Christians' Thoughts & Culture & Gender & Gospel ali | 01 Jun 2009 09:59 pm
How the Gospel ministers to the transgendered.
Russell Moore has written a series of short posts looking at a hypothetical situation where a transgendered person accepts the gospel and how the gospel then ministers to their sexuality.
I confess, I have wondered about this question on and off for a good number of years now, and I think Russell Moore’s response is a good one. Of course, there are people for whom this is not hypothetical which makes it all the more important.
Have a read:
- The Question.
- John or Joan? My Answer: Part 1.
- John or Joan? My Answer: Part 2.
- John or Joan? My Answer: Part 3.
- John or Joan? My Answer: Part 4.
- John or Joan? My Answer: Part 5.
HT: The Gender Blog, which is also where I stole the title from.
on 07 Jun 2009 at 4:39 pm 1.Doug said …
I could understand advising a transgendered person to celibacy but I’m not sure why a minister would advise him/her to “live as their true gender” and use the pronoun that is opposite their physical appearance.
I’m glad Moore stops short of advising additional surgeries to reverse the female appearance.
I don’t know what Biblical background Moore is working off of here.
I hope I don’t sound dismissive of Moore as this is a difficult topic and I’m glad he’s trying to address it.
In many case I think transgenderism is mostly mental illness and the elements of sin are tangential. I don’t think a pastor would advise a schizophrenic to just ignore his delusions through faith. I don’t think he’d advise the schizophrenic man (with a capacity for the gospel) that although he thinks he’s Napoleon Bonaparte that he must tell others he’s Bill Smith.
on 10 Jun 2009 at 1:48 pm 2.Ali said …
I’m not sure I’d agree.
I think gender confusion is far more than mental, but even if it were not, I think it healthy to ground people in reality. So, a schitzophrenic man needs to be reminded of reality and referred to as Bill Smith.
Now, it may be that while he is in the middle of a schitzophrenic episode he is unable to grasp that he is actually Bill Smith, but the particular situation Moore is talking about is a person who confesses they were born a male and is willing to live in line with their God-given gender.
This doesn’t mean, of course, that there is not more work to be done. Moore, to my mind, is providing a framework in which, where possible, further work is done. But I’m guessing that he has in mind a pastor who is not equipped to deal with the deeper issues (done through the gospel).
on 12 Jun 2009 at 8:44 am 3.Doug said …
Do you get a sense of the Biblical concepts/framework that Russell Moore is working off of?
I’d be hesitant to go much further on this sort of issue without some Biblical grounding.
on 12 Jun 2009 at 10:24 am 4.ali said …
In part one and part five, Moore gives some biblical references and in these and other parts gives a biblical explanation as to why he would take the course of action he is promoting. Basically, he is in one sense seeing this sin as the same as any other sin - it is to be repented of and fought against within the person themselves. The Church should respond to it in the same way they respond to any other sin - they should show grace and try to help the person live a righteous life, encouraging, teaching, rebuking etc.
In terms of the specifics of the sin, I think Moore uses the biblical response to eunuchs (in this case, at least) and a complementarian understanding of gender as essential to personhood. Therefore, he would encourage John to learn how to be a man in ways similar to any man who needs to learn how to be a godly man - hanging out with men, taking on masculine responsibilities, conceiving of himself as a man etc.
Moore doesn’t go much further than this, as far as I can tell. My own theoretical thoughts run further. My belief is that all sin, especially sins of self-image, are a perverted way of seeking love. It’s my belief that at the bottom of every bit ungodliness in the world is the desire for love. This is not easy for a lot of people to grasp, because there are so many layers of sin that build up. In John’s case, I’d be looking at learning how to receive love from Christ, the only love that truly fits. There’s far more to it, but to me that is so basic to John’s situation that he needs to work hard to get there and to maintain his identity as a God-created person in Christ. His God-given gender will start to flow from that, I believe. I also endorse Moore’s suggestions, though I would be careful to avoid legalistic definitions of masculinity.
It’s a difficult one.