Wow, I loved this advise. I found it fascinating how well you understand church politics.

It's also a bit amusing coming from a past column that described the various ways in which gay men have trysts when out on vacation. So bizarre! ;p

Dear Father Tony,

Odd, I thought I was signed up. I get the daily digest and Bil's facebook notices. No matter, I redid it.

Ok. First of all, I don't dislike you. To be fair, I went back and read some of your previous postings, which I found to be intelligent, well-written, and quite witty. In all honesty, I would much rather have you as a friend.

Secondly, I do not blog... officially. I have written a few posts on Susan's Place, if you are familiar with that site. I also write longhand in a private journal. I don't object to you reading my susans.org posts, should you care to; my user name there is the same. I would appreciate it however if you (or any of your readers) would not reproduce anything found there anywhere else.

At any rate, while I read a number of sites such as this, this is the first time I have ever commented. Why today, I don't know; why you, I don't know. Something just set me off today.

What I initially thought to myself was, "Oh God, not again." You see, right or wrong, the "Father" in front of your name grants you a measure of instant credibility and respect from me; because I know what it takes to earn that title.

And I felt that you dismissed me -- and other T folk -- as an immateriality to be grudgingly dealt with later; good only for current comic relief. You know, I expect derision from people like "Pastor" Phelps and those of the Westoboro Baptist Church ilk, but...I didn't expect it from you. And that hurt.

And while I agree that you are not responsible for my state of mind, I believe that you are responsible for the message that your words convey. And in this case I felt that your words sent the unequivocal message that "T folks are just an afterthought. They don't matter."

And that I don't matter.

Look, I understand church politics, having labored in those particular mine fields for many years. I understand that congregations are inherently change-resistant; and as I mentioned, this column was filled with sound advice.

But.

I don't believe partial inclusivity is a concept that Christ would have embraced, for all it may be politically expedient. In fact, I believe that my pain of exclusion is more important to him than any small victory of fragmented inclusion. It is not just MY pain that matters to him -- it is the pain of all who are told "You're not as good, you don't matter, maybe later, NOT TODAY." What would Christ have said if he were told "Those ten of your disciples are welcome, but the other two are not"?

I believe he would have said "It's all or nothing."

I think that what I felt was hypocritical was your statement that a congregation should not feel that they are being forced to swallow a bitter pill; yet that is exactly what me -- and other T folk -- are being asked to ingest. "Not now. Maybe later, if you're lucky. Not today."

Proposition 8 in California...Florida and Arizona...adoption and foster care in Arkansas...there were plenty of bitter pills to go around. And you know how much it hurts to have a fundamental right taken away -- or never granted -- by those saying the same thing to gay and lesbian couples that I felt you were saying to T people. "Your (insert here) just isn't as good."

Sigh. We need to stand or fall together. Christ wouldn't have compromised on this. How can we?

Tony, please note that I have used throughout this post the term "I felt." I am not saying that my interpretation of your words was 100% accurate, nor that it was your absolute meaning or intent.

All I am saying is that this is how I read it.

Was I wrong?

Peace,

Tasha Elizabeth

I would like to comment about d. and about transgender issues. There may be a transgendered woman or man in your community who is Christian, at least somewhat "out" as T, older, conservative or ordinary dresser, patient and mature in attitude, and has a commitment to educating people about what life is like for transgendered people. There is one such person at my MCC congregation, for several years a board member, and she has spoken at community education forums held by churches from other denominations. She can't pass due to her height and body and facial build, but I consider that an asset in her public testimony, since it forces people to connect her dignified manner with her conservatively dressed but clearly non-standard physical appearance.

Concerning femme men and butch women already in the congregation: there's likely to be one or more who is a stalwart of the congregation and a long-time member. If people like the chorister or the volunteer coordinator or soup kitchen manager or early morning altar guild stalwart, even if they are swishy or gruff, invite them into the core group (and understand that they might not want to rock the boat at first, particularly if they are church employees like the music minister, etc). Many straight congregants may have a clue, and if not, they may have second thoughts about dissing someone they have known and respected for a while. (Of course, not all the femme men and butch women are gay, but they may have been suspected of being so, and may be willing to stand up for gender diversity).

First of all.....where is this lizard-sexual?

For crying out loud, the comments on the drag queen thing illustrate clearly the tranny problem. Tony specifies an outrageous drag queen and the trannys scream "you mean me!"......er, no, I read it as the outrageous drag queens myself. And the advice was good advice. In a conservative congregation you want conservative representation by conservative looking and acting individuals. The last thing you want is someone in a flowered dress and ill fitting wig announcing they have a functioning set of wedding tackle and demanding full acceptance. Seems like a no brainer to me.

Speaking from the straight Christian perspective, I have to say that this information is insightful and incredibly helpful. Father Tony acknowledges the difficulty of negotiating the minefield that is a conservative congregation, which can with careful guidance be educated and changed. Caution is the guiding principle in undertaking this task. The process must be understood from the congregants' point of view; with patience, they can be educated about all aspects of inclusion.

I still want to know about the lizard....was that some sort of trans-species slam (relax, I'm joking)

As a reformed ex "Dignitarian" Catholic, I think Father Tony's article is spot on. I don't go to church any more, but if I did, I'd be meeting people and enagaing in dialogue just as they are, just where they are, label-free.

Can I add that I'm heartily sick of labels? The only that I want anymore is my name.

There are Christian transgendered people out there who are older, dignified, good speakers, and willing to speak to groups. So what if they might not be able to "pass" due to build, facial features, etc? I know one such person. Your community has one or more transgendered persons that fit this description, and could communicate well with the middle-aged and elderly church-goers who are most likely to be shocked at the idea. When a 50 to 60 year old transgendered woman walks into the room and is wearing the same church-going clothes as the rest of the 50 year plus women in the congregation, there is at least one commonality felt by the cisgendered women - at least this person knows how to dress for church.

For the young to middle-aged portion of the congregation, an LGBT seminarian might be a good guest speaker at an education program. If there is a UCC, Episcopal, or non-Baptist non-denominational seminary within driving distance, you could give the seminary main office a call and ask how to find such a student.