At the heart of the guidance is a prioritization of the \u201cpastoral,\u201d which effectively cordons the ceremony off from meaningful theological reflection. This leaves the guidance grossly underdetermined, reducing priests to cheerleaders for those on their way to a new sex. The document opens, for instance, by announcing that the Church of England \u201cwelcomes and encourages the unconditional affirmation of trans people, equally with all people, within the body of Christ\u2026.\u201d It goes on to insinuate that transitions from one sex and \u201cidentity\u201d to another may sometimes be licit\u2014and that affirming these transitions is always the appropriate \u201cpastoral\u201d response. In conducting such ceremonies priests should be \u201cguided by the wishes of the candidate.\u201d The church, it now seems, must give unconditional welcome to trans individuals, but those individuals are apparently free to impose conditions upon the church.<\/p>\n
This triumph of the \u201cpastoral\u201d happens when the church abdicates its responsibility to respond to such moments theologically. As the document notes, the \u201cgiving or adoption of a new name has a long history\u201d within the tradition, as at confirmations or upon taking holy orders. Yet the text does not attempt to connect such a practice to the taking of a different gender. This simple derivation from past to present circumvents the very theological thinking required to keep such a practice from sliding into a warmed-over celebration of therapeutic individualism. This is a baptism-type ceremony, to be sure, but it is the spirit of the age that is being consecrated.<\/p>\n
Of course, developing the theological architecture necessary to provide real pastoral guidance to gender dysphoric Christians and their priests would make explicit the deep revolution that is at work in the church\u2019s teaching about the nature of sex and the person. It would also open up the possibility that pastors and priests might have the responsibility to say \u201cno\u201d to requests for consecrating new names for transgender individuals.<\/p>\n
It is ironic that such an individualistic and therapeutic atmosphere would infect the church\u2019s understanding of baptism through a service reaffirming baptismal vows. It is in baptism, as the document notes, \u201cwhere we find our true identity in Christ.\u201d Yet any \u201cAffirmation of Baptismal Faith\u201d founded upon transitioning into a new sex risks conveying that the source of alienation within one\u2019s former life was one\u2019s physical body\u2014introducing a latent Gnosticism into the theology of baptism.<\/p>\n
Read it all<\/a>.<\/p>\n I’m grateful to @firstthingsmag<\/a> for the chance to write about @churchofengland<\/a>‘s ‘pastoral guidance’ for liturgically celebrating trans persons. https:\/\/t.co\/c2LUrzR9sT<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 Matthew Anderson (@mattleeanderson) January 3, 2019<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n