For Immediate Release

The 77th General Convention of The Episcopal Church has now added “gender identity and expression” to the church's nondiscrimination canons for both lay and ordained ministry. The House of Bishops passed the legislation on Saturday, July 7th. The House of Deputies then passed it Monday, July 10, officially making it an act of the convention.  By adding this language to its canons, The Episcopal Church joins the United Church of Christ, which took a similar step in 2003, and the Unitarian Universalist General Assembly, which did so in 2007.  Like The Episcopal Church, both groups have had openly transgender ordained and lay leaders for several years.

"We are filled with joy for this clear affirmation that the Episcopal Church welcomes and values the ministerial gifts of transgender people, lay and ordained,'' members of TransEpiscopal said in a joint statement after the House of Deputies' vote.

''We are also delighted by the strong support and broad understanding of trans issues shown by deputies representing a wide range of regions and generations in this church. As the church steps boldly into new frontiers in various facets of its life, we are proud to be part of this spirit-filled movement. We thank all of our allies, especially IntegrityUSA, The Consultation, and the Chicago Consultation for their tireless, heartfelt support.''

On the final day of Convention the House of Deputies also concurred with the House of Bishops to pass resolution D022 which calls for a Church-Wide Response to Bullying.  "Gender identity and expression" are included along with "economic, ethnic, racial or physical characteristics, religious status and sexual orientation" in a list of characteristics in response to which bullying often takes place.

“Bullying of any kind, for any reason, goes contrary to the second of Jesus’ two great commandments:  to love one’s neighbor as oneself.  As we in the United States continue to grow in awareness of the effects of bullying, we are proud that The Episcopal Church has decided to take a stand in support of the most vulnerable in our society.  Transgender people are certainly among them: according to a 2011 study, 78 percent of transgender people report being bullied or harassed as children.  It is high time for our church to join in the lifesaving work of ending this epidemic.”


The text of D022 reads as follows:

Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring, That the 77th General Convention calls for a church wide response to the epidemic of bullying, particularly of those perceived as being “different” by virtue of economic, ethnic, racial or physical characteristics, religious status, sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression; bullying is defined as the recurring use of single or combined written, verbal or electronic expressions or physical acts or gestures, directed at any person that: result in physical or emotional harm to the person or damage to his/her property; places the person in reasonable fear of harm to him/herself or of damage to her/his property; creates an intimidating or hostile environment for the person; impacts the rights of the victim.  Bullying shall include cyber-bullying through elctronic/social media, telephonic technology or other means;and be it further

Resolved, That the General Convention encourage new partnerships among our congregations, dioceses, campus ministries, National Association of Episcopal Schools, public schools, counseling centers, and governmental organizations in order to support and offer preventative programs addressing bullying, harassment, and other related violence, especially with higher risk populations; and be it further

Resolved, That these partnerships be encouraged to create or join with existing required programs  designed to recognize and prevent abuse, neglect, and exploitation in our church settings which:

 - utilize positive, inclusive, empowering and developmentally appropriate
    materials
 - raise participant’s awareness about the issue
 - focus on prevention
 - seek to change bystander behavior into ally behavior
 - create partnerships between youth and adults
 - provide intervention and treatment for those who exhibit bullying behavior.

The Episcopal Church, Transfigured

I’m almost at a loss for words.

Yesterday the House of Deputies—one of the two Houses in The Episcopal Church’s bicameral system of governance – passed resolutions D019 and D002.  The House of Bishops had done the same on Saturday afternoon.  Both resolutions add “gender identity and expression” to the Church’s nondiscrimination canons.  D019 addresses access of lay people to the life and governance of the church – so, for instance, it clarifies that transgender people can be Eucharistic ministers, vestry members, retreat attendees or leaders, etc.  D002 affirms that transgender people can be ordained leaders.  These resolutions addressed an already/not yet phenomenon:  already trans people are vestry members, Deputies to General Convention, Eucharistic ministers or Lectors; already, transgender people are priests and deacons in a handful of dioceses in this church.  But now we affirm and underscore that practice.  Transgender people are not just in Massachusetts, Washington State, and California.  We are, as the saying goes, everywhere.

We knew that the resolutions were on the Deputies’ calendar for the day, so a number of TransEpiscopal members listened in the gallery, once more on the edge of our seats.

As the House moved quickly down their calendar list, our resolutions quickly approached.  But just as D019 came up, a problem emerged.  A combination of factors had caused a delay in the Spanish translation of several complex resolutions.  As a result, the House would need to delay the vote until at least the afternoon session, maybe longer.

We adjourned to Steak n’ Shake.

After a raucous lunch (pressure release being a good and necessary thing) we said goodbye to Tina Beardsley who was flying back to the UK.  We very much miss her and so appreciated her warmth and wry humor—by the end of her stay, Tina and roommate Rev. Gari Green had practically developed a Midwest/UK vaudeville act.

Back in the Deputies gallery, D019 quickly came to the floor.  Once more, backers were ready to roll.  We heard from Sarah Lawton of the Diocese of California, whose sister is trans.  We heard from Deputy Dante Tavolaro, transman from Rhode Island.  We heard from Rev. Carla Robinson, transwoman from the Diocese of Olympia.  From a bevy of young adults, including Sam Gould from the Diocese of Massachusetts, and Natalie Venatta of the Diocese of Kansas. A Deputy from Alaska spoke of trans people in his congregation.  There were innumerable allies, just as in the hearing before the Ministry Committee.  People from across the United States—all manner of regions, and not simply the coasts—stood up and spoke passionately in support.  There were some people opposed to the move, and they were more represented on the floor of the House than in the hearing, though still a clear minority.  As expected – and as happened in the House of Bishops in 2009 – they tried to amend the resolution to remove the specific language from the canon.  In support of this move, a Deputy from the Diocese of Albany ridiculed the growing list of protected categories, saying she felt slighted “as a red-head” for not being included despite being a minority of the population.  My mom and sister are both red heads.  I can only imagine how fiercely they would have responded to that comment.

In any case, the supportive Deputies were more than ready for the amendment, and it was soundly defeated.  A vote on the original resolution followed quickly, and at 3:15pm it passed by a landslide.  Debate had lasted for a half hour.

D002 came up directly afterward.  In many ways, as in the House of Bishops, the debate was a continuation of the previous one.  The amendment tactic having failed, however, it was not tried again.  Once more Deputies from all around the church, North and South, Midwest, East and West, got up and spoke in support.  Sarah Lawton of California spoke of her experience with trans clergy, saying we as a church will be “richly blessed” if we open our ordination process explicitly to trans people.  Carla Robinson spoke of the rigorous process she underwent for ordination in the Diocese of Olympia, even after having been ordained in the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod.  She wanted to make the supportive atmosphere she experienced in that process more widely accessible.  Then a Deputy from Alabama in a plaid sport coat and bow tie (in honor of Gregory Straub, Secretary of the General Convention, who is known for his crazy sport coats) got up and began speaking.  At first I couldn’t tell if he would speak in favor or against.  But then he said that we are to make God’s kingdom present here on earth, and read from Isaiah 56:4-5:

For thus says the Lord:
To the eunuchs who keep my sabbaths,
   who choose the things that please me
   and hold fast my covenant,
I will give, in my house and within my walls,
   a monument and a name
   better than sons and daughters;
I will give them an everlasting name
   that shall not be cut off.

These were a people, he said, that formerly had not been allowed access to the assembly.  They had been a people cut off—unwelcome because of what we might refer to as their gender identity and expression—but now they were welcomed.  “We must name what God has named,” he said.

TransEpiscopal members were sitting in a row in the gallery.  When he said that, we all just lost it.  I tweeted

#GC77‬ Dio Ala: we r to establish kingdom here on earth, now. Let not eunuch say I am a dry tree (Is 60); we must name what God has named

And then:

#GC77‬ Dep from Alabama: wow, you absolutely made my day ‪#TransEpiscopal‬

Shortly thereafter, debate finished.  Again, as expected, and as happened in 2009, a Deputy (Diocese of Albany) requested a vote by orders.  This tactic makes it more difficult to pass legislation.  Instead of a voice vote, in which a simple majority suffices, a vote by orders tabulates by each diocesan deputy team (what’s called a Deputation).  The votes of evenly divided deputations count as “no” votes.  The most contentious resolutions tend to be tabulated in this way.  It also delays the results, as they must be certified.  So, as Deputy business continued, we waited.  We stood up and sang “Be Thou My Vision.”  A fifteen minute recess came and went.  Still no results.  We were on the edge of our seats once more.  Finally, a question emerged as to when we would hear the results.  Secretary Straub let President of the HoD Bonnie Anderson know that she had the results already.  No, she said, she had not yet received them.  But then—aha!—she realized they had been before her for some time. All of us seated in the gallery roared.

She read them aloud: we had done it.  A landslide.

At 4:48pm I tweeted:

#GC77‬ D002 PASSES!!!! By a lot!!!

And then:

#GC77‬ D002: Y lay: 94; Y clg: 95; N lay: 11; no clg: 16; Divided lay: 5; Divided clg: 0; thus, No + Divided lay: 16; No + Divided clg: 16

It had passed by 85%.

We were Transfigured.

CP

**Photos by Anderson C (except photo #2)

A Church Where All Can Actually Mean All

By Anderson C.

Yesterday, I listened to moving testimony at the Ministry Committee hearing for resolutions D002 and D019 that would add “gender identity and expression” to the Episcopal church’s non-discrimination canons. Their passage would ensure access for transgender people to the ordination process and all levels of laity participation.   The resolutions were successfully voted out of committee yesterday, similar to the last General Convention when they were subsequently approved by the House of Deputies but stalled in the House of Bishops in a discussion to remove mention of any protected groups in the non-discrimination language and replace it with language that would ban “all” discrimination.

I write this post to address these resolutions as a transgender man and a relatively new member of the Episcopal Church.  I also write as a witness to the power of the presence of ordained transgender people in the church and the knowledge that I could have access to all levels of lay participation. 

Baptized and raised in the Roman Catholic Church, it was my spiritual home until roughly six years ago when I simply could not abide any longer the way I was being treated by my fellow parishioners.  At the time, I was not living as my true self.  Instead, I was trying to live as expected by the Catholic Church and, apparently, by some of her parishioners – as a woman rather than the man I know myself to be.

And yet, despite these efforts, despite trying to adhere to the messages of the Roman Catholic church and the expectations of those around me, I was still treated differently, as “other,” based on my appearance as a masculine woman.  Some of my fellow parishioners would return my greetings in church with mumbles and troubled expressions, while some would not respond at all. The final blow came when, during mass, a woman who had offered the sign of peace to the people around her, folded her arms across her chest and looked me in the eyes while refusing to accept my hand that was offered to her in peace. Her message to me was clear – I was not wanted there.

Some people told me that those who did not welcome my presence in my church were only individuals and I should not have let them drive me from my spiritual home.  Some stated that “all” people are welcome in the Roman Catholic Church.  However, the word “all” can be a veil that conceals patronizing tokenism or subtle discrimination.  We may all be welcome in God’s house, but that doesn’t mean that we are all necessarily treated the same way when we are there.  “All” was in the language that the priest at my former Catholic church used when I explained my pain from the treatment of some of my fellow parishioners.  He told me, “We are all children of God and made in his image,” as though I was the one who needed convincing rather than the people who would not speak to me or the woman who refused to accept my offer of peace.

And so I left the Catholic Church, becoming spiritually adrift. Where was I to go?  Where could I receive the Eucharist as my true self?  In what church would I not face rejection?  From what I had seen and heard from other transgender people who had been discriminated against in their churches of other Christian denominations, I thought that there was no place for me.  I was so spiritually lonely that I even tried to go back once to my former Catholic church but experienced such a level of anxiousness while sitting in the pews that I thought I was going to be ill so I didn’t try it again.

My spiritual Diaspora lasted for years, leaving me hungry for the sustenance of the Eucharist and the fellowship of a congregation.  I didn’t believe that a spiritual home existed for me.  Until, that is, I met a transgender man who was an Episcopal priest.  

A priest! 

My entire world changed at that moment.  I knew then that if a church was accepting of transgender people in the ordination process, then this would be a church where I would be accepted as well, and not only sitting in the pews.  In a church with ordained transgender people, I knew I would find an open path for my own lay ministry.

For transgender people, one of the most marginalized groups in our society, witnessing the participation of others like themselves in ordained and lay ministries in the Episcopal church can be positively uplifting and life altering, as it was for me. 

There is power in the presence and visibility of transgender people in The Episcopal church, and a person does not need to be transgender to see it -- anyone who is struggling in their life, who might feel for whatever reason that they would not be accepted into any church, would receive the message, as I did, that the Episcopal church can be a spiritual home for them. This Episcopal 'beacon,' as it were, could be guaranteed by adding "gender identity and expression" to the non-discrimination canons D002 and D019.

Hearing on D002 and D019 -- Powerful Witness

This afternoon the Ministry Committee heard resolutions D002 and D019.  The room was full, the testimony sign-up lists overflowing with overwhelmingly supportive people.  The committee itself is large—forty members – which made getting up to speak that much more overwhelming for those who did it.  But what an amazing collective witness we offered. 

In addition to trans people ourselves, a striking number of allies came forward, including two bishops.  One of them was my bishop, Tom Shaw, who spoke of our experience in the diocese of Massachusetts with trans clergy as well as strong support for the trans community more generally.  Striking testimony was offered by Vivian Taylor whose writings have been share on this blog before.  Vivian spoke of finding a home in the Episcopal Church during college, prior to her deployment to Iraq as a chaplain’s assistant, and her intention to enter discernment for ordained ministry.  Bishop Chet Talton spoke of the stance of full welcome that he has supported in the Diocese of San Joaquin, and of the ministry of Carolyn Woodall who was ordained a deacon this spring.  

The lone dissenting testimony was offered by a deputy from the diocese of Albany.  The main sentiment she shared was a sense of isolation in her disagreement with resolution D002.  When gently pressed by Bishop Mary Glasspool to be more specific about her concern, the deputy indicated her belief that “God doesn’t make mistakes” and that those who transition inherently assert the opposite. Bishop Shaw and I also answered a question from another deputy from the diocese of Albany about how to respond to people in that diocese who may feel alienated by the passage of these resolutions.  Both of us emphasized the importance of relationships, of staying in conversation, of recognizing the humanity of one another, even and especially when we disagree.  This deputy also turned out to live only twenty minutes from where my spouse grew up in central New York state.  The world is small, and we must be gentle to one another.

After forty-five minutes of testimony on both resolutions, the chair ended the session.  Because there were so many more people who wanted to testify, unfortunately, many were not able to, and we will be posting more testimony here.  When the session ended, we streamed out into the hall, hugging each other and sighing huge sighs of relief.  While a number of us dispersed, a few stayed behind to hear debate and voting on the resolutions.  As it turned out, the vote was very straight forward:  both D002 and D019 were passed out of committee and now head to the House of Bishops.  They should come there in the next couple of days. 

Tomorrow at 2pm there will be a hearing on another trans related resolution, D022, the Churchwide Response to Bullying.  Stay  tuned for news on that resolution as well as House of Bishops movement on D002 and D019.

CP