"The referendum was a test of our faith" – Edwin Vassallo
The Malta Independent, today
Parliament: A people without faith is a failed people – Edwin Vassallo
by Elaine Attard
In a speech which lasted just over an hour during the parliamentary debate on the Opposition’s motion on the appointment of a standing committee on family affairs, Edwin Vassallo said he feels that a people without faith is a failed people (Poplu bla fidi, poplu żarmat).
He argued that the social affairs committee already deals with family issues and various subjects that directly affect the family, such as children, disabled people and the elderly.
“I agree with the concept in the motion but what it proposes, is already happening within the social affairs committee,” Mr Vassallo said.
“We are witnessing historical change but social realities are also changing and this merits our reflections. Last Saturday’s referendum was a test of our faith. I would be dishonest if I did not speak my beliefs. I understand that my choice on divorce is a moral choice, hence the free vote for the Nationalist MPs,” he added.
It is clear that divorce is a priority for the Maltese people and that we have a reality which is different than yesterday. The attack on the Church and faith has also become very clear, he noted.
Speaking about the MP’s vote on divorce in parliament, he said that he cannot understand why journalists are insisting on knowing how individual MPs will vote. “The issue at stake is whether the referendum result will be reflected in parliament and not how each MP will vote. I do not mind being part of the minority in parliament but I will vote according to what I believe in. We are not like sheep, we should decide responsibly and not go with the flow,” he continued.
He promised to work in respect of the majority’s will, but at the same time he will work towards preventing what Maltese society fears most about divorce and stop it from happening altogether.
“I will fight the divorcist mentality, which renders married life frivolous. The divorce law should be used as little as possible. This goes beyond winning more votes,” he continued.
He feels that infidelity between married couples should be addressed and married couples should be helped to remain faithful to each other.
He doubts Malta will be better off with the introduction of divorce but he agreed that it will be a different situation worth analysing.
“The state on its own cannot be successful in doing so. Anyone who can help should be on board shouldering the responsibility with the state towards making families more successful. The Church has experience which can help us look ahead. We thought the family was strong but we found out it’s experiencing a period of weakness, we thought our faith was strong, but we found out it was not strong at all. Family cannot be strengthened without strengthening faith,” he said.
“The individual cannot be separated from his or her faith, hence I disagree that the Church should be silenced. I am ready to lose my place in parliament to continue defending what I believe in. My fear is that we are celebrating a Malta without tolerance and respect to diversity. We should respect other people’s opinion,” he finished.
38 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Charlo Bonnici: “I had declared that when it comes to voting I would be solely led by my conscience respecting, however, the will of the people . For this reason, I have decided to abstain from voting if I am 100% sure that there’s a majority in Parliament for this Act. If for some reason this does not happen, then I wish to be at liberty to do whatever is necessary to let the will of the people prevail.”
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110601/local/charlo-bonnici-also-decides-to-abstain.368384
I had planned to vote for Charlo Bonnici, but now I’ll just abstain. If he has a conscience, so do I.
I am sorry Mr Bonnici, but such reasoning is cowardice. You were elected to serve the conscience of the people, not your own. If you don’t have the stomach for it, please RESIGN!
And this counts for all members of parliament.
This is the prime minister. Unbelievable. What leadership.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110601/local/PM-does-not-rule-out-abstaining-or-voting-no.368295
The PM also said that government “might propose amendments”. If they do propose amendments I assume they will then have to vote in favour.
Antoine, thank you for raising this point.
This is why no one on the government side should ever have said that he/she will abstain or vote against the bill.
The government side should have said that, driven by the result of the referendum and by the principle of democracy (whatever that is), it will take the lead on the bill and make a “family friendly” law out of it. It is the PM himself who often reminds us that we have to change challenges into opportunities!
Then, using a series of careful amendments that should please Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando and Jesmond Mugliett (OK, that may not be so easy), the government should shape the law so that it respects the referendum question and the need to “protect the family.”
At this point, the only unknown votes would have been those of Pullicino Orlando and Jesmond Mugliett (did I forget someone else?) and the government would have looked good.
If the whole package was labelled “family friendly divorce” then there would have been enough pressure on Pullicino Orlando, Jesmond Mugliett, and perhaps even on Marie Louise Coleiro Preca to vote yes.
In principle, it is going to be somehow like you say anyway, Antoine. But the current handling of the government’s replies on the Parliamentary vote is proving to be very damaging, and I can only attribute that to there not being one coherent message from the top.
“The country did not vote unanimously on divorce, so how can we expect there to be a unanimous vote in Parliament,” (the Prime Minister) asked, when speaking to journalists yesterday.
Il-Partnership rebah.
I get a sense that the government, or even Parliament, through the Social Committee and now with the Opposition’s motion about the family, would like to govern the family.
I find this to be nonsense. The family is the territory of its members, and the government should stay out of it.
The government should only ensure that there is regulation for the protection in case of weaknesses, such as the provision of maintenance for children. I believe that divorce legislation, and hence the civil code generally, should be used to provide such protection mechanisms.
Other than this, the government cannot regulate infidelity, faith or a divorcist mentality.
I do agree with Edwin Vassallo, though, that the Church cannot be silenced, and that there may have been an attack on the Church and on (the Catholic) faith.
Although some may argue that the Church can defend itself, I do believe that as a Member of Parliament, he is entitled to speak freely on this matter. Whilst the Church cannot persecute those who do not adhere to its teachings, the same protection must be afforded to the Church and its followers.
The prime minister is losing the plot. He seems to be more concerned about defending the religio than governing the patria.
In his post-referendum ditherings he has berated the patria for being unkind to the religio during the campaign. He is sounding more like archbishop Gonzi than prime minister Gonzi. He forgets where his duty lies.
His attitude encourages the rantings of types like this fartarsed knicker salesman from Mosta.
He never had one.
Dr Fenech Adami on a conscience vote on moral issues http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110318/local/let-conscience-be-mps-guide-on-divorce-eddie-fenech-adami.355279
“The individual conscience of the legislator should decide, whatever the result. If it were me, I would decide according to my conscience…” Dr Fenech Adami, long known for his strong stance against divorce, insists.
So much for the champion of democracy.
Sweet Jesus, we had Tonio ”Taliban” Fenech preaching to us, with an open line to the Virgin Mary. And now this guy Edwin Vassallo as well? If I may swear, (and in this case please allow me to, D) WHO THE F**K DO THESE PEOPLE THINK THEY ARE?
You want to preach conscience and play God, then bloody well resign, people, and that goes for ALL MPs who choose not to respect the public’s decision.
Isthi ibleh! Gib ismek kollu kummidjant!
[Daphne – Are you the same Andrew Farrugia who teaches English at Junior College? Goodness. I’ve just looked up another comment you posted here: “Hahaha, jae; you just don’t know the first thing about this guy who is a consummate master in spinning, weaving, twisting, and equivocating. What’s more he is into insults big time and then has the gall to protest against being served with his own medicine. He has now moved into Hecate’s bosom from where he can issue anathemas against the Times where he was previously handled with kids’ gloves. Over here he feels comfy-like trying to rubbish the comments of a lady who is perfectly entitled to her views; really speaks volumes about his tolerance levels and utter lack of fair play. But some of us are used to this – he is eminently hilarious.”
So I’m Hecate, right? Never mind. I’ll let you in on a secret that will save you embarrassment with your students. Sssshhhhhhh! It’s kid gloves, not kids’ gloves. ‘Kid’ is short for kidskin, which means leather made from the skin of baby goats, and not children’s skin. Now I need you to tell ME a secret: how on earth do you issue anathemas?]
Daphne, don’t hold your breath for a reply. Andy Pandy throws mud and then runs away.
He says worse things than calling someone Hecate, and then not even bothering to substantiate his slanderous allegations with even the flimsiest of evidence.
Message boards, to him, are a virtual playground, where differently from real-life playgrounds, he can actually play the bully. Except that this is not The Times. Over here, bullies get their just desserts.
[Daphne – He seems to me to have some serious problems. My first reaction is that he is a psychological clone of the foreign minister’s spokesman, Melvyn Mangion. Sort of severely retarded emotional development coupled with massive insecurities and a very fragile ego. I mean, what grown begins a sentence with Hahahahahaha?]
For the sake of people who might not know him well enough, this is what Andrew Farrugia/Andy Farrugia/afar3 is all about:
“Prime Minister, i doubt whether you read the comments on this putrid and highly toxic latrine but i suggest that for once you face reality. By this i mean that it is about time that you convene the “Kunsill Generali” so that people know where they stand. I want a party which represents me, irrespective of whether it will lead to a cataclysmic split and a thrashing at the next election; i want all hangers-on, opportunists, blackmailers, witches and assorted delinquents out of the party. It is your choice but it is also my vote.
Andy Farrugia (once an Mnajra “hero”)”.
“Excuse me, just for the sake of a God-denier, atheist, humanist, nihilist whatever etc, etc, non-entity who roams around these stables, my previous comment contained a typo; “trashing” and not “thrashing”.
Andy Farrugia”.
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/gonzi-must-set-example-on-divorce-vote-muscat
In the second part of his comment, he’s probably referring to me. He seems obsessed with me. Of course, it would be useless telling him I’m not a nihilist.
As for being a non-entity, well, if the “Mnajra (sic) hero” (such modesty!) says so, then it must be true. However, calling “non-entities” names is rather silly, I would think. But what would a “Mnajra hero” know about that?
[Daphne – I can NOT believe that such an unbalanced person with a desperately fragile ego, who writes such terrible English, has actually been engaged to teach English at the state college. No wonder the results are so dreadful.]
Hahaha! Finally i seem to have attracted the attentions of the muck-raking sorceress herself! Was that the only thing you could dig up to “embarrass” me? Try again.
[Daphne – I think everyone reading this should know that this man has a University of Malta address and teaches English – incredible – at the state sixth form college. He is using his university computer network – the IP number tells me – to post abusive comments on websites. He is also afar3 on the Malta Today comments board. He comes across as an attention-seeking crackpot with psychological difficulties and a very fragile ego. I must say, they’re really scraping out the barrel if this is all they can find to teach English. http://www.um.edu.mt/contact/andrewfarrugia%5D
And what sort of English language teacher gets the spelling of a word right the first time, but then sends a “correction” on the correctly spelled word (spelling it wrongly the second time), and all for the sake of a “non-entity”?
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/gonzi-must-set-example-on-divorce-vote-muscat
I wonder about the kind of drivel he might be spouting in the lecture room. It is also quite amusing that while he is fond of calling the Malta Today comments board a stinking cesspit and so forth, he has no qualms about inhabiting it.
Saying that you’ve “finally seem to have attracted” DCG’s attentions means that you’ve been trying to do so for a long time. Sounds pretty sad to me.
[NGT – Saying that you’ve “finally seem to have attracted” DCG’s attentions means that you’ve been trying to do so for a long time. Sounds pretty sad to me].
He probably did not mean to say “finally”. Then again, he does teach English!
Why do these people insist that they believe in the family when they seem to think that it would not survive without the state banning divorce?
How effing patronising. I refuse to vote for someone who treats the electorate like children.
Has it become ‘attacking the faith’ now? Sometimes I wonder whether I’m living in a European country or an Arab one.
“He feels that infidelity between married couples should be addressed and married couples should be helped to remain faithful to each other.”
What does this mean, free chastity belts? Maybe a curfew for all married men. Yes, how about electric shock therapy to anyone caught thinking about infidelity.
Mr Vassallo, if you are so wholly holy, parliament is not your place. If you desire to pursue a vocation join the priesthood. Your job in parliament is not to propagate Christian dogma.
I get this sinking feeling that we’re about to see the political version of a suicide bombing.
“I am ready to lose my place in parliament to continue defending what I believe in.”
Excellent.
Now resign.
To the rest of those sorry excuses for MPs : do likewise.
Sometimes I wonder whether these kind of pathetic and contradicting declarations are a result of a) ignorance or b) deceit. It’ll probably be a bit of both but I can’t help thinking that in this case the former is the predominant factor.
Dearest Mr Vassallo, last Saturday’s referendum was NOT a test of your faith. It was a test of your reasoning capabilities notwithstanding your faith.
I don’t know if it’s only me but lately every time I read what a PN MP has said in parliament I get this shiver down my spine and a reaction of ‘ma x’biza ta’ nies!’
The PN needs to do some thorough soul searching or risk becoming irrelevant for a decade or two.
“The referendum was a test of our faith” E. Vassallo.
Not really. It is not the faith of the electorate that is being tested by this referendum, but it will be our parliamentarians who will have their faith tested when they vote on the divorce legislation.
Now let us see how faithful these self-styled devout Catholics will be to their conscience and their god. I much fear that politicians are lured to populism more than to God. How will the bishops of Malta and Gozo react to their vote in parliament? Will they issue another ‘fatwa’ on parliamentarians just as they did on the electorate?
Can the Catholic Church accept in its flock an MP who declares to be Catholic but votes for divorce? Apparently, it does. My conclusion is that if you are an ordinary person and vote for divorce you will be denied holy communion, but if you are an MP and vote for divorce, that is fine.
Who else sits on the Social Affairs Committee? If they are of Mr Vassallo’s ilk I don’t think I will have much faith in their output.
“Family cannot be strengthened without strengthening faith”, meaning that only Roman Catholics can have a strong family, right?
Who needs Alain de Botton for some lucid thinking when we have our very own Edwin.
“I am ready to lose my place in parliament to continue defending what I believe in”. You’d almost be forgiven for thinking it was a quotation from Saint Catherine of Alexandria rather than Edwin tal-Best and Less.
If what he believes is incongruent with the will of the people as clearly expressed in the referendum, he should do just that: lose his place in parliament by resigning at once, rather than waiting until 2013 to be voted out.
I really am having a hard time thinking that Edwin Vassallo is not an aberration within the party for which I have voted in so many elections. The general behaviour of the PN in the divorce legislation issue is too close for comfort to that of Alfred Sant’s MLP.
I apologise for repeating this again but it must be emphasised.
The point everybody seems to be missing is with regard to Malta’s international standing.
Just think what the repercussions would be.
I can already see it: “Maltese Parliament defies referendum result”
It would be the first-ever EU member state where legislators veto a referendum result.
I like seeing Malta in the international news, but for goodness’ sake, not for infamy. I shudder to even think it.
It would undermine everything.
It’s what Malta is all about.
You don’t like a rule, then you ignore it.
It’s part of the fabric.
Malta has some of the finest people with talent, flair, imagination and intelligence, anywhere in the world. Unfortunately, with the exception of Simon, none of them are in politics.
Look at this clown:
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110602/local/labour-mp-adamant-on-voting-against-divorce-bill.368484
Married couples should be helped – there is widespread consensus on this issue. Here we have Hon Vassallo stating that “The state on its own cannot be successful in doing so. Anyone who can help should be on board shouldering the responsibility with the state towards making families more successful.” A simple question, what has the state done so far to set up structures aimed at preparing couples for marriage? We all know the answer.
My last comment.
What have we learnt from this referendum?
We have learnt how valid and relevant is still the church’s preachings to live a good life for everyone. It has shown the strength of our religion in trying to strengthen the marriage. Everyone stands to gain from a healthy family. A healthy family is a strong society. That’s why divorce is outdated and a failure. That’s why this century we are moving away from the philosophy of the last century and that’s because the things which happened in the last century or more ( among these divorce) are a failure. The twist in philosophy is an admission of failure.
Is Saviour Balzan to be taken seriously?
The church’s letter to the electorate is a sign of maturity, civic reponsibily and good manners (sign of education) Qualities which Saviour Balzan cannot recognize because he doent’ have in his repertoire. He is just an idiot and imbecile. I don’t know who is that idiot who appointed him editor. He is an irrational uneducated person.
Shame on you Labour
You told the church to shut up and stop preaching. Typical labour ipocrisy telling that he is tolerant and at the same time telling those who oppose them to shut up.
Quoting Labour Has the church done enough to compensate for its mistakes in the 1960s? Before even the church has had time to speak out its thoughts.
Goodbye.
[Robert Galea – What have we learnt from this referendum? We have learnt how valid and relevant is still the church’s preachings to live a good life for everyone].
Debatable and nothing to do with the referendum at all.
[Robert Galea – It has shown the strength of our religion in trying to strengthen the marriage].
One does not strengthen marriage by forcing people to stay in the marriage. A strong marriage is not one where people have no option but to stay in the marriage. It is one where people choose to stay in the marriage.
[Robert Galea – Everyone stands to gain from a healthy family. A healthy family is a strong society].
Of course.
[Robert Galea – That’s why divorce is outdated and a failure].
Non sequitur and utterly false. Divorce is not intended to save marriages. Divorce per se cannot be sensibly called a failure. If anything, the need for divorce might give the impression that marriage is a failure. Of course, I don’t believe it is.
[Robert Galea – That’s why this century we are moving away from the philosophy of the last century and that’s because the things which happened in the last century or more (among these divorce) are a failure].
Simply saying that something is, does not make it so.
[Robert Galea – The twist in philosophy is an admission of failure].
Twist in philosophy? What do you mean by that?
[Robert Galea – Is Saviour Balzan to be taken seriously?]
Irrelevant straw man argument. Saviour Balzan did not invent divorce. And even if he did, your argument would be an ad hominem fallacy.
[Robert Galea – The church’s letter to the electorate is a sign of maturity, civic reponsibily and good manners (sign of education)].
I’m still not sure what they apologized for (they didn’t say), if they actually did (some say they did, some insist it was not an apology). I actually saw it as a sign of immaturity, civic irresoponsibility and very bad manners (a sign of naivety – they think we’re stupid).
[Robert Galea – Qualities which Saviour Balzan cannot recognize because he doent’ have in his repertoire. He is just an idiot and imbecile. I don’t know who is that idiot who appointed him editor. He is an irrational uneducated person].
Perhaps I should remind you that this is not Malta Today.
[Robert Galea – Shame on you Labour]
Neither is this Kullhadd or Maltastar.
[Robert Galea – You told the church to shut up and stop preaching].
Nobody did so.
[Robert Galea – Typical labour ipocrisy telling that he is tolerant and at the same time telling those who oppose them to shut up].
To be fair, Labour didn’t tell anyone to shut up.
[Robert Galea – Quoting Labour Has the church done enough to compensate for its mistakes in the 1960s? Before even the church has had time to speak out its thoughts].
I’ll take your word that you’re not misquoting. I’ll answer the question for you. No. And I’m not a Labour supporter. And do you seriously believe that everyone should sheepishly wait for the church to give its own opinion before uttering anything? People no longer delegate their minds to the Church. You’d do well to get used to that.
Our Religion is very valid from a sociological point of view.
Divorce is an outdated because research has shown that divorce brings about more problems than it is meant to solve. That’s why it is outdated and this century we will see a renessaince of the marriage as a lasting institution.
I have not doubt that Labour intended to shut the Church’s mouth. i have doubts whether you are a labour supporter or not. The Labour party tried to influence its sympathisers. That title came out in the Maltastar before the church had anytime to speak out it sthoughts. The church didn’t do anything wrond in the 1960s. It was all labours fault.
Don’t you believe that having a strong lasting family is better than having a second or a third family. Researc
That is the church preachings and research abour divorce have proven this.
Whatever you’re smoking, the Maltese government isn’t going to decriminalise it…