carolynwoodall's photostream on Flickr.
Thursday, February 6, 2014
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Now, my minor criticism of the Church-wide Consultation on C056
Yes, there has to be a downside. It was a bit surprising that I would find something like that in this group, but it relates to transgender folk and, in one aspect specifically to transsexual folk.
One was the discussion of the legal issues. There is a group working on these and the transsexual issue never came up. Perhaps it is in their notes or on their agenda, but it wasn't mentioned. Here it is - if one of the people in the relationship is transsexual, the laws of the state will have to be used to determine if what is being contemplated is a same sex blessing or opposite sex, and possibly whether a marriage in the church is appropriate.
Transsexual persons have a perception of their gender identity which is in opposition to their physical sex. While that is true to some extent in transgender persons in general, for those who are transsexual it is so strong that the appropriate treatment, after psychotherapy, hormone therapy, a second opinion on the issue, and living a year as a member of the gender with which the person identifies, surgery to change the body is performed. To the extent possible, the external is changed to conform to the internal.
How the government responds to this varies from state to state. Some states will allow birth certificates to be changed and re-issued with the new name and sex designation, and then they will seal the original. Others will permit nothing to be done, and some have procedures in between - such as amending the certificate but leaving the original information accessible. The Social Security Administration and State Department, by the way, will change the gender marker in their records (and on your passport) once proof of the surgery is shown. Some states will accept the person in their new gender role, others go by birth sex.
What does that mean? Here is an example. A male to female transsexual who lives in a state which recognizes her post-operative status can get married to a man, even if same sex marriages are not legal. But another state may only recognize birth sex and that woman can not marry a man. She can marry another woman, even though same sex marriage may be unlawful. While a fun way to mess with the PTB's, it doesn't work unless she is a lesbian. (Sexual orientation has nothing to do with gender identity, and that's a looooong discussion for some other time and place.)
That's the sort of thing a priest might need to know if faced with this situation. The Episcopal Church has transsexuals in the church, and even among the clergy, so this becoming an issue is not at all far fetched.
Give it some thought, folks, if the goal is to be truly inclusive.
It's late so the other half of this will be written later.
One was the discussion of the legal issues. There is a group working on these and the transsexual issue never came up. Perhaps it is in their notes or on their agenda, but it wasn't mentioned. Here it is - if one of the people in the relationship is transsexual, the laws of the state will have to be used to determine if what is being contemplated is a same sex blessing or opposite sex, and possibly whether a marriage in the church is appropriate.
Transsexual persons have a perception of their gender identity which is in opposition to their physical sex. While that is true to some extent in transgender persons in general, for those who are transsexual it is so strong that the appropriate treatment, after psychotherapy, hormone therapy, a second opinion on the issue, and living a year as a member of the gender with which the person identifies, surgery to change the body is performed. To the extent possible, the external is changed to conform to the internal.
How the government responds to this varies from state to state. Some states will allow birth certificates to be changed and re-issued with the new name and sex designation, and then they will seal the original. Others will permit nothing to be done, and some have procedures in between - such as amending the certificate but leaving the original information accessible. The Social Security Administration and State Department, by the way, will change the gender marker in their records (and on your passport) once proof of the surgery is shown. Some states will accept the person in their new gender role, others go by birth sex.
What does that mean? Here is an example. A male to female transsexual who lives in a state which recognizes her post-operative status can get married to a man, even if same sex marriages are not legal. But another state may only recognize birth sex and that woman can not marry a man. She can marry another woman, even though same sex marriage may be unlawful. While a fun way to mess with the PTB's, it doesn't work unless she is a lesbian. (Sexual orientation has nothing to do with gender identity, and that's a looooong discussion for some other time and place.)
That's the sort of thing a priest might need to know if faced with this situation. The Episcopal Church has transsexuals in the church, and even among the clergy, so this becoming an issue is not at all far fetched.
Give it some thought, folks, if the goal is to be truly inclusive.
It's late so the other half of this will be written later.
The SCLM Consultation on C056
OK, a bit more on how that went.
The plenary sessions are available to review online, but the summary of them is that they provided background for the task. The work was done in the small groups. The purpose was to give the task group members feedback on the issues related to the liturgies. Many things came up in the groups. One group had some dissension over the fact that the whole event was being carried out as though the fact of same sex blessings being authorized by the church was presumed. Clearly, not everyone was in agreement, but everyone agreed to stay at the table and talk. That's always a good sign.
It was presumed. The purpose of the event was to discuss the various aspects of same sex blessings to assist the task group in coming up with theological and liturgical resources for those blessings. The purpose was not to debate whether it should happen. That debate has been had.
One thing, a very important thing, which was clarified is that same-sex marriages will not be addressed. Currently, the Canons do not permit clergy to actually perform weddings of same sex persons. That's for the future and a different resolution. With respect to that, however, customs in Europe and other places were discussed. The marriage doesn't occur in the church. The marriage is strictly a civil affair, presided over by he appropriate civil functionary, and the church service is a blessing of the marriage.
We can also expect to see requirements for counseling and the like very much like those for opposite sex couples. The issues are truly the same. Here are two people who want to spend their lives together seeking the blessing of the church. Instruction is appropriate - regardless of the composition of the couple.
One of my personal concerns about these rites would be that they would serve to distinguish same sex couples from opposite sex couples. I asked that the rites be written in such a way as to be appropriate for both same sex and opposite couples who may want to use them. It isn't perfect, but equality has not yet been achieved. That will take time, the overturn of DOMA, changes to the Canons, and likely other things I'm not remembering or thinking of at this time. The important thing is that we are making the effort to take the initial steps.
Let us all continue to pray for the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music as they work on this task.
The plenary sessions are available to review online, but the summary of them is that they provided background for the task. The work was done in the small groups. The purpose was to give the task group members feedback on the issues related to the liturgies. Many things came up in the groups. One group had some dissension over the fact that the whole event was being carried out as though the fact of same sex blessings being authorized by the church was presumed. Clearly, not everyone was in agreement, but everyone agreed to stay at the table and talk. That's always a good sign.
It was presumed. The purpose of the event was to discuss the various aspects of same sex blessings to assist the task group in coming up with theological and liturgical resources for those blessings. The purpose was not to debate whether it should happen. That debate has been had.
One thing, a very important thing, which was clarified is that same-sex marriages will not be addressed. Currently, the Canons do not permit clergy to actually perform weddings of same sex persons. That's for the future and a different resolution. With respect to that, however, customs in Europe and other places were discussed. The marriage doesn't occur in the church. The marriage is strictly a civil affair, presided over by he appropriate civil functionary, and the church service is a blessing of the marriage.
We can also expect to see requirements for counseling and the like very much like those for opposite sex couples. The issues are truly the same. Here are two people who want to spend their lives together seeking the blessing of the church. Instruction is appropriate - regardless of the composition of the couple.
One of my personal concerns about these rites would be that they would serve to distinguish same sex couples from opposite sex couples. I asked that the rites be written in such a way as to be appropriate for both same sex and opposite couples who may want to use them. It isn't perfect, but equality has not yet been achieved. That will take time, the overturn of DOMA, changes to the Canons, and likely other things I'm not remembering or thinking of at this time. The important thing is that we are making the effort to take the initial steps.
Let us all continue to pray for the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music as they work on this task.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
SCLM Chuchwide Consultation
The event took place in Atlanta, GA this weekend. I'm killing time in the hotel lobby, along with a bunch of other participants with late flights. The subject was General Convention Resolution C056, dealing with the development of liturgies for same sex blessings.
The agenda, which went from 2pm on Friday to noon on Saturday was packed. It consisted of plenary sessions, which are archived at: http://www.episcopalchurch.org/live/sclm/ We also had small group sessions to consider specific issues.
I'm still sorting it all in my mind, and I will write more after I get home and review my notes.
The agenda, which went from 2pm on Friday to noon on Saturday was packed. It consisted of plenary sessions, which are archived at: http://www.episcopalchurch.org/live/sclm/ We also had small group sessions to consider specific issues.
I'm still sorting it all in my mind, and I will write more after I get home and review my notes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)