A personal evaluation of what went wrong with Methodist & other responses to Orlando

There has been a lot of discussion on social media around the hurt caused by the initial prayer offered by the Church of England yesterday and by the initial official response issued by the Methodist President and Vice President as well as the prayer offered by the URC.  In the case of the CofE there was a later joint statement by the Archbishops of York and Canterbury which sought to repair some of the damage. It was welcomed by many, but also seen as ringing slightly hollow in terms of the difference between the words and level of hurt many within that many within that Church have experienced as a result of the policies and actions of the church.

In contrast to this the contributions of LGBT+ Christians, particularly Ric Stott and Rachel Mann were welcomed and widely shared. Indeed by the end of the day their two contributions had been combined into a very moving and visually attractive prayer.

To be fair at times there was a coming together of the welcome and unwelcome. The Methodist initial statement included as links below the CofE prayer which had caused so much pain with the one by Rachel Mann which had been balm to many.

As I followed what was going on and felt the pain caused along with others I struggled to understand what had gone so wrong. Those releasing the statements and prayers which had caused the pain by their omission were seeking to give solace and respond in a compassionate way, of that I was sure. However, in not understanding a crucial aspect of the context their words were painful.

I was reminded of a quote I understand is drummed into the students studying where I live, “a text without a context is a pretext”.

So what had gone wrong in their, and others, reading of the context and what might we be able to learn from this.

Firstly, I believe those responding had read the context in a hegemonic way. That is they had read it in terms of those impacted being “like them” – predominantly white, middle class, heterosexual, middle-aged and cis. This context was not one where these were the dominant social characteristics of those most directly impacted. Most importantly those impacted were LGBT+ and many were Latino. Whilst one might hear as a defence these responses were put together before all the information was available the key piece of information, “that this took place in a LGBT nightclub” was there from the beginning.

Secondly, I believe that the responses which were lacking focused on seeing “community” in term of a physical, geographical location. The community impacted in this case was not only the geographical area of location but the LGBT+ community, which is a global community. This illustrates, I think, that the institutions are rooted in modernist understandings of community, rather than those linked to our current networked communities, which are far more based on identity. The formal discussions around these changing understandings of community have tended to revolve around digital/ online faith communities and fresh expressions within our institutions. We need to catch up on understanding the world we live in now. Our responses to tragedies need to be focused and context specific rather than generic.

Thirdly, I worry that those initially responding were doing so based upon media reports which were seeking to frame the story within a particular hegemonic way. Until Owen Jones walked out of the Sky studio so much discussion had sought to  frame this as a “terrorist” attack and to straight wash away the fact that a hate crime could also be a terrorist attack, the two did not need to be separate and that when the LGBT+ community were targeted that was relevant. As a prophetic community we need to be ready to think through the messages we are getting from the wider media as well as those we are contributing.

Finally, I think we need to think about the audience our messages are going to be read by and how they will be read. Again I think that this is where part of went wrong was hegemonic understandings that are held by some. I believe these statements would have been checked and published by people with similar outlooks and that is why nobody appeared to pick up why others might be so hurt was going out. We need to ensure that the teams we have working within the church are as diverse as possible and that in situations such as this we have people in place to check what is going out from an EDI point of view.

Between beginning to write this and posting it on my blog the Methodist statement has been expanded with some excellent statement and material by London Chair, Micky Youngson, an ally who gets it. This has changed the piece totally. I have then also updated this post because the media department have again updated the response so only Micky's material is showing and the original response is now a short link at the bottom. It's been a fascinating exercise in seeing how media responses change according to how understanding develops.

So where do we go from here, bearing in mind that Micky's material has been added later after a lot of the initial damage had been done and however much that original response is changed and the media department seek to erase it they cannot erase our memories of it? Well, I think that it would be useful if the president or vice-president and the media department were to apologise, admit that they had got it wrong and explain why. We are a faith that believe in confession and repentance, to illustrate this now I think could be very powerful.
*as a post script to this I have just seen a beautiful prayer on the President's face book page which expresses his care for the LGBTQI community. I have no doubt that this is an honest and heartfelt prayer and was very moving.
The president and vice president statement has been updated with wording which explicitly addresses the hurt caused they say
""We stand in solidarity with our LGBTQI brothers and sisters, and acknowledge the pain caused when we fail to live out the love of Christ for all. We are desperately sad that hurt has been caused by the statement made yesterday, which was an immediate response to assure people of our love and prayers for those affected by this tragedy. The murders in Orlando were an abhorrent tragedy, possibly the largest targeted killing of the LGBTQI community since the Second World War. God's love is for all. As Christians we are called first and foremost to love all. We stand in together with gay and straight men and women, and continue to hold the LGBTQI community, the victims' friends and their families in our hearts, thoughts and prayers."

I for one want to thank them for these words and that we, who were hurt by the statement yesterday, have been heard.

 

Some prayer pointers for Orlando

The tears are falling for the Orlando shooting and the loss of 50 LGBT lives in an attack. Reading through the social media streams and watching the mainstream media has provided an interesting contrast for me which highlights the issue…..there is much about this tragedy and other LGBT deaths which the straight/ cis world doesn’t, perhaps can’t get.

This post is seeking to give some pointers to help us pray in an informed way for this tragedy.

After we have prayed for the dead and injured the first group that many of us will be praying for will be the family and friends of those who have died. This tragedy may be particularly difficult for some who struggled to accept their child’s sexuality or gender identification. Then there may be those whose children may have lived a closeted life. We don’t know if some, in their grief, will also be dealing with disclosure of their children’s sexuality or gender identification. As we pray for the parents let it be in an informed way with these things in mind.

The next group that we might want to pray for are the friends of the bereaved. Many of these friends are going to be part of the LGBT community, others will not. Again for those who may of lived closeted lives there may be those friends and colleagues who are having to come to terms with feelings related to “why didn’t I know?”. Amongst the LGBT+ community there will be a range of feelings, whilst the aim of the community is to love and give acceptance there will also be anger as well. There may also be fear, particularly amongst BAME members of the LGBT community, who already face discrimination amongst their own LGBT community at times. Let us pray that those members of our community know they are truly accepted.

We also need to pray for those friends and members of the community who regularly experience hate and for those whom this confirms all the negative views they have of religion about being a source of hate.

We also need to pray for each member of the LGBT community as they seek to support others in their community. There will be people, particularly in that local community and in those cities preparing for upcoming Prides who will be extremely busy in their grief and will be seeking to provide so much support whilst not having the space to grieve themselves. We need to particularly remember them.

Then there are the first responders and surgeons. We need to pray for them in their work and as they possibly face post-traumatic stress for what they have faced. Within some of these people there will be contrasting feelings about the LGBT+ community. Franklin Graham has indicated on Facebook one of the chief surgeon’s is on the board of Samaritans Purse. They will be doing their job professionally, yet it might bring them face to face with the reality of the prejudice that their faith has within it.

Let us pray for these people that may be facing a real dissonance through this experience. Let us pray too for those whose dissonance lead to responses which seem lacking and hurtful through what they omit.

Let us pray for the media too. The way in which news is made means that complex things are often reduced into soundbites, particularly by people who don’t understand the pain that their reductionist approach is giving. Let us pray against reductionism, this was a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender tragedy as President Obama said. Let us not reduce it to “gay”.

When praying for communities affected let us not get sucked into just thinking of the physical Orlando community but also let us think about the wider LGBT+ community, who are closer and much more of an actual community than many realise.

When talking about a terrorist attack let us not believe that it can be separated from a hate attack. The very fact you are part of a community who is subject to hate crime can increase your risk of being a terrorist target. It can also make you more liable to further hate crime when you are innocently part of another group who terrorists happen to be an unrepresentative minority of. Let us pray against both homophobia and Islamophobia.

Let us pray for love most of all and for a change of hearts amongst those who would sow the seeds of hate through ideology which forgets people.

Finally, let us pray for the family and friends of the guy who shot these people. They are also bereaved and going through all sorts of pain too. Let us show them love rather than hate too.

If you want a ready made prayer I would highly recommend one put together by Rachel Mann.

Response to Marriage and Task Group Report and Open Church Charter

This past week has seen the publication of two important documents relating to the church and LGBT+ people. The first is the Oasis Foundation Open Church Charter and the second is the Methodist Church Report toConference from the Marriage and Relationships Task Group (report 29 in the second part of the Methodist Conference Agenda).  At the outset I want to say I am supportive of both documents and wish to express thanks to those whose hard work has produced them. What follows is intended as a supportive critique rather than negative criticism.

I will start with the Methodist Report. My first question point comes from the legal implications. As the report does explicitly mention trans issues within it I would suggest that this section also needs to include that ensuring that legislation related to gender recognition is duly considered. This is relevant to marriage and relationships because if one looks at the legislation one will see there is a grey period where a trans/ cis couple which was previously same sex may are legally be considered to still be of the same sex if the trans person has not gained their gender recognition certificate. The legislation does not allow for them to remain in a civil partnership but for the gender recognition certificate to be granted they must be married. The Equality Act 2010 states that trans people who are going through gender reassignment cannot legally be discriminated against in the provision of goods or services (and as the working group report does state) there is no religious opt out on the law around those going through gender reassignment.

With regard to the report this is picked up in 3.2.2.b.ii “A reality is that the marriage of transgender people in church may be already be happening, because the authorised person and celebrant would probably not know a person’s gender status other than what is on the legal documents. If the Task Group recommends that the definition of marriage be revisited and if that revisiting recommends removing or widening statements around gender, then the issue of transgender in relation to the marriage definition would be irrelevant – although there would continue to be pastoral responsibilities.”

This paragraph is important because it shows that currently, as explained above trans issues are currently relevant in the discussion of marriage and relationships and will only cease to be so if the task group recommend the definition is widened.

 With regard to the definition around homophobia I understand how this came out of the 2014 report and why, as a result of this, it would be outside the remit of the group to also say that definitions of transphobia and biphobia should be excluded within their discussion. However, if a definition of homophobia is going to be included with the CPD document I believe that definitions of transphobia and biphobia should also be included, thus I would argue that these issues also need discussing with Faith and Order in relation to 2.1.4.

What this document is, quite unintentionally doing I believe, is reinforcing the privilege of gay and lesbian people within discussions on LGBT+ (which then serve to make invisible or secondary the concerns of other groups within that spectrum who are impacted by both prejudice and lack of visibility within the church). Following on from this it is important to understand that gender queer people do not have the legal protection that those going through gender reassignment do. Whilst the report recognises and explicitly mentions intersex people it makes no reference to those who are gender queer and does not refer in any way to the problems which the use of binary language in the documents being discussed may cause to those who have a non-conforming gender identity and those seeking to minister to them within the church when it comes to marriage and relationships. In terms of listening to each other I think it is vitally important that these minority within minority voices are heard and that we consider what policy reflects the world we are in now. This is particularly important with regard to the development of scriptural understanding and theology. This is an area where the Methodist could take a lead in producing some excellent scholarship if it included the full spectrum of identities in the work it understands it needs to produce to examine the issues in a truly Methodist way.

I am not sure if relevant documents relates only to documents which have been to conference but I would argue within the Methodist Context the document We Are Family which was a piece of research sponsored by the Methodist Church is also a relevant document to be considered when looking at the issues here.

The fact we can remain united whilst holding disagreement on some issues and disagreement on the dominant interpretation of scripture is important and I am glad the report has underlined this. The model statement on Living With Contradiction in 1.5 is quite moving and I believe should be held up as a model of good practice.

The EDI toolkit produces excellent resources and I would argue needs to be much more widely available. I understand why it takes the form it does but because of the wider importance and use of a number of the documents I would argue they do need to be made more easily and freely available via the Methodist website.

The issue of shared premises and legislation raised in 2.4.1 links to the second point of the Open Church Charter and explains why the term “within the scope of current British law” is so important.

The report brings to light the problems for churches who share premises. Whilst this is a minority problem at the moment I believe if the URC were to say it became a congregational issue and vote denominationally to allow congregations to hold marriages on the “opt in” basis that the number of problems could increase. Whilst understanding about the wish not to pre-empt conclusions I think the delay may be problematic and cause deep hurt in churches which may in the next couple of years wish to “opt in” if the denominational barrier within the URC is removed but are told the discussion cannot even begin to happen because of their Methodist partners providing a legal bar on this. As the report makes clear within it the URC is due to come to a conclusion in July of this year and the Book of Reports 2016 which has been published by the URC ready for their General Assembly (page 32) shows that they are taking the view there is no common view and so recommending it come down to individual churches.

I am pleased that the wording being looked at by various committees in relation to 2.5, on the provision of assistance, is including “other immediate family members” as it widens the scope to not only include assisting partners but also adult children who may for various reasons still be dependent upon their parents.

The discussion of the impact of our understandings and policy on marriage and relationships upon mission is one which is both informative and moving. The discussion shows a real understanding of many of the issues involved and the understanding of what the impact of this issue has been on some church leavers.

The pastoral issues raised show insight and are very important too although at times the insertion of the words “and gender identity” would be helpful too. This is one of the strengths of the Oasis document. It is not cis-normative in its language and outlook.   

3.1.2 is an important piece of this document and it is good that there was work between Faith and Order and the working group on this. Within the issues linked to the view marriage is for procreation I think that further work might be done to look not only at same sex marriages but how this understanding needs to be examined in the light of the marriages of those heterosexual couples who choose not to have children or cannot have children, and those older couples who might marry late in life. This is again a rich area for theological reflection if the church chooses to invest in it.

I want to look at 3.2.2b, already referred to in detail. The argument that there is little or no biblical material on gender identity is true to some extent, however emerging scholarship and theology is being to develop this particularly in how it links to existing liberation theologies and the scholarship around them. The reality is indeed that gender identity is more complex is true and so it is a pity that nowhere in the document there appears to be reference to the concept of “gender queer” or “non-binary” and transgender is in there instead of trans*. Now, I know that much of this will have been based on the consideration of the knowledge of the readership but I do wonder how much actual trans input there has been on this. It is right and proper and really good that the report recognises that gender identity is different to sexuality but there is a complex connection between the two which may exist. I think this is something that all sectors of the church need to look at in more detail, particularly as the number of people who identify as trans and those close to them is growing within the church as a whole, as well as becoming more visible in society.

The recommendation of the EDI to produce some simple guidance on trans is important, although I believe the wording should relate to gender identity as a better and more inclusive term. I also believe that within this there should be specific work, guidance and resources given to providing some resources around the pastoral care of the friends and family of trans people. This is important in relation to issues of loss I have talked about extensively elsewhere within previous posts on this blog.

With regard to the preparation of appropriate marriage resources this is where working with organisations such as the Oasis Foundation, (whose charter explicitly refers to marriage preparation within it) may be useful. Traditionally we have focused on looking at ecumenical partners. I think in the current age it may be useful to look at what para-church groups and organisations can be seen as useful partners too with regard to this type of thing.

The report highlights the excellent work being done by other working groups within the church and the need for joint working. What I think the references to the working group and EDI work, amongst others, do is identify why there needs to be a more joined up approach at times within the church.

What about putting on a national Methodist equality and diversity conference where all the groups concerned with and working on the issues related to the wide range of these areas of diversity and inclusion can come together and share their experiences identifying the common ground between them and how this can be Connexionally harnessed.

The recommendation in 3.2.2 is welcomed but I am concerned about the wording for the reasons previously mentioned. I think the inclusion of the term “non-conforming gender identity” would be an important amendment to make.

With regard to the issues of non-participation I would like to add that within one circuit there was selection of those asked to participate and that to break through that system one had to be eager enough to pursue information on when the consultations were taking place.

As explained in a previous post on this blog I agree the concentration on same sex marriage issues was a shame., especially in light of the range of excellent resources provided to take the discussion beyond this. 

I was heartened by the way in which the youth participation strategy has been taken seriously with regard to this issue and the feedback from 3 Gen has been extensively included.

So the overall conclusion of the task group is we keep on talking and we keep on working on things. On one hand this is really frustrating and I want to scream….can we just get on with it. On the other the way this is being handled is bringing real fruit. There is, through this report, a motion on looking properly at trans issues going to conference and there is real discussion going on about change.

My worry is something which has been reinforced by looking at the conference agenda more widely….do we want to carry on talking until the Anglicans have sorted themselves out and so we can put in place policies which more closely mirror theirs? I know a lot of work went into this report and I do not believe that is the motivation of the working group….but I do wonder if it is the motivation of some others in the church.

As I finish though I want to reinforce my thanks to those who have put this report together and all those who have been involved in helping facilitate the discussions. What we are doing, when compared to many of the other denominations via the resources put together through this group and via the EDI, is actually putting together a lot of good practice.

It does highlight though a worry I have with the Open Church charter. Whilst I fully support it I do worry that point 2 within the charter, because of the messy situation within our denominations, may put people off from signing. Now I know it has been carefully worded to say: “Within the scope of current British law we will offer marriage to couples regardless of gender identity and sexuality and where this is not allowed under law, we will offer celebration, preparation and support for same-sex marriage partners in loving, healthy monogamous relationships” but I still worry if it might cause churches who would otherwise be quite happy and willing to sign to delay.

A long post I know but I hope you appreciate why this one had to be.

The Invisible Church by Steve Aisthorpe Reviewed

Invisible Church by Steve Aisthorpe is a book I was eagerly awaiting having heard some good things about this study into Scottish Christians who were not church attenders. It is a book which has some excellent cartoon illustrations from Dave Walker whose work you may be familiar with.

The book acknowledges that it builds upon the work of Francis and Richter in Gone for Good? And Alan Jamieson’s A Churchless Faith. What it fails to mention is that both these books are somewhat dated now. Gone for Good was published almost 20 years ago and A Churchless Faith published in 2002 was followed up by Church Leavers: Faith journeys five years On in 2006. The texts this study is building upon are therefore not cutting edge. Yet, as Aisthorpe acknowledges they are still useful.

What I was surprised about was that he did not make mention of much of the work that has arisen on the subject of pioneering and which has itself build on Jamieson’s work. He does make passing reference to FreshExpressions and new monasticism as well as the recent Church Growth research but I felt the text could have made more use of some of the contemporary work. It was a particular loss that it was clearly produced just prior to Grace Davie updating her text on Religion in Britain since 1945 and producing Religion in Britain: A Persistent Paradox. I believe that reference to this updated text would have been particularly useful to the author.

The sample for the qualitative part of the study was relatively low at 30 interviewees. However, Aisthorpe does make use of other social survey material which had a much larger data set and used a random sample.

It was a highly readable book which was easy to work through, but perhaps that was part of the problem with it. It was too readable and seemed to lack depth. There were so many places where I wanted him to expand because he seemed to be only skimming the surface of some very important points.

One area where the book was very good was critiquing some of the stories and studies which have given rise to a range of assumptions about who leaves church and why. His myth busting chapter two was well balanced and made some important points which people who have not been closely following the development of the secularisation debate in the UK may be unaware of. This, summed up both the strength and the weakness of the book for me. It provides an excellent introduction to the current situation but for the more knowledgeable reader if felt sadly lacking.

The “So What? Questions and Activities for Further Reflection” sections at the end of each chapter were useful reminders and provided some useful tools for reflecting on my own practice as a local preacher and experience as a church member.

Whilst he is wary of the models of stages of faith as put forward by Fowler and others this topic is what he is really discussing in various forms in the chapters on “exit routes” and “life really is a journey”.

My favourite chapter was “A Longing for Belonging” which explored a range of issues related to welcome and inclusion in churches beyond those topics which are normally included.

The view of the church which came out of this was one which was realistic, if at times stark. I think these parts of the book are important for all of us to consider.

As with many others Aisthorpe is of the view we are at a pivotal moment in the history of the church and in the mist of something happening which we need to be ready to go with. He highlights some of the risks associated but this book explains why they are important.

Would I recommend the book? Yes, if you are new to the topic or if you are a local preacher, etc who needs a kick up the backside. As I say it is certainly very readable.

Self-Care and Being Sustained

I know I was going to post another couple of cis partner of a trans person posts but just to let you know at the moment they are on hold. I recently read the book of The Danish Girl, (which is very readable and quite different to the film) and for reasons I don’t quite get I found it a personally hard read in places.

That together with life being very, very busy at the moment means I am planning on pausing the series and posts on that topic. One of the important things for us all, whatever our situation, is knowing when we need to take a bit of self-care in order to be able to support others more fully. Sometimes it seems it's not possible but often it is….just by thinking about small things like do we need to alter our social media engagement for a short while or sometimes for a longer season.

At the moment I’m in a place where I need to learn to still my mind and let myself recharge in bites. I’m finding adult colouring so useful for this and a great way to pray. I find it hard to totally just stop but adult colouring enables you to still the mind whilst still doing something with your hands. The change of colours also, if I am using it as a prayer activity, allows me to pray for one thing (whilst colouring in that shade) and then move to another topic or theme when I swap the pencil.

Sometimes (infact quite often) I don’t finish my colouring in one go but that’s ok, I find in leaving the picture unfinished I am able to leave my prayer in a present continuous state.

I guess, ironically, that in seeking not to address the questions I was looking at I have actually jumped to question 3 “what sustains you?”

Well as you can see creative prayer is part of what sustains me. Besides colouring I find using music (secular or “Christian”) really useful in sustaining me. One of my favourite songs for using to come into God’s presence is Nirvana’s Come As You Are. My mind subverts the lyrics to let me know God is already here, but in prayer I choose to acknowledge coming into his presence and he invites me to do that just as I am.

I also find reading a great way to remove myself from whatever I am worrying about, stressing about. My favourite places to read are in coffee shops, gardens or beaches. In Birmingham I have discovered Winterbourne House and Garden……it’s a wonderful place with quite a nice tea room too. Grabbing a pot of earl grey and toasted tea cake, whilst escaping the world with a book is something I use to sustain myself and provide a touch of self-care.

I could go on but that would be counterproductive. I will be back on this topic and probably other random things in between but in the meantime go well.

This is my body - C. Beardsley & M. O'Brien Ed's Reviewed

This is my body: Hearing the theology of transgender Christians edited by Christina Beardsley and Michelle O’Brien is a collection of contributions by people connected with the Christian trans group Sibyls.

 

The introduction to the book acknowledges the lack of voices from trans men and younger people. I think the lack of a voice from cis partners of trans people is also a loss in a book like this which is not exclusively trans, containing the voices of allies as well. It is not that young and f to m Christians don’t exist, rather I think they are more likely to access different networks (often for LGBTQ+ Christians now LGB Christian groups are becoming more welcoming to T members). Something touched upon in relation to secular f to m groups by the editors as they seek to give an explanation.

The book is a hybrid of academic articles and personal stories. This works to some extent, as does the decision to include all contributions to the stories, however brief. However, I do think that the disjuncture between academic or pseudo-academic articles and many of the stories is such that a book and a pamphlet would have been more helpful. Additionally a couple of the contributions are so brief one does wonder if it would have been more helpful not to include them if something more could not have been coaxed out of the writers.

The first main chapter by the editors talking about The Sybils Gender, Sexuality and Spirituality workshop was particularly strong. Within it there was interesting use of labelling theory and it’s bringing into focus of intersectionality. We all have a sexuality of some kind (even if that is not binary or is a sexual orientation linked to a lack of attraction) and a gender (again even if that is non-binary). This workshop seeks to look at how these factors intersect and how they further relate to our spirituality. The way people have responded to this workshop was also interesting to read.

The next chapter; Acting like a man-playing the woman: gender in performance which is solely authored by Beardsley uses historical analysis of theatre and performance in order to rebuff some of the assertions made by Oliver O’Donovan (a theologian whose work has put forward a range of unhelpful and incorrect notions regarding gender). This was one of the parts of the book which appealed to the social historian within me.

Jasmine Wooley put together a chapter on the social construct of gender which was useful in the way it explained the way that people’s understanding of being trans is often linked to their role as social actors. This is not to suggest that being trans is a choice, rather it highlights as the symbolic interactionists do the way in which we “perform” in relation to the “other” and form our identities around what is expected of us and the fears of what will happen if we deviate from that. Whilst the discussion around legislation was helpful and positive I was disappointed that the discussion of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act (2013) did not acknowledge the negative aspect of that legislation for trans people and their partners who are within a civil partnership. There was a really interesting short section towards the end of this chapter on the challenges presented by the medical model, I was disappointed this had not been slightly longer. However, the chapter covered a lot of ground.

Michelle O’Brien’s chapter on Intersex was particularly interesting and moving. It wove together personal testimony with research. This was the chapter I learnt most from.

This first part of the book for me was the strongest. The chapters became more academic as they moved onto the Theology and Trans chapters. Mercia McMahon sought to reflect on the way in which queer and feminist theologies can help in developing a trans theology. In doing this she also sought to think about how the untimely death of Althaus-Reed, a former professor of divinity in Edinburgh, put back the development of a trans theology. Whilst this chapter did do some useful thinking I think there was an issue in not bringing into play other liberation theologies such as womanism.

Beardsley put together a second solely authored chapter which engaged with the Church of England document “Some Issues in Human Sexuality”. It was a useful update of an earlier article and was interesting in that it gave some of the background to where the current discussions are coming from. This was followed by a chapter looking at a group discussion on the issues within the paper on Issues in Human Sexuality. It ended with some useful recommendations for churches.

Section Three was Scientific and Other Perspectives. This part of the book was the one which I found most difficult to engage with, particularly as a non-scientist. The first chapter by Terry Reed of GIRES was interesting and I was able to follow it. It dealt particularly well with non-binary identity.

Then came Chris Dowd’s chapter Five things cis folk don’t know about Trans folk because it isn’t on trashy TV – my right of reply. Chris is a  URC minister  and ally who came from a MCC background. This paper was based upon his PhD paper. Now, I have to admit a lot of my reaction to this chapter came from the persistent use of the word “folk” which annoys me. To me “folk” is a type of music and the only time I hear it used in relation to people is by Christians. Aside from that it is not a bad chapter which highlights the misconceptions many people have about trans people.

Susan Gilchrist’s paper sought to mix history, science and theology in what was essentially a psychology paper. As a non-scientist I found it overly academic and the least helpful chapter within the first part of this book.

The second part of the book, as I say contained personal stories. The historical ones of these were enjoyable and informative. It was interesting reading these to reflect upon how they were from a particular generation and I did wonder how they would contrast with younger people’s stories had they been in there.

Cross dressing was discussed and I think the most interesting and useful was a self-interview with Elaine Sommers.

The saddest chapter came from well-known trans activist Helen Belcher whose story told of her move to atheism, in part as a result of the awful treatment she had received from the church.

These stories were the most important part of the book to me in many ways because they highlighted what bad practice in the church can look like, as well as what better practice is like. The stories of partners were also touched upon, although as I say I think it would be useful for them to have been told by the partners themselves.

With regard to the contribution by allies I found them interesting and at points offensive. How, even in inverted commas the T word got into the book I have no idea. It would be like writing a piece about ethnicity and using the N word to talk about when you first met a black person.

So would I recommend the book? Yes, if you want to understand more about the experience about older trans people or if you want to explore some of the historical or theological issues involved. If you want a quicker and easier read that just tells you about somebody’s experience of being trans and Christian I would recommend Rachel Mann’s Dazzling Darkness.

Thisis my body: Hearing the theology of transgender Christians, (2016), Edited byChristina Beardsley and Michelle O’Brien is published by Darton, Longman andTodd Ltd.

Initial feelings of being a partner of a trans person

In doing the thinking out loud as I put together paper for the Twilight People Symposium on Trans and Faith last week I am aware it got a bit academic.

I want to see if I can put together some posts which might be a bit more useful for those people actually going through the journey too. I also want to eventually get to looking at this using some biblical material to help people of faith think it through that way.

In terms of doing this I am going to keep to the three questions that arise from Jake Lever’s excellent art work The Blue, The Gold and The Dim:

 

1.    What does your journey feel like?

2.    How has your journey been different to what you expected?

3.    What sustains you as you travel in your boat?

 

Today I’m going to look at what does your journey feel like? As I do this I need to explain we are now several years into the process of my husband’s transition. He has been through process of coming out, accessing the medical services, having his top surgery and is due to have his hysterectomy in the summer.

It’s been a scary journey, especially in the early stages. I didn’t really understand what was going on and was scared. I was scared about what the person I loved was saying. Even though I had identified before he said anything something of what was going on it messed with my head. I live in a world when it’s much easier to think in terms of the binary (i.e. male and female).

I was scared by how scared he was. There were a lot of tears and I knew he was really hurting inside. I also had an awareness that a lot of trans people end up taking their own lives and that scared me lots. I was worried that he wouldn’t make it through.

I was scared about how other people would react to him. He had talked about fears of being attacked and that got me really scared. As time went on that fear subsided but I was upset that he got aggro, especially one morning when he went to the loo in a coffee shop. This was overcome a bit when we worked out where had the gender neutral toilets and were able to plan things like where we did coffee around this.

I was scared that he would never understand how I felt about it. I was supportive but I was supportive because I saw it as being like a disability. The transition was about fixing something that had gone wrong. I know this annoyed him because he doesn’t see it like that, but it is the only way that I can understand it.

I was scared that because I was gay I wouldn’t be able to stay with him when he transitioned and if we did things would never be the same in the bedroom.

Then I was scared about the impact of surgery and if it would all go ok.

I was scared about how you talk about it and when.

I was scared that the church might reject us both and I was scared that his employers might not be great.

I was scared it might damage what felt like a fragile relationship with his parents.

There was a lot of fear around as you can see. But as my journey has gone on my journey, our journey, has felt a lot different to expected.

Where I expected him to face rejection by the church and work he has on the whole experienced love. That’s not to say there haven’t been people who have used the bible to be transphobic, but on the whole there has been love. People tend to be much more loving and understanding then we often give them credit for.

Where I expected our relationship to fall apart it nearly did, but we got through that largely by hugs. We found a way to talk about things….somehow…and we cried lots but we didn’t let this destroy us.

Where I expected him to fall apart he actually began to blossom. As he stopped repressing things he actually became a much happier person and that made life easier.

In terms of the reactions of others they weren’t as bad as expected and when he did get hassle we learnt how to handle it, as I say primarily by identifying the safe toilets.

We learnt to stop living in fear and to enjoy each day much more.

His parents did struggle and that was an interesting one. I listened and made sure I used the right pronouns as I affirmed I understood some of the things they were saying about how they felt.

One strategy I found really useful was to ensure we went out to eat when he had had a medical appointment. It was easier to talk about it over dinner because it was less likely to end up in an argument or misunderstanding. I guess in a public setting you just ask the questions you need to know like “how long?” “what next?” and so on. You both have to keep your emotions under control as you discuss scary things.

I found it useful to go clothes shopping with my husband and whilst he developed his style I was able to help discuss what I thought would work. This also helped me know his style so if I were shopping alone for him I would be more likely to get it right (e.g. at Christmas).

If I were putting forward a resource to help trans people and their partners I would put the following questions together as things to talk about:

1.    What are you scares you about your partner transitioning?

2.    Which of these things do you think you can control?

3.    Which of these are the really hard things you won’t be able to control?

4.    What relates to your partner and what relates to your feelings about yourself?

5.    Who do you know who it will be safe to talk about these fears with?

6.    How would I like my partner’s life to be if they are transitioning?

7.    How can I help them blossom whilst ensuring I don’t wither?

8.    How do I understand the process of transition?

9.    Is there any more information I need to get about what’s involved and if so where do I get that information?

10. Where my safe place is and what am I going to do when it all seems overwhelming?

At that point it will be useful to know of some support groups and good sources of information. Note the list is not exhaustive and I would suggest if there is a LGBT centre or organisation near you that you get hold of them in the first instance to find out about local groups:

 Gires

 

TGPals

 

Partners of Distinction

 

DiverseChurch (for 18-30 year old Christians)

 

For Parents:

Mermaids

 

 

Gendered Intelligence

 

          DiverseChurch Parents (Group for Christian parents)