The mom called the church office: “As you may know, my son now identifies as a female. She is planning to attend your youth group retreat this weekend. I need to know how you plan to accommodate her for restrooms and showers.”
This call represents not only an ethical and theological issue, but a looming legal dilemma as well. Earlier this year the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Department of Education, and the Justice Department issued “bathroom” guidance requiring restroom and locker room facilities that are “consistent” with a person’s gender identity.
In addition to federal mandates, rapidly changing state and local laws may apply to religious organizations as well. The California legislature is poised to pass a bill that will force private universities to comply with the state’s position on gender identity access matters.
What does this mean for churches and Christian schools and camps? It’s a bit murky at this point, but faith-based organizations need to be aware and prepared.
For this week’s Holy Soup podcast, I talked with Eric Kniffin, a Colorado attorney specializing in legal issues facing religious institutions. He urges churches and other organizations to perform a “mission audit.” Based on core beliefs and convictions, organizations should discuss and establish written guidelines related to:
- gender identity issues
- facility use policies
- human resources practices
- sexual abuse policies
- volunteer criteria
Setting these boundaries in advance will establish faith-based underpinnings, and help defend against future legal actions.
For regulation updates, volunteer administration, and background checks, churches may receive helpful information from Shepherd’s Watch.
Kniffin said all churches need to identify potential legal and social pressures, and prepare to withstand challenges–from government, activist groups, citizens and church members. And, because every situation is unique, he recommends all receive competent legal help.
Regardless of how you feel about issues such as transgenderism, public and governmental views are changing, fast. These issues need to be prayerfully discussed and addressed, even if they seem uncomfortable.
Listen to the enlightening conversation with Eric Kniffin here on the Holy Soup podcast.
Very interesting interview and relevant subject matter. I think it’s critically important for churches to know about these potential issues.
The times, they are a’changing! We are not far from having to make a choice whether to be subject to God or Caesar. I’m preparing for the days when it’s far more practical for churches to drop off the government teat. Namely, learn to live without:
Tax deductible contributions
Property tax exemptions
State licensing of ministers
Non-profit or organizational entity-ship
Strangely, such things are relatively recent in the history of the Church, but we cannot conceive of functioning any other way. We must begin to think outside the box of what we think is normal.
Short term, and more on topic, the best, though not inexpensive solution, could be reverting to single ‘holer’ facilities.
Of course, we can probably succumb to social ‘norms’ and provide a third option for restrooms. It wouldn’t be ‘sin’ to do so. The greater issue is where/when do we really have to draw a line? The Church has gone underground before and will likely have to do so again before that Loud Shout from Heaven that will be heard round the world.
Heartspeak, interestingly, providing a “third option” for restrooms is not an option, according to the new federal rules. The new government regs specifically prohibit requiring transgender individuals to use “single-user” facilities (i.e., family restrooms) when others are not required to do so.
Here’s a link to a free guide for handling touchy subjects at church: http://lifetreecafe.com/tackle-touchy-subjects-guide/?utm_source=internal_lifetree_cafe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07_26_2016_ltc_touchy_subject_to_cl&utm_source=bm23&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Download+Free+Guide&utm_content=CL_20160727_TouchySubjectsLTC&utm_campaign=07/27/2016&_bta_tid=26326333641054719613502102063673504862075646245681702252296431974483456
Yes, I should have realized that anything that ‘singles out’ someone was not going to fly. To some degree, our N. American sensibilities regarding privacy are a bit more than many other places in the world. I think in and of itself, following these ‘guidelines’ doesn’t cross the line of obeying man rather than God. It certainly would have repercussions with a great many local church members. I’m not likely to send my daughter into the restroom alone but I suppose I should then be allowed to go in ‘her’ restroom as a security precaution. Is that forbidden?
New facilities will likely evolve to help retain a more individual sense of privacy. The alternative to not complying will mean that the whole government permissions issue as I mentioned above will need to be considered. Some will take the cheaper meat offered to idols and some will be strict abstainers, each must be clear in their own conscience. This will be one of those 21st century cases in a similar vein. Again, I don’t think either is wrong. That it is forced upon us by our government however, is reprehensible.
Phil shared on Facebook: “God, help us!”
William commented on Facebook: “If the person is confused about their gender provide a “Porta-Potty” or an outhouse out behind the church for them!”
Were we a better world when things were black and white and could be enforced as such. LGBT people could forced out of sight and out of mind and it was legal to do so. Should we reinstate laws of old and what would that look like today?
Ultimately, The Mission, is to reach the lost and make disciples…
What does it take to reach the lost, the confused, the lame, the blind, …?
(Answer: It can’t be about us, our sensibilities, nor what WE would prefer..and certainly not about our rules and ‘laws’…)
Heartspeak…..”Ultimately, The Mission, is to reach the lost and make disciples”… In your mind what does a disciple look like? Could you in complete detail and plain language explain how that should be done? How would you do that to LGBT folks? Explain with clear details. If they reject your missions message, what rights do you think they should have in society? Again explain clearly and concisely.
The disciple making process begins long before one (I’ll use conventional language) ‘becomes a Christian’. Jesus very clearly made disciples who ultimately decided NOT to follow Him–i.e. Judas. Yet Judas was called a disciple because for a period of time he was willing to follow until such time that he determined he could no longer do that and made his own tragic choices.
What Jesus did was involve himself with and surround himself with folks whom he welcomed into relationship. That relationship enabled them to make a decision whether what was involved was something they were committed enough to, so that they could bring others into a similar relationship with the Master. Disciples replicate more followers of Jesus. Teaching others to hear and follow the Master and leading by example.
Jesus sat, ate, walked, talked, partied with sinners on a regular basis, yet without sin. He did not worry what kind of ‘message’ he would send. His message was one of love, tolerance, forgiveness, and heartbreak over sin, yet also was committed to the absolute truth and authority of God in our lives. Those who were willing to follow along did so, those who were not did not do so.–such as the Pharisees.
So if you make your place of meeting into a place that is hostile and belligerently opposed to a people group, how ever can you hope to build a relationship that will demonstrate the love of God? If they totally reject your message, you probably don’t have to worry about them using your bathroom.
Rights? Rights?? They have the same rights that you and I have and the same desire to be loved. Where have we been empowered by God and scriptures to be the final arbiters over all those who reject our message? That has not been given to us and is a far different discussion than discussing our mission of disciple making. I have the freedom to reject sin in my life , but I do not have the freedom to reject sinners.
Let’s return the discussion to others…
Disturbing. Very disturbing.
Heartspeak You avoided my questions entirely. You said “If they totally reject your message, you probably don’t have to worry about them using your bathroom.” that statement speaks volumes . Explain why they wouldn’t want to use the bathroom. What would your message say that would cause them to think that way? Details please.
Ken commented on Facebook: “If he’s biologically male, he will be expected to use the men’s rest room.”
If they totally reject the message of the Kingdom, they are unlikely to be in your building, hence unlikely to need to use your bathroom. If they’ve come to your building, still reject your message, and have a need to use the facilities you are entirely welcome to suggest they use their chromosomally accurate bathroom but if they refuse–what are you going to do? Call the cops? Physically prevent it? Let them use your carpet? There are some who will insist on making a point—it’s then up to you how you will respond–please don’t dishonor the Master in how you do that nor bring shame to His cause nor your fellow disciples.
The entire point of this blog post has been to prepare folks to have a thoughtful, loving, Spirit guided, response and to seek His guidance on what that will look like. Thanks, Thom.
Heartspeak “. If they’ve come to your building, still reject your message, ” Your message meaning, they are sinful because of who they are?
No. They are sinful because they are sinful human beings like the rest of us–from birth (courtesy of Adam). The ‘type’ of sin is irrelevant. Sin prevents the possibility of relationship with God unless one accepts God’s truth and method of reconciliation. The Good News is that it’s possible to be reconciled with God—unless one doesn’t want to be. The choice is ours to make.
Mike commented on Facebook: “I think the privilege of having gendered bathrooms is gone. We all need to share all of them equally, get used to the idea of doing so, and stop trying to figure out which gender someone was, is, or is becoming. Take all signs off the doors except ‘restroom.'”
Heartspeak “The ‘type’ of sin is irrelevant. ” if so then let them use the restroom of their choice.
Nathaniel commented on Facebook: “In light of all of our cultures current state of confusion, maybe we should do away with a “gender identification” on the door and simply use the designation ‘if you have a penis use this bathroom/shower”, “if you have a vagina use this bathroom/shower”. It’s one thing to. Acknowledge people are confused. It’s another thing to nurture confusion. Love without truth is not love.”
“Sit” or “Stand” should be the polite criteria.
Do the Muslim churches have to do this also