THE
P RTAL
August 2018
Page 3
P ortal Comment
What does the
word “marriage”
mean in 2018?
A concern expressed by Ronald Crane
T
he Catholic Herald for 6th July 2018 contained a reader’s letter from one Neil Addison
who was described as a “barrister”. I found the contents of this letter very interesting. Mr Addison
began by affirming the decision of the Supreme Court to allow mixed-sex civil partnerships. He continued
to point out that the historic understanding of marriage no longer reflects the legal concepts of marriage
in Britain or in Europe.
We now have two quite distinct meanings for the
word “marriage”. One is the traditional one of the life-
long union of one man with one woman. The other the
union of two people of opposite or same sex for as long
as the couple fancy.
As the church is pushed ever more to the margins of
society, the church needs to stand up for its beliefs in
the public square. Repeating them to an ever decreasing
number of mass goers, will merely hasten the process.
This would be one way that the Catholic Church could
express its beliefs loud and clear. Incidentally, it might
How is it possible for the Catholic Church to continue also enable the church to avoid prosecution at some
solemnising marriages that it claims are sacramental, future date, for not treating everyone (straight or
when down the road at the Register Office, couples otherwise) equally.
are married with a vastly different view of the very
meaning of the word “marriage”? This has been the
On the question of civil partnerships, as I write
case, of course, since the introduction of civil divorce, this article a friend of mine, Catherine Utley, is in
but with the introduction of same-sex marriages, the the House of Lords, listening to a debate on Lord
situation has become much more serious.
Lexden’s Private Member’s Bill that, if passed, would
extend civil partnerships to siblings aged over thirty
These two understandings of the one word “marriage” years who have lived together for at least twelve years
are incompatible. It is, as opponents of same-sex consecutively. This would give them access to the legal
marriage said at the time of the bill passing through recognition and fiscal safeguards that are so essential
parliament, using a word to describe what you want it to all cohabiting partnerships. Blood relations are, at
to mean, rather than what it actually means. This also present, excluded from such partnerships.
devalues traditional marriage to the status of the state’s
understanding of the word, rather than as a sacred
There are many relations (not just siblings) who
sacrament.
choose to live together as adults for various reasons,
but are badly treated by the state. My friend has shared
Neil Addison’s solution to this problem is to suggest a house with a sibling for many years, and together they
that the church embrace civil partnerships for mixed- have brought up a child. Yet they have no protection as
sex couples, and to get out of the legal registration of regards inheritance tax; let alone pensions entitlement.
marriage altogether. This is surely a simple solution to
a vexed problem.
Lord Alton, and Baroness Deech QC (Hon.) drew
attention to this injustice. The Bill passes to the
In France; couples wishing to avail themselves of the Committee stage, but without support from the
sacrament of marriage, first go to the Mairie for the Government, it is unlikely to become law. However, it
civil ceremony, then later that same day, or perhaps the is a first step.
next day, to church for a Nuptial Mass: the Sacrament
of marriage. Why not in this country?
Two subjects for your prayers.