History

St. Mark's History and Its Place in the Community

The church was built in two phases, beginning in 1888 and completed in 1894 with the addition of the chancel, spire, and foyer. The style of the church is Neo-Romanesque, with rounded arches instead of the Gothic pointed arches. This style was continued in 1926 when the parish hall was added. In 1965-66, the nave was restored and a central altar was added. In 1990-91 the basement was developed into an undercroft as a legacy for the 21st century.

Parish Sign, installed September, 2003

The artistic glory of the church is its stained glass windows, most of which are German works by Mayer of Munich dating from 1888 to 1931 in the nave and chapel, with later works in some of the smaller clerestory windows above. The large window over the baptistry is an early Tiffany window (1888), depicting Christ leaving the praetorium, as portrayed by Gustave Doré. The clerestory windows are by Mayer (1905-1916, 1924, 1938, & 1946-47), Lamb (1936-37), and Willett, Connick, and Brenda Belfield (1981-86 & 1999). The small window in the east vestibule, depicting the Winged Lion of St. Mark, was made by Lamb in 1976.

The parish began in 1867-69 as a mission to Federal workers on Capitol Hill, and it flourished at the turn of the century when it was the Pro-Cathedral (1896-1902) of the Washington Diocese, created in 1895, before construction of the Washington Cathedral. From its beginning, St. Mark's has focused on innovative worship, Christian education, artistic expression, and social outreach. These concerns have continued over the years, and the Christian education program has evolved since the late 1950s in ways that address practical ethical issues in the context of Judeo-Christian values amidst the conflicting options and tensions of real life.

Since 1998, the Rev. Paul Abernathy has been our eleventh rector, succeeding Jim Adams (1966-1996), Bill Baxter (1954-1966), and other outstanding rectors since our first rector, A. Floridus Steele (1867-1893). We look forward to further growth and evolution in our next century on this Capitoline Hill, as a citadel of enlightened, inclusive, and tolerant Christianity.

Our first parish historian, John Chew (1852-1916), called St. Mark's ”a citadel on this Capitoline Hill,” recalling one of Rome’s seven hills. Jim Adams, our tenth Rector (1966-96), called St. Mark's ”a citadel of Enlightened Christianity.” I see us as a community of people trying to make sense of their lives in a religious context of Judeo-Christian values -- more inclusive and tolerant than in earlier years and hopefully an enlightened citadel on Capitol Hill.

Welcome to this community, where we are all links in a chain of continuity and change, going back to the late 19th Century and leading us into the 21st Century.

Bert Cooper
Parish Historian
202/363-5351

Courtyard photo by Thia Hamilton

Bill Baxter: Building Church

In 1954, St. Mark’s Church, Episcopal, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. was an inner-city parish whose members had largely moved to the suburbs. Then 65 years old, the parish was dying. The Bishop of Washington accepted this as an inevitability, something that was caused by the changes in demographics and economics in postwar Washington. It was into this scenario that Bill and Jean Baxter made their way. Bill was three years out of seminary.

Brilliant, brash, ardent, and energetic, Bill took on the challenge of the parish in ways both unexpected and (sometimes) unwelcome. Building Church by William and Jean Baxter (JoEllen Hayden, Editor) records some of his memories of those times, including redevelopment of the life of the parish, the early days of the civil rights movement, Lyndon Johnson’s presidency, and the introduction of a new Christian Education program that addressed the practical and everyday concerns of his parishioners.

To order a copy of Bill Baxter’s book, print out the order form (PDF) and mail or FAX it to Baxter House.

An Idiosyncratic Timeline of St. Mark’s History

1867

St. Mark’s begins as a “mission” of Christ Church, Capitol Hill (1794), to serve government clerks and others living closer to the Capitol. Services are held in what is now known as the Sewell-Belmont House, at the corner of Second Street & Constitution Avenue N.E.

1869

After a year of holding services in a small frame building located across Third Street – in the block now filled by the Adams Building of the Library of Congress – we become an independent parish. Two years later, after buying an L-shaped lot at the southeast corner of Third and A Streets, we drag the frame building to the new property. It sits at the south end of the lot, now devoted to the high altar and chancel.

1888

On the northern two-thirds of the property, we begin construction on the main part of the nave. This is the first completed section of the present “Mostly-Neo-Romanesque” church building.

1893

After the death of the founding rector, the parish is divided on a number of issues – including how “High Church” our worship services should be. The dissension leads to the election of two rival vestries and, eventually, a court challenge. (In other words, we have a long history as a feisty bunch.)

1894

We complete work on the chancel and altar area, and finish things off by adding the spire to the bell tower.

1896

The first Bishop of the new Episcopal Diocese of Washington steps in with a solution for both healing the parish schism and finding a place to hang his miter: He names St. Mark's as the pro-cathedral of the Diocese, an eminence it retains until 1902.

1926

We build the current Parish Hall, affording room for parish dinners, plays, lectures and other events.

1940

A new rector soon takes a leave of absence to serve as a Navy chaplain. He returns for a few years after the war but departs again in the early 1950s; an increasing number of parishioners decamp as well.

1954

The Diocese of Washington recommends looking for an older rector to take over St. Mark’s, with the expectation that he will lock the doors for the last time on the day he retires. Our Vestry rejects the idea and invites a dynamic young rector, Bill Baxter, to join a determined group of members in reinvigorating the parish.

1956

The first “chancel drama” is performed in the nave: T.S. Eliot’s “The Cocktail Party.”

Late 1950s

We institute the “functional education” approach to adult Christian Education. Developed out of the experiences of The Rev. Dr. Charles F. Penniman, Sr., it offers new ways to explore personal and social issues in a religious context.

Early 1960s

Liturgical dance is introduced under the guidance of Mary Craighill, a pioneer in the field.

1963

Bill Baxter preaches the first Sunday sermon delivered to the new president, Lyndon Johnson, and his wife, Lady Bird Johnson (an Episcopalian who frequently attended services at St. Mark’s). The sermon is memorialized in a print hung in the foyer hallway.

1966

We junk the traditional pews and begin holding services “in the round.”

1971

We successfully fight off the last of several congressional proposals over the years to extend the Library of Congress to cover our block; two years later, the church is added to the National Register of Historic Places.

1991

After years of enduring the cramped basement space for classes and social gatherings, we renovate the undercroft, which now houses modern offices, classrooms, bathrooms and the parish library.

1998

The Rev. Paul Roberts Abernathy, our 11th rector, succeeds our longest-serving rector, the Rev. Jim Adams (1966-1996).

St. Mark’s and Gay Rights

• Resolution on Same Sex Marriage (PDF)

A little history concerning St. Mark's and Gay Rights. For all those who were not at St. Mark's in 1992, you may find this extremely interesting. For those who were here in 1992, I hope you will remember this time with pride.

In June, 1992, Eleanor Holmes Norton called upon our former Rector, Jim Adams, to testify at the House Committee on the District of Columbia Subcommittee on Fiscal Affairs and Health.

He was asked to address the issues of whether the DCHealth Care Benefits Expansion Act (which allows individuals working for the DC government to purchase family coverage for a domestic partner and the dependents of a domestic partner from the DC employee health plan and also accords visitor rights and certain other rights on domestic partners) would "promote homosexuality and undermine the Christian family" and to provide an analysis of the treatment of homosexuality in the Bible.

The hearing was being held to discuss a resolution to overturn this District law. The proponents of the resolution to overturn, lead by Rep. Clyde Holloway (R-LA) were bringing two ministers (one Catholic and one Baptist) to testify that the DC law did undermine the Christian family and promote homosexuality. Mrs. Norton asked Jim and the minister from the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church to present the opposing views.

Jim's testimony was razor sharp and to the point. Some highlights are:

"The opposition to this bill comes from people who believe that homosexual relationships are contrary to the will of God. They are entitled to their beliefs, but I am entitled to mine as well. I believe that denouncing homosexual practices and denying them the same rights as heterosexuals sets up a climate in which mindless fear and hatred can flourish."

"Telling homosexual people that we love them but that they do not deserve the same rights as heterosexual people, however, does not constitute a very loving act. To demand that other people conform their lives to our religious beliefs constitutes a denial of the respect that must be a component of love."

Jim testified that there were only five references to homosexuality in the Bible -- two found in Leviticus in chapters warning against participation in local fertility cults. He said the only reason that homosexuality was mentioned at all was because the Israelites' sense of identity depended on their differentiating themselves from their neighbors.

He also testified that there are three references to homosexuality in the New Testament and they appear in lists of offensive behavior, lists that inlude lying, perjury, and greed. "What the writers in these passages condemn is not homosexual practice in general but prostitution and promiscuity. Prostitution and promiscuity -- in the same fashion as lying, perjury, and greed -- undermine the trust necessary for the stable functioning of society. Nothing in these three passages, however, relates to the subject of domestic partners."

Jim concluded, "...the Bible allots precious little space to the subject of homosexuality. Apparently it was not a subject of much interest to the people who wrote the Bible. Like them, I am opposed to prostitution, and I am opposed to people forcing other people into sexual acts, but I do not think that the concerns about homosexuality raised in the Bible are any basis to deny adult homosexual partners living together by mutual consent the same rights as married couples."

Rep. Holloway began asking questions, not the least of which was, "Is your parish predominantly gay?" Jim said, "No."

Perhaps the emotional highlight of the hearing was when Holloway asked Jim if he was gay. The audience gasped. Jim replied, "No, are you?"

Holloway then said, "I'm almost flabbergasted to hear the statements that have been made today. You don't read the Bible as I do ... Does a bill like this set the example we would like to have set for our children?"

Jim responded, "We have too-long raised our children in a climate of hatred toward those not like them. This sends the message that they should not feel that way."

An article concerning this hearing was on page one of the Washington Post Metro section (D-1) on Friday, June 5, 1992.

Afterwards the vestry, lead by Senior Warden Janice Gregory and Junior Warden Wayne Curtain, wrote Rep. Holloway an outstanding letter affirming what Jim had said.

Highlights of the letter our vestry sent Rep. Holloway include:

"We would also like to address more fully one of the questions that you put to him. The question was whether or not our congregation was "predominantly gay." We are concerned that this question suggests an intent to label and devalue members of our church, our community, and our society -- and on that basis, to dismiss as unworthy the views of our Rector."

"To discriminate against some members of our congregation is to discriminate against us all. We choose to stand together. Since some of our members are homosexual, so are we all in the face of discrimination. Since some of our members are Jewish, so are we all in the face of discrimination. Since some of our members are children, so are we all in the face of discrimination. We are mothers, fathers, single, married, gay, straight, old, young, African-American, white, Latino, Asian-American, handicapped; we are many faces of humanity. As a congregation, however, we are one.