Historically Speaking  It is sometimes claimed that the church has always opposed homosexual behaviour and never tolerated it in any way. Such a claim could influence our interpretation of the Bible if it is a true claim. It would indicate a long tradition of how homosexuality has always been understood in the church and suggest less of a need for a change of attitude, perhaps. But has this always been so? 'Christian religious life was the most prominent gay life-style in Western Europe from the early Middle Ages to the Reformation, about two thirds of the period since Europe became Christian.(30) I will quote below in some detail. The purpose is not to espouse that homosexuality is therefore OK, but to indicate that the argument that 'the church has always said this' is incorrect. The material below may also make us want to ask questions about our attitudes towards homosexual people. Many clergy left records of passionate involvement with persons of their own gender. Some were clearly sexual. Read the Love poetry between Ausonius and Saint Paulinus, bishop of Nola,
Or assign to mortals, As long as I am held within this prison body, In whatever world I am found, I shall hold you fast, Grafted onto my being, Not divided by distant shores or suns. Everywhere you shall be with me, I will see with my heart And embrace you with my loving spirit. ... And when, freed from my body's jail I fly from earth, Wherever in heaven our Father shall direct me, There also shall I bear you in my heart. Nor will that end, That frees me from my flesh, Release me from your love. Boswell says, "Like most residents of the ancient world, Ausonius and Paulinus accepted love between men as normal variety of human affection, but unlike their pagan contemporaries, they invested it with Christian moral and spiritual significance. The author intends to pursue his love in heaven."(31) "Homosexual marriage ceremonies, were widely known in the Catholic world from the fifth century on. Such ceremonies were performed in catholic churches by priests and either established what the community regarded as marriages, or commemorated special friendships, in both cases in devoutly Christian terms." (ibid)
A. sends the bond of precious love. What strength have I that I may bear it, That I may endure your absence? Is my strength the strength of stones That I can wait for your return? I never cease from aching, night and day, Like someone missing a hand and foot. Without your anything happy or delightful Seems like mud trod underfoot. Instead of rejoicing I weep; My spirit never seems joyful. When I remember the kisses you gave me, The way you refreshed my little breasts with sweet words, I would like to die Since I cannot see you. ...O if my body had been committed to earth Until your longed-for return, Or if I could go on a journey like Habakkuk's, So that just once I could come to where I say the face of my lover, Then I would not care if I died that very hour. For there is no one who has been born in this world Who is so lovable and dear, No one who without feigning Loves me with so deep a love. Therefore, I ache without end Until I am allowed to see you. We can't be sure if the sexual language here refers to actions or is a metaphor like the Song of Songs. But obviously, carnal love between two women was seen as OK, or they wouldn't have written the poem. The passion is plainly erotic, not some dis-involved 'platonic' love The poem is filled with biblical allusions and references.(32) It is a Christian love poem in a Christian life. Where heterosexual people are tempted to think of homosexual people as perverts, perhaps they should read the love poetry above. Is it not rather similar to that of a heterosexual couple? Are the two women not experiencing the same God given love and desire as a heterosexual couple?
(30)
Boswell, J. "Homosexuality And The Religious Life: A Historical
Approach." in Grammick, J. (Ed) Homosexuality In The Priesthood And The
Religious Life (Crossroad 1989) pp 7 |