Geri Halliwell may have blown him a kiss in her low-cut gown for his 50th birthday party. But the sweetest music to the Prince's ears has just been delivered - not by Sexy Spice - but the Bishop of Oxford, the Rt Rev Richard Harries.

With immaculate timing, the Bishop of Oxford came up with his own request to the British people - to give Charles and the divorced Camilla Parker Bowles a break.

The Bishop said: "The fact they can get some support and mutual encouragement from one another, and clearly have a deep relationship, I think, deserves understanding and compassion.

"At the moment, Prince Charles has made it clear that he and Camilla have no short-term or medium-term plans to get married."

The Bishop added: "And I don't think, whether it's Prince Charles or anybody else, we should push any couple into any kind of precipitate action."Unhappily for the birthday boy, Many people in Oxford would prefer to push poor Camilla off Carfax Tower rather than into a hasty marriage.

Carolyn Sinclair, of Wallingford, was in no doubt that if Charles and Camilla did decide to tie the knot, they shouldn't be permitted to do so in church. "No, certainly not," she said. "It would be a second marriage for both of them - I've been married twice and if I wasn't allowed to be married in church the second time, neither should she.

"Being refused was a distressing experience. Let them get married in a registry office if they like, as long as we don't have to read about it. Would she make a good queen? No. She has no morals. I don't like her and I don't think it would be fair on Charles and Diana's sons."

This was a view shared by Frank Comley, of Iffley Road, Oxford. "No, a church marriage shouldn't be allowed," he said.

"It should be a registry office job and that's it. I'm not religious and I never have been, but I still don't think they should marry in church." But not everyone felt the same. Tina Humphries, of north Oxford, thought Charles and Camilla should be permitted to marry in church if they chose. "Yes, I think everyone should have the chance to, if they want. She's made mistakes and so has he, but everyone is entitled to be happy. I don't think she would make a good Queen, though. She doesn't have enough experience - although I don't think that Diana would have been any better."

Ian Cullup-Smith, of Bicester, was adamant. "I'd be against them marrying in a church ceremony," he said. "Why should they be an exception? I think that the Church of England are bringing this into the political arena, Charles and Diana should stay as they are, or marry in a registry office. I don't think she should be Queen. After all, Edward VIII had to abdicate to marry the woman he loved." he said.

But some couldn't care less. Chris Thompson, of Cowley Road, Oxford, said: "If they got married in church, that's fine by me - as long as everyone else can do the same. Or they can stay as they are - it depends on how they feel."

Carol Kennett, of Jericho, was even more blunt: "I really couldn't care less. Let them get on with it. Should we get rid of the royals? No - I suppose they're good ambassadors."

Prof Vernon Bogdanor, of Oxford University, author of The Monarchy and the Constitution, said he agreed with the Bishop's view.

He said the 1772 Royal Marriages Act meant that the Queen would have to give her approval before the marriage could take place, a decision she would take on ministerial advice.

If Camilla married Charles she would then automatically become Queen on his accession to the throne, unless an Act of Parliament prevented it.

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.