According to Cheng, the Saints are the breaking through of radical love. They do this first off by expunging erotic boundaries. Although same-sex desire is explicitly condemned by and within the Roman Catholic church, the practice of venerating Saints has opened up a space wherein such a desire is actually encouraged, leading to an erotic fixation upon the Saints. In light of this, queer theologians have submitted a variety of queer readings of the Saints and have consequently crossed the dividing line between the holy and the erotic (along with some of the other aforementioned boundary markers). In addition, these queer theologians have begun to apply Roman Catholicism’s three categories of Saints (martyr, confessor and doctor) to members of the LGBT community. Queer saints are acknowledged as individuals who have been virtuous, consecrated models of queerness, and who have also served as role models for LGBT people.

The Saints are furthermore the breaking through radical love because they eradicate literary boundaries. There are queer theologians who have mused over the relationship between Saints and the erotic within the context of hagiography (or biographies of the Saints). By weaving together queer theory with their own imaginative readings of the lives of the early Christian Saints, these theologians have effectively collapsed the literary genres known as histories and queer romances. They have also challenged the dualistic view which separates celibacy from sexuality. They contend that eroticism was not erased in the cases of those Saints who remained celibate, and rather that it was intensified as a result of the restraint shown by these people. Moreover, there are some queer theologians who have argued that there are homoerotic elements permeating the genre of hagiography, but that these elements have routinely been suppressed in liturgical retellings of these narratives.

Finally, the Saints are the breaking through of radical love because they erase social boundaries. Although non-Christians in the Roman empire venerated the dead, they did not cross any precious metaphysical boundaries in terms of claiming intimacy with the divine. The Christian cult of the Saints was scandalous because it challenged the presumably immovable boundaries between earth and heaven, the living and the dead, and divinity and humanity. Roman veneration of the dead was also restricted to a person’s own ancestors, family or kinship group, but Christian veneration of the Saints allowed for these family lines to be crossed. The dead belonged to the worldwide community of Christians; to everyone, and not strictly to the martyr’s own biological relatives. The boundary between family and strangers was thus dissolved. This practice transcended a vast array of social boundaries, and presented a challenge to all social and family relationships (which are grounded in patriarchy). To venerate the Saints is therefore to follow in the tradition of the early Christian Saints, who redefined the boundaries of the family. This is what stands at the heart of both queerness and radical love. One significant way that saints in our own day and age can cross social boundaries and follow in the footsteps of the s/heroes of the faith is to minister to and advocate for LGBT people.

According to the Nicene Creed there are four marks of the church. Cheng has decided to cover each of these marks from the perspective of the queer experience in order to show how each one dissolves the boundaries that separate people. The first of these marks is oneness. It has been argued by queer theologians that Christians are called to a condition of permanent porousness in terms of opening ourselves up to others. They have critiqued the institution of marriage by asserting that these sorts of relationships imply a degree of possession and permanence which is contrary to the porous character of the church. Additionally, they have noted that monogamous sexual relationships (like marriage) tend to become entities unto themselves that withdraw from the larger body of Christ. It has been proposed that desire (defined as longing for an ever-closer relationship with others) is a much more apt descriptor for the church than is the traditional metaphor which compares the church to a heterosexual marriage (i.e. the bride of Christ). A variation in metaphor may well eliminate the impression that monogamous heterosexual marriage is the only natural or even the foundational form of relationship for the church. It is believed that the oneness of the Christian community would be significantly strengthened by the incorporation of queer relational configurations (for example platonic friendships, one-night stands and life partners) into the life of the church.

The second mark of the church is holiness. Holiness is when the divine meets the human or where God’s grace is made manifest on earth. It occurs when humans attempt to give back to God what God has done for humanity, and given that what God has done for us is characterized as a gift of pure grace, it can only be “repaid” by our own generosity and hospitality to other people. Some queer theologians have argued that an ethic of hospitality should be the overriding norm for all issues (including sexuality) in light of the fact that the early church was recognized by its proclivity for welcoming outsiders. Thus they believe that sexual acts such as anonymous sex and communal sex should not be forbidden per se, but rather judged according to the degree to which these actions are hospitable or welcoming. It is also reasoned that all genders are collapsed into Christian by this ethic. Therefore the only distinction between people that actually matters is whether or not a person is working towards the new creation (the church) or not (the world).

The third mark of the church is catholicity, or unity in difference. There is of course only one body of Christ, but this body is composed of all believers and therefore includes a wide assortment of gender identities, sexes, sexualities, races, cultures, ages and abilities. To the degree that the church accurately personifies Christ’s body, it is catholic. Cheng is critical of the Roman Catholic church for not being catholic enough when it comes to matters concerning sexuality and gender identity. He goes on to proclaim that a genuine catholicity which is becoming of the body of Christ is demonstrated most faithfully in queer churches. These churches are welcoming of people from an extensive variety of backgrounds, including a broad diversity of sexualities and gender identities. They furthermore provide a space where people can participate in varied forms of prayer, worship and liturgy as well as a variety of justice-seeking ministries. Included amongst these ministries are some which are common to a number of denominations (homeless shelters and food pantries) as well as others which are more distinctive of queer communities, for instance providing care for individuals with HIV/AIDS, pursuing marriage equality, contesting ex-gay movements and resisting anti-gay violence worldwide.

The fourth mark of the church is apostolicity. The church is an institution which stands in a dynamic tradition and in a communion of saints. It is important that the church exhibit a positive and deep engagement with the Christian tradition, as well as a humility which is manifested in a willingness to consider the possibility that the tradition could be wrong. The term apostolicity is derived from the Greek word apostolos, meaning that which is sent forth. This is a significant detail which highlights the mission of the church, that being the sending forth of the gospel. Cheng speaks of the magnitude of technological advances and cyberspace for the spread of the gospel and for the formation of ecclesial communities. In the fluid world of cyberspace, linguistic divisions, as well as sexual, gender and class borders vanish. As a result of these developments, queer people from around the world who had, in the past, been isolated with respect to physical geography are now increasingly able to connect with like-minded people in order that they might practice radical love in cyber-community.

Cheng closes this section by touching upon one final aspect of the doctrine of the church; the subject of pastoral care. Through and within the church, LGBT people can discover spiritual, emotional and physical healing as they minister to the needs of one another. There are a number of difficult issues, many of which are unique to the queer community, that LGBT people are facing (including the increasing rate of HIV/AIDS as a result of barebacking, which is unprotected anal sex). As such, it is imperative that churches begin to educate themselves with regard to how they might create a welcoming space for and also how they might assist LGBT people in the midst of their trials. Those church communities that vigorously practice pastoral care can facilitate the dissolution of the dividing line between segregation and community by bringing LGBT people out of isolation and into an external community of radical love.

I came across this new single by the High Society Collective. I was diggin’ it, so I figured I would bless all y’all with it as well. If you enjoy the track, you can purchase it from your I-tunes store. 100% of the proceeds will go toward the construction of a well in order to provide safe, clean water for children in Guatemala. You can find more information regarding High Society’s charities here.

Cheng contends that the Holy Spirit’s leading or directing towards radical love corresponds to what queer people refer to as gaydar, which is the ability to detect all others in the room who are queer by reading the subtle, unspoken signals that are transmitted by queer people. The Holy Spirit guides people in unexpected ways in order that they might fall in love with other people, which is not typically something that is planned out in advance or something that can be forced onto another party. In these ways, the Holy Spirit can be viewed as a sort of queer super glue that dissolves the boundaries which normally keep people separate and bonds together persons who are brought together in radical love. Additionally, queer scholars have identified a fundamental correlation between the ekstasis of human sexual passion and the desire for God in deep prayer (when control is radically ceded to the Spirit). 

Cheng lists four boundaries that are dissolved by the Holy Spirit. The first of these is the dividing line which stands between sexuality and church. These two subjects are rarely discussed in the same breath, for they are normally treated as mutually exclusive categories. The formation and development of the Metropolitan Community Churches (a denomination that was established by LGBT people but which is welcoming of all) is one example of the ways in which the Spirit has broken down this barrier. Second, the Holy Spirit crosses the dividing line betwixt public and private conversations concerning human sexuality. These two categories are likewise regarded as mutually exclusive. In general, discussions of non-normative sexualities and their associated practices are limited to the private sphere. An illustration of the Holy Spirit’s dissolving of this category is the event when a queer person comes out of the closet. The Spirit inhabits locations of shame and toxicity with such gentleness that queer people are released from these feelings. The Spirit therefore enables them to do and to be what God has called them to do and to be, collapses their closets and frees them to come out.

Thirdly, the dividing line positioned between unity and diversity is vaporized by the Holy Spirit. On the day of Pentecost (when the Spirit was first poured out upon the church) There was a unity in purpose and location, but there was also diversity in the ways that the Spirit was manifested and in the ways that God’s message was shared. As is true of the wind, the Spirit blew wherever it chose, and the gospel was communicated in accordance with the needs of each individual hearer. In light of the unity in diversity which was disclosed on Pentecost, queer theologians have postulated that it is the Holy Spirit of God who is leading their resistance against heteronormative patterns of relationship. Moreover, they contend that the diversity that is conveyed both by and within the LGBT community is something that is always to be celebrated; and that regardless of the space that they are inhabiting. Fourth, the line between law and lawlessness is expunged by the Spirit. Some queer theologians suggest that the Holy Spirit operates by both law and freedom. The Holy Spirit’s work is an expression of the faithfulness of God in raising Jesus from the dead. Employing marriage as an example, they declare that marriage (whether same-sex or opposite-sex) is to be ruled by the Holy Spirit. This rule is not antinomian (or without law) in nature (as some might allege) for the Holy Spirit itself works in agreement with a rule; the rule of faithfulness. It is in this way that the Spirit manifests itself in both fidelity and freedom.

Lampmode recording artist Json is releasing his third album, Growing Pains, on February 21, 2012. This is the first video from that project. I thought that his last album, City Lights, was pretty dope. Json has his feet planted firmly in the neo-Puritan camp, and this is reflected in is lyrics, but even if you would disagree with some aspects of his theology, you can still find some encouraging words and solid production in his art. At least, you could on his last album; but I am expecting no less from this one. Check it out next Tuesday and lend some support to our brother. 

Queer scholars theorize that violent conflicts are continually on the verge of exploding between the competing factions that exist within a given society. This suppressed violence is often directed towards a scapegoat, or a helpless innocent victim who is typically marked by difference. Order is restored to said society when the scapegoat is either abolished or annihilated. This process is then repeated ad infinitum. Queer people regularly play the role of the scapegoat within American society. The repressed vitriol of the American public is frequently aimed at the LGBT community (either metaphorically or literally). This is attributable to the reality that queer people are ordinarily viewed as outsiders due to their marginalized sexualities and gender identities. They have become the victims of discrimination and violence, and this in order to preserve the so-called order in our society.

Queer theologians have observed that the life, death and resurrection of Jesus is essentially a rejection of the scapegoating system. Jesus Christ, the sacrificial victim par excellence, condemns and terminates the need to scapegoat others. The resurrection is God’s emphatic “No!” to the insider/outsider dynamic. Queer theologians have expanded upon this initial insight by reinterpreting the traditional satisfaction theory of the atonement in terms of this denunciation of scapegoating. What does it mean to say that Jesus died for the sins of humanity? Queer theologians stress that it is incorrect to maintain that God demanded the death of the Christ as a sacrifice for the sins of the world. God was most certainly present at the cross, but He was not in attendance in order to assist in the act of crucifixion. God draws near to humanity because God longs to halt the repetitious cycle of violence against scapegoats.

Queer theologians furthermore contend that Jesus substituted for a series of substitutions in His crucifixion. Animal sacrifices had supplanted the primitive practice of human sacrifice, but at the cross, the role of the scapegoat is performed by Jesus, who takes the place of the animal as the High Priest and Lamb of God. At the moment of sacrifice, Jesus Himself becomes the scapegoat through the substitution of His own life for the lives of society’s scapegoats, and in so doing He unmasks the undercurrents of the scapegoating mentality and reveals to the world the cruelty of the sacrificial system. Taking the concept of substitution yet another step further, Cheng recognizes that substitutionary atonement can also dissolve the boundaries between sexuality and gender, in addition to those that stand between insiders and outsiders. Vicarious atonement requires multiple exchanges of identity. The death of Christ is applied to persons irrespective of sexual orientation or gender. Hence through substitution, Jesus becomes a multisexed and multigendered body in a manner that is echoed by the multisexed and multigendered character of the body of Christ (the church).

Of course, there are a number of queer theologians who do not subscribe to a substitutionary atonement. For instance, some prefer the moral influence theory of the atonement which was proposed by the eleventh century theologian Peter Abelard. This theory posits that the crucifixion of Jesus is salvific in the sense that it results in a subjective transformation or repentance within those who are made aware of His death. This theory too can be understood as a manifestation of radical love. The death of Jesus can provoke people to rethink and to repent of our own biases against those who have different sexualities and gender identities from our own.

Prior to his consideration of the ways in which Mary dissolves these boundaries, Cheng comments that it is important to recognize that Mary has very often been an oppressive doctrine for women, especially within the context of traditional Latin American liberation theologies. A major reason for this is because the stone-walled hymen Virgin Mary who conceived through a pleasureless copulation with a divine cloud and gave birth in an unimaginable manner is almost entirely detached from the reality of impoverished women in Latin America. Essentially, a life of virginity is rarely compatible with the life of poverty that is experienced by Latin American women, which frequently results in violence, promiscuity, prostitution, rape and sexual bondage. Mary must be queered, but this requires more than merely pointing out the oddities involved in the conception of Jesus and Mary’s own immaculate conception. The denied reality of the everyday experiences of these women needs to be acknowledged, and we must begin to perceive Mary as one who conceived through pleasure; perhaps even self-pleasure.

Despite the oppressive past of the doctrine of Mary, her very existence actually challenges the boundaries of traditional family relationships in multiple ways. As a woman who was unmarried and yet pregnant, Mary would have been considered a sexual outcast. She certainly defied the societal norms of her own day and age. Her ability to sympathize with sexual exiles makes her the ideal person to intercede on their behalf. On top of this, she thoroughly blurs the boundaries between mother, daughter and spouse. She is of course a daughter of God through creation, however she is also Theotokos; the mother of God. Furthermore, to the extent that she is equated with both the new Eve and the church as the bride of Christ, she is additionally the spouse of the new Adam, her son Jesus Christ. Those who assume that Cheng’s observations are outlandish or perhaps even inappropriate must be made aware of the fact that he is not the first to express the relationship between Jesus and the Virgin Mary in this incestuous, boundary crossing manner. Truth be told, Saint Augustine of Hippo described Jesus as the infant spouse who was born from His own bridal chamber, which was the womb of the Virgin Mary.

Mary also upsets the boundaries between the rational and the irrational. The fact that Jesus is son, brother, husband and Lord to Mary all at the same time is a paradox which does not fit neatly into traditional rational categories. By trailing Mary as an emblem of the irrational, we are directed into a space of radical otherness which is a foretaste of redemption. She is the matrix within which the collective expression is located in whispered, forbidden longings for God. Queer theologians have been quick to remind us that the original theological significance of the virgin birth was not the sexual purity of Mary. It was rather a demonstration of the divinity of Christ. Moreover, Mary’s virginal body (which had escaped the cycle of sex, procreation and death) was a symbol of the finite human who through theosis had been transformed into a divinized and immortal human being. All notions of sexuality (heterosexual or otherwise) are challenged by this divinized, sexually paradoxical Mary.

The final boundary that Mary disrupts is that which stands between female and male. First, the fact that no male participated the conception of Jesus deconstructs the complementarian notion that the husband/wife marital bond is the natural and heavenly ordained mode of sexual relations. Second, the fact that there was no male involved might suggest that Jesus was an intersex person. As the product of parthenogenesis, He had no Y Chromosome from a male father, even though he did have male genitals. Third, Mary stands in opposition to patriarchy and provides a remedy for traditional Christianity’s strict obsession with paternal images of God. She provides a pathway to the divine female. Queer theologians have recognized that the emphasis upon Mary’s virginity has engendered harmful consequences for women who, along with Mary, have been sentimentalized and placed upon a pedestal (which commonly results in a number of spiritual, psychological and physical problems). As such, it is important to venerate the awesome, powerful, beautiful and fertile Queen of Heaven, instead of the quiet, weak perpetual virgin. Fourth, popular imagination has often portrayed Mary in ways that contest the traditional concept of a male-only priesthood. She has been depicted as a virgin priest or bishop, even during periods of time when the only people permitted to receive holy orders were men.

There are other boundaries that Jesus dissolved. He violated the religious and societal boundaries of His time by eating meals with tax collectors, prostitutes and sinners, by touching unclean people such as lepers and bleeding women, and by conversing with social outcasts like the Samaritans. As a result of His unorthodox deeds, He dissolved the boundaries between clean and unclean, holy and profane, saint and sinner. These transgressive actions challenged the religious and political leadership of His own day, and they eventually led to His death. Queer theologians are encouraging LGBT communities to follow Jesus by stirring up and spoiling the status quo through transgressive and non-violent acts of civil disobedience against governmental authorities and religious organizations who crucify the queer Christs in their midst.

Cheng contends that Jesus Christ also crossed sexual boundaries. There are queer theologians who have postulated that Jesus was bisexual in orientation. Some of them take this quite literally and speculate that Jesus might perhaps have been attracted to all three members of the household in Bethany (Mary, Martha and Lazarus). Other theologians are less concerned with Jesus’ actual sexual orientation. Instead, these choose to emphasize the similarities between bisexuality itself and the glorious ambiguity of Jesus who refused to be confined by purity codes; gay or straight. Just as Jesus erased supposedly fixed boundaries, bisexual people challenge the illegitimate gay/straight dichotomy by their very existence. Ultimately, as far as these theologians are concerned, bisexuality is much more than a matter of physical sexual acts. It is a way of thinking that rejects hierarchical, binary constructive organized thought.

Lastly, Jesus crosses over gender boundaries. Queer theologians have taken a number of approaches to drive home this point. Some have written of the intersex Christ who possesses the physical attributes of both sexes. It has been suggested that Jesus’ birth was parthenogenic, being that it was the result of a virgin pregnancy. In other words, because of the fact that there was no contribution of a Y chromosome by a male, Jesus would have two X chromosomes. This means that although He was indeed phenotypically male, He was chromosomally female. Furthermore, queer theologians have argued that there could not be a more perfect image of God than the intersex Christ, because of the fact that the original perfect image bearing human being was specifically both male and female. In addition to these things, queer theologians have pointed out that the church, who is also referred to as the body of Christ, is herself multi-gendered.

The apostle Paul asserts that in Christ, there is no longer male or female, and in light of this some queer theologians have spoken of the transgender or transvestite Christ who dissolves essentialist categories of gender in a manner similar to the intersex Christ. The socially taboo behavior of trans individuals issues a challenge to societal norms pertaining to gender in a way that parallels Jesus’ practice of ministering to unclean persons and social outcasts. It has also been noted that the harassment which Jesus continually underwent, the alienation that He experienced at the hands of His own biological family, the fact that he did not have a place to lay His head and likewise His crucifixion are mirrored by the everyday experiences and sufferings of trans people. On what is certainly a more positive note, trans people who have completed gender reassignment surgery have remarked that they have felt a sense of resurrection posttransition. Like Jesus after His resurrection, these individuals are both the same and different. Part of them has died and yet another is born again in their new gender. They have been transfigured in a way that defies simplistic categorization.

This legalistic view of sin tends to lead to the privileging of pride and disobedience as the root causes of sin, which is problematic. Feminist theologians have contended that the primary sin issue for women (though also for all oppressed people, including LGBT) is that they do not have enough pride. For women, sin often takes the form of shame, running away from the gifts that God has given and the inability to lift oneself high enough. The traditional Augustinian view of sin also leads to a negative opinion of sexuality, for it is the means through which sin is passed on from person to person. Marital procreative sex is the only redemptive form of human sexuality.

There are a few queer theologians who have embraced the traditional doctrine of original sin and who hope to preserve it. One reason that it has found favor amongst LGBT people is because it erases the simplistic boundaries between good and bad people. Original sin is the radical equalizer. No one is exempt from it. We are all living in sin. It therefore makes no sense to consider LGBT people to be particularly egregious sinners, for we are all equally fallen. We all suffer from a diminished capacity to love, we hurt each other because it is in our nature to do so, we wound each other because we ourselves are wounded. It appears that those who would judge LGBT people for their sexual practices have failed to grasp the full import of this doctrine. Other queer theologians have focused upon the systemic or societal aspects of original sin. They suggest that people should pay more attention to the structural foundations of oppression, exploitation and expendability, and less attention to the sinfulness of particular sexual acts.

Cheng has suggested a new definition of sin that will shift focus back to Jesus Christ and off of a legalistic system of rules and laws. He has defined sin as opposition to what God has done for us in Jesus Christ, that which is antagonistic to radical love and the reinforcing of boundaries that keep categories separate and distinct from one another (essentialism). Whenever sexuality and gender identity are understood as permanent and unchangeable binary categories (i.e. female/male and homosexual/heterosexual) false dichotomies are reinforced, and the sin of essentialism has been committed. For LGBT people, sin can also be understood as a refusal to come out of the closet and to take one’s rightful place as God’s image bearer.

One particular boundary that, according to Cheng, should be identified as sin is that which keeps race and sexuality separate. He states that society tends to see these categories as mutually exclusive and seldom overlapping. Said differently, all colored people are straight and thus opposed to LGBT issues, and all queer people are white and therefore opposed to racial issues. This benefits society when it desires to see these two parties pitted against each other, as in the marriage equality movement. The race/sexuality binary has had the effect of rendering queer people of color nonexistent. A theology of radical love would pursue the dissolution of this sinful boundary. Currently, there are womanist, black liberationist, and Asian queer theologians who are all hard at work seeking to do just that.

The rumor was true after all. The release of Killah Priest’s brand new double album, The Psychic World of Walter Reed, was postponed. The album is now scheduled to drop on March 13, 2012. Let’s hope that it’s for real this time. This is the video for the third and final track that has been leaked from the album thus far. It is sick and twisted; as usual. Give it a listen, and should the album actually hit stores in mid-March, go and cop it.