On this final day of the 79thGeneral Convention TransEpiscopal has so much to celebrate. Everything we came to this convention supporting has passed, and more. We had many connecting conversations with people from across the church, and we also felt the support of the wider church in various ways even when we didn’t have direct conversations. It really felt like the church had our back. We felt it at the Revival on Saturday when the Presiding Bishop said “my brothers, my sisters, my siblings.” We felt it in testimony, especially on the floor of the House of Deputies. We felt it in resolutions where trans and nonbinary concerns got added to resolutions in committee, at times when we weren’t even aware of it. We may yet discover more legislation impacting us in specific ways among the record number of resolutions passed this convention. At over 500 resolutions, this convention dealt with the largest such number in its history, and while we did our best to go through all of them, the lack of a keyword search function on the General Convention website meant that we probably missed some. But several that we discovered along the way join with others we were advocating for, making the gains at this Convention arguably the most significant we have ever experienced.

Nondiscrimination Canons Augmented and Extended to Employment

Early in this convention we became aware of resolution A091. It sought to take the nondiscrimination categories, including ‘gender identity and expression’ whose addition we supported and celebrated in 2012, and to apply them to clergy appointment and hiring processes. We were disappointed when this resolution did not make it out of Committee #15 on Ministry. But then later we learned that a similar resolution had been assigned to Committee #2 on Constitution and Canons. It was not only similar, it was stronger. It had also made it out of committee. In fact, when we learned about it, it had already passed the House of Bishops (we don’t know if it was discussed or if it passed on their consent calendar). It was resolution A284 (originally D026), sponsored by the Reverend Beth Scriven. As of last night it was on the consent calendar, but this morning it was removed along with several other resolutions, forcing it to come up for a floor vote. We scrambled in the midst of packing to help alert folks to please testify in support and were elated when it passed.

A284 does several things:

• It addresses two places in the canons, the “Rights of the Laity” Canon, I.17.5, and Canon III.1.2. The latter canon (previously only) addressed access to the discernment process toward ordination.

 

• In both canons it adds to the list of protected categories, specifically “family status (including pregnancy and child care plans).”

 

• To both Canon I.17.5 and Canon III.1.2 A284 adds the context of employment. In the latter canon the existing language that read “No person shall be denied access to the discernment process” now also has “or to any process for the employment, licensing, calling, or deployment.” The canon’s final sentence also has some slight additions: “No right to employment, licensing, ordination, call, deployment, or election is hereby established.”

This resolution was inspired in important ways by the #MeToo movement as it has been playing out in the Church. Testimony in its support included stories of how in interviews women have been asked questions that men are typically not – questions about family, children, pregnancy, and child care plans. We have heard testimony at this convention about how lesbian, gay, bisexual, and/or trans and nonbinary people have been asked additional questions about their relationship status, or have been let go from their positions once they have come out or begun transition. Earlier this week our own steering committee member and newly elected President of the Episcopal Rainbow The Reverend Gwen Fry, shared her story of losing her rector position in the Episcopal Diocese of Arkansas in the wake of her coming out as trans. We recommend reading it here in the Issues blog of the Consultation (the peace and justice coalition of which TransEpiscopal is a member). This Convention has also devoted considerable energy to the work of dismantling racism and renewing the Church's commitment to that work. Sexism, racism, ableism, xenophobia, homophobia, and transphobia -- all of these forms of oppression in all their permutations and intersections need to be dismantled. Our communal life together, embracing difference, is poised for renewal. This resolution makes an important new statement about our commitment to this process as a Church.

Studies of Employment, Compensation, and Career Development

D069 calls for the gathering of statistical information and stories about employment and compensation for LGBTQ clergy. Today the House of Deputies voted to concur with the Bishops who had passed it earlier this week (again, we don’t know if there was discussion or if it passed on their consent calendar). We were glad to connect with the statistician of the Church Pension Group Matthew Price along the way about the possibility of it becoming a report like one he worked on a decade ago, “Called to Serve.” Deputies the Reverend Vanessa Stickler-Glass and the Reverend M.E. Eccles, its respective sponsor and endorsers, spoke powerfully and movingly in its support this morning.

We had contributed to the construction of D069 and were glad to observe the passage of its sibling resolution – its inspiration, in fact – D005. It called for similar statistical information to be gathered on the basis of race and ethnicity. As we embrace difference across axes of oppression in the church, we need to take stock of where bias persists and gaps remain. Another resolution we learned about late in the game was A043. It acknowledges “that there has not been adequate investment in the career development of women, transgender, non-binary, and racial/ethnic minority clergy at multiple levels” and “that an appropriate interim body be assigned the task to study these concerns and make a report, including analysis and recommendation for improvements, to the 80th General Convention.” We very much appreciate our inclusion in this resolution and we look forward to being among those contributing to this study, and collaborating on its recommendations and outcomes.

Name Changes, Liturgy, Access and Advocacy

C022 Originating from the Diocese of California, this resolution calls upon Episcopalians to “support legislative, educational, pastoral, liturgical, and broader communal efforts that seek to end the pattern of violence against transgender people in general and transgender women in particular, calling attention especially to the rising violence against transgender women of color and gender non-conforming people.” It further calls congregations “to remove barriers to full participation in congregational life by making their gender-specific facilities and activities fully accessible to all, regardless of gender identity and expression.”

C054 Originating from the Diocese of Virginia and Province III, this resolution asks the Church to work with the Office of Formation in partnership with organizations such as Integrity (now the Episcopal Rainbow) and TransEpiscopal to establish “Guiding Principles for the Inclusion of Transgender and Non-Binary People in Dioceses, Parishes, Missions, Schools and Camps.”

A088 This resolution affirms trans and nonbinary people, as well as cisgender people in various life circumstances, in our ability to have our names and gender markers amended in Church records and to have certificates such as baptism and ordination reissued. The guidelines for doing so could be out as early as this year, or no later than the end of 2019.

A218 As of this writing we are aware that the Name Change Rite in the Book of Occasional Services is among a portion of that book slated to be released to the wider church soon, while other portions of that book receive additional attention.

A068 Prayer Book Revision ended up passing in a significantly modified form. A task force is slated to be created to begin that process, though it will receive significantly less funding than had originally been indicated. Gender expansive and inclusive language received more attention at this Convention than we have ever heard before, and it is clear that such language is a priority heading into this triennium.

B012 As we have reported in previous posts, the 79th General Convention took an important step forward in ensuring that sacramental marriage equality is accessible across the whole church. Several TransEpiscopal members testified at this Convention in its support.

The passage of these resolutions truly sends us out from the 79th General Convention with a sense of elation. We are all making our way forward together in what Presiding Bishop Michael Curry has called the Way of Love.

The Reverend Cameron Partridge, Diocese of California and TransEpiscopal Steering Committee Member

This morning TransEpiscopal attended its first hearing of this General Convention: Legislative Committee #13, scintillatingly titled "Committee to Receive the Report of Resolution A169." Its topic was the possible revision of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer. For a tradition that strongly emphasizes the phrase lex orandi, lex credendi, loosely translated "praying shapes believing," this hearing was highly significant. The Episcopal Church rarely revises its prayer books -- the current one was issued in 1979 after several years of trial use, while the prior prayer book was issued in 1928. Given all that, and given the significant media coverage the issue of gender and prayer book revision has received recently, surprisingly few people attended the hearing. Sixteen people testified. Of those sixteen fourteen spoke in favor of Prayer Book revision while three spoke in favor of embracing the Prayer Book as it stands, or revising it in a more limited, piecemeal manner.     

We spoke in support of three (out of eight resolutions): A068 ("Plan for the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer"), C031 ("Minimize Gendered Language in the BCP"), and D036 ("BCP Revision: Inclusiveness and Expansive Language").

C031 was originally passed by the Episcopal Church in Connecticut at its 2017 Diocesan Convention. It asks that the Prayer Book revision process "amend, as far as is practicable, all gendered references to God, replacing them with gender expansive language." As its explanation stated, the mandate from the 2015 General Convention to present a plan for comprehensive Prayer Book revision (which resulted in resolution A068), opened "an unprecedented opportunity to further our commitment to equality of all genders." The title of the resolution is misleading: this resolution does not call for the minimization of gendered language for God so much as an expansive approach to such imagery. 

D036 begins by emphasizing the "urgent pastoral and evangelical need for revision of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, particularly regarding the use of inclusive and expansive language for humanity and divinity." It also notes right off the bat that this work "began even as the 1979 BCP was being developed." The resolution's explanation gives a fuller description of how this "pastoral and evangelical need" was recognized and addressed by several General Conventions from the 1970s well into the 1990s after the 1979 BCP was released. It calls for the development of a new BCP "to meet the contemporary needs of The Episcopal Church, including employing inclusive and expansive language for humanity and divinity." A proposed revision of the BCP for trial use is to be ready no later than the 81st General Convention -- two GCs (six years) from now.  
 
A068 is one of two resolutions proposed by the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music. A069 called for embracing at greater depth the Prayer Book we already have, while A068 calls for its full revision. Three speakers spoke in support of A068 from a trans and/or nonbinary point of view. We referenced the long-recognized androcentric and eurocentric imagery and language that pervades the 1979 BCP and we emphasized how binary its language remains. Gratifyingly, several other speakers also referenced the problem of how binary language erases the lived reality of nonbinary identified people.
 
We also acknowledged the beauty and reverence of Prayer Book language. I, for one, spoke of having grown up in a parish that was strongly opposed to the 1979 Prayer Book and continued to use the 1928 Prayer Book at its principal worship through the 1980s. As a result of that experience, I grew up steeped in the deep significance of patterned, common prayer, aware of how profoundly language matters, how it can touch people at a very deep level. I was aware that changing liturgical language can be fraught. At the same time, given how deeply impactful liturgical language can be, I was also aware that when the language of worship feels like it is missing the mark, its reverberations can be alienating. There were aspects of the 1928 BCP that I grew to love (e.g. the post communion prayer reproduced in Rite I, p. 339). Yet I also grew to feel strongly constrained and alienated by its androcentric language, particularly (though not only) its he/him/his pronoun usage. I have known a number of students over the years, particularly in my previous divinity school context, who loved the Rite I language of the BCP. On the whole, in the campus ministry and divinity school contexts I served previously, and even more so in the parish I serve now, Rite II and the supplemental texts developed after the '79 BCP, Enriching Our Worship, resonate much more strongly. Yet in almost all of our authorized texts some sort of language revision is necessary to keep the language from being exclusively binary. Regularly our worship language reinforces the idea that there are only men or women and that anyone who identifies as neither male nor female simply does not exist. Too many times I have heard the frustration, the deep pain, of nonbinary identified Episcopalians, their sense of being erased by the language of our worship. Our worship language matters in ways we may not fully realize.
 
Let me also add here: I have heard this pain from non-binary lovers of Rite I, from Evensong enthusiasts, from devotees of the Daily Office. The call for Prayer Book revision need not oppose such facets of Episcopal worship. In several comments from those opposed to BCP revision I have heard a concern that Rite I in particular would necessarily be removed. On the whole I'm not a huge fan of Rite I at this point in my life, but I have no need to see it removed from a revised BCP, knowing that many people highly value it. I also appreciate the daily office and would love to see it further developed within the continued principal emphasis on Eucharist. I would especially love to see a revised Prayer Book do more to elevate the seasons of the Christian liturgical year.
 
Prayer book revision is a very expensive undertaking, and for many this factor will be where the rubber meets the road. Yet it's not going to get less expensive as time goes on. Nor do I believe that declaring we will embrace the Prayer Book now will make us any more resolved to revise it in three, six, or even twelve years, as one commentator seemed to suggest this morning. It is past time we got on with thoughtfully and prayerfully revising this critical source of our ongoing formation as Christians, as followers of Jesus, as members of Christ's body in this world.

- The Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge
Diocese of California and TransEpiscopal Steering Committee Member 

by the Revd Dr. Cameron Partridge

What a whirlwind the last couple of days at General Convention have been. Friday the news of the Supreme Court’s decision blew through Convention like wildfire. People are absolutely jubilant. And then yesterday Bishop Michael Curry of North Carolina was elected the next Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church on a landslide, first ballot vote. He follows Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori as a pioneer: she has been the first woman elected to this position, while he is the first African American. He is an firey, articulate preacher and evangelist, the kind of inspiring leader you want to get up and follow to the ends of the earth. Yesterday the House of Deputies also discussed C019 “Establish Response to Systemic Racial Injustice”. As Deputy Jennifer Baskerville Burrows wrote, “To hear a white member of the [Social Justice and U.S. Policy] committee say words to the effect of, “we have the chance to make race the centerpiece of the next triennium” signals a shift.  If funded, resolution C019 will put real muscle (to the tune of $1.2 million) behind the work of racial reconciliation for both justice and mission strategy.”

Amid this intense, spirited movement, two of the resolutions that TransEpiscopal has been particularly tracking have also made their way through the open hearing process.

D037 came first. This is the resolution that calls for a study of the canons to clarify that and/or how people who have legally changed their name(s) can have their names amended in church records and registries and church certificates reissued. It came to the committee on Governance and Structure last night amid several other complex resolutions on the possibilities of restructuring aspects of our Church’s governance. To begin, the chaplain of the committee lead us in prayer and a hymn, one of my favorites: “God is love and where true love is, God [Godself] is there.” When our resolution came up, something like six or seven of us testified in support of it. No one testified against. We told stories of how we or people we know have been impacted in our full access to the life of the Church by not being able to change records in a consistent way, or to have certificates reissued. After we were finished, a number of deputies and bishops came up to us, thanking us for our testimony. As the Structure committee sifts through all the complexities of the restructuring resolutions, our stories were, as one committee member later related to me, very straight forward and incarnational. We hope it moves out of committee and to one of the houses quickly.

Then twelve hours later, at 7:30 this morning, we gathered again to testify in support of D036. This resolution, on “Adding a Name Change Liturgy to the Book of Occasional Services”, came to the Committee on Prayerbook and Liturgy. Once again we began and ended with prayer and song, and once more we had a great group of people prepared to testify. I am hoping that some of these folks will write about their experiences as well. I lead off my own testimony by recounting an experience I had in 2001 when I first claimed my name. I described how I passed a difficult night, sharing the name Cameron with loved ones. When I went to church the following morning and was asked to do the first reading, I had been stunned to find myself standing before the congregation reading the story of Jacob wrestling with the divine stranger who then gave him the name Israel. Flash forward several years, my testimony continued, to my years in parish ministry in which I had a trans parishioner who wanted to take on his chosen name in the context of the congregation. And so I put together a rite as a component of the Sunday liturgy, drawing in part upon the name change rite in Changes: Prayers and Services Honoring Rites of Passage that is the subject of D036. To be able to take up one’s name in the midst of one’s congregation, to be named and seen in that way, can be a profound recognition of the deep spiritual significance of embodying one’s name, I concluded. I was also struck that in addition to the other trans folks who testified—and, again, there were several powerful speakers – there were non trans ones as well, lifting up the flexibility of this resource to be used by many people. These were folks in a religious order who talked about the possibilities of claiming a new name in connection with religious life. This rite is additionally applicable to situations like adoption or divorce/remarriage. I especially appreciate that this resource came out of indigenous Episcopal congregations, communities that have long recognized the spiritual significance of names and particularly of taking on a new name later in life.

We now wait for D036 and D037 to go to their houses of origin. The name change liturgy resolution should first travel to the House of Bishops, while the name change canon study resolution should head to the House of Deputies. Meanwhile a number of resolutions related to liturgical marriage equality are coming forward to the Houses of Bishops and Deputies as well. Stay tuned on all of these fronts.

Amid all of this, the hymn from the beginning of the D037 hearing continues to echo in my ears: God is love and where true love is, God Godself is there.

by the Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge

This post forms the second in a series about the history of TransEpiscopal’s legislative efforts at the General Convention of The Episcopal Church, as we head to the 78th General Convention at the end of June. 

After our first effort at GC legislative advocacy in 2006 (described here) we realized that we needed to bring a team. We also experienced the power of working in coalition. In 2007 we had become members of the Consultation, “a collaboration of progressive organizations within the Episcopal Church that partner to work for social justice.” Even as we attended GC with our own focus, we also collaborated with the nine other member groups of the Consultation. The key to TransEpiscopal’s work lay not in lifting up any one particular voice or having any one specific spokesperson, but rather in operating collectively and intersectionally. We chose to work this way out of respect for the varied experiences and identities within our own communities and in recognition that we are not alone in being impacted by oppressive social structures. Thus far we have emphasized collegiality, respect, shared resources, variously offered gifts and talents, and collective determination. TransEpiscopal has never had a president, has never had elected positions. Perhaps someday a different structure will make more sense for us. Perhaps not. 

Coming into the 76th General Convention in Anaheim, we were expecting four transgender-themed resolutions amid a much greater number related to liturgical blessings for same sex couples and overturning the (ambiguous) moratorium on openly gay bishops. Some of our targeted resolutions sought to put the Episcopal Church on record in support of secular transgender nondiscrimination legislation, while others sought to amend our own canons in support of trans equality within TEC. Never before had a group of trans Episcopalians organized ourselves to testify at the committee hearings to where these resolutions had been directed. Never before had there been an openly trans Deputy to General Convention, which we gained in Dante Tavolaro of Rhode Island. With growing excitement, we made our way through Convention. To get a flavor for our energy, see this early blog post about the intense opening days of Convention or this one in which I raced up and down the escalators between the House of Bishops and Deputies meetings; this testimony from Dante Tavolaro from the floor of the House of Deputies; this progress report from Michelle Hansen; this recorded testimony from Gari Green or from Vicki Gray.

After all was said and done, the 2009 General Convention passed four trans-themed resolutions: 

by the Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge

TransEpiscopal looks forward to being at the 78th triennial General Convention of The Episcopal Church in Salt Lake City June 25-July 3. There, as in the past several years, we aim to collaborate with several groups and individuals to continue being agents of transformation in and through the Episcopal Church, that trans folks – and indeed all people--  might be empowered in and by this Church to be the people God is calling us to become. Already we have come a very long way, even as significant work remains to be done.

As we turn toward Salt Lake City, we wanted to take a moment—a few posts—to recall the history of TransEpiscopal’s legislative advocacy at GC. 

TransEpiscopal’s first such effort was about a year after our founding, in 2006 at the 75th Convention in Columbus, Ohio. This was an especially intense, emotional Convention. The House of Bishops elected The Episcopal Church’s first ever woman Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori. The Convention rejected a resolution that intended to place a moratorium on openly gay bishops, three years after Bishop Gene Robinson had been consecrated in New Hampshire (A161 which can be found here). And then, not long after that rejection, the Convention passed a slightly different version of that resolution (B033) which essentially sought to do the same thing with vaguer language (which was later essentially overturned at the GC of 2009). The GC of 2006 was incredibly difficult, especially for LGBT people. 

Amid all this, there wasn’t much awareness of or advocacy for trans people in The Episcopal Church or, really, much specific language to help name our experiences and identities. Take, for instance, the difficulty of even locating a digital record of the one resolution touching on trans people in the life of the church that did, in fact, come before the 2006 General Convention: resolution C030. This resolution, which originated in the Diocese of California, sought to do what the 77th General Convention eventually did in 2012: to add “gender identity and expression” to the nondiscrimination language in Canon III.1.2, on access to the discernment process toward ordained ministry. You can find its legislative record here.  Here is an image of it as well. 
​
Once recognized by the General Convention, and given a number (C030), the resolution got referred to the Committee on Canons. When that committee held a hearing on this and its other resolutions, TransEpiscopal’s founding member Donna Cartwright testified in its support. Donna had driven on her own to General Convention and was a lone voice speaking out in support of this resolution. As the legislative history reports, the committee ultimately “presented its Report #14 on Resolution C030 (Amend Canons: Title III, Canon 1, Section 2) recommending discharge, and re-referral of the resolution to the Committee on Ministry.” This decision was communicated to the House of Bishops. But this sentence really tells the story: “Resolution Died With Adjournment.” Or better, as the abstract of C030 puts it, “The 75th General Convention rejects a resolution to amend Canon III.1.2 regarding access to the discernment process.”

The funny thing about this is that for years several of us have been trying to locate a digital record—or, really, any official record—of this experience that Donna Cartwright had shared with us as it was happening. It felt important, a kind of signpost saying we were there. But none of the key terms – words like “transgender” or “gender identity” or even just “gender” – were generating anything in the digital archives. What ultimately did lead to its location, finally, was an advanced search targeting the year 2006 and typing the word “rejected” under “Action taken.” Among the sixty-six other rejected resolutions, C030 was easy to pick out. In other posts, narrating other encounters at later GCs, we have commented on the importance of naming, of specificity. Without that naming, even as language can still so often fall short, it can be easy to lose traces of our histories, to forget aspects of our journey. 

But, in the person of Donna, we were indeed there, and we knew we needed to return in greater numbers. And so, in 2009, we did….

Today the world lost a remarkable woman named Louise Brooks. I knew her through The Episcopal Church’s LGBT advocacy organization IntegrityUSA, for which Louise was the communications director over the last several years. She brought to that role a long career as a documentary film-maker, journalist, activist and media-consultant. Together with her wife, Integrity’s most recent president emerita the Reverend Canon Susan Russell, Louise brought impressive media sophistication to the organization’s communications.

I first met Louise in the summer of 2007 when I joined a number of LGBT and allied Episcopalians at a New York City roundtable as part of the Anglican Communion Listening Process on sexuality. As I pulled up a chair to this proverbial table, Louise was among a cadre of formidable folks who welcomed me warmly. I saw Louise the following summer at the “Fringe Festival” of the Lambeth Conference (the decennial gathering of bishops from around the Anglican Communion), and then a year later at the 2009 General Convention of The Episcopal Church. It was there that we began talking more, and that the seeds were sown for what turned out to be – as far as I know – her last film project: Voices of Witness Out of the Box.

For the first time in 2009, Integrity and TransEpiscopal had brought several volunteers to the Convention to do advocacy and education on trans equality. As part of that effort, Dante Tavolaro (Deputy from the Diocese of Rhode Island in both 2009 and 2012) and I led a “Trans 101” for the combined Integrity/TransEpiscopal team (you can catch bits of it in the video posted below). About thirty or so people, including Louise, gathered in Integrity’s meeting room as Dante sketched out a simple grid or set of rules that went like this: in the West or Global North we’re assigned a sex at birth, either male or female; males are expected to grow up to be men, to “act like men”, and to date women. Those born female are expected to become women, to “act like women”, and to date men. There are many ways to violate these rules. To not act “like a man” or “like a woman” in your given context, to date people of your same sex, or to transition are just a few.  Gender theorists call this set of rules “heteronormativity.” Christian theologians call it “complementarity.” Louise called it “the box.”  

As she put it in this May 15th preview, Louise left the 2009 General Convention committed to bringing this conversation, trans voices, and “the box” idea itself to the wider church.

About six months after GenCon 2009, Louise called me up to explore the idea for the documentary. Could Integrity and TransEpiscopal work together on a film that showed not only how transgender people are “out of the box” but also — at least implicitly – how many other, nontrans people are out of it as well? This film could convey both difference and connection—that trans people have different challenges than nontrans people do and at the same time that what can make life difficult for us also impacts everyone else. We all live with the pervasive influence of that box which, crucially, intersects and assembles anew in conjunction with race, class, ability, and national origin. We are connected in our struggle, even as we struggle in distinct ways. 

As Louise ultimately described the project, "Gender identity and gender expression are issues that can easily be misunderstood and cannot be wrapped up in a neat little box. So the goal of Out of the Box was to answer some of the most frequently asked questions.” The simplicity of “the box” pointed to, opened – but did not seek to plumb – the complexity underlying it.

We talked and emailed about the film at several points between 2010 and last winter. When I learned that Louise was ill, I suspected the film would need to go on hold, perhaps indefinitely. But then, seemingly out of nowhere, Out of the Box roared to life. In early February I flew out to Los Angeles for a day of filming.  Louise seemed totally in her element. She was fatigued but connected and absolutely focused. In between the interviews we talked about the upcoming General Convention and about Macky Allston’s powerful film Love Free Or Die that had just been released. I was honored and grateful to be part of this work, curious and excited about its potential impact.

What I hadn’t realized was just how steeped in transformation this film was from the start. Shortly after its release on May 31st, I saw a HufPo blog post by Louise’s wife (and major Out of the Box supporter) Susan Russell. Susan explained, “what we found in Anaheim in 2009 was that the presence of members of TransEpiscopal testifying in committee hearings, participating in round-table discussions, speaking their truth, and sharing their lives created a profoundly teachable moment that quite literally changed lives.”  But what really struck me was the next sentence: “And one of those was my wife.” “Now,” Susan continued, “I have a hard-and-fast rule to never blog about my wife, but this blog is going to be the exception that proves the rule. A long-time activist, journalist, documentarian, and media consultant, Louise was convinced that gay, lesbian, and bisexual equality was a hard enough row to hoe without adding the ‘T’ into the mix. ‘Let's fight one battle at a time’ pretty much summed up her position -- that is, until the 2009 General Convention and the powerful witness of the transgender folk who so courageously shared their stories, their experience, their journeys, and their reality with her. She left Anaheim committed to finding a way to get their voices out beyond the relatively small audience of an Episcopal General Convention team -- and the idea for the documentary film project Voices of Witness: Out of the Box was born.”

I read that and was speechless. It’s one thing to talk about transformation – I hear the word all the time, and I preach it, too – but seeing it, hearing an authentic story of it, experiencing it just takes my breath away. I had not understood what a profound impact we had had on Louise.

But in retrospect, as I contemplated Susan’s words, it made sense. Or at least, it explained more fully the deep sense of connection, the passion with which Louise pursued this project. It very clearly mattered to her at a deep level. When she said she was making the film as a gift to the church, you could tell she really meant it. And it truly was.  

I was concerned to learn that Louise was too ill to attend General Convention this past July, but I was far from surprised that she was present all the same. She was on the phone with the communications team every day. She was making things happen. We were all pulling for her, and she was most certainly pulling for us.  

You hear a lot of people described as “fighter.” “He/she was a fighter.” I am not someone who knew Louise from Adam, but it seems clear to me that she was indeed a fighter. She fought for me and so many others.  But there was a heck of a lot more to Louise than that, and I don’t know even a quarter of it. What I do know, though, is that Louise was a woman of profound compassion, open to being transformed, and passionate about opening that process to others. 

I will always be grateful for her support and solidarity, and my heart is with Susan Russell, with All Saints Pasadena, and IntegrityUSA in this time of loss. May light perpetual shine on Louise.

- The Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge

And it’s a wrap.  General Convention 2012 is now one for the history books.

From my perch here on my last night in this Indianapolis hotel room, I am struck by a combination of wonder, gratitude and just plain exhaustion.  This church has done so much over the last couple of weeks, and they’ve also been long.

And in that spirit of Eucharist – of thanksgiving – and of the comfort and challenge communion offers, I offer a couple of snapshops from my experience of two communion services in the latter part of Convention:  The Integrity Eucharist and the TransEpiscopal Eucharist.

It was a huge honor to serve alongside Bishop Mary Glasspool, Bishop Gene Robinson, and Deacon Carolyn Woodall in the service.  And words cannot describe the emotion of the evening, which was a capstone to the passage of resolutions D019 and D002 earlier that day. The crowd of 1600 was positively elated.  Members of the TransEpiscopal team sat in seats of honor in the front row.  I have no words for how I felt looking out from the platform, seeing both longstanding TransEpiscopal teammates and newer members, several of whom are mentees (or, as became our GC joke, padawans…) and friends from Massachusetts.  I was particularly proud of our young adult presence this year.  There they all were being preached to, directly, by +Gene Robinson, who emphasized again and again, “we were meant to live in tents.”  

Referencing the nomadic life of Abraham and Sarah, he underscored how we should expect to be on the move, to be challenged, to grow comfortable with new understanding and then to be challenged yet again.  This is the work of the Spirit, +Gene preached, the Spirit that continues to flow among us, opening us to truths that Jesus told us we could not yet bear.  As John 16:12-13 puts it, “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all truth.”  This has become one of my favorite passages over the last several years, particularly since I began working in earnest on trans issues in the church.  It's obviously one of +Gene’s favorites as well.  

The following day the House of Deputies debated one of the major LGBT related resolutions of General Convention, #A049, which authorized a blessing of same sex couples that was developed over the previous triennium.  It, too, passed in a landslide.  It was a huge moment for a church that does so much of its theology through its liturgical practice and development.  It is one thing for couples to already be able to receive a blessing—or even to have their marriage solemnized in church, as Bishop Shaw authorizes clergy to do in the Diocese of Massachusetts—but it is another thing for The Episcopal Church to officially authorize a blessing rite. 

Meanwhile, TransEpiscopal was preparing for another Eucharist.  Today I noticed a tweet from someone that read, “I hesitate to ask, but what is a TransEpiscopal Eucharist”?  In short, it was a service of Communion organized and lead by members of TransEpiscopal to which all were invited.  We came into the 2009 Convention with no plans for such a service, but were persuaded by friends within TransEpiscopal, Integrity, and the Episcopal Women’s Caucus to gather in that way.  In 2009 it was small—maybe twenty people – but very powerful.  We gathered in a circle around a table at the back of Integrity’s conference room, shared scripture readings, a group reflection, and the holy gifts of bread and wine.  At one point, someone held up a camera and snapped a photo that conveys well the service’s intimate feel.  

This year we decided to do a service again, planning the liturgy more in advance yet still leaving plenty of room for the Spirit to move our preparations.  As Iain Stanford and I finished putting the liturgy together in Integrity’s nerve center, the debate in the House of Deputies on the blessing liturgy was live streaming.  The liturgy passed just as we finished our work.  What a day!

As it so happened, our openness to the Spirit’s blowing allowed us to transform the service into a combination of both Baptism and Eucharist.  One of the totally unexpected delights of the Convention was meeting a genderqueer identified transman who, it turns out, came into Convention considering baptism.  TransEpiscopal volunteers instantly bonded with him, grafting him into the team.  And when Elizabeth Kaeton, President  of the Episcopal Women’s Caucus, baptized another General Convention attendee in the hotel fountain earlier this week, our new friend wondered whether he too might take this step here, rather than back in his home state.  Several long, inspired conversations later, it was apparent that the TransEpiscopal Eucharist was the perfect context for this moment. 

I had never had the privilege of doing an adult baptism before, nor had I baptized someone from the trans community.  This was a truly holy moment.  It also followed a long period of reflection—in place of a sermon—in which nearly all of the forty or so gathered people participated.  There was such joy, love, wonder in that room.  It was such a privilege to see the various roles played by both clergy and laity, trans and allied.  As Rev. Carla Robinson invited us, we all shared the bread and wine with one another, a fitting follow-up to the renewal of our baptismal covenants.  We were living fully into our membership in this one body—this changing, challenging body—and not simply our own, there in the Integrity meeting room, but that of the wider convention, of the wider church.  
 
As we come to the end of this powerful Convention, we stand at a kind of commencement.  An ending/beginning.  We are stepping into a new chapter in the life of The Episcopal Church.  TransEpiscopal’s and IntegrityUSA’s prioritized resolutions were and are part of something much larger.  

+Gene Robinson told us, “we were meant to live in tents.”  Yet even tents can perhaps prove  too constraining.  On the Transfiguration Mount where Peter, James and John beheld the already/not yet resurrected Christ, Peter’s impulse was to “make three booths” or “dwellings,” to try to pin Jesus down, to pitch his tent among us and stay for a while.  A long while.  But we weren’t meant to stay on that mount forever.  We were meant to travel back down, to walk through unforeseen valleys and reach the other side.

We were meant to be transfigured.

- The Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge

Yesterday was an historic day, as theHouse of Bishops voted in favor of all three of the resolutions that take upgender identity and expression.

As yesterday’s blog post left off, we were on the edge ofour seats as the bishops began their afternoon session.  

At the conclusion of the morning session, Rev. Stephanie Spellers, a priest from my diocese (though soon to be of the Diocese of LongIsland) and one of the chaplains to the Bishops, had preached on one of the textsassigned for the day: Romans 8:18-27. From the lectern at the front of the room, she read it out deliberately:

I consider that thesufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory about tobe revealed to us. For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealingof the children of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not of itsown will but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creationitself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedomof the glory of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has beengroaning in labour pains until now; and not only the creation, but weourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly while wewait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies. For in hope we were saved. Nowhope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what is seen? But if we hopefor what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.

She paused for several seconds before continuing:

Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but that very Spirit intercedes with sighs too deep for words. And God, who searches the heart, knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.

She went on to talk about our groaning as a church. We should not mistake this groaning simply for suffering, though it does indeed signal pain. Yet it signals something much larger: rebirth.  We should not lose hope in the midst of our process, our transition, our rebirth.  As I tweeted: 

#GC77 Stephanie Spellers 'this groaning that you hear' is church being reborn. 'You would notbe sitting here now unless u believed it.' 

We would not have been sitting there, would not still beworking here now, unless we believed it.

And, again:

#GC77 Stephanie Spellers: 'we are walking together in the space between.'#TransEpiscopal  

Walking together in the space between—she could not have spoken more directly to my experience as a trans person had she been trying.  And yet the beauty ofthese words were that they spoke both to my experience and to that of the church in its liminal, in-between location right now.  That’s a connection I tried to name in the panel after Integrity’s showing of Out of the Box several days ago—as a trans person I feel like the place in which the church stands poised, forging its way forward into uncharted terrain, is familiar territory.  It was so powerful tohear it from my friend Stephanie, and to hear it shared with the bishops I knowshe is so honored to support.

What amazing, nourishing preaching we have heard these last several days. Truly food for thejourney, for all of us.

So, after posting the “Edge of Our Seats” blog entry, I headed to the House of Bishops and took a seat in the gallery.  It took about a half hour for D002 tocome up.  The text is the same asthe 2009 resolution (C061).  I had told my spouse and a friend I would text them as soon as debate began so they could watch comments on the GC#77 Twitter feed.  So at 3:35pm when Bishop Mary Gray Reeves of the Ministry Committee presented D002 with a recommendation of passage, I texted a single word: “Now!!”

At 3:36 I then tweeted:  

#GC77 D002 Bp Douglas speaking re: transgender res

At 3:38:

#GC77 Gene Robinson speaking in favor of D002 Trans nondiscrimination res

At 3:39:

#GC77 Mark Andrus speaking in favor of D002

At 3:41:

#GC77 Chet Talton of San Joaquin speaking in favor of D002, referencing ordination of a trans woman that he recently did

At 3:43:

#GC77 Bishop Love of Albany wants to know what 'gender expression' means. PB responds, how gender isexpressed in world. Thank you PB!

And again at 3:43:

#GC77 Texas seeks to end debate

And then:

#GC77 it passed!!!D002

I turned around in my seat and locked eyes with my TransEpiscopal colleagues seated behind me.  Big smiles and weepy eyes.

Several things struck me right off the bat.  First, that those in favor of the resolution were clearly ready to speak. Bishop Ian Douglas referenced the hard educating work he engaged in three years ago on the World Mission committee, to which C061 was sent last time.  He explained what gender identity and expression meant, and how his daughter’s generation seemed more familiar and comfortable with transgender people than perhaps people of older generations knew.  Bishop Robinson reiterated the strong support for the trans community that I have heard him share in numerous venues recently. Bishop Andrus spoke of how his diocese has ordained a trans woman to the diaconate who is passionate in her work for peace and justice (Vicki Gray, who has posted in this space before and is here as an alternate Deputy from DioCal).  Bishop Chet Talton shared how his diocese has recently ordained a highly qualified Deacon (Carolyn Woodall, who is also here at GC, volunteering with IntegrityUSA) and how he sees other transgender people in congregations around the diocese of San Joaquin.  When Bishop Love of Albany spoke, I was struck that he asked the same question I recall him asking three years ago, namely what “gender expression” is. There seemed to be some concern that it might be code for sexual activity.  After Bishop Love’s question, the Presiding Bishop asked if someone would like to respond.  A long pause ensued. Just as I started to worry that no one would respond, the Presiding Bishop herself leaned forward into the mike and explained that gender expression is simply how your gender is expressed in the world.  I was so grateful that Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori was willing to offer that simple, straight forward definition.  Right afterward, thebishop of Texas called the question and the vote was taken.

Discussion had taken eight minutes, and D002 passed on avoice vote by a large margin—I would put it at 3/4 or perhaps 2/3 in favor.

The D019 debate then followed directly.  Once more, starting at 3:45pm I tweeted:

#GC77 now onto D019.Beckwith speaking of his experience in All Saints Worcester. Bishop Shawspeaking in favor

At 3:46:

#GC77 South Carolina speaking against D019. Referencing 'gender expression', says Wikipedia definedgender expression as all over the map

At 3:49:

#GC77 Rochester, Bishop Singh, speaking of experience of living in liminal space; opportunity to engage liminal embodiment as a church

Again, at 3:49:

#GC77 Gene Robinsonspeaking in support if D019; addressing 'gender expression'

At 3:50:

#GC77 Lawrence of South Carolina speaking against

At 3:52:

#GC77 Bishop Andrus'when we have confusion about a group' that is precisely a reason to protectthem

And then at 3:53:

#GC77 bishops passD019!!

Once again, debate and passage had taken eight minutes.

What immediately struck me was how there was more resistance to this resolution about access of the laity to the life of the church than there had been to the resolution about access to the ordination process.  Perhaps that is because there is less opportunity to regulate the laity, as a colleague here pointed out—people in the ordination process have to pass through many steps (including psychological testing).  My own sense, however, is that the conversation about D019 was a continuation of the earlier one on D002.  Bishop Lawrence of South Carolina, for instance, continued to push on the question about “gender expression.”  And I didn’t tweet it, but here again the Presiding Bishop intervened when Bishop Lawrence made a statement about gender expression relating to same sex relationships and sexuality more broadly.  “we aren’t talking about relationships at all,” she said.  “We’re talking about individuals here.”  

My bishop, Tom Shaw, spoke in favor, referencing the way in which we in the Diocese of Massachusetts have been able to reach out to the trans community and advocate in favor of transgender nondiscrimination legislation at the state level.  It meant so much to hear him say that, as I’ve been walking with him in this work for a number of years now.

Bishop Beckwith of Newark spoke of his experience as a rector at All Saints in Worcester, in the Diocese of Western Massachusetts, where the transition of a trans man was moving not only for him but for the congregation as a whole.  I know the folks to whom he was referring, and I was moved to hear this witness.

Bishop Singh of the Diocese of Rochester made a strong connection between trans embodiment and his experience of liminality—of being perceived as an American in India and an Indian in America—of being bi-cultural.  He asked us to consider how the church’s own multiple identities, its threshold identity, could be deepened through our conversation about trans embodiment.  This comment spoke so directly to themes close to my heart, my ministry and teaching, that I was essentially sitting there in an excited vibrational state.  That this conversation could point toward the deep theological significance of this vote, and this conversation, not simply for trans people but for the church more broadly, left me truly excited and full of hope.

When the vote was taken, once more it passed by a significant majority.

TransEpiscopal members and our allies gathered outside the gallery after the House went into recess and gave each other huge hugs.  This was a major step. 

As we stood in the hallways, we learned that D022, the resolution calling for a Churchwide Response to Bullying, had passed the House of Bishops.  I was surprised that it had come up so quickly, since the hearings had been a day apart. But there it was, another major step forward.

Now we wait for the House of Deputies to take up all three resolutions.  It could happen latetoday, but most likely tomorrow (July 9). We are halfway there.

- The Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge   

 We’re now on the edge of our seats waiting for resolutions D002 and D019 – the transgender nondiscrimination resolutions – to come to the floor of the House of Bishops (HoB). Since the Ministry Committee passed these two days ago we have been waiting for them to turn up in the HoB—they are on the supplemental calendar for day 2, and since the Bishops are a bit behind in their calendar, they haven’t come up quite yet. TransEpiscopalians sat in the HoB gallery last night and this morning, and will be back when the bishops go into open session at about 3:15pm.

Our work here has been buoyed by some wonderfulpreaching.  Yesterday Bonnie Anderson, President of the House of Deputies, preached an inspiring sermon based on the readings for the feast day of the martyred Czeck Reformer John Huss (c. 1369 – 6 July 1415).  You can watch the video and see the text here.  Her theme was courage:

“Courage animates all our virtues-honesty, confidence, humility, compassion, integrity, valor. Without courage, all these virtues lie dormant. There is no prescription for teaching courage. You may have noticed that courage 101 is not taught in school, or even in college, or even in seminary.”

She continued, 

“I can vividly remember the first time I stood up for something. I bet you can too. That memory becomes the story of a defining moment that is incorporated into our spiritual selves and becomes a cornerstone of our morality or our moral courage. If we are to reflect on our life, each of us can probably name today, events and people who helped to shape our moral courage. Moral courage defines us at our core and prompts us to act in spite offear.”

I left the service strengthened for the day ahead.  As we did yesterday, several of us readied ourselves to testify at a committee hearing.  This time it was D022, a “Churchwide Response to Bullying.”  I spoke in support of it in my capacity as an Episcopal Campus Minister.  Before the day was out, the committee had reported it out tothe House of Bishops.

Then this morning Bishop Michael Curry of the Diocese of North Carolina, assigned the lection in celebration of the life of the novelist and abolitionist Harriet Beecher Stowe, preached a soul-stirring sermon on how being a prophetic Christian requires a certain kind of insanity. Watch and/or read it here.  Citing the gospel passage from June 10th(Mark 3:20-35) in which Jesus’ family comes to find him and declares him “out of his mind,” Bishop Curry proclaimed, 

“forgive me for saying it this way,but Jesus was, and is, crazy! And those who would follow him, those who would be his disciples, those who would live as and be the people of the Way, are called and summoned and challenged to be just as crazy as Jesus. So I want to speak on the subject, ‘We Need Some Crazy Christians.’”

I couldn’t help myself—I just had to tweet, to share, what I was hearing.  Over the next several minutes my twitter account posted:

·     #GC77 nervous re: voting on #Trans people in ordained & lay ministry? remember this morning's sermon: 'we need some*crazy* Christians.'

·     #GC77 Rt Rev Curry preaches it in a.m.Eucharist: 'we are called to be *different*'. #TransEpiscopal

·     Bp Michael Curry: 'We need some *crazy* Christians to change this world in the name of Jesus.'... 'Think different.'#GC77

·     'the ones crazy enough to think they can changethe world do.' May this Convention be transfigured by the Bps witness #GC77

And all of this crazy talk made me free associate:

·     As Seal put it, 'cuz we're never gonna survive unless we get a little crazy' #GC77 #TransEpiscopal

I haven’t been able to get the Seal song out of my headsince (and now it’s in yours… sorry).

After the service I flipped over my name tag and wrote 

*Crazy* Christian

As I left the worship space I found myself wondering, will the bishops make the connection between Bishop Curry’s inspiring message and the trans nondiscrimination resolutions? Are they willing to be “crazy” enough – as some may well deem them within this church and beyond– to embrace the ministries of its transgender members, lay and ordained? Are they willing to take that leap?

This morning TransEpiscopal members and supporters sat inthe HoB gallery. The bishops did not quite get to our resolutions, but we return to the gallery now with hope in our hearts.

- The Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge

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.

- The Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge

General Convention 2012: Off and Running
The TransEpiscopal team has hit the ground running here at The Episcopal Church’s 77th General Convention in steamy Indianapolis.  Most of us arrived on Monday, and yesterday was a day of joy and discovery, as many people who knew each other only online finally got to meet in person.  For the first time we have our own booth in the Convention exhibit hall, and over the last two days we have been meeting people from across the church in that space.  As in 2009, I am so struck by the sense of interconnection, and especially the unexpected ways that people from all across the church are connected specifically to trans people.

Yesterday I met a priest from a Midwestern diocese who had watched the documentary Out of the Box last Saturday evening.  She was moved to make a connection in her sermon between the gospel passage last Sunday and the idea of being and acting “out of the box.”  She talked about how our church would be looking at resolutions adding “gender identity and expression” to the church’s nondiscrimination canons here at General Convention.  Two parishioners then thanked her for her words and shared that each of them were parents of transgender people.  This was the second instance of a priest I know preaching about transgender equality this past Sunday.

The other one was a friend in Massachusetts where our state nondiscrimination law just went into effect on Sunday.  I was moved to see coverage of this law in a headline at the top of the Boston Globe metro section as I flew to Indianapolis Monday morning.  The sense of celebration and of momentum coming into General Convention has been powerful.

There are three resolutions that TransEpiscopal is supporting along with our coalition partners in IntegrityUSA, the Consultation, and the Chicago Consultation:

D002 “Affirming Access to the Discernment Process for Ministry”

This resolution would add “gender identity and expression” to Canon 3.1.2, the church’s nondiscrimination canon for access to the ordination process.  This addition would make explicit that ordained ministry is open to transgender people. 

D019 “Amend Canon I.17.5 - Extending the Rights of Laity”

This resolution would add “gender identity and expression” to Canon 1.17.5, the church’s nondiscrimination canon for access of lay people to all levels of the life of the church.

D022 “Church wide Response to Bullying”

This resolution calls for a church wide response to the epidemic of bullying, including those targeted because of their gender identity or gender expression.

D002 and D019 were assigned to the Ministry Committee, and hearings on them will take place tomorrow at 2pm.  TransEpiscopal members and allies are preparing now to testify.  Once the hearings take place, the committee has to decide whether to send them along to one of the two Houses in The Episcopal Church’s bicameral system.  So stay tuned for more on that front, as well as the fate of D022, the resolution on bullying.

Meanwhile, today has been packed with hearings on various other numerous resolutions, including marriage equality, the impact of DOMA on couples with an immigrant member, and many, many more.  
  
This afternoon, I was joined by Rev. Dr. Christina Beardsley (of Changing Attutude) at the Consultation’s Speaker’s Corner in the exhibit hall. We gave an overview of the trans-related resolutions before us, and the broader context for movement on trans equality in the Episcopal Church and Anglican Communion.  We emphasized that the last General Convention passed four transgender supportive resolutions, falling short only on C061, now called D002.  Tina also spoke about the longstanding presence of transgender clergy in the Church of England, as well as the collaborative work that has been taking place between various "LGB and T"(as she puts it) and allied groups.

Between the end of the Speaker’s Corner and Integrity’s double feature of Out of the Box and Love Free Or Die, we learned that resolutions D002 and D019 were going to receive a joint hearing tomorrow at 2pm in the Ministry Committee.  

With that knowledge, we came into the room packed for the double feature.  Out of the Box had begun when I scooted into a free row to grab a seat.  After sitting down I looked up and realized I was directly behind my bishop Tom Shaw who plays a prominent part in Love Free or Die.  He turned around and grinned at my comment in Out of the Box about my decision to transition feeling like Christmas morning.  I laughed out loud at the scene of him in the water fight.  Seeing each of us up on the big screen was a little surreal.  As Bishop Gene Robinson went on to say in the panel afterward, as difficult a time it is in the life of the church, it is also such an amazing, wondrous time.  What a privilege to be part of this holy work of transformation.

So now at the end of this second full day in Indianapolis, we prepare for our hearing tomorrow.  Please keep us all in your prayers, that minds would be clear and hearts be open.

- The Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge

From Historic Trans ENDA Testimony to the "Stalling" of a 2006 Antibullying Guide in MA  

Today has been a historic day for transgender people in the U.S. Kylar Broadus, founder of the Trans People of Color Coalition, became the first openly transgender person to testify before the U.S. Senate. The subject of his testimony was the Federal Employment Nondiscrimination Act – ENDA — that has been stalled in Congress for several years now. At our last General Convention in 2009, The Episcopal Church passed resolutions D012 and C048, putting us on record in support of an ENDA inclusive of gender identity and expression as well as of sexual orientation. 

In his testimony, video of which can be viewed here, and a transcript of which can be found here, Broadus spoke of his transition (from female to male) as well as his work history. Transition was for him “a matter of living the truth, and sharing the truth with the world, rather than living a lie and pretending to be somebody every day that I was not…. [I decided to] bring my full self to the table and to the world.” 

He explained that as he came into a fuller sense of himself in the late 1980s-early 1990s, his work attire gradually shifted from women’s to men’s business attire, and his haircut significantly shortened. His colleagues treated him well, but within six months of telling management of his decision to transition, he “was ‘constructively discharged’…. While my supervisors could tolerate a somewhat masculine-appearing black woman, they were not prepared to deal with my transition to being a black man.” He concluded stating, “it’s devastating, demoralizing, and dehumanizing to be put in th[e] position” of being denied work because of being trans.

As it also emerged today, the same thing can be said for an anti-bullying guide produced under the Romney administration here in Massachusetts in 2006. The Boston Globe reported this morning: “Former governor Mitt Romney’s administration in 2006 blocked publication of a state antibullying guide for Massachusetts public schools because officials objected to use of the terms ‘bisexual’ and ‘transgender’ in passages about protecting certain students from harassment, according to state records and interviews with current and former state officials.” While at the time aides to the governor publicly attributed the delay to a standard review process, in fact an email from May, 2006 revealed otherwise: “Because this is using the terms ‘bisexual’ and ‘transgendered,’ DPH’s name may not be used in this publication,’’ wrote an official in the Department of Public Health.

In other words, the governor did not want to be associated with a guide for protecting youth who might grow up to be like Kylar Broadus, or any of the participants in Integrity’s new video Voices of Witness: Out of the Box. Gay and lesbian youth might be one thing, but bisexual and transgender youth were something else entirely. 

A year and a half removed from the devastating landslide of LGBT suicides last fall, that covert distancing and delay looks even more unconscionable. This afternoon Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley commented, “For the Romney administration to block a discussion on the impact of bullying on LGBT students was to fail to protect some of our most vulnerable children.’’

As General Convention draws near, one of the major priorities of both TransEpiscopal and IntegrityUSA is for The Episcopal Church to pass a resolution on the problem of LGBT bullying. As Harry Knox recently reported, Integrity will be showing the film "Bullied" on July 8th. Today's Senate testimony and Globe stories underscore the urgency of this work, particularly for bi and trans people, that, as Broadus put it,  all of us might be empowered to "liv[e] the truth and share [that] truth with the world."

​- The Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge

After years of planning, IntegrityUSA, in collaboration with TransEpiscopal, has created the documentary Voices of Witness: Out of the Box.  As Integrity Director of Communications Louise Brooks has described it,

"'Voices of Witness: Out of the Box' is a groundbreaking documentary giving voice to the witness of transgender people of faith courageously telling their stories of hope, healing and wholeness.

"Gender identity and gender expression are issues that can easily be misunderstood and cannot be wrapped up in a neat little box. So the goal of "Out of the Box" was to answer some of the most frequently asked questions. We have been blessed by a truly amazing cloud of witnesses who shared their stories and their lives with us. It has been a privilege to work with them to take this project from a dream to a reality as we offer their voices of witness to the church and to the world." -- Louise Brooks, Executive Producer

As one of the participants in the film I see this as both an intersection and an opening. It is an intersection  of trans people and church-- church as site of ongoing growth and striving, and potential source of empowerment. It is also an opening-- an opening for non-trans folks who have never seriously contemplated trans people before, an opening for trans people who have not been able to imagine church as an empowering communal space, and an opening even of trans narrative itself, a first fruits of a much larger process for all of us of listening to the variety of ways in which we identify and narrate our lives.

A huge thank you to IntegrityUSA, to the entire production team for Out of the Box, and particularly to Louise Brooks, for her incredible work on this beautiful documentary.  Please share widely!

​- The Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge

In a banner week in which the governor of Hawaii signed a workplace nondiscrimination bill into law, and in which the legislature in Nevada is debating a similar measure, the biggest transgender-related news is coming from Chaz Bono. That’s because the documentary about his transition, Becoming Chaz, premiered Tuesday night on the Oprah Winfrey Network, and Chaz has been everywhere this week promoting it.

The few reviews I’ve read have found their way into the film via people other than Chaz. His partner Jennifer has been a fascinating figure for some, and Cher has for others. I haven’t read any reflections on his siblings, but they would be bridge figures for still other viewers of the film like, say, my sister. It makes sense—if you’re not trans (and even if you are), you might have a hard time relating to Chaz, but you could more easily imagine yourself in the position of those who have a relationship with him.  

But as a trans man myself, Chaz was the one on which I knew I would be primarily focused. Because he’s the son of celebrities, having grown up under completely different circumstances than did I or anyone I know, I honestly wasn’t sure how well I would relate. More than that, I was concerned that because of its celebrity connections, this film had the potential to feed into the mass media’s sensationalistic appetites. Given all that, I was fascinated how little this film actually does falls into that trap, and how Chaz and Jenny come across as remarkably down to earth and authentic, very human amid a fair bit of drama. Chaz is very clearly and simply himself, take it or leave it. So too is Jennifer. The two of them have been through a lot both individually and as a couple, and they’re remarkably honest about that.  

I was intrigued — and oddly relieved — to hear that there nevertheless were aspects of the film that stretched their own comfort zones when they saw it after the fact. In the interview with Rosie O’Donnell after the Oprah channel premier, Chaz talked about the difficulty at first of seeing an argument that unfolded over kitchen preparations for Jenny’s graduation party. But then as he watched it again, he came to see the argument as a real portrayal of where he and Jenny were at that moment. That comment to O’Donnell conveyed a revealing sense of perspective, a sense that Chaz knows he was in a different space then and will be in a still different one down the road. Comments like those suggest to me that he takes his “becoming” very seriously, and in a much broader and deeper sense than transition alone.

Chaz has been through some seriously choppy life waters, and while he doesn’t put it this way, his remarks about previous eras of his life suggest that he has had to make a practice of seeking perspective. He has had to make a practice of accepting himself for who he is. When he said at one point that he didn’t want to lose anyone because of his decision to transition but knew that he had to make the decision regardless, I thought, yeah, I know what you’re talking about. You don’t get to a place like that, you don’t arrive at such a crossroad, without having done a ton of work-- discernment. 

I also appreciated how Chaz did not present himself as speaking for every trans man, let alone every trans person. In one scene, as he spoke at what I believe was a Transgender Day of Remembrance event in West Hollywood, I was impressed with the way he got up and described himself as a newcomer to the community, not presuming to speak for others, and acknowledging that tons of organizing and community building had preceded his arrival on the scene, in many ways making that arrival possible.  

That said, there were some assertions in the film with which I disagreed. The misleading graphic listing the side-effects of testosterone failed to distinguish those that affect trans men alone (e.g. the need to monitor liver function) from those that all non trans men have to watch (e.g. cholesterol). I wasn't crazy about the film's repeated use of “breast removal” language; as a result, many reviewers are now using it in a way that can subtly reinforce the judgment that this surgery is merely a form of “amputation” (or, worse, “mutilation"). Simply sticking to the term “chest reconstruction” would have been more straight forward. Chaz also made a few universalizing comments about the relational effects of testosterone, saying things about his insights into male/female difference that reminded me of remarks I once heard on the infamous testosterone episode of This American Life. All I could think was, Stop! Don’t go there! Trans folks don’t know any more about what “really” differentiates the sexes, where “really” means “biologically,” than anyone else. What I think we do have a chance to see at particularly close range is how gender gets culturally organized, how intricately, concretely, differentially, intersectionally each of us is woven into an ever-shifting socio-cultural fabric. 

There is so much more to say about this powerful film—more than I have time to write here. But the final thread I find myself pondering is that of narratives—with what stories we narrate our origins, the origins of our self-awareness, the origins of our decisions. Again and again, we were shown images of Chaz as a child on TV with Sonny and Cher, images that had the effect of asking the viewer to consider the narrative s/he supplied for that child. It makes me wonder, what narratives do we assume or project onto one another? How do we shift those narratives when our expectations are subverted? But that then raises the larger question, how do we narrate change without assuming the process moves in a straight line? There is something crucial about what it is to be human that is captured by Chaz’s process of becoming. Not only does it raise the question of how sexual difference fits into—indeed might change — one’s conception of the human person. It also asks us all, trans and non-trans, to consider how the process of becoming itself, how transformation, grounds and indeed defines our humanity.  

- The Rev'd Dr. Cameron Partridge