Dillashaw


	The Transformation of the Church: Speaking a Theology of Sexuality Heather S. Dillashaw Senior Project Vanderbilt Divinity School 13 March 2000 Introduction "Love that is rooted in justice does not aim for peace at all costs - its aim is transformation."1 Transformation is often not a peaceful experience. It involves change, a re-imaging of how the world has operated. The church, like the rest of the world, resists this transformation. The prevalence of sexual violence in the streets and in our homes - including Christian homes - demands the church to break its silence and speak out against this disruption of lives by senseless violence. Rising numbers of eating disorders among young women so they will be the "perfect" size show the lack of positive body image messages they receive. The rise of hate crimes against ethnic and sexual minorities should cause the church to stop and think about its responsibility in working to stop the violence and fear found in these crimes. It is time for the transformation of the relationships between the church and sexuality. A theology of sexuality is needed to bring about this transformation. Simply proscribing a definition of correct sexual expression does not encompass the experience of the majority of members. Negative expressions of sexuality, as mentioned above, go unchecked. Statistics are frightening regarding the number of women and children who have been and continue to be affected by sexual abuse and sexual violence. Hate crimes are rising in number, even among school children and teenagers. The silence that often surrounds victims and perpetrators of sexual violence in their churches and homophobia among pastors and lay persons alike find their roots in centuries of either silence or condemnation of sexuality and its many expressions. In recent years curriculums have been developed surrounding issues of sexuality2 and pastors and church leaders are being better educated about the prevalence of sexual violence. However, this is not enough to create, teach, and learn to live a theology of sexuality for our congregations. The Bible, long a looked-to authority for the church, speaks of sexuality and sexual expression in many more ways than is typically preached from the pulpit on Sunday mornings. Creating a theology of sexuality for the church must include this written authority of tradition. Preaching is also a responsibility of pastoral care. The texts of our tradition can give us insights into better ways of caring for one another and creating a safer, healthier world to live in. Sexuality is a huge topic, one that cannot be adequately covered in one project. The focus of this paper is divided into three sections: sexual violence, body image, and gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered issues.3 These topics in and of themselves encompass more than is possible for an in-depth study in the scope of this project. Therefore, each is organized with a focus toward practical suggestions for the church. After each section is an example of a sermon related to the biblical texts mentioned. The specific topics of this paper were chosen because of the context of my own work and experience with these aspects of sexuality. I am the partner of a survivor of child sexual abuse. Through her reflections, other conversations and research I have been made more fully aware of the church's culpability for the prevalence of sexual violence. I work with youth and young adults in church and campus ministries. They have brought to my attention the importance of positive body image messages from the church to counter the false ideals present in our culture. As a lesbian Christian minister, I have struggled on a personal and corporate level with the enormous fear homophobia has instilled in the church. My experiences at Vanderbilt Divinity School through class discussions and field education placements have shown me the church's struggle to deal with issues of sexuality. A practical theology of sexuality is not evident in most congregations. Through the lens of sexual violence, body image, and g/l/b/t issues this paper attempts to create a theology of sexuality - based on a "love that is rooted in justice." Sexual Violence Sexual violence is a topic, in my experiences, the world wishes would simply go away. The Christian church has historically approached these issues in much the same way as society: little, if any, work is done for prevention and treatment of the consequences. Instead, there is generally silence and avoidance of anything dealing with sexual violence. For example, the widely-used Protestant liturgical year lectionary avoids using the biblical passages dealing with rape, incest or other references to sexual violence. Statistics that track victims of sexual violence show alarming numbers each year. One in three women and one in five men will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime.4 Child sexual abuse is another aspect of sexual violence. A 1990 study done in the United States reported 27% of women and 16% of men have experienced some form of child sexual abuse. A British study reported 46% of women but did not report on men.5 Many of these victims interpret their experiences through the lens of religious convictions, however loose or strong their ties to a particular religious tradition might be.6 These interpretations often contribute to the victim's sense of her or his provocative role in the violence/abuse: "I should not have said this, or done that, or worn that"; "This is my punishment for other sins I have committed; "This is my cross to bear," and so on and so on.7 The more I heard statements such as these, the more I began to recognize the culpability of the church for the prevalence of sexual violence. The culpability appears to me to lie in the silence surrounding issues and instances of sexual violence. Centuries of mostly silence regarding anything having to do with sexuality contribute to a victim's feelings of shame and unworthiness in their relation to the church.8 Many mainline Protestant denominations have sexuality curriculums, provide workshops for clergy education about sexual violence, and give significant sums of money to organizations such as The Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence in Seattle, Washington. However, these resources appear to be vastly under-utilized for the majority of congregations. Discussion with colleagues and classmates from a variety of denominations at Vanderbilt Divinity School, field placements in two United Methodist ministries, and my personal experience in Disciples of Christ and United Church of Christ congregations have demonstrated to me the lack of involvement in most congregations regarding issues of sexual violence. Speaking aloud of sexual violence is not an easy task, nor is there one way and manner in which this should be done. The preaching moment is one instance in which the church can utilize itself as a vehicle for teaching and learning. Texts such as Genesis 34, Judges 19, and 2 Samuel 13 are examples of biblical texts dealing with sexual violence. These can be read and taught from the pulpit. There are also resources available to clergy and lay persons to help in the process of discerning productive ways in which to preach on this topic.9 The Christian tradition has provided us with many tools and resources to speak out against injustices and mobilize our congregations with prophetic words and practical strategies. Genesis 34, Judges 19, and 2 Samuel 13 speak of the rape of a woman by a man. The other men in the woman's life seek retribution after the rape occurs. Retribution takes the form of violence following the woman's rape under the auspices of revenge for the injustice of the rape. Another aspect of these texts is the voices of the victims. The voices of the women vary: Dinah in Genesis does not speak, the Levite's concubine does not speak in Judges 19, Tamar in 2 Samuel protests the rape and its aftermath. Each of these scenarios is also present in our communities today. Alice A. Keefe suggests the rape of these women is a "signifier for broader issues" in the communities in which the rape takes place.10 In the case of Dinah and Shechem, the broader issue at stake is the merging of Israel with another community if Shechem marries Dinah as he wishes. This could be a threat to Israel's identity if a precedent was set for intermarriage. The subsequent wars - or brothers' acts in Dinah's case - speak to issues of preserving communities' order and relations among their members. Rape upsets this order by violating the pace of life. It signified an economic and property loss to the father of the woman and in so doing affects the life cycles of the community. Dinah and the Levite's concubine do not speak, Tamar pleads with Amnon to not rape her. This sounds familiar to the statistics of contemporary society: 64% of rapes are not reported and 66-80% of victims know their offender.11 Dinah's and the concubine's rapes were reported, but the women have no voice. Our society is ordered in such a way that 64% of women who are raped feel they have no voice and do not report the crime. Amnon was Tamar's brother. Family members or friends make up the majority of perpetrators in child sexual abuse cases. 12 Keefe's commentary makes sense to me, as I believe there is much more to these (and all) biblical texts than the mere reporting of data. I agree also with her suggestion that the retribution of the rape crimes fails to uphold the social order - as did the rape acts themselves. Dinah's rape and the revenge sought by her brothers disrupt their community. Neither act is acceptable, but both are also present in our communities today as well. There is no clear response that works in the biblical texts, nor have we found one in contemporary society. Organizations such as The Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence exist, but numbers of victims remain very high. The problem is far from being solved. This image of rape as a metaphor for social disorder and upheaval is a powerful one. It could also be a problematic metaphor as well as helpful one. Why is rape of a woman the metaphor used to symbolize community disorder in these accounts? Are there other metaphors that would also work? If so, why use the rape of a woman? Or, is this metaphor - as it seems Keefe would suggest - used because it is the most graphic and poignant way to get the message across? Is the woman's body a symbol for "community, connectedness, and covenant"13 in which the rape is evidence of destruction of those things? These are difficult questions, but it seems Keefe's perspective is one of many ways to read and use these texts. The broader picture of Keefe's view is valuable in talking about our communities, but there are also the issues of the rapes themselves. Sexual violence does destroy and disorder communities, whether or not there is acknowledgement that this destruction takes place. Abuse suffered within a family disrupts the trust and safety that are "supposed" to be present in familial relationships. A rape shakes up the woman's congregation if it is something made public knowledge. There is violation of trust and a disturbance in the congregation because these things are not okay. But, life should not go on as if nothing has happened. Healing does not happen by keeping quiet about the injustices that have occurred. Education about the prevalence of sexual violence is also an important responsibility for the church. Adults, youth, and children need to be informed of ways in which to protect themselves and situations to avoid. Although this kind of education is beginning to take place in school systems, faith communities need also to be involved! Children should grow up knowing the church is committed to working to end all kinds of violence, including sexual violence. Knowing this, in turn, may make all the difference when a person needs to talk to someone about an instance of abuse. It is much more likely a person would seek out a pastor or church member had there already been education and discussion around these issues. Silence does not create space for an abused person to speak. What are other ways we are accomplices in the silence surrounding issues of sexual violence? Stories of young women who have suffered from rape and other abuse often tell of their mothers and/or fathers urging them to forget about it, be sure not to talk about the abuse to anyone else.14 The recent movie, "The General's Daughter," is a frightening example of this. A woman's father tells her to just forget about it and all will be well, in order to protect the institution she and the men who raped her attended. She eventually is killed in her final attempt to get her father to listen to her, to acknowledge she had been wounded by the violence done to her. The investigator who handled her murder case accuses her father, in the end of the movie, for his complicity in her death.15 National media, through examples like this movie, are beginning to portray those who are participants in the perpetuation of sexual violence. How often do we hear this preached from our pulpits and taught in our Sunday school classrooms? Domestic violence shelters should not be one of the only places victims of violence find refuge. We must preach and teach a healthy way of relationships, acknowledging the harm that has been done by our silence, in order to create truly inclusive communities where all are safe. Jesus speaks to his disciples in Matthew 25, saying whenever they serve "the least"16 of their community, they are serving God. His descriptions of "the least" are those who are sick, in prison, hungry. Aren't those who are affected by sexual violence hungry for healing; their perpetrators "sick" as they abuse sex and power? Jesus' disciples are told to be active in their pursuits of justice. So, too, should we be if we are seeking to follow Christ - working for the healing of victims and perpetrators of sexual violence. "If You're Not Outraged, You're Not Paying Attention!" Genesis 34 Webster's dictionary gives eight definitions for community. One of them is: "a social, religious, occupational, or other group sharing common characteristics or interests."17 Ancient Israel fits into this category of community, as do the faith communities that share Israel's legacy in contemporary society. We, today, share some common characteristics and interests with others in our faith communities. These commonalities are expressed in things such as corporate worship, where many groups gather together at a specific time and place for reflection, meditation, and learning. Our religious concepts guide the ways in which we gather together in community. Israel's life as a community also included worship and faith practices. However, this meant different ways of thinking about community than we tend to do today. Israel was in a much more volatile position in the ancient world than we are in the Western world. Christian and Jewish communities today do not have the same ethnic and identity concerns as Israel did. Our lives and communities are not threatened by neighboring nations and tribes. New people coming into our communities do not pose a threat to our existence - though many responses from faith communities in dealing with diversity seem to not understand that. Early Israel was under constant threat of losing their identity as a nation as they sought to differentiate themselves from other religious practices of their time. Israel set up systems of law and practice to help preserve their identity as they struggled to maintain the way of life they had chosen. Parts of the Hebrew Bible, such as Leviticus, give us a glimpse of how some of these law systems operated. Government of the community, religious practice, property rules, and family identity are some of the things addressed in the law codes in the Hebrew Bible. It is in this context that the story of Genesis 34 takes place. Dinah goes out to visit other women of the region in which she lived; this is the opening of the chapter. In the next verse, Shechem seizes her and lays with her by force. The implication to us is Dinah is raped. Dinah's brothers are pretty unhappy about this. Rape is not okay, their sister has been defiled by a man who did not have rights to her - he was not her husband nor was he a member of their community. Understandably, they want revenge for their sister. So, they trick Shechem into thinking he is welcome and liked and suitable to marry Dinah as he wishes to. Then they destroy Shechem's community, likely by killing the men, plundering their city and even raping their women. The crime rendered by Schehem is returned to him in even greater force. Justice is served. Or is it? Reading further along, the actions of Dinah's brothers do not get Israel very far in preserving their community. They are put in more danger due to the violent reaction of the brothers according to Jacob, their father. And what of Dinah? As many feminist commentators have noted, she is not heard from again after the first verse of the story - and even in the opening lines she does not speak. The voice of the narrator tells us what she does. Other commentators talk of this story as being not about the literal characters at all, but rather as speaking to Israel's concerns of identity. Alice A. Keefe suggests the rape of these women is a "signifier for broader issues" in the communities.18 For Genesis 34, Dinah's rape by Shechem shows the threat of the merger of Israel with another community if Shechem gets to marry Dinah. This merger could potentially mean the end of Israel - the cost of preserving identity was war. So, there are these two perspectives: one from a more literal interpretation, one from a broader context. Which are we to have on the situation? Or, do both give us insight and lessons to be learned for our lives in faith communities today? It seems to me that the latter is a better way to approach this text. Each context holds truth for Israel and for us. Again, community is a group of people sharing common characteristics and interests. From what we know of Israel and of our communities today, I think we can safely say that a common characteristic we share is this: Rape is wrong. It is not okay for anyone to be forced into an unconsenting sex act. In Dinah's story, her community is disrupted by this act: outraged to the point of revenge of great force. How does your faith community react to the rape of one of its members? Are they aware? Is there outrage in public or private discourse? Or, is this something rarely talked of or heard about except occasionally in the news or in conversation with someone who works at the domestic violence shelter? One in four women has been the victim of some form of sexual violence. Some statistics say one in three women and one in five men will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime.19 The faith communities I am aware of have at least four women as part of their membership - generally many, many more than four. Sobering to think about, isn't it? Someone in your Sunday School class, maybe in your pew during worship, maybe even in your family has been the victim of sexual violence. Knowing this, and especially knowing people in my life who struggle with the consequences of this type of violence being done to them, makes me want to wage war against their perpetrators - I would like to see them punished severely and there are those times when my anger wants them to die for their crime. If this is my reaction, I know the pain and frustration of women and men for whom this is a reality of life must be many times greater than my own. This is not a reality that is separate from our life of faith, from worship or Sunday School or prayer times. This is the reality of our community. What, then, is our responsibility? "If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." This message is captured on the bumper sticker of a car roaming the streets of Nashville. The slogan means to capture the complacency of our society, I think, to attempt to get people to think of the ways in which injustice runs rampant in our streets and homes. It also, it seems to me, is telling of the ways in which our faith communities react to sexual violence. We do not pay attention because we do not want the pace of our lives disrupted. If we don't pay attention, we do not have to reconcile the fact that those one in four women are women who are a part of our everyday lives - not just statistics we learn in a minister's workshop educating us on sexual violence and sexual misconduct. Paying attention takes a lot more work than letting others take care of the details of those statistics. After all, that is what the domestic violence shelter is for, isn't it? "We give money to the women's shelter, and to the prevention of sexual violence education program", said the well-meaning church member when asked of the involvement of the church in issues of sexual violence. This is necessary money, those are necessary programs, and the church's monetary resources are well-used to answer those needs. But what of our other resources? Namely: ourselves, our time, and our words. Are our faith communities places of refuge and comfort for those affected by sexual violence? Do we preach the texts of our tradition that struggle with these issues? Is there safe space for a woman who has been raped to speak of the pain and horror she experiences because of this crime? Dinah's story should make sense to us, in both its characters and its place in the broader context of Israel's struggle to be a faithful community. We should be outraged by the rape of Dinah - both in ancient Israel and in the many women who walk through our halls and sit by our sides in worship. Our communities should be disrupted and shaken by these acts of violence! Disrupted not into silence and withdrawal from the situation, but to voicing the injustice and acting to reform the systems that continue to allow rape and other acts of sexual violence to happen. The feminist commentators are correct in their view of Dinah's voice: it is silent and missing from the conversation. One of our tasks is to give Dinah a voice - to create space for those whose voices have been silenced not only by their perpetrators, but also by our inattention to the crimes committed against them. We must speak out and act from within the walls of our church buildings, not just at the domestic violence shelter. Revenge through punishment and death may be one answer, but this kind of revenge does not resolve the problem and I do not think it pays the best attention to the issue. It did not lay to rest the struggles of early Israel, nor does it for us today. Our task, as was Israel's, is much more complex. One in four women are victims of sexual violence. We have a difficult task before us, but we are promised strength for the journey. God kept covenant with Israel, though Israel shifted and changed in its growing pains, and had to reconfigure itself as the years went by in its struggle to honor the covenant with God. So, too, must we struggle and change our way of being in the world. One in four women…the way things are is not the way they have to stay. Our faith communities must be involved in the struggle for healing and change for those who live with the consequences of sexual violence. We must also be a part of the solution for prevention. If we are not outraged, we are not paying attention. Body Image Body image is a significant aspect of sexuality. Everywhere we look, there are portrayals of other people's bodies. These media and advertising images have become the "ideal" for us to be. Young girls and young boys are often caught up in what they must do to look "right" and be accepted by their peers.20 The girls try to live up to the images seen in "Cosmopolitan" and "People", even going to the extreme of eating disorders; boys talk about when they will "score," and check out the older girls' breasts and behinds. There is rarely talk of anything other than the physical aspects of their objects of affection. The joy and growth that comes through the give and take of friendships and intimate relationships have become lost as sexuality dissolves into the physical - how we look on the outside is the most important focus. What happens next? We cannot continually live on the cover of "Cosmo" or in the locker room talking about our sexual victories. Body images should not be based on what we see on television or on the cover of magazines. Discussion of body image is often only a negative enterprise - when we think of our bodies we should be thinking of the positive qualities that enable us to do all the things we do! Undergraduate college women give valuable insights into the many different forces that pressure them toward unhealthy behaviors.21 Media and advertising are not the only entities giving these undergraduate women the message that they are "not okay" unless they look like magazine models. Tina, a junior at Vanderbilt, tells of an incident involving a professional health care worker at the Student Health Center of Vanderbilt. Tina had been having problems with her back and went to Student Health to see if she could get some medical help. She told the man she saw the symptoms of her back pain. His immediate response was something to the effect of: "You really should lose weight. Then, you likely would not have this problem." He did not ask any questions regarding other factors that could affect Tina's back. She was shocked and hurt by his response, saying that it made her feel: "I'm somehow broken; made me feel gross and ugly."22 People in authority, like this male health care provider, seem to support the media's role in upholding unreasonable stereotypes for body weight and body image. If this man had asked questions of Tina, he would have realized there were other factors that contribute significantly to her back problems. Tina is a piano major, spending several hours a week and sometimes a day sitting at the piano. This fact could have a lot to do with her back pain, but his assumption was her weight without regard to other factors. How do we, as the church, counter these negative messages of body image? Where is our prophetic voice in honoring our bodies in all of their shapes and sizes? This seems a daunting task in the face of so many media messages like "Cosmopolitan" and "Sports Illustrated" - and misguided health care professionals - as they show the best way of looking and living. Being a part of a church community involves commitment to its beliefs and practices, not the messages of the media. Our scriptures have many texts in which to guides us in this enterprise. Paul tells the Corinthian church to remember that "your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God."23 This is a powerful statement! The people in Corinth had gotten consumed with messages contrary to their faith. Maybe this is not so different from our church communities today. Bodies are wonderful gifts - this is the message we should be sending to our communities. Body image is a positive concept! Biblical texts can give us insight and tools for preaching and teaching positive, healthy ways of viewing our bodies. This, in turn, helps us to base our chances and choices of relationships not on the "imperfections" we have been told by the media of our physical selves but on the gifts of all aspects of our bodies. 2 Samuel 11 can address this aspect of sexuality. King David sees Bathsheba bathing and wants to have her in his bed. Bathsheba is married to someone else. David does not have to commit adultery in order to have his sexual desires met. However, he summons her, they have sex, she gets pregnant. This is not an unfamiliar story in our world today, maybe in the ancient world either. David and Bathsheba possibly acted very much in line with this way of thinking: enjoy the physical here and now and do not think of anything beyond erection and orgasm. Was Bathsheba being provocative and luring David to her, as many commentators suggest?24 What if David was being nosy walking around on his roof and, seeking a new woman for his bed, took Bathsheba without her consent?25 Either of these possibilities can have important lessons in creating a theology of sexuality for our communities. If Bathsheba was being provocative, why did she feel she had to do that in order for David to pay attention to her? If David was on the prowl, why did he feel he could sleep with a married woman? The first scenario is as follows: Bathsheba's provocative actions are irresistible to David. If this is true, maybe Bathsheba was intentionally attempting to garner David's affections. To do this, she felt she had to present herself in a sexually alluring manner. Bathing in the nude on a rooftop in full view of David seems to have accomplished her purpose. They have sex; Bathsheba gets pregnant, and ends up in David's household. Mission accomplished? Maybe so, but are the consequences worth the actions? Bathsheba was already married: the adultery with David was against the laws of Israel for both of them. David wants to get around this mess, so he goes to great lengths to have Uriah, Bathsheba's husband, killed. With Uriah out of the picture, David can marry Bathsheba and the child - as well as the sex - will not be illegitimate. The prophet Nathan tells David in no uncertain terms that he has dishonored God and he will be punished for killing Uriah and taking his wife. David and Bathsheba's child dies as part of David's punishment. Bathsheba may now be one of David's wives, but are the consequences worth the actions? Her previous husband has been killed, though he did nothing to warrant his own death, and the child is dead. Did Bathsheba, in this scenario, get what she wanted? In the second scenario David is the one responsible for the adultery. He sees Bathsheba, decides he wants to have sex with her, sends for her and his wish is met. It appears as though he does not wish for this relationship to be a long-standing one. She "returned to her house"26 immediately after the sex, according to the text. David does not hear from her again until she discovers she is pregnant and tells him of her pregnancy. Her husband, Uriah, is away in battle - fighting for David - so the implication is the child has to be David's. This does not seem to be part of David's plan; as mentioned above he has Uriah killed. However, before having him killed, David attempts to get Uriah to sleep with Bathsheba so it will seem as though the child is his and not David's.27 David does not want to be responsible for his actions. Why did David believe his actions would not have negative consequences? Did his position as king lead him to think he had a right to whatever he wanted? We do not know which, if either, of these scenarios is true to the thought of the characters of David and Bathsheba in this text. The narrator does not give us much detail into this story. However, the following chapters of 2 Samuel continue David and Bathsheba's story, showing the many disasters that fall upon David and his household following the adultery. The prophet Nathan warns David that there will be much grief to come for him, due to God's anger at David's adultery - David's disobedience and dishonoring of God. In either perspective, David and Bathsheba are thinking of body image only as something to be used for physical pleasure. This can lead to thinking of our bodies the way media and advertising portray the "perfect" image in contemporary society. If our bodies are to be used to get what we want - whether it is for sex, the right female or male to notice us, to fit into the "cool" crowd people, the right job - we reduce our sexuality to physicality. And, this physicality is itself defined in very narrow terms, giving a small number of images we "should" be. James B. Nelson, in Body Theology, speaks of the necessity of Christian communities to embrace and expand our understandings of sexuality. A "viable sexual theology…will express the prophetic critique on every institutional and cultural arrangement that sexually distorts and oppresses; it will be grounded in commitments to equality, justice, and fulfillment."28 We have a responsibility to be a voice against the body image messages of our culture; to remind ourselves that our bodies are "temples of the Holy Spirit"29 and not of "Cosmo" and "Sports Illustrated." "The Perfect 10" 2 Samuel 11-12 How many of you have ever seen another person walking through the neighborhood, sitting near you at a restaurant, watched an actress or actor on T.V. and wished you looked more like that person? I imagine most of us have experienced moments such as those. What is it that makes us unhappy with the way we look? How about wishing you could buy that particular brand of jeans, those shoes with a certain designer label, or the power suit you just know would give you a better image at work? Anything to make us look "better," right? Why are we never satisfied with our bodies? Do we ever stop and think about the positive aspects of our bodies or do we simply go about our days taking for granted what we have been given, maybe occasionally using them to get things we want? The media and advertising agencies of our culture uphold certain body types and appropriate ways of dressing, don't they? These body images seem to hold great power in the way we think about ourselves! But do these "perfections" really offer a good and healthy way of living? The story of David and Bathsheba may give us some insight into these questions. King David is walking around on the roof of his palace. He sees Bathsheba bathing, likes what he sees, and decides he wants to have sex with her. Bathsheba is sent for, she comes to David, they have sex and then she leaves. There's not much depth to this particular relationship. Now, add in the other factors: Bathsheba is married to Uriah, who is fighting in David's army and is away from home. David knows adultery is against the laws of Israel, but this apparently does not enter into his decision to have Bathsheba for a one-night stand. Biblical commentators have differing opinions on what is going on in this story. However, traditional interpretations put much of the blame on Bathsheba.30 These interpretations say Bathsheba was being intentionally provocative, luring David to her with her nude bathing on the rooftop. She had to have been aware of what she was doing, therefore David does not have much resistance to the act of adultery because Bathsheba is pretty much throwing herself at him. In my opinion, the text gives us nowhere close to enough detail to come to this conclusion. It seems to me to be just as likely that David was being nosy and looking for a new woman to have in his bed. There are many directions in which to think about this text, but I want to focus on Bathsheba for today. In spite of my misgivings about the traditional interpretations of her actions, let's look at this interpretation and see what it can teach us. We'll assume at this point that Bathsheba was being provocative: she knew exactly what she was doing and wanted to lure David into having sex with her. So, she used her body to do so. Why would Bathsheba think she had to look alluring and behave provocatively for David to pay attention to her? And why would this leave David so defenseless to stopping the adultery? This scenario does not show either person thinking much beyond the physicality of the relationship. It is not really an unfamiliar story, is it? T.V. shows and advertisements portray situations like this all the time. The beautiful woman snares the perfect, powerful man and they live happily ever after wearing the right clothes, working the right jobs, and usually hurting no one else in the process. We are bombarded with these images of what the perfect people look like, where they shop, what jobs they have and even get help in the "pop" psychology sections of bookstores with countless books on how to get the perfect man or woman for you. Still assuming Bathsheba planned her actions for the end result to be sex with David, let's follow the story a little further. Bathsheba discovers she is pregnant. David must be the father because her husband is in battle fighting in David's army. She tells David, eventually becomes one of his wives, and moves into the palace. Mission accomplished? Maybe so, but are the consequences worth the actions? David has Uriah killed to cover up the adultery, God is rather unhappy with how all of this has happened and tells David his household is in big trouble as punishment. David and Bathsheba's child dies. The rest of David's family goes further into dysfunction if you follow the story through 2 Samuel. Reality is much different than what we see on T.V., isn't it? Maybe the concentration on what we look like and how this will get us what we want - if we can only perfect our image - is more than just a little misguided. Most of us likely do not think about our body images in exactly these terms, at least not on a conscious level. But what do we do to counteract the messages of the world around us that insist the perfect body is the solution to our problems? How many ads for different weight loss programs and cosmetic products go across your television screens and radio waves on a daily basis? The consequences of David and Bathsheba's adultery are pretty severe. They have disobeyed and dishonored God. The heart of the issue is not in the adultery, but in their refusal to look beyond the immediate physicality of the other. Aren't we guilty of this as well? Do we not let advertising images of the perfect body guide our actions regarding our bodies? How many people are hurt by our inaction and inattention to the harm done by these false ideals of body image? Our consequences may differ some from David and Bathsheba's, but I do not think they are any less severe. Eating disorders are occurring at an alarming rate among women and adolescent girls. A recent newspaper article quotes between 5 and 10 million women and girls suffer from an eating disorder. A registered nurse interviewed for the article placed significant blame on media and advertising messages that go unchecked, promoting unhealthy body weight for females.31 I am not suggesting eating disorders are something God has done to us - we have done this to ourselves through our own choices and are now paying the price. Eating disorders are only one example of the consequences of upholding a false ideal for our bodies. The price is high for dishonoring what we have been given in the gift of our bodies. Thousands of women die each year from complications related to eating disorders. College women have told me, in a Bible study I attended at Vanderbilt University, that there is often competition among undergraduate women at that particular institution to see who can skip the most meals in a week. I was horrified by this revelation, but not very surprised. Genesis tells us we were created in the image of God. Is this the image of God? Focusing on how we look and what we eat so that others will find us attractive? Tradition, scripture, and my own experiences of God do not indicate to me that God is all that concerned about us achieving a "perfect 10" score in the swimsuit contest. We were created in many different shapes, sizes, and colors. Is not this more reflective of the image of God than the ever-elusive ideal we seem to be in constant search of? All different sizes and shapes, made for a variety of tasks and purposes, working together to achieve happy and healthy communities? God did not abandon David and Bathsheba or stop loving them and their families. God was greatly disappointed because both of them were capable of living with much great integrity than their adultery exhibited. I think God's presence is much the same in our contemporary lives of faith. Our bodies are not simply vehicles through which we get what we want: dress in the right clothes, behave in a provocative manner and the perfect mate will be just around the corner; support false ideals of body weight because that is what everyone else is doing and how we will be accepted into the right group of people. The ways things are is not the way they have to stay. We have been created to be so much more than the perfect 10. We're created in the image of God! I think that's got to be far beyond anything a perfect 10 could hope to achieve. David and Bathsheba messed up. So do we. It's not easy to live contrary to the dominant messages of the culture that surrounds us. But we do not struggle alone. God is faithful and true, loving unconditionally in all circumstances - even when we forget what it means to be faithful. Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgendered Issues Definitions of "right" relationships are difficult to create and put into practice. Often, the church seems to have made very specific claims regarding the ways in which humans can have relationships with others in order to be a part of God's plan. Males and females are allowed intimate, sexual relationships in the context of marriage with the blessing of God and the church. Anything that is sexual outside of this definition is simply wrong and not pleasing in the eyes of God. Our definitions of right relationships seem to come as much from the social conventions of our Western world as they do from the church.32 As with body images, the media and advertising agencies give us the much-desired look to strive for: mostly, heterosexual white couples. These couples have, of course, the "ideal" bodies and lives as well. Ads on television for washers and dryers show moms, those for lawnmowers and other tools show dads. Everyone is placed in his or her proper gender role to fit society's definitions of right relationships. Where, exactly, does this definition come from? As a child and adolescent growing up in the church, I do not remember a specific lesson that told me how and in what context sex was appropriate - not from the Bible, from Sunday school, or the pulpit. However, I do not remember ever not knowing this: sexual expression of any kind was for marriage only. Marriage, of course, was a state reserved for men and women. I had graduated from high school before the thought ever entered my mind that those who were "gay" looked a whole lot like the rest of the world - that maybe they weren't this strange and aberrant group of people. A few years ago, media and advertising did begin to shift a little. Youth today can watch sitcoms with interracial couples, neighborhoods that are comprised of a variety of ethnic groups, male-female couples living together (and having sex!) before marriage, a cross-dresser or two, gay males as successful, accepted business people and the main characters of the show, and a lesbian appearance every now and then.33 The shift is happening away from the traditional nuclear family of mom, dad, and two kids. But, these new shows are still in the minority. Though there have been outcries from any number of groups as to the legitimacy of these characters on public television; nevertheless most of the sitcoms and dramas are quite successful. Where, then, does this leave the church? How does our voice fit into the conversations of the media, advertising industry, peer groups at school? The church's messages must be more encompassing of the life experiences of its congregations. Examples throughout this section will illustrate the reality of life today does not fit so easily into the church's traditional way of thinking about relationships. Stories of our faith are not limited to only those with good and happy endings. As shown above, there are many biblical texts that speak to the difficulty of trying to live a faithful life. Making unhealthy and dangerous choices is easy to do, especially where there are not convincing voices showing possibilities of other ways to live. Being a part of youth and campus ministries gives tremendous insight into young people's perspective on their church experiences as it relates to sexuality. The Wesley Foundation Campus Ministry at Vanderbilt University has completed a seven-week Bible study developed and led by Jane Ellen Nickell, as mentioned in the previous section. This involved discussions of sexuality in many forms through the framework of 1 Corinthians. Each student voiced his or her surprise at a study that related sexuality and the Bible as a positive endeavor - even if Paul's words were not always so positive. Sexuality in this study was presented as much more than sex acts: relationships among a community, how bodies are taken care of through food and drink, women's experience as different than men's through the lens of sexism, and the appropriateness or not of a variety of sexual expressions. The students, particularly in the session that discussed appropriate and inappropriate sexual expression, referred to their upbringing in the church. One young woman said she received a lot of black and white answers to issues surrounding sexual expression. This framework, she said, does not fit with her life experience. The older she got, the more distance she felt between her church and the rest of her life. She has found in the campus ministry a place and space that goes beyond the "black and white" solutions of her childhood. Like many others, she grew up knowing little about sex other than that its proper expression is in male-female marriage alone. As her world expanded in high school and in the past 3-½ years of college, her experiences continued to make the distance between church and the rest of life grow.34 Rachel, the young woman mentioned above, now has friends who are gay and lesbian. Her parents divorced a few years ago because her father is gay. These relationships do not fit into what the church of her childhood taught. She has found in the Wesley Foundation Campus Ministry a community in which she is free to struggle with the incongruities that are present between her life experiences and her upbringing in the church.35 Sexuality's intimate expressions encompass much more than the physical sexual expression between a male and female. Should she not also be able to find this in a parish congregation? Recent literature on pastoral care and non-heterosexual persons has confronted tradition and society with the damage and degradation these individuals have suffered at the hands of tradition and even in the name of God.36 Sexual orientation issues continue to be highly volatile subjects in the church, even with the increasing prevalence of this literature. Different arguments both for and against the inclusion of non-heterosexuals in the church's life abound in most Protestant denominations.37 Western Christianity has traditionally seen deviation from the heterosexual norm as contrary to God's intention for humanity, or in simpler terms: sin.38 In more recent years, many groups have arisen from within the church claiming homosexuality is as valid an expression of sexuality as is heterosexuality. And, non-heterosexuals have the same claims to church membership and leadership as heterosexuals: sexual orientation should not be a determinant for membership, ordination, or commitment to another person as a life partner.39 These groups remain in the minority of their denominations, but they are vocal and proactive organizations that continue to have a significant presence. Tradition and scripture present g/l/b/t issues with rather difficult dilemmas for many people. The translations of the Bible we use put homosexuality in lists of sins in the New Testament; Leviticus' law codes say it is an abomination for a man to lie with another man.40 How do we reconcile the presence of g/l/b/t persons in our churches and in our world with these messages? Do we bracket the authority we have given to scripture in order to be inclusive of g/l/b/t persons in the life of the church? Or, do we treat these persons as sinful because of their identities as non-heterosexual, welcoming them but advocating for their repentance of that sin? These are difficult questions to answer, as each position has many arguments and advocates in our national church bodies and local congregations. Scripture has been central to the preaching, teaching, and faith practices of mainline Protestantism since the Reformation. Its authority and meaning to our congregations must be acknowledged in teaching, preaching, and discussion surrounding g/l/b/t issues. Arguments are made from one position that homosexuality as we know it is not the subject of the biblical references. Therefore, we cannot equate healthy, same-sex relationships today with the abomination and sin spoken of in the Bible.41 Others say homosexuality as we experience it today is exactly what biblical texts are speaking of and we cannot condone g/l/b/t persons and support their same-sex relations as valid expressions of a Christian life.42 How, then, are we to proceed in this discussion? Is there a resolution that will encompass our experiences and remain true to our faith? All Protestant denominations I am aware of struggle with this issue, at least on some level. Increasing visibility of and "secular"openness43 to g/l/b/t persons has forced the church to begin more and more discussion - and legislation - for g/l/b/t life in the church. The stakes have become high, with congregations leaving denominations due to national stances on the topic.44 Friends and colleagues from the United Methodist Church voice to me their fears that the differing opinions on homosexuality are going to split their denomination. Preaching is, again, a difficult enterprise when the texts do not provide easy solutions. Romans 1:26-27 is a New Testament example of text that indicates homosexuality as unnatural and a result of disobedience of God. This is a text that Boswell argues is talking of heterosexuals engaging in homosexual behavior, not homosexuals behaving as would be natural for them.45 Bernadette Brooten disagrees with Boswell, giving evidence that Paul is talking about homoeroticism as unnatural therefore wrong in the eyes of God.46 The issue is not whether the text says homosexuality is a sin or not. Rather, the text does believe homosexuality is unnatural. The issue becomes how do we hold this in tension with our experiences of g/l/b/t persons; experiences that do not indicate these are sinful persons because of their identity as such. In Romans 1, Paul is talking to a community that is made up of both gentile Christians and Jewish Christians. There seems to be argument from each of these groups as to the validity of the other group's claim to Christianity. They have missed the point, it seems, of following Christ and gotten wrapped up in details of who is right and who is wrong. This is not an unfamiliar story to our church communities today. Paul spends the second part of chapter one giving great detail into what happens when God's people become unfocused. They have known God's truth but refuse to live according to it. Verses 25-27 say: "…because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error." The issue for us should not be whether the text says homosexuality is a sin or not. Rather, the issue becomes how do we hold this in tension with our experiences of g/l/b/t persons; experiences that do not indicate these are sinful persons because of their identity as such. Further into the book of Romans Paul again uses the terms natural and unnatural. Chapter 11 contains an analogy of gentiles being branches unnaturally grafted onto an olive tree that is Israel. This may not be the traditional way the tree grows, but it is God's doing and both the natural and unnatural branches are rooted in God the creator. Paul wants to convince both the gentiles and the Jews they are heirs of God's promise. Here, natural and unnatural are now equal. Maybe now is the time for g/l/b/t persons to be equal with heterosexuals - both with their roots in God and both heirs of God's promise.47 Jesus says nothing regarding homosexuality, but he did speak a lot about love. The two greatest commandments from Jesus concern loving and honoring God with all that we are and loving those around us as we love ourselves (Matt 12: 28-31). There is no distinction regarding sexual orientations. "More Light: Now is the Time" Romans 1:26-27 Homosexuality. There are not many words nowadays that stir up quite as much controversy in the church as homosexuality, are there? Denominational conferences are called to debate whether gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons should be allowed full life in the church. If the decision is made to welcome and offer membership - as is the case in most mainline Protestant denominations - then the question becomes whether or not the further step should be taken: allowing the ordination of non-heterosexual persons. Here in the United Church of Christ, General Synod passed a resolution several years ago that sexual orientation should not be a factor for or against ordination. Rather, the candidate's fit for ministry is the issue at stake in ordination recommendations. To date, the UCC is the only mainline Protestant church to not explicitly exclude g/l/b/t persons from consideration for ordained ministry. My colleagues in other denominations, who do not have first-hand knowledge of the United Church of Christ, often assume that homosexuality is a non-issue for our congregations. I do not know many people who are a part of our church that would agree with that assessment. The reality is, g/l/b/t persons continue to struggle to be a fully accepted part of the UCC. The issue makes us squirm in our seats, doesn't it? It would be a whole lot easier for it to simply go away, or for a sign to drop from God stating a clear and uncontested opinion on the matter. My experience of the world, the church, and of God tells me that neither of these is likely to happen. So, it seems to me that our responsibility is to deal with it: search our tradition, scriptures, minds, and hearts for a faithful response to all of God's people. In Romans 1, Paul is talking to a community that is made up of both gentile Christians and Jewish Christians. There seems to be argument from each of these groups as to the validity of the other group's claim to Christianity. They have missed the point, it seems, of following Christ and gotten wrapped up in details of who is right and who is wrong. Sound familiar? Paul spends the second part of chapter one giving great detail into what happens when God's people become unfocused. They have known God's truth but refuse to live according to it. Verses 25-27 say: "…because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error." Sounds like Paul is referring to homosexuality, according to the literal reading of the text, doesn't it? When we think about natural intercourse, the first thing that comes into our minds is sex between a man and a woman. Some interpreters say this is an obvious condemnation of homosexuality. Others say Paul is talking about heterosexual persons giving up their natural expressions for homosexual intercourse and therein lies the sin: it is not about homosexuals engaging in what would be natural intercourse for them. Both of these answer the question of homosexuality in relation to this particular passage: the first says it is wrong, the second says it is not relevant to what Paul is talking about so why do we assume it is a sin? I am not convinced by either of these arguments. Instead, I want to look at it from another position: Paul is saying homosexuality is unnatural and not within God's truth, but that does not mean this is the final word on how we are to approach the issue. I would propose that gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered people are as much a part of God's truth as are heterosexuals. How, then, do we deal with the tension between this position and Paul's words? John Robinson was a Puritan pastor in the early 1600s in England and later in Holland. He was a leading figure in what became the Congregational church in the new world of America, though he did not ever come to America himself. The Congregational church is a huge part of the UCC's heritage and contemporary congregations. Robinson was concerned for those leaving for America, that they would remember their faith convictions and not adopt a narrow and rigid way of thinking. As they were leaving, our history tells us Robinson told this group of Puritans to remember that "The Lord has yet more light and truth to break forth from his holy Word." I think Robinson may have been speaking about the continuing revelation of God in our world: what we first see or read is not always the only or final answer. Certainly, this is not nearly as easy as living in a world where all is black and white. But, I think it better reflects the diversity of humanity and the realization that God is far bigger than anything we can possibly imagine. Further into the book of Romans Paul again uses the terms natural and unnatural. Chapter 11 contains an analogy of gentiles being branches unnaturally grafted onto an olive tree that is Israel. This may not be the traditional way the tree grows, but it is God's doing and both the natural and unnatural branches are rooted in God the creator. Paul wants to convince both the gentiles and the Jews they are heirs of God's promise. Here, natural and unnatural are now equal. Maybe now is the time for g/l/b/t persons to be equal with heterosexuals - both with their roots in God and both heirs of God's promise.48 Jesus says nothing regarding homosexuality, but he did speak a lot about love. The two greatest commandments from Jesus concern loving and honoring God with all that we are and loving those around us as we love ourselves (Matt 12: 28-31). There is no distinction regarding sexual orientations. G/l/b/t persons have been a part of the world probably for as long as heterosexual persons have. More and more evidence is being found to support the presence of homosexuality in all cultures and times of history. This diverse group of people do only make up a minority of the population. But, that does not make the minority any less valid or any less capable of full inclusion in the life of the church. Popular opinion may go against you if you propose this attitude of full inclusion for all people, regardless of sexual orientation. It is not easy to be a voice against the majority. The church has often had a difficult time going against popular opinion. Jesus was certainly not well liked by the authorities of his day. His followers fought many battles to establish the church they believed in. God is not through with us yet, there is still much work to be done to truly be this faith community we believe in. Now is the time to open our minds and hearts to the full diversity of God's creation - gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and straight. Who knows what we might accomplish when we live together, in all of our diversity as equals, seeking to live God's truth of love and justice for creation? Maybe fewer young men and women will be murdered because their killers see being gay as a disease, fewer teenage women and men will commit suicide because they feel there is no safe place for them in a world where their same-sex feelings are looked upon as sinful. Maybe more relationships can be celebrated openly instead of behind closed doors, more people joining faith communities because they are open and loving instead of closed and fearful. And, maybe we will come ever closer to knowing the fullness of God's love. Conclusion The young woman of the Wesley Foundation experiences the church of her upbringing as distant from the "rest of life." Somewhere along the way, the church has forgotten how to be the church. Our church communities should not be separate from the rest of our lives - not for our children and youth and not for us. Separating ourselves from the world by shutting our communities off from the issues that permeate our society is not the answer to God's call. The reality of life is not behind closed doors, but out in the streets, in the classrooms, on college campuses. This is where the church must be. We have to expand our rhetoric of sexuality to encompass the life experiences of our congregations. Developing, and more importantly, living a theology of sexuality that attempts to include, honor, and celebrate the diversity of human experience makes a significant step in bridging the distance between the church and the "rest of life." Doing this means responsibility for both what we have been a part of and what we can become. Each aspect has positive and negative consequences. As previously discussed, the church has been a part of the maintenance of systems that perpetuate sexual violence, unhealthy body images and relationships, and homophobia. A theology of sexuality has to have a component that calls for the redemption of our actions in these instances. Theology must also look to the present and the future, to give a vision of what we are capable of in this moment and of all that we can become. The preaching moment provides us with a powerful opportunity to speak this vision. Can we really surmount the staggering numbers of sexual violence? How is it possible to go up against the media and advertising empire and give alternate body images? Is there a realistic way to create communities that fully welcome and accept g/l/b/t persons in the face of so many negative messages? The reality is, I cannot predict whether the church will answer these questions positively or not. A theology of sexuality has to include positive answers to these questions. Our tradition and the abilities of our contemporary communities give us the resources to facilitate this transformation. We are capable of being a voice based in the perfect Love that casts out fear.49 But, we must not sit idly and wait for the answers to come to us, for others to pave the way for change. Jesus of Nazareth did not wait in a safe and comfortable home for people to come to him. Nor did he go out and speak words that were sure to maintain the comfort zones of his listeners. Following Christ - being the church - is not a passive enterprise. We must speak the truth, even when it makes us squirm. Congregations should be communities that speak out against abuse and violence. Our communities should be witnesses to all the diversity of humanity. The fear of transformation can be overcome only if we speak, giving voice to our need for redemption and hope for coming ever closer to living in the fullness of God's love. Endnotes 1 Morrison, Melanie. The Grace of Coming Home, Cleveland: The Pilgrim Press, p. 145. 2 The United Church of Christ, "Created in God's Image," for example. 3 Hereafter referred to as g/l/b/t issues. 4 www.cpsdv.org: The Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence. 5 Cashman, Hilary. Christianity and Child Sexual Abuse, London: Mackays of Chatham, p. 31 6 www.cpsdv.org : The Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence. 7 These statements come from class discussions at Vanderbilt Divinity School in which female survivors spoke of stages of their feelings surrounding their abuse, personal friends who have talked with me regarding this subject matter, and from my partner's reflections on her experiences of child sexual abuse. 8 www.cpsdv.org 9 i.e., Telling the Truth: Preaching about Sexual and Domestic Violence, Eds. John S. McClure and Nancy J. Ramsay; The Center in Seattle provides workshops and other educational resources accessible through catalogs and the internet. 10 Keefe, Alice A. "Rapes of Women/Wars of Men," in Semeia, no 61 1993, p. 79-97. 11 www.cdsdv.org 12 Cashman, 34. 13 Keefe, 94. 14 Class discussions at Vanderbilt Divinity School and private discussions with personal friends gave this insight, as well as information from The Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence in a presentation given by Rev. Marie Fortune at Vanderbilt Divinity School in the Spring of 1999. 15 I am unaware of the identity of the script writer for this film. The addendum to the film itself says it is based on a true story. 16 Matthew 25:31-46. All biblical texts from New Revised Standard Version of the Bible. 17 Webster's College Dictionary, p.275. 18 Keefe, Alice A. "Rapes of Women, Wars of Men." 19 Statistics from The Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence. 20 I realize this statement is relevant to most people of all ages. The concentration of my work in the church has been with youth, this is why I focus on this particular group. However, the discussion is also aimed at all people through the examples of youth. 21 The examples in this paragraph come from undergraduate women of Vanderbilt University. However, my initial insight into these experiences came from my own observations and participation in discussions at Elon College when I was an undergraduate student there. In particular, from class discussions in a class, "American Adolescence," taught and developed by Dr. Seena Granowsky in the spring of 1996. 22 Tina, in discussion of "body image" led by Jane Ellen Nickell in "Sexism, Sexuality, and Embodiment" Bible study for the Wesley Foundation Campus Ministry at Vanderbilt University. This study ran for seven weeks in the spring semester 2000. All students in this study group agreed to my presence in the group and my desire to use their insights for this project, their last names are not used intentionally to protect their privacy. 23 1 Corinthians 6:19. 24 For example, George Nicol, "The Alleged Rape of Bathsheba: Some observations and ambiquity in biblical narrative," Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, no 73 March 1997, p. 43-54. 25 For example, J. Cheryl Exum, Fragmented Women: Feminist subversions of biblical narratives, Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1993. 26 2 Samuel 11:4. 27 Uriah would not break the "ritual regulations of the battle camp which forbade intimate relations with women." Footnote, 2 Sam 11:11, HarperCollins Study Bible, 483. 28 Nelson, James B. Body Theology, Louisville, Westminster/John Knox Press: 1992. 29 1 Corinth. 6:11. 30 See, for example, George Nicol, "The Alleged Rape of Bathsheba: Some observations on amibiquity in biblical narrative," Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, no 73 March 1997, p. 43-54. 31 Dunavan, Naomi. Grand Forks Herald, North Dakota, February 8, 2000. 32 Monica Furlong also speaks of this concept in "Sex before Marriage" p.262-263 in Sexuality and the Sacred. 33 Ellen Degeneres' sitcom "Ellen," did, for the last few episodes portray the main character as a lesbian. There is not a network sitcom or drama that currently does so. 34 Rachel, a Vanderbilt University senior who participated in the Wesley Foundation study. 35 Vanderbilt's Wesley Foundation is a Reconciling Campus Ministry of the United Methodist Church. This is a branch of the United Methodist Church's Reconciling Congregation program that seeks to include all persons, regardless of sexual orientation or other factors that are used to discriminate, in all aspects of church life. 36 For example, Discovering Images of God: Narratives of Care Among Lesbians and Gays, Larry Kent Graham; Counseling Lesbian Partners, Joretta Marshall; Coming Out Through Fire: Surviving the Trauma of Homophobia, Leanne McCall Tigert. 37 Jeffrey Siker's Homosexuality and the Church: Both Sides of the Debate is an example of a resource that gives a diversity of opinions on the subject. 38 My research and knowledge has been largely limited to Christianity in what we call the Western world.. 39 Examples from some Protestant churches: Open and Affirming Program and The Coalition for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered Concerns of the United Church of Christ; Reconciling Congregations of the United Methodist Church; More Light Presbyterians. There are other denominations with similar organizations. 40 Leviticus 18:22; 20:13; Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9; 1 Timothy 1:10. 41 For example, L. William Countryman, in Dirt, Greed, and Sex: Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and their Implications for Today frames his discussion in terms of cleanliness and uncleanliness, p. 110-123; John J. McNeill, in The Church and the Homosexual and John Boswell in Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality both make the argument that Paul is speaking in Romans 1 not of homosexuals, but of heterosexuals committing homosexual acts. I do not claim this to be the extent of references on this argument, but assume these to be 3 well-known examples. 42 See Richard B. Hays, "Awaiting the Redemption of Our Bodies: The Witness of Scripture Concerning Homosexuality" in Homosexuality and the Church: Both Sides of the Debate. As with previous note, Hays is not the only example from this position. 43 I am speaking of actions such as the addition of domestic partner benefits for same-sex couples in institutions (i.e., Vanderbilt University employees), insurance companies, and the state of Vermont's recent addition of same-sex partners' equal rights to the benefits awarded to married couples. 44 For example, several congregations in the Southern Conference of the United Church of Christ have left the denomination because national resolutions call for the full inclusion of g/l/b/t persons in the life of the church, including ordained ministry. 45 Boswell, p.110. 46 Brooten, Bernadette. Love Between Women. Chicago, University of Chicago Press: 1996, p. 215-264. 47 Idea for this came through a conversation with Dr. Amy-Jill Levine at Vanderbilt Divinity School. 48 Idea for this came through a conversation with Dr. Amy-Jill Levine at Vanderbilt Divinity School. 49 "There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love." 1 John 4:18. Works Consulted Adams, Carol J. and Fortune, Marie M., Eds. Violence Against Women and Children: A Christian theological sourcebook. New York: Continuum, 1995. Boswell, John. Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay people in Western Europe from the beginning of the Christian era to the fourteenth century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. Brooten, Bernadette. Love Between Women. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. Countryman, L. William. Dirt, Greed and Sex: Sexual ethics in the New Testament and their implications for today. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988. Exum, J. Cheryl. Fragmented Women: Feminist (sub)versions of biblical narratives. Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1993. Farley, Margaret A. "Sexual Ethics," p. 54-67 in Sexuality and the Sacred: Sources for Theological Reflection. Nelson, James B. and Sandra P. Longfellow, Eds. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994. Frymer-Kensky, Tikva. In the Wake of the Goddesses: Women, culture and the biblical transformation of Pagan Myth. New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1992. Furlong, Moncia. "Sex before Marriage," p. 262-263 in Sexuality and the Sacred: Sources for Theological Reflection. Nelson, James B. and Sandra P. Longfellow, Eds. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994. Graham, Larry Kent. Discovering Images of God: Narratives of care among lesbians and gays. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1997. Gunnemann, Louis H. The Shaping of the United Church of Christ: An essay in the history of American Christianity. Cleveland: United Church Press, 1977 and 1999. Hays, Richard B. "Awaiting the Redemption of Our Bodies: The witness of scripture concerning homosexuality," p. 3-17 in Homosexuality in the Church: Both sides of the debate. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994. Heyward, Carter. Staying Power: Reflections on gender, justice, and compassion. Cleveland: The Pilgrim Press, 1995. Keefe, Alice A. "Rapes of Women/Wars of Men," Semeia, no 61 1993, p. 79-97. Lorde, Audre. "Uses of the Erotic: The erotic as power," p. 75-79 in Sexuality and the Sacred: Sources for Theological Reflection. Nelson, James B. and Sandra P. Longfellow, Eds. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994. Marshall, Joretta L. Counseling Lesbian Partners. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1997. McClure, John S. and Ramsay, Nancy J., Eds. Telling the Truth: Preaching about sexual and domestic violence. Cleveland: United Church Press, 1998. McNeill, John J. The Church and the Homosexual. Boston: Beacon Press, 1988. Morrison, Melanie. The Grace of Coming Home: Spirituality, Sexuality, and the Struggle for Justice. Cleveland: The Pilgrim Press, 1995. Nelson, James B. Body Theology. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992. Nickell, Jane Ellen. "Sexism, Sexuality, and Embodiment in 1 Corinthians: A seven-week Bible study for young adults." Unpublished. Nicol, George G. "The Alleged Rape of Bathsheba: Some observations on ambiguity in the biblical narrative," Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, no73 March 1997, p. 43-54. Siker, Jeffrey S., Ed. Homosexuality in the Church: Both sides of the debate. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994. Tigert, Leanne McCall. Coming Out While Staying In: Struggles and celebrations of lesbians, gays, and bisexuals in the church. Cleveland: United Church Press, 1996. http://www.cpsdv.org. The Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence. Seattle, Washington.