Some 120 Church of England clergy have written a letter to someone (it's not clear who, but probably someone in a frock and a pointy fascinator [and why does Blogger's spell-checker not recognise this word?]) saying civil partnerships should be facilitated in churches.
A few weeks ago, John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, said that marriage is defined as a contract between a man and a woman and it is not for the state to 'dictate' the meaning of the word marriage.
Logically, and by implication, the Archbish must mean that the CoE should also not dictate the meaning of the word marriage - the church has no monopoly on the dictionary, nor the rite itself.
Commonly used words (unless scientific or professional) are not generally defined by institutions, but by popular use. Take the word 'gay', for example, or 'awful', the meanings of which have changed over time - the latter now meaning the total opposite of the original usage.
If the church defines marriage as being only between 'a' man and 'a' woman, does that mean Archbish Sentamu does not recognise polygamous Islamic marriages?
Perhaps the Archbish should invent his own word for his bigoted version of the marriage contract. Methinks he's a bit of a Cnut, who, as many will know, tried to turn back the waves under the inexorable onslaught of the tide....
Now, apropos of my little trip to Italy earlier in the week, I now present my homage to famous Italians:
Fabrizio
Biaggi
Rossi
Schettino
3 comments:
You clearly have a leaning toward Italians CB... ;)
Completely agree about Sentamu BTW.
I love Italians as well.. LOL
I read the final phrase of the first paragraph as "saying civil partnerships should be fornicated in churches". Is the Blogger spell-checker up to its old tricks again?
Post a Comment