VI | GENDER AND SEXUALITY
In How to Be an Antiracist, Ibram X. Kendi talks about being raised by Christian parents. He recounts how his parents attended Urbana ’70, a Christian youth conference at the University of Illinois. At this conference, they heard Tom Skinner preach for the first time. In front of more than 11,000 college students, including Kendi’s parents, Skinner declared that “the Liberator has come!” He then led the crowd through his lesson in church history.
“The evangelical church…supported the status quo. It supported slavery; it supported segregation; it preached against any attempt of the black man to stand on his own two feet,” Skinner would say. He went on to recount how he had worshipped a “white Jesus” that had been presented to him throughout his life. A Jesus that was white and polite. A Jesus that followed all the rules and wanted us to do the same. Skinner presented his new, revelatory version of Jesus as an activist, a social revolutionary in every sense. Stating that any gospel that does not “speak to the issue of enslavement…injustice…and inequality” is not the gospel, Skinner asserted that the systems that worked against Jesus were the same systems of power that worked against the oppressed in society today. “Jesus was dangerous, he was dangerous because he was changing the system.” According to Skinner, Jesus was killed because he was trying to change a system that oppressors didn’t want changed.
This has come to be known as liberation theology. Tom Skinner’s perspective on Jesus is just one example. Skinner was influenced by the theologian and author James Cone. Liberation theology teaches that Jesus’ mission was not primarily spiritual. Jesus meant to set people free not just from their spiritual bondage but from all forms of bondage faced by marginalized groups in society. Jesus’ liberation from captivity is political, economic, social, and spiritual. Therefore, the focus of this theology is identifying problematics and liberating groups oppressed by them. Liberation theology is best summarized as a mixture of the ideas of Critical Theory with the stories and perspectives of the Bible.
Liberation theology argues that the whole of Christian teaching and theology should be reconstructed along the “axis of the oppressor and the oppressed,” according to one of its fathers, a Peruvian priest named Gustavo Gutierrez. Liberation theology is itself a subset of an approach to theology called liberal theology.
The word theology simply means “the study of God.” In the world of theology, like politics, there is a spectrum of ideas. There are two primary camps – one conservative and one liberal – though these don’t necessarily coincide with politically conservative or liberal views.
Liberal theology is biblical interpretation through a postmodern worldview.
Liberal theologies are those that incorporate modern social or political movements into their doctrine and teaching. Liberal theology seeks to modernize the Bible and Christian teaching and teaches that the Bible is not fully sufficient for Christian living. Liberal theological teaching can often include progressive social stances.
Conservative theologies are often called “fundamental.” Conservative theology often sees Scripture and its doctrines as direct challenges to social or political movements. Conservative theology places an emphasis on the sufficiency of the Bible for Christian living. Conservative theology is often engaged socially but does not embrace progressive social viewpoints.
Here is a comparison between liberal and conservative theology:
Liberal theology says that Scripture is not infallible, inerrant, or sufficient.
Liberal theologians teach that Scripture can be wrong historically. It can also be wrong socially and otherwise. The Bible is a product of its time and is not a perfect document. Thus, it is important that the Bible is recontextualized and reframed in the context of modern society. The Bible serves as a guide for morality but is not to be taken literally.
Conservative theology is about sola scriptura.
Conservative theologians teach that the Bible is the only thing necessary to equip us to live the life that God designed us for. It is also infallible and inerrant. This does not mean the entire Bible or its approach to history should be taken literally. There is a difference between literal and figurative interpretation. We must use wisdom in assessing what is literal and what is figurative. Overall, conservative theology looks to the words of Paul in 2 Timothy 3:16-17: “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
Liberal theology says that there were and are no “supernatural” miracles of Jesus or anyone else.
Liberal theologians teach that the virgin birth of Jesus did not happen, and he most likely didn’t physically rise from the dead. The miracles of Jesus are allegorical and not factual. Jesus was a moral teacher and a great man, but his followers most likely exaggerated his miracles to give greater weight to his life.
Conservative theologians believe that the life of Jesus and the miracles described in Scripture are factual.
Conservative theologians assert that the virgin birth of Jesus did happen. That he was fully God and fully man. They teach that Jesus is much more than a moral teacher or a great man. He healed the sick, raised the dead, died on a cross and physically rose again after three days.
Liberal theology often subscribes to Universalism, the belief that Hell is not real.
Liberal theologians often have a tough time reconciling the idea of an omniscient, omnipotent God sending people to a place called Hell. If God knows everything, then why would he create people to send them to hell?
Conservative theology believes in the utter depravity of humanity.
Even though God created us, we are born with a wicked heart that wants to do evil. If we never accept the gospel of Jesus, we will find ourselves eternally damned after our death to a place called Hell. If we embrace Jesus, we will find ourselves in Heaven with him.
Liberal theology embraces subjective truth.
Liberal theology and Critical Theory agree that the concept of truth is a subjective social construct. Therefore, the “truths” of Scripture must be reinterpreted subjectively based on cultural progress. It is good enough to pursue what we believe to be socially good and do our best to live according to our personal interpretation of Scripture. People are mostly good how they are, where they are. God didn’t create objective standards for us to live by. Instead, he asks us to embrace the concept of moral goodness. Not grace + truth, just grace.
Conservative theology presents Scripture as bedrock and unchanging truth.
Conservative theology teaches that Scripture’s demands of us and its definitions of sin and morality are not subjective based on cultural “progress.” We must allow God to change our entire nature from the inside out to become who he has destined us to become. Yes, there is always grace for our sins, but we must also consider the objective truth of Scripture when defining what is sinful.
The difference between these two is vast. Liberation theology – the kind Kendi’s parents responded to – sits firmly in the camp of liberal theology. These theologies embrace the concept of problematics within the church and seek to reform them as well. They overtly embrace CT and postmodern ideology.
In relation to sexuality and gender, there are two problematics within the Bible and Christianity.
The biblical depiction of gender is cisnormative.
The biblical picture of marriage and sexuality is heteronormative.
I am often asked this question by people new to our church: “Are you affirming?”
It is important to understand liberal and conservative theology because of what that means in relationship to sexuality and gender and Christianity. In this context, to be affirming means to have a liberal theology related to gender and sexuality, to practice DEI towards those who are not heterosexual or cisgender.