When the Church Celebrates Sex-Change Surgery

It's what happens when you replace divine wisdom with human wisdom.

Members of the LGBT community stage a peaceful protest outside Church House on February 15, 2017 in London, England.

By Michael Brown Published on July 11, 2017

I am not the least bit surprised that the Church Of England is “Considering Special Services To Celebrate Gender Reassignment.” I’m saddened and disappointed, but certainly not surprised. The handwriting has been on the wall for a while now, and other religious groups have already instituted special ceremonies for people “transitioning.”

In the last 48 hours, I received a steady stream of emails and comments asking me if I had seen “this” — referring to the announcement that “The Church of England’s governing body has voted to look into special services for transgender people.”

Replacing Divine Wisdom With Human Wisdom

But before we condemn the Church of England as godless and apostate, let’s look at this from a trans-activist point of view. After all, doesn’t Jesus call us to come to Him as we are, with all our blemishes and sins? Doesn’t the gospel of grace tell us that we don’t need to clean up our act before we can be accepted by God?

As Vicar Chris Newlands said, “I hope that we can make a powerful statement that we believe trans people are cherished and loved by God, who created them.”

It would also be fair to ask the question: What sin is a transgender person committing? If they genuinely believe they were born in the wrong body, why can’t they pursue a surgical and hormonal solution? Why should this be treated differently than any other physical or emotional handicap? Let these troubled souls find relief wherever they can, and rather than condemn them, celebrate them.

As the Right Reverend Paul Bayes said: “As the world listens to us today, the world needs to hear us say that LGBTI orientation and identity is not a crime, not a sickness and not a sin.”

The problem with this line of reasoning is that it replaces divine wisdom with human wisdom. It substitutes a misguided, earthly compassion for a truth-based, scripturally grounded compassion.

Churches that celebrate same-sex marriage and gender transitions are substituting a misguided, earthly compassion with a truth-based, scripturally grounded compassion.

The former embraces same-sex “marriage” because “love is love.” The latter recognizes God’s plan for marriage as sacred and unalterable.

The former endorses homosexual behavior because “this is the way God made me.” The latter recognizes homosexual desires as part of our fallen human nature, something to be rejected as sinful and redeemed through the cross.

The former celebrates sex-change surgery because a struggling soul has found wholeness. The latter understands sex-change surgery to be a mutilation of a healthy body, knowing that God can make whole from the inside out.

The Church of England’s Steady Decline

But again, the Church of England’s latest decision should not surprise us at all. It has steadily lurched toward embracing gay “marriage” in recent years.

Not only so, but already in 2011 in my book A Queer Thing Happened to America, I wrote this:

Reform Judaism now has a series of blessings to be recited over sex-change surgery, part of the revised, 500-page manual, Kulanu [meaning, “All of us”]: A Program for Implementing Gay and Lesbian Inclusion. Can you imagine praying a prayer whose sentiments are roughly equivalent to, “God, we ask You to bless our efforts as we radically alter Your creation and design through mutilating surgeries of perfectly healthy body parts and organs in keeping with our preferences and needs”?

But there’s more. As I explained:

Yet even this pales in comparison with the new prayerbooks released by gay synagogues in San Francisco and New York. They contain a blessing for “unexpected intimacy,” meant to be recited “after engaging in anonymous sex, though those involved in the project say it could also be said for other meaningful encounters with strangers.” So gay synagogues have now invented a prayer to be recited after having sex with a stranger. Talk about trying to sanctify the obscene!

The prayer, titled “Kavannah [Devotion] for Unexpected Intimacy,” goes on to ask God — “who created passion and wove it throughout creation” — to permit the encounter to be a blessing “that allows us to both touch and see the Divine.”

Proponents of the siddur [prayerbook] see the prayer — included in a section of innovative blessings meant to enhance life-cycle moments — as an effort to elevate a practice that, in some quarters, is viewed as integral to gay culture …

The point of the prayer for unexpected intimacy is “that all aspects of our lives are holy if we approach them with a sense of the sacred,” said Rabbi Camille Angel of [the gay synagogue] Sha’ar Zahav.

“The fact of the matter is we have emotional, sexual, intellectual encounters that are Martin Buber’s I-Thou, which ennoble us and draw us to our highest potential,” she said. “Whether they ever happen again, the experience itself can change us and be a blessing in our lives.”

And remember: This liberal rabbi was speaking about blessings to be pronounced after anonymous sexual encounters.

In light of religious perversions like this, I’m not the least bit surprised when the Church of England considers something less extreme, although also wrong and misguided.

Let us then, as followers of Jesus, open our doors wide to those who identify as LGBT, showing them compassion, offering them love and support, and proclaiming the gospel that, indeed, God has a better way.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Gary

    This is not “the Church” choosing to endorse homosexuals. “The Church” is made up of Christians. These people are not Christians. If they were real Christians, they would not be doing this.

    • Jackie

      @ Gary: Totally Agree with what you said!

    • eddiestardust


  • Wayne Cook

    The church lurches on toward oblivion.

    • gailpurpleangel

      So says a man in 2017. Over 2000 years ago, the leaders in Christ’s time period made similar comments “If This isn’t Real, then the death of Christ will put an end to His teachings. But, if this man IS right, then you may find yourself actually fighting against God.” God promised to always leave a remnant of believers. After thousands of years, God’s promise has continued.

      • Wayne Cook

        Check my comment again. You just made the same statement, except you equated church with Church.

  • That more and more churches are being inclusive and supportive of people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender has nothing to do with “celebrating.” It’s a matter of being pragmatic. In my experience, people who are transgender (or who have gender dysphoria, if you will) seek to live their lives authentically, per the gender of the souls inside their bodies. That can sometimes be accomplished simply through appropriate dress, makeup, and hairstyling. In other cases people are willing to risk more radical surgery and hormone treatment. If, as Thomas Jefferson would say, it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket, I don’t know what anyone would object.

    • Gary

      It isn’t in accord with Christianity. They are pagans pretending to be Christians. .

    • ZincChloride

      You just don’t understand why this culture exist and its purpose. If it were to only let these people be themselves it would have been done a long time ago… but their purpose is to destroy our American Judeo-Christian culture and heritage… the fascist left uses these troubled people to destroy what God has created.

    • Nobody Specific

      The problem is its not what Christian marriage and life style were set out to be. TJ is right its not for the rest of us to judge or punish, that belongs to God alone. That however does not mean we should not help people to try and lead a more Christ like life. Sometimes that might mean telling them what they do is wrong, even if they don’t want to hear it.

      We have to realize they are not living authentically. They are trying to live a lie they happen to be more comfortable with. We are what we are. They are not dealing with their problem they are masking the symptoms for a time. True healing would mean learning to live with who they are and loving the body they were given.

    • GPS Daddy

      Claiming that the soul has gender is a worldview/religious claim. There is no scientific evidence for it. By using the state to force people to submit to this view is forcing your religion on others.

    • Beth Van

      First, I would recommend that you use a quote in it’s correct context. Jefferson was referring to religious liberty, not anything even close to sexuality of any kind. He said, “”The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

    • Patmos

      “It’s a matter of being pragmatic.”

      Disregarding salvation and what you proclaim to believe in is pragmatic?

      Be a little more self centered. Actually, that’s probably not possible.

  • Beth Van

    Satan offers earthly sinful rewards and pleasures because he knows he will have the soul that succumbs for eternity. I can pray and hope that somehow God’s Truth will be able to penetrate into these troubled minds and souls and bring them to salvation. It saddens me very much to see what is happening and I must admit a certain level of revulsion, but it is important to get past that and keep God’s teachings at the forefront.

  • ZincChloride

    21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

  • Iseewhattheydid

    Yes I believe you are right about freely accepting these individuals and helping them to approach the Cross for their true healing. But what is the Church to do about the deliberate effort of these groups to use the force of law and government to force Christians to go beyond that in ways that violate our beliefs? They have an army of activists dedicated to changing case law to force society to the left.

  • davidrev17

    If all of these topsy-turvy, PC sexually-related proclivities are somehow unalterable (from an evolutionary standpoint that is), thus right in the eyes of a “three-times Holy God” – including this groundswell movement of late, whose so-called “Christian” proponents have been bangin’ their same-sex drums for acceptability in the Church as well – then WHY in heaven’s name, have Christian heterosexuals been absolutely SILENT all this time, when they should be free to engage in their “straight” sexual desires like all the rest of those professing Christians?

    Someone please answer that, because I never hear, or read about this issue (or NON-issue) being discussed at all? After all, since I’m approaching 18 loonnnnng years of heterosexual celibacy – while ardently striving under the Divine-enablement of the Holy Spirit to remain sexually “pure” all this time – doesn’t the Bible plainly teach that “God is no respector of persons”?

    Shouldn’t we “Christian” heterosexuals also have the “right” to do as we please with our bodies? I mean, God made we heterosexuals this way too??? And if this is the evolutionary “case” amongst we H@#o sapiens regarding our behavior – then shouldn’t we be free to engage in any kind of sinful activity whatsoever – with brazen impunity at that??

    • Rocky

      Interestingness point. I encourage you to remain pure, we are serving our Heavenly Father and Jesus is our role model, he never spoke about his rights which is all I hear about these days, you never hear these activists talk about their responsibilities to God and his word. Their message is not God’s and their fight and resolve is all for the wrong fight. The disciples never argued with people about moving with the times, their goal was to proclaim the gospel to a fallen world. We should take their lead and rather than bang our own drum and message we are better to align ourselves with the heart of God. What is the heart of God? To speak the truth in love. We should try to stay on track and rather than take them on in vain arguments trying to get them to see our point. Sadly this is really an attack on another of Gods designs for the earth – family, it is like cancer attacking cells which are the makeup of the body, family’s which are the makeup of healthy humanity are becoming corrupt.

  • Irenaeus

    Please note that the Church of England does NOT represent the vast majority of worldwide Anglicans, and there is a significant movement within Anglicanisn away from this kind of apostasy. The Anglican Church of North America split from the Eposcopla Church, and has consecrated a missionary Bishop to go to Scotland, which is also apostasizing. The Global Anglican Future Conference (representing the majoroty of Anglicans worldwide) condemns this action from the Church of England.

    Stay tuned… we may see Canterbury itself be excommunicated by true Anglicans.

    • יחל הירדן בן־קרוה

      Does that make the ACNA the SSPX?

    • Many Sparrows

      Thank you for putting that in context.

  • Jim Walker

    I see the End times prophecies coming true one by one.
    The devil is having a field day lately in destroying churches after churches but we all know how this is gonna end.
    We win and they lose.

    • Then don’t worry about it. Why fight it? Are you trying to delay the Apocalypse?

      • Jim Walker

        Fight to help save as many people as possible.

      • GPS Daddy

        Well, let’s look at the options:

        1. If the material world is all that exists, then your correct, don’t worry about it. But the “down” side to that is that there is nothing to really worry about for “wrong” or “evil” does not exist either. So no reason to be concerned over the “evils” of the world in general.

        2. The material world is an illusion. Everything is spiritual. In the case of eastern mystisism, you are that same “thing” as a rock or your next door neighbor. “Wrong” and “right” do not carry the same meaning as they do in Western culture. In fact, you end up with the same definitions as #1 with the same consequences. Just like in Hollywood, you can murder someone on film but it’s not really murder because they did not really die.

        #3. The physical world is real AND the spiritual world is real. This means that the evil done in the physical realm really is evil for the spiritual world makes it count. Things like hate, raceism, anger, strife, slander, lieing, etc… are spiritual in root. They now matter because there is both a physical and spiritual realms. Have you noticed that man’s justice just does not cut the mustard? Not to worry for Justice transcends the grave.

        Justice transcending the grave gives us two things:

        A. The wrongs we have suffered, every wrong or mean word spoken to you or thing done to you where Justice has not prevailed, Justice will prevail on the other side of the grave.

        B. Ever wrong word, every wrong thought, ever wrong action, ever wrong inaction that you or I have done will meet Justice on the other side of the grave.

        Are you ready?

        • The material world is all that exists. But what makes you think that makes good and evil, right and wrong, no longer relevant? They are simply permutations of the altruism that exists, not only in our own species, but most other animal species as well.

          • Gary

            Only God has the authority to define good and evil and hold everyone accountable to those definitions. If there is no God, then good and evil are nothing more than the opinions of people, and opinions vary.

          • Human history is replete with holy books and writings by people claiming divine inspiration. It is replete with prophets, soothsayers, and people claiming to be semi-divine. But we do not need to rely on such things to do good by our fellow human beings.

            Once my ever-so-doctrinaire Catholic brother said to me, “If I didn’t believe in Hell, I would have no problem pushing a person off a cliff to his death.” I think it’s probably the most asinine thing he has ever said. It’s like saying that it’s impossible for anyone to exhibit any sort of human decency and humanity without first clinging wistfully to an invisible world of angels and demons and gods and prophecies.

            I treat others the same way as I hope would hope they treat me, and I do this without hope of heavenly rewards or fear of fiery retribution.

          • Gary

            It is your opinion that treating others as you want them to treat you is the right thing to do. But, you have no way of proving it is better or worse than treating them some other way. In your beliefs, there is no one with the authority to make moral rules that apply to everyone and are enforced.

          • Gary, you make it sound as if human beings were nothing more than meat puppets being tugged back and forth between “God” and “Satan,” having no instinctive moral or altruistic sense of our own. This is neither true of human beings nor animals in general.

          • Shaquille Harvey

            If you take the atheistic and naturalistic view then yes that is all we are ” human meat puppets “.
            May I ask how and where do you get the sense or notion for, not only, objective morality but also that there is altruism ?

          • Gary

            Can you prove that your “instinctive moral or altruistic sense” is superior to that of someone else whose moral or altruistic sense differs from yours?

          • Shaquille Harvey

            Hold on you state “The material world is all that exists” but then state “altruism exists” however altruism like morality, good and evil are metaphysics not material properties. So how can your statement “The material world is all that exists “be true ?

          • GPS Daddy

            Relevant? That’s an interesting way to change the meaning of what I wrote. I did not say that right, wrong, good and evil were no longer relevant in a materialistic worldview.

            But let’s explore your answer. Permutations of altruism do exist in humans as well the animal kingdom. How does “permutations of altruism” square with Darwinian Evolution since Darwinian Evolution is the only game in town in a materialistic worldview? Quite good I think. To understand this a bit better I think that an analogy would be helpful. Altruism would be like a clockwise rotation of water down a vortex in the Southern Hemisphere. Egotism, being an antonym to altruism, would be the counter clockwise rotation of water down a vortex in the Northern Hemisphere. When altruism provides the evolutionary advantage then we see it presented (a clockwise rotation) but when egotism provides the evolutionary advantage then we see egotism (a counter clockwise rotation) presented. Just like a vortex of water they are both naturally occurring expressions of evolution.

            So when egotism is expressed by a politician that is caught in a Ponzi scheme that does not provide an evolutionary advantage then natural selection takes over and selects out that politician by conviction in a crime. But a different politician that does a similar thing but is not caught or convicted clearly had an evolutionary advantage for they were more fit and survived. So just like water vortex rotation has no inherit moral meaning so to altruism and egotism have no inherit moral meaning outside of natural selection giving an evolutionary advantage.

      • eddiestardust

        One of the best things we can do on this planet is to save a person’s life or their soul..

    • Boris

      You’ve already lost. The victor is science, free inquiry and critical thinking. POOF.

      • Jim Walker

        Try containing the knowledge and wisdom in the collective brain of everyone on earth. A finite brain trying to decipher and decode an infinite universe.

        • Boris

          Actually a brain made of star matter. So we humans are the universe becoming aware of itself. How cool is that?

          • Jim Walker

            Even a collective of all brains that ever lived on this earth will not compute an answer of how life began.

          • Boris

            To jump from the fact that the origin of life is currently unknown to the conclusion that it could not have happened naturally is a logical fallacy called the Argument from Incredulity. Self-replicators can be very simple such as a strand of 6 DNA nucleotides. We don’t know exactly what the first life looked like but we know what came after was incredibly simple. The complexity of modern life is the result of 4 billion years of cellular evolution. Science will never accept a supernatural explanation for the origin of life or anything else. There are very good reasons for this. The only way we could accept a supernatural explanation for something is by first eliminating all possible naturalistic explanations. However we could never be sure we’ve done that. Science is a method, not a collection of data.

          • Jim Walker

            I have never mentioned about collection of data. I just say the mind of humans collectively is unable to give an answer to this question : Which comes first ? The chicken or the egg?.
            You can continue to depend of your science, but please pander your stuff elsewhere.

          • Boris

            You depend on science every day. If you really wanted to know which came first, the chicken or the egg you could just google it. You can pretty much find out anything on the Internet. If you want to. But you don’t. You creationists just ask questions like that hoping your critics won’t know the answer. The change from predecessor species to modern ones is so gradual it is almost imperceptible. There’s no first two of any species and no first egg of a chicken. The line is too blurred between species and you would know that if you ever picked up a science book.

          • Jim Walker

            All the best to you and your science.

          • Boris

            Science works whether you believe it or not. Science is the only path to knowledge. No wonder you hate it.

          • Jim Walker

            Oh I believe science for its some of its discoveries but that is not a path to knowledge but the journey towards finally finding God.

          • Boris

            Science has eliminated that possibility. Get over it.

          • Jim Walker


          • Boris

            Where’s your evidence for this God you believe in? The fear planted in your empty head by OTHER PEOPLE is your only evidence and you know it. So do the rest of us. ROFL!

          • Jim Walker

            That is the same question I asked a Christian friend before I become a Christian myself. I was in fact ridiculing him for his faith in God too.
            I hope you too will one day get to know Him. Peace out!

  • Cathy Phillips News-Line

    Our enemy, the great deceiver, disguises himself like an angel of light. He wants to tell you things that sound so close to what God wants for us that some have difficulty telling the two apart.
    Lord help us to not only to discern right from wrong, but help us see the difference between right and “almost” right.

    • Many Sparrows


History is His Story
Dwight Longenecker
More from The Stream
Connect with Us