random musings...

Category: Church

Queer Theology

The “anarchistreverend” blog, in the post http://anarchistreverend.com/2011/07/synchroblog/, asked people to blog about queer theology today, August 10, 2011. I think it will have a list of all of those who responded by blogging. My friend Cindi, who blogs at http://cindik.com/, has echoed the call several times, which finally inspired me to add a few words to the cause.

The original proposal stated: “On that day I want people to blog about what queer theology means to them. I want you to share your story of how reading the Bible queerly has changed your life. I want you to talk about how your sexuality or your gender identity has brought you deeper into relationship with God.”

And further clarified: “This synchroblog is NOT ABOUT apologetics. This isn’t about taking on the clobber passages or explaining why it’s okay to be queer. It’s time to move past those conversations. […] This day will give a hint of the beautiful stories that can be shared; of the amazing ways that queer folks read and delve into the Scriptures.”

Since I’ve waited until the last possible moment to think about this, my thoughts aren’t as well thought out as I would like… but I’ll give it a shot.

As a gay pastor of a small church composed of mostly LGBT people, the relationship of Christianity and queerness is very much of personal interest to me. First of all, I would echo the anarchistreverend’s sentiment that “it’s time to move past [apologetic] conversations.” Although I don’t mind giving my take on the “clobber” passages or why one can be queer and Christian to those who are genuinely struggling with those questions, I have no interest whatsoever in arguing about it with those who are determined to adhere to homophobic views. Queer people are loved children of God and our inherent, God-given worthiness is not up for debate. Period. End of Question.

But what does being queer and Christian mean to my life? For one, if I had not come to terms with being gay, I probably would never have come back to the church or Christianity. After many years, having left the church behind for reasons that had nothing to do with the question of queerness, I came back to church as a safe place to meet other gay people. In the process, I discovered “progressive” Christianity and re-found my love of the church and God. This has led me on a weird and wonderful journey to ministry.

But does being gay / queer enhance my spiritual journey? One way in which it does is that being a queer Christian forces me to question the status quo. To think for myself. I cannot just accept whatever traditional doctrine that I’m told I’m supposed to believe. Too many church teachings have historically been about maintaining the church’s power over people’s lives and not about helping them find God’s love. To buy into those doctrines would be self-damaging and irresponsible. The way many churches treat queer people is a good example of this at work.

This questioning and challenging is a gift that queer people give to the church. Being queer is to be on the margins of what is “acceptable.” Queerness makes people question and challenge boundaries, especially as to whether our boundaries are really God-given or established by fearful, power-pursuing humans. Marriage is a good example. Queerness challenges the status quo. It challenges the very definition of and reasons for marriage.

But, our questioning as queer people should also go beyond pushing the boundaries outward to include more people. We should question the very structure of the boundaries. Sticking with marriage, we might question whether being included in this institution is even the best thing. Perhaps we instead need new understandings of committed human relationships. In one way, I’m surprised that conservative Christians are against gay marriage. If conservatives wanted control over gay people and how they are allowed to act and present themselves then the best way to do that would be to bring them within the walls of their moral codes. I think it is wonderful when a new state approves gay marriage, but is to be within those walls really what is best? I’m not saying I disapprove of marriage… I think it is exciting when two people are in love and make a commitment to each other. But there are lots of side issues (such as church vs. state marriage) and this is not really meant to be a blog entry on marriage.

And there are plenty of other issues that come to mind… sexual ethics, open relationships, pornography, bdsm, family dynamics, the nature of love… Being queer should challenge us to try to think through those issues and not just accept the stereotypical, traditional Christian responses. And all of this questioning and searching the Bible, our hearts, and our fellow spiritual journeyers for answers should bring us closer to God in a more genuine, heartfelt relationship. Because that’s what queer people have to do, forge our own path of relationships – with each other and with God.

Related to this questioning, being a gay Christian has led me to think of Christ as queer… Jesus was always challenging the status quo, making people think. If you’re interested in the idea of a queer Christ, I’ll offer a sermon I preached a couple of years ago for further reflection. Listen to it at http://www.phoenixchurch.org/sermons/032909_ka_1corinth12_12-21_26.mp3 or read the pdf file attached to this blog entry.

Okay, that’s it as a last minute reflection on what being queer and Christian means to me… at least what it means to me today anyway 🙂 I’m still questioning… and hope I always will be.

referenced sermon in pdf format:  Recognizing Ourselves in Christ

How to make a difficult decision easy (sort of)

At a meeting a month or so again I mentioned how my church had made a difficult decision without rancor or ill will despite the fact that not everyone was in agreement on what the outcome should be.  Several people asked “how did you do that?” as if it sounded quite miraculous.  Indeed, in some sense it did seem like a miracle, especially considering we have, at times in our history, sometimes made easy decisions seem difficult and difficult decisions seem almost impossible.  But this is not unique to our church either.  Any group of human beings, all of whom have unique opinions, passions, and perspectives, can struggle with group decision making.

This led me to think about how did we take a difficult decision and make a pleasant process out of it?  Here are some of my thoughts and some of the principles that we followed:

What is church? (once again)

Looking back, I notice that my last four or five posts have all somehow been related to what is church. Maybe I saw this coming… but I’m needing to take a good long break from my church. I’m still a member there, but I’m not sure if I’ll ever be back. Who knows what the future holds? But now I’m wondering if I should be looking for some other place to go for now. What is it I expect from church? What do I think church should be? For me, for it’s members, for the larger civic community, and for the world?

As a start, I think a church should be a community of seekers – people seeking knowledge and relationship with a greater, loving power. The bigger question is what does it mean to be a community? It means people who support each other and struggle with each other in a loving way. Which sounds nice… but the nuts and bolts of it aren’t always easy. People are not perfect and sometimes there doesn’t seem to be any way to reconcile the problems.

I think a church should be about living out the “kingdom of God,” which to me means living out the love of God and living in a justice oriented way. Basically, following Jesus’ teachings.

I think a church should be about social justice.

I think a church should be about meaningful worship. The church is not just about social justice. I can go volunteer with any secular justice organization to work on causes important to me. Worship is about relating to God and I think ultimately working on our relationship with God is what sets church apart from those other organizations. This must be a priority. Of course, I’m not saying here what I think constitutes meaningful worship. That’s probably another long post…

I think a church needs to officially welcome and accept GLBTQQ people and honor who God made them to be. In the UCC, this would be an “open and affirming” church. I know I have no desire to be part of a church that doesn’t accept me for who I am. I just won’t do that – I have no desire to fight that battle. I need a church that will support and nurture me, not one I have to constantly fight with. But, I also am not sure I want to be part of a church that isn’t willing to step up and say officially they are open and affirming. I know of churches that accept gay members but don’t think they need an official statement. To me, that is in some sense saying “you can come here, but don’t make a fuss about who you are… we’ll take gay folks, but we don’t want too many of them.” I’m also not sure about a church that officially welcomes gay folks but is restricted in how they can do so by their denominational rules (for example, maybe they aren’t allowed to perform commitment ceremonies). I feel quite strongly about this, but it severely limits my options on existing churches. In my city, I can only think of one church that might meet my ideal requirements (re: GLBTQQ issues) other than the one I’ve decided I need a break from.

My ideal church is probably some combination of the mission statement from my currently estranged church and The Center for Progressive Christianity’s 8 Points.

I’m not sure what else… I guess that’s all I’ve got off the top of my head.

Is finding such a church a pipe dream?

What does church mean to you?

What is church?

Or should I say what is the purpose of church? I’ve heard talk recently that implied a tension between mission vs. worship as the purpose of church. So that got me thinking.

How can we define church? Perhaps as a community that attempts together to live according to the modeling and teachings of Jesus? It seems to me that church without a mission, a social justice element, has got problems. On the other hand, a church that doesn’t spiritually nourish people isn’t really a church. It’s no different than any other civic-ly minded non-profit organization. So, I think a church needs both, but for me the spiritual – worship, etc. – is what makes a church a church.

More S&M Jesus

No idea is original…

This website seems so wrong and yet… This guy’s making fun of religion, of course, but I certainly laughed at his site… Religion, of course, can use some shaking up, but finding a relationship with God is serious… but doesn’t need to be solemn or puritanical… I think we forget that

S&M Jesus

Ok, in a class on Queer Theory, the issue of S&M came up. It was proposed that seen in this context one might argue that safety is the opposite of desire. In an S&M scene, one can also say the bottom/Masochist is the one with the power. They agree to what can and can’t be done in the scene. They have the safeword to end the scene. Thus, in a sense, they ultimately control the scene.

This got me thinking in a weird vein… if safety is the opposite of desire (and passion)… is a safe God a static God, a God without passion… no passion of God or for God? Does the idea of a becoming God, a constantly creating God, then imply a God with passion, that inspires passion?

To get back to S&M… would an S&M scene make a metaphor for the human-God relationship? Is God the S or the M? Think of the New Testament imagery, especially of the last day of Jesus’ life. Jesus… beaten, wearing a crown of thorns, tied to a cross, pierced by a spear… Jesus is the one on whom pain is being inflicted… Jesus is the one with the power, who wished in the garden that the scene didn’t have to play out, but who refused to use the safeword to stop the scene…

Of course that makes humanity the Sadist, the one inflicting the pain on Christ as God incarnate, perhaps as the symbolic stand-in of all creation. The S&M relationship is ultimately one of trust and taking that trust to its limits, isn’t it? Is God showing ultimate trust and love for us by not using the safeword? Are we earning that trust? Are humanity, creation, God all getting what they need from the scene… trust, love, pleasure? Or has the scene gone horribly wrong?

Maybe God is a switch and wants to change roles for awhile… put me under your control God… I give my life over to you… being used in the Bible, the whole master/slave language kind of works here… In any case, maybe our relationship with God needs to be a little less safe, a little more passionate, a little more trusting, loving, pleasuring… and yes erotic.

Ah well, it’s an interesting analogy to play with. I haven’t fully explored it so I don’t know if it really works or not… and if it’s blasphemous, I don’t care and I doubt that God does either 🙂

Pastor and parishioner

Recently, Rev. Jeremiah Wright of Trinity UCC in Chicago has been vilified in the press for some of things said in sermons in the last few years. Wright retired earlier this year but he was the long time pastor of presidential candidate Barack Obama.

My view on this… some of the things Wright was saying don’t seem too bad to me… what’s wrong with pointing out that the United States is not blameless in this world? I think it is critical that we do so. But, some of the things Wright has said strike me as more suspect… criticizing Hillary Clinton for her privileged position as a *white* woman in comparison to Obama’s less than privileged position as a *black* man seems to be me to just be the flip side of what Geraldine Ferraro was recently criticized for saying. Bascially it sounds like they’re arguing about who’s oppression is worse (gender vs. race). It’s a pointless argument that I can see no positive benefit from. All oppression needs to be addressed.

I also could very well be wrong about my personal assessments of Wright’s quotes because all of the quotes were out of context. They were 10 second clips out of a sermon, which I’m guessing probably ran a lot longer. To really try to judge what he was saying, I think one should be obligated to listen to the whole sermon.

However, in any case, none of that is what really upsets me the most. What I don’t understand is why Barack Obama is being held responsible for what his minister said? What is the relationship between pastor and parishoner? The media seems to think that everyone who goes to church has to blindly believe and do what the preacher says. And, if they don’t, I guess they need to issue a press release to make their disagreement public. It all seems ludicrous to me. I’m much more interested in what Obama says than what his pastor said.

Page 3 of 3

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén