There has been some discussion on the web lately about the Church and the Transsexual phenomenon. This was occasioned by the recent CT article entitled The Transgender Moment. On Feb 13, 2008 John the Methodist @ the Locusts and Honey blog noted the CT article and also linked to his own position paper on this issue (where there’s quite a bit of discussion.) Since then. Andrew Conard @ the Thoughts of Resurrection blog also posted a entry on “Sex, Gender and the Bible.” I posted some of the thoughts that follow @ the Methoblog, but I also wanted to expand on them a little here.

Put simply, I believe that the transsexual issue must be distinguished from the “Homosexual Issue.” It is a different issue. And, I have a hard time seeing how there is anything moral here. For a church to” take a stand” on this issue, it would have to state what is or is not true of people psychologically! The Church is in no position to do this. Churches need to find the courage to journey with people. We may not always understand, but we must always be committed to the best interests of others - whether we understand their experience of life or not.

A discussion of how I arrived at this point of view follows.

1.) My own views on Gender Ambiguity (such as they are) have been informed by the following:

a.) In college I was a chemistry major. This not only gave me a strong and enduring "hard science" bias against psychology, it also first introduced me to the complexities of human gender. In advanced Organic Chemistry we began to touch on some of the facts of animal & human biochemistry. Our professor showed us, in a series of chemical formulas, the relationships between the human sex hormones. After filling the board with diagrams, formulas and reactions, he, then, turned to the class and said (his words not mine): "And, given what you see on the board, it's a wonder more of us aren't screwed up than are!"

We laughed. (But, I think the laughter was a little uneasy.)

That lecture left a lasting impression on me. When you actually hear the facts of human gender on the chemical/hormonal level, it's a little ... um, eye opening... to say the least.

b.) In the 1980's I heard E. Mansell Pattison lecture on sexuality and homosexuality. Pattison expounded a developmental theory of same-gender attraction (along the lines that Nicolosi or Socarides or others associated with NARTH would maintain).

But, in one of his lectures he dealt with the development of gender in human beings. It is a complex process and there are a number of things that can go wrong. He felt very strongly that Gender Reassignment Surgery was justified in certain cases. He indicated that there are several different types of gender anomalies that can and do occur in the human species. And, again, given the facts of human development, both physical and emotional, it's a small wonder things don't go wrong more often than they do!

I think this impressed me all the more because of Pattison's conservative SideB views on homosexuality. His research was in "religiously motivated" change in sexual orientation. (In fact Pattison's old study is constantly floating around the Internet as proof of homosexual orientation change.)

c.) Subsequent interaction with transsexual individuals on the Internet has also given me considerable "food for thought."

One early example still stands out in my mind.

I read a long and painful exchange in the alt.religion.christian newsgroups between a transgendered person in the Southern Baptist Church who was going by the name of "Jennifer Ussher" (I think) and her many detractors. It was heartbreaking to read — on many levels! Since it was a Usenet discussion, she got flamed repeatedly from all sides. But, she hung in there. She was castigated, condemned, called a pervert, etc. Bible verses were thrown at her (the OT on cross-dressing and malakos in 1 Corinthians 6) — and all for what? She'd already had the operation, for crying out loud. And, I don't really think those verses relate to the "transgender" phenomenon anyway. (To be honest I wish I knew what malakos in 1 Corinthians 6 refers to. I am not at all sure.)

Since that time I have had other opportunities to interact with transsexual individuals. I have appreciated hearing about their (very different from mine) experience of life.

While I believe there is a strong Christian moral case against same-gender sex acts, any case against transsexualism is very shaky, indeed — in fact, upon close examination, nonexistent.

(3.) I am inclined to want to defend the notion that gender is "bipolar." Christians value and respect sexual differentiation. There are two poles, though there are also some people who are inter-sexed. The notion that gender is bipolar is so intuitive that I really think it can be and should be defended. Nonetheless, there are certainly complications & variations — and that's a good thing too. So, the view I'm moving toward is one that would affirm gender as a "good thing" and gender variations as a "good thing" also. Chocolate twist does not call into question the existence of either chocolate or vanilla.

(4.) And, finally this quote from Coleridge seems to me to be somehow relevant to the transsexual issue and to the "homosexuality" issue — and any number of other issues, wherein certain people are seen as deserving of contempt & rejection rather than acceptance & appreciation.

"The Jews would not willingly tread upon the smallest piece of paper in their way, but took it up; for possibly, they say, the name of God may be on it. Though there was a little superstition in this, yet truly there is nothing but good religion in it, if we apply it to men. Trample not on any; there may be some work of grace there, that thou knowest not of. The name of God may be written upon that soul thou treadest on; it may be a soul that Christ thought so much of, as to give His precious blood for it; therefore despise it not."

— S. T. Coleridge, Aids to Reflection (1825)

We may not always understand. But, we can determine to “trample not any.”

— Craig L. Adams