Evangelicals - gah...

I must confess myself more than a little stunned at what I have found out this evening.

In my days in Leeds, I always felt uncomfortable with standard forms of Christian evangelism, such as "door-knocking" or "street-preaching".  It seemed too intrusive, too invasive, too impolite and not giving people the respect they deserved.  I was part of a church drama group, and we were asked to do some pieces on the streets in York as part of an evangelistic exercise.  Also invited was a young American guy named Todd Farley.  He did mime to music, contemporary Christian music.  I stood there almost open-mouthed as he was able to draw a crowd in.  Ok, the music was loud and "different", but even so people just stood and watched.  He then did a workshop, which I went to in order to see if I could add some depth to characters I portrayed.  I came out a trainee mime, and joined with four others in Leeds to create a troupe.  The last 3 years of my time in Leeds were dominated by mime ministry, and we were invited as a group by Todd to tour with him in Norway.

Even after I left Leeds, I was still involved in Todd's organisation for a while - until I moved to Scotland and it all got too difficult.  I grew to know this guy a little - his love of Star Trek, his sense of comedy, his flaws too - such as the occasional "pig-out" on things which really weren't too good for him!  And then - silence.  Occasionally I would have a look on Mimeistry's website to see what was going on, but marriage and work meant that I was no longer fit enough to do what I had done before.  It was more occasional interest than a strong desire.

I found Todd on Facebook last month, and decided I would see if he would become a friend to this strange woman.  He did.  And this evening I was thinking of him, so decided to look up his history on his "new" website.  And came away feeling stunned.

He and his wife, Marilyn (who I also really enjoyed being with) are now divorced.  He was disowned by Mimeistry for announcing that he believed practising gay people could be ministers in the church.  He has had divorce, death (of his mother and brother) and a loss of career to deal with in the last 2 years.  I was amazed - partly because I never thought that he would be someone who would make that stand for gay people in the church, although I don't really know why I thought that.  I was shocked that divorce had happened - although I realise that I only really knew them in their very early years of marriage.  And I'm left with some questions too.  Is he gay himself?  After all, Ray Boltz, who's music Todd used very powerfully, came out as gay a couple of years back, and was shunned by the evangelical Christian community as a result.  Todd talks about being an advocate for a gay friend - was that Ray?

Part of me thinks "good riddance - these evo fundie types cut off their noses to spite their own faces again - I hope the whole edifice fails".  But part of me is also sad, to see yet another person damaged by all of this, and this time someone who I did actually care for and respect, and who was in very, very deeply.  I'm surprised at how deeply I'm moved by it.  I guess it's because in 1990 I almost gave up my job to work with Todd for three months - unusually Todd gave me the choice - and also I guess because I look at what I could so easily have become or remained - a vindictive, small-minded, legalistic Christian.

Birthdays and Deaths

So, it's J's birthday today. Usually we go to the nearest Chinese restaurant, which does absolutely fabulous food, for lunch. Last year J's parents joined us - and the plans hadn't changed for this year - until around 11 o'clock when J's mum phoned and said that J's dad had volunteered to drive somebody into the town's hospital for an 11:45 appointment - so much for having lunch at 12...

To be honest, it pissed both J and I off. The in-laws seem to specialise at putting people in front of family - they almost always manage to find someone "in need" who needs them more at a particular time than attending a family event, or who would be lonely if they weren't at the family event. It would be nice to know that, just some times, they valued family more than others, and that they recognised there are other people who can help at such times.

The lunch was OK - J's dad didn't arrive until 1:20, just as the starters had been served - and they did pay for it all. J's mum asked about baby-sitting on Tuesday evenings so that we could go to small group - embarrased silence. J had signed up this morning to be a volunteer to visit old people who are housebound. While I don't have a problem with it particularly, it's yet another contact made through the church - although it appears that the organiser now also has problems with church, it's irrelevance and the arrogance that lots of believers display. Tonight's not the night to talk about it all - and then I'm away until Friday afternoon, and then we're out on Friday night...

Humph Lyttelton died on Saturday. While he probably should be best known as a jazz trumpeter (and the bits I have heard him play have been almost magical), I remember him as the dead-pan chair of I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue. I was actually quite moved by the news, with an odd mixture of sadness and chuckles. Few celebrities move me this way. Radio 4 broadcast a tribute show on Sunday, which J and I listened to over the web before today's lunch. It had Willie Rushton on it - the one member of the ISIHC group I had actually met. Happy memories...

Stereotypes

I met a someone I've known a long time for coffee in Birmingham city centre on Friday. We first met over 25 years ago at university because we went to the same church, and became good friends, sharing a house for nearly three years, and doing drama and radio together. Some distance crept in when he moved to Birmingham, then got married, then divorced, then I moved and got married, then he got married again. My wife and I supported him financially as he was starting up in Christian radio, and then, four years ago, I dropped the news of my transition on him – contact had reduced to one or two “contacts” a year by then.

On Friday he said he was very hurt, primarily because he felt I’d presented him with a fait accompli. Quite what he expected to do to make me change my mind, I don’t know. But apparently I did his head in, so he effectively dropped contact. Because he’s arranging a church reunion in May, he got in touch again and apologised, and we agreed to meet up.

Now, here’s the thing. He couldn’t cope with the idea that I was still the same person inside, and seemed freaked that I could remember things from our past. He also didn’t seem to cope with the idea that I could have “lost” faith. (Was I “disillusioned by God” – no, I was disillusioned by the church, initially.) He wanted to start a new friendship rather than adapt the old one. He still couldn’t say that I’d done the right thing in transitioning, despite me saying again that the alternative was probably death – I don’t think he believes it. And my “hope that was OK” message has so far gone unanswered. My thoughts – he can’t cope with me at all. As a female ex-Christian, and one who has rationalised herself out of faith, I’m simply no longer the kind of person who he would naturally socialise with. To be honest, that hurts, especially given the distance and time given. But then he has always been one to want to control the rules around a relationship.

It seems that evangelical Christians tend to only think in stereotypes – Christian or non-Christian, male or female, leader or follower. When the stereotypes get merged – like a female Christian leader – that’s where the problems start. What I’ve done, of course, is just completely override the stereotypes. The view being that someone who looks like a guy simply can’t be female inside, it doesn’t make sense. And so my friend, along with pretty much all the evangelical Christians I’ve known, just dropped contact. I don’t fit their world view any more, so I must be wrong. Of course, there are a few exceptions to the rule. But I find it incredibly arrogant that the majority of Christians should simply assume that their world view is completely, 100%, unalterably right.

Then I remember Saturday night. Another, even longer-term friend (from school) came to a choral concert I was singing in – I’d invited him and he had willingly accepted. Now this friend, also an evangelical Christian, (but softly evangelical , if that makes any sense) has accepted my gender change, on the surface at least. He said on Saturday night that that was largely because he saw himself as leading a colourful life, and so viewed me in the same sort of light – someone who didn’t know how to deal with the issues they had. But even so, he still said that he took time to adjust how he related to me. Now, I might be being super-sensitive here (a big problem for transsexual people) but once again this “stereotype” came up. But then my wife also says that she relates to me differently now than when I was male.

Don’t get me wrong – it’s very releasing and relieving not being treated as male, but why do people who know me well still want to revert to stereotypical gender relationships? Or is this simply because I’m surrounded by evangelical or pseudo-evangelical Christians?