Under one discipline

Christian Century, Oct 18, 2000

IN AN EFFORT to sidestep the restrictions placed upon United Methodist clergy against performing same-sex unions, James Wall suggests that lay members perform such ceremonies, since they are not subject to the same restrictions (July 19-26). Wall has neglected to take into consideration that the United Methodist Book of Discipline states very clearly that lay members of the denomination may have charges brought against them for a variety of reasons. Two of the chargeable offenses are: "disobedience to the Order and Discipline of the United Methodist Church" and "dissemination of doctrines contrary to the established standards of doctrine of the Church."

It could be interpreted that lay members of the church who perform same-sex unions or covenant ceremonies are committing these offenses and are therefore subject to investigation and church trial. If the charges are proven by clear and convincing evidence at such a trial, the penalties may include (as a last resort) termination of the layperson's church membership. When the possible consequences are taken into consideration, the suggested solution is hopelessly complicated.

Gene A. May Lillian United Methodist Church, Lillian, Ala.

Rather than churches designating laypersons to "officiate," same-sex couples should simply make known their intention to enter into lifelong unions of faithful love, and invite their Christian friends, lay and clerical, to attend not simply as guests but in order to constitute an ekklesia of witnesses.

An appropriate form of response could be developed whereby those present would recognize and affirm the commitment made by the couple and ask God's blessing on them. A document could be drawn up to record the event, which would be signed by all present.

Some heterosexual couples intending to get married could express their solidarity by choosing the same form for their marriages.

Such low-profile celebrations would be greatly preferable to the "in-your-face" ceremonies of recent years where the protest-making, law-breaking clergyperson, and not the couple, almost inevitably became the center of attention. Over time the low-profile celebrations would be sure to win tolerance, then acceptance.

Brian Rice McCarthy Madison, Wis.

James Wall's proposal regarding same-sex unions is almost certainly appalling to those who look for full inclusion of gays and lesbians in the church. It changes nothing in the polity or structures of exclusion. But it has merits because of its compassion. Wall suggests that laypeople do nothing more or less than was done for the man Jesus spoke of who went down from Jerusalem to Jericho--reach out in compassion to the ecclesiastically unclean whom the priest and Levite cannot or will not touch.

John E. Kelso Burlingame, Calif.