Reference is made to Marisa Micallef’s article Tangas in a twist (TMID, 19 February).

Archbishop Mgr Paul Cremona OP would like to clarify that at no point and in no way did he ever state or imply that cohabitating couples should be given “married people rights”.

One needs to make a clear difference between issues concerning what constitutes marriage, and the need to ensure justice in the various realities of relationships between people.

As has been clearly stated by the Maltese bishops in their statement of 24 March 1999, the Church can never approve cohabitation or any measures that may encourage it. The Church believes that the State has to pay attention to maintain and sustain a full and clear distinction between the status of marriage and the status of cohabitation, which are and remain two different realities.

The Church also believes that the State cannot encourage cohabitation or appear as if it were doing so. On the contrary, the State should do its utmost to strengthen the family built on marriage and so encourage everybody, primarily young people, to choose responsibly a mutual, full and permanent self-giving in marriage, rather than an experiment in frail unions where one could abandon everything as if nothing had happened.

As has also been stated in the 24 March 1999 Maltese bishops’ statement, as regards cohabitation, the State should protect the rights of those concerned, especially the children that may be born. It should see that everybody shoulders the responsibilities of his or her actions and that nobody evades such responsibilities.

Even when, for some reason or other, cohabitation comes to an end, one has to ensure the protection of the natural duties of one party towards another party and towards children. Whoever lives a similar union that comes to an end should remain accountable for these obligations and the State should ensure the recognition and safeguarding of every right of those concerned. At the same time, one has to continue to keep in mind that marriage and cohabitation are not the same thing and can never be considered as if they were the same thing, not even when the State comes to determine the rights and duties that emerge from cohabitation.

When one speaks about State determination of rights and duties of people living together in an experience which is different from that of a marriage between a man and a woman, one should not limit oneself to cohabitating partners. One should take into consideration the rights of other people living together under one roof and sharing their lives with each other perhaps for many years, for instance brothers and sisters.

Charles Buttigieg

Public Relations Officer

Archbishop’s Curia