Share/Bookmark

Queer Theology As Change Agent

3rd March, 2009 - Posted by nwilsonadmin - 4 Comments

Queer Theology as Change Agent

Creating Change Conference, Denver, Colorado

January 31, 2009, Address at Workshop

Rev. Nancy Wilson

 

I am glad to address you today as the spiritual leader of Metropolitan Community Churches. MCC started 40 years ago, just before the Stonewall Rebellion, by a Pentecostal gay man, Rev. Troy Perry.  We have about 300 congregations and communities in about 30 countries. We do human rights work all over the world, and have a dynamic relationship with The Fellowship, an African American same-gender loving friendly church.

 

I have been a lesbian/feminist activist, AIDS activist and MCC minister for 36 years. And, I am a Christian who thinks Jesus would be more at home at Creating Change than at the Vatican or at Saddleback Church, or even the Methodist Church I grew up in.  I am a Christian who does not need for anyone else to be a Christian the way I am a Christian, and for whom someone like Thich Nhat Hanh, the Buddhist teacher and activist is also my brother and teacher.  Even Vatican II said, “We reject nothing true in other religions.”

 

Today, mostly we want to provoke you, to have you try on the idea of yourselves as queer theologians; or, if you are not religious, to think about why religion might be important to our movement! While we are changing the world, changing churches and religious institutions, we have the joyous responsibility of doing the creative and imaginative work of doing queer theology!

 

It was so moving to hear Patti Berne (a presenter at the institute) share her work on the intersectionality of race, class, sexuality, disability and spirituality. That’s truly queer theology in practice. . .

 

The starting point of queer theology is queer bodies and queer lives and stories!

 

How many of you consider yourself religious, with a serious connection to a faith tradition and community/institution? How many of you consider yourself spiritual, but not religious? How many of you are most definitely not religious or spiritual? How many are undecided? I want to respect the diversity in this room, and acknowledge it and celebrate it.

 

At the risk of oversimplifying, the majority of people at this conference, and in our movement, fall into one of two categories:  1) they are religious, or grew up in a religious home, and were alienated, disappointed, or harmed by a faith community; or  2) they have had no connection to any religious group at all, but still have a very negative view of the role of religion in society. In other words, religion just pisses you off and you are not sure what having a spiritual life might mean!

 

If you are in recovery, your recovery program may have challenged you to have a spiritual connection. There is a much smaller group of us here, representing a much larger group out there, who have found our way to integrate faith, spirituality, and being same-gender-loving LGBTQI/queer. . .

 

It is funny to me that everything else, including our movement is good when it is organized – except religion! We are rightly suspicious of religious institutions because of the abuse of power, and the toxic alignment of religion with colonialism and capitalism. Yet, there are progressive, indigenous spiritual and religious movements that have much to contribute to our ideals of collaboration for justice, wholeness and peace.

 

Top Twelve Reasons Religion Matters Whether You are Religious or Not:

 

v    Religion is a global phenomenon, and a majority of the people in the world identify with a religion, even if nominally. Fundamentalism is a pan-religious, modern phenomenon that is has not quite peaked yet and must be challenged.

v    In the US, religious people, especially conservative religious people, vote.

v    Laws, especially oppressive laws about bodies and sexuality, are often based on religious ideas that have still not been properly refuted in the public arena – for instance, most people would say the Hebrew scripture and Christian Bible condemn homosexuality, which now, most people in the guild of scripture scholarship would say is not true.

v    Progressive religious movements and people led the abolitionist movement, support for women’s suffrage, peace movements, in the US and globally. There was a great story in the New York Times, editorial page, today, January 31, 2009,  telling the story of how one woman’s dream, and getting her Lutheran Church to pray for peace lead to a mass movement that over threw Charles Taylor, the ruthless dictator of Liberia – and they now have a woman president!

v    The African American church was the cradle of the civil rights movement, and the language and music of faith were the language and music of the movement

v    Religion is not just about beliefs – it is about culture, and race and class and family. Just ask any Roman Catholic!

v    There are queer communities in this country and in other countries that cannot be organized without a spiritual or religious component, without addressing the need for spiritual community.

v    What you don’t know, or underestimate people’s religious sensibilities and deeply held beliefs, can lose campaigns, like Prop 8 in California.

v    Queer people of faith have played an important part in leading our movement, but have often been marginalized.

v    In our post-modern world, loss of transcendence, spirituality and loss of confidence in meta-narratives has caused a collective grief, and a loss of confidence in claiming our values and ethical constructs.

v    Religion can be the most divisive, destructive force, the cause of wars and violence; or it can be a powerful voice for justice and peace.

v    People of faith can be influenced to change their minds on important issues, if they can see that a more important religious value is at stake

 

At Creating Change this week, John D’Emilio spoke of the age of Barack Obama and “the common good,” a politics of values that might be able to help us transcend identity politics as the be-all and end-all. People of faith understand this language, and what means to form coalitions for a higher cause. Use us!

 

Rev. Deborah Johnson spoke of the “worm hole moment” we are in, that we have a spiritual opportunity, and must not apologize for who we are, but be authentically who we are, everywhere we are. You might have heard that she went from speaking to preaching for a minute in that room Thursday morning, and that call and response from the audience was her religious heritage being lived out in a queer context! It was exciting for many and uncomfortable for some all at once!

 

What we are lumping together today and calling Queer theology owes an enormous debt to Liberation theology, which started thirty five years ago, which spoke about the “epistemological privilege” of the struggling poor – in other words the poor know something about Transcendence, about God that the rest of us do not know. It critiqued the marriage of Christian theology, colonialism and capitalism.

 

Black theology took up the Blackness of Jesus, and the beauty and power of being black, especially in America–the goodness of black bodies. Queer theology is in debt to black theology.

 

Queer theology is also a descendent of Feminist theology, which taught us that when god is male, male is god; and to the understanding that heterosexism is derived from misogyny. Queer theology owes a debt to queer theory’s notions of resistance and subversion, as queer people deconstruct and reconstruct theologies from the social location of being queer.

 

Queer theology is about claiming our innate spiritual authority – as sentient beings, as Children of God. It is about having the confidence to speak up for what we know to be true, and good and beautiful. To speak truth to power in our times, to cry out for justice to claim our community values as spiritual and moral values.

 

Queer theology says that our experiences – the pain and the joy, the closet and the coming out, being gender non-conforming, our relationships, our families — these are all theological and spiritual categories, and  say something about what it means to be human and divine.  Humankind and the Divine are not complete without us. We are the queer image of the Divine.

 

Queer theology is a lens on queer existence, that there is a peculiar spiritual meaning to our being in the world. To paraphrase Rick Warren, it is to discover “The Purpose Driven Queer Life!” And, conversely, Queer existence says something about the nature of the Divine.  

 

Queer theology today is done by Catholics, Protestants, MCCer’s, people from every Christian perspective, Unitarians, Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Indigenous practitioners and pagans; by academics, by poets and activists.

 

If you are a queer community organizer, political activist, and you know nothing about this dimension of queer community, we want you to know about it.

 

Finally, I want to share three “roles of religion,” Queering H. R. Niebuhr’s Christ and Culture:

 

Religion of Culture – supports the status quo, the present power structures; denies that it has privilege; is silent about sexuality. This kind of religion says, “Don’t scandalize us. Don’t rock the boat, this is not a good time to bring up queer issues” It tends to serve the middle and upper classes, valuing intellectual approach not comfortable with the body, or conflict, or dealing with social issues at all.

 

Religion against Culture – This is the religion of alienation, separation, of fundamentalist Christianity, Islam and others. This is religion called “Holiness,” Pentecostal; and, until recently, these folks were not encouraged to vote, and felt persecuted as working class and poor people. They tend to preach, “Our way or the highway.” There is a hostility to modernization, and a tendency to be anti-intellectual and anti-science; conformity to rules, and based in fear. However, they provide social structure, comfort, help for those at the bottom of the power pile. Unfortunately, sometimes they buy into myths such as “Queers will destroy us” (our marriages, our families, our “way of life,” unexamined patriarchy).

 

Religion transforming culture – this is religions that is oriented “for the common good,” and values justice, peace and liberation. It relies on the prophetic traditions. This religion creates coalition with secular groups, other religious for a larger, common good. It takes risks, it sides with the oppressed. It will cross class and racial boundaries.

 

How do we see the religious traditions we came from in this framework? How does it affect the ways in which we work together for change?

 

 

Claim your right to be a queer theologian!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on: March 3, 2009

Filed under: Presentations/Papers

4 Comments

Jkid

May 5th, 2009 at 8:01 pm    


While I respect peoples life stly choice to be homosexual I do not affirm the decision. The people who think homosexuality is ok are simply reading stuff into the bible which is not there. We can love homosexuals and other sexually different people while praying they change their lifestyle. I myself have urges which are wrong (pedophilic) but I do not act on them never have never will. Lets move back to traditional conservative theology.

noahsdad

June 14th, 2009 at 8:49 am    


Jkid,

When I read my Bible, carefully, and pray, I encounter a Jesus whose radical witness of love extended to all. As just one example, Phillip, acting on that love, saw no barrier to baptizing a sexually different person, whom the religious authorities of the time would have considered unclean. I believe I know what Jesus would do–and His teaching is the ultimate tradition!

Peace to you,

noahsdad

cham

June 24th, 2009 at 8:53 am    


Noteing the comment by Jkid; I would like to point out that homosexuality is not a choice. It is viewed as a choice because of patriarchal immposition of the value which causes classism. This value is power. Power over thought, over personhood, power over individualism. Conformity is the answer if a partriarchal society is allowed to dominate peoples who differ. When conformity is not an option, then alienation and chastisement becomes the means to enforce – just like sanctions against countries that don’t act the way we think they should as just one off the cuff example. It is these types of non-substantiated beliefs that have been expressed by non-believers (fundatmentalists/religious)which permeate the culture/society we live in. It is this discourse that the world needs to hear which will turn heads and cause intellegent peoples to re-consider their belief model/system..

David S

May 19th, 2010 at 6:11 pm    


I have worked for the gay rights movement since the 80s. HIV/AIDs awareness in Greenwich Village, where my partner passed away and where I lost many friends. I have worked for the acceptance of gay unions in the ELCA, which was quite recent. I have been out since college, and I participate in several G/L/B/T groups and issues.

What your article avoids acknowledging, and what angers a lot of people within the G/L/B/T community, and among our straight families and supporters, is that you do not mention who chose the “acceptance” of the word “Queer”, nor the large group of people in our community that resent your use of this vulgar, ugly, and forced hate word.

It does not surprise me that this word has been pushed so much by feminists. In the real world, women do not bear the brunt of the this hate word, either verbally or physically. This word is used by anti-gays, usually simultaneously as “faggot” during verbal harrassment,physical harrassment and even murder.

Your movement dubiously states that “by embracing the word we disempower it” or “spoil its’ sting”. Some may call this idealistic, but many of us realize it delusional and harmful.

One has to ask themselves, who chose this “hate word” to use. Most research I have done traces it back to lesbians in the feminist movement, and accepted by a fringe of young gays that are both naive, rebellious, and inexperienced.

I was violently bashed in broad daylight in Jackson Heights,NY. It was from a group of skinheads. I was called 2 names during the nightmare experience (“faggot” and “queer”). These are both hate words that are used every bit as much today as they always have in attacks against gay men. One word I was not called was “gay”.

Many of us fought and debated with family and friends and coworkers about the use of the word “Queer” being a hate word, and in some cases that do have Hate Crimes Legislation, eyewitnesses have testified as to the persecutors use of the term.

Most mainstream gay people do not like the word. As stated, it’s ugly, it has the connotation of being radical and alienating.

Further, most of the success in the “gay rights movement” has been highjacked by “Queer Liberationist” when it was in fact accomplished by gay rights movements, which you now arrogantly force under your “umbrella term of inclusivity”.

The very fact that the word is still a matter of contention in the gay community should have thrown up a red flag to any caring group of people. But your group does not care that for many, this word is aone that makes us wince, that we’ve heard pejoratively and is used even today as a hate word in schools. It is not “cool” as some naive now believe, it is as hurtful and filled with ridicule as it always was.

I notice that no word that was considered disparaging to women has not been “disempowered by embracing the word” or “redefining the word”. To that end, I would point out that no other group has accepted a hate word and “disempowered it”. More accurately, as with queer, the strategy was to push the idea that prejudicial words and bigoted words were used only by the socially ignorant, and many words such as “kike, gook, dego, nigger, faggot, queer” were reduced in usage even by straight men.

What is so condescending about your movement is how you have arrogantly forced this word on gay men, a label so many of disdained and worked against, after years of freeing ourselves of us.

Accurately, the appearance of “radical queers” started appearing in the gay parade marches and political marches and were a small number.

It was in the 90s that ultra-liberal academes started gathering momentum in certain liberal institutions. You mention “intelligent peoples” as if you were a member of that group, and yet you are not honest about the many gay people (male and female, but agreeably mostly gay men) that find this word “offensive”, that do not believe the ridiculous statement that the word has been reclaimed, and it is a word that mainstream gays HATE.

At no point have any of you even paused to consider another phrase. What is worse, many of you have used revisionist history now referring to gay rights leaders of the past as “queers” when in reality they would have been highly insulted and angry if you used the term in reference to them.

I spent over half my life being devoured by various gay issues, AIDs issues, etc.
I note that we demonstrated outside of St. Vincents in Greenwich Village in the 80s so that gays could visit their loved ones in hospitals and it’s only NOW that hospitals have been ordered to oblige.

Gay unions in mainstream churches has been a slow process but the debate is ongoing in most congregations. Use of the word “Queer” would have ruined our chances in the ELCA vote, and outside of the small MCC, most gays (particularly religious) are embarrassed and angered by the word.

You have pushed this hate word right back on us without any concern for dissent. Like communists or fascists, the opinions of the many have been ignored by arrogant, bogus intellectuals such as yourself, that care more about your own self-righteous, self-empowering rebellious and “enlightened” view than the pain, insult and disgust with which so many gay men feel about the word.

I have spoken to a huge amount of gays on the issue, and most say they are used to seeing it in community magazines, but do not find it acceptable to label us with that term on a socialogical issue.

All you have really done is made a coup, much like the Weathermen in the 60s, without any concern to all of the gay rights activists that paved the way for decades without use of that word.

We used to stress that gays were normal, just a minority with regards to sexual orientation. Many men were embarrassed to come out because society was ignorant and bbelieved gay men were all sissies and wanted to be women. It was the gay movement that pointed out the fact that there were more heterosexual transvestites than gay ones.

Most gay people prefer that word when coming out to their parents, family and coworkers.

You all go on and on as if you speak for the entire gay community, you group anyone that is not hetero-normative and push them under this forced umbrella of non-normatives which is about as hateful and foolish as if our enemies had done it to us. Antigay straights would love nothing better to than have us accept all of their non-normatives on to us.

IN REALITY, there are normative heterosexuals and normative homosexuals.
In each group, there are non-normative (or atypical) subgroups.

I have less in common with a straight transvestite than a straight man. They share the same sexual orientation. I don’t even share that!

To force all “deviants’ into one umbrella without consensus, just a determination by ultra-liberal academes is thoughtless, hurtful and many of us view it not only as betrayal, but a force to be resisted.

Statistically, Intersex individuals overwhelmingly detest the word “Queer” and most wish their medical condition to be private.

Bisexual men generally don’t like the word ‘gay’ let alone “queer”.
Most gay men don’t want to be thought of as queers. But you don’t care because the word does not carry with it the pain, and demeaning humiliation and fear that word carries, and your handful of young, brainwashed “Queers” are not experienced to know what effort brings about change, nor do they respect the amount of change brought to them, because people like you have falsely claimed responsibility to those who actually worked hard for that change, sacrificed for it.
I can not imagine you waltzing into an AIDs ward in the 80s or early 90s and taking a poll about the word “queer”. I can’t envision someone being that loathsome. I know my partner hated it. His father called him that when he first found out, as did mine.

But people like you don’t care, or they try to placate us by saying “we’re sorry for SOME who feel bad memories from this word…BUT….”

You are everybit as hurtful and everybit as condescending in forcing that label on gay men as you have as any antigay bigot that wants to punch me in the mouth is. They didn’t betray me. Your fraction of the gay community (g,l,b,t) betrayed us by negating our voices, our feelings, and the experiences of our very real lives.

David Shallenberger

Leave a reply