Skip to main content

Bi Christian Unitarian: A Theology of Transgression

I'm sure that all you readers subscribe to the Journal of Bisexuality (who doesn't?). If you do you'll have seen that the most recent issue is a special issue on the subject of Bisexualities and Spiritualities. And it features an article I wrote called "Bi Christian Unitarian: A Theology of Transgression." The copyright is owned by the publishers, so I can't reproduce the article here, but the link should help you to look it up if you're interested.

My basic premise is that bisexuals transgress the boundaries of gender and sexuality that we have constructed in our culture. When others speak and write about bisexuals they identify the "problem" with the bisexual who transgress these boundaries, and would rather call into question the existence of bisexuals than the existence of those boundaries. However, when bisexuals speak for themselves they are more likely to call into question the nature of those boundaries. Bisexuals witness to the possibility of love transgressing boundaries, and in doing so provide a parallel to a God who does not limit Godself to those human boundaries we have constructed between races, genders, religions. Bisexual love is a parallel to the love of God which transgresses boundaries.

Comments

Yewtree said…
Thanks for this Stephen - will definitely read the article. It's good to see someone standing up for us bisexuals! We're not just "greedy".
10:00 am
Yewtree said…
Oh, that's weird, I could access the full article earlier but now it's asking for an Athens login and my uni doesn't subscribe to that journal :(

I should have grabbed it while I could see it, but I didn't think it would suddenly disappear.
12:58 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What does it mean to be non-creedal?

Steve Caldwell says "The problem here isn't humanism vs. theism for theist Unitarian Universalists -- it's the non-creedal nature of Unitarian Universalism" This is a good point. We need to think much more deeply about what it means to be a non-creedal religion. The first thing I want to say is that there is more than one possible understanding of non-creedalism. The Disciples of Christ are a non-creedal church, they say here : " Freedom of belief. Disciples are called together around one essential of faith: belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Persons are free to follow their consciences guided by the Bible, the Holy Spirit study and prayer, and are expected to extend that freedom to others." Quakers are also non-creedal and say here : Quakers have no set creed or dogma - that means we do not have any declared statements which you have to believe to be a Quaker. There are, however, some commonly held views which unite us. One accepted view is that th...
3 comments
Read more

LOST and theology: who are the good guys?

***Spoiler alert*** I'm continuing some theological/philosophical reflections while re-watching the series LOST. One of the recurring themes in LOST is the idea of the "good guys" and the "bad guys." We start the series assuming the survivors (who are the main characters) are the "good guys" and the mysterious "Others" are definitely bad guys. But at the end of series 2 one of the main characters asks the Others, "Who are  you people?" and they answer, in an extremely disturbing way, "We're the good guys." The series develops with a number of different factions appearing, "the people from the freighter" "the DHARMA initiative" as well as divisions among the original survivors. The question remains among all these complicated happenings "who really are the good guys?" I think one of the most significant lines in the series is an episode when Hurley is having a conversation with ...
3 comments
Read more

Is humanism theologically tolerant?

OK, well this might be controversial, but I feel the need to say it. Is humanist tolerant? Please note I'm not asking about humanism within society. Clearly humanism certainly believes in tolerance within society and I'm forever glad they are often the only people in the media calling for a separation of church and state. No, what I'm talking about is descriptions of Unitarianism like this and adverts like this , discussed at Peacebang here , which say that humanism is one option, Christianity is another, God is one option among many. The trouble is, humanism, by definition is theologically opposed to theism. This is very different from the relationship between Christianity and Buddhism. These two traditions may be vastly different, but Buddhism, by definition , is not opposed to Christianity, and Christianity, by definition , is not opposed to Buddhism. But humanism is consciously defined in opposition to Christianity and theism. So to say that humanism and theism can bot...
14 comments
Read more