The Apostle Paul and homosexuality: an ante litteram homophobia or a man to understand (First part) – Saint Paul and homosexuality: or before the letter homophobia, or a man to be understood? (first part) – The Apostle Paul and homosexuality: a homophobia ante litteram or a man who must be understood? (first part)

(Italian, English, Español)

THE APOSTLE PAUL AND HOMOSEXUALITY: A HOMOPHOBIA BEFORE THE LETTER OR A MAN TO UNDERSTAND? (Part One)

"Make no mistake: neither fornicators, born idolatry, nor adulterers, ne prostitutes, born sodomiti, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, not cursed, nor will they extortionately inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you; but you have been washed, you have been sanctified, you have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God!» (1Color 6,9-11)

- Church news -

Author
Ivano Liguori, Ofm. Cap.

PDF print format article – Article print format – Article in printed format

Homophobic St. Paul? No, but a man of his time. Who knows how many Christians, reading the passages of San Paolo, they had the impression that the Apostle of the Gentiles was a little too rigid, so much so that he has been branded - and not just now - as a misogynist and a homophobe.

Making such a disparaging judgment about a person It's completely out of place, especially if the person in question lived in the 1st century. d.C., and therefore very distant from us in terms not only of chronology, but also sociological.

Mind you, certain evaluations and expressions — including those that St. Paul uses in his Letters — must always be taken in cultural context, social, historical and theological in which they were formulated, avoiding making the mistake of reading facts and people of the past with criteria relating to modernity.

A healthy historicism is necessary to understand the issues and the men and Saint Paul, man of his time and son of his social and religious culture, he never denied his identity, indeed, if anything, he made it a point of pride even after his conversion to Christ, as is abundantly testified in the book of the Acts of the Apostles and in the Letters:

«I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but grew up in this city, trained at the school of Gamaliel in the strictest norms of paternal law, full of zeal for God, like all of you are today" (cf. At 22,3). «Then the tribune went to Paul and asked him: "Tell me, you are a Roman citizen?”. Answered: "Yes". replied the tribune: “I purchased this citizenship at a high price”. Paul said: “Io, instead, I am by birth!”». (At 22,27-28) «circumcised at the age of eight days, of the lineage of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, Jew, son of Jews; as for the Law, Pharisee; as for zeal, persecutor of the Church; as for the justice that derives from the observance of the Law, irreproachable" (cf. Fil 3,5-6). “You have certainly heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I fiercely persecuted the Church of God and devastated it, surpassing most of my peers and countrymen in Judaism, as avid as I was in upholding the traditions of the fathers" (cf. Gal 1,13-14).

About, instead, to certain ideological debates on hot topics like those present in Sao Paulo, it is better to limit them only to television debates in which most of the time only noise or bacchanal occurs. Places where guests are deliberately invited to provoke mutual opposition and where a faithful Christian - especially if a priest - should never set foot because he will always be seen as a circus attraction that is intended to entertain the public and on which one can let off steam and say the worst things. Doing theology and theological reflection, starting from the fact of faith means acting with other intentions and above all with other means, and that is what this article strives to do.

But let's get to the elements for a correct understanding of some sexual aspects. In my previous article (you see WHO) I referred in a non-exhaustive way to the broad theme of homosexuality in the ancient world; and I focused in particular on clarifying the nature and type of the sin of the city of Sodom in reference to the Biblical text (Gen 19,1-28) and to what the Pontifical Biblical Commission has clarified. Sin of Sodom which traditionally - at least since the 2nd century. AD onwards - inaugurated and determined in common feeling the identification of homosexual relationships between male individuals, but which then also included a form of heterosexual anal sexual intercourse, therefore it is possible to make a subsequent distinction between homosexual sodomy and heterosexual sodomy (cf. Dictionary of Italian Treccani, voce sodomy).

Etymological clarification is necessary because it helps us to delve deeper into the fact that the sodomy it does not only concern the expression of a specifically male homosexual practice but also the exercise of a hetero-oriented sexuality. A stronger the discussion will no longer only be between a level of ethereal or homo sexual orientation but on the broader exercise of human sexuality as such and its understanding within the plan of salvation wanted by God.

Let us remember how sexuality was also created by God as an element of salvation for men and women and that in this sense abuse in the etymological sense can only generate various problems, regardless of whether it is hetero-directed or homo-directed sexuality. The foundation of this vision is clearly not a philosophical reflection on the natural order, it is rather a reflection of faith that seeks to grasp creation, and therefore sexual and sexual relationships, in the alliance plan. This requires that humanity realizes itself in the recognition of its Creator, recognition that implies respect for the differences that unite society, especially the difference between men and women (cf. Xavier Thévenot, Male homosexuality and Christian morality, Torino, 1985, SHE DI CI p. 177). When the Creator is not recognized in any way, living one's humanity in totality even if God were not given, there is the serious possibility of incurring the sin of the city of Sodom which, by not recognizing and welcoming God and the foreigner, is prey to every excess and violence, his condition is particularly serious because he is executioner and victim at the same time.

I always remember what my sexual morality teacher he warned during his courses in the theological faculty. In the pastoral care of people with homosexual orientation it is essential to broaden the field of understanding so as not to focus solely on genital practice. It is not necessary to focus immediately on genitality as human sexuality is inclusive of various factors and although certain genital acts constitute an intrinsic and objective disorder this must not be a reason for impediment to the person who wishes to follow a human and Christian journey and who realizes how a differently oriented or disordered genitality actually constitutes a reason for embarrassment and confusion. This is also true for masturbation, for premarital relations and for fornication. We understand how certain questions remain open, because the point of view of the Bible is not to address the particularities and even less the singularity of situations which most of the time are always conflictual and placed within a defined historical space.

It is more necessary than ever to recognize with serenity the not remote possibility that a man or a woman could abuse their sexual identity and genitality. The right understanding can only provide a precise theology of corporeality that combines with the specific personality of each subject, in order to suggest the best paths to follow to live well and peacefully a heterosexual or homosexual relationship with oneself with the consequent deeper understanding of one's being. The authentic hypocrisy in these sexual themes can be seen in angelism which volatilizes the obstacle or sublimates it by hiding the problem and increasing the suffering that is hidden either under a denial or under a semblance of spiritualization.

How homosexuality was perceived in Paul's time? In the Letters of the Apostle the theme of homosexuality is not a central theme, even if some people still find it hard to believe it today and perhaps will be shocked by it. The Apostle is more interested in announcing and preaching Christ crucified and risen and the salvation that comes from him to every man within a renewal of life that is not only chronological - including, that is, between a before and an after —, that is, from the passage between sin and grace. The three texts of Saint Paul's Letters in which we can recognize homosexual conduct are the following:

1Color 6,9-11: “Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Don't fool yourself: neither fornicators, né idolatry, nor adulterers, nor depraved, born sodomiti, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor will robbers inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you! But you have been washed, you have been sanctified, you have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God". 1TM 1,10: «We know that the Law is good, provided that it is used legitimately, in the belief that the Law is not made for the right, but for the wicked and the rebellious, for the wicked and sinners, for the sacrilegious and the profane, for parricides and matricides, for the murderers, the fornicators, the sodomites, the merchants of men, the liars, perjurers and for anything else contrary to sound doctrine, according to the gospel of the glory of the blessed God, that was entrusted to me". RM 1,24-27: «Therefore God gave them up to impurity according to the desires of their hearts, so much so that they dishonor their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth of God for lies and worshiped and served creatures rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God abandoned them to infamous passions; indeed, their females have changed natural relationships into unnatural ones. Likewise the males too, leaving the natural relationship with the female, they became inflamed with desire for each other, committing ignominious acts male with male, thus receiving within themselves the retribution due to their aberration".

We will have the opportunity to comment and analyze these texts briefly in the continuation of the article but what is now most interesting to clarify is that there is no Pauline text in which the explicit reasons for blame for a homosexual relationship are found, in short, a clear moral definition. Instead, we have specific texts and terms in which homosexual acts are regarded with blame (cf. soft [soft/feminine] e arsenokoitis [have sexual intercourse with a male as well as with a female]. We will also have the opportunity to focus more specifically on these terms throughout the article, now it is necessary to grasp the demarcation between sexuality and genitality, between corporeality and personality. The difference is subtle but substantial, especially for our times when talking about homosexuality and the right of citizenship of homosexuality in the modern world, inevitably leads to political ideology. But at the time in which Saint Paul wrote this problem did not arise in the slightest, for the simple fact that it is once free from any Puritan ideology and moralism.

Many of St. Paul's contemporaries they deal with the topic of homosexuality as it was generally considered already in the ancient world. Various testimonies come to us from the Greco-Roman world, as well as those pagan Mesopotamian populations with which the Jews came into contact. In some cities, sexual freedom was so evident - think for example of the city of Corinth - that the same toponym became the synonym for libertinism. Saying that a man or a woman lived "Corinthian style" indicated fairly free and unscrupulous sexual conduct. As we can read in the essay by Eva Cantarella that bisexuality was an almost stable condition of the sexual style of ancient man; and it is precisely in this social and cultural climate that Saint Paul lives and carries out his ministry as an apostle (cf. According to Nature, bisexuality in the ancient world, 2025, Universal Economy Feltrinelli).

For Jews, the revulsion towards homosexual sexual behavior was established in several documents. It would be interesting to ask ourselves whether the written prescriptions then found an application correspondence in real life as well as in Lex Scatinia of the Roman Republican era. In Jewish society these normative positions do not in themselves establish a precise sexual ethic but are more suited to the stigmatization of the pagan world that Jewish apologetics has maintained among the fundamental themes of its identity as a people and in the effort of ethnic conservation. We find evidence of what we are saying not only from reading canonical sources (cf. Lv 18,22 e 20,13) but also from profane and non-canonical literature (cf. Testaments of the XII Patriarchs; Levi XVII, 11; Philo; Sibylline Oracles).

The correct exegesis of the book of Leviticus — respectively in the Codes of Purity and Holiness — often cited inappropriately by many delicate souls who flock to our Christian communities, they prohibited various things with the sole purpose of preserving the identity of the chosen people. The preservation of purity and holiness could only be pursued at the time through a separatist attitude from everything that could stain the people's experience of salvation starting from the liberation events of Egypt and Sinai. And usually these separations included food and moral customs and practices of those neighboring peoples who did not enter into the covenant with God. With a joke we can summarize how the Levitical Fathers sent you to hell if you gorged on shrimp and lobsters - foods considered you know ―, whereas they wouldn't send you there if you had relations with a strictly prostitute kasher. Similarly, nowadays there are still Christians who see in the tattooed or homosexual individual - practices considered you know from Leviticus - the sure seal of the devil but they do not see the devil in their repeated attitude of unforgiveness and resentment towards some relative or acquaintance or in the attitude of division and scandal within the Church of God through their reckless judgments which dismember the body of Christ into its poorest members burdened by sin.

For this reason the apostolic experience of Saint Paul it is fundamental because it makes us understand that man's Promethean effort is no longer required to remain just, pure and holy before God, something that the ancient Law promised with the scrupulous observance of its innumerable prescriptions, without however succeeding. The ancient Law reveals sin and makes it aware but cannot eliminate it unless salvation is received through Jesus Christ who overcomes the Law. Now that we have fully entered into the grace that Christ deserved for us with his sacrifice on the cross, we can overflow with mercy even in the face of the superabundance of sin and the actual sins that many Christian converts had committed and of which we find a list in the First Letter to the Corinthians:

Sanluri, 25 November 2025

______________________________

SAINT PAUL AND HOMOSEXUALITY: OR BEFORE THE LITERATURE OF HOMOPHOBIA, OR A MAN TO BE UNDERSTOOD? (first part)

“Do not be deceived: neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. And this is what some of you used to be; but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” (1 Cor 6,9–11)

— Ecclesial actuality —

Author
Ivano Liguori, Ofm. Cap.

Was Saint Paul homophobic? No — he was a man of his own time. How many Christians, when reading certain passages of Saint Paul, have had the impression that the Apostle of the Gentiles was somewhat too severe, to the point of being branded — and not only in our day — as a misogynist and a homophobe. To pronounce such a disdainful judgement upon any person is entirely inappropriate, all the more so when the individual in question lived in the first century A.D., far removed from us not only in terms of chronology, but also sociological context.

Let us be clear: certain assessments and expressions — including those used by Saint Paul in his Letters — must always be read within the cultural, social, historical, and theological framework in which they were formulated, avoiding the grave mistake of interpreting the past with the conceptual criteria of modernity.

A sober historical awareness is indispensable if we wish to understand questions and persons. And Saint Paul, a man of his time and a son of his social and religious culture, never renounced his identity; indeed, he made of it a point of pride even after his conversion to Christ, as abundantly attested in the Acts of the Apostles and in his Letters:

“I am a Jew, born at Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up in this city, educated at the feet of Gamaliel according to the strict manner of the law of our fathers, being zealous for God, as all of you are this day” (Acts 22:3). “The tribune went and asked him, ‘Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?’ He replied, ‘Yes.’ The tribune answered, ‘I acquired this citizenship for a large sum.’ Paul said, ‘But I was born a citizen’” (Acts 22:27–28). “Circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the Church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless” (Phil 3:5–6). “You have heard of my former way of life in Judaism, how I persecuted the Church of God violently and tried to destroy it, and I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my ancestors” (Gal 1:13–14).

As for certain ideological controversies, especially on such heated themes as those found in Saint Paul, it is best to confine them to television studios — places where noise, spectacle, and provocation prevail. There, guests are deliberately invited to create mutual opposition, and a Christian — especially a priest — should never set foot in such an arena, where he will inevitably be treated as a circus curiosity, summoned to entertain the public and become the object upon which all manner of insults may be discharged. To do theology and engage in theological reflection, starting from the datum of faith, requires entirely different intentions and entirely different instruments — and this article seeks to do precisely that.

Let us now consider the elements necessary for a just understanding of certain sexual questions. In my previous article (see HERE), I recalled — though not exhaustively — the broad theme of homosexuality in the ancient world; and I paused in particular to clarify the nature and the species of the sin of the city of Sodom in reference to the biblical text of Genesis 19:1–28 and to the explanations offered by the Pontifical Biblical Commission. The sin of Sodom, which traditionally — at least from the second century A.D. onwards — established in the common imagination the identification of homosexual relations between males, subsequently came to include also a form of heterosexual anal intercourse; hence one may distinguish between homosexual sodomy and heterosexual sodomy (cf. Treccani vocabulary, s.v. sodomy).

This etymological clarification is necessary because it helps us deepen our understanding of the fact that sodomy does not refer solely to a homosexual practice properly male, but may also involve a heterosexual misuse of sexuality. To an even greater degree, then, the discussion cannot be limited merely to sexual orientation — whether hetero- or homosexual — but must extend to the broader exercise of human sexuality as such, and to its understanding within God’s salvific design.

Let us remember that sexuality itself was created by God as an element of salvation for man and woman; and in this sense, abuse — in its etymological meaning — cannot but generate various disorders, regardless of whether it concerns heterosexual or homosexual acts. The foundation of this vision is not a philosophical reflection upon natural order; it is rather a properly theological reflection that seeks to grasp creation — and therefore sexual and sexed relationships — within the covenantal design. This requires that humanity be fulfilled in the recognition of its Creator, a recognition that implies respect for those differences that shape society, above all the difference between man and woman (cf. Xavier Thévenot, Male homosexuality and Christian morality, 1985). When the Creator is not recognised in any way — when one lives one’s humanity even if God were not given — then one runs the serious risk of falling into the sin of the city of Sodom, which, in rejecting both God and the stranger, becomes prey to every excess and act of violence — a condition particularly grave, for it renders one both executioner and victim at the same time.

I always recall what my professor of sexual morality insisted upon during our theological studies: in the pastoral care of persons with homosexual orientation, it is essential to enlarge the field of understanding so as not to focus solely and immediately upon genital practice. One must not fixate upon genitality, for human sexuality includes various dimensions; and although certain genital acts constitute an intrinsic and objective disorder, this must never become an impediment for the person who genuinely desires to undertake a human and Christian journey, and who recognises that a differently oriented or disordered genitality may in fact be a source of embarrassment or confusion. The same is true for masturbation, premarital relations, and fornication. We readily understand how certain questions remain open, because Scripture does not aim to address particularities — still less the singularities — of individual situations, which are often conflictual and always situated within a specific historical reality.

It is therefore necessary to acknowledge with serenity the not-so-remote possibility that a man or a woman may misuse sexual identity and genitality. A proper understanding cannot but require a precise theology of the body, united to the specific personality of each subject, so as to suggest the best paths by which to live well and peaceably one’s relationship with oneself — whether heterosexually or homosexually — together with a deeper understanding of one’s own being. The true hypocrisy in matters of sexuality is found in a sort of spiritualist angelism that evaporates the obstacle or sublimates the difficulty, concealing the struggle and thereby increasing the suffering hidden beneath either denial or a pretence of spiritualisation.

How was homosexuality perceived in the time of Paul? In the Letters of the Apostle, homosexuality is not a central theme — though some today may find that difficult to believe, even to the point of scandal. The Apostle is far more concerned with proclaiming and preaching Christ crucified and risen, and the salvation that flows from Him to every human being, within a renewal of life that is not merely chronological — that is, the “before and after” — the passage from sin to grace.

The three Pauline texts in which a homosexual conduct may be discerned are the following:

1 Color 6:9-11: “Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. And this is what some of you used to be; but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” 1 Tim 1,10: “We know that the law is good, provided that one uses it as law, with the understanding that the law is not intended for a righteous person but for those who are lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the unholy and profane, those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, the sexually immoral, sodomites, kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which I have been entrusted with.” Rom 1,24–27: “Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another, males doing shameful things with males and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error.”

We shall have occasion to comment upon and briefly analyse these texts later in the article. What is important to clarify now is that there is no Pauline text in which we find an explicit moral condemnation of a homosexual relationship as such — no fully developed moral definition. Rather, we find specific terms and specific actions treated with moral disapproval (cf. soft, “soft, effeminate”; queer, “a man who lies with a male as with a woman”). We shall examine these terms more closely later. For the moment, it is necessary to grasp the distinction between sexuality and genitality, between embodiment and personality. The difference is subtle yet substantial — particularly in our time, when discussions of homosexuality and the supposed “right of citizenship” of homosexuality in modern society inevitably drift into ideological and political terrain.

But in the time when Saint Paul wrote, this problem did not arise in the slightest, for the simple reason that his was a period entirely free of ideological frameworks and puritan moralism.

Many of Paul’s contemporaries addressed the theme of homosexuality in the same manner in which it was generally viewed throughout the ancient world. Various testimonies come to us from the Greco-Roman world, as well as from the Mesopotamian pagan cultures with which the Jews came into contact. In certain cities, sexual liberty was so pronounced — Corinth, for example — that the very name of the city became a synonym for licentiousness. To say that a man or woman lived “in the Corinthian manner” indicated sexual conduct that was notably free and unrestrained.

We may also recall, as Eva Cantarella notes, that bisexuality was a nearly stable condition of ancient male sexuality; and it was very much in this social and cultural environment that Saint Paul lived and exercised his apostolic ministry (cf. According to Nature. Bisexuality in the ancient world, Feltrinelli, 2025).

Among the Jews, rejection of homosexual conduct was firmly established in various documents. It would be interesting to ask whether written prescriptions actually found concrete application in daily life — as in the case of the Lex Scatinia in the Roman Republic. In Jewish society these normative positions did not in themselves constitute a fully developed sexual ethic; rather, they served primarily to mark a boundary against the pagan world, a boundary that Jewish apologetics had long upheld as essential to its identity and to the preservation of the people. Testimonies of this attitude may be found not only in canonical sources (cf. Lev 18,22; 20,3) but also in non-canonical Jewish literature (cf. Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Levi XVII, 11; Philo; the Sibylline Oracles).

A correct exegesis of the Book of Leviticus — particularly with regard to the Codes of Purity and of Holiness — often quoted with little understanding by the more delicate souls who populate our Christian communities, reveals that many prohibitions had one principal aim: the preservation of the identity of the chosen people. Purity and holiness could, at that time, be safeguarded only through a stance of separation from anything capable of contaminating the experience of salvation — an experience rooted in the events of the Exodus and Sinai. This separation included dietary and moral practices of neighbouring peoples who did not belong to the covenant with God.

In a somewhat humorous summary, one might say that the Levitical Fathers would send you to hell for feasting on prawns and lobsters — foods considered ṭarèf — but not for visiting a prostitute, provided she was rigorously kasher. Likewise, even today there are Christians who see in a tattooed or homosexual person — practices deemed ṭarèf by Leviticus — the unmistakable mark of the devil, yet fail to recognise the presence of the devil in their own repeated refusal to forgive, in longstanding resentment towards relatives or acquaintances, or in the divisive and scandalous attitudes within the Church expressed through rash judgments that tear apart the Body of Christ in its poorest and most burdened members.

For this reason the apostolic experience of Saint Paul is crucial: it shows that the Promethean effort of human beings to keep themselves righteous, pure, and holy before God — something the Old Law promised through meticulous observance of innumerable prescriptions, yet could never accomplish — is no longer required. The ancient Law reveals sin and makes one conscious of it, but cannot remove it, unless one receives salvation through Jesus Christ, who surpasses the Law. Now, having entered fully into the grace Christ has gained for us through His sacrifice on the Cross, we may abound in mercy even in the face of an abundance of sin — including the sins formerly committed by many Christian converts, enumerated in the First Letter to the Corinthians:

Sanluri, 25 November 2025

______________________________

THE APOSTLE PAUL AND HOMOSEXUALITY: A HOMOPHOBIA BEFORE THE LETTER OR A MAN WHO MUST BE UNDERSTOOD? (first part)

And if we still have some hair left on our stomachs, we would come to discover that even Holy Scripture seems to be obsessed with homosexuality and homosexuals. We found out, For example, that David and Jonathan may have been more than just friends; that Sodom and Gomorrah are the capitals of LGBT+ love, and that even Jesus, with his apostles and with Lazarus of Bethany, I had something to hide; in summary, absolutely no one is saved anymore.

- Ecclesial news -

Author
Ivano Liguori, Ofm. Cap.

PDF print format article – article print format – article in printed format

Saint Paul, homophobic? No: simply a man of his time. How many Christians, when reading certain passages from Saint Paul, They must have had the impression that the Apostle of the Gentiles was too rigid, to the point of being pointed out — and not only today — as misogynist and homophobic. Issuing such a disparaging judgment about a person is totally inappropriate., especially when said person lived in the 1st century AD., so distant from us not only chronologically, but also sociologically and culturally.

It is worth clarifying: certain evaluations and expressions — including those that Saint Paul uses in his Letters — must always be read within the cultural context, social, historical and theological in which they were formulated, avoiding the error of judging events and people from the past with the criteria of modernity.

A healthy historical sense is essential to understand the issues and the men. and Saint Paul, man of his time and son of his social and religious culture, he never denied his identity; it's more, made her a source of pride even after her conversion to Christ, as the Acts of the Apostles and their Letters abundantly testify:

«I am Jewish, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but raised in this city, educated at the feet of Gamaliel according to the strict observance of the Law of our fathers, full of zeal for God, "as you all are today" (cf. Hch 22,3). "The tribune appeared and told him: “Dime, are you a roman citizen?”. He responded: "Yeah". replied the tribune: “I obtained that citizenship for a large sum of money”. Paul said: “Well, I have it from birth” (Hch 22,27-28). «Circumcised on the eighth day, of the lineage of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, Hebrew son of Hebrews; regarding the law, Pharisee; regarding zeal, persecutor of the Church; regarding justice based on the Law, irreproachable" (cf. Flp 3,5-6). "You have certainly heard of my conduct in the past in Judaism.": how he furiously persecuted the Church of God and devastated it, surpassing many of my compatriots of the same age in Judaism, extremely jealous of my parents' traditions." (cf. Ga 1,13-14).

As far as, instead, to certain ideological debates — especially on hot topics such as those appearing in St. Paul —, It is better to leave them limited to television debates, where noise and spectacle almost always reign. They are places where certain participants are deliberately invited to provoke confrontations, and where a faithful Christian - and even more so a priest - should never set foot, because it will always be seen as a circus attraction intended to entertain the public and on which all kinds of insults are unleashed. Doing theology—true theology—starting from the data of faith means acting with other intentions and with other means., And that is precisely what this article tries to do..

Now let's move on to some necessary elements for a correct understanding of certain aspects of sexuality. In my previous article (see HERE) I recalled — although without pretensions to exhaustiveness — the broad topic of homosexuality in the ancient world, and I stopped in particular to clarify the nature and type of sin of the city of Sodom according to the biblical text of Genesis 19,1-28 and the details offered by the Pontifical Biblical Commission. The sin of Sodom, that traditionally — at least since the 2nd century AD. (C). from now on — inaugurated in the common imagination the identification of homosexual relationships between men, It later came to also include certain heterosexual practices, specifically anal intercourse; hence it is possible to distinguish between homosexual sodomy and heterosexual sodomy (cf. Dictionary of the Italian language Treccani, voice sodomy).

This etymological clarification is necessary because it helps us delve deeper into the fact that sodomy does not refer only to the expression of a male homosexual practice in the strict sense., but also to the abuse of sexuality exercised in a heterosexual manner. A fortiori, The debate can no longer be limited to a question of sexual orientation — homo or heterosexual — but must be expanded to the broader exercise of human sexuality as such., and its understanding within the plan of salvation wanted by God.

Let us remember that sexuality has also been created by God as an element of salvation for men and women, and that in this sense the abuse — in its etymological meaning — cannot but generate various problems, regardless of whether it is a sexuality oriented towards the other sex or towards the same sex. The foundation of this vision is not a philosophical reflection on the natural order; is, rather, a properly theological reflection that seeks to understand creation — and, therefore, sexual and sexual relationships — within the design of the Alliance. This requires that humanity realize itself in the recognition of its Creator, recognition that implies respect for the differences that sustain society, especially the difference between man and woman (cf. Xavier Thévenot, Male homosexuality and Christian morality, 1985).

When the Creator is no longer recognized in any way, when you live your own humanity even if God were not given, there is a serious possibility of incurring the sin of the city of Sodom that, by not recognizing or welcoming God and the stranger, remains prey to all excess and violence: an especially serious condition, because it makes the person both executioner and victim at the same time.

I always remember what my sexual morality teacher warned during courses at the theology faculty. In the pastoral care of people with homosexual orientation, it is essential to broaden the field of understanding so as not to focus immediately, nor exclusively, in genital practice. You should not stop looking at the genitals, since human sexuality includes various factors; and although certain genital acts constitute an intrinsic and objective disorder, This should not become an impediment for the person who wishes to follow a human and Christian path., and that recognizes that genitalia oriented in a diverse or disordered way can constitute a real cause for shame or confusion. This is equally true for masturbation., for premarital relations and fornication. We thus understand that certain questions remain open, because the point of view of the Bible is not to address the particularities — and even less the singularities — of situations that, most of the time, They are conflictive and are located within a precise historical context.

It is necessary, well, calmly recognize the possibility — not at all remote — that a man or a woman could abuse their sexual identity and their own genitalia. Adequate understanding cannot dispense with a precise theology of corporeality, linked to the specific personality of each subject, to be able to suggest the best possible paths that allow you to live well and serenely in a relationship with yourself - whether heterosexual or homosexual - along with a deeper understanding of your own being.. The real hypocrisy in these sexual themes is found in the angelism that evaporates the obstacle, sublimates it, hides the problem and increases the suffering that remains hidden either under denial or under an appearance of spiritualization.

How was homosexuality perceived in Paul's time?? In the Letters of the Apostle homosexuality is not a central theme, although some – still today – refuse to believe it and perhaps even become scandalized. The Apostle is much more interested in announcing and preaching Christ crucified and resurrected, and the salvation that reaches every human being from Him within a renewal of life that is not merely chronological — from before to after —, that is to say, from sin to grace.

The three texts of the Letters of Saint Paul in which we can glimpse homosexual behavior are the following:

1 Corinthians 6,9-11: "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't fool them: nor the immoral, nor the idolaters, nor adulterers, not even the effeminate ones (malakoí), nor the sodomites (Arsenocites), not even the thieves, nor the misers, not even the drunks, Neither slanderers nor raptors will inherit the Kingdom of God. And this was some of you; but you have been washed, you have been sanctified, "You have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.". 1 Timothy 1,10: «We know that the Law is good, as long as it is used legitimately, considering that the Law is not established for the righteous, but for transgressors and rebels, for the wicked and sinners, for the sacrilegious and profaning, for parricides and matricides, for murderers, the fornicators, the sodomites (Arsenocites), human traffickers, the liars, perjurers and everything that opposes sound doctrine, according to the Gospel of the glory of the blessed God, which has been entrusted to me.. Romans 1,24-27: "Therefore God gave them over to impurity according to the desires of their hearts.", so that they dishonored their bodies among themselves, for they exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature instead of the Creator, that is blessed forever. Amen. That is why God gave them over to vile passions: His women changed natural relationships for those that are against nature. Likewise men, abandoning the natural relationship with the woman, they burned with desire for each other, "committing shameful acts man with man and receiving in themselves the payment they deserve for their error.".

Let us remember that sexuality has also been created by God as an element of salvation for men and women, and that in this sense the abuse — in its etymological meaning — cannot but generate various problems, regardless of whether it is a sexuality oriented towards the other sex or towards the same sex. The foundation of this vision is not a philosophical reflection on the natural order.; is, rather, a properly theological reflection that seeks to understand creation — and, therefore, sexual and sexual relationships—within the design of the Alliance. This requires that humanity realize itself in the recognition of its Creator, recognition that implies respect for the differences that sustain society, especially the difference between man and woman (cf. Xavier Thévenot, Male homosexuality and Christian morality, 1985).

We will have the opportunity to comment and analyze briefly these texts in the continuation of the article, but what is important to clarify now is that there is no text in Saint Paul where an explicit condemnation of a relationship homosexual as such, that is to say, a fully developed moral definition in the modern sense. What we do find are concrete terms that describe acts considered with disapproval: — malakoí (soft), literally “soft”, “effeminate”; — Arsenocites (queer), “those who have sexual relations with men as with a woman”. We will also have the opportunity, in the course of the article, to dwell on these terms more precisely; now it is necessary to grasp the distinction between sexuality and genitality, between corporeality and personality. The difference is subtle, but substantial — especially in our time —, where talking about homosexuality and the “right of citizenship” of homosexuality in the modern world inevitably leads to political ideology. But at the time when Saint Paul writes, this problem simply does not exist: It is a time free from any ideology and any puritan moralism.

Many contemporaries of Saint Paul They address the issue of homosexuality in the same way it was generally understood in the ancient world.. Numerous testimonies come from the Greco-Roman environment, as well as the pagan Mesopotamian peoples with whom the Jews came into contact. In some cities, sexual freedom was so widespread — let's think, For example, in Corinth — that the same place name became a synonym for debauchery. Saying that a man or woman lived “in the Corinthian way” meant describing fairly free and unscrupulous sexual behaviors.. And as we can read in Eva Cantarella's study, Bisexuality was an almost stable condition in the sexual style of ancient man; and it is precisely in this social and cultural environment where Saint Paul lives and develops his ministry as an apostle. (cf. Eva Cantarella, Second nature. Bisexuality in the ancient world, Feltrinelli, 2025).

For the Jews, the repulsion towards homosexual sexual behavior was well established in various documents. It would be interesting to ask ourselves if the written prescriptions later found a concrete application in real life., in the same way that happened with the Lex Scatinia of the Roman republican era. In Jewish society, These normative positions do not in themselves constitute a fully developed sexual ethic.; rather they correspond to the stigmatization of the pagan world, that Jewish apologetics maintained among the fundamental pillars of its identity and its effort to preserve its ethnic specificity.

The testimonies of what we say are found not only in canonical sources (cf. Lv 18,22; 20,13), but also in secular and non-canonical literature (cf. Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Levi XVII, 11; Philo; Sibylline Oracles).

The correct exegesis of the book of Leviticus — in the calls Purity Codes and of Holiness —, to which many delicate Christians appeal without knowledge, prohibited various practices with a single objective: the preservation of the identity of the chosen people. Purity and holiness had to be preserved through ritual separatism from everything that could “contaminate” the salvation experience of the people., from the founding events of the Exodus and Sinai. Normally, These separations included dietary and moral practices of neighboring peoples who did not participate in the alliance with God..

We can sum it up with a very precise irony: The Levitical Fathers sent you to hell for bingeing on shrimp or lobsters — foods considered ṭharèf —, but they didn't send you to hell if you had sex with a prostitute as long as it was strictly kasher.

In the same way, Today there are still Christians who see tattooing or homosexuality - practices that Leviticus classified as ṭharèf - an infallible sign of the devil., but they are unable to see the devil in his permanent lack of forgiveness, in his resentment, or in its division within the Church, through reckless judgments that tear apart the Body of Christ, especially in its poorest members and wounded by sin.

That is why the apostolic experience of Saint Paul is fundamental: makes us understand that the Promethean effort of human beings is no longer required to remain just., pure and holy before God, something that the old Law promised through the scrupulous observance of innumerable prescriptions, without ever managing to bring it to its fullness. The Old Law Reveals Sin and Makes It Conscious, but not able to delete it, unless salvation is received through Jesus Christ, that surpasses the law.

Now, having fully entered into grace that Christ has deserved for us with his sacrifice on the cross, we can overabound in mercy even in the face of the overabundance of sin and the concrete sins that many converted Christians had committed, and of which we find a list in the First Letter to the Corinthians:

«Do not deceive them: nor the immoral, nor the idolaters, nor adulterers, not even the effeminate ones, nor those who sleep with men, not even the thieves, nor the misers, not even the drunks, nor the defamers, nor will the rapacious inherit the Kingdom of God. And this was some of you; but you have been washed, you have been sanctified, "You have been justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God." (1 Color 6,9-11).

Sanluri, 25 November 2025

The books of Ivano Liguori, to access the book shop click on the cover

______________________

Dear Readers,
this magazine requires management costs that we have always faced only with your free offers. Those who wish to support our apostolic work can send us their contribution through the convenient and safe way PayPal by clicking below:

Cookie	Duration	Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional	11 months	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy	11 months	The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.

<img decoding="async" data-recalc-dims="1" class="alignnone" style="display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" src="https://i0.wp.com/isoladipatmos.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/STATISTICHE-2024.jpg?resize=250%2C161&#038;ssl=1" width="250" height="161" data-eio="l" />