funinspace

With all the debate on homosexual marriages going on I was trying to figure out when Xianity started putting an end to polygamy within their realm. It is interesting to hear talk protecting family/Xian values as a reason to not allow this. Especially when they ask where will it lead, i.e. things like polygamy. Since the NT is ambivalent about polygamy, then what are they talking about? So, I see that Tertullian argued against polygamy at the end of the 2nd century. And that Ambrose also argued against it at the end of the 4th century. I have to assume it was still going on at some level with at least official tolerance at the end of the 4th century. And it seams to have ended well before the last few centuries (Mormonism not considered). Other than that, I came up blank from my books at home, and on a modest search on the internet.

I realize that it would not disappear overnight. But questions like when was it officially called "wrong" say either by a Synod or Pope, or say when did it become illegal as such? Anyone out there with some information in this area?

Hopefully this is the right forum, I wasn't really sure.

DK

The Evil One

Roman society was not polygamous, so polygamy was never going to be a going thing in a religion, like Christianity, that was trying to graft itself onto Roman society.

Infidelettante

I can't cite the verse but Paul said a Bishop was to be the husband of one wife so I quess the answer to your question is...pretty early on.

JT

funinspace

1 Timothy 3:12 "A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children..." And there's another verse covering overseers. This limitation is strictly for church leadership. And it directly implies, that it is copasetic for the general congregation. And there are no other NT verses that directly cover the subject. Even some Xian groups recognize that it was never called a sin. Polygamy was part of the older Jewish culture within the Hebrew Bible. King Herod, of Jesus' time had multiple wives. And like I said the issue was still alive enough towards the end of the 4th century for Bishop Ambrose of Milan to feel the need to speak up against it. I don't have the document to quote right now. So it seams that the issue may have faded of it's own prerogative do to blending with the Roman culture. But that leaves it at a very foggy answer.

DK