rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) (10/01/84)
MORE OF CAPRIO'S QUOTATIONS C = Confraternity Edition (Challoner-Douai + new research & translation) OT = Old Testament; NT = New Testament; KJV = King James Version RSV = Revised Standard Edition Numbers in parentheses refer to page numbers in his book CHRISTIANITY, SOCIAL TOLERANCE, & HOMOSEXUALITY (University of Chicago Press, 1981, $9.95 in paperback). All errors of fact or interpretation are mine. ======================================================================= > "For this reason God gave them over to degrading > passions; for their women exchanged the natural function > for that which was unnatural, and in the same way > also the men abandoned the natural function of the women and > burned in their desire toward one another, men with men > committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons > the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not > see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over > to a depraved mind, to do things which are not proper,.." > Romans 1:26-28 (NASB) "Unnatural" is Latin CONTRA NATURAM, Greek PARA' PHY'SIN, in KJV ren- dered "against nature", but accurately translated "beyond nature" or "in excess of nature" (in NT usage the preposition PARA' expresses exceeding, not opposition, for which the preposition KATA' is used). {107-113, 114} The concept of "nature" Paul uses, & the primary sense of the word in antiquity, is that of the character, or defining property, of an entity, not nature as "the physical universe" or "all God's creation", nevermind nature as in the medieval doctrine of "natural law", deve- loped 1,000 years later. Thus, when Paul speaks of the "nature" of a person or group of people, he refers to personal constitution or group character (customs, culture including ethical heritage), resp. In the passage above, he talks of persons abandoning their character- istic sexuality ("the natural function"), i.e., heterosexuality ("their women exchanged the natural function", "the men abandoned the natural function of the women"), for homosexual liaisons ("that which was unnatural" for THEM), thus contradicting their sexual orien- tation: in other words, the entire passage refers ONLY to heterosexuals! To people who are congenitally (by their "natures") attracted to the opposite sex, & who thus violate their inherent bent by homosexual acts. And what Paul condemns is not homosexual acts (& certainly not homosexual persons, who don't figure in the passage AT ALL) for everyone (including homosexuals), but "homosexual acts committed by heterosexuals" {109}, and even here, his main charge is infidelity (to inherent sexual orienta- tion ) rather than lust. St. John Chrysostom agrees, and emphasizes Paul's careful use of the word "abandon" in concert with "nature", "inherent char- acter". [Pardon the repetition, but I wanted to make the point clear.] The idea of homosexuality as innate was common in the Hellenistic world Paul lived in, but even if Paul & other Jews drew no distinction between gays and straights who dabbled in homosex, the above passage refers ONLY to heterosexuals. Remaining parts of the text that some have tried to use homophobically are {footnote 72, 112-113}: "Degrading passions", "vile affections" in KJV, is Greek PATHE' ATIMI'AS, two words "of very broad interpretation" {112}. PATHOS, "passion", is a very common word & has no moral import. ATIMIA is "dishonorable". But "whence arises the dishonor -- from the act itself, from God's attitude toward it, or from the attitude of the community?" {112} Boswell cites Paul: in 2 Cor 6:8, 1 Cor 15:43, and 2 Cor 11:21 ATIMIA means "ill repute IN CONTRAST to wickedness" {113}. In 1 Cor 11:14, ATIMIA applies to long hair on a man, and in Rom 9:21 & 2 Tim 2:20, to chamber pots: hardly sub- jects possessing great moral gravity. So ATIMIA at best refers to Burger Court-like "community standards", rather than fundamental moral values. St. Jerome, author of the Vulgate, & other Greek exegetes understood it this way as well. The only other words that could possess moral weight are PLANE', "error" (KJV), its 4 instances in Pauline writings denoting mere "mistakes", and ASCHEMOSY'NE, "that which is unseemly" (KJV), occuring a few more times in the NT: in 1 Cor 12:23 it's applied to body parts, "uncomely" (KJV), & in 1 Cor 13:5 it's variously rendered as EST AMBITIOSA by Jerome (Vulgate), "behaveth itself unseemly" (KJV), "is arrogant" (RSV), "is ambitious" (C) -- not much agreement here. In 1 Cor 7:36, "behaveth himself uncomely" (KJV) refers to a father who refuses marriage for his virgin daughter, maybe an example of poor judgment or parental selfishness but hardly a matter of "moral failure" {113}. Furthermore, ASCHEMOSYNE is the pri- vative (the contrary, formed by adding a negating prefix) of the noun SCHE'MA, whose many meanings all involve the idea "of appearance or form" {113}. And in his epistles Paul "does not associate it [SCHEMA] with any clearly discernible moral purpose" {113}. Furthermore, the above verses (26-28) follow a passage (19-23) condemn- ing the Romans for rejecting monotheism even though they understood the idea, and the entire section is devoted to the general topic of the in- fidelity of the gentiles. Thus just as heterosexual gentiles abandoned their sexual orientation through homosexual adventures, so they also abandoned belief in one god, to which their knowledge of things (obtained through exercise of intellect, characteristic of all humans, even pagans) leads them. Editors of the Confraternity Edition place the title "Punishment of the Idolators" in front of verse 24, emphasizing a general, theological pur- pose involving the gentiles for the succeeding verses. The sexual refer- ence in verses 26-27 is "quickly dropped" once "the point is made" {109} and Paul returns in verse 28 to the general theme of infidelity. Thus, EVEN IF all Boswell's explications above were wrong, the quoted passage is merely a sexual analogy briefly adopted to illustrate a general thesis, & is of minor importance, in Paul's brief against the gentiles. So if we substitute Boswell's emendations in the KJV text (more accurate than NASB) & edit KJV for clarity, an accurate translation ought to re- semble the following: For this God gave them up to dishonorable interests, for even their women did change the characteristic use into that which went beyond their characters: and likewise, also the men, abandoning [closer to the Greek than KJV's "leaving"] the characteristic use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is inappro- priate, and receiving in themselves that reward [KJV has "re- compense"] of their mistakes which was suitable [KJV has "meet"]. Romans 1:26-27 where "characteristic" & "characters" refer to sexual orientation, here specifically heterosexual, and "interests" represents Greek PATHE, a very broadly-defined word, closer to "enthusiams" or "interests of some intensity" than the English word "passions", which has an implicit erotic and pejorative sense. [For any of the above, & more, see pp. 107-114, and Appendix 1, "Lexicography & Saint Paul", pp. 335-353, for even greater detail.] NOT THE END (BUT I'M HALFWAY THERE!)