‘To be trans is to enter a sacred journey of becoming whole’

[tabbycatstripy]

This isn’t a quotation from India Willoughby. It’s from a letter signed by senior religious leaders, including Rowan Williams, ex Archbishop of Canterbury, to Boris Johnson, urging him to ban trans conversion therapy.

I’m not a member of the CoE, but I don’t think I’m unreasonable in thinking they are going outside their religious remit. If I attended their church I would be seriously questioning whether these people shared my religious faith, and whether they had lost their ability to lead me in faith.

Be trans, don’t be trans. I don’t mind. But I don’t think it has anything to do with Christianity and see nothing in any Christian thought that would regard being trans as ‘sacred’ (obviously being kind etc is a Christian way to live your life - that’s different to calling being trans ‘sacred’).

All a bit odd.

I'm a Christian. I believe in God. I don't believe human beings can change sex or that anyone is born in the wrong body. I sometimes feel quite out of step with modern society. Belief in gender identity is faith based and people are perfectly entitled to such a view but I find it very hard to reconcile with Christian theology.

‘Belief in gender identity is faith based and people are perfectly entitled to such a view but I find it very hard to reconcile with Christian theology.’

Because it has nothing to do with Christian theology. Accepting people into your faith is obviously Christian. Changing your faith to match their beliefs is a different thing.

@Artichokeleaves Quite. I don't think traumatising female rape victims, for example, is really Jesus's thing.

So, are they saying the Skoptsy were right to worship in the way they did?

allthatsinteresting.com/skoptsy

The Cof E has also ended freedom of speech for clergy and church members who don't believe TWAW. It has passed a service telling clergy to gaslight entire congregations, inc abuse victims, about someone's sex if the individual says so.

No assessment or even consideration of the impact or distress on women and child abuse victims, or even the ex wife/ kids of the TW concerned. No assessment of the safeguarding risks of telling children that males are women- the guidance was written by 3 males, all transwomen. Another abuse scandal just waiting to happen- the 'sacred caste'.

-www.churchofengland.org/sites/default/files/2018-12/Pastoral%20Guidance-Affirmation-Baptismal-Faith.pdf

www.churchofengland.org/news-and-media/news-and-statements/guidance-welcoming-transgender-people-published

God makes mistakes! It's official!

I think it's naivety. I've been working with churches doing the 'Living in life and faith' consultation, which is about encouraging people to listen to each other's views on diversity- gay marriage etc.

The concern around the mismatch between general synod, clergy, and congregation members is immense. There's a huge swell of support for same sex marriage. Trans issues are, as always, hitchhiking on the coat tails of that. And no one wants to be kind and be seen to be kind more than your average CofE member. Love is literally the foundation of the faith. Anything that looks 'unloving' is a problem.

Obviously if you know your stuff, mass conversion of kids to trans life styles is in no way 'kind'.

Classic baby/bath water issue. And actually I think it will go faster in the CofE because there's no pesky Bible quotes saying 'thou shalt not declare thou art trans, and invade the spaces of the opposite sex'. Because it was quite literally unthinkable.

How does one define 'sacred?' I don't have the cultural roots to understand its meaning in the CofE context, but I'd love to learn.

And is this the only journey to wholeness for the affected individuals? What if they find, at that journey's end, that nothing has improved at all or even turned much worse? How do the signers of that letter know that this journey is the only right one to take?

I am willing to believe that it is the right journey for some, but not for all, and that is the reason why children considering transitioning must get proper comprehensive mental health care, trauma counseling if needed, etc. before medication is initiated.

I agree with you. I'm a Catholic and as far as I've always understood, the Christian Faith teaches we are made either male or female at conception according to God's Will, so the Abp. is committing heresy . It's not loving to reinforce a person's delusions on anything. It's not kind . St. Thomas Aquinas said "The greatest love one can show to another is to lead him( or her) to Truth". Thus, the Christian is called to always speak and live truthfully. We should be humble enough as Christians to accept that God decides our sex and it is immutable and have the courage of our convictions to stick to this belief, no matter how unpopular it makes us. We cannot change it and should not try. True Christian love and , IMO kindness from anyone of any faith or none, would be offering or supporting the offering of high-quality therapy to those suffering from gender dysphoria to get to the heart of the issues that the GD is stemming from, usually abuse in childhood, come to terms with their biological reality and learn to accept and then hopefully, LOVE, being the sex they actually are! Or at least, take it for granted like most of us do!
Furthermore, some people with this disorder WANT conversion therapy and so do some people who experience SSA, especially if they're devout Christians. They should be allowed to have it and have the choice. It is deeply unjust and beyond cruel to deny it to them and the Abp. could do with being reminded of that! No one is advocating the FORCING of conversion therapy on anyone!
He's basically saying God makes mistakes, which is blasphemous and I would imagine blasphemy is still considered a serious sin, even in the most liberal circles in the C.o.E.. False kindness is dangerous, and can be deadly. Some who have been encouraged to transition have regretted it sorely, some to the point of suicidal ideation and even actual suicide! He needs to cop on! People with GD are entitled to have the CHOICE to enter conversion therapy!

@chisanunian

Strewth. Where will it all end?

Actually I don't know why I'm asking, because I know the answer already. With women at the bottom of the pile yet again.

Sex castes (using Sheila Jeffreys scheme here) will never change.

Oddly enough, those that benefit from being a sacred caste remain fundamentally the same…

@mateysmum

So we were right then when we referred to trans as a new "sacred caste"!

Oh, yep.

If they can all define trans conversion therapy, then I might listen to them.

Do they?

@DomesticatedZombie

If they can all define trans conversion therapy, then I might listen to them.

Do they?

Different version of transubstantiation for some, it seems.

@ErrolTheDragon yes, when I said 'can' bless and legalise gay marriages, obviously any denomination is from a state point of view free to vote to do so and change their canon law if they wanted and if it was within the scope of their institution. I just meant Methodist and URC are the only ones to have actually done so and therefore the only ministers who can do the ceremonies - although you're quite right, I forgot Quakers. Sorry Quakers! Scottish Episcopalians also for those north of the border. A CofE, Catholic, Baptist minister etc would not be allowed by virtue of their vows.

@nepeta

How does one define 'sacred?' I don't have the cultural roots to understand its meaning in the CofE context, but I'd love to learn.

And is this the only journey to wholeness for the affected individuals? What if they find, at that journey's end, that nothing has improved at all or even turned much worse? How do the signers of that letter know that this journey is the only right one to take?

I am willing to believe that it is the right journey for some, but not for all, and that is the reason why children considering transitioning must get proper comprehensive mental health care, trauma counseling if needed, etc. before medication is initiated.

Generally something sacred is something that has been set apart for a special use or purpose. A sacred journey isn't heading out to the shops for milk, it's a journey in some way dedicated to God, (or whatever) like a pilgrimage.

It's also a pretty well established way to speak about human life itself as a kind of pilgrimage, and that kind of statement is drawing from that poetic and theological tradition.

But like a lot of that kind of language it can be used as jargon to disguise a lack of real meaning or thought.

Just to add to all the great discussion here that from a biblical standpoint being a Christian is not about being kind. God is good, but not necessarily kind. He is righteous. Jesus was right, and righteous, but not actively kind as such, in this modern sense anyway

I don't think the CofE could properly change it's practice on same sex marriage without the agreement of the other Anglican provinces at Lambeth. Which. last time they voted on it, said no.

At least, that's how it's supposed to be done - when the Episcopalians decided a number of years ago to do it anyway, they were barred from voting. Canada just recently did the same thing and so far no one is saying anything but when it comes to the next Lambeth conference, it will be interesting to see what happens.

It's essentially a very conservative system - there is no change unless a substantial number of members agree. Anyone can, of course leave the Anglican Communion, either as an individual or a body - what holds it together is the agreement to abide by the decisions of the group. Groups not doing so but maintaining their claim to membership is a real problem.

And the Quakers, I think?

Yes, the Quakers were at the forefront of campaigning for gay marriage, and have generally been pretty good on women's rights historically, which is why it's depressing that currently there's a top-down imposition of gender ideology - I'm a Quaker and I cannot see how gender ideology can possibly sit comfortably with our testimonies of truth and equality. But don't get me started...

@Plasmodesmata

tabby I think you misgendered God there.

😁

The Vatican produced an encyclical three years ago which condemned trans ideology. One Vatican priest went further and stated it is diabolical. I am so pleased the Catholic Church sees the truth and I am actually shocked that any other Church that calls itself Christian would ever support this false ideology that has at its centre the abuse of children and women. And that's not even getting started on men attempting to take over God's role of deciding male and female and altering His perfect creation. This is absolute heresy.

I've read the links above with great dismay. As a Christian, recently confirmed as an adult, I am horrified to see what I have signed up to. I was aware of the Living in Love and Faith consultation thing, but I didn't realise that since 2017 the church has literally committed to a policy of only affirmation and celebration of trans journeys.

I'm really upset by this. It doesn't fit at all with what I believe is God's perfect design and plan for us all as individuals.

The Church of England makes errors. It’s a human institution and it will return to sanity as human institutions do.

I read an interesting 'thing' on Instagram this week. I can't remember it word for word, or where I saw it to find it again.

But it basically said that God made trans people trans on purpose. He didn't make a mistake by putting them in "the wrong body". He intended them to be trans all along.

Now I'm not saying (as a CofE Christian) that I agree with that standpoint. But I thought it was interesting. I'd never really considered it that way before.

*I think it's naivety. I've been working with churches doing the 'Living in life and faith' consultation, which is about encouraging people to listen to each other's views on diversity- gay marriage etc.

The concern around the mismatch between general synod, clergy, and congregation members is immense. There's a huge swell of support for same sex marriage. Trans issues are, as always, hitchhiking on the coat tails of that. And no one wants to be kind and be seen to be kind more than your average CofE member. Love is literally the foundation of the faith. Anything that looks 'unloving' is a problem.

Obviously if you know your stuff, mass conversion of kids to trans life styles is in no way 'kind'.

Classic baby/bath water issue. And actually I think it will go faster in the CofE because there's no pesky Bible quotes saying 'thou shalt not declare thou art trans, and invade the spaces of the opposite sex'. Because it was quite literally unthinkable.*

Thanks for that picklemewalnuts as it absolutely sets the record straight.

I'm Anglican, and feel there is enormous tension between what the clergy want and what they know that their congregations will accept. So they know that they can only push us so far.
It's also a problem that most people have absolutely no idea of what banning conversion therapy actually means.
The CofE desperately, and I mean desperately, want to appear NICE. Congregations are diminishing and they want young worshippers, so are prepared to put theology on the back burner.

I went through the Living in Love and Faith, which was intended to cover the implications of gay marriage and ministry, but they hadn't the sense to leave well alone and tacked on a segment on a trans relationship right at the end. Which we weren't allowed to discuss. unbelievable.