Dialogue Surroundng Same-Sex Marriage Requires Clear Definition of Terms

Thank you for publishing Molly Hennessy-Fiske's extensive article, "Same-Sex Marriage Policy Missing" (Nov. 15). I would add that this piece and the entire dialogue surrounding this issue would benefit from a clearer definition of terms.

To put it in the most dry terms possible, the institution of marriage vests clergy with the right to act for the state in legally "uniting" a couple while simultaneously offering the ecclesiastical "action" appropriate to the religious tradition represented. I am not certain what was asked of the minister of Memorial Church. Did Slayton and Hernandez seek such a legal marriage? Or did they ask to have their commitment celebrated in the company of friends and blessed by a minister? Note well that Stewart Barns "blessed" the couple at Christ Church: there is no indication that he married them.

Having seen clergy of various traditions bless dogs, kitchens, boats, books, vacations, and soccer fields, I cannot imagine denying a blessing to two men who love one another. Such denial would be deeply discriminatory. On the other hand, unless the laws change and the blurred line between ecclesiastical and civil authority is redrawn, the possibility of a same-sex marriage cannot in fact be decided by the Reverend Mr. Gomes, nor can Harvard, powerful as it is, settle the issue with policy-making. --Peter Kosewski   Radcliffe College   Communications Office