Don't Condemn - Don't Endorse
By Ralph Spence - September 2002
Resolution D-039, passed at General Convention in 2000, provides some much needed guidance regarding the commitments required in relationships that include sexual activity. It denounces promiscuity, exploitation and abusiveness and, while acknowledging the church's moral authority in relationships, it places the burden of accountability on the individual conscience of those who may act in contradiction with the church's teachings. Previous discussions and resolutions had focused more on the benefits, rather than the responsibilities, associated with relationships and this was a welcome shift of attention.
I recently read an (AP) article that compared the various positions taken by the mainline Protestant churches regarding same sex-blessings and ordination. The article said, "The Episcopal Church is still absorbing last year's ambiguous convention vote to acknowledge church couples - which implicitly includes both heterosexuals and homosexuals - living outside wedlock. There have also been decisions not to discipline priests who conduct same-sex unions or bishops who ordain actively homosexual clergy."
It seems that the position of ECUSA could be viewed as being similar to the "don't ask - don't tell" policy, although our policy may be more accurately described as "Don't Condemn - Don't Endorse." While there are those who advocate and perform same-sex unions in ECUSA, there are also those who believe homosexual behavior is wrong. Both groups are currently welcome in our church and both are united in their opposition to any violence toward homosexual people or discrimination in public policy. Because there is no official ECUSA position that could be used to support political advocacy or condemnation of same-sex unions, these groups are able to coexist in our church.
While many believe homosexual behavior is wrong, there are others who feel it would be pastorally irresponsible to endorse same sex-unions without a clear theological explanation, a call for legal and financial commitments to protect partners within these relationships and guidance for those who are confused with their sexual identity. The church has a pastoral responsibility to uphold the authority of scripture, protect those who may be vulnerable in relationships and provide guidance to the innocent. If these issues are not addressed, there is concern that what began as an effort to embrace those who have no choice in their sexual identity and encourage commitment, could become a policy that undermines the authority of scripture, leaves partners in sexual relationships vulnerable to exploitation and encourages sexual experimentation.
Much of the apprehension regarding same-sex unions has more to do with concern over how these issues will be resolved, than fear of homosexual persons. When these issues are raised, the variety of responses received makes it clear that even those who supported the last resolve of D-039 are not in agreement. In order to respond to concerns, and provide a clear vision for the future, no further action should be taken by the church until we are able to provide guidance in these areas. Rather than rehashing the old arguments leading up to General Convention, we should focus energy toward building on the work of Committee #25. We could begin by discussing the criteria that should guide the discernment process described in resolution D-039 regarding the "prayerful support, encouragement and pastoral care" of relationships other than marriage. In addition to providing criteria for discernment, there is a great potential for discovering common beliefs in the discussion of these guidelines and it is possible that we could reach a better understanding of the reasoning behind the traditional interpretation of scripture.
So why are members still arguing about sex? It appears that some individuals are not satisfied with peaceful coexistence and wish to use the church's resources and political influence to define acceptable behavior in this country and throughout the Anglican Community. The conflict between welcoming diverse beliefs and the desire to exercise political influence is tearing this church apart. There are many difficult issues to sort out and I agree there needs to be more conversation; however, it is possible that members of ECUSA may never agree on the interpretation of God's truth in regard to homosexual behavior. Rather than creating winners and losers and dividing the church by vote of General Convention, maybe a policy of "Don't Condemn - Don't Endorse" is the best way to maintain a balance that allows all of us to feel welcome.
