Catholics 'might not be committing sin' in voting for divorce - Anton Gouder

The Archbishop’s pro-vicar Anton Gouder has restated a stand by the Church that Catholics voting for divorce in a referendum “might not be committing a sin” if their decision had been well-reasoned.

29 January 2011, 12:00am
by Matthew Vella

2 min read

Gouder complained that comments on divorce he made on radio, allegedly stating that voting for divorce would be a sin, had been “manipulated” by the media. But he added that a common statement by various clerics was required in order to make the Church’s teaching clear on voting for the introduction of divorce.

Gouder said today on Radju Malta’s Ghandi x’Nghid that MPs and citizens voting in favour of divorce in a referendum “may not be committing a sin” if their decision had been informed and conscientious, even though they would have still come to a wrong conclusion.

“Everyone must think according to their conscience, and be well-informed that way. Christians’ conscience should be guided by Christ. To go against this guidance would require certain self-examination. You could come to a ‘wrong conclusion’ but not deliberately so. You might not be committing a sin if you come to this ‘wrong conclusion’.”

Asked by presenter Andrew Azzopardi whether this argument sounded “perilous”, Gouder replied that Christians were duty-bound to think “in terms of the common good and not according to their individual needs or the personal experiences of people close to them…" - referring to family members who had experienced marital separations.

“Every Christian is duty-bound to be well informed of the Church’s teaching on the common good. And non-Christians should be informed of the common good. If they are not well informed, they would be committing a sin [in voting for divorce].

“If they are informed well, and still comes to a wrong conclusion, he might not be doing something wrong.”

A suggestion by Judicial Vicar Mgr Arthur Said Pullicino to judges and lawyers to be ‘conscientious objectors’ and “desist” from collaborating on divorce proceedings, had angered parts of the legal community. His declaration had prompted a signed statement by Gouder and University theology lecturers saying that a Catholic’s ‘reasoned’ conviction to vote for divorce may be a mistaken decision, but “one is always obliged to follow and decide according to one’s conscience”.

“All citizens, Catholic or not, if asked to give their judgement whether they wish or not the introduction of such a law in favour of divorce have the right and duty to follow their own conscience which needs, however, to be well informed and well formed, keeping in mind the common good,” the declaration states.

Most recently, former Prime Minister Eddie Fenech Adami went on record stating that divorce was wrong because “it was Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who told us divorce breaks down society.”

Matthew Vella, a freelance journalist at MaltaToday, was formerly executive editor at Malt...

•

ta ghezempju dan gouder flok jalem kif tkun ragel qijad jalem kif tigdeb u tilab bil kliem. ghadli fejn tkun ta hali nigi nisimak kumidjant

Patricia Marsh •

Serrahtilna mohhna Father Gouder! Mur kompli ahdem fuq id-dokument dwar il-festi, ghax bhal kull progett iehor li jsir f'dan il-pajjiz donnu li ghadu ma tlestiex. Nispera li mhux ser taghmel xi U-TURN iehor u wara li qajjimt kaos shih ser tirtira kollox? Toqghodx tghid li gejt ikkwotat hazin, iva hekk ghidt quddiem Malta kollha u wara li ndunajt li ghamilt froga, ta' supperv li int ser twahhal f'haddiehor. Skuza ruhek ghax mill-bqija ser nibqghu niftakkruh bhala wiehed minn hafna qassisin li jpacpac hafna u r-rwol ta qassis ma jaghmlu qatt. TKOMPLUX TBIEGHDU N-NIES MID-DAR T'ALLA BIZZEJJED IL-MERHLA DEJJEM QED TONQOS.

•

Lola mohhok mimli hmerijiet, vera immanipulawlek mohhok bir-religjon. maghmudija , pracett, grizma u zwieg u il-hajja lesta lollllllllllllll u hallina lola lola what goes around comes around tinsiex li int jekk int mizzewga, u forsi ghandek it-tfal jista jigri kollox u jekk me jkunux it-tfal tieghek jista jigri lit-tfal ta tfal tieghek kulhadd fid-dinja qed jghix Lola meta jigri lilna personalment ,hemm hekk imbaghad nkunu nafu xi tfisser meta jgarrab imbaghad inbidlu d-diska meta tiehu xi xokk taf kemm tibidlu d-diskors hux mela tinsix dak li mhux qed taqbel mieghu illum int(sforz tar-religjon li manipulalek mohhok) tista taqbel mieghu il-quddiem nerga nghidlek , jekk ghandek tfal jew tfal ta tfal jist ikollohm marriage seperations- jew anke jigu gays

•

By the way I 'agree' with marriage because I believe in the right of gay men and lesbians to choose. Personally I think marriage is a bankrupt institution. Even straights are rejecting it. You also have to understand that the LP is not a church like the Catholic Church where everyone is required to have one point of view lest they get excommunicated or denied communion. There are different views within the party and they all seem to respect each other nonetheless. Can you say the same thing with the PN with Gatt threatening to resign like a spilt little brat. The PN is on its last legs and so is the Catholic Church. Thank God Malta's youth have woken up to the joke. Fancy believing in a cruel God who sends his son to be tortured! And why are you, presumably a woman, believing in an all-male God. Are you women not as good as men to be gods. I say gods because there are three gods in Christianity ... but apparently you lot cannot count.

•

As to your comment about J Muscat's views, you forgot to say that he believes in civil marriages for gay men and lesbians. What about you? Do you agree with him? In this regard, I disagree with him but there is a hell of a lot more to admire in Muscat than in Gonzi.

•

Dear Lola If God made Adam and Eve and they had children, they must have had sex with each other to get the world going. I wonder whether it was Eve with the boys or Adam with the girls? Or perhaps brothers with sisters? So according to your silly book, God approves of incest. You say it is the Word of God. Tell me, how do you know? Was it emailed by him or her or faxed to you. It is a collection of writings some of which are spiritual and some others demonic. Mind you, you have a right to believe in fairy tales.

•

@JCC God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. Homsexual marriage is unnatural no matter how much the individual think it is OK, it is not. I am glad that J Muscat thinks the same way.

•

Knisja kienet, ghadha u tibqa' Partit Nazzjonalista minkejja t-tixjir tas-slaleb fl-ajru ta' l-isqfijiet u t-tbissima ta' xi whud li jilbsu l-mitra ... tbissima li tahbi l-velenu tal-messagg taghhom. Ebda wiehed minnhom ma jixraqlu d-deskrizzjoni ta' nisrani.

•

"Top Gouder" should have read "To Gouder".

•

Marriage is made for (a) men and women and (b) men and men and (c) women and women. The individual is more important than the institution. If it was good enough for Joseph to consider ditching Mary, it is good enough for everyone else. Top Gouder, my message is this - if you think marriage is so important and a sacrament, go and get married.

•

Gouder says that MPs and citizens voting in favour of divorce in a referendum “may not be committing a sin”. Who gives a shit what a unmarried priest thinks? Is he not a member of a Church that conceals the abuse of children from the rightful authorities? Win or lose, th Church is facing defeat on this issue because it is only a matter of time before divorce and same-sex marriages are introduced in Malta. It is high time for the government of Malta to stop recognising the Church as a state and to stop accepting Church marriages and annulments. Malta should assert its sovereignty for a change. Stop talking about Malta being independent. It is not. It is still tied to the apron of the Catholic Church. Malta paljazza!

•

wasal izmien li isib delizju gdid gouder ohloq partit u semmieh il meri kollox.

•

vera nihu pjecier nara il gouder jiprova iraqa il qarra hamra biros. ghax najdua kif ini irida ta super talker imma jahasra sar bhal politici jibdel fejn jehel.

•

proset gouder vera qijad tigbor inies ghal twemin tal knisja bil kumidji wara lohra. ftit ta zmien ihor tibdew thalsu inies biex jigu il knisja ghax ftit fadal boloh jamnu dak li tajt int u il knisja

•

I would be voting for the divorce law to be introduced because I feel that every one has the right to choose. My conscience is clear about this, may I add that I am a practicing catholic and although personally, I am happily married and would not consider divorce, who am I to stop others who want to? Mons. Anton Gouder is right, if our decision is well-reasoned, I do not see any wrong and no sin is commited.

•

What qualifies this person to tell others if they are committing a sin by the way they vote? Are we going back to the primitive sixties when our beloved clergy made it a mortal sin if a person read a Labour Party newspaper? His lot gave interdiction to the Labour Party leaders and those who supported the party’s political beliefs in those dark days. People like him caused all the unrest that happened then. I was foolish enough to support them at the time, but not this time. We have moved on since then, it’s a pity the church in Malta hasn’t. It would be better for the Catholic church to cleanse its ranks from all the paedophiles it has than to try and force its out-dated teachings on the masses. If the church wants to preach morality, it should set it’s own house in order first. We now have many Muslims and people of other faiths who are entitled to vote on this issue who wish to have a divorce law like other EU countries. Therefore the church has no right to get involved in this issue, it is a civil matter. It is evident that our clergy are a bunch of hypocrites. Including the Pope because in his youth he was a Nazi Party member.

•

Nahseb aqta kemm ser jiddejjaq minnek Mons. Gouder. Iddahhaqx SURFTURTLE! Anqas guts iggib ismek m'ghandek ahseb u ara kemm tiddibatti fil-pubbliku! U le, x'kull tip tara fid-dinja! Andrew Farrugia alias

Paul Sammut •

Very simple. Mons Gouder can't run with the hares and with the hounds He is playing dirty politics. Basta jiprova jsalva lil Gonzipn u addijo il-fidi. Dik qeda jinqeda biha biss bhala paraventu ghal ipokrazija u 'ngann. Mela haseb li l-Maltin ghadhomcwiec?

•

Mgr. Gouder has finally seen the light. Independently of whether his is a ploy presented as part of a "grand design" aimed at wrongfooting the pro-divorce movement, what he says is perfectly right, morally and ethically. So, what's all the fuss on the divorce issue? The Church should now pursue the line suggested by this luminary and allow the civil society to debate the issue and cast its vote accordingly. Following Mgr Gouder's pronunciamento it is evident that the Church has finally found a win-win situation for itself if not for the entire nation. If the No faction wins, the Church would immediately proclaim a victory for traditional Catholicism, if the Yes faction does, the Church would be able to say that it respects the vote and acknowledges that the faithful voted for divorce only for those who no longer consider themselves Catholics, while remaining faithful to their religion themselves.Another win for the Church's renowned diplomacy. Besides, it will immediately prod its annulment panel or whatever it is called to accelerate their process thereby giving divorce seekers the chance to make amends with the Church while getting what they need. Good for Mgr Gouder's strategy of Plan A and Plan B. Plan B seems to appear more advantageous to the poker player.

Pauline Moran •

Mons. Gouder I challenge you for a debate on national television regarding the subject of divorce and the role of Jesus Christ whom you say is against divorce so much! You and the church are the real sinners because Jesus never ever judged anyone or tried to harm someone with his words or actions. You say (or think) that you represent Jesus Christ but you are wrong. You(the church) represent only those who are fuelling its wealth, covering its sins (and you have a lot), and protecting the greedy and the powerful. Shame on you for trying to poke your finger in the rights of the Maltese citizens! If Jesus was among is he will surely whip you all up for twisting his words and taking advantage of his name.

Keith Goodlip •

IF Jesus spoke of divorce (and that is a BIG IF); as a Jew, he was speaking for the Jews. He did not speak for other religions.

Alfred Galea •

Schlangina, how could Jesus speak against divorce if there was no divorce then?? Remember the Samarian woman at the well? He didn't condemn her or call her names even though she had 6 husbands.He didn't call her a sinner.

•

Hallina Mons Anton Gouder l-ewwel parlajt hafna u issa qed tibla lura id diskors li ghid meta kont ghet li taghmel DNUB MEJJET JEKK TIVVOTA FAVUR ID DIVORZJU Xkunbinazzjoni Mons Anton Gouder l-ewwel kellna lil isqof MIKIEL GONZU meta gie imponut id DNUB IL MEJJET u issa ghadna lil neputih Dr Wenzu Gonzi li il knisja skond kliemek Mons Anton Gouder li ipprovajt terga timponi id dnub il mejjet Jiena haga wahda nghidlek Mons Gouder li int ma TISTAX IS SOLVI IL PROBLEMI TAL MIZZEWGIN IMMA DAWN HUMA IRIDU ISOLVUHOM

•

ask all these things tomr.anton gouder , http://nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm the church speaking of conscience and morali , disgusting : Two recently uncovered letters from the Vatican provide strong evidence that, despite their claims to the contrary, the present Pope and his predecessor were well aware of the scale of the priestly child sex abuse crisis and took active steps to cover it up. “These letters show beyond doubt that the Church can never be trusted to tackle this dreadful problem responsibly by itself" — Keith Porteous Wood, National Secular Society. The letters make clear that the Vatican, and the Pope’s personal representatives, put protection of the Church before the protection of children. It instructed bishops in two different parts of the world not to report known abusers to the police or release files. Read the letters here. Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the National Secular Society, comments: “These letters show beyond doubt that the Church can never be trusted to tackle this dreadful problem responsibly by itself, but what can be done? The most effective remedy is pursuing the Vatican itself, and perhaps its leaders, through international organisations and the courts. Lawyers have got close to proving that the Vatican itself has been not just complicit, but calling the shots. These letters could just prove to be the last piece in the jigsaw. “The letters make it all nigh impossible for the Vatican to heap all the blame for gross misdeeds on local bishops. As Prefect of the Congregation of Doctrine of the Faith since November 1981, no one knows more about child abuse in the Catholic Church than the current pope, Joseph Ratzinger. Most of those reading these letters will be asking whether the pope could not have known (to put it no stronger) about these instructions to be obstructive to the secular authorities in reporting suspicions or releasing files.” The executive director of Amnesty International Ireland, Colm O’Gorman, said that the 1997 letter was proof that the Vatican had been operating a policy of instructing bishops not to report criminality by priests. A campaigner and survivor of abuse, Marie Collins, called on the Pope to state “that mandatory reporting by church representatives to the civil authorities in Ireland of any complaint of child abuse has his approval”.

•

TRUST THEM AND YOU WILL BE SORRY they are wolves with sheep skin, using the bible and christ to hide. Vatican Bank (Institute for Religious Works) The IOR is built on secrecy. Described by a US court as “murky”, it keeps secret accounts, does no audits, and claims to destroy records after ten years. Since 1998, however, the Vatican Bank has come under pressure from the monetary watchdog, OECD. In 2009, to be able to continue using the euro, it agreed to submit to the anti-money-laundering laws of the European Union thus putting itself under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice Almost a century ago Pope Pius XI stressed the necessity of married women to be “fruitful” and “obedient”. Of course, the first leads to the second, as a woman worn out with childbearing is more likely to be docile and her children serve as hostages. Nowadays “fruitfulness” is called “giving life” and “obedience” in Vatican-speak becomes “true freedom Life at all costs The Church doctrine of the “culture of life” was anounced in 1995. It was a change of course for an institution which, apart from a taboo against shedding blood itself, has accepted the death of the body as collateral damage to the life of the soul. However, today we hear no mention of the pope's hangman, his army or his Inquisition. To foster reproduction, the Vatican has a new “culture of life” ― and women must bear the brunt. Côte d'Ivoire A concordat was made especially for “the basilica in the bush”. This pink marble church, built by an ailing dictator who was worried aobut his soul, is modelled on the pope's own cathedral, St. Peter's, but was planned to top it. The funds for the upkeep of the huge and empty basilica are guaranteed by a concordat. The Vatican appears to have no qualms about taking money from a land where most people don't reach the age of fifty, but it requires that all financial accounts be kept secret. I feels to vomit ,when i hear the word catholic church.

•

here is the church "BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA %#@*%$#@%#@#*& " the goverment should have the guts and remove the 1993 concordat, people don't know what a concordat means ........ but politicians are afraid of the vatican- since they are chatolics but, it was eddie fenech adami who made that concordat in 1993 a concordat in brief is : What are Concordats? These church-state accords often give the Church massive state subsidies and other privileges. They can also permit Church employees to be hounded about their private lives. Yet as “international treaties”, concordats bypass the democratic process, making parliaments powerless to modify, let alone revoke them. The left gets a modus vivendi, the right a concordat Concordats have traditionally been made with rightwing governments, whether absolute monarchies or fascist dictatorships. However, only a quiet working arrangement has been made with authoritarian governments on the left, as these compete with the Church ideologically, rather than complementing it. Concordats help control women Concordats can be a powerful tool for social control. These Vatican “treaties” can prohibit divorce, get a woman fired for remarrying or even deny her access to sex education and family planning. Concordats help keep women married and bearing children for the Church. Yet studies have shown that most Catholics worldwide disagree with many key Vatican doctrines — as do many priests. Concordats as international treaties Concordats take the form of treaties between the Church government and a national government. This allows them, in most cases, to claim precedence over national legislation, and sometimes even over a country's constitution. How do concordats mesh with a country's laws? Legal experts explain In (monist) countries where international treaties are at the top of a single hierarchy of laws, concordats have automatic precedence even over constitutions. In dualist countries, on the other hand, concordats must be incorporated into national law and their priority varies, though, even here concordats generally outweigh national laws

John Mifsud •

Welcome to the new theology of a la carte Christianity!

Donella Agius •

What does Mons Anton Gouder means when he said a person is well informed and then votes for divorce without commiting any sin? Well inforned does not mean that at least one sees what Jesus himself said? Jesus spoke very clearly against divorce.

Donella Agius •

The church in Malta needs direction and not opportunists like Mons Anton Gouder. A position in the Church means more responsibility and not more power as the power-hungry Gouder thinks. He spoke the truth only once when he said it is a sin for a true catholic to vote for divorce. But since this brought him to unpopularity with the media, he has now changed completely his words and is saying the opposite.

Corinne Fiorini •

Vote with conscience for Believers – meaning understanding the miserable pains that one is going through a bad marriage who has to hold on to it for the sake of marriage and suffer the consequences for not being set free from constant fights, abuses in physical and mental, adultery, discrimination from the community which all affects children in growing up such evil environment. That is living in hell. Voting yes to divorce will give the affected couples and families a chance to carry on with their lives. Nobody wanted a divorce when entering a marriage. Married a “wrong person” is the main reason causing the break-up. God cares for individual’s well being. I doubt that He would call a spouse, hero, if he or she is being victimized constantly or beaten to death by his or her spouse, just to keep the vow for Him. For children sake, an amicable divorce would be best for all parties involved, instead of dividing them into tinier pieces than before. (Brain washing will kill their soul.) Help them to understand and to accept the situation and to grow up in a new life. The divorced couples might surprisingly discover that they bond better as friends than being husband and wife, only if they honestly make an amicable settlement with goodwill. Applauds for Fr Anton Gouder's new statement which clarified the misconception about Divorce Is Evil.

•

If you're a Catholic and want to vote for divorce, no problemo. Just vote for divorce, and then confess afterwards. Simples!

•

Thats my kind of Church; I feel at home with it.