quote:

---

Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth;

Homosexuality: Contemporary Claims Examined in Light of the Bible and Other Literature and Law;

and, The Politics of Deviance.

---

www.catholic.com/library/Early_Teachings_on_Homosexuality.asp

Early Teachings on Homosexuality

Some argue that neither the Bible nor apostolic tradition condemns the practice of homosexuality. Passages such as Leviticus 18:22–30, Romans 1:26–27, 1 Corinthians 6:9, and Jude 7 serve as ample proof that Scripture indeed condemns homosexuality. Below is ample proof from tradition. The Fathers are especially harsh against the practice of pederasty, the homosexual corruption of boys by men.



The Didache

"You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not practice magic, you shall not practice witchcraft, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill one that has been born" (Didache 2:2 [A.D. 70]).



The Letter of Barnabas

"You shall not commit fornication; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not be a corrupter of youth" (Letter of Barnabas 10 [A.D. 74]).

"You shall not be a corrupter of boys, nor like unto such" (ibid.).



Justin Martyr

"[W]e have been taught that to expose newly-born children is the part of wicked men; and this we have been taught lest we should do anyone harm and lest we should sin against God, first, because we see that almost all so exposed (not only the girls, but also the males) are brought up to prostitution. And for this pollution a multitude of females and hermaphrodites, and those who commit unmentionable iniquities, are found in every nation. And you receive the hire of these, and duty and taxes from them, whom you ought to exterminate from your realm. And anyone who uses such persons, besides the godless and infamous and impure intercourse, may possibly be having intercourse with his own child, or relative, or brother. And there are some who prostitute even their own children and wives, and some are openly mutilated for the purpose of sodomy; and they refer these mysteries to the mother of the gods" (First Apology 27 [A.D. 151]).



Clement of Alexandria

"All honor to that king of the Scythians, whoever Anacharsis was, who shot with an arrow one of his subjects who imitated among the Scythians the mystery of the mother of the gods . . . condemning him as having become effeminate among the Greeks, and a teacher of the disease of effeminacy to the rest of the Scythians" (Exhortation to the Greeks 2 [A.D. 190]).

"[According to Greek myth] Baubo [a female native of Eleusis] having received [the goddess] Demeter hospitably, reached to her a refreshing draught; and on her refusing it, not having any inclination to drink (for she was very sad), and Baubo having become annoyed, thinking herself slighted, uncovered her shame, and exhibited her nudity to the goddess. Demeter is delighted with the sight—pleased, I repeat, at the spectacle. These are the secret mysteries of the Athenians; these Orpheus records" (ibid.).

"It is not, then, without reason that the poets call him [Hercules] a cruel wretch and a nefarious scoundrel. It were tedious to recount his adulteries of all sorts, and debauching of boys. For your gods did not even abstain from boys, one having loved Hylas, another Hyacinthus, another Pelops, another Chrysippus, another Ganymede. Let such gods as these be worshipped by your wives, and let them pray that their husbands be such as these—so temperate; that, emulating them in the same practices, they may be like the gods. Such gods let your boys be trained to worship, that they may grow up to be men with the accursed likeness of fornication on them received from the gods" (ibid.).

...

"In accordance with these remarks, conversation about deeds of wickedness is appropriately termed filthy [shameful] speaking, as talk about adultery and pederasty and the like" (The Instructor 6, ca. A.D. 193).

"The fate of the Sodomites was judgment to those who had done wrong, instruction to those who hear. The Sodomites having, through much luxury, fallen into uncleanness, practicing adultery shamelessly, and burning with insane love for boys; the All-seeing Word, whose notice those who commit impieties cannot escape, cast his eye on them. Nor did the sleepless guard of humanity observe their licentiousness in silence; but dissuading us from the imitation of them, and training us up to his own temperance, and falling on some sinners, lest lust being unavenged, should break loose from all the restraints of fear, ordered Sodom to be burned,
pouring forth a little of the sagacious fire on licentiousness; lest lust, through want of punishment, should throw wide the gates to those that were rushing into voluptuousness. Accordingly, the just punishment of the Sodomites became to men an image of the salvation which is well calculated for men. For those who have not committed like sins with those who are punished, will never receive a like punishment" (ibid., 8).



Tertullian

"[A]ll other frenzies of the lusts which exceed the laws of nature, and are impious toward both [human] bodies and the sexes, we banish, not only from the threshold but also from all shelter of the Church, for they are not sins so much as monstrosities" (Modesty 4 [A.D. 220]).



Novatian

"[God forbade the Jews to eat certain foods for symbolic reasons:] For that in fishes the roughness of scales is regarded as constituting their cleanness; rough, and rugged, and unpolished, and substantial, and grave manners are approved in men; while those that are without scales are unclean, because trifling, and fickle, and faithless, and effeminate manners are disapproved. Moreover, what does the law mean when it . . . forbids the swine to be taken for food? It assuredly reproves a life filthy and dirty, and delighting in the garbage of vice. . . . Or when it forbids the hare? It rebukes men deformed into women" (The Jewish Foods 3 [A.D. 250]).



Cyprian of Carthage

"[T]urn your looks to the abominations, not less to be deplored, of another kind of spectacle. . . . Men are emasculated, and all the pride and vigor of their sex is effeminated in the disgrace of their enervated body; and he is more pleasing there who has most completely broken down the man into the woman. He grows into praise by virtue of his crime; and the more he is degraded, the more skillful he is considered to be. Such a one is looked upon—oh shame!—and looked upon with pleasure. . . . Nor is there wanting authority for the enticing abomination . . . that Jupiter of theirs [is] not more supreme in dominion than in vice, inflamed with earthly love in the midst of his own thunders . . . now breaking forth by the help of birds to violate the purity of boys. And now put the question: Can he who looks upon such things be healthy-minded or modest? Men imitate the gods whom they adore, and to such miserable beings their crimes become their religion" (Letters 1:8 [A.D. 253]).

"Oh, if placed on that lofty watchtower, you could gaze into the secret places—if you could open the closed doors of sleeping chambers and recall their dark recesses to the perception of sight—you would behold things done by immodest persons which no chaste eye could look upon; you would see what even to see is a crime; you would see what people embruted with the madness of vice deny that they have done, and yet hasten to do—men with frenzied lusts rushing upon men, doing things which afford no gratification even to those who do them" (ibid., 1:9).



Arnobius

"[T]he mother of the gods loved [the boy Attis] exceedingly, because he was of most surpassing beauty; and Acdestis [the son of Jupiter] who was his companion, as he grew up fondling him, and bound to him by wicked compliance with his lust. . . . Afterwards, under the influence of wine, he [Attis] admits that he is . . . loved by Acdestis. . . . Then Midas, king of Pessinus, wishing to withdraw the youth from so disgraceful an intimacy, resolves to give him his own daughter in marriage. . . . Acdestis, bursting with rage because of the boy’s being torn from himself and brought to seek a wife, fills all the guests with frenzied madness; the Phrygians shriek, panic-stricken at the appearance of the gods. . . . [Attis] too, now filled with furious passion, raving frantically and tossed about, throws himself down at last, and under a pine tree mutilates himself, saying, ‘Take these, Acdestis, for which you have stirred up so great and terribly perilous commotions’" (Against the Pagans 5:6–7 [A.D. 305]).



Eusebius of Caesarea

"[H]aving forbidden all unlawful marriage, and all unseemly practice, and the union of women with women and men with men, he [God] adds: ‘Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for in all these things the nations were defiled, which I will drive out before you. And the land was polluted, and I have recompensed [their] iniquity upon it, and the land is grieved with them that dwell upon it’ [Lev. 18:24–25]" (Proof of the Gospel 4:10 [A.D. 319]).



Basil the Great

"He who is guilty of unseemliness with males will be under discipline for the same time as adulterers" (Letters 217:62 [A.D. 367]).

"If you [O, monk] are young in either body or mind, shun the companionship of other young men and avoid them as you would a flame. For through them the enemy has kindled the desires of many and then handed them over to eternal fire, hurling them into the vile pit of the five cities under the pretense of spiritual love. . . . At meals take a seat far from other young men. In lying down to sleep let not their clothes be near yours, but rather have an old man between you. When a young man converses with you, or sings psalms facing you, answer him with eyes cast down, lest perhaps by gazing at his face you receive a seed of desire sown by the enemy and reap sheaves of corruption and ruin. Whether in the house or in a place where there is no one to see your actions, be not found in his company under the pretense either of studying the divine oracles or of any other business whatsoever, however necessary" (The Renunciation of the World [A.D. 373]).



John Chrysostom

"[The pagans] were addicted to the love of boys, and one of their wise men made a law that pederasty . . . should not be allowed to slaves, as if it was an honorable thing; and they had houses for this purpose, in which it was openly practiced. And if all that was done among them was related, it would be seen that they openly outraged nature, and there was none to restrain them. . . . As for their passion for boys, whom they called their paedica, it is not fit to be named" (Homilies on Titus 5 [A.D. 390]).



"[Certain men in church] come in gazing about at the beauty of women; others curious about the blooming youth of boys. After this, do you not marvel that [lightning] bolts are not launched [from heaven], and all these things are not plucked up from their foundations? For worthy both of thunderbolts and hell are the things that are done; but God, who is long-suffering, and of great mercy, forbears awhile his wrath, calling you to repentance and amendment" (Homilies on Matthew 3:3 [A.D. 391]).



"All of these affections [in Rom. 1:26–27] . . . were vile, but chiefly the mad lust after males; for the soul is more the sufferer in sins, and more dishonored than the body in diseases" (Homilies on Romans 4 [A.D. 391]).



"[The men] have done an insult to nature itself. And a yet more disgraceful thing than these is it, when even the women seek after these intercourses, who ought to have more shame than men" (ibid.).



"And sundry other books of the philosophers one may see full of this disease. But we do not therefore say that the thing was made lawful, but that they who received this law were pitiable, and objects for many tears. For these are treated in the same way as women that play the whore. Or rather their plight is more miserable. For in the case of the one the intercourse, even if lawless, is yet according to nature; but this is contrary both to law and nature. For even if there were no hell, and no punishment had been threatened, this would be worse than any punishment" (ibid.).



Augustine

"[T]hose shameful acts against nature, such as were committed in Sodom, ought everywhere and always to be detested and punished. If all nations were to do such things, they would be held guilty of the same crime by the law of God, which has not made men so that they should use one another in this way" (Confessions 3:8:15 [A.D. 400]).



The Apostolic Constitutions

"[Christians] abhor all unlawful mixtures, and that which is practiced by some contrary to nature, as wicked and impious" (Apostolic Constitutions 6:11 [A.D. 400]).

quote:

---

Just a biblical comment on Sodom, for perspective:
Check out Ezekiel 16:35-50
Jerusalem is getting reamed out big time. It is interesting to me tht Jerusalem is compared UNfavorably with Sodom. 16:47ff

"You not only followed their (Sodom's) ways, and acted according to their abominations; within a very little time you were more corrupt than they in all your ways. As I live, says the Lord God, your sister Sodom and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done. This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy."

I think this is important because clearly we have God speaking through the prophet Ezekiel about the sins of Sodom. Jerusalem's sins of idolatry and unfaithfulness to God are so much more damaging than the sins of Sodom that they can be compared as they are above. What is more, notice what is not even mentioned in the text on Sodom's sin? The principle sin of Sodom is actually its perversion of their hospitality toward others.

---

quote:

---

AUGUSTINE

"[T]hose shameful acts against nature, such as were committed in Sodom, ought everywhere and always to be detested and punished. If all nations were to do such things, they would be held guilty of the same crime by the law of God, which has not made men so that they should use one another in this way" (Confessions 3:8:15 [A.D. 400]).


...and...

www.catholic.com/library/Early_Teachings_on_Homosexuality.asp

"The Fathers are especially harsh against the practice of pederasty, the homosexual corruption of boys by men."

---

But OBVIOUSLY the range of aspects covered in the above list far exceed the horrible sin of "pederasty."


The quote from Eusebius of Caesarea deals with "unions" that are also "forbidden."

quote:

---

Eusebius of Caesarea

"[H]aving forbidden all unlawful marriage, and all unseemly practice, and the union of women with women and men with men, he [God] adds: ‘Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for in all these things the nations were defiled, which I will drive out before you. And the land was polluted, and I have recompensed [their] iniquity upon it, and the land is grieved with them that dwell upon it’ [Lev. 18:24–25]" (Proof of the Gospel 4:10 [A.D. 319]).

---

THEN, in above quotes Iconoclast uses the vast variation and directional wanderings of contemporary Evalgelical practice and "rules" to smokescreen the fact that Christians in all eras have not always been so vague and flip-flop. (Neither are all Evangelicals so flip-flop now!!!!) Iconoclast writes as if remarried persons are considered in exactly the same light as once-married believers. His ignorance (willful or not) is no proof of his assumption.

Remarried Christians do not have available to them the same range of ecclesial ministry as once-married.

To claim otherwise may be convenient for Iconoclast's arguement; but it is false.


Marriage is a form of monasticism! And as such married priests have been part of the Church (East AND West) from the beginning.

Homosexual cohabitation and mutual-sin has never been part of the requirements for ministry.


Those who would deny that salvation in Christ is a salvation from the sin of the flesh, and that it is being dead and buried with Christ in Baptism are false witnesses.


Christians are called to the "mortification of my passions."

Anything else is deception.

In the prayer by St. Basil that is oftn used in preparation for taking communion he says:

quote:

---

though I have been wholly subject to sin, a slave to passion, and have defiled thine image within me, who am thy creation and thy work; but trusting in thine infinite compassion, draw nigh unto thee. Receive me, O Lord, thou that lovest mankind, as thou didst receive the sinful woman, the thief, the publican and the prodigal son. Take away the heavy burden of my sins, O Thou that takest away the sins of the world, and healest the infirmities of men, and callest all that are weary and heavy laden to thyself and givest them rest; thou that camest not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance, cleanse thou me from all stain of body and soul and teach me to fulfill holiness in thy fear

---

It would be a mistaken habit to read "Take away the heavy burden of my sins" in a purely "juridical" manner -- that of God merely forgetting the offence. The scriptures make it PLAINLY CLEAR that the "BURDEN OF SIN" dwells in us bodily: we are "infirmed" with the "whole subjectsion" of the "passions" to which we are "enslaved" which "defile the image" and make us "weary and heavy laden" and in need of God's saving mercy.

Salvation is not a Gnostic affair. Neither is it all at once and then completely done. We are not saved; but rather, hopefully, we are "being saved" -- the Bible says.


A quote from another thread said it well:

quote:

---

John Earp:

He that sins is of the devil. He that is begotten of God does not sin. (see 1 John 3) One who says they believe in libertarian free will and does not live free from sin (a la Romans 6) simply does not live what he says he believes.

Sin shall not be your master, for your are not under law, but under grace (Rom. 6:14)

Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see God (Heb. 12:14)

---

The fact that few of us are recognized as Saints, and that most all of us come up far short does not cancel the truth of what John Earp quoted from Romans and Hebrews. Christianity is so radical a surgery that ALL of its "patients" have to die to be saved. But the Judge said we had to be holy. We can have HIS holiness, by participation, but it requires death in the waters of Baptism and walking in that newness of life -- dying to our passions!


Another prayer, often used in preparation for communion is this one from St. John Chrysostom:

NOTICE THE UN-GNOSTIC EMPHASIS ON THE BODY!

quote:

---

. . . And grant that I may partake of thine All-holy Body and Precious Blood for the sanctification, enlightenment and strengthening of my weak soul and body; for the relief from the burden of my many sins; for my preservation against all the snares of the devil; for victory over all my sinful and evil habits; for the mortification of my passions; for obedience to thy Commandments; for growth in thy divine Grace and for the inheritance of thy Kingdom. For it is not with careless heart that I approach thee, O Christ my God, but I come trusting in thine infinite goodness, and fearing lest I may be drawn afar from thee and become the prey of the wolf of souls. Wherefore I pray thee, O Master, who alone art holy, that thou wouldest sanctify my soul and body, my mind and heart and reins, and renew me entirely. Implant in my members the fear of thee, be thou my helper and guide, directing my life in the paths of peace, and make me worthy to stand at thy right hand with thy Saints; through the prayers and intercessions of thine immaculate Mother, of thy Bodiless Servitors, of the immaculate Powers, and of all the Saints who from all ages have been well-pleasing unto thee. Amen.

---

Obviously, to a Zwingli who thought that participation at the Lord's Table only to be a once-a-year merely-symbolical (It is rather realistic-symbolism and symbolic-realism, and not "merely" anything.) this is not Gnostic enough! Some think communion only requires looking at the elements. That is as though salvation is only a mental and theolretical matter. But, a Calvin emphasized the Real Presence of Christ in Communion, but only bodily in heaven. Calvin allowed for the spatial ambiguity of us partaking "here" and Christ feeding us from "there." The Early Church had asolutley no trouble in also including temporal ambiguity in understanding that we participate in that ONCE-AND-ONLY-ONCE AND DEFINITELY-FOR-ALL Supper, and that Communion, and through it the whole Chruch, is an Exchatological event. (Perhaps the heavy Zwinglian influence can help explain why it is that so many Calvinists regard sin as something that they don't expect "necessarily" to get rid of. Perhaps that is, secretly, what it is in Wesleyan heritage that offends them.)

But the witness of the Spirit in the Church and in the Scritptures is this...


But our Lord calls us to be Holy. And unworthy

though we are -- and especially so needing healing

from the "foutain of imortality" -- we are called:

to repent, to believe, and to partake!


+







Edited by - PotOnWheel on 02/25/2003 09:41:34 AM

quote:

---

Semeia

And, as a Christian, in answer to your question: The main reason homosexuality hurts people is that it exposes them to the hatred and prejudice and accusation and judgment of Christians the world over.

---

quote:

---

Iconoclast

I have never denied that homosexuality is not God's original design and "violates nature" in that sense. My point has always been that divorce and remarriage ALSO violates God's original design and that Jesus EXPLICITLY called remarriage after a divorce the sin of adultery.

---