Queer Theories and Theologies

I’ve decided to enter the ministry. And I’m going back to school in order to prepare. My choice of schools is Meadville-Lombard Theological School. I want to go there so I can take the course “Queer Theories and Theologies” under Laurel C. Schneider.

Professor Schneider’s description of “Queer Theories and Theologies” is, to say the least, pretty queer, especially given that it’s offered in a seminary:

“This course is a close examination of the development of ‘queer theory’ out of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered liberation movement on the one hand, and the international development of critical theory on the other. Our particular interest throughout the course will be first in exploring queer theory as a public academic discourse and second in discussing what impact this discourse may have on theology and ministry.”

Professor Schneider’s course objectives are perhaps the most appealing aspect of “Queer Theories and Theologies”:

“1. To get confused and yet not give up on thinking. 2. To improve in critical thinking about the intersections of theory (system of rules or principles) with public action so that we may be better able to recognize the ways in which theory often flies ‘under the radar’ in the public realms of church and ministry, government, social movements, and culture. 3. To make at least one practical connection between queer theory as you come to understand it and public theology.”

I’m pretty confused by some of those objectives. But I’m not quite ready to give up on thinking. There’s hope for me yet.

Whenever one is confused in Professor Schneider’s course he (or she or it or undecided) has an opportunity to submit a “weekly reflection.” This is the part of the reading schedule that includes a “reflection question” meant to help guide reading for the session. The good news is that the student can use the question to frame a one-page response to the reading, or (and I’m quoting directly from the syllabus) the student can “ignore the question and address one of (the student’s) own that emerged for (the student) in response to the session’s reading.”

I can hardly wait for this part of the class because the readings are both godly and scholarly. For example, students read “The Queer God” by Marcella Althaus-Reid. Later, they read an article by Howard Eilberg-Schwartz, which is in “God’s Phallus and Other Problems for Men and Monotheism.” Mark Jordan’s “The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology” also makes the list. But the highlight of the readings is none other than professor Laurel Schneider’s article “What Race is Your Sex?”

I thought about writing a rebuttal to Schneider’s article called “How Tall is Your Age?” But I decided to call it “What color are your brain farts?”

By session nine of “Queer Theories and Theologies” the student is expected to formulate a central question or thesis statement for a project, which constitutes 30% of the final course grade. Mine will take the form of a final paper called “Why Queers Enter the Ministry.”

Some years ago, a man asked for my opinion on why his good friend, an atheist, had decided to go to Yale Divinity School. I told him that the Enemy could do more harm trying to destroy an institution from within than from without.

And so it is with the so-called GLBT (Gilbert) movement. The Gilbert has equal rights. He is not fighting for anything. He is only seeking to destroy anyone or anything that will not validate him. That is why only 4% of gays who live in states giving them a “right” to get married actually do get married. They do not seek to enjoy marriage. They seek to destroy marriage. All because it denies them validation.

Originally, all Unitarians and Universalists were Christians who didn't believe in the Holy Trinity of God but, instead, in the unity of God. Later, they stressed the importance of “rational thinking” and the “humanity” of Jesus. Since the merger of the two denominations in 1961, Unitarian Universalism has emphasized “social justice.” Hence the interest in the Gilbert movement.

We live in a time when Gilberts are invading Christian denominations in an effort to destroy their core Christian beliefs. I intend to enroll in Meadville-Lombard Theological School in order to reverse this trend and bring the Unitarians and Universalists back to Christianity.

I want to set them straight, so to speak. I want to save them before their symbol, the flaming chalice, is replaced by a flaming phallus.

This seems relevent to your interests. It offers a chance to mock those who disagree with perverse behavior.

???

How about no queer, no GLBT, no homosexual/gay/lesbian, or gender identity studies. The only reason for any of the previous is to validate that which is destructive, repugnant, sinful and unhealthy, and to recruit young people.

How about it all goes back into the closet.

I do prefer the term queer studies to the former term gay and lesbian studies because it takes the focus away from sexual acts and looks at people who are different in the way they interact with their society. It doesn’t just include people who pair off sexually with members of their own gender, it includes people who never pair off, who live celibate lives, and who focus on their job or their ministry.

How can you even consider putting those people in the same group as homosexuals and calling them queer? What a slap in the face for those who are single for ANY reason.

Are you sure you're on the right forum?

I haven’t looked at any other comments but I will. His comment makes absolutely no sense whatsoever other than promoting perversion.

It doesn’t just include people who pair off sexually with members of their own gender, it includes people who never pair off, who live celibate lives, and who focus on their job or their ministry.

So, I'm queer because I've never gotten married?

25 posted on 02/09/2010 12:05:11 AM PST by BlessedBeGod (New Wizard of Oz: Pelosi as the Wicked Witch of the West & Michelle as the Wicked Witch of the East.)

And I’ll bet you never knew...

Quite a revelation, isn’t it, that someone thinks you’re no different than a homosexual cause you can’t relate to society *normally*. Like only married people can....

28 posted on 02/09/2010 6:20:50 AM PST by maica (Freedom consists not in doing what we like,but in having the right to do what we ought. John Paul II)

I’m going back to the original “real” meaning of the word, before it took on the modern sexual connotation that was first pejorative and is now claimed by the activists.

I’m going back to the original “real” meaning of the word, before it took on the modern sexual connotation that was first pejorative and is now claimed by the activists.

Even under the original meaning of the word (strange or odd) that is offensive. People are not strange just because they are celibate.

And these days, grouping nay morally correct person with the sodomites is very offensive.

Unfortunately the word "queer" has been permanently ruined. Just like "gay" has been permanently ruined.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.