Of the 54 religious leaders who responded:
12 responses, 22%, were supportive or neutral
42 responses, 78%, branded me a sinner in need of repentance
First, the bright side. One in five religious leaders had an initial response that was either supportive of our plight or at least neutral enough that they were open to discuss the issue. We can take heart that there are those in the clergy who do not automatically condemn a cross-dresser as a sinner. They don't take the Scriptures literally when that approach makes no sense. They take a consistent approach, not picking and choosing when to apply the quotation and when to explain it away or ignore it. They recognize that standards in dress code vary from country to country and accurately point out that skirts are worn by men in many places even today. The good news for cross-dressers is that if you seriously seek an accepting church home, by knocking on five doors you are likely to find one that will open and invite you in.
The other leaders fall into three rather distinct groups.
21 respondents, 50%, sent a single message and then rode off. I consider them, "One Shot Spiritual Cowboys."
16 respondents, 38%, engaged in dialog but eventually left with me still wearing the guilty brand. It took them multiple shots to convict me so I labeled them, the "Bang, Bang...You're Dead" group.
5 respondents, 12%, abandoned the absolute sinner stance and were open to discussion. They are "Our Mission Field."
I replied to everyone and gradually developed a follow-up message that covered the essential points. It better explained my position and asked them to consider the matter further. Here's the reaction.
To me these are the worst representatives of Christianity. They act like spiritual cowboys carrying a spiritual gun. When they see a "sinner," they assume a position of righteous indignation, load the appropriate Biblical verse (in this case Deuteronomy 22:5) and squeeze the trigger thus slaying another sinner for Christ. Then they holster their gun and, armed with a knowledge of all the sinful practices mentioned in the Bible, ride off in search of another sinner. Although some said they cared for me, loved me or were praying for me, their lack of a return response made a mockery of those statements.
Many Christians are taught to love the sinner but hate the sin. These people learned a violent hatred of sin. They also discovered a liberal dose of self-righteous anger. What they have failed to develop is any sense of real love or compassion. There was no willingness to discuss the specifics and several told me not to reply again. They had read the Bible and didn't need commentaries that might suggest other meanings. Rather than helping draw people to a relationship with God, they create a deeper wedge between hurting people and the God they seek. These extracts give a sense of what they had to say. Some demonstrate a basic level of understanding but the overall impact isn't particularly pretty.
These leaders did engage in dialog but did not change their opinion about me being a sinner and essentially "turned me over to God." Only one directly addressed my question about how to deal with the various interpretations ascribed to Deuteronomy 22:5 and he dismissed them. Many continued to cling to a literal interpretation. Others side-stepped my quotes and questions and fired other Biblical verses at me in an attempt to prove their point. In a legal setting, their replies would be described as non-responsive.
Some are slightly less dogmatic and stop short of absolutely condemning me, but they still leave me hanging, guilty as charged. At times during these exchanges I became angry and said things I wish I hadn't. It was frustrating to be condemned and yet be unable to get my accusers to directly address the questions that I posed. I felt that I had returned to my grade school catechism days. If I was treated so poorly while using God's Word, where does someone stand who doesn't know the Scripture and hasn't worked out any issues for himself? What chance does he have to reach God through these ministers?
Although most stuck close to the Scriptures it became readily apparent that there was more to some of the comments than pure religious prohibitions. Many negative stereotypical views slipped in. I was not surprised since there is significant inaccurate information about transvestism, but I am disappointed that they made very little effort to obtain greater understanding even though for many this was their first significant encounter with a cross-dresser. When they asked questions, they often indicated that they didn't want to know the answer. These extracts present a rather ugly picture of Christianity.
This handful of people represents hope for the future. They started out much like the others but developed a willingness to hear something new. During the course of our discussion they began to soften their position. Although they have not totally accepted what I said, they departed from the standard position of guilty as charged. Some of their insights are quite significant and, at some level, I agree with each of them:
Said that the problem is that they don't understand, understanding is the key all relationships and issues and many people don't take the time to understand
Realized I was serious and wanted to review his thoughts to see if he acted hastily
Admitted that dialog was needed but felt there must be some underlying problem.
Expressed appreciation that I was seeking the truth not just finding someone to tell me what I wanted to hear. Acknowledged that the circumstances would determine whether there was a problem
Admitted the behavior might not be sinful but probably was "sick"
Each engaged in a meaningful dialog and was willing to take a fresh look rather than relying on what he had heard before. Each decided that their initial position needed to be reexamined. They didn't necessarily know the right answer but were willing to explore options. That is the type of response we ought to hope for. These extracts represent the beginning of some promising dialogs.