Jun
04
2009
Joan or John? How Do You Minister the Gospel to the "Transgendered"?
Here’s the “ethics dilemma” Russell Moore presented to his ethics class for them to answer for their final:
Joan is a fifty year-old woman who has been visiting your church for a little over a year. She sits on the third row from the back, and usually exits during the closing hymn, often with tears in her eyes. Joan approaches you after the service on Sunday to tell you that she wants to follow Jesus as her Lord.
You ask Joan a series of diagnostic questions about her faith, and it is clear she understands the gospel. She still seems distressed though. When you ask if she’s repented of her sin, she starts to cry and grit her teeth.
“I don’t know,” she says. “I don’t know how…I don’t know where to start…Can I meet with you privately?”
You, Joan, and a godly Titus 2-type women’s ministry leader in your church meet in your office right away, and Joan tells you her story.
She wasn’t born Joan. She was born John. From early on in John’s life, though, he felt as though he was “a woman trapped in a man’s body.” Joan says, “I don’t mean to repeat that old shopworn cliché, but it really is what I felt like.”
Joan tells you that when she was twenty she began the process of “transitioning” from life as a man to life as a woman. She underwent extensive hormone therapy, followed by extensive plastic surgery—including so-called “gender reassignment surgery.” She has lived for the past thirty years—physically and socially—as a woman.
“I want to do whatever it takes to follow Jesus,” Joan tells you. “I want to repent…I just, I don’t know how to do it.”
“I am surgically now a woman. I’ve taken hormones that give me the appearance and physical makeup of a woman,” she says. “Even if I were to put on a suit and tie right now, I’d just look like a woman with a suit and tie. Not to mention the fact that, well, I am physically…a woman.”
“To complicate matters further,” Joan says through tears, “I adopted my daughter, Clarissa, when she was eight months old and she’s ten years old now. She doesn’t know about my past life as…as a man. She just knows me as her Mom.”
“I know the sex change surgery was wrong. I know that my life is twisted. I’m willing to do whatever Jesus would have me to do to make it right,” she says. “But what would Jesus have me to do?”
Joan asks you, “Am I too messed up to repent and be saved? If not, what does it mean for me to repent and live my life as a follower of Jesus? What is right for me to do?”
For Dr. Moore’s insightful answer, see
Here’s the conclusion:
You see, the scenario about “Joan” isn’t really all that hypothetical. Chances are in your town right now, there are people in that situation. Why don’t they show up in our churches? Is it because they doubt if our gospel is really addressed to them? Is it because we doubt it too?
If Joan comes to your church this Sunday and hears the gospel, if “she” decides to throw away everything “she” knows and follow Christ, will your church be there to love him, and to show him how to stop pretending and to fight his way toward what he was created to be? Maybe it would take a Joan at the altar call to make us question whether we really believe what we say and what we sing. Is there really power, wonder-working power, in the blood of the Lamb? Is our gospel really good news for prodigal sons, even for sons so lost they once thought they were daughters?
Update: The posts are now collected in one printable PDF.
25 Comments
The answer is Yes! Joan is a better candidate than most Johns.
What great posts! There is indeed wonder-working power in the blood of the Lamb! Amen.
Leanne Payne's book The Broken Image is the best I've ever read in relation to these sorts of matters.
Many Christians believe in the wonder-working power of the blood, but aren't always sure as to how they can be used by God to help others; she shows how to pray effectively for the healing of persons.
That makes the problem of being merely prone to bad language somewhat sad and pathetic — because Dr. Moore's answers are straight-up right, and the rest of us who have the same quality of sin but not the same physical investment in our sins ought to be able to work out our salvation with fear and trembling.
The challenge for the Evangelical church as a whole is to really do this kind of ministry; and communicate how we do this with wisdom and love to the unbelieving world; and yet somehow also answer Biblically the continuing breakdown of our culture, evidenced by President Obama's recent declaration of "Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, and Transgender" Pride month.
http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3313
If there's an upside to the acceptance of LGBTs by culture, it's that the Church is being forced to think long and hard about how to openly, honestly, and lovingly witness to and love people who are touched by those issues. For me, the fact that I've grown up in the 2000s means that I've been able to seek help about these things freely, and ask questions and share my story more honestly, than I would have if I was dealing with this in decades past.
"make sure she understands that part of the sin she’s walking away from is a root-level rebellion against the Creator." — Moore
This is where he goes wrong. Everyone outside of Christ is living in "root-level rebellion" against God (John 3:18). There are not levels or degrees of being outside of God's covenant. This is where the church fails; by treating these cases as "special". And is not this desire for "specialness" at the root of homosexual identity? There are no sinners who need special treatment beyond what every other sinner needs.
My besetting sin may not be yours, but we all need the same remedy.
read: "specialness" = pride.
Without having yet listened to the sermon, my mind immediately goes to this somewhat parallel scenario that plays out in churches every day:
You, Joan, and a godly Titus 2-type women’s ministry leader in your church meet in your office right away, and Joan tells you her story. She wasn’t always married to the man she is married to now. She was married before. From early on in that marriage, though, she felt as though her husband was “married to his job/the bottle/fill-in-the-blank". Joan says, “I don’t mean to repeat that old shopworn cliché, but it really is what I felt like.” Joan tells you that when she was twenty-five she left her husband and has since remarried. She has lived for the past thirty years as the wife of another man. “I want to do whatever it takes to follow Jesus,” Joan tells you. “I want to repent…I just, I don’t know how to do it.” “I am divorced,” she says. “According to the words of Christ, I committed adultery and caused him to commit adultery by leaving him. Even if I were to leave my husband now, I’d just be compounding the sin. To complicate matters further,” Joan says through tears, “We adopted our daughter, Clarissa, when she was eight months old and she’s ten years old now. She doesn’t know about my past life as…as another man's wife. She just knows us as her Mom and Dad.” “I know the divorce was wrong. I know that my life is twisted. I’m willing to do whatever Jesus would have me to do to make it right,” she says. “But what would Jesus have me to do?” Joan asks you, “Am I too messed up to repent and be saved? If not, what does it mean for me to repent and live my life as a follower of Jesus? What is right for me to do?”
It seems to me that the answer to one would at least be similar to the answer to the other, but folks tend to shift in their seats a bit and making rationalizations when it comes to divorce…but is that any less of a sin? One is the corruption of the Imago Dei, the other is the corruption of the image of Christ's relationship to His Church and His absolute faithfulness even in the face of our faithlessness. Is it because one is more newsworthy and the other is more generally accepted?
Before I duck for cover, let me just say that I'm speaking as a divorced (not remarried) woman who grew up in a liberal church and who came to Christ much later in life (last year)…and who has since entertained similar questions even after repentance, which for me – as my ex-husband has remarried and has another daughter now – this still isn't the unpardonable sin, and Christ has redeemed me, and that means that my life is now to be devoted to Christ and His kingdom – a great privilege and joy! And these are honest questions.
Barbara,
You said: "One is the corruption of the Imago Dei, the other is the corruption of the image of Christ's relationship to His Church and His absolute faithfulness even in the face of our faithlessness".
These kind of distinctions do not exist within Scripture. All outside of Christ are the fallen image of the Imago Dei, not just some "special" cases.
Topher –
For the record, I don't think Moore is arguing that Joan is a "special case". But it's likely that prior to conversion, Joan saw herself as a special case, and Moore is helping her see how she's not.
Moore is doing an excellent job of applying the gospel to both Joan/John and the many in the church who are tempted to marginilize her.
The unsaved transgendered person usually believes themselves to be outside the need for repentance, faith and spiritual transformation.
The church has often seen the unsaved transgendered (or homosexual or late-term abortionist or …) as outside the availability of repentance, faith and transformation.
Both concepts are sin.
Topher,
As you point out my doctrinal error (as a laywoman and still a toddler in Christ I am subject to such – well, as a creature in this flesh package I am subject to such!) …still, your conclusion makes my point exactly. Thank you.
Topher – On the one hand, you're right. We're all sinners, and we all need the same thing, and that's Christ.
At the same time, the situation with John is a rather unique situation that requires unique attention. This isn't a sin as commonplace as lusting after women, which all men deal with.
The spiritual solution is the same for all of us, but the practical ways in which situations are dealt with differs person to person. Situations with LGBT strugglers also have the added element of being in the crosshairs of current cultural movements and political wars, so that has to be taken into account.
And I do think that there are more practical issues to think about here. An ex-gay man, if he marries a woman, is going to have different struggles and challenges in his marriage than a man who never lived that lifestyle. And people who remain single (for whatever reason) and are, like John, basically eunuchs, are going to need more support and compassion from a Christian community than people who have extensive families.
all sin is sin that will keep us from knowing God unless we are born again.
However, there does seem to be greater consequences of some sins as oppossed to others.
Real adultery is worse than lust, even though both are sin and both will send to hell.
Romans 1, and the "abomination" language of Leviticus seem to indicate that homosexual sins are worse in consequences on society and culture and more addictive and harder to get free from.
Problem with the issue now is that seem to be using this issue to silence churches and preachers and Christians. They don't want us to even say, "that is wrong and that is sin". "God hates sin"
That "hate speech" legislation stuff can lead to silencing the ability of Christians to even say, "that is sin".
Well done Russell Moore.
I remember when at a coffee house at my church we had two transvestites come to enjoy some music coffee and such.
I wondered where they would go to the bathroom? they decided to go in the woman's room. Man, what a night of learning for our church.
Another night a man, big guy, came dressed up in a dress with a nice purse, and he had a really nice beard.
Another night of much learning.
I simply love the people in the grace of God. And try to converse in all honesty. I may say to the man: "Why the dress? I really don't understand, though perhaps you could explain?"
And then just be nice and talk, but mostly listen. And that's where I'm still learning. I'm not the best listener.
Thanks for such a good post.
Christ died for the sinner, the body and the soul.
No matter what we do to our bodies, even if we mess it up as bad as becoming a transgendered person, our soul will be no different than any other soul.
"The unsaved transgendered person usually believes themselves to be outside the need for repentance, faith and spiritual transformation."
Rachel, all those dead in sin believe themselves outside the need for repentance. Until Christ comes, we all give ourselves the thumbs-up.
Jay,
Not all men struggle with lusting after women. Truly, to reduce every man down to one besetting sin is a flattening of our struggles. Yes, many men do, but not all. Lusting after men was a problem back in the Sinai desert, even as lusting after women was. Nothing new friend.
Ken,
Sin and sins are two very different things.
Cheers all.
Topher – Surely not every man struggles with lusting after women. I, for example, struggle with lusting after men. What I meant to say was that all men struggle with lust, except for the very rare asexuals.
This is perhaps the dumbest thing I've read in a long time.
Your faux spirituality, faux compassion and smug assurance that you can require from Joan the complete devastation of her life and family (under the guise of following Jesus) are what consistently drive gays, lesbians and transgenders away from evangelical churches.
Blaming Joan for the bad advice (it was her idea, you'll argue) that she should revert to being John, albeit while remaining physically a woman only compounds your spiritual malpractice.
Next you'll be starting Ex-Transexual groups. Where will your false prophet madness end?
For the record, Joan the newly born again Christian, should continue to live as Joan until the Holy Spirit convicts her to stop living as Joan.
She should learn from the beginning to walk in the Spirit and obey the Holy Spirit instead of allowing self-important nuts to make for her, a decision that is not Biblical.
Using your theory of Complementarity to devastate the life of this new convert is sick.
Have you no shame?
Genesis 2:18 is every bit as authoritative in this case as Genesis 2:24.
How cavalier you folks are in prescribing for others what you would never prescribe for yourselves.
Rick Brentlinger
"Genesis 2:18 is every bit as authoritative in this case as Genesis 2:24." -Rick
I don't get what your saying.
John was born a man. He decided to mutilate his body in many ways, and deny that he was a man, and so lied to himself, and said he was a woman, when he wasn't.
God hates sin. And we are under His wrath. Christ is the substitute for our sin, and sins. If John comes to Christ and asks for forgiveness for his sin, then Christ will save his soul. If John doesn't, then God will throw both John's soul and body into hell.
And the same fate is for all who do not come to Christ in repentance and faith.
So, I see the greatest compassion this earth has to offer in what Russel Moore has laid out in his ethics class.
I say agian, Well done Master Moore.
Genesis 2:18 says: "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him."
Joan felt all her life that she was a woman in a man's body. Around age 20, she had sexual reassignment surgery so that her body matched her emotional and psychological makeup. She has lived as a woman, in a body that is anatomically female, for thirty years.
Christian pop psychologists are now advising new convert Joan to stop living as a woman and start living as a man.
A Few Questions:
1. Must new convert Joan/John remain celibate for the rest of her life?
2. May the anatomically, emotionally and psychologically female John, now marry a man?
In that case you have in your church what to all outward appearances is a gay male couple.
3. Would not you spiritual giants then accuse John of sin?
4. May the anatomically, emotionally and psychologically female John now marry a woman?
In that case, the happy couple has only the option of lesbian sex since "John" is anatomically, emotionally and psychologically female.
5. Would not you spiritual giants then accuse John of sin?
Joan/John has testified that she was born with a female emotional and psychological makeup in a male body.
For Russell Moore's viewpoint to be correct, we must assume that:
(a) God never allows that to happen, therefore Joan/John is simply confused, or,
(b) Joan/John is lying about being a woman in a man's body, or,
(c) regardless of (a) and (b), at salvation, God always heals, changes, corrects the problem of feeling like a woman in a man's body.
It seems self-evident that those three choices are not the truth.
Some people are born with bipolar disease, a mental condition that is not healed at salvation. Advising new convert Joan to stop living as a woman, something she has done for 30 years and to start living as a man is as silly as telling someone suffering from bipolar disorder to "snap out of it because you're saved now and that shouldn't bother you any longer."
Both transsexualism and bipolar disorder are mental conditions which are not necessarily healed at salvation and we have no scriptural warrant to label either condition as sin. Transsexualism isn't a cut and dried issue where the Bible makes a definitive statement about it being sin.
To assert otherwise (as so many have done) is foolish and hurtful in the extreme. If in your capacity as spiritual leaders, you guys are actually giving converted transexuals such damaging advice, I hope your malpractice insurance is paid up.
Rick Brentlinger
Rick, I think it would be probably most wise for John to remain celibate and single. Like you pointed out, since he is still physically female because of his past surgeries, marrying a woman would require them to either be celibate in marriage (in which case, I don't think such a union should be entered at all) or to have what is essentially lesbian sex.
Unlike you, however, I don't see lifelong celibacy as some horrible life. Many homosexual Christians who don't partake in gay sex or relationships because of Scripture's teaching (such as myself) end up celibate and have very full, active lives as part of the church. Others experience enough change in their attractions that they can cautiously, with a lot of prayer, honesty, and patience, move on to opposite-sex marriages.
In no way do feelings of loneliness or struggles to do what God has deemed right give us the excuse to ignore the Bible's teachings. If the church is doing what it's supposed to do, people like John, homosexual strugglers, or just people who are unlucky in love will be supported, loved, and fulfilled even if they aren't called to marriage.
What if Joan/John chooses not to live according to your opinion (chooses not to be celibate)?
1. Is (Joan), now John, living as a man but with her surgically altered female body, free in Christ, to marry a man?
2. Or is (Joan), now John, living as a man but with her surgically altered female body, free in Christ, to marry a woman?
If I understand your belief correctly, you do not factor emotional or psychological identification as a man or as a woman into what makes one a man or a woman.
Instead, you go only with physiology. Your position appears to be:
'Anyone with male anatomy is a man and anyone with female anatomy is a woman, regardless of which gender the individual identifies as emotionally and psychologically.'
Except for transexuals in which case, all of you must live celibate lives (and stop complaining about it, sister 'cause its God's will!!!)
But after Joan/John has gotten saved and started to trust the spiritual leadership of the church, s(he) is told:
1. Stop living as a woman, start living as a man.
2. And ummm, by the way, there's absolutely no possibility of marriage for you for the rest of your life, to anyone, no matter how long you live.
We Christians who led you to our loving Lord now decree that you may never be married, may never experience the emotional, physical, psychological, romantic, sexual bonding the rest of us enjoy in marriage.
3. Your sins may be forgiven but we can't get over them ourselves and we don't want you coming to our church as a man and putting your arm around your wife.
4. We couldn't handle seeing you sitting with your spouse in every service and wondering what you two do in bed, since physiologically you're both women.
5. And we certainly can't have you dressing as a man and marrying a man and coming to church looking like a gay couple. Nope, to paraphrase the soup Nazi, "No sex or marriage for you!"
6. And Oh Yes, God agrees with us on this!
Jay wrote: — "Unlike you, however, I don't see lifelong celibacy as some horrible life."
Okay but the issue is not what you see. Its what Joan/John sees and what you (and others) are deciding – that lifelong celibacy is the only appropriate Christian choice for Joan/John.
I marvel that you can so easily decree celibacy for others and posit that celibacy as God's will.
The Bible says:
"Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband…
But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn" [in lust]. 1 Cor 7:2-9.
Since you are requiring Joan/John to live as a man, must John obey your celibacy requirement or should John obey 1 Corinthians 7:2 and 9?
Jay says, Its better to be celibate.
The Bible says, Its better to marry.
Who is right?
Rick Brentlinger
"Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband…"
Husband: a male partner in marriage.
Wife: a female partner in a marriage.
Male: ..being the sex that produces germ cells (sperm) which fertilize the eggs of a female.
Female: being the sex that bears young.
God made them male and female. And he said be fruitful and multiply.
The Bible is clear Rick. God is the Creator, and we are His creatures. We need to listen to Him.
Not all who say they Christians are Christians, and so they don't adhere to God's final authority, His Holy Writ, which is a treasure of Truth, and of mercy.
Some make up their own rules as you say Rick, which is what you are doing as well.
Let the Holy Scriptures speak. The truth will set you free.
I appreciate what Jay has said. you may want to listen a little.
Is it possible that you are wrong.
if words mean what they mean, then you are wrong. Unless you want to change the meaning of words, and make them mean whatever you want.
God is setting forth His truth to not only show us he loves us, but that he hates sin.
But His love overcame sin. Jesus Christ, the only Man who could, carry a wooden Cross up to Calvary, and lay His hands and feet out, and spikes were hammered through His precious perfect flesh, unlike our sinful flesh, and he became sin for us sinners.
What a savior! What a God.
And what a Gospel! Do you believe the Gospel, that Christ died for the sins of the world, and rose from the dead on the third day?
"Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him." John 3:36
Are you obeying the Son? Am I obeying the Son?
How do we obey Him?
Repent and believe the good news of Jesus Christ. Turn from our sin, and trust in Christ and His Word.
Have a nice weekend.
Don-
I too appreciate what Jay said. He is a highly intelligent young man and I admire his desire to do what is right.
Yet the advice he gives concerning celibacy is not Biblically based. I note that you assiduously avoided engaging what I wrote.
Fortunately, the Bible never asserts that a man must possess viable sperm which can fertilize the eggs of a female or that a female must be fecund in order for their marriage to be valid.
Its odd how you followers of Calvin always question the salvation of folks who disagree with you ("Not all who say they Christians are Christians").
If your Calvinist philosophical (not to be confused with Biblical) belief system is true, I am entirely powerless to get saved anyway, until God over-rules my "rebellious" spirit and saves me against my will. Then and only then can I repent and receive Jesus as my Lord and Savior.
Those of us who have "had our senses exercised by reason of use, to discern good and evil," are not intimidated by sly insinuations that because we disagree with your opinions, we are not saved.
You lift up the Bible as God's final authority, as do I, yet the advice given for the fictional Joan/John in this thread is not based on any clear statement of scripture about transexuals. Therefore your advice is opinion, not gospel truth.
Meanwhile, you absolutely refuse to consider the havoc such poor advice wreaks on your brothers and sisters in Christ.
FWIW, I am blessed to be washed in the blood of the Lamb and eternally grateful to my dear Mother who led me to saving faith in Jesus Christ so many years ago.
Now to Him that loved us and washed us from our sins in His blood,
Your brother in Christ,
Rick Brentlinger
Rick, my suggestion that John not marry is indeed my own opinion, not based on anything Biblical. Now, I don't think John should marry a man, because that would indeed be a homosexual union, no matter what John's body looks like. As I said, I think Scripture makes it clear that homosexual romantic relationships are not a part of God's will.
Now, if John–whose body, Russell Moore says, had been completely surgically altered to mimic the external female form–married a woman, I'm not so sure what the proper course of action would be. Perhaps a wiser, older person who has experience with this issue can share their thoughts. All I said was that, since John's body is still female, physical satisfaction between him and a wife would essentially be the same as lesbian sex.
And I am honestly not sure what the proper course of action should be there. I believe homosexual sex is banned in the Bible because it presents a mockery of what God deemed for a man and a woman in marriage. The idea that a couple (such as John and his hypothetical wife) could technically have gay sex despite being male and female is, frankly, a concept so rare and bizarre that I haven't worked out the kinks yet, which is why I said that celibacy might be the best bet, just to be on the safe side.
I would be interested to hear some Biblical responses about the possibility of John marrying a woman.
"I note that you assiduously avoided engaging what I wrote." -Rick
I really didn't. I may be unskilled at dialog, but I haven't any more a determined agenda than you do. I simply addressed the verse of Scripture you used, way out of context.
"Fortunately, the Bible never asserts that a man must possess viable sperm which can fertilize the eggs of a female or that a female must be fecund in order for their marriage to be valid."
Fortunately for who?
I was just defining what a male is, and what a female is. The facts and truth are clear.
"Its odd how you followers of Calvin always question the salvation of folks who disagree with you ("Not all who say they Christians are Christians")."
Matthew 7:21-23
"..I am entirely powerless to get saved anyway, until God over-rules my "rebellious" spirit and saves me against my will."
"So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?”"
The true repentant sinner will hate sin, and love Christ. He will certainly struggle with sin to some degree or another, but he will hate that he loves sin. And what sin is is clear in the Word of God.
"Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, en-slavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted." 1 Tim 1:8-11
"..are not intimidated by sly insinuations.."
That's judgmental.
Rick, I have had some good dialog with many different people. Some don't like me, and some do. I'm not much at conversing really. I love Christ, and I want to obey Him.
He rose from the dead. He was crucified for the sins of the world. For fornicators, blasphemers, and drunkards like me. Jesus changed my heart, and He had mercy on someone who didn't want His mercy.
What a Savior! And what a God and Friend.