The writings of West, Van der Walt, and Kaoma (2016) call for safe spaces where the voices of those oppressed within and by faith communities because of religiously-infused homophobia can be heard. Though the right to freedom of religion or religious belief should be respected, this right cannot justify criminalising SOGIESC or inflicting harm on queer-identifying people.
The reality of discrimination against the marginalisation of queer-identifying people has contributed to multiple oppressions in the African faith landscape. West et al.. (2016) suggest that rereading the toxic so-called homosexuality texts in the Bible is not only necessary to demythologise them and empower queer-identifying Christians to respond to the rhetoric, but that they also offer redemptive interpretive options; their argument is that to move beyond
homophobia, ‘we must not allow the churches to determine which biblical texts are ‘about’
homosexuality’ (2016: 4).
Van der Walt (2017) offers a praxis of intercultural Bible reading as a redemptive religious practise which enables space for alternative understandings, positions, and insights by inviting the other into the interpretation through a celebration of their diverse biblical understanding and self-reflection. A ten-phase empirical study of intercultural bible reading conducted by Van der Walt (2017) brought together eight culturally diverse women for a contextual Bible study of 2 Samuel 13:1-12 and resulted in a safer space in which women were available for one another in a caring and supportive manner, holding each other’s pain, suffering, and vulnerability. These women experienced being truly heard and understood the complexity that social situations present through sharing their personal position and hearing the everyday lived realities of others. Van der Walt (2017) argues that social transformation and the promotion of human dignity is achievable by encouraging interaction between culturally diverse contextually embedded people to celebrate each other through real interactions through the use of intercultural bible reading. Not only can intercultural bible reading create an opportunity to question heteropatriarchy that is often based on the exclusive practise of bible interpretation, but it is an invitation to queer-identifying people who have been pushed to the margins, excluded from society, and silenced, to be seen and heard by creating a safe, supportive environment in which the ideologies that inform othering can be ‘named, dismantled and deconstructed’ (Van der Walt, 2017: 20). ‘Safer space’ is preferred to ‘safe space’ because a space cannot always be completely safe for all people, especially those with marginalised identities. According to Asakura (2017) such a space may function as a recharging station that provides emotional fuel to navigate hostile social contexts.
Davids, Matyila, Sithole, and Van der Walt, 2019 invite us to think about a theology that is for queer people by queer people which disrupts the traditional status of authoritative voices and the dominant direction of theological reflection and engagement. This ‘izitabane zingabantu ubuntu theology…calls for the theological reflection(s) done by those, and starting from the lived experiences of those, who are often negatively identified in the African context with the term Isitabane’ (Davids et al.., 2019: 9). This suggests, furthermore, an embodied reclaiming of the affirmation of life by embracing our bodies and destabilising what is considered normal, proper, and holy in faith landscapes, thus reimagining community, and the engagement with sources of faith (Davids et al.., 2019).
Schnoor (2006) as cited in Winder (2015) explains how gay Jewish men use religious values and practises to add meaning and purpose to their lives and to make sense of their gay identities.
Similarly, Shurts et al.. (2020) finds that establishing alternative religious organisations that accept queer-identifying people, instead of merely tolerating their existence, are critical of the practise of reinterpreting religious writings to find acceptance, and they are a means of mitigating possibly negative experiences emerging from religious institutions and teachings.
Van der Walt (2017: 8) makes the challenging suggestion that alternative methods can be used by encouraging local contextual readings of biblical texts that consider the possibility of diverse interpretation and invite differences that can be celebrated.
Shurts et al.. (2020) explain how one need not be part of a religious group to experience spirituality, though religion can endorse the expression of spirituality. There is the possibility of healing by becoming part of a religious community that accepts and affirms one’s sexual orientation (Shurts et al.., 2020). Crocket et al.. explain how ‘participants who remained in their religious community of origin were in affirming communities or chose to either reject or
compartmentalise their sexual identities’ (2018: 101). In addition, Crocket et al.. (2018) show how those who remain in their religions experience a sense of integration of their sexual and religious identities, and attribute non-affirming or rejecting messages as human rather than divine. According to West, Van Der Walt, and Koama (2016) this bible-based heteronormativity dictates what is normal and places a moralising emphasis on what the body should do. Anything that falls outside these parameters is stigmatised as hypersexual, promiscuous, or deviant. Van der Walt (2019) challenges us to counter fundamentalist, exclusivist, uncritical and non-contextual religious interpretations that result from heteropatriarchal communities and to strive towards and seek life-affirming inclusive alternative approaches and strategies that can be achieved through responsible contextual intercultural bible-reading processes. Judaism can achieve this through Talmudic study by engaging in ‘midrash’ which translates as ‘to seek with care’ through the study of Torah to understand the meaning of text, its context, and by recording contradictory interpretations and constantly re-evaluating the text to distil its divine intent. Midrash17 forces you to be aware of our own positionality, acknowledging how your biases act as a lens through which to understand the text.
Alonzo and Buttitta (2019) resolve that models of coming out tend to be too linear to be satisfactory, given that the process of coming out is a lifelong process of responding to multiple social forces. Whether sexual identities are viewed as declared, performed, or both, it is apparent that they are fluid and contextual. Therefore, a person's sexual identity is not fixed or constant but can, and often does, change over time and place. Alonzo and Buttitta challenge us to think of coming out as a process of coming into life, which emphasises learning about norms
17 ‘Midrash’ is an interpretive act, seeking the answers to religious questions (both practical and theological) by plumbing the meaning of the words of the Torah. See https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/midrash-
and expectations of queer culture in the everyday social settings of PoC while ‘stepping into an identity that integrates other critical aspects of identity’ (2019: 22). This is emphasised by the findings of Winder (2015) who also confirms the coming out process is a journey, not an event. McCornick (2013) finds that contemporary research reveals that coming out differs depending on one’s social, political, and economic context that it does not occur in the same order or at the same pace and includes identity expression with ambits beyond SOGIESC because of the myriad of complex, multi-dimensional, and inter-locking identities we all contain/bear/. According to Lugg (2003) multi-dimensionality moves beyond intersectionality by pushing the analysis to be more inclusive, by acknowledging that to be queer, can hold multiple meanings and can be experienced differently from person to person.
According to Winder one aspect of that journey involves working through religious beliefs and
‘the impact of race adds another intersectional component [as queer-identifying PoC] will experience coming out and religious development through their own unique racial lenses’
(2015: 21). Winder (2015) writes that people who are deeply religious or are from deeply religious communities where homosexuality is discouraged, can be faced with anti-gay sentiments, and have a hard time accepting their own identities. Alonzo and Buttitta (2019) show how a component of coming out is grappling with the negative overt and covert messages about sexual minorities that exist in society and having to grapple against internalising these negative beliefs and messages which is often unavoidable and harmful to an individuals’
concept of self and sense of wellbeing. This is echoed in the findings of Shurts et al.. (2020) that lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals experience coming out as a difficult decision because of fear of rejection from family or friends as a result of religious beliefs or the fear of rejection by the church or religious congregations resulting from notions of sin. According to West et
al.. (2016) queer-identifying people experience trauma in faith communities because of theologies which are normative and traditional.
The findings of Garnet and Kimmel (2003) suggest that although it is difficult not to disclose one’s queer identity, greater distress may be experienced when the alternative means misleading and/or lying to people. Hans (2017) writes that coming out of the closet is central to developing a positive queer identity and claiming one’s queer identity. This embrace of identity often results in exposure to homophobia, and when this occurs in churches, Hans (2017) and Winder (2015) both suggest that QPoC turn to alternative, non-religious but welcoming spaces to negotiate and reconcile their religious beliefs with their sexual and gender identity. According to West, Van der Walt, and Koamo ‘homophobia in the churches inhabits a particular biblical shape, and so this biblical shape must be interrogated and destabilised and replaced with a redemptive and liberating shape’ (2016: 4).
The process of coming out does not occur in a vacuum and, as queer people, we continue to construct identity and express it while we live our life. Therefore, according to Shurts et al..
(2020) we continue to progress through developmental processes that involve other aspects of our identity, including our faith, which are often affected and challenged when we come out.
For as long as patriarchal heteronormativity in our societies and religious spaces is
‘un(der)acknowledged, maintained and even encouraged, we will fail to address the … queerness of all human sexuality’ (Punt, 2009: 11).