged and argued that the referendum was “not about the moral approval of anything”.

“It is about whether one accepts or refuses the States's imposition of one particular moral code upon the whole population,” the group, which is composed of Catholics in favour of divorce, said.

“Catholics who vote ‘yes’ are consistent with Catholic teaching, unlike those who have erroneously turned the referendum into a moral legitimisation of divorce.”

The movement said those who are against divorce have “conveniently chosen to present the referendum question in such a distorted way in order to confound the electorate, especially Catholics.”

The movement also hit out at those who branded Catholics in favour of divorce as “voters ‘à la carte, false Catholics, wolves dressed as sheep, brigands, traitors of Jesus Christ, and the like," referring to the Gozo Bishop's description of Catholics who voted in favour of divorce.

"Voting ‘yes’ doesn’t mean one morally or religiously approves divorce. We call upon all Catholics, whether they are morally in favour or against divorce (for this is beside the point), to vote ‘yes’ in the coming referendum,” the movement said.

More in Divorce Referendum
avatar
I believe Mr. Vincenti's argument was addressing the pro-divorce movement's stance that women have nothing to lose with the introduction of divorce: http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110524/local/Women-have-nothing-to-lose-with-the-introduction-of-divorce.366977 Although I don't agree completely with Mr. Vincenti on: "This is of course the worst possible kind of divorce as it favours one sex over the other", I definitely agree with: "The truth is that the wife-beater will also be set free with divorce." No one can deny that, it is a fact that he can remarry. In such cases, yes, women stand to lose. So the pro-divorce movement's billboard of a woman with a black-eye is a very unrealistic portrayal, how would divorce be solving that issue? I'm not an expert, but in cases of domestic violence if I'm not mistaken annulment might not even be granted to prevent the wife-beater remarrying and possibly doing the same thing over again. Divorce is definitely not the solution in such cases. I agree with a more lenient annulment system however, for example granting the possibility to remarry to the victim, but not to the wife-beater, beating someone is a criminal act after all deserving punishment. But divorce without reason is something else. I disagree with granting a divorce to everyone, the 'quick fix' as many people in favour of divorce label it. Mela dawn affarijiet ta' quick fix jew??? And you can rest assured that it won't remain 4 years if yes wins... I believe each case should be examined in its own right followed by the court taking a well-informed decision whether granting divorce can be beneficial. I think we're better off as we are now, there is annulment after all for those with honest reasons. Annulment is even granted for 'inappropriate preparation for marriage', so it has become more lenient. I'm voting No.
avatar
Vincenti, some women may want to divorce their husbands. They may opt for a younger good looking man. Have you heard of cougars, women who are after younger men. You are sexist but then ... why should I be surprised?
avatar
jiena BRIGANT U KBURI!
avatar
Mr. Vincenti quotes saying ''The anti-family movement, etc., etc''. Is this poor person for real??? Has any side every said or is aiming to be an anti-family??? I can start to understand anti-abortion, but anti-family?? Miskien minn jirraguna hekk ghax ikun tilef totalment ir-raguni, ma jkunx haqqu li tiehdu bis-serjeta.
avatar
Mr Vincenti, For argument sake, wouldn't what you say apply also to the wife? Haven't you heard of wives walking out on their husbands? Wouldn't a woman be able to force a divorce on her husband? etc, etc
avatar
Will women be worse off with Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando’s divorce Bill? I believe they will. The divorce law will force a woman into a divorce that she may not even want. It will allow a married man to divorce his wife, possibly in exchange for a younger, more attractive woman. He will be able to just walk out on his marriage and family to get a divorce – no questions asked. I have never heard of anyone being allowed to negate on a legal contract without incurring penalties. Not until Dr Pullicino Orlando presented his no-fault divorce law that is wholly geared against women. A divorced man may choose to remarry and have another child. Provided that he is able to demonstrate that he cannot financially support his new family and at the same time pay maintenance in respect of his first marriage, he may quite possibly apply to the courts to request that he stops any child maintenance allocated to his first wife and children. This is a travesty. The divorce movement claim that a battered woman should be given a second chance. Who in their right mind wants a woman to undergo such abuse anyway? Of course, the wife-beater was kept conveniently out of sight in their billboard that depicted the grim looking woman with a black eye. The truth is that the wife-beater will also be set free with divorce. Freed to remarry and in all likelihood continue to abuse another wife. How then did divorce solve the issue of wife beating? Simply, it did not solve anything. It just shifted the problem onto another woman. The proposed divorce law is perfectly crafted to suit men with the divorced women of Malta and their children becoming poorer and even more dependent on men. This is of course the worst possible kind of divorce as it favours one sex over the other and the siblings of the second marriage over those of the first. This divorce law will create a subgroup, a new minority class of divorced women and their fatherless children. The anti-family movement have gone to enormous lengths to disguise the implications of this law by reframing it and calling it “responsible”. I feel that the women of Malta deserve far better than a divorce law that places them at a disadvantage to men.
avatar
When the church starts dedicating the same time and effort on topics like the cost of living, decent wages, poverty, health care, child abuse, extreme capitalism, drugs, corruption, animal welfare, then maybe just maybe they might win back the faith of many lost sheep. Bunch of hypocrites
avatar
wasal izmien li naraw flats flok knejes ghax tilfu il fiducja ta hafna nies. proset bishop
avatar
A certain William Cauchi in the TOM blog wrote: When some so called ''learned speakers'', including the church hierarchy start speaking on behalf of God it gives me the shivers!!!!! That was exactly what the crusades were all about. And this crusade is not different than the previous ones. ''We, the righteous ones'' have God behind us and only we shall speak and act on His behalf and all the others shall be crushed and damned to hell. Tal biza - imma biza vera in the year 2011!!! Has man not learned anything in the last 2000 years. ......How right he is. All Europe has changed it's mentality (after a thousand so called ''just'' wars in the name of Christ), but we in Malta still think as if we are the sole bulwark of Christianity and all the rest lives in sin!!!!
avatar
How utterly embarrassing for Malta as a little country who wants to be on an European stage to be going through this hogwash over a civil right of divorce that is endorsed by the whole world except Malta. And how shockingly disgusting that people in the high hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church are once again pitting misinformed Catholics against their Christian brothers and sisters for their own financial gains. How much longer can this island afford to let these treacherous scribes, pharisees and hypocrites whose prime concerns are only personal, trample on their civil rights. MATTHEW 23:23 WOE TO YOU SCRIBES, PHARISEES, HYPOCRITES ! FOR YOU PAY TITHE OF MINT, ANISE AND CUMMIN AND HAVE NEGLECTED THE WEIGHTIER MATTER OF THE LAW, JUSTICE MERCY AND FAITH. THESE YOU OUGHT TO HAVE DONE, WITHOUT LEAVING THE OTHERS UNDONE. MATTHEW 23:25 WOE TO YOU SCRIBES, PHARISEES HYPOCRITES ! FOR YOU CLEANSE THE OUTSIDE OF THE CUP AND DISH , BUT INSIDE THEY ARE FULL OF EXTORTION AND SELF INDULGENCE.
avatar
Jiena qed nahseb li id-dinja waslet fl-ahhar taghha u qed nghixu fil-bidu tat-tmiem taghha skond dak il-famuz ktieb tal-bibja l-APOKALISSI. M'inhiex nghid hekk minhabba d-divorzju ghal min se jivvota IVA imma sirna qisna l-Kelma ta' Alla kif irrelevata fil-kotba tal-Bibja nsejniha, u dawn l-affarijiet strambi li qed jigru bhalissa fid-dinja kollha juru haga wahda li bdejna THE BIGINING OF THE END.