The New Progressive Christian Trans Woman

 The authentic you

I seek to live the mission of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ in my own life moment by moment to be the contagious agent of transformation in society.  This necessarily requires me to embrace the authenticity of my divine wholeness in relation to Jesus and not in relation to a dogmatic oppressive theology or ideology.

Through Jesus I find the power of life through authenticity and non else.  Hence when I reflect on my spirituality and sexuality I come to the realization that the authentic me, the I am, is the wholeness and most of all the truth of who I am, the reconciliation and integration of both.

It is crucial for me to reconcile and integrate my spirituality and sexuality because the power to transform society into the beloved community to a large extent finds itself in me.

As I am called to be a disciple of Jesus empowered to transform and heal society I can only do it through the wholeness that yields the fruit that manifests that vision.

The authentic mission of Christ

The struggle of the inclusion of those that are GLBTQQI etc. is an issue of identity and authenticity centered squarely on dogma. Dogma is the doctrine of the Church, the rules, regulations and precepts of the Church. While the common ground is Jesus Christ of Nazareth, son of the living God, the argument, the disagreement is over peripheral and  somewhat juvenile issues of sexual and/or physical identity.

Would the whole Church be discarded over peripheral issues? Did Jesus sacrifice his life only for the sexual and/or gender identity of humanity? Is this what the journey of the Church is about at least here in the United States? Does the foundation of the Church rest on its sexual/gender identity?

Are the arguments of Heterosexism, homophobia, Genderism legitimate arguments to have in the face of the cross of Jesus Christ that calls all of humanity to life? Are the aforementioned concerns the common ground of the Church or is Jesus the common ground? I submit that if Jesus is the common ground then all else is sinking sand.

Holy Scripture does not rest on the partial proof texting of dogmatic interpretation but the whole rest on the radical inclusive love of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. All scripture must be framed in the context of Jesus. In Mt 16:18 Jesus speaks to Peter and states the following:

“And I say also unto thee that thou art Peter and upon the rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

As Jesus speaks to Peter he says (3) short words reflecting ownership. He says “I” – twice and “my” (once). These words mean originator, ownership. He then states that the gates of hell will not prevail against it. He will defend his church against even the gates of hell. Why doesn’t Jesus just say hell? Why does he say gates of hell? The words say that Jesus defends his church and while the disciples take a junior partnership in that defense the primary defense rests with Jesus.

And verse 19 states that whatever the disciples need for the Church to grow, function and transform society Jesus will provide.   The Church is called and empowered by Jesus to live out the mission statement of Jesus of Nazareth the Christ.

Now who is the Church that Jesus refers to? Luke 4:18 describes who the church is in the following statement

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord.”

Here Jesus clearly and succinctly describes his church – the center of his heart.  The following people groups of the church are delineated below:

Those that are poor

Those that are brokenhearted

Deliverance of those that are captive

Those that are blind

To set at liberty those that are bruised

And finally in verse 19 Jesus says “To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.”

The aforementioned community is transformed and transformative – it is the beloved community, it is Jesus and the disinherited. The Church relates to Jesus through relationship and that relationship is articulated through (1) prayer (2) empowerment of the Holy Spirit (3) authenticity and finally (4) minimal dogma.

If this is the Church that Jesus calls and ordains then what of discrimination, bigotry, and marginalization? Where is the Church in relation to Jesus? Shall the Church be servant of dogma and society? What or who is the common ground? If the Church is called to be that transformative agent in the community then it must return to its founder.

The Church must not conform to the culture or society, and it must not be a resource of political and social conformity. The church must be the Jesus in the community. And then, any and all dogma must be viewed in the context of Jesus of Nazareth.

In contrast if the Church is not about Jesus it should not call itself a Church. It must deny Jesus and embrace the state and society openly. Then the Church could openly practice Heterosexism, homophobia, Genderism openly and then those that are GLBTQQI etc. would be clear and honest in their decision.

Flower Theology

(A Process Theology of the Spring - Pollinization and fertilization of the Creator’s Gift)

Hebrews 11:1-13 states Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for. By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible. By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even though he is dead. By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death; he could not be found, because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God. And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him. By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith. By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. By faith he made his home in the Promised Land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God. By faith Abraham, even though he was past age—and Sarah herself was barren—was enabled to become a father because he^[a]considered him faithful who had made the promise. And so from this one man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore. All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth.

If, based on Holy Scripture and all creative consistency then it must be a logical conclusion that all life is in a state of continual and consistent revelatory truth within a divinely evolving process. The truth in the morning of creation as it relates to the beginning of earth’s existence and the truth in the afternoon of earth’s existence is different. While the logic of early truth remains as a building block it cannot be used to justify or even to identify the truth of today. This would necessarily determine how I look at God, how I see the processes of God and therefore it is necessary for me to look at life from the context of a total environmental conceptual point of view. It is my belief that God’s revelatory truth was revealed to each of the people is Hebrews 11 within the context of where they were within their environments and not without and therefore I must conclude that if God is unchanging and consistent and that the same processes are in effect today. If I put this progressive truth in the context of a flower then I find myself understanding the processes of God more readily as affirmed below:

As an example if we look at the flower we realize that there is a time of pollinization, and fertilization, a period of growth, an expansion, a change in the dynamics of the flower as the flower blossoms revealing the newness and character of life.

It is this pollinization or this imbuing of matter into the flower that causes an inescapable growth and change of dynamics in the flower that begins; this is the springtime of the flowers evolutionary existence. If my view of God rests in a truth that is a progressive reality, reflecting the dynamics of a flower versus a static truth that denies God’s dynamic infinite processes found in the flower, then I miss the wonders and blessings of a Holy God.

This life has been pollinated by Jesus Christ and the Cross with the love of God and therefore life is forever changed revealing the power and evolutionary dynamics of the processes of God. (This dynamic is an expansion of faith). Upon the acceptance and reception of God’s love the creation is then fertilized revealing that spring newness in the life of the created being.

As life evolves in its search for form and function it is incumbent upon humanity to choose to comprehend the enormity and complexity of divine evolution yet the simplicity of the divine evolutionary process primarily a mysitcal event.  Each moment in terra firma must be seen from the perspective of a divine evolutionary processes stemming from the divine. The simplicity of the divine evolutionary process is made complex because of humanities prideful need to somehow interpret life for its own not necessarily to comprehend its place in the divine. We must question the selfish identification and motives of humanity as the apex of the divine and reassess humanity in the context of life seeking form and function divine imperative.

The challenge I see is the segregation and divisiveness that are deeply embedded in the structural and systematic policies and regulations of American society. The trajectory of the aforementioned concerns aim at maintaining the white ethnic communities control on power and as such the control of meaning through political, governmental, economics, education and socially constructed white norms.

The aforementioned concerns impact me as a disciple of Jesus, an African American Transgender woman and a person living in the 21^st century. It also impacts humanity as a whole and tends to detract from any healing that would take place.

At this time in history America has many issues and challenges to its identity and purpose. It is struggling and yearns for an answer to its internal and external problems. The traditional white European model is not working. America needs to embrace a new way of being, a new way of community, a new language, a common ground.

As a possible way to address the aforementioned issues the following thoughts focus on the responsibility of the Church of Jesus in 21^st century transitory America, the necessity of an interfaith church and the decline or a reframing of the denominational church and a new conceptualization of language and finally a common ground are offered.

I must take a moment and say that the white power structure that maintains white privilege is not necessarily every white person’s agenda. Admittedly there are some in the white ethnic community who don’t feel that way, who haven’t had the same predatory “Wall Street” experiences. Nevertheless the white power structure is there and the poor white person can have more of an opportunity to partake and experience white privilege as opposed to the ethnic groups of less or non privilege.

It is in this context that the church of Jesus has been commissioned to address. The embedded segregation and divisivness fuel the physical, spiritual, economic and mental violence denying the divinity of every human being on the planet. The church must reclaim its rightful place with the disinherited to transform society and culture. It must be done through ministries and programs that seek to “farm the soul”, that is developing and maintaining a spiritual practice, bringing about a healing and reclaiming the forgotten awareness of humanities divinity.

As a disciple of Jesus there must always be a realization that Jesus and Christianity as it has been practiced can be considered two different activities. The power of Jesus came out of his authenticity and his embrace of his identity. The very core of his authenticity was love of community.

The historical setting in which Jesus grew up, the House of Israel, the economic and social predicament of Jesus’ family all of these are important. [1] He saw the situation of his community and saw a need to address the issue. Because of what he saw he became an advocate for social justice on a cosmic scale. The cross was a statement on the cruelty and dehumanization of humanity and eventually led to a transformation of the Roman Empire.

The Church of the 21^st century must be the model of hope, the Church of Jesus. I am of the opinion that the Church of Jesus has an authenticity that is sorely absent from the Church of the Messiah, or the imperial church of Rome. The church of Jesus must not be about dogma or the incaptualization of the imperial Christ as the Christian Church is but about the authenticity of Jesus, the marginalized Jew.

This must be one of the most painful realities of the denominational church. Christianity often has been sterile and of little avail. The conventional Christian word is muffled, confused and vague. [2] It misses the authenticity of Jesus in its effort to appeal to the Roman Empire, capitalist and resource oriented society. As such it has advocated for racism, sexism, genderism etc and has not contributed to the overall healing of the people as a whole.

In contrast the Church of Jesus is a church of the disinherited whose core is the authenticity of Jesus. It worships in the spirit of Jesus and as such it must be a place where the oneness of the divine and the authenticity of the individual embrace through grace and spirit. The Church and ministry programs must reclaim, rebuild and redefine culture, society and meaning in an interfaith context at the very core.

The Church of Jesus is also charged with breaking down the “power of color” and to build up and embrace the “power of authenticity.” The power of authenticity emanates from a heart of transparency that has been transformed by the spirit of the divine. All paths of true power must come from a place of authenticity, a place of the heart. The Church must be that place of an authentic spiritual centeredness that transforms each person, community and society into a beloved community.

The core of the interfaith church rests on the two theological concepts of radical inclusivity and engaged love, communicating those theologies through its mission of local, national, international and global community holistic healing. Institutional and denominational religious concepts and theological thought based on archaic and outmoded concepts of faith and identity must gradually be eradicated through a process of spiritual revolutionary and evolutionary education whose core is radical inclusivity and engaged love espoused by the divine teachers.

The spiritual revolutionary and evolutionary education process is realized through radical inclusivity and engaged love seeking in partnership with the divine a new revelation within our species of spiritual and mental maturity. I propose that the power structure and challenges mentioned at the beginning of this working paper can be resolved within the context and understanding of the Community of the Transcendent Faith in the Divine, an interfaith experience.

As an advocate for The Community of Faith in the Divine, an Interfaith Experience it is beneficial for the holistic healing and American renewal and reawakening to embrace a new conceptualization of language. This reconceptualization is necessary because of the capitalist oriented language that has divided humanity into groups, categories, economic and political parties thus yielding a broken and spiritually depleted humanity.

Language can paint exclusivity or inclusivity, appreciation or hatred, helpful or predatory. Language paints a picture of whom and where we might be going. The current power structure paints each ethnic group in different ways and always in comparison to the white ethnic community model. This language feeds certain stereotypes that create a downward spiral at a generational level.

Questions about the source of language, the purpose of language and the intent of language should be addressed. As the language is addressed in the context of The Community of Faith in the Divine, an Interfaith Experience it should be developed with an overt understanding and purposeful goal of healing first in self and then in the outer-self.

Language and even more specifically words in concert with the goal of a global spiritual renewal and reawakening are significant as the individual acknowledges and embraces their part in the re-creation of a just and free society while embracing a societal and cultural civil union empowered from a holistic perspective. Each word in The Community of Faith in the Divine, an Interfaith Experience must be seen and chosen in the contextual metaphor of a container and as such be recognized as holding a myriad of emotions, thoughts, longings, and other matters of the heart whether good or bad.

Words testify and witness to our life and the life of the human community and must be revisualized as containers that have the resources needed to realize a global spiritual renewal and reawakening. Words should be about giving, healing, and embracing with the undergirding theological basis of radical inclusivity and engaged love. The aforementioned article is primarily a starting point for a global spiritual renewal and reawakening within the context of The Community of Faith in the Divine, an Interfaith Experience.

The final issue addressed by this working paper is the question of that common ground of love. The reality of an interfaith church speaks to the common ground that all of humanity seeks. It is the articulation of the common ground through community, interdependence, appreciation, peace, education, and social justice. It is the yearning of humanity for freedom, wholeness and justice.

The interfaith church seeks to be that common ground, the church of Jesus. The church must overtly welcome all people in their authentic selves. The common ground must be about authenticity and a radical welcome, it must be the community of Jesus in the world today. Dogma, rules and regulations while well meaning at an organizational level tends to miss Jesus, miss the love, miss the embrace of the disinherited and of all interpretations of the divine.

In a country that is changing and transitioning in its identity and ethnic makeup and to embrace the future radical shift in power from a white oriented power structure to a more diverse power structure the Church of Jesus must be an advocate, a co-partner with the divine for the disinherited, for those that don’t fit in, for the once and great masses of humanity that seek that common ground of love.

In closing I submit that the Community of the Transcendent Faith in the Divine, an Interfaith Experience can be a vehicle for spiritual renewal in America. Until this community is acknowledged and realized in the hearts of people beyond the divisions of religion and an archaic closed mindedness the challenges will continue to jeopardize and minimize our maturity and impact for the greater good on mother earth.

[1] Thurman, H., Jesus and the Disinherited (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1976) p 11

[2] Ibid, p 19

I don’t normally comment on the politics but the present strange state of affairs, while not surprising is nevertheless something that calls me to speak out.

I noticed that for the first part of Senator Obama’s campaign the question a lot of people had in the electorate was whether he was a Christian and whether he was Black or White enough (kind of juvenile don't you think) yet true.  Over and over, day after day, news report after news report the question was asked are you a Christian, are you Black or White?   The European American establishment pushed hard to cast him as anything else but a Christian and of course he eventually became African American.  

The ensuing months revealed the religious bigotry and racism of some in the European American community.  Now let me take a moment and say that the European American community is not the only ethnic group that has bigots, racists, and others that are an embarrassment but since they have a very explicit history of the aforementioned they seem to own these matters at least in the North American context.  I repeat that they are not the only ethnic community with these issues.

Anyway, so Senator Obama spent months defending his Christianity and now people say ok well I guess you are a Christian so we can’t get you on that well how about the lapel pin, or how about the clothes your wear and of course you are out of touch and an African American man shouldn't even consider running for president  – surely there is something wrong with an African American man running for president of the United States.   If you notice the European American media asks the questions with a specific demographic in mind.  Is he out of his mind? It should be noted that in the context of African American men they have been lynched, assassinated, humiliated, set up in multiple insidious ways that the some people wouldn't believe or even understand. The fact that a large percentage of African American men are in jail or prison is primarily a symptom of European America’s need to maintain their power structure over an increasingly diverse and multicultural nation.  It should be no surprise that we now have our own North American Berlin Wall to address the issues of immigration.

Now Jeremiah Wright has been forced by the media to raise his head and whether knowingly or unknowingly challenge Obama during the middle of an intense campaign.  While I understand his need to defend his reputation it is my opinion that as a fellow African American I would not have addressed the situation in the manner that Rev Wright has.  Strange, very strange indeed.  Rev Wright wouldn't even be out there unless the media sharks weren't looking for some food to feed on.  Some in the media consider themselves king/queen makers, the arbiters of the political agenda, the ones that determine public opinion.  The media lives by the motto "we the media determine your opinion, we determine your vote and we will educate you." 

It’s very interesting how the media is seeking to change the national and political discussion away from issues that matter to inconsequential and mundane issues. Gas prices, housing issues, education, the Iraq War all cry for real solutions yet the media is trying desperately to change the national conversation to race, clothing issues, and relationship issues. Some in the media tend to be very juvenile, and insensitive to the real pressing issues that concern the United States.

For me the bottom line is that some in the Ethnic European American community have a real problem of race sensitivity, there just plain racist. Their not thinking of the nation as a whole but of self interest and the notion that race equates to power.  I personally disagree since I have lived long enough to know that there is very little truth in that argument. Although on the surface it seems true when I really study it it's not about race.  Real power emanates from authenticity, mission, and stewardship of God’s vision for humanity which has very little to do with ethnicity.

From a religious, spiritual standpoint I see this in Senator Obama more than any other candidate and hope that he stays on conversation and not cave in to the media sharks and talking heads.  Clearly Obama is just like those of us who live and reside in America who seek a progressive American community, a better union, a whole nation, one that future generations can be proud of, one that is mature and beyond the divisiveness that exist today.  I agree that we can move beyond where we are but the whole concept of power must change from ownership of a certain group or place to one of power and diversity.  

Real power emanates out of authenticity and diversity, not primarily from any ethnic group or race.

In my humble opinion Senator Obama represents where we as a people need to go.  His vision of inclusiveness and communication will go a long way to eliminate the “other” and bring our American community closer to a place of wholeness which is the ultimate solution to the problems we face.