APOLOGIA
By Hendrik van der Breggen
The
Carillon, July 11, 2013
Homosexuality
and history
The openly gay Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson
(recently retired) claims the following in his book God Believes in Love (Knopf, 2012): "homosexuality as a sexual
orientation was unknown to the ancient mind." Robinson adds: "The
psychological construct of a homosexual orientation was not posited until the
late nineteenth century…there was no understanding that such same-gender
attraction might be 'in the nature' of a certain minority of people."
Some scholars today even claim that the notion
of a sexual orientation separate from sexual behaviour was unknown to writers
of the Bible.
I think the above claims are false. Here are my
reasons.
Yes, the term "homosexuality" was
coined in the late nineteenth century (by a German psychologist), but it very
much seems that both the concept (idea) and the reality of homosexual
orientation, in contrast with homosexual sexual behaviour, have been around much
longer.
The ancient philosopher Plato (c. 429-347 BC)
wrote a number of dialogues, some of which deal with same-sex sexual
relationships. In Plato's dialogue Symposium
it's difficult if not impossible to understand the relationship between the
characters Alcibiades and Socrates without making use of the distinction
between homosexual orientation and sexual behaviour.
Although Alcibiades' desires are intertwined
with a passion to study philosophy with Socrates, it's clear that Alcibiades
has same-sex sexual desires for Socrates and has had them since his youth, as
he himself acknowledges. And it's clear that Alcibiades' sexual
advances—behaviours—are directed to Socrates (and are rejected by Socrates, to
Alcibiades' chagrin).
Also in Plato's Symposium the character Aristophanes sets out an account—a creation
story—of "original human nature." This story clearly points to the notion of sexual orientation as distinct from
same-sex sexual behaviour.
Aristophanes explains that there were three
original human beings, each with a different sexual nature: male, female, and a
combination of both. But then Zeus (in a response to misbehavior by the
original humans) punished the original human beings: he cut each original into
two.
Subsequent human beings reflect the original
human beings from which they descended by the sexual desires they have: i.e.,
males who desire males reflect the original man; females who desire females
reflect the original woman; males who desire females and vice-versa reflect the
original man-woman.
Aristophanes' account of human nature doesn't
use the words "sexual orientation" but his description reflects the
reality and the concept that homosexual orientations—i.e., strong, persistent,
enduring same-sex attractions—existed and were known to exist. Aristophanes'
account also reflects the known reality and concept of same-sex sexual
behaviour, for his account attempts to explain the origins of this behaviour. (For
further reading, see Lysis, Phaedrus, and
Symposium: Plato on Homosexuality, translated by Benjamin Jowett
[Prometheus, 1991].)
The highly credentialed New Testament scholar
Robert Gagnon confirms the above (Gagnon's graduate degrees are from Harvard
and Princeton). Gagnon writes: "there is considerable testimony in ancient
sources to the belief that same-sex passions, at least in some cases, are
congenital" (The Bible and
Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics [Abingdon, 2001], p. 384).
Gagnon mentions Plato's Symposium, but also mentions the ancient philosopher Aristotle
(384-322 BC): "Aristotelian thought speculated that some males who desired
to be penetrated by other males…were so disposed 'by nature'…and others 'from
habit'…." Gagnon mentions other ancient
sources as well. (See too Gagnon's criticism of Internet-sensation Mathew Vines
on this point in "Theologians Find Vines' 'Homosexuality Is Not a Sin'
Thesis Not Persuasive," Christian
Post, April 20, 2013.)
Also, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on homosexuality,
"Alexander the Great and the founder of Stoicism, Zeno of Citium, were
known for their exclusive interest in boys and other men."
Clearly, there are good reasons for thinking
that in ancient times people in fact had—and knew about—enduring sexual predispositions,
what we call orientations, which would incline a person to same-sex sexual
expression or behavior.
Now, we should ask: Did writers of the Bible
know about the concept of sexual orientation as an attribute of the person
separate from their sexual behavior?
I think that the answer is Yes. Keeping in mind
that the apostle Paul was acquainted with Stoic and Epicurean philosophers,
permit me to appeal to the academic authority of the eminent New Testament
scholar and historian of ancient history N. T. Wright.
Wright says the following (in an interview on
the Bible and homosexuality): "One thing that I do know, as an ancient
historian, is that there is nothing in contemporary understanding and
experience of homosexual condition and behavior that was unknown in the first
century. The idea that in the first century it was all about masters having odd
relationships with slaves, or older men with younger men—yeah, sure, that
happened—but read Plato's Symposium.
They have permanent, faithful, stable male-male partnerships, life-long
stuff—Achilles and Patroclus in Homer, all sorts of things."
Wright adds: "Paul in Corinth will not have
been unaware, in a world where private life only is for the very rich and the
very aristocratic, everyone else does what they do pretty much in public. Paul
will have known the full range of stuff, so that the idea that 'Oh, well, in
the first century they didn't know, we now with our scientific knowledge [do
know]'—that's a little bit of Enlightenment arrogance again actually." (N.
T. Wright, "On debate about homosexuality," YouTube interview, 2009.)
Thus, even though ancient philosophers and Bible
writers didn't know all we know scientifically about sexual orientation, it's
reasonable to think that the ancients and Bible writers did know about
homosexual orientation as a human condition, they knew about same-sex sexual
behaviour, and they knew the difference between the two.
As Wright goes on to say, this doesn't settle
the debate about what the Bible says about homosexual sex—it is to frame the
debate.
In so doing, I would add, it wreaks havoc with frames,
such as Bishop Robinson's, which misrepresent history.
(Hendrik
van der Breggen, PhD, is associate professor of philosophy at Providence
University College. The views in this column do not always reflect the views of Providence.)
P.S. For further reading:
No comments:
Post a Comment