I refer to various newspaper reports regarding the Archbishop’s reactions to the Private Member’s Bill presented by Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, as reported on 6th and 7th July.

Whereas members of the Catholic Church have every right to take part in the discussion on the introduction of divorce in Malta, it is very surprising to hear the Archbishop basing his criticism on political considerations. In Malta, first and foremost, we choose the MPs because of their values, rather than because they are part of a political party. In Parliament, an MP can choose to stop forming part of a particular party. Elected MPs should therefore be free to decide on how best to represent the electorate.

Secondly, how can the Archbishop question the “moral authority” of the MP presenting the bill? How can some puritan, holier than thou MP present a divorce bill? Does this breed exist? If it does, he/she would not even think of presenting it!

In agreement with the Archbishop, stable marriages are the best way forward for society and the country. The issue which the Catholic Church is not expected to understand, but which our MPs are duty bound to deal with, is what to do with failed marriages. The choice is not between stable marriages and divorce, as the Catholic Church so conveniently tries to portray. The choice is whether we retain the present system of separation or whether we go for divorce legislation. Any MP truly representing the best interests of the electorate will definitely go for the latter.

The Archbishop then switches to Catholic rhetoric – “anything which goes against the indissolubility of marriage harmed society”, and that Jesus taught us that “marriage is forever”. This is supposedly justified by general statements, such as “statistics abroad showed that wherever there was divorce, families had become unstable”. The Archbishop should know that statistics can be used and interpreted as best suits the biased user, and that such general statements will not convince anyone with grey matter in his head. They will only convince fundamentalists who are not willing to consider that there are other better ways to do things. Unfortunately, their numbers in our Malta seem to be quite high.

Regarding divorce obtained abroad, I could not believe that the Archbishop could come out with such a lame justification – that this was due to international obligations. Where are his Catholic beliefs? Here we see the Archbishop trying to defend a ‘political’ position which discriminates between citizens in Malta.

The Archbishop tells us that “rather than divorce, the State should be bringing about the conditions to strengthen marriage”. The State, through its obligation to safeguard the rights of all its citizens (including those of minorities), should do both and not be led to make a choice.

It is also incredible how the Archbishop states that divorce abroad “was not sought by people who are suffering, but by people who wanted something else – such as men who wanted younger women”. Apart from the generality of the statement itself, it shows how insensitive the Catholic Church is towards those who are really suffering, branding all divorced men as some sort of evil sex maniacs.

Knowing the Catholic Church, one can understand why it continues to bury its head in the sand or escape from the realities of this country, but our MPs should know better. They have an obligation to all the electorate, cannot ignore non-Catholics, and have a duty to promote social justice in Malta. The discussion and vote in Parliament will show us how mature they are.

Vincent Magri

MTARFA