Talk:Queer theology

message: ==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==
 This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cfurey, Nwinsick.
==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==
 This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2021 and 3 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Spiffaroo.
==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==
 This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 January 2021 and 19 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Claire.lewis171.
==Untitled==
Hello friends, I would like to bring this entry into substantive form, and I would like to ask who would like to help me do this in a reasonable and collaborative way. Queer theology is an established thread in Christian theology and one that has now enjoyed years of discursive, academic and ministerial engagement. There are active engagements with queer theology in Islam and Judaism, and I am very interested to learn more about its reach in the whole range of other traditions and conversations - such as Neopagan, Spiritualist, Hindu, Buddhist, Humanist, so on, and so on... My expertise is in Christian queer theology. It seems from this talk page that previous attempts at developing this entry have struggled because of various levels of contention. To try to avoid that this time, perhaps those who are interested in working on this can begin with a discussion here that will then move afterwards to substance on the page. My hope is that this entry can be complex - adequately characterizing the development and controversies and mixed perspectives on queer theology (both internal and external to queer theology itself), without collapsing into a contest (or silencing) of any particular view of theology or sexuality. --Stella Faith (talk) 15:18, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it time? 

message: Hello friends, I would like to bring this entry into substantive form, and I would like to ask who would like to help me do this in a reasonable and collaborative way. Queer theology is an established thread in Christian theology and one that has now enjoyed years of discursive, academic and ministerial engagement. There are active engagements with queer theology in Islam and Judaism, and I am very interested to learn more about its reach in the whole range of other traditions and conversations - such as Neopagan, Spiritualist, Hindu, Buddhist, Humanist, so on, and so on... My expertise is in Christian queer theology. It seems from this talk page that previous attempts at developing this entry have struggled because of various levels of contention. To try to avoid that this time, perhaps those who are interested in working on this can begin with a discussion here that will then move afterwards to substance on the page. My hope is that this entry can be complex - adequately characterizing the development and controversies and mixed perspectives on queer theology (both internal and external to queer theology itself), without collapsing into a contest (or silencing) of any particular view of theology or sexuality. --Stella Faith (talk) 15:18, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I also suggest that, because of past contention, we introduce ourselves/avatars here as we wish, so that there is some basis for conversation. What information you include is obviously totally up to you. Even a "Hi, I'm @rs43wu, someone who enjoys cloudy days and clean handwriting" gives us some level of relatability. Of course, substantively relevant background can help, but as we all know only up to a point. There is no gauge of truth or motivation in this forum about personal identity or standing. Additionally, I personally ask that we respect the many ways knowledge and familiarity of the subject can be gained: academically, experientially, religiously, historically, politically, and so on... Does that seem reasonable? I'll begin below. --Stella Faith (talk) 15:18, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Editor Introductions

message: ==Sketching an Initial Outline for the Page==
# Overview
# Historical Development of Queer Theology
# Key Figures
# Key Concepts
# Controversies and Challenges
# Future Directions
# Bibliography
--Stella Faith (talk) 15:28, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed! And we should explain this on the page. I am moving this up to the top portion of the Talk, before the "Old Talk" category, so that it will be more easily found with the new conversation. --Stella Faith (talk) 13:21, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussing the Page

message: # Overview
# Historical Development of Queer Theology
# Key Figures
# Key Concepts
# Controversies and Challenges
# Future Directions
# Bibliography
--Stella Faith (talk) 15:28, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Sketching an Initial Outline for the Page

message: I question the list of queer theologians and think that some of them (esp. Glaser and McNeill) are more appropriately gay and lesbian theologians. I think this article needs to carefully distinguish between the work of gay/lesbian scholars and queer scholars. The two are not the same. There are definite differences in political agenda.
Elizabeth Stuart  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.134.207.194 (talk) 13:16, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed! And we should explain this on the page. I am moving this up to the top portion of the Talk, before the "Old Talk" category, so that it will be more easily found with the new conversation. --Stella Faith (talk) 13:21, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Theologians 

message: I removed this from the category for Christian theology, simply because this stub doesn't explain how it is distinctly Christian, as opposed to just "general" theology.  Maybe after some more edits, we can put it there again.  KHM03 21:45, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Category

message: With reference to the link below, the others are quite right that this page is not about debate. It is perhaps more appropriate to add the link to a page that does address religious controversies over sexual orientation. Queer theology is not at all what your link is addressing. Your link is merely addressing homosexual behaviour and queer theology, whilst marginally concerned with such behaviour, casts a broader net and is more of a strategic political stance.
I edited the page on "queer theology" page to include links to (DR) Rembert S. Truluck's page, and to truthsetsfree.net, another "gay christian" site.
In the process, I also added a religion-stub for (Dr) Truluck.
And it was also me who added the link to the Anti-"queer theology" site, which you removed, siting reason that it was "not about this debate".
The link was:
 
*What the Bible REALLY says about Homosexual Issues, by Tony Marco 
I protest that your deletion was a POV-inspired deletion.
My edit's, I suggest, where balanced, NPOV - two supporting the idea of "queer theology", one against, and the creation of an NPOV page, which I contend added to this category, as Dr. Truluck is an prominent "gay christian".
How can you justify that a link to a page giving the other side of the argument is "not about this debate"?
(It's not as if I edited the article to include the stuff in the counter argument - I merely added a link!)
I would suggest that the fact that you are a member of the MCC (which, I presume is a "gay christian" church), adds weight to my argument that your deletion was a partisan, POV-inspired deleltion.
As I understand it, Wikipedia is an "encyclopedia", this means that pages are not "adverts" for one any particular idea, they must attempt to give some degree of balanced analysis.
The idea is that any user, of whatever "persuasion", might look up this page, read the main tenets of the article, and then have an opportunity to see other related ideas, including arguments against.
For example, if someone looks up the article on Stalin, he/she may wish to link to some external pages which are pro Stalin or anti Stalin.
CPMCE 01:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to Anti-queer theology site

message: This article has been targeted in recent weeks by CC80, a sockpuppet of the Joan of Arc vandal.  This and similar articles may be targeted again by other sockpuppets of the same person.
A vandal who has damaged Wikipedia's Catholicism, Christianity, cross-dressing, and homosexuality articles for over two years has been identified and community banned.  This person will probably attempt to continue disruption on sockpuppet accounts.  Please be alert for suspicious activity.  Due to the complexity of this unusual case, the best place to report additional suspicious activity is probably to my user talk page because I was the primary investigating administrator. DurovaCharge! 17:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Community ban of the [[Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse#Joan_of_Arc_vandal|Joan of Arc vandal]] 

message: To ensure that 'trad' teachings are not misunderstood or simplified, a distinction between acts, desires, and the persons who experience (passively) desires and choose (actively) acts has to be made; any church with a coherent theology makes, and has always made these distinctions.  Desires are not sinful, insofar as a person does not choose their desires.  Despite this, a further distinction is made, insofar as the desires can be fundamentally disordered, i.e. incapable of being ordered to a positive, non-sinful end.  Homosexual desires are considered by such in most 'traditional' (Catholic/Orthodox) teaching.  The acts themselves are always and have always been considered sinful.  Insofar as someone who experiences homosexual attractions but does not act on them is morally blameless, 'traditional'   teaching has, at least since Aquinas, always made a distinction which DanB's edit does not reflect. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.155.112.104 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 8 January 2007   (UTC)
:This just isn't true. Christianity does teach that certain desires are sinful, even if not acted on. Jesus said of committing adultery that if a (straight) married man looks at a woman (not his wife) lustfully, he has already committed adultery with her in his heart. A consistent interpretation of this would imply that if a man looks at another man lustfully, he has already committed homsoexual acts with him in his heart. —Angr 12:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Distinction Between Acts & Desires

message: So i read this part of the article and i`m a little bit surprised.
Sure there can be theologian who are defender of liberation theology. But there are also a lot of theologian who have nothing to do with liberation theology, but they are a part of queer theology. 212.95.108.33 10:56, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Only" Liberation Theology ?

message: The article should maybe give room for official Church views and reactions to Queer theology. The same is done for liberation theology, which have been much criticized, the same might very well be true for Queer theology. ADM (talk) 15:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Official Church views and reactions

message: dbachmann has reduced the entry to a tiny stub waiting further revision, under the proposition that if a few American universities teach courses called "Queer Theology," and if a small handful of books have been published with the title, then the term itself has been defined by those actions. But other editors on this page disagree that anyone has the right to narrow the meaning of the term "theology" to only "Christian apologetics." (In addition, some of the editors here wish to define "Queer Theology" as a branch of "Queer Theory," but I question whether a group of "Queer Theology" Protestants are prepared to avow that they have been more indebted to Foucault and social constructionism than to the Bible.) dbachmann, please explain how your approach is consistent with Wikipedia's Notability criterion. Are you implying that the guidance provided to people of faith regarding same-sex love by a few American authors since 1980 in any way remotely compares to the historical influence of Whitman and Carpenter since the 1800s? Please also speak directly to the issue of who has the right to limit the scope of inquiry and tradition meant by the term 'theology.' I am concerned that the current trajectory fails Wikipedia's criteria for cultural relativism. Chairease (talk) 03:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking over the material that DB removed, I think a lot of it really was unencyclopedic at best and at worst unrelated to queer theology as the field currently stands. Some of that material might be useful for articles on LGBT/Religious issues, but by and large none of it seemed very theological. Aristophanes68 (talk) 14:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Too much editing 

message: "Queer Theology" is a pov attempt to ghetto-ize lgbt people in the history of Christianity.  Queer Theology?  What is that?  Is it supposed to mean "Apologetics of interest to queer people"?  Cross-religious theological debates on LGBT issues?  Theology is a social science.  You can no more have "queer theology" then you can have "queer statistics" or "queer anthropology".  You can have theology, statistics, and anthropology that studies queer issues (but you'd have to define that first - what is a "queer issue"?), but the scholarship (of theology or anthropology) is not inherently queer.  This article should be deleted unless it's subject can be explicitly specified in the lede.  It's content should be absorbed into primary articles.-Eris Lover (talk) 03:51, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghettoization 

message: Sources suggest that queer Muslim theology at least exists, but not really to the point where we'd be able to devote more than a sentence or two to it. That being the case, do y'all think we can mention in the lede that this is primarily about the interpretation of Christian and Judeo-Christian doctrines and texts? I see the categorization already basically reflects this. (In fact, I'd want to look further into whether this is really a Jewish thing at all, or if Judaism only comes in because Christianity uses the Jewish Bible.) –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:40, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which religions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Queer theology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120124122730/http://www.clgs.org:80/blog/commentary/queer-god-really-remembering-marcella-althaus-reid to http://www.clgs.org/blog/commentary/queer-god-really-remembering-marcella-althaus-reid
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:51, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm a student editor trying to figure this crazy Wiki world out so I apologize if I step on any toes. I've added a cited reference in the intro section to the fact that queer theology was at some point referred to as gay and lesbian theology. Thanks! Cfurey (talk) 03:11, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to previous names 

message: I changed language that takes out the subjectivity of this work and hyperlinked the definitions to the identities listed, and broadened the assumed understanding of what scriptures are theological and for what religious context. 
I added two cited works for this change. 
Cheng, Patrick S. (2011). Radical love : an introduction to queer theology. New York: Seabury Books. pp. 9–20. ISBN 978-1-59627-132-6. OCLC 670477054.
Cornwall, Susannah (2011). Controversies in queer theology. London: SCM Press. pp. 2–8. ISBN 978-0-334-04355-3. OCLC 704376055.
Spiffaroo (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes  

message: changed the structure of theologians and added a section that parsed out theologies working within queer theologies and not instead of queer theology. Spiffaroo (talk) 21:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: new section

message: included diversity in the historical context of early thinkers and included a citation for the expansion of scriptural references. Spiffaroo (talk) 01:42, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes  

message: Expanded the terminology section to take out cultural and historical biases.Spiffaroo (talk) 02:08, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes