I’d never considered this…

In Mexico same-sex marriage is probably legal.  I say probably, because so far only one state explicitly allows same-sex marriage (Coahuila), but a marriage in one state is recognized in throughout the Republic.  If there have been any legal complications, I just haven’t heard of any.

There really wasn’t much fall-out from this, mostly because marriage in Mexico is a contractual matter, and the Church (or churches in general) aren’t involved.  The legal benefits and liabilities kick in when you sign the papers in the judge’s office.  If God, or your relatives, require some further procedures, that’s not the State’s concern.  This creates some confusion for U.S. tourists, who want to get married in Mexico, and sometimes find they aren’t legally married since all they had was a religious service.

The basic marriage laws are much the same system in all “Napoleonic Code” (Code Civil) countries, one reason that same-sex marriages have not been a particularly divisive issue in European countries or in Mexico (and, recently added to the list of countries allowing same-sex marriage, Uruguay).  It’was just a matter of dropping the requirement that the two parties to the contract be of opposite genders.

But, in the United States, ministers in the various religious denominations do double-duty:  the religious service IS the legal act.   There seems to be some fear that because same-gender marriages are allowed by law, then religious denominations will be required to perform them (as if any minister is required to perform a wedding now… Rabbis don’t have to marry Catholics, nor priests Jews — or same-gender couples, nor divorcees, nor…).  And, same-gender marriages are a hot-button political issue.  This is one of those rare times that the Mexican way probably does trump the U.S. way of doing things… and it seems even some clergymen are coming around to realizing it:

In a letter last month, Bishop Marc Handley Andrus of the Episcopal Diocese of California directed his clergy to “encourage all couples, regardless of orientation, to follow the pattern of first being married in a secular service and then being blessed in The Episcopal Church.”

The bishop’s missive illustrates what a tangled web we have woven when clergy intone “by the power invested in me by the state.”

Because the Episcopal Church doesn’t sanction same-sex marriage — but gives the option of blessing the union — the bishop appears to be seeking a way to bless all couples while distancing the church from legal arrangements sanctioned by the state.

“There are a lot of benefits in getting out of the legal marriage business,” the Very Rev. Brian Baker told The Sacramento (Calif.) Bee in reaction to the bishop’s letter. “This way the clergy and the couple can focus on the spiritual blessings the church has to offer and not the political stuff.”

On the theological flip side, many conservative clergy worry that as agents of the state they will be pressured to perform same-sex marriages — or, in some other way, coerced into recognizing same-sex relationships in contradiction of church doctrine.

Maybe the bishop is on the right track: Separate secular from sacred by drawing a bright line between civil arrangements and the sacrament of marriage. Each state would limit itself to defining marriage as civil benefits for committed couples (as mandated by state law) — and each religious group would be free to define marriage according to the tenets of its faith.