After banning "gay conversion therapy", Church of England to vote on welcoming transgender people - Sensationalist Headlines

[quote]The Church of England’s ruling body is to vote on whether to provide special services for transgender people during their transition. The General Synod is [B]considering a motion on the need for transgender people to be “welcomed and affirmed in their parish church” as part of the “long and often complex process” of transition.[/B] The vote comes after [B]bishops overwhelmingly backed a motion calling for a ban on “unethical” conversion therapy for gay Christians.[/B] While the synod debated and voted on the private member’s motion on Saturday, an estimated 1 million people were celebrating Pride weekend in London, marking 50 years since the decriminalisation of homosexuality. On Sunday the meeting in York will decide on a diocesan synod motion on “welcoming transgender people”, tabled by the Rev Chris Newlands of Blackburn. [B]The church has stated its “fundamental belief” is that baptism can only be received once, therefore there is “no possibility” of the synod approving a service re-baptising individuals in their new gender.[/B] Newlands’s motion “seeks to ensure that the C of E engages seriously with the issue of providing the opportunity of a liturgical marking of a person’s transition, which has the full authority of the C of E, as an appropriate expression of community and pastoral support to trans people”. The motion recognises that [B]it cannot require clergy to offer to perform such a service if they “cannot in good conscience offer support in a liturgical marking of a person’s transition”.[/B][/quote] [url]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/09/anglican-church-vote-welcoming-transgender-people-general-synod[/url]

Sounds like a step in the right direction to me.

[quote]The church has stated its “fundamental belief” is that baptism can only be received once, therefore there is “no possibility” of the synod approving a service re-baptising individuals in their new gender.[/quote] ...Would this even matter? I will freely admit it's been a long time since I've been in a church(2002 at the most recent), and it wasn't C of E at that, but my understanding is that God doesn't care all that much about the physical form and that the benefits of baptism would apply post-transition without any additional actions needed on the part of the worshipper.

I keep forgetting that we have a state religion, no matter how tolerant our actual society and gov may be. At least our queen gets a cool as fuck title of "Defender of the Faith"

[QUOTE=EuSKalduna;52450243]I keep forgetting that we have a state religion, no matter how tolerant our actual society and gov may be. At least our queen gets a cool as fuck title of "Defender of the Faith"[/QUOTE] The irony of it all though is that the CoE was originally created because the King wanted a pretext to divorce his wife and get rid of the Pope's authority in the process.

I really like moves like these. It's really easy to say this as someone who isn't religious, but I honestly believe for religions to work they need to start with the foundation of accepting all people, and then work in their weird beliefs and traditions. I know it's hard for a lot of religions born in hateful eras with long standing anti-lgbt traditions to suddenly start accepting them into their ranks, but tbh it's the only way they're going to be taken seriously in the future, even if it means outright ignoring some of their (long already disproven) religious texts.

[QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;52450395]I really like moves like these. It's really easy to say this as someone who isn't religious, but I honestly believe for religions to work they need to start with the foundation of accepting all people, and then work in their weird beliefs and traditions. I know it's hard for a lot of religions born in hateful eras with long standing anti-lgbt traditions to suddenly start accepting them into their ranks, but tbh it's the only way they're going to be taken seriously in the future, even if it means outright ignoring some of their (long already disproven) religious texts.[/QUOTE] My country is about 80% Catholic and there's a lot of things that are really backwards like a lack of legal abortion methods or even divorce, but one thing I always appreciated in the recent years is how a lot of Churches have began a more tolerant and open stance on LGBT people, including the [url=http://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/159225-catholic-church-shut-up]acceptance of gay priests and nuns[/url]. It's really nice to see people united like this and just have the core value of loving thy neighbor. Really hope someday all religions can have this accepting stance to people regardless of their orientation or culture. [img]https://i.imgur.com/JcTD40d.jpg[/img] [img]https://i.imgur.com/4XJnJrV.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=TestECull;52450208]...Would this even matter? I will freely admit it's been a long time since I've been in a church(2002 at the most recent), and it wasn't C of E at that, but my understanding is that God doesn't care all that much about the physical form and that the benefits of baptism would apply post-transition without any additional actions needed on the part of the worshipper.[/QUOTE] Even if you believe in the regenerative powers of baptism on the soul, it's believed by all churches as far as I know that it's only able to happen once, and any re-baptism has zero affect on the soul whatsoever. I have no idea why this is a big deal other than possibly to stop people from asking for a baptism ceremony over and over again.

[QUOTE=NachoPiggy;52450540]My country is about 80% Catholic and there's a lot of things that are really backwards like a lack of legal abortion methods or even divorce, but one thing I always appreciated in the recent years is how a lot of Churches have began a more tolerant and open stance on LGBT people, including the [url=http://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/159225-catholic-church-shut-up]acceptance of gay priests and nuns[/url]. It's really nice to see people united like this and just have the core value of loving thy neighbor. Really hope someday all religions can have this accepting stance to people regardless of their orientation or culture. [img]https://i.imgur.com/JcTD40d.jpg[/img] [img]https://i.imgur.com/4XJnJrV.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] It's really good to see that the church is becoming more open, because growing up, I was always told that God is accepting of everyone. Which wasn't something mimicked by the church, or even the teachers at school. People should always feel welcomed into a church

Nothing wrong with acceptance for social behavior like being homosexual, heterosexual, cis/transsexual (and others). However naming any of those as healthy, normal, unhealthy or abnormal is a science's work to do.

[QUOTE=Scratch.;52450658]It's really good to see that the church is becoming more open, because growing up, I was always told that God is accepting of everyone. Which wasn't something mimicked by the church, or even the teachers at school. People should always feel welcomed into a church[/QUOTE] My parents and family are all devout Catholics and they never really shown signs of any prejudice to any group of people as well. Like I knew being gay was considered a sin and all since it was a teaching in the Bible everyone manages to learn about, but it really wasn't an important detail. Prominently was also taught that God loves everyone and God forgives all sins, and the teaching of the Golden Rule was a core that was ingrained in my mind 'one should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself' and loving thy neighbors and all that. Sunday Church Masses were really fun and positive for me growing up. It was really weird and quite a huge culture shock for me the first time I read about groups like the Westboro Baptist Church and how hateful they were to a specific group of people and how they genuinely wished they'd go to hell and that sort. I really feel like ideally once religious groups focus more on the core human unity and loving each other values, things would be a whole lot better for everyone.

[QUOTE=Jackald;52450694]Makes sense. Surely it's a bit hard to say "God has a plan for you" and "You're defying what God wants from you" when God's supposed to be an Omniscient, Omnipresent, and Omnibenevolent force. I mean how can anyone defy a God who made you to do exactly what he wants you to do.[/QUOTE] Ah, but then we get into the many, [I]many[/I] interpretations of religious texts and beliefs. I've heard "God's just testing you" more than enough times to know that not everyone believes in God having entire control over your will. Not arguing with you, but I'm sure there's people who believe things like "God has a plan for you, but you've deviated from it" or something.