Saturday, 19 November 2005

Saturday opinions

From the Telegraph:
Simon Heffer comments on the visit of The Queen to the General Synod, More mediaevalism wouldn’t go amiss

Christopher Howse remembers Peter Anson, A failure, though sharply observant

From the Guardian:
Nicholas Buxton writes on secularism in Face to Faith

From The Times:
Roderick Strange Bleak November is the month to consider, and apportion, our talents

Ruth Gledhill interviewed Gene Robinson, ‘In the end, there is no one God does not love’

From the Church Times
Paul Vallely on Priest Idol, Give the priest a proper chance

Robin Gill The patient doesn’t always know best

Mark Vernon Partnerships could save marriage

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Saturday, 19 November 2005 at 5:45pm GMT
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: Opinion
Comments

Mark Vernon compares civil partnerships to formalised friendships in medieval times but he overlooks some key differences. As he writes, "Such sworn brotherhoods and sisterhoods were formal relationships that usually existed alongside those of husband and wife." In contrast, a civil partnership is exclusive. You can only be in one at any given time and you cannot be married at the same time (and of course you cannot be "civil partner" to someone of the opposite sex). There are even restrictions to do with prohibited degrees of (blood) relationship. It is therefore not simply an expression of a particular agenda, when Stonewall's web site explains: "Civil partnership is a new legal relationship for lesbian and gay couples, aged 16 and over."

Yes, civil partnerships will hopefully formalise friendships but they are about more than close friendships. They are about exclusive relationships for which sexual activity is relevant even without "the Church's confusion over homosexuality". Does not the law itself (chapter 5, paragraph 117) state that the irretrievable breakdown of a civil partnership can be established by the absence of "cohabitation" over five years (shorter in conjunction with other factors)? I think this means sex!?

By the way, Aelred of Rievaulx seems a doubtful patron saint for civil partnerships. The Encyclopedia of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender & Queer Culture (at http://www.glbtq.com/) quotes him as having written to his sister, a nun: "Do not imagine that men in the absence of women and women in the absence of men cannot defile themselves, for the detestable sin that inflames a man with passion for a man (vir in virum) or a woman for a woman (femina in feminam) is judged more serious than any other crime."

Posted by: Thomas Renz on Monday, 21 November 2005 at 12:43pm GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.