To the Whitworth Board of Trustees:  

We are a group of students, alumni, faculty members, and broader community members who are operating under the name “Signal Safe Space WU.” We have become aware of a petition that has been circulating, signed by many members of the Whitworth community, calling for no action by the board of trustees with regard to the issue of LGBTQ+ inclusion at the university. The following is a point-by-point refutation of the argument contained in that petition, with some additional considerations included. We pray that the Lord softens your hearts to the lived experiences of queer students, faculty, and staff at Whitworth and submit that action must be taken to protect these members not only of the Whitworth community, but of the family of God.  

First: How would this change Whitworth’s relationships with the global church?  

It is incredibly presumptuous to state that the global church has reached a consensus on this issue, when in fact, according to Pew Research Center, Christians in the U.S. have a lower rate of acceptance of LGBTQ+ people than many countries in the Global South, such as the Philippines, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, and Brazil. A brief list of countries that rank similarly to or higher than the U.S. with regard to Christian acceptance of LGBTQ+ peoples includes Spain, Germany, the Czech Republic, France, Britain, Italy, Greece, Canada, Australia, Japan, and Venezuela. As such, the statement that there is “near-unanimous consent on the Bible’s teaching as it relates to this sphere of human life” is factually incorrect. We maintain that Scripture is most clear on the character of Jesus Christ and His radical love for all people. It is simply not the case that only “a minority of white, wealthy, and American denominations have changed their position.” Additionally, we would challenge the notion that it is always right to adhere to Christian tradition, or to the idea of majority rule, especially on issues that deal so directly with people’s lived experiences of marginalization.  

Second: How might this change interfere with the university’s commitment to a biblical, countercultural witness?   

We would argue that to be affirming is to be countercultural. There are still so many Christian communities, including Whitworth, where members of the LGBTQ+ community have to fear for their physical and emotional safety as they go about their day-to-day lives. Additionally, just because one is operating against the status quo does not mean they are doing so correctly. Christ does not call us to be countercultural for the sake of being countercultural, but for the sake of affirming the dignity of all people. We would strongly disagree with the statement that “a commitment to inclusivity, however, is not tantamount to Christian love,” because it is followed immediately by a statement which we wholeheartedly agree with: “as a distinctive Christian university, Whitworth has a sacred calling to create, encourage, and nurture opportunities for students to encounter the Christ who meets them in their greatest needs and deepest desires.” In order for queer students to truly encounter Christ at Whitworth, they must encounter Him as the one who sees, loves, and affirms them for who they are, meaning their professors and staff cannot feel that their LGBTQ+ identity puts them at risk for losing their place in the Whitworth community.  

Third: How will this proposed change affect Whitworth’s mission to honor God, follow Christ, and serve humanity?  

The Seven Sisters of American Protestantism are the largest mainline churches in the United States, consisting of American Baptist Churches, Disciples of Christ, the Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Presbyterian Church (USA), United Church of Christ, and the United Methodist Church. Five of these denominations (Episcopal, ELCA, PC (USA), UCC, and UMC)  are either affirming or largely affirming in practice. It is, again, simply untrue that denominations that embrace an affirming policy are “declining in membership and influence.” Additionally, we contend that a given denomination’s level of membership and influence is not a benchmark for how faithfully they are adhering to the gospel of Jesus Christ. We also take issue with the false persecution narrative that this section of the document is riddled with. Calling Whitworth “an endangered species” only perpetuates the diseased notion that American Christianity is under attack, which gives American Christians the right to fight back, only leading to more violence toward oppressed communities. In truth, the way for the board to secure the school’s position in higher education is to openly declare Whitworth to be a safe space for queer students and faculty.  

Fourth: What are the practical implications of affirming the various lifestyles indicated by the letters LGBTQ+?  

First of all, we take issue with the condescending tone in this part of the petition. It is clear that little to no research has been done on the lived experiences of affirming members of the LGBTQ+ community, and we would urge the undersigned to use caution in their language. For example, bisexual people are just as capable of maintaining committed relationships as heterosexual people are. The implication that a different sexual orientation makes someone inherently less faithful perpetuates a harmful stereotype. Additionally, if more research had been done, the undersigned would know what a “Q” lifestyle endorses, or what forms of sexual behavior “+” includes. By leaving these questions open to speculation to the letter’s readers, the letter perpetuates fear mongering about the lives and practices of LGBTQ+ people. It is obvious that this argument does not take the LGBTQ+ community and its allies seriously, and this section reads as one written by people who do not care to try to understand the love, joy, and multi-faceted nature of the LGBTQ+ community. As far as we understand, the only practical implication of affirming queer lifestyles is that queer people feel safer at Whitworth, and LGBTQ+ faculty are not at risk of losing their jobs or being denied a place at this university.

Fifth: How might this change potentially affect other policies and practices at Whitworth? 

We completely concur that the hiring policy has implications for the wider campus climate. And it is for this very reason that we view it as vital that the Board of Trustees reconsider their stance on the hiring policy and rewrite it to explicitly protect LGBTQ+ faculty and staff. Prioritizing the opinions of non-affirming faculty, staff, and students is nowhere near as important as prioritizing the safety of queer faculty, staff, and students, whose membership to our community is being discussed as if it is up for debate whether or not they belong. It is catastrophizing to assume that if the hiring policy was changed, non-affirming community members would be ostracized. But it is true that with the hiring policy being what is, queer community members do feel ostracized. It is not the case that if one group of people is protected, all other groups need to suffer as a result. We are not seeking retribution but justice and equity.  

We are saddened by the overwhelming representation among the undersigned of people affiliated with the theology department and/or campus ministries. We also want to point out that this letter directly addresses the questions made in the petition, and as such, has a distinctly Christian theological bent. This was not done with the intent to exclude those in the Whitworth community who practice other religions. Because the initial petition is framed as simply wanting the Board of Trustees to “consider and address the questions enumerated below,” we wanted to provide responses to these questions for the BOT to consider as well as they discuss how to move forward. We share the hope that “students might clearly hear Jesus’ invitation to “Come, follow me” to a life of wholeness, freedom, and purpose”. But we would add to it the hope that they know a queer life can also lead to wholeness, freedom, and purpose. Loving Jesus and being a member of the LGBTQ+ community is not, has never been, and will never be, an oxymoron.  

(Written by Cienna Dumaoal and edited by Annaclare Splettstoeszer)