The Episcopal Church in the United States has voted overwhelmingly in favour of allowing the ordination of transgender people.
At its 77th General Convention, it approved an amendment to its non-discrimination canons to include “gender identity and expression”. The amendment makes it uncanonical to bar “transgender” people from the priesthood….
A member of the delegation from the UK, Christina Beardsley, said that the debate was “wonderful”. One of the most “profound” contributions, she said, came from the Bishop of Rochester, New York, the Rt Revd Prince Singh, who said: “Just by being people of faith we inevitably occupy liminal space and identity, and so embracing trans people would take us into deeper depths of what it means to be a pilgrim people.”
Yeah, this is where I get off the train.
Yada-yada-transgendered-gay marriage-yada. The only new and startling thing I found here was in the picture — what’s up with all of the international flags? Have they been portraying themselves as an international federation or communion previously? Because that’s what this looks like. And I think that’s what it’s meant to look like.
I found it interesting that they want the PB to remain a diocesan bishop, as well. That’s the way +++Canterbury works, isn’t it? Diocesan, Primate, and Communion figurehead all rolled into one. It seems to me that they’re forming a “Global North” liberal communion. Or trying to, anyway. Which may be why they don’t give a toss about moderate and conservative Episcopalians fleeing. If they’re the mothership, then the other churches can contribute toward the running of the new “communion,” yes?
Am I totally off-base here? Sorry for the odd structure and all of the phrases. I’m kind of thinking in type.
An most unbiased article which silently asks what is stopping the CofE from sharing the joy and happiness of its brothers and sisters and gender-pronouns-of-choice in TEc? If only, for example, one could get more of such as the quote of the bishop of Rochester (not to be confused with the recently resigned, er, retired CofE Bishop of Rochester). I just wish I could make sense of it.
#3 — The Church Times hasn’t been flattering to TEC in the past. When I read this, I was rather wondering if there was a sarcastic undertone and they chose the Rochester quote for that purpose. The English are so good at subtlety. And it’s unlike them to not print the situation from the other side.
Since people of one sex, who think they are the opposite sex fall under the category of a mental disorder in the DSM, does this mean that mental disorders are identities? If so, shouldn’t people with all types of mental disorders be allowed into the priesthood too? Doesn’t it seem that TEC is discriminating by only allowing people with a type of gender identity disorder to be priests? ; )