Four Strands of Queer Theology

LGBT positive theological works have been circulating since the 1950′s. Patrick Cheng introduces us to four strands in the evolution of queer theology. He is not attempting to divide the history of queer theology into distinct theological eras, and these strands are not mutually exclusive. For him, this is a roughly chronological way of describing particular trends in the development of queer theology over the last half-century.

The first strand in the development of queer theology is apologetic theology. It can be summarized by the slogan, gay is good. The goal of this strand was to urge the church to accept gay people for who they are and to persuade gay people to believe that they can be both Christian and gay. An array of approaches were utilized in order that these objectives might be met. It was argued that the traditional attitudes of the western Christian tradition regarding homosexuality were both erroneous and defective because they disregarded the biological, psychological and genetic conditions of people with homosexual orientations. Queer apologists became convinced that when these conditions were given proper consideration that the only legitimate conclusion that could be drawn was that homosexuality is a morally neutral condition that is inherent to the individual and unalterable. Others contended that homosexual acts are positively moral if they permit the full expression of an individual’s personality and if they allow this individual to generate all of her/his redemptive love, mature adjustment, and creativity. Some apologists formed organizations and churches that ministered specifically to LGBT people. Still others looked to open up dialogue between gay activists and communities of faith. Apologetic theology reached its height in the 1980′s when it was argued that the early church was not as uniformly homophobic as tradition would have us believe, and that it was not until the thirteenth century that the Christian church began to treat same-sex acts with hostility and intolerance.

The second strand in the development of queer theology is liberation theology. Liberation theology is based upon the exodus narrative, which is the story of the Israelites being set free from their bondage in Egypt. The primary concern of this strand pushed beyond the original apologetic desire to find acceptance for gay people by and within the church and sought to demonstrate that queer liberation from heterosexism and homophobia was at the very heart of Christian theology and the gospel message. As with other liberation theologies, queer liberation argued that God was not neutral and that He had a preferential option for poor and oppressed peoples. It was God’s nature to befriend the friendless and to identify Himself with the underprivileged. Queer theologians were adamant that a God who oppressed and sided with those who oppressed homosexuals was blind to the enslavement of gay people, and was nothing more than an oppressive idol. Queer liberationists suggested that Jesus might have remained celibate due to the fact that He Himself was a homosexual. These theologians also insisted that the gay community had the right to refer to God as our gay God. Furthermore, queer liberation echoed the assertions of Latin American and black liberation theology by declaring that straight people had no right to determine what constituted sin and morality for LGBT people. LGBT people were to do this for themselves, and any attempt by a straight person to define sin and morality for LGBT people should be considered patriarchal, condescending and even blasphemous.

The third strand in the development of queer theology is relational theology. Rather than focusing on issues of acceptance or liberation, theologians in this strand were determined to locate God in the erotic, in mutual relationships and in human interconnectedness. It was developed initially and predominantly by lesbian theologians as a response to a perceived silence in gay male theology with regard both to woman’s issues and to the importance of feminist theological reflection. Relational theologians began to argue that God was not extrinsic to sex or gender, but was rather immersed in our gendered and erotic particularities. God exists within the connections that people have with body and nature and darkness and moisture and dirt and sex. Friendship was also a central theme in this strand. Human friendship (whether it included genital expression or not) was perceived to be a useful paradigm of right relation for the whole of creation.  In fact, friendship was such a crucial concept within this strand that relational theologians reasoned that it would be preferable to think of Jesus as a friend rather than as a master. The theology which arose during the 1980′s in the midst of the HIV/AIDS pandemic is a powerful expression of the relational mode of thinking (especially when we consider the terror that was generated as a result of the overwhelming public ignorance with regard to the ways in which this disease could be transmitted). Queer theologians argued that the only way to deal with the anger and pain of unjust natural evils like HIV/AIDS was (paradoxically) through acts of love, by tending to the sick and the dying, by comforting the bereaved, and by striving to find a cure.

The fourth strand in the development of queer theology is queer theology itself. The chief objective of queer theorists is to deconstruct the essentialist notions of sexuality and gender identity that have been socially constructed through language and discourse. They contend that both sexuality and gender identity should be understood as fluid points across a continuum and not as fixed categories. Some who have taken this approach have sought to do away completely with the homosexuality/heterosexuality dichotomy. This binary is considered to be destructive because homosexuality and heterosexuality are patriarchal classifications which reinforce the sex role system. The term homosexual itself has been rejected by many due to the fact that it is perceived to be a scare term and an instrument of social control which is used to intimidate people who appear to deviate from the norms dictated by role psychology. Queer theologians actually caution LGBT people against adopting an essentialist reading of gay and lesbian identity, arguing that when LGBT people think of themselves as a tribe, as a separate people or as a race they echo medieval theology’s preoccupation with the Sodomites. This does not mean that those who hold to this view deny that there are people who are born with gender variant identities or same-sex attractions who remain that way throughout the entirety of their lives. Instead, they are seeking to highlight the fact that the significance and meaning of these gender expressions and sexual attractions within a culture fluctuate depending upon the time and place. This strand has also produced more works of transgendered theology than any of the other three previous strands.

What direction is queer theology moving in as it proceeds into the future? Cheng notes that queer theorists are beginning to focus on a broader range of issues including race and class in addition to sexuality and gender identity. Notions of intersectionality and hybridity are being emphasized more and more as queer theologians start to make use of the insights that they have gained from engaging with critical race theory and postcolonial theology. LGBT theologians are also encouraging one another to be in dialogue with the other liberation theologies which have emerged since the 1960′s. These conversations are considered to be essential for those reflecting from the queer theological perspective if they hope to avoid the danger of a gay theological hegemony that excludes other voices in various shades of contextualities.