Concilium

« Sexual Minorities » – S. Knauss

2.3. The Rainbow-Colored Body of Christ

The both/and embodied in the Bi/Christ – both human and divine, both the bridegroom of the church and the mother giving birth to her through the side wound, both ascended to heaven and among us in the eucharist – allows for diversity to be present as such, in contrast to the either/or logic of heterosexuality in which those who are different are either excluded as the other or have to adapt to and affirm the governing norm of the ‘us’ in the modes of inclusion or tolerance. What does this mean for the church as the rainbow-colored body of the Bi/Christ? Although queer theology is not delimited by denominational boundaries, I will speak here in particular to the reality of the Catholic church.

Straightness and queerness intermingle in the church as institution and space of God’s presence in community. A theology of natural gender complementarity, regulations reinforcing heterosexual relationships and a centralized, hierarchical structure make the church a space of exclusion of all those who do not comply with these norms: many LGBTIQ persons feel as if leaving the church is the only solution for overcoming the conflict between their sexual and religious identity, given that their religious community does not welcome them as who they are. Yet the church is also a rather queer space, populated by celibate men and women who resist the complementary logic that would push them into heterosexual marriages, men – fathers – who dress in women’s clothes, women – sisters, mothers – who choose men’s names like Joseph or Luke, male priests who are symbolically ‘intersex’ because they are masculine in so far as they represent Christ to the church and feminine in representing the church to Christ. Not surprisingly, Elizabeth Stuart writes that this church “taught me that social categories were not fixed, that they could be played around with and that the church was a space in which gender shifted.”[20]

[20] E. Stuart, ‘Sacramental Flesh’, in G. Loughlin (ed), Queer Theology. Rethinking the Western Body (Oxford: Blackwell, 2007), 70.

A frequently-cited resource for thinking about gender in the church is Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” The interpretation of this sentence shows, however, how difficult it is to think difference within the body of Christ: Being one in Christ is variously imagined as the abolition of differences with regard to gender, class or ethnicity so that all will be one and the same, the new creation of humanity without sexual or other differences, or a spiritual oneness regardless of remaining bodily differences.[21] While these images of oneness certainly sound appealing, we should be cautious about them, because the question arises: who or what will be imagined as the model for this one humanity? And given the overwhelming power of heteronormativity, the suspicion arises that ‘oneness’ will really mean adjustment to the heterosexual ideal. But is uniformity really what this phrase expresses as a vision for the body of Christ? Judith Gundry-Volf argues instead that the text suggests that different individuals will be united in their differentiated being through the Spirit in the body of Christ, and their difference will be relevant and constitutive of the body of Christ: “Within this new humanity of equals created in Christ the creaturely differences remain and play a role in the formation of Christians’ new identity and interrelations.”[22] Being “all one in Christ Jesus” does not mean being all the ‘same’ but being a community of ‘others’ in which difference is valued.[23] In this reading, the church is a community where everybody is different and all are united in faith in Christ and hope in salvation, in which LGBTIQ persons find their place without having to adapt to the heteronormative ideal.

[21] For a summary of interpretations see J.M. Gundry-Volf, “Beyond Difference?. Paul’s Vision of New Humanity in Galatians 3.28,” in D.A. Campbell (ed), Gospel and Gender. A Trinitarian Engagement with Being Male and Female in Christ (London: T&T Clark, 2003), 8-36.

[22] Gundry-Volf, “Beyond Difference?”, 8–9.

[23] Gundry-Volf, “Beyond Difference?”, 31.

3. Nomadic Theologians: An Inconclusive Conclusion

It would be very unlike queer theology to close with a conclusion that implies that these reflections on the contributions of sexual minorities to the reflection of the church on its source, the trinitarian God, and itself as the body of Christ are the last word to be said about these topics. Queer theologians are, as Althaus-Reid writes, nomadic bodies that remain without a permanent abode and produce only preliminary insights, driven by their desires to cross ever new boundaries.[24] The experiences of sexual minorities, within and without the church, of being excluded for being non-normative bodies and living non-normative desires reconfigure continued theological reflection and the life of the church. A queer theology inspired by these experiences will teach about the violence of either/or logics of thought and politics, the importance of body and desire in speaking with and about God, the inseparability of theological speculation and social justice, and about difference as a value, not a threat. Nomadic queer theologians will continue to play and struggle with these and other possibilities.

[24] Althaus-Reid, The Queer God, 50–51.


Author

Stefanie Knauss is an Assistant Professor of Theology at Villanova University. In her research she focuses on gender studies and queer theory in theology, body and religion, and theology and culture. Her recent publications include More than a Provocation: Sexuality, Media and Theology (2014) and, co-edited with A.D. Ornella and A.-K. Höpflinger, Commun(icat)ing Bodies: Body as a Medium in Religious Symbol Systems(2014).