Church of England transgender blessings

[howonearthdidwegethere]

You'll never guess what...

The policy announced today was drawn up by...three transwomen (who are priests), at least one of whom describes themselves as a trans lesbian.

The guidance was compiled in consultation with the Rev Dr Tina Beardsley, the Rev Sarah Jones and Canon Rachel Mann who said in a joint statement: “Collectively, we have sought to ensure that these new pastoral guidance notes provide a rich and generous space for trans people to locate their lives in the existing liturgy for the affirmation of baptismal faith."

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/church-offers-blessing-to-transgender-people-qfzznztx7

In the meantime, the CofE won't marry gay couples.

Why would trans members of the chuch of England have pushed for a second baptism when that is against the theology of their church? Wouldn’t they have known that? I am sure the part of you God sees transcends all physical or mental characteristics anyway.

I’m not quite up on all the ins and outs, but one possibility is that the CofE is so broad that you will find people who disagree with the official line on just about anything. So while the official position is that baptism is a one-time thing, there are some (evangelicals who would probably be more comfortable in the Baptist church) who disagree and think that adults can be rebaptised as a sign of their faith (believers’ baptism) because when they were baptised as a baby they were too young to know what they were committing to. And there are plenty of others who simply don’t know much about the church’s doctrines and don’t understand that rebaptism is a no no.

However, I don’t think most TRAs actually wanted rebaptism, but they did want a special service to mark their transition and/or a ‘correction’ of the record of their original baptism to show that they had ‘always’ been the gender and name they had transitioned into. This they haven’t been given.

I think the surmise of the writer Ian, that Bishops have been 'led by the hand' is correct.
The church has no business affirming trans identities through liturgy. This is a totally different thing to being welcoming.
I feel constrained by the rules and unable to speak plainly about why I would not want to 'affirm' trans identity in church or elsewhere. My perception of the truth would be objected to by those who are looking for offense.
I am just really disappointed that only conservatives can see the problem with this.
What was the Gay and Lesbian Christian Association is now One Body One Faith and is enthusiastically championing the T and Q in the manner of Stonewall.

I'm not a member of the Church of England, but I do hope that it wall also support those who might be left behind after such a change, wives, children, family etc.

As long as they also do this then I'm all for it. The church, any church, should give their blessing to people regardless of gender, ethnicity etc etc. I'm a staunch atheist but some Christians I've known in the past said they ask themselves what Jesus would have done: I think that's a good approach.

Sunday Times article 'Bishops and priests line up to rebel against trans baptisms'

(extract)
One priest, Julian Mann, vicar of the Parish Church of the Ascension in Oughtibridge, Sheffield, has written to the Archbishop of York to say that he would fight any disciplinary action imposed on him if he refused to conduct a service.

Ten other priests told The Sunday Times they would also refuse.

Rod Thomas, Bishop of Maidstone, urged the Church to reconsider, warning that it needed to consider the theological basis for “unconditional affirmation of trans people”.

He also said that transitioning could be a factor in family break-up and said the church had to work out what to do if someone who had transitioned subsequently sought a marriage service. The Church of England does not conduct same-sex marriages.

Julian Henderson, the Bishop of Blackburn, issued a statement on behalf of church evangelicals warning that the new service is “both highly divisive and theologically and pastorally questionable.”

Keith Sinclair, the Bishop of Birkenhead, has also intervened.

Michael Nazir-Ali, the former Bishop of Rochester, said: “The church should be compassionate and sensitive towards those who experience gender dysphoria, but its fundamental teaching must be based on a revealed truth and objective biology and its relation to social structure.”

Paul said the church needed to think through the implications of its decision. “What would it say for the church to ‘celebrate’ gender-identity change to the spouse who feels betrayed, to the children who feel abandoned, to the parent who feels bereaved — and even to those who have undergone transition and now regret the decision?”

He said it was a “misuse” of the baptism service to switch from “affirmation of faith to affirmation of gender identity”. (continues)

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bishops-and-priests-line-up-to-rebel-against-trans-baptisms-5pnnm0c0l?shareToken=e687d175af9b298950ea09b20f57dcb0

thread
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3458445-Two-more-articles-in-the-Suday-Times

“What would it say for the church to ‘celebrate’ gender-identity change to the spouse who feels betrayed, to the children who feel abandoned, to the parent who feels bereaved — and even to those who have undergone transition and now regret the decision?”

I am so glad someone is saying this.

Yes me too, I'm actually pleasantly surprised that 10 priests have spoken out about this. (I doubt any of them were thinking from a feminist point of view).

It's very bold of those members of the church to speak, in the face of such pressure. I am minded to write to them and express gratitude for their support.

Oh i see that's 10 Bishops, not priests. Even better.

Colour me dim, but haven't CofE being telling us for decades that Baptism is not a Christening/naming ceremony?

I know! It's batty.