Читать книгу Man Jesus Loved - Theodore W. Jr. Jennings - Страница 10

In the work that lies ahead, we must distinguish distinct strategies of reading that together make up a gay-affirmative rereading of biblical texts.

The first level of a gay-affirmative reading is one that has been pursued with considerable force over the last half century: contesting the presumed basis in Scripture for cultural and social denigration of and even legislation against persons who engage in same-gender sexual activity. The current result of this strategy is that several of the texts formerly read as referring to this behavior may no longer be so employed; they are the result of mistranslation. Another result is that any counterhomosexual texts can be applied, if at all, to behavior rather than to orientation.

These results may be regarded as important but insufficient. Therefore alternative strategies must be employed.

In the first place, a strategy may be employed that exposes homophobic readings as engaged in an obfuscation of the text—that is, as entailing a fundamental distortion of the biblical message. Here one must assert that a reading of these texts (for example, the narrative concerning Sodom) which uses them to license opposition to persons who engage in same-sex sexual relations actually blatantly distorts the texts. The distortion entailed is a measure of homophobia—that is, of a fear of homosexuality that brings the institutionally approved reading into irrationality.

While it is a positive animus against homosexuality, homophobia is also complemented by what may be called a heterosexist reading. This reading is so preoccupied with the model of heterosexual marriage and family values that it reads into the text its own presuppositions. This strategy does not necessarily entail a hatred or fear of homosexuality but rather a bias toward finding confirmation of the marriage and family values of heterosexual culture in the biblical texts. A reading that counters heterosexism then moves to a wider arena: not just delegitimating homophobic readings but contesting the reading that suggests the privileging of heterosexual institutions. Contesting heterosexism entails contesting the view that heterosexual institutions in fact are supported in the biblical texts. Note that while homophobic readings also appeal to heterosexist readings the reverse is not necessarily the case.²

A third level of reading is one that is “pro-gay.” This kind of reading is anticipated by those who read the story of Jonathan and David or of Ruth and Naomi as gay-positive. This approach is analogous to, for example, feminist readings that demonstrate the presence of strong female characters or of feminine attributes of the divine, or of readings like those of Cain Hope Felder that demonstrate the hidden presence of African people in the biblical texts. We are concerned then with the hidden presence of relationships that may be construed as gay in some sense.

To these strategies of reading we may add a fourth: reading the texts from the perspective of a contemporary gay or queer sensibility. Here the aim is to discover how the text appears when it is read from a standpoint affirmative of gay or queer reality—that is, what the text means now, when viewed from this perspective. While dependent upon the other strategies I have suggested, this reading goes beyond them by taking seriously the point of view of contemporary readers, as when the Bible is read from the standpoint of the impoverished of Latin America or women in North America.

The task of a gay reading thus entails a multiple strategy of interconnected readings of texts. By attending to the distinction between and relations among these strategies, we become better acquainted with the biblical text itself as well as with the varied aspects of liberationist readings generally. In the material that follows, we cannot hope to accomplish more than to provide examples of the kinds of readings that may be employed. But the results of these readings may be useful not only to people who are concerned with the question of homosexuality, but also people who seek to understand the Bible in a fresh way and to liberate the tradition not only from homophobia and heterosexism but also to open the way to a non-erotophobic understanding of faith.