Queer theology is a theological method that has developed out of the philosophical approach of queer theory, built upon scholars such as Marcella Althaus-Reid, Michel Foucault, Gayle Rubin, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, and Judith Butler. Queer theology begins with the assumption that gender variance and queer desire have always been present in human history, including faith traditions and their sacred texts such as the Jewish Scriptures and the Bible. It was at one time separated into two separate theologies; gay theology and lesbian theology. Later, the two would merge and expand to become the more inclusive term of queer theology.
Terminology
The term queer can be understood within queer theory as encompassing one of three meanings: as an umbrella term, as transgressive action, and as erasing boundaries. Its use has become more popular in social settings for personal identification and in academic settings leading to the creation of programs such as the Center for LGBTQ and Gender Studies in Religion, a program created in 1996 at Pacific School of Religion. Building upon these three meanings of queer, queer theology can be understood as: Theology done by, with, and for LGBTQIA (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual) individuals focusing on their specific needs as stated by persons identifying within the LGBTQIA+ community. Theology that purposefully opposes the fixity of social and cultural norms regarding gender and sexuality. It seeks to bring equitable value to marginalized voices, experiences, and perspectives that allows theology in queer people. Theology that challenges and deconstructs harmful and historically imposed boundaries, particularly with respect to sexual and gender identity. Queer theology is inclusive to individuals' sexual and gender identity and allows the LGBTQ+ community to reclaim what they see as their rightful space in Christianity and the Imago Dei, as well as other religions and faith traditions. Furthermore, according to Jennifer Purvis, "queer" signifies not only a range of variant genders and non-heterosexual sexualities, but a posture of resistance, questioning attitude, and a set of techniques and approaches. For that reason, queer theology calls for thinking beyond what may be known, disciplined and controlled and asks us to re-embrace our queer cognizance.
The term can be traced back to the 1990s, when J. Michael Clark proposed the term "pro-feminist gay theology" and Robert Goss used the term "queer theology." The term "queer" was also used to describe the early Adamites sect.
Theologians
One proponent of queer theology was Marcella Althaus-Reid, who drew on Latin American liberation theology and interpreted the Bible in a way in which she saw as positive towards women, queer people and sex. She proposed a theology that centered marginalized people, including people in poverty and queer people. For Althaus-Reid, theology ought to be connected to the body and lived experience. She put it this way:
One theme in the theology of her The Queer God (Routledge, 2003) is the holiness of the gay club, as she explores the intersection and essential non-contradiction of a strong, vibrant faith life and sexual desire. An example of finding otherness and desire in Biblical texts is her reading of Jeremiah 2:23–25 from the Hebrew, presented in her previous work Indecent Theology:
In a paper read at the Conference of Modern Churchmen in 1967 titled "Jesus, the Revelation of God", Hugh William Montefiore offers a controversial interpretation of the early life of Jesus. Jesus was not aware of his vocation as Messiah until approximately age thirty, Montefiore argues, and this vocation can therefore not explain the celibacy of Jesus. Apart from the Essenes, celibacy was not a common practice in Jewish life. Montefiore suggests we might need to look for a non-religious reason to explain the celibacy of Jesus:Men usually remain unmarried for three reasons: either because they cannot afford to marry or there are no girls to marry (neither of these factors need have deterred Jesus); or because it is inexpedient for them to marry in the light of their vocation (we have already ruled this out during the "hidden years" of Jesus' life); or because they are homosexual in nature, in as much as women hold no special attraction for them. The homosexual explanation is one which we must not ignore.