As I said in an earlier post, I think there is a lot of room for differences of opinion within the Church on the issue of what to think about the Transgendered. It isn't easy to define a solid position for or against it based on clearly applicable scriptures. There are a lot of verses at the periphery of the issue, and if you pick from those, you can come up with very different theologies. So, in light of that, it really bothers me when Christians resort first to attacking other Christians for their different interpretations. I'd challenge anyone who thinks that their theology captures all that God is to reconcile with Romans 11:33. Or, as Shakespeare would say: "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Two clergy have taken up opposite extremes, each bashing the other, and I wanted to make it clear I don't think either of them are helping things.
The first is the "MadPriest," an Anglican priest from England. He posts the article from the CitPat with the heading "Today's Complete and Utter Bastards Are: Spring Arbor University." From perusing his blog, I think he is intentionally over the top, but I don't think it is helpful to having a reasonable discussion. I appreciate his support for my Father, but I don't think he has to bash fellow Christians to do it.
The second may be worse than the first. This one comes from the superintendant of the southern Michigan conference of the Free Methodist Church, Pastor Tom Ramundo. He tries to tar my father by association in noting that the whole thing "seems very carefully orchestrated" to advance the gay agenda. My dad's not gay, and he'll be the first to tell you there is a difference between being transgender and being gay (or maybe he'd be the second to tell you, and my mom the first, I'm not sure which). The article continues to quote him: "I know that university really well, and I know its leadership," he says. "I am sure they have endeavored to treat him in a redemptive way." The Free Methodist superintendent describes the situation as "just one of those issues where there’s that tension between love and purity, and the school’s just finally having to take a strong biblical stand." Of course, he doesn't say what makes this position "biblical" (they continue to be silent about what the Bible has to say about things). It just seems very arrogant and reckless to me placing his confidence in his personal relationships with the walking saints that apparently govern Spring Arbor. The facts: they told him to lie; kept him from relating with his fellow colleagues; and did everything they could to keep him out of sight. I don't see how this is meant to be redemptive. I could go on about the attrocities commited in the name of "purity" but that might be unfairly lumping someone together with something they are obviously not, and I'm trying to avoid that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Your emphasis on the Bible's silence on this particular issue is interesting. To refer to the Bible as THE norma of right and wrong...Like I said, quite interesting. I think the Christians of a 1,000 years ago (or 1,500 or 1,900 for that matter) would've been surprised by your father's defense of his recent decisions and really surprised by the view of the Bible implied in your post.
I hope everything is dealt with more lovingly and prayerfully than it has been up till now. As humans we never seem pray enough and never seem to know how to love as perfectly as the Lord did. May God be with you during these times!
anonymous-
I'm not sure exactly where you are coming from. Are you suggesting earlier Christians didn't rely on the Bible to tell write and wrong? As far back as the time of St. Augustine of Hippo, there has been the motto "In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, and in all things charity" with respect to things of the Church. The Reformation motto "sola scriptura" for Protestants emphasizes the premacy of scripture. I am not Catholic or Orthodox, but I'm not sure the additional authorities accepted by those denominations (church tradition, for example) would add anything to this discussion. I don't know what the Pope would say, but if you know him, maybe you could refer him to my blog. ;)
In my view this clearly falls in the category of "non-essentials." John Stott calls "non-essential" anything that well meaning Christians, equally dependant on the authority of scripture, still disagree on. There is a long church history, dating back to the epistles of allowing for diversity of practice in the Church, and I don't think I am totally out of synch with that.
Whoa. Ramundo, who from what I've heard is fairly well respected in the area and the denomination, is building bridges from apples to oranges. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the GL (or GLBT) community uses your dad's situation as a "cause celebre"--but that's a far cry from being in cahoots. I think one of the issues that will muddy the waters is the link between your dad's condition, the legal experts on this sort of situation, and the GL advocacy groups. That chain could prove to cause a lot of misunderstanding on both sides: the GL community sees "Christians persecute one of our own yet again!" while the conservative Christian community sees "Gay agenda!"
I beleive above all else, the Bible teaches us to love each other. And love covers all things- economic stance, race, ethnicity, and gender. I actually left Spring Arbor for reasons like this and I will continue to stand on the side of the "underdog", because that is where I know God wants me to be.
I want you to know that I support you, your family, and your father in all of their endeavors. Keep your head up.
Here are two letters I sent to Rev. Ramundo. He has offices within a mile of me. I have not heard back which is interesting since the sin of gossip is mentioned many more times than anything about transgender!
Dear Rev. Ramundo,
Your recent comments (below) were extremely disappointing coming from a fellow believer. They typify some of the most hateful gossip I have ever experienced. The fact that homosexual rights groups have highlighted the ignorance or bigotry involved with my situation does not mean that I have been used by anyone. Nothing was orchestrated. I responded to a gross injustice at the university's response to my medical diagnosis and the absolute necessity of following the prescribed standards of care. There was nothing redemptive about how I was treated. Exclusion, financial retribution, and bullying are not redemptive acts
I love the Lord and have delighted in my work at SAU. Most of the graduate programs that have been the cause of the most significant growth in recent years are the product of my leadership. I hope to continue my work at SAU and avoid embarrassing SAU through a very protracted and expensive legal battle that I am quite certain I would win. Mediation is set for March 6th and gossip-mongoring will only make it more difficult to reach an amicable settlement.
Now that you know the facts, I trust that you will correct the false impressions created by your feelings and false assumptions.
Yours in Christ,
J. Nemecek, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Spring Arbor University
Rev. Ramundo-
I know you haven't had time to respond to my earlier email but I thought I should share a few more things that may help you understand my situation. For brevity's sake I will do short bullets:
* In both undergraduate and graduate classes, SAU teaches an affirmative understanding of my medical condition and treatment consistent with what I am doing.
* The Free Methodist Book of Discipline lists gender identity issues - along with organ transplants and environmental issues - as ethical dilemmas not sin or something perverse.
* I have met with a Christian counselor - ordained by the Free Methodist Church - who has informed the university that my diagnosis is accurate, the treatment is effective and necessary, and that neither the diagnosis or treatment have any negative impact on my ability to do my job or continue a faithful Christian walk.
If you are going to speak on this issue, I think it is important to have accurate information.
Thanks for your time. Have a great day.
Blessings,
J. Nemecek, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Spring Arbor University
I'll try to keep my comments restrained. Ramundo's remarks are just one more brick in the wall between me and most evangelicals.
Back in the day, Julie was the most orthodox Reformed minds I had personally met. She seemed to be extremely well reasoned, highly intelligent, and absolutely loved the Lord. I have a hard time believing that much has changed.
The way she has been treated by SAU and now Ramundo, who I though was a proponent of social justice, makes me ill.
crap.. I meant to say "one of the brightest orthodox Reformed minds I had personally met".
If SAU's position represents Christian thought, perhaps I should take up the worship of Norse gods. Odin is up front; he's all about smiting. These weasels do the same thing in a passive-aggressive manner, hiding under the cloak of freedom of religion.
Though Supt. Ramundo has done a lot of good things, he does have a lot of spiritual growing to do. It sounds to me like he hasn't done his research if he doesn't know the difference between GID and homosexuality. Also, he obviously doesn't know your dad at all. Before he wrote anything, he should have researched some more. You can't just place your opinion without digging deep and knowing what's behind everything and how things are defined.
My family left the Jackson church that Pastor Ramundo was the minister of because of his poor understanding of ministry. Though I don't want to say who I am... I do want DCNemesis and his family to know...when I was sick one time, you brought me Chai tea from the Coffee house and a movie called "A River Runs Through It" Very thoughtful. :)
In response to the previous anonymous-
What exactly is this difference between the GID and homosexuality you are talking about? As far as I know, homosexuality was treated as a mental disorder under the psychosexual disorders category in the DSM until about 20 years ago when it was removed due to pressure from gay activists. The next version of DSM conveniently created a new category, the GID, that definitely can be applied to homosexual individuals as well. I would not be surprised if this category will also be removed or replaced by something else in the DSM V if the GLBT groups want to normalize the transgendered behavior, just like they did with homosexual behavior.
I hear there's a rally tomorrow (Monday). Is that right? What time and where? Is Julie coming?...
GID and homosexuality have nothing in common. The former is about gender identity and sense of self and the latter has to do with sexual orientation.
As a former student at Spring Arbor this situation makes me very sad. I do not believe that I ever had the chance to meet your father personally, but I am deeply saddened by the fact that this issue is casting a negative shadow on what is such a great school.
I understand that being transgender is not the same as being a homosexual, and I have great sorrow for the struggle that your father faces. You have maintained that there is no sin in your father's lifestyle, however, in another post he said that even other attendees at his new church thought that he was a woman. Do they see he and your mother as a lesbian couple? If so, would that be the appearance of sin? (Romans 1 has no question on the fact that actual homosexuality is a sin.)
We are called by Christ to love eachother and to live our lives as blamelessly as possible so that the devil does not gain a foot hold.
I am torn between knowing that you are a child of God, and that we are to love eachother in spite of our issues, and knowing that God also does not want issues to divide and your bringing them into the spotlight (whatever your intentions were) is only causing pain to the greater Christian body and to a school that I loved very dearly.
I am not writing this to try to say that I am perfect, or that I can even begin to understand the situation from your standpoint. I also do not want to heap pain onto what I know are very sensitive and still very raw wounds. I am just concerned that the way that this situation is being handled is more detrimental than anything positive that could ever come of it.
Humbly and prayerfully yours,
Alicia
Alicia-
If Spring Arbor is acting in accordance with Biblical principles, as they claim, then they should have nothing to be ashamed of. There are divisions in the body of Christ, and I agree that we need to do what we can to mend them. This won't happen, however, by just ignoring the issues at hand, the things that seperate us as Christians. Did abolishonists cause pain to the Christian body because they stood against slavery against some of their fellow believers? I hope that all sides can come to an understanding of what the other really sees, and grow as a result. There was pain for many before this story ever went public. I fail to see how public pain is worse than private abuse.
I think making this a religious argument is crazy- as previously stated, each side has their own interpretations and Biblical arguments to use. Seems to me it matters if anyone is being harmed through this transition. That's the important fact- looks like Julie should be able to live however she wants- I'm still unsure if the college was wrong to ask her to leave- I am still reading more and educating myself before I can decide- shouldn't everyone?
Post a Comment