One of the joys of blogging is that I sometimes get to learn so much from my readers. This response to my post on Jesus and the Beloved Disciple set me thinking:
One of the points traditional theology makes on the Incarnation is that what was not taken on by the human nature of Jesus was not redeemed. Hence the idea that Jesus experienced same sex attraction is essential for those who look to him as the source of salvation. Perhaps the Celtic View of Salvation would be more helpful here than the Augustinian One. Rather than concentrating on the woundedness of human nature by sin undone by the redemption the idea that Jesus is teaching us how to be truly human serves to give context to the meaning of what redemption is about. It is as if Jesus is teaching us a song that we once knew but have forgotten. Jesus is providing the courage to take up the melody again.
His is not only instruction but empowerment. Intellect and Will Together assemble a portrait of genuine human persons fully integrated in all aspects of the character and personality. Jesus makes us whole. The Spirit continues this Mission of the Son in our time renewing the face of the earth so that Eden is Intimacy with God, with Self and With Others: a Garden of Delight, Openness and Love.
I was not aware of Jack’s starting premise, which I simply accept here as given. I love Jack’s suggestion that the redemption is about learning to be fully human, and the wonderful image of Jesus “teaching us a song that we once knew but have forgotten. Jesus is providing the courage to take up the melody again.”
But there is a darker interpretation too, to Jack’s words, that initially left me distinctly uncomfortable. Jack says that “the idea that Jesus experienced same sex attraction is essential for those who look to him as the source of salvation.” Why is this essential ? What if he did not? We can assume that Christ experienced sexual feelings, but beyond some tantalising hints, we have no hard evidence of their precise nature. If he did not experience same sex attraction, then the starting premise leads to the conclusion that such feelings were not redeemed. Perhaps orthodox, rule book Catholics have been right all along, and we queers are simply doomed to hell after all?
No, that line of reasoning cannot be turned against us either, because what’s sauce for the goose: By precisely the same logic, we could argue that if Christ did not have opposite sex erotic attractions, they too were not redeemed. Just imagine the outcry if it were seriously suggested that Jesus was completely celibate and asexual and that heterosexual attractions are damned alongside us homos? The clear conclusion is that he must have at least experienced erotic attractions – and probably to both sexes.
In modern terminology, Jesus Christ was probably bisexual – just as Kinsey found for the overwhelming majority of people.
- Put Christ Back Into Christianity: The Body of Christ (Queering the Church)
- A Reader’s Excellent Questions On Celibacy.(Queering the Church)
- Benedict’s Thoughts on Priesthood: Confused, Contradictory. ()pen Tabernacle)
- Patrick Chen, on the “Erotic Christ”. (Queering the Church)
- Bi spiritual leaders? yes, you can be religious and bisexual, and was Jesus bi? (Bisexual Examiner)
- Could Jesus Have been Gay? (Michael B Kelly – published in “Seduced by Grace”, online at Professor Kyung Soo Park’s Study )