Christianity has an image problem—the image of being judgmental, hypocritical, and anti-gay. Homosexuality is one of the most relevant and pressing theological issues in the Christian community, especially in Christian colleges and universities. However, this discussion of homosexuality as a theological issue has neglected the well-being of individuals who experience same-sex attractions. The lack of compassion in discourse increases the marginalization of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual (LGB) and Same-Sex Attracted (SSA) individuals. Additionally, Christian denominations today divide by a progressive view of sexuality (PVS) or a traditional view of sexuality (TVS). A PVS postulates that “homosexual acts are not immoral or sinful…but like heterosexual acts, good or bad depending on context” (p. xix). A TVS postulates that “the Bible condemns same-sex sexual practice and romantic relationships…and blesses marriage between a husband and a wife” (p. xxi). Thus, Christopher Yuan wrote Giving a Voice to the Voiceless: A Qualitative Study of Reducing Marginalization of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Same-Sex Attracted Students at Christian Colleges and Universities to establish a foundation to navigate through the tension between sexuality and faith and to affirm the possibility of holding a TVS while reducing marginalization (Yuan, 2016).

In Chapter 1, Yuan introduced the “what” for his research. First, Yuan described how college campuses have been criticized as epicenters for institutional oppression, including the oppression of LGB and SSA who report marginalization at Christian colleges and universities. This tension created two camps: one who believes that the only solution to reduce marginalization is for Christian colleges and universities to change institutional policies on homosexuality to a PVS, and another who believes that reducing marginalization does not require institutional policy change from a TVS. However, Yuan “decided to seek input [for solutions] from the very ones who feel marginalized, LGB and SSA students, thus giving a voice to the voiceless” (p. 3). In Yuan’s own words, “this study sought to discover other options for reducing marginalization of LGB and SSA students at Christian colleges and universities without changing policies that directly reflect the school’s biblical foundation and religious identity” (p. 3). Thus, Yuan entered into the research under three assumptions: (1) the Bible is the Word of God; (2) the Bible communicates a TVS; and (3) Christian colleges and universities need to reduce the marginalization of LGB and SSA students.

In Chapter 2, Yuan described the “why” for his research when he embarked on “biblical and theological study of issues related to compassion for the marginalized” (p. 10). First, he established that there are clear examples of marginalization in the Bible. He identified three individuals at a higher risk for marginalization in the Bible: the Sojourner, the Widow, and the Orphan. Sojourners were socially outcasted and perceived as threats, so they depended on the kindness and hospitality of native inhabitants because they possessed no tangible rights. Widows were unimportant and perceived as a liability to their husband’s family and society because their female status, dictated by societal customs and traditions, made them dependent on the support and protection of their husband or adult male. Orphans were powerless for the same reason as widows, and they were vulnerable to losing their birthrights. Second, Yuan highlighted passages from the Old and New Testaments to create the theology of compassion for the marginalized. He stated, “Memory of and gratitude for God’s grace are essential to a practical theology of compassion for the marginalized, even LGB and SSA people” (p. 23). Third, Yuan drew some parallels between the experiences of those marginalized in the Bible and LGB and SSA people today. LGB and SSA people are often social outcasts in a society that is predominately heterosexual, and they are more vulnerable to injustice and susceptible to oppression, such as verbal and physical attacks and homelessness. Thus, Yuan concluded that even in “unrepentant same-sex sexual practice,” LGB and SSA people deserve compassion and kindness (p. 29). 

In Chapter 3, Yuan provided an overview of the project description, research method, and data analysis methodology. There were two research questions Yuan wanted to answer for his thesis: “What are the experiences of Christian college or university LGB and SSA students? How can the campus climate at Christian colleges and universities be less marginalizing for LGB and SSA students?” (p. 31). As a result, Yuan reviewed prior literature and sociological and psychological research studies on sexuality to determine the best terminology and research methods to use for his field research. The research design was a fixed mixed methods research design that incorporated predetermined qualitative and quantitative aspects and emphasized qualitative findings. The research instrument was “an online [Qualtrics] questionnaire consisting of three sections: (1) demographic data; (2) LGB and SSA student experiences; and (3) recommendations” (p. 39). The first section contained 11 questions (10 quantitative, 1 qualitative). The second section contained 16 questions (7 quantitative, 9 qualitative) of which three questions were adapted from the UCLA Loneliness Scale. The third section contained four qualitative questions. Additionally, Yuan opted to use King and Horrocks’ three stages of thematic analysis: (1) descriptive coding; (2) interpretive coding; and (3) overarching themes, as his data analysis methodology for qualitative data. Descriptive coding involves identifying relevant material directly from the text, interpretive coding involves clustering descriptive codes into categories, and overarching themes involve generating theories to explain the relationship between the levels of coding. Finally, Yuan submitted his proposal and informed consent to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Bethel University. Upon approval, Yuan recruited a minimum of 30 LGB or SSA students and alumni who attended a Christian college or university that holds a TVS through an informal recommendation process. This process involved sending a Principal Contact Letter to administrators, staff, faculty, alumni, and students, who would forward the Potential Participant Letter containing the link to the study to qualified participants. 

In Chapter 4, Yuan “analyzed and evaluated the [quantitative and qualitative] data from the online questionnaire” (p. 40). The sample size was 80, of which 52 completed the full online questionnaire. However, the quantitative and qualitative data analysis included complete and partial data. When quantitative data were analyzed for demographics, all participants were young adults, students or alumni, who attended a Christian college or university that held a TVS, and the majority of participants were white males in the midwest. More importantly, Yuan identified three major findings: (1) a diversity among respondents who held a TVS and PVS and agreed with institutional policies; (2) a negative correlation between students who agreed with a PVS and agreed with institutional policies; and (3) a majority of respondents scoring high on loneliness. As mentioned earlier, qualitative data were analyzed as Yuan read over each response and applied King and Horrocks’ three stages of thematic analysis. From this process, Yuan developed three overarching themes, nine sub-themes, and twenty-seven interpretive codes. The first overarching theme was disclosure of sexuality, which contains two sub-themes—reason to hide and reasons to be open. The second overarching theme was experiences, which contain three sub-themes—classmates, employees, chapels and student programming. The third overarching theme was recommendations, which contains four sub-themes—institutional policies, campus climate, programming, and groups and mentoring.

In Chapter 5, Yuan drew from three primary sources: “(1) biblical-theological reflection; (2) related literature; and (3) data from [the] field research” to generate six conclusions and 34 action steps. The six conclusions about LGB and SSA students at Christian colleges and universities are: (1) they fall within a spectrum between what Mark Yarhouse, a clinical psychologist, called the “assertive advocates,” individuals who advocate for change to a PVS, and “sincere strugglers,” individuals who attempt to live faithfully according to a TVS (p. 98); (2) they generally feel lonely; (3) they hide their sexuality for the same reason as students attending secular institutions; (4) they experience a negative campus climate comparable to students attending secular institutions; (5) they expressed anger and frustration at Christian institutions; and (6) they expressed positive support. From these conclusions, Yuan stated that “marginalization of LGB and SSA students can be accomplished while holding to the traditional view of sexuality and without changing the institutional position on same-sex sexual practice” (p. 104). He described 34 actions steps within seven categories: “(1) clarity of institutional policies; (2) culture change campuswide; (3) culture change classrooms; (4) culture change dorms; (5) culture change programming; (6) community building; and (7) campus beyond” (pg. 104). Finally, Yuan conducted an exegesis of Mark 2:1-12, the story of Jesus forgiving and healing the paralyzed man who is assisted by his four friends from the roof. He urged individuals at Christian colleges and universities to be sacrificial friends and pallet bearers by implementing these action steps.

Overall, the greatest strength of Giving a Voice to the Voiceless is Yuan’s compassion because he is a culturally competent researcher. His compassion comes from his “firsthand experience as an SSA student, teacher [adjunct professor at a Bible college], and speaker at Christian colleges and universities” (p. 7). Yuan experienced marginalization for being Asian and effeminate, life as an openly gay man, challenges from distributing illicit drugs that cost him three years in federal prison, and restored humanity and hope through Christianity during and after prison. Thus, Yuan embraced his background and story, which enabled him to be culturally competent and empathize with LGB and SSA students in his research. 

A weakness in Giving a Voice to the Voiceless is the study design. Yuan compared results from previous studies of marginalization of LGB and SSA students at secular colleges and universities to his current field research. As a result, Yuan implemented a cross-sectional design during his analysis, but his conclusions may be compromised because he compared results from two different time points. 

Nevertheless, I enjoyed reading Giving a Voice to the Voiceless because I empathized with and gained a greater understanding of the marginalization experienced by LGB and SSA students. I appreciated how the book gave a platform for LGB and SSA students to be vulnerable with their experiences navigating through intersectional identities in sexuality and faith. While theological disagreements may be deep, something everyone, Christian or non-Christian, could agree upon is the need to reduce marginalization of and increase compassion for LGB and SSA. Therefore, this book is for anyone seeking to get educated and/or achieve those goals as the stories and specific action steps are inspired by the LGB and SSA students themselves. Additionally, this book is especially crucial for administrators, faculty, staff, alumni, and students at Christian colleges and universities, whose responses will have far-reaching consequences. As Yuan concluded in Chapter 5, I also hope that Christians would utilize these research findings to glorify God and create spaces that are “full of friends who are pallet bearers” to LGB and SSA individuals (p. 131). No longer should LGB and SSA individuals be paralyzed by fear and stigma. 

Bibliography

Yuan, C. (2016). Giving a Voice to the Voiceless: A Qualitative Study of Reducing Marginalization of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Same-sex Attracted Students at Christian Colleges and Universities. Wipf and Stock Publishers.