Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 05-11-2012, 10:01 AM

There has been a lot said about 'same sex' unions in the news today. I have always wondered why this is such a hot button issue. Certainly Christianity was against sodomy. But is the concept of Christian marriage really preclude the possibility of two men being made one? I don't think so. In fact I can see a strong argument for same sex unions in the writings of Clement of Alexandria especially.

Let's start at the most basic. Was baptism conceived as 'marriage'? Yes. The early Christians seemed to identify 'baptism' with the 'sacred bridal chamber.' http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/vi...r%20baptism%22 My problem with this of course is that it is not even clear that women were originally included in these rites. If you have guys getting married - even spiritually - to other guys you have same sex unions.

Could baptism have involved two people in the water instead of just one? If we remember John and Jesus are usually held to represent the paradigm for baptism. Yet was the 'baptism' according to the water or the dove or the fire which appeared in the Jordan?

More important baptism seems to be connected with the restoration of the two sides of Adam that became split at creation. While this may led itself to the idea of a man and a woman becoming one, this isn't necessarily so either. Men were called 'brides' and again there is very little documentation of women entering the 'bridal chamber' per se.

My point of course is not to say that the church sanctified homosexual relations. It did not. Nevertheless as I noted before some sort of mystical bond between two men - i.e. same sex unions - is not the same thing as endorsing sodomy.

I am working on straightening out all of Clement's references to the 'agape' doctrine of John chapters 13 through 16. There are running themes in the writing of Clement of Alexandria which are generally recognized by those who study him. One is that he views 'faith' as a preliminary step towards the perfection of ultimately knowing God.

and he who on fitting considerations readily receives and keeps the commandments, is faithful (pistos); and he who by love requites benefits as far as he is able, is already a friend. [Strom 7:3]

Philia is the intense love of friendship extolled by Aristotle. From Wikipedia:

Quote:

As Gerard Hughes points out, in Books VIII and IX Aristotle gives examples of philia including:

"young lovers (1156b2), lifelong friends (1156b12), cities with one another (1157a26), political or business contacts (1158a28), parents and children (1158b20), fellow-voyagers and fellow-soldiers (1159b28), members of the same religious society (1160a19), or of the same tribe (1161b14), a cobbler and the person who buys from him (1163b35)."[2]

All of these different relationships involve getting on well with someone, though Aristotle at times implies that something more like actual liking is required. When he is talking about the character or disposition that falls between obsequiousness or flattery on the one hand and surliness or quarrelsomeness on the other, he says that this state:

"has no name, but it would seem to be most like [philia]; for the character of the person in the intermediate state is just what we mean in speaking of a decent friend, except that the friend is also fond of us." (1126b21)

This passage indicates also that, though broad, the notion of philia must be mutual, and thus excludes relationships with inanimate objects, though philia with animals, such as pets, is allowed for (see 1155b27–31).

In his Rhetoric, Aristotle defines the activity involved in philia (τὸ φιλεῖn) as:

"wanting for someone what one thinks good, for his sake and not for one's own, and being inclined, so far as one can, to do such things for him" (1380b36–1381a2)

John M. Cooper argues that this indicates:

"that the central idea of φιλíα is that of doing well by someone for his own sake, out of concern for him (and not, or not merely, out of concern for oneself). [... Thus] the different forms of φιλíα [as listed above] could be viewed just as different contexts and circumstances in which this kind of mutual well-doing can arise"[3]

Aristotle takes philia to be both necessary as a means to happiness ("no one would choose to live without friends even if he had all the other goods" [1155a5–6]) and noble or fine (καλόν) in itself.

The author of the Philosophumena says that there was a longer version of the Gospel of Mark in the hands of the Marcionites that explained Jesus as introducing a divine philia to the world. The Marcionites also made use of material from the Gospel of John (= the Paraclete) in their gospel. I find it highly probable that this report about Jesus establishing philia in longer Mark means that material from John 13 - 16 was found in Mark.

There seems to be a three step process in John 14 which roughly corresponds to the famous faith, hope and love of 1 Corinthians 13 (cf. Clement QDS 37). At the beginning the initiate only has faith. This faith transforms in light of actually becoming acquainted with who Jesus really is. At that point one becomes a 'friend' of God - like Abraham and Moses. Yet the Christians apparently proposed a further step of becoming a brother of God which was mystically achieved through Agape.

So we read a little later in the same work (Strom 7:7):

Without doubt, the holiness of the Gnostic, in union with [God's] blessed Providence, exhibits in voluntary confession the perfect beneficence of God. For the holiness of the Gnostic, and the reciprocal benevolence of the friend of God, are a kind of corresponding movement of providence. For neither is God involuntarily good, as the fire is warming; but in Him the imparting of good things is voluntary, even if He receive the request previously. Nor shall he who is saved be saved against his will, for he is not inanimate; but he will above all voluntarily and of free choice speed to salvation. Wherefore also man received the commandments in order that he might be self- impelled, to whatever he wished of things to be chosen and to be avoided. Wherefore God does not do good by necessity, but from His free choice benefits those who spontaneously turn.

I have noted here before that the 'good doing' - eupoiia - eventually becomes the adelphopoiia in the Byzantine terminology. The Hebrew equivalent is yatab and shows up in the mystical speculation of Marqe the Samaritan:

Quote:

It is a special thing that we receive blessings from our Lord, who is merciful and pitiful, doing good to those who love Him. (Mimar Marqe 2:10)

In any event we have already dealt with the 'doing good' interest in Clement. Let's see how Clement takes an interest

Wherefore he not only praises what is noble, but endeavours himself to be noble (οὐκοῦν οὐ μόνον ἐπαινεῖ τὰ καλά, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὸς βιάζεται εἶναι καλός); changing by love from a good and faithful servant into a friend, through the perfection of habit (ἕξεως), which he has acquired in purity from true instruction and great discipline. [Strom 7.11]

sotto voce · 05-11-2012, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

There has been a lot said about 'same sex' unions in the news today. I have always wondered why this is such a hot button issue. Certainly Christianity was against sodomy. But is the concept of Christian marriage really preclude the possibility of two men being made one? I don't think so.

Two men can be made 'one' in one superficial sense, but it's not a biologically rational sense, so neither should it be supposed that it is a psychologically rational sense. If biological sexual variation has, in the human species at least, produced an evolved masculine psyche and a feminine psyche that are complementary, then only the union of male with female can actually be a union. Copulation of two individuals of the same psyche is liable to be meaningless or harmful.

stephan huller · 05-11-2012, 11:34 AM

Then at the culmination of this mystical understanding there is concept of spiritual marriage in Clement's citation of Theodotus. The description begins with the high priest stripping off layers of his attire as a symbol of his ultimate union with God. Theodotus writes:

Quote:

But where is there a right judgment of Scripture and doctrine for that soul which has become pure, and where is it granted to see God "face to face"? Thus, having transcended the angelic teaching and the Name taught in Scripture, it comes to the knowledge and comprehension of the facts. It is no longer a bride but has become a Logos and rests with the bridegroom together with the First-Called and First-Created (τῶν Πρωτοκλήτων καὶ Πρωτοκτίστων), who are friends by love (φίλων μὲν δι'ἀγάπην), sons by instruction and obedience (υἱῶν δὲ διὰ τὴν διδασκαλίαν καὶ ὑπακοήν), and brothers by common generation (ἀδελφῶν δὲ διὰ τὸ τῆς γενέσεως κοινόν). So that it belonged to the dispensation to wear the plate and to continue the pur suit of knowledge, but the work of power was that man becomes the bearer of God, being controlled directly by the Lord and becoming, as it were, his body. [Ex Theodoto 27]

The reader should see that Moses's encounter with God is the ultimate context here ('face to face' and 'friend to friend' in Clement's version of Exodus). I am struck by this line:

It is no longer a bride but has become a Logos and rests with the bridegroom together with the First-Called and First-Created (τῶν Πρωτοκλήτων καὶ Πρωτοκτίστων), who are friends by love (φίλων μὲν δι'ἀγάπην), sons by instruction and obedience (υἱῶν δὲ διὰ τὴν διδασκαλίαν καὶ ὑπακοήν), and brothers by common generation (ἀδελφῶν δὲ διὰ τὸ τῆς γενέσεως κοινόν).

I can't help but think this is a reference to two men who have been married in Christ. There is a 'bride' and a 'bridegroom' both are in Christ, friends, sons, brothers. I think this is broader than merely becoming friends, sons and brothers with Jesus

The philosopher loves and likes the truth, being now considered as a friend, on account of his love, from his being a true servant.

Further, agreement in the same thing is consent. But what is the same is one. And friendship is consummated in likeness; the community lying in oneness. The Gnostic, consequently, in virtue of being a lover of the one true God, is the really perfect man and friend of God, and is placed in the rank of son. For these are names of nobility and knowledge, and perfection in the contemplation of God; which crowning step of advancement the gnostic soul receives, when it has become quite pure, reckoned worthy to behold everlastingly God Almighty, "face," it is said, "to face." For having become wholly spiritual, and having in the spiritual Church gone to what is of kindred nature, it abides in the rest of God.

since also righteousness is twofold, that which is out of love, and that from fear. Accordingly it is said, "The fear of the Lord is pure, remaining for ever and ever." For those that from fear turn to faith and righteousness, remain for ever. Now fear works abstinence from what is evil; but love exhorts to the doing of good, by building up to the point of spontaneousness; that one may hear from the Lord, "I call you no longer servants, but friends," and may now with confidence apply himself to prayer.

But what is loveable, and is not also loved by Him? And man has been proved to be loveable; consequently man is loved by God. For how shall he not be loved for whose sake the only-begotten Son is sent from the Father's bosom, the Word of faith, the faith which is superabundant; the Lord Himself distinctly confessing and saying, "For the Father Himself loveth you, because ye have loved Me;" and again, "And hast loved them as Thou hast loved Me?" What, then, the Master desires and declares, and how He is disposed in deed and word, how He commands what is to be done, and forbids the opposite, has already been shown.
Plainly, then, the other kind of discourse, the didactic, is powerful and spiritual, observing precision, occupied in the contemplation of mysteries. But let it stand over for the present. Now, it is incumbent on us to return His love, who lovingly guides us to that life which is best; and to live in accordance with the injunctions of His will, not only fulfilling what is commanded, or guarding against what is forbidden, but turning away from some examples, and imitating others as much as we can, and thus to perform the works of the Master according to His similitude, and so fulfil what Scripture says as to our being made in His image and likeness. For, wandering in life as in deep darkness, we need a guide that cannot stumble or stray; and our guide is the best, not blind, as the Scripture says, "leading the blind into pits." But the Word is keen-sighted, and scans the recesses of the heart. As, then, that is not light which enlightens not, nor motion that moves not, nor loving which loves not, so neither is that good which profits not, nor guides to salvation. Let us then aim at the fulfilment of the commandments by the works of the Lord; for the Word Himself also, having openly become flesh, exhibited the same virtue, both practical and contemplative. Wherefore let us regard the Word as law, and His commands and counsels as the short and straight paths to immortality; for His precepts are full of persuasion, not of fear.

Wherefore also all men are His; some through knowledge, and others not yet so; and some as friends, some as faithful servants, some as servants merely. This is the Teacher, who trains the Gnostic by mysteries, and the believer by good hopes, and the hard of heart by corrective discipline through sensible operation. Thence His providence is in private, in public, and everywhere.

The cause of these, then, is love, of all science the most sacred and most sovereign.
For by the service of what is best and most exalted, which is characterized by unity, it renders the Gnostic at once friend and son, having in truth grown "a perfect man, up to the measure of full stature."
Further, agreement in the same thing is consent. But what is the same is one. And friendship is consummated in likeness; the community lying in oneness. The Gnostic, consequently, in virtue of being a lover of the one true God, is the really perfect man and friend of God, and is placed in the rank of son. For these are names of nobility and knowledge, and perfection in the contemplation of God; which crowning step of advancement the gnostic soul receives, when it has become quite pure, reckoned worthy to behold everlastingly God Almighty, "face," it is said, "to face." For having become wholly spiritual, and having in the spiritual Church gone to what is of kindred nature, it abides in the rest of God.

He impoverishes himself, in order that he may never overlook a brother who has been brought into affliction, through the perfection that is in love, especially if he know that he will bear want himself easier than his brother. He considers, accordingly, the other's pain his own grief; and if, by contributing from his own indigence in order to do good, he suffer any hardship, he does not fret at this, but augments his beneficence still more. For he possesses in its sincerity the faith which is exercised in reference to the affairs of life, and praises the Gospel in practice and contemplation. And, in truth, he wins his praise "not from men, but from God," by the performance of what the Lord has taught.
He, attracted by his own hope, tastes not the good things that are in the world, entertaining a noble contempt for all things here; pitying those that are chastised after death, who through punishment unwillingly make confession; having a clear conscience with reference to his departure, and being always ready, as "a stranger and pilgrim," with regard to the inheritances here; mindful only of those that are his own, and regarding all things here as not his own; not only admiring the Lord's commandments, but, so to speak, being by knowledge itself partaker of the divine will; a truly chosen intimate of the Lord and His commands in virtue of being righteous; and princely and kingly as being a Gnostic; despising all the gold on earth and under the earth, and dominion from shore to shore of ocean, so that he may cling to the sole service of the Lord. Wherefore also, in eating, and drinking, and marrying (if the Word enjoin), and even in seeing dreams, he does and thinks what is holy.
So is he always pure for prayer. He also prays in the society of angels, as being already of angelic rank, and he is never out of their holy keeping; and though he pray alone, he has the choir of the saints standing with him.
He recognises a twofold [element in faith], both the activity of him who believes, and the excellence of that which is believed according to its worth; since also righteousness is twofold, that which is out of love, and that from fear. Accordingly it is said, "The fear of the Lord is pure, remaining for ever and ever." For those that from fear turn to faith and righteousness, remain for ever. Now fear works abstinence from what is evil; but love exhorts to the doing of good, by building up to the point of spontaneousness; that one may hear from the Lord, "I call you no longer servants, but friends," and may now with confidence apply himself to prayer.

He having acquired the habit of doing good, exercises beneficence well, quicker than speaking; praying that he may get a share in the sins of his brethren, in order to confession and conversion on the part of his kindred; and eager to give a share to those dearest to him of his own good things. And so these are to him, friends. Promoting, then, the growth of the seeds deposited in him, according to the husbandry enjoined by the Lord, he continues free of sin, and becomes continent, and lives in spirit with those who are like him, among the choirs of the saints, though still detained on earth.

steve_bnk · 05-11-2012, 11:53 AM

You are mixing words and images, like equating a spiitual bond to a same sex union, which has a clear current meaning.

Hetero men can have strong love bonds that are not homosexual, or sexual at all. IMOpart of the strong reaction to homosexuality is because it is seen as a weak corruption of that bond.

The Lord Of The Rings at heart is a love story between the male fellowship of the Hobbits, Elves, Men, and Dwarves.

Based on some ancient scriptures and interpretations a past claim has been same sex marriage was part of the earlier church.

stephan huller · 05-11-2012, 12:13 PM

No im just saying that "Christian marriage" likely started as an act of ritualized union between two men

sotto voce · 05-11-2012, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

No im just saying that "Christian marriage" likely started as a ritual union between two men

Yet the only evidence proffered is that of two heretics, two thousand years late.

stephan huller · 05-11-2012, 12:42 PM

Indeed I defy anyone to provide an example of an early Christian official presiding over a marriage of a man and a woman. I can think of Christians who happened to have been married. Ambrose, Origen's patron or St Peter. I can't think of an example of a priest who puts men and women in holy matrimony. What would happen if they divorced? Yet I am aware what the gospels say (or don't say). But really you'd think no matter how pious people may have been you'd expect at least to hear about the Christian wife or husband who wanted dissolve their Christian marriage (like you do today among the Copts who don't allow for divorce). Nothing.

Christian marriage - aka 'the bridal chamber - was a sacrament involving two men.

stephan huller · 05-11-2012, 12:46 PM

Again I ask - how can this be about an initiate and Jesus:

Thus, having transcended the angelic teaching and the Name taught in Scripture, it (the soul) comes to the knowledge and comprehension of the facts. It (soul) is no longer a bride but has become a Logos and rests with the bridegroom together with the First-Called and First-Created

Why is the Logos assumed to be already with someone (= the bridegroom)? It sounds like Clement's 'see your brother, see your God.' There are two men standing here in the 'bridal chamber' rather than one man and an invisible Christ.

sotto voce · 05-11-2012, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Indeed I defy anyone to provide an example of an early Christian official presiding over a marriage of a man and a woman.

A Christian official? What planet are you on?

What has to be shown is that Abraham married a man. Sarah wasn't a man, really, honestly. And the idea stuck, don't you know. Isaac married Rebekah. Jacob married Rachel. And so on. There was no ceremony. No busy-body official.

stephan huller · 05-11-2012, 01:04 PM

Clement's use of philia in the Stromata:

That department of politics which is called "Law," he divides into administrative magnanimity and private good order, which he calls orderliness; and harmony, and sobriety, which are seen when rulers suit their subjects, and subjects are obedient to their rulers; a result which the system of Moses sedulously aims at effecting. Further, that the department of law is founded on generation, that of politics on friendship (φιλίας) and consent, Plato, with the aid he received, affirms [1.25]

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-11-2012, 11:53 AM	#4
steve_bnk Contributor Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,602	You are mixing words and images, like equating a spiitual bond to a same sex union, which has a clear current meaning. Hetero men can have strong love bonds that are not homosexual, or sexual at all. IMOpart of the strong reaction to homosexuality is because it is seen as a weak corruption of that bond. The Lord Of The Rings at heart is a love story between the male fellowship of the Hobbits, Elves, Men, and Dwarves. Based on some ancient scriptures and interpretations a past claim has been same sex marriage was part of the earlier church.

05-11-2012, 12:13 PM	#5
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	No im just saying that "Christian marriage" likely started as an act of ritualized union between two men

05-11-2012, 12:42 PM	#7
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Indeed I defy anyone to provide an example of an early Christian official presiding over a marriage of a man and a woman. I can think of Christians who happened to have been married. Ambrose, Origen's patron or St Peter. I can't think of an example of a priest who puts men and women in holy matrimony. What would happen if they divorced? Yet I am aware what the gospels say (or don't say). But really you'd think no matter how pious people may have been you'd expect at least to hear about the Christian wife or husband who wanted dissolve their Christian marriage (like you do today among the Copts who don't allow for divorce). Nothing. Christian marriage - aka 'the bridal chamber - was a sacrament involving two men.

05-11-2012, 12:46 PM	#8
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Again I ask - how can this be about an initiate and Jesus: Thus, having transcended the angelic teaching and the Name taught in Scripture, it (the soul) comes to the knowledge and comprehension of the facts. It (soul) is no longer a bride but has become a Logos and rests with the bridegroom together with the First-Called and First-Created Why is the Logos assumed to be already with someone (= the bridegroom)? It sounds like Clement's 'see your brother, see your God.' There are two men standing here in the 'bridal chamber' rather than one man and an invisible Christ.

05-11-2012, 01:04 PM	#10
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Clement's use of philia in the Stromata: That department of politics which is called "Law," he divides into administrative magnanimity and private good order, which he calls orderliness; and harmony, and sobriety, which are seen when rulers suit their subjects, and subjects are obedient to their rulers; a result which the system of Moses sedulously aims at effecting. Further, that the department of law is founded on generation, that of politics on friendship (φιλίας) and consent, Plato, with the aid he received, affirms [1.25]

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.