# When same-sex marriage was a Christian rite.



## Ryft

I tried searching the forums on this issue and found nothing, so I am posting this question as a new thread. If it was discussed somewhere before and I simply did not have the right search string, please direct me to that thread.

I ran across this article by "ThosPayne" that presented an argument for same-sex marriage existing in the historical Christian church. I would like to know if there exists a response to the historical evidence that he cites, undercutting or defeating his argument.

*"When same-sex marriage was a Christian rite."*



> A Kiev art museum contains a curious icon from St. Catherine's Monastery on Mt. Sinai in Israel. It shows two robed Christian saints. Between them is a traditional Roman ‘pronubus’ (a best man), overseeing a wedding. The pronubus is Christ. The married couple are both men.
> 
> Is the icon suggesting that a gay "wedding" is being sanctified by Christ himself? The idea seems shocking. But the full answer comes from other early Christian sources about the two men featured in the icon, St. Sergius and St. Bacchus,2 two Roman soldiers who were Christian martyrs. These two officers in the Roman army incurred the anger of Emperor Maximian when they were exposed as ‘secret Christians’ by refusing to enter a pagan temple. Both were sent to Syria circa 303 CE where Bacchus is thought to have died while being flogged. Sergius survived torture but was later beheaded. Legend says that Bacchus appeared to the dying Sergius as an angel, telling him to be brave because they would soon be reunited in heaven.
> 
> While the pairing of saints, particularly in the early Christian church, was not unusual, the association of these two men was regarded as particularly intimate. Severus, the Patriarch of Antioch (512 - 518 CE) explained that, "we should not separate in speech they [Sergius and Bacchus] who were joined in life". This is not a case of simple "adelphopoiia." In the definitive 10th century account of their lives, St. Sergius is openly celebrated as the "sweet companion and lover" of St. Bacchus. Sergius and Bacchus's close relationship has led many modern scholars to believe they were lovers. But the most compelling evidence for this view is that the oldest text of their martyrology, written in New Testament Greek describes them as "erastai,” or "lovers". In other words, they were a male homosexual couple. Their orientation and relationship was not only acknowledged, but it was fully accepted and celebrated by the early Christian church, which was far more tolerant than it is today.



Read the rest here (last internet archive of the original article).


----------



## Herald

I can't answer your question within historical context, although the Word God provides all the instruction we need on biblical marriage. A Christian can be trapped by debating within historical context apart from the Bible, given that historical accounts are often subjective in nature.


----------



## Beau Michel

The Scriptures are the only rule of faith and practice.Same sex couples cannot obey the command to be fruitful and multiply.Also the Scriptures are very clear on God's view of homosexuality(even the world knows what the Scriptures say on this matter).Beau Michel-Reformed Baptist


----------



## Philip

Ryft said:


> I ran across this article by "ThosPayne" that presented an argument for same-sex marriage existing in the historical Christian church. I would like to know if there exists a response to the historical evidence that he cites, undercutting or defeating his argument.



a) why is this article no longer up on the regular internet?

b) Was the original website credible?


----------



## Rufus

I've come across this article or something like it before, it came across as trying to prove something that otherwise cannot be proved. Most instances of "Christian gay marriages" were vows of brotherhood with no sexual connotation, and even if Sergius and Baccus were a homosexual couple that is one instance among the millions of Christians prior to the normalization of homosexuality.


----------



## davenporter

Here's the article. In a Facebook discussion, one of my old pro-gay PC(USA) professors from undergrad brought it up. Of course I just turned to Scripture and argued from that, but does anyone know about the (lack of) authenticity of the information in it?

anthropologist: When Same-Sex Marriage Was a Christian Rite


----------



## Apologist4Him

Beau Michel said:


> The Scriptures are the only rule of faith and practice.



Only infallible rule yes...the Scriptures are the final court of appeal, not the only authority (Solo Scriptura), but the highest and only infallible authority (Sola Scriptura). I think you rightly point out the issue of authority, it is vital to the topic. I did some searching with Logos, and would like to share a quote by R.C. Sproul:

"We have already seen, within evangelical circles, a move from limited inerrancy to challenges of matters of faith and practice. When the apostle Paul is depicted as espousing two mutually contradictory views of the role of women in the church, we see a critique of apostolic teaching that does touch directly on the practice of the church. *In the hotly disputed issue of homosexuality we see denominational commissions not only supplementing biblical authority with corroborative evidence drawn from modern sources of medical psychological study but also “correcting” the biblical view by such secular authority. The direction of these movements of thought is a matter of grave concern for advocates of full inerrancy.*" - Sproul, R. C. (2000). R.C. Sproul's chapters from symposium volumes (electronic ed.). Grand Rapids: Baker Books.



Beau Michel said:


> Same sex couples cannot obey the command to be fruitful and multiply.



True, and it is part of the reasoning behind the notion of homosexuality not being "natural", a sin against God's designed "natural order". In Romans Chapter 1 the Apostle Paul say's:

RO 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to _vile_ passions. For even their women exchanged the *natural* use for what is against nature. [SUP]27[/SUP] Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is _shameful_, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. - NKJV





Beau Michel said:


> Also the Scriptures are very clear on God's view of homosexuality



One of the clearest passages on God's view is in Lev 20:13. Far too many people do not take God's view seriously, and part of it stems from low views of Scripture, and a lack of fear of the Lord in our day. God is actually more "harsh" on the matter than any republican. Anyway, I agree the Scriptures are clear, and many have heard, but do not care, because the natural inclination is to worship man made idols and self, anything other than the Creator.


----------



## Rufus

I wonder what would pop up if we searched the ECF, Reformers, and the Puritans for references to homosexuality.


----------



## dudley

Rufus said:


> I've come across this article or something like it before, it came across as trying to prove something that otherwise cannot be proved. Most instances of "Christian gay marriages" were vows of brotherhood with no sexual connotation, and even if Sergius and Baccus were a homosexual couple that is one instance among the millions of Christians prior to the normalization of homosexuality.



“Sergius and Baccus were a homosexual couple that is one instance among the millions of Christians prior to the normalization of homosexuality.” According to what I know Sergius and Bacchus were Roman soldiers, Christian martyrs and gay men who loved each other. They were killed around 303 in present-day Syria. The close bond between the two men has been emphasized since the earliest accounts, and some recent scholarship has revealed their homosexuality. The oldest record of their martyrdom describes them as erastai (Greek for “lovers”). Scholars believe that they may have been united in the rite of adelphopoiesis (brother-making), a kind of early Christian same-sex marriage. A classic example of paired saints, Sergius and Bacchus were high-ranking young officers. Sergius was primicerius (commander) and Bacchus was secundarius (subaltern officer). They were tortured to death after they refused to attend sacrifices to Zeus, thus revealing their secret Christianity. It is also recorded that it was a common practice in the Roman Empire for straight men to also visit the baths and engage in sexual relation with other men.


----------



## nicnap

It may have happened, but it was not a *Christian *"rite."


----------



## JM

Brother Dudley, is the information you provided in your post from John Boswell and can it be trusted? Wiki notes that his conclusions about Sergius and Baccus are doubtful and "have been disputed by many historians."


----------



## Phil D.

The article conspicuously lacks any primary source documentation for virtually all of its assertions. Showing a single "curious" and undated icon from an all-male monastery is hardly an indication that same-sex unions were ever a widely accepted rite within the early Christian community. 

Here is a small sampling of what we do in fact have written record of concerning the early church leaders opinion of such things.

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 [c. A.D. 90]).

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

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. (Exhortation to the Greeks, 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). 

Eusebius of Caesarea

Having 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

[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

Those 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]).​


----------



## Apologist4Him

Rufus said:


> I wonder what would pop up if we searched the ECF, Reformers, and the Puritans for references to homosexuality.



It would be interesting to read ECF, Reformers, and Puritan thoughts on the topic. I did a search through my Logos 4 resources last night on the topic and came up with 3,685 results in 926 articles in 279 resources. Unfortunately I do not have ECF in my resources, and lack many if not most Reformer resources (considering what is available) and only a handful of different Puritan resources. I did stumble on an interesting quote by Franicis Schaffer:

*Philosophic Homosexuality*
Some forms of homosexuality today are of a similar nature, in that they are not just homosexuality but a philosophic expression. One must have understanding for the real homophile’s problem. But much modern homosexuality is an expression of the current denial of antithesis. It has led in this case to an obliteration of the distinction between man and woman. So the male and the female as complementary partners are finished. This is a form of homosexuality which is a part of the movement below the line of despair. In much of modern thinking, all antithesis and all the order of God’s creation is to be fought against — including the male-female distinctions. The pressure toward unisex is largely rooted here. But this is not an isolated problem; it is a part of the world-spirit of the generation which surrounds us. It is imperative that Christians realize the conclusions which are being drawn as a result of the death of absolutes.[SUP][SUP][1][/SUP][/SUP] – Francis Schaeffer

[SUP][SUP][1][/SUP][/SUP] Schaeffer, F. A. (1996). _The complete works of Francis A. Schaeffer : A Christian worldview._ Westchester, Ill.: Crossway Books.


----------



## Ryft

Philip said:


> (1) Why is this article no longer up on the regular internet? (2) Was the original website credible?



1. It is still up on the regular internet, as Benjamin Davenport (Msg. 6) provided an example of. What I looked for, and linked to, was the original source material rather than a reproduction thereof; and I have no idea why it no longer exists at its original location.

2. The original web site was the _Colfax Record_, a local newspaper of Colfax (in Placer County), California. It is a credible web site as far as newspapers go (http://colfaxrecord.com). However, the original article is presumably from a personal blog by "ThosPayne" (cf. the myColfax service allows its users to post personal blogs) and not an article by _Colfax Record_ staff itself.



davenporter said:


> Here's the article. ... (link)



That is a reproduction of the article, published 11 December 2009 at Livejournal. The original article was published 24 August 2008 at _Colfax Record_, although presumably in the myColfax personal blog of "ThosPayne" (e.g., http://my.colfaxrecord.com).



JM said:


> Wiki notes that [Boswell's] conclusions about Sergius and Baccus are doubtful and "have been disputed by many historians."



Such an article at Wikipedia might prove helpful. Would you be willing to provide a link?


----------



## JM

Saints Sergius and Bacchus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> Sergius and Bacchus are a classic example of paired saints; scholar John Boswell considers them to be the most influential set of such an archetype, more so than even Saints Peter and Paul.[4][5] In his Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe, Boswell further argues that Sergius and Bacchus's relationship can be understood as having a romantic dimension, noting that the oldest text of their martyrology describes them as erastai, which can be translated as "lovers".[6] He suggested that the two were even united in a rite known as adelphopoiesis or (brother-making), which he argued was a type of early Christian same-sex union or blessing, reinforcing his view of tolerant early Christian attitudes toward homosexuality.[6] Boswell's methodology and conclusions have been disputed by many historians.[1][7][8][9][10][11] Regardless, in the wake of Boswell's work, Sergius and Bacchus have become popularly venerated in the gay Christian community.[12][13] A 1994 icon of Sergius and Bacchus by the gay Franciscan iconographer Robert Lentz, first displayed at Chicago's Gay Pride Parade, has become a popular gay symbol.[14]


----------



## AThornquist

The evidence for a "Christian rite" of same-sex marriage is not only extremely weak, but even if it did accurately speak of an historical belief it is equivalent to Christians in the year 3,500 AD looking back to 2012 AD when a "Christian" leader named Barack Obama said that gay marriage is acceptable according to Jesus. Liberal so-called Christians of any generation may condone gay marriage but that doesn't mean it is glorifying to God or in any way acceptable according to His Word. So I don't give a rip if self-proclaimed Christians condoned same-sex marriage, the Lord speaks clearly that homosexuality is sin; therefore, by their brazen lack of repentance they prove themselves to be liars and enemies of God.


----------



## Ryft

Thank you, Jason, for the link.

Incidentally, and for the interest of everyone, I found the following critical review of Boswell rather helpful (which, it turns out, that Wikipedia article cites):

Young, R. D. (1994, November). "Gay Marriage: Reimagining Church History." _First Things_, 47 (pp. 43-48).


----------



## Semper Fidelis

The original is an example of the worst form of archaeology. I had a professor once point out that you can sort through some of the stuff you've had in storage for a number of years and completely forget what is was for. Without written texts to accompany them, people can make up just about any story to accompany a bit of archaeological "evidence". In this case, mix an agenda with a PhD behind your name and suddenly a made-up scenario is considered "scholarship".


----------



## Unoriginalname

Even if we assume that this story did transpire the way that this man said it did, I cannot understand how one can convincingly extrapolate from this story the opinion of the entire early church. I was unaware that exceptions make rules. Furthermore Phil D's helpful list shows that the ECF's views on sexual ethics was fully inline with the plain teachings of scripture.


----------



## crimsonleaf

This sentence from the article sums it up for me:

"Contrary to myth, Christianity's concept of marriage has not been set in stone since the days of Christ, but has constantly evolved as a concept and ritual".

So it's a man-made development, much like the assumption of Mary, praying to Saints and too many other heresies to document here.


----------



## jwright82

One could point to many different examples of "saints" and "popes' engaging in behavior that is contrary to scripture, that doesn’t make such behavior right or normative. This is just an example of modern deconstructionist type historiography that is ridiculous at best. One “possible” exception now overturns the “rules” in any historical situation. This view basically looks for “conspiracies” where there are none. I heard one historian say that history is not that interesting by itself so people look for “conspiracies” to spice it up. You know like the Church has been hiding the truth for all these years but now we “know” that homosexual marriage was condoned by the church.


----------



## (^^)Regin

President Obama's approval of same sex marriage was condemned as far as from the pulpits in Japan.


----------

