The funny thing about a rainbow is that it’s strongly associated with two factions that are frequently at war. A rainbow was God’s promise to Noah, and now it’s also the encapsulation of LGBT+ pride. I’ve personally never been particularly enthralled by rainbows. But I’ve been thinking a lot about them lately because of what they mean to people and what they mean to me. 

I loathe to take a definitive stance on issues like LGBT+ people vs. the Church. I think there’s a lot lost in these big controversies, and I’ve always done my best to avoid conflict. So I must beg forgiveness on my silence and lack of noise because I’m coming to the nasty realisation I can’t not have a stance. This is all obvious, really, and I’ve known for some time now that silence can also be violence. But I never had any skin in the game, to put it crudely, until now. 

Now I have a good friend who’s transgender, a best friend who’s queer, another who’s ace, and so on. I know more and more LGBT+ people than ever before, thanks to my time and connections at Calvin, ironically enough (this isn’t an angsty post about what’s been happening at our alma mater, though). And whether I like it or not, I now have to also look at myself.

Google recently introduced me to the language of how one can be “visibly” LGBT+ —more specifically, the concept of being “visibly queer.” Now, I could go all Judith Butler on you, but I’ll save that for another rainy day. But my layman’s from-the-hip intellectual take is that there aren’t more queer people than there were fifty years ago (absolute population growth aside), merely more “visibly queer” people. 

There’s a lot of delicate ground around when one is something “enough” to take up the rainbow. This is particularly troublesome in the territory of queerness because queerness is meant to be a catch-all of sorts and who’s to say one person is more queer than the other? I don’t know. Do I feel like I could identify as queer? What if I’m just overthinking it and making a big deal out of something that isn’t? People experience these questions ad nauseum. 

But back to rainbows. LGBT+ people still need to be loved, yes. LGBT+ people still need to be saved, too. Phil used this really lovely turn of phrase about how Calvin has not made queer people more faithful. I know Calvin and many other religious spaces have done a lot of damage to LGBT+ people. But I also know many LGBT+ people still want to love the Lord. And it is so, so important to accept that, however confounding it may be to Reformed faithfuls. 

I believe God’s rainbow to Noah and God’s rainbow to LGBT+ people are the same (albeit conceived through differing interpretive prisms). I know I’m bypassing all those exhausting and heady theological debates, and there are many seminarians out there who would gladly tell me I’m a heretic. But I don’t see the equality of God’s promises as heresy; it’s faith. And a lot of faithfulness isn’t the grand dash to victory as a runner, but rather the slow and painful tedium of trying to pick out an impossibly tight knot (and no, you aren’t allowed to just cut through it). 

I trace the rainbow through the rain,

And feel the promise is not vain

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

post calvin direct

Get new posts from Anna Jeffries delivered straight to your inbox.

the post calvin