Part 1-A: Children and Youth at Risk
Our Children and the Church
Part II: Dignity and Full Membership for All
Part III: A Vision of Unity
Resolutions
In addition, the Hon. George T. Shields served as our liaison with the Executive Council, and Ms. Diane M. Porter was our liaison with the staff of the Church Center. The Rev. Dr. Sheryl Kujawa also assisted the Commission in its work with the matters of children and youth at risk. Upon the ordination of Dr. Howard R. Anderson in 1993, he resigned as chair of the Commission and served as consultant to the commission for the remainder of the triennium.
Return to Table of Contents
The Commission met six times during the triennium, once in Minneapolis, Minnesota, twice in Charleston, South Carolina, once in Los Angeles, once in Memphis, Tennessee, and once in Delray Beach, Florida
In the course of the Commission's work, a wide variety of people spoke to the Commission regarding their work and ministry with and on behalf of children and youth at risk. The Commission met with gang members and leaders, former gang members, and those who work with them. A representative of the Commission attended the National Gang Summit held in Kansas City, Missouri, in 1993. The Commission also visited programs serving rural and urban youth and collected models of effective parish-based youth ministry which we hope to share with the wider Church through the Office of Youth Ministry. Both those who spoke to the Commission at its meeting along with site visits to a variety of programs encouraged the Commission as to the quality of ministry.
Three members of the Commission attended the Integrity National Convention held in Houston, Texas, in 1992. A hearing was held to gather information concerning the status of participation of gay and lesbian people as baptized members of the Episcopal Church. A representative from the Commission attended the National Episcopal Youth Event in Amherst, Massachusetts, in 1993.
Return to Table of Contents
1992 1993 1994
Income appropriated by
General Convention $17,000 $19,500 $14,000
Expenses (Actual) (Actual) (Est.)
Commission Meetings 12,145 19,484 10,500 Consultant
Expenses 881 853 2,500
Subcommittee Meetings 2,098 400 0
Administrative 0 0 0
TOTALS 15,124 $20,737 $14,000
Return to Table of Contents
"Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?" I will, with God's help. "Will you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself?" I will, with God's help.
These two promises from the Baptismal Covenant are at the heart of the work of the Standing Commission on Human Affairs. In response to God's gracious and boundless love for us, we have promised to live lives of respect for and service to others. Those two promises would be difficult enough to fulfill if they required respect and dignity for peoplemerely like ourselves; but in fact, they require it toward all persons.
During the last triennium, this Standing Commission on Human Affairs has struggled with the Episcopal Church's continuing failure to live up to those promises -- a struggle we want to share with the Church in this report. To be sure, no individual and no institution can perfectly fulfill God's purposes for them; and yet, we have become convinced that there are two glaring examples of our inability to do so. At best, they are the result of inattention and blindness; at worst, they are examples of our prejudice and misplaced priorities which allow us to "write off" certain fellow human beings in our midst. In either case, it is time to acknowledge our sin and to recommit ourselves to the respect and service we pledge in the Baptismal Covenant.
During the 1992-1994 Triennium, this Standing Commission on Human Affairs has focused on two groups of people who desperately need -- but are not receiving -- the attention, respect, resources and loving concern of this Church. One group is as near as our own families; the other is nearer than most of us probably realize. The first is as valued as "motherhood and apple pie" -- at least in theory; the second is often hated and feared. The first runs the risk of losing our attention; the second is often the victim of scapegoating and the target of our anger and derision. Both have been marginalized.
The first are our children -- all of our children, and particularly those at risk. The second are our sisters and brothers in Christ who find themselves -- among other things -- to be lesbian and gay.
To whom is this report addressed? Beyond the House of Deputies and the House of Bishops at this 1994 General Convention, we hope to address ourselves, the membership of the Episcopal Church. It is all too easy to point out the splinter in the eyes of others, while missing the planks in our own eyes. And so we will attempt to set our own house and priorities in order and to address ourselves, as members of the Episcopal Church, about the needs of children -- those within the Church, and those beyond it, as well as addressing ourselves as Christian citizens to the need for full civil and human rights for lesbians and gay men.
In our report on children and youth at risk, we hope to summarize the many circumstances which make the world a risky place for our young people. Then we will look at the Episcopal Church's response to its own members who are children and youth, and describe what might be a working theology for effective children's and youth ministry. Next, we will offer some ideas for how the Church might find its ministry in response to its own young people and those in the surrounding communities, offering some examples of what might be done in the name of Christ.
In our report on civil and human rights for gay men and lesbians, we will contrast the theory and the reality of the Church's relationships with its lesbian and gay members. We will raise some questions which trouble us about our actions (and inactions) as Episcopalians and as Christian citizens with respect to lesbian and gay people.
Finally, we hope to leave the General Convention and the members of this Church with one important question: Does baptism confer full membership in the Body of Christ or not?
"An Outline of the Faith commonly called the Catechism" says that "Holy Baptism is the sacrament by which God adopts us as his children and makes us members of Christ's Body, the Church, and inheritors of the kingdom of God." Indeed, each newly baptized member is greeted by the full congregation with: "We receive you into the household of God ... share with us in his eternal priesthood." The troubling question with which this report deals is whether or not the Body of Christ has first and second class membership.
Return to Table of Contents
As we begin to talk about the children and young people in our churches and beyond,it is important that we define who they are, and ask to whom they belong.
In most church discussions and for the purposes of this report, "children" denotes children in the 6th grade and younger, while "youth" or "young people" denotes those in he 7th-12th grade age group. However, most secular institutions (e.g., the Children's Defense Fund) use the legal definition of "children" as all those under 18 years of age. This report will often use the collective noun "kids" to refer to all our children and young people. Though "kids" is sometimes used in a derogatory or discounting way, we hope to reclaim it as a term of affection and respect.
So, whose kids are these? In the name of rugged and tenacious individualism, too many people in the United States have lost their sense of community. In the process, the family, no matter how configured, has come to be regarded as a private, competitive fighting unit against the world, whose only appropriate concern is for itself. In that process, we have abdicated much of our communal responsibility for the raising and nurturing of children to their particular parents, who may or may not be present. Such a hands-off attitude, which holds little concern for and prohibits any community intervention into the life of another family, has helped perpetuate widespread child abuse (and domestic violence).
It is time we recover what we once knew, and what other cultures maintain better thanwe "the children" belong to all of us, and we all share in the responsibility for their nurture, support and development. As Christians and as Episcopalians, we share in the responsibility for their salvation and their growth in the life of faith. As a well known African proverb proclaims, "It takes a whole village to raise a child." It is time that we takethat responsibility for our children.
It is important that we own the truth -- these are our kids. Typically, children are seen as "women's work." Women still do the vast majority of caring for children in the home, teaching them in our schools (and Sunday Schools), and providing services for them in our society. Men are crucial to this important work.
Is the world facing our kids really different than that in which most of us grew up? In many ways, yes, it is a different world. The expectation for many of us growing up, and our expectations for children and youth, have been that they will grow up and become I productive members of society. In surveys and interviews where young people across thecountry were asked about their prospects and dreams for the future, responses indicated that many youth are living in an environment where they do not expect to find productive work, or even to be alive to see the age of 21, and realize these dreams.
One out of four children under the age of 18 in the United States now lives in a single-parent family in which, "on the average, [the youth are] clearly more at risk than those in two-parent families ... . This increased risk level in single-parent families holds true for both males and females as well as across racial-ethnic groups."1 These 6-12th graders in single-parent families rank higher than their two-parent family counterparts in frequent alcohol use, binge drinking, daily cigarette use, illicit drug use, sexual activity, depression, suicide, theft, vandalism, school absenteeism, and incidences of riding with a drunk driver. We must be clear that not every child in every single-parent situation fits this description, nor is every child in every two-parent home happy and well-adjusted. But on average, the growing numbers of single-parent families has put increased pressure on kids, often with the single parent having fewer resources with which to respond to those pressures.
There is little evidence that young men are sharing equal responsibility--for birth control, STD/AIDS (sexually transmitted disease/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) prevention, or unwanted pregnancies--in their relationships with young women. The burden for prevention still falls to the female partner, and when prevention efforts fail it is usually the young woman who bears the lasting brunt of that failure. The absence of young fathers in the lives of their children usually commits young mothers and their children to a life of poverty. The risk to young people of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases is enormous. The fastest growing age group of those being diagnosed with AIDS is that of 20-to 29-year-olds. Given the eight- to ten-year incubation period between infection and the onset of AIDS symptoms, it is very likely that for most of these new cases infection occurred during the teen years. All of this in a population of kids which thinks of itself as invulnerable.
When one reads through the statistics related to the lives of young people, one cannot but be struck by the statistics related to black teenaged males. The plight of children of color stands in stark contrast to the plight of white children. Young black males in urban areas stand out among those of color as being particularly threatened. It would not be alarmist to say that we stand to lose nearly a whole generation of black men if we do not respond to the needs of these children.
In addition to the physical violence of guns, of course, too many of our children and young people are still subject to a wide range of other violences, including verbal and emotional abuse, an assault on self-esteem, the abuse that expresses itself as neglect. There is no family structure where these forms of violence are unknown. Nor is there any ethnic or socio-economic group which is immune to their impact. Neither affluence nor education protect against them. We, as adults, compound that violence through our own inaction. Our doing nothing and saying nothing about the lives of all our children is the sin of omission with which we all must confront ourselves.
At the core of all the factors described here -- poverty, racism, poor education, and gang violence that mar American society -- lies the tension between individual freedom and social justice in community. Excessive individualism, evident in increasing atomization of individuals and families, underlies the social disintegration that has increasingly afflicted American society since the 1950s. To be sure, the postwar era has seen the weakening of social bonds, some of which were patriarchal and oppressive. Yet those social bonds have not been replaced by the balance between individual and social values that can create the basis for a more equitable society--much less the biblical vision of community.
On the contrary, many children and youth in the United States have not experienced the attitude of respect for all human beings celebrated in the Baptismal Covenant. Rather they have been subjected to the devaluation of their humanity through neglect and abuse, whether purposeful or not. Too often, children and young adults, rich and poor, in the cities in the suburbs, and rural areas, learn from their own experience and those of their peers that they are at best superfluous and worthless, and at worst even burdens on our society. How is it possible for children and youth who internalize these attitudes, and thereby do not value and respect themselves, to value the dignity and lives of those around them? Where human life is cheap and there is no alterative that is readily apparent, suicide and homicide are often the tragic consequences. Middle class children and youth who feel their parents value them only for their accomplishments in school or in the job market learn that their own lives have no intrinsic value, but rather only contingent value for the luster that can be added to parents' stature in the community.
The strong sense of inadequacy, anger and rejection on children and youth from more affluent homes parallels the feelings of socially and economically deprived children. The result in wasted life is often the same in either instance. We are diminished as a community by these tragic social failures.
The picture of our American youth is, at first glance, a bleak one. There is no doubt that our culture is putting unprecedented pressures on all young people. These issues are real in the lives of all our kids. A number of our children and youth are remarkably strong and wise and are responding reasonably well to these pressures, but even for them, the pressures are still there. There is not a child in this country -- even those who live in our most affluent neighborhoods -- whose self-esteem and well-being aren't under siege by one or more of these factors. And as the number of the above-mentioned factors increase in the lives of young people, the more "at-risk" they become.
The prognosis for these young people is not hopeless, but it is gravely serious if we do not act. Soon. "Many young people believe, because of the conditions surrounding them, that equality of opportunity does not exist; so they give up. This creates a vicious circle: talents are squandered, teenagers are ill prepared, employment is denied, at-risk behavior is reinforced. Adrift in a desolate and often hostile environment, these young people desperately need adults to whom they can turn for guidance and support." 10 What better place to turn than to the Church? Who better to provide guidance and support than we Christians for whom nothing (and no one) is hopeless?
Return to Table of Contents
There is an abundance of good news for children and young people in the Episcopal Church, and much for which to be grateful. First, of course, is the ultimate Good News, Jesus Christ. We follow a savior who offers endless hope and infinite possibility. As one African-American priest, standing in the doorway of his church, surrounded by housing projects, matter-of-factly and powerfully told our Commission, "The power of the Gospel is plenty powerful enough to transform lives."
Many dioceses are taking on the challenge of ministry with young people in new and exciting ways. This Standing Commission has seen and heard about dramatic and Spirit-filled ministries to, with, and for young people within and beyond our Church:
On the other hand, the news -- from the local congregation to the national church -- is not all good. The Episcopal Church, as a whole, has never funded children's and youth ministries as generously as other denominations. Over the last decade, our national Church budget for youth and children has only been cut, never increased.
In all too many of our dioceses and congregations, young people are not near the top of anyone's agenda -- at least not the decision-makers', and no one is dealing with the issues facing young people. Despite "youth ministry" being high on nearly every congregation's profile of priorities as it searches for a new priest, this priority is seldom reflected in the congregation's budget; young people are seldom represented on the search committee; and once the new priest arrives, other duties and pressures push kids and kids' issues aside. Local parish youth group leaders bum out quickly, due in large measure to their weariness from having constantly to beg for financial support and to seek parishioners willing to lend a hand.
In most congregations, canons and bylaws do not allow or encourage young people to participate fully in the life of the church (e.g., to serve on the vestry). In many congregations, there is an ongoing controversy about the inclusion of young children in the liturgy, and seldom is the recitation of the Lord's Prayer slowed down enough for youngerchildren to keep up. Many congregations act as if the only kind of "mission" young people can do is dishwashing after the parish potluck supper. Children and youth are seldom invited to make a pledge along with their congregation's stewardship efforts. Only our largest and wealthiest congregations have someone on the staff whose primary task is youth ministry, and even then they are often the first to be let go in a financial pinch.
Youth ministry is a special calling. Instead of giving this precious responsibility for our kids to our best and brightest both clergy and lay, we often delegate it to the newest and least experienced. Many clergy are eager to accept the first lay volunteer they can find to "do" the youth group, providing little training and ongoing support for these sincere and committed volunteers. And even if training is sought for this ministry -- by clergy or laity -- there are few good opportunities for receiving it (and even fewer within the Episcopal tradition).
To offer the Good News of Jesus Christ, which will always be our most important gift to young people, we must offer ourselves. "Young people need adult disciples and mentors who will talk to them about values and the virtues of faithfulness, honesty, self-control, courage, compassion and the willingness to make sacrifices in the name of love."11 It is through ourselves that our young people will come to know the love of Christ. It is in our incarnated ministries with them that young people will come to know Christ.
This adult companion is often the youth group leader, in a congregation that is large enough to sustain such an ongoing group. Or, in a smaller setting, it could be any adult who sincerely cares and takes an interest. But this gift of ourselves cannot be a once-a-week offering; indeed, this kind of mentoring takes time and is ministry "for the long haul." The kind of youth ministry called for in today's world requires mentors who do as they say -- who "walk the talk," which includes not always getting it right, admitting failure when it occurs, acknowledging the pain.
Ministry to, with and for young people must move beyond the dissemination of information, toward formation. "In the case of youth ministry, the medium really is much of the message. The youth group (the same would apply to a relationship between a young person and another Christian adult) is a vehicle by which the participants can experience the Gospel of God ... the life of the youth group can express, or at least point to, the acceptance, forgiveness, love and growing wholeness that comes from God. It is the relationships within the group, and the overall tone or quality of the group in which participants sense and absorb the presence and activity of God among them and within each of them. It is through the life of the youth group that participants sense and grow aware of God's movements toward healing and wholeness, that is, toward salvation. Youth and adults together discover themselves to be actually working out their own salvation 'in fear and trembling' as they live together and sense God working out his will within and among them." 12
In 1986, in preparation for the first Youth Ministry Leadership Academy, sponsored by the Diocese of Connecticut and the national Church's Youth Ministry Office, four principles were articulated for doing this kind of "relational ministry" with young people:
What is clear about these principles of relational ministry is that they apply to all ministry, not merely to ministry with young people. This kind of ministry has ramifications for any Episcopal congregation or any individual Episcopalian who wants to use them in their ministries with children, youth and adults:
Effective ministry takes time. One has to spend a lot of time building a relationship with a fellow Christian in order for real growth and formation to occur. One has to spend a lot of seemingly meaningless or frivolous time with a child or young person before enough trust develops for the child to ask a question that comes from the heart. That question may be pondering a decision about sex or drugs, or wondering aloud why parents fight so much, or asking what it means to live a Christ-centered life. So-called "quality time" is a myth in youth ministry, in the sense that it rarely happens except in the context of spending a lot of "down time" in building relationships and trust. (Parishioners should be reminded of this when they complain that "all the youth minister ever does is play volleyball with the kids.")
Faith is caught, not taught. Our usual method of education assumes that the teacher has a body of knowledge that the learner needs, and in one way or another, we attempt to open up the brain of the learner and "pour in" the information. While there is information, history and facts to be learned, more is required if we are to enable our young people to become mature Christians. Formation is a different approach to learning, and asserts that the most important learnings about living the Christian life are learned from watching arguing, playing, working, making decisions, crying and interacting with other Christians. Along the way, mentoring is helpful and necessary -- such as Bible study and learning about the Church's historic faith and practice, or developing a prayer life. But faith, and a life in faith, requires nurturing.
Kids do not need to wait until they are "grown up" to have a ministry. Their ministries are NOW, and any congregation which so acknowledges that will learn how much power there is in it. Kids can be empowered to live out their own baptismal promises now. They can learn about their faith. They can be among our best evangelists. Children can learn about and actually do outreach. Helping to gather and sort food for the parish food pantry is but one example. Young people can take their place in the decision-making and work of the church. They can become knowledgeable about HIV/AIDS and share that information in a peer relationship at school among kids that we could never reach. Over the last decade, our young people have raised a united voice: "We are not the Church of the future. We are the Church now." It is time we believed them.
If the Episcopal Church were to take seriously its commitment to our children, what might we see happening in our parishes and communities? What might a children's advocacy "wish list" look like for the Episcopal Church?
In the face of so many at-risk factors, can the Church play any real role in responding to the crisis? Can the Church help to bring about the spiritual revitalization that is so urgently needed in our society? Data gathered on 46,000 youth in public schools indicates a resounding "yes."
"Youth who attended religious services at least once or twice a month (active youth) were nearly half as likely to engage in any of the at-risk behaviors than those who rarely or never attended religious services (inactive youth) This finding holds true for all ages and for both males and females."13
Religious, along with family and social, values affect responsible decision-making. A national sexuality curriculum evaluation, determined "the greatest influence on the intention not to engage in sexual intercourse is whether or not the student feels it is against her or his values to do so."14
Church congregations are one of the few settings where young people can interact with a wide variety of age groups, thereby getting a broader perspective than is otherwise available to them. Also, an individual has the opportunity to be exposed to this samecommunity over a span of years, thereby having a potentially powerful influence on a person's life.
Churches do not always live up to that potential. Another Search Institute study of 3,000 adolescents in Protestant congregations determined that "43 percent of students report two or fewer hours in their lifetime spent at church discussing sex. And 36 percent report spending two or fewer hours learning about alcohol or other drugs." The report goes on to conclude that "young people's long-term involvement in and loyalty toward faith institutions may be dependent on whether their congregations address 'real life' issues. If not, young people may see faith institutions, finally, as irrelevant -- a pattern and a memory that is no longer significant."15
The challenge and the opportunity is to raise these issues from a faith perspective. Young people often know the facts (which is why a young person's initial response to an issue is, "We already learned that in school"). What is missing in other settings is the opportunity to look at issues as they relate to faith and experience. Such an approach which goes deeper than a "just say no" simplicity, needs the strong support of both clergy and lay leaders in order to succeed.
Finally, Search Institute's Carolyn H. Eklin and Eugene C. Roehlkepartain point to three "protective factors" which churches can provide: (I) genuine care and support from one or more adult persons in the congregation, (2) high expectations on the congregation's part for its youth, and (3) opportunities for youth to be contributing members of their congregation. "Youth need to be able to participate in meaningful, valued activities and roles--those involving problem- solving, decision-making, planning, goal-setting, and helping others. These opportunities enhance young people's sense of responsibility and purpose, which can, in turn, help reduce negative behaviors." 16
All of this brings us right back to the Baptismal Covenant. As adults in the Episcopal Church, it is only in respecting the dignity of all our children, and seeking to serve Christ in them that we will be able to acknowledge and empower their own ministries within the church and beyond it.
As the Standing Commission on Human Affairs, we are not calling for any one specific program for children and youth, but rather for a new attitude toward children and youth by this Church and by its individual members. The children in our churches and the children beyond our churches are experiencing an assault on their physical lives, their emotional health and their spiritual well-being. The familiar saying is true: if we are not contributing to the solution, then we are a part of the problem.
What we need is a true change in our hearts so that, like Christ, we authentically beckon all of God's children to come. It is time that we, the Episcopal Church, do more than give lip-service to the importance of our church's and our nation's children. It is time that we recommit ourselves, with God's help and guidance, and with all the resources we can muster, to their physical and spiritual well- being. No one can do everything, but each of us can do something, and together, we can make a difference in the lives of our children.
It takes a whole village to raise a child. Can we, will we, be those villages?
Return to Table of Contents
In the 1992-1994 triennium, this Standing Commission on Human Affairs has struggled with our--the Episcopal Church's--treatment of and attitude toward lesbian and gay people, within and beyond the Church.17 It is clear from the baptismal promises we make, to "respect the dignity of every human being" and to "seek and serve Christ in all persons," that everyone is to be respected and served.
Former General Conventions have passed a number of resolutions related to people whose sexual orientation is toward people of the same sex: The 1976 General Convention (Minneapolis) passed Resolution A-69: "It is the sense of this General Convention that homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church." It is interesting to note in the Journal of the Convention that two amendments were proposed to this resolution -- one to substitute the word "all" for "homosexual," the other to add the word "forgiveness" after acceptance. Both amendments were defeated. The Journal, with a touch of understatement no doubt, adds the comment "There was considerable discussion."
One must be careful not to interpret or read into something more than is there, but it does seem clear that this 1976 Convention intended (1) to say something positive, (2) to say it about homosexual persons specifically, and (3) not to imply that homosexual people per se have any more or any less to be forgiven for than anyone else.
At the same 1976 General Convention, Resolution A-71 was passed: "This General Convention expresses its conviction that homosexual persons are entitled to equal protection of the laws with all other citizens, and calls upon our society to see that such protect n is provided in actuality." This resolution seems to acknowledge that there is a gap between the equal protection provided in the law, and the equal enforcement of those laws.
This same 1976 General Convention put off the question of ordination of homosexuals until the Joint Commission on the Church in Human Affairs could study the matter and report back.
The 1979 General Convention (Denver) received the report of the Human Affairs Commission, and in response to the ordination question, passed a resolution, "That this General Convention recommend to Bishops, Pastors, Vestries, Commissions on Ministry and Standing Committees, the following considerations as they continue to exercise their proper canonical functions in the selection and approval of persons for ordination." The resolution goes on to say, "There should be no barrier to the ordination of qualified persons of either heterosexual or homosexual orientation whose behavior the Church considers wholesome," and, "We believe it is not appropriate for this Church to ordain a practicing homosexual, or any person who is engaged in heterosexual relations outside of marriage." Later in the Convention, 21 bishops signed and entered into the minutes a statement expressing their inability to associate with the resolution and its implications, the position of the bishops being that implementation of the resolutions would make lesbian and gay lay persons second-class citizens of the Church. They noted further that, as "this action of the House is recommendatory and not prescriptive, we give notice as we are answerable before Almighty God that we cannot accept these recommendations or implement them in our Dioceses ... ."
The 1982 General Convention (New Orleans) resolved, "That the 67th General Convention reaffirms the actions taken by the General Conventions of 1976 and 1979 affirming that homosexual persons are children of God and are entitled to full civil rights."(Resolution B-6 1 A.)
The 1985 General Convention (Anaheim) resolved, "That the 68th General Convention urge each diocese of this Church to find an effective way to foster a better understanding of homosexual persons, to dispel myths and prejudices about homosexuality, to provide pastoral support, and to give life to the claim of homosexual persons 'upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral care and concern of the Church' as recognized by the General Convention resolution in 1976."
The 1988 General Convention (Detroit) resolved, "That this 69th General Convention decries the increase of violence against homosexual persons and calls upon law enforcement officials across the land to be sensitive to this peril and to prosecute the perpetrators of these acts to the fullest extent of the law; and be it further Resolved, that the Executive Council be directed to communicate with the Attorney General of the United States, and the Attorneys General of the several States the expressed wishes of this General Convention that such violence be decreased markedly; and be it further Resolved, that all Bishops, and especially the Presiding Bishop, be encouraged to speak openly and publiclyto repudiate the misconception that the Church encourages such violence, and to counter the public declarations of those who claim that AIDS is the punishment of God upon homosexual persons; and be it further Resolved, that the actions of the 65th General Convention, which declared that " homosexual persons are children of God who have afull and equal claim with all others upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church" be re-emphasized to all members of this Church.
The 1991 General Convention finally acknowledged in Resolution A104sa a "discontinuity" between the traditional teachings of the Church and the experience of some of its members, acknowledging also the Church's failure to resolve these matters legislatively.
This Standing Commission had originally intended to deal only with the civil and human rights of homosexual persons in the world, but once again it seems imperative that we get our own house in order first. These resolutions are recorded in the Journals of the General Conventions -- but how well are they being lived out across the Church?
We have heard some good news across the Church. During the summer of 1992, at the national convention of Integrity, members of the Standing Commission on Human Affairs held a hearing and offered lesbian and gay Episcopalians (full members through baptism in the Body of Christ) an opportunity to offer testimony about what life is like for them in the Episcopal Church:
Mostly, however, the news was not good:
It is clear to us on the Standing Commission for Human Affairs, and it comes as no real surprise, that the legislation of the past General Conventions has not changed all attitudes and behaviors. It does seem odd to us, however, that the very people who appeal to the 1979 General Convention resolution against the ordination of "practicing" homosexuals as if it were canon law, are sometimes the same people who ignore the resolutions upholding full civil rights for lesbians and gay men and which proclaim that "homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church." The recommendatory nature of the 1979 resolution on ordination must once again be pointed out: "That this General Convention recommend to Bishops, Pastors, Vestries, Commissions on Ministry and Standing Committees, the following considerations as they continue to exercise their proper canonical functions in the selection and approval of persons for ordination: ... ."
What is clear is that we are not living up to the legislative stands we have already taken with respect to supporting full civil and human rights for homosexual persons. We must point out to the Episcopal Church, of which we are a part, that we are not "walking our talk."
There are other evidences of the discontinuity between what we say and what we do in the Episcopal Church today:
Virtually every congregation in his Church has a red, white and blue sign hanging nearby which proclaims, "The Episcopal Church Welcomes You." The truth of the matter is that if one is lesbian or gay, and especially if one is open and honest about it, many Episcopal churches do not welcome you. In fact, some Episcopal churches will not even tolerate you. Some will forbid you to be a lay reader; some believe you should be "healed"; a few will deny you communion or even exorcise you. It's time we seriously asked ourselves whether or not we are willing to live up to the welcome promised by our signs.
It is ironic that in this Decade of Evangelism, we seem intent on alienating and keeping out one of the few identifiable groups of people who want to be welcomed in.
For many lesbian and gay people, the Church has been like an abusive parent. Like many abusive parents, the Church sincerely professes love for all its children and is quick to deny wrongdoing. But in fact, the Church often heaps abuse on the heads of some of its children -- sometimes denying them bread at the table, tearing away at their self-esteem with shouts of "abomination," and denying them the solace and comfort promised in the word "family." It is time for the Church to admit that it is not an innocent bystander in this abuse, but too often a perpetrator.
In an abusive situation, we usually counsel people to get out, to remove themselves from harm's way. Many have already left the Church -- the Episcopal Church and others. But many have stayed in our midst. Presiding Bishop Browning recently paid tribute to them for their perseverance in the struggle for acceptance in the church: "I thought about your origins. I thought about what it has cost you to be honest about who you are. I thought about how accustomed you must have become to having people, who have never met you, form judgments about you based upon what you are rather than who you are ... . And I wish with all my heart that you had never had to get used to that ... . Is it possible to know the pain of what you have known and still find it within yourself to remain in the body where so much of that pain has occurred?" Along with the Presiding Bishop, we on this Standing Commission sincerely hope so.
Some of our sons are gay, some of our daughters are lesbian. And they are listening to our debates and dialogues and pronouncements. But mostly they are watching -- watching to see whether they are an abomination or a child of God in the eyes of their parents and their Church and their God.
What many of them are hearing from us, the Church and the culture, is hatred. For our lesbian and gay kids, who internalize this hatred, they learn that it is an awful thing to be who they are. Fear of discovery, rejection and violence becomes a pan of their everyday lives. Our "straight" kids, on the other hand, often learn that it's okay to hate, ridicule, reject and bash their lesbian and gay peers. There is an even greater burden on lesbian and gay young people in communities of color, where homosexuality often carries an even greater stigma.
What kids see and hear from us will have an incalculable impact. If lesbian and gay youth hear hatred and condemnation, many will consider and some will attempt suicide. According to a U.S. Health and Human Services report, "gay adolescents were two to three times more likely than peers to attempt suicide, accounting for as many as 30% of completed youth suicides each year." 18 If they hear that their future is a disgusting lifestyle, many will end up in heterosexual marriages desperately trying to be someone they are not, often bringing untold pain to themselves and others. If they have no positive role models for how to put one's lesbian/gay sexuality together with one's Christianity, then they will assume it cannot be done.
As we learn to respect the dignity of every human being and seek to serve the Christ in all our children, we may save one gay boy from being thrown out of his home, forced to sell his body to provide for himself. We may save one lesbian girl from running away to drugs to ease the pain. We might even save some parents and their relationships with their lesbian and gay children, if we helped them understand rather than reject their children. We might save one girl or boy from suicide, another from AIDS. These lesbian and gay kids are our children too, and it's time we tried.
Whether the numbers of lesbian and gay people are ten percent or one percent or something in between, the same God who knows the number of hairs on our head does not want to lose one of God's children. There are no throwaways in God's kingdom -- not one.
This Standing Commission believes we would be taking a giant, positive step forward if we were to live up to the "full and equal claim ... upon the love, acceptance and pastoral concern and care of the Church" promised in the 1976 resolution. Inevitably though, the question of full membership in the Church also leads us to the questions of the ordination of lesbian and gay people and the blessing of their monogamous, committed, life-long-intentioned relationships.
This issue of full membership is at the heart of the question about ordination. "No Christian has a right to be ordained; but any Christian has, or ought to have, a right to be considered for ordination ... . Baptism does not merely confer church membership. Rather, it makes a statement about one's basic humanity. It speaks of one's relation to the Christ in and for whom one is created. However one is regarded by the standards of society, baptism is a gracious affirmation of worth and dignity. It grants the freedom of the City of God ... . These two things, ordination and baptism, are linked. What is said about redeemed humanity in baptism and in ordination should be congruent ... . To put the matter in terms of moral discipline, if lesbian or gay sexual orientation represents a flaw in one's humanity so basic as to prevent one from being considered for ordination, should it not also prevent one from being baptized?" 19 A similar thought was expressed in the debate over women's ordination: "If the Church is not ready to ordain women, then it should not baptize them."
The fifty bishops who have signed the 1979 minority view statement (the original 21 who signed in 1979, plus an additional 29 who added their signatures in 1988) recognized this issue when they wrote, "This action [of the majority] also speaks a word of condemning judgment against countless laypersons of homosexual orientation who are rendered by its implications second-class citizens in the Church of their baptism, fit to receive all other sacraments but the grace of Holy Order -- unless, in a sacrifice not asked of heterosexual persons generally, they abandon all hope of finding human fulfillment, under God, in a sexual and supportive relationship. This action, thus, makes a mockery of the vow and commitment which the Church has made to them in that same sacrament of baptism, to 'do all in [its] power to support these persons in their life in Christ' -- all of these persons, without exception -- and calls into question the vows of us all to 'strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being.'" What can we as a church do to facilitate a dialogue about how to widen the circle of Episcopalians who are supported in their committed relationships without devaluing the traditional teaching of the Church?
Those bishops who have permitted the blessing of same sex unions, and those priests who have performed them with the knowledge of their bishops, seem to have done so in aneffort to respond to the "full and equal claim" resolution, and as an expression of full membership for those lesbian and gay members.
It is important, and perhaps instructive, to remind ourselves that the discussion about full membership and inclusion for lesbians and gay men is not only going on in the Episcopal Church. The question of full incorporation -- involving such issues as ordination and the blessing of lesbians and gay men committed to mutual, life- long love and support -- is being asked in virtually every denomination -- from mainline Presbyterians, Methodists and Lutherans to the Southern Baptist Convention.
The Standing Commission on Human Affairs wants to suggest a hope-and-prayer list for how the Episcopal Church might proceed:
Return to Table of Contents
We have raised difficult and complex issues for the culture and for the Church. They will not be resolved easily or quickly. But we must continue to address them, and we must "hang in there" with one another while we are discerning where our journey is taking us.
For Christians, how we treat each other is not a matter of opinion. Christ reveals to us the truth about all relationships. While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us -- an act of sacrificial love. Jesus mounted the cross in obedience to the Father's will. The Gospel of John declares this act as one which glorifies the Father. Empowered by the Holy Spirit, when we are enabled, however imperfectly, to live with each other in sacrificial love, we glorify both the Father and the Son. We see here a glimpse of the living reality of the Trinity, the three persons in perfect relationship which is the vision of all relationships.
The Baptismal Covenant offers us a glorious vision of what the Christian life can and should be. These promises call us to ministry with all of God's people, within and beyond the Church. The verbs in the baptismal promises are full of forward movement and longing for completion: continue, persevere, proclaim, seek, serve, strive. Like Abraham, we long for the "city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God." We will not enter that city until we are reunited with God in heaven. Until then, we live with the vision.
"Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?"
I will with God 's help.
"Will you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself?"
I will with Cod 's help.
"Will you proclaim by word and example the Good News of God in Christ?"
I will with God's help.
Resolved, the House __________ of concurring, That this 71st General Convention request the Church Center staff to disseminate the materials and resources that the Standing Commission on Human Affairs has assembled and this report to the Bishops and youth ministries of this Church.
EXPLANATION
The Standing Commission acknowledges the great value it places upon the resources provided them by their sister in Christ, Sheryl Kujawa. Comprising the basis for many statements and recommendations contained within the report of the Commission, it will be helpful to the larger church for youth ministers in every diocese to know of and utilize these materials for their own programs, thus bringing them into the diocese as available resources for all groups engaging themselves in issues dealing with children and youth at risk.
Resolved, the House of __________ concurring, That Canon 1.17.5 be amended to read as follows:
No one shall be denied rights or status in this Church because of race, color, or ethnic origin a place in the life, worship, and governance of this Church except as otherwise specified by Canon.
EXPLANATION
This resolution is the result of the findings and report of the Standing Commission on Human Affairs for the 1992-1994 triennium.
Return to Table of Contents
Standing Commission on Human Affairs
1995-1997 Proposed Budget
Income 1995 1996 1997
Appropriated by
General Convention $17,500 $20,250 $14,700
Expenses
Commission Meetings $17,500 $20,250 $14,700
Return to Table of Contents
Resolution #A062
Resolved, the House of __________ concurring, That there be appropriated from the 2 Assessment Budget of the General Convention for the expense of the Standing 3 Commission on Human Affairs the sum of $52,450 for the triennium 1995-1997.
1. "Single-Parent Families," Search Institute SOURCE, Vol. IX, Number 2, June, 1993, pp. 1-2
2. "FACTFILE," Hetrick-Martin Institute, New York, 1992, pp. 1-2.
3. Fateful Choices: Healthy Youth for the 21st Century, by Fred M. Hechinger, Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1992, pg. 30.
4. Fateful Choices: Healthy Youth for the 21st Century, by Fred M. Hechinger, Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1992, p. 34.
5. The Adolescent and Young Adult Fact Book, Janet M. Simons, Belva Finlay, and Alice Yang, Children's Defense Fund, 1991, pg. 1.
6. The Adolescent and Young Adult Fact Book, Janet M. Simons, Belva Finlay, and Alice Yang, Children's Defense Fund, 1991, pp. 94-95.
7. The Adolescent and Young Adult Fact Book by Janet M. Simons, Belva Finlay, and Alice Yang, Children's Defense Fund, 1991, p. ix.
8. Fateful Choices: Healthy Youth for the 21st Century, by Fred M. Hechinger, Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1992, pp. 25- 26.
9. "Deadly Consequences: Stopping Youth Violence," by Deborah Prothrow-Stith, M.D., taken from a conference presentation to the Boys and Girls Clubs of America 86th Annual National Conference.
10. Fateful Choices Healthy Youth for the 21st Century, by Fred M. Hechinger, Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1992, p. 27.
11. Taken from a Diocesan Convention address by the Rt. Rev. Frederick H. Borsch, Bishop of Los Angeles, December 5, 1992.
12. "Youth Ministry: An Experience in Relationship and Creation," unpublished article by Robert L. Burchell, I 979.
13. Data from Troubled Journey: A Portrait of 6th-12th Grade Youth, by Peter L. Benson, Lutheran Brotherhood, 1990, quoted in Search Institute SOURCE, February, 1992, Vol. Vlll, No. 1, p.1.
14. "The Faith Factor." Search Institute SOURCE, February, 1992, Volume Vlll, No. 1, p. 1.
15. "Effective Christian Education: A National Study of Protestant Congregations," quoted in Search Institute SOURCE. February, 1992, Volume Vlll, No. 1, p. 2.
16. "The Faith Factor," Search Institute SOURCE, February, 1992, Volume Vlll, No. 1, p. 3.
17. The Standing Commission is very aware that there is a wide diversity of sexualities expressed across the human spectrum-even among heterosexuals. It is beyond the scope of his report and the work of this Commission to attempt to cover them all. There is much about sexuality that we are still learning. In this report we will limit ourselves to responding to the same issue addressed by several previous General Convention resolutions: homosexuality.
18. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Report of the Secretary's Task Force on Youth Suicide, Volume 3: Prevention and Interventions in Youth Suicide, Rockville, MD, 1989, as reported in PEDIATRICS, a publication of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The official suppression of this report by the Executive Branch of the Federal Government and some members of Congress, is testimony to the denial which goes on related to these issues.
19. "Ordaining and Baptizing: The Case for Gays and Lesbians," a paper by Daniel B. Stevick, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania.
Return to Table of Contents