Same-Sex Unions In Premodern Europe by John Boswell

     Before the ink had even dried on the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision in favor of civil unions for same sex couples, Jan LaRue (no relation to Johnny), chief counsel at Concerned Women for America*, issued the following statement:

"Even if the legislators ignore the will of the people and institute some type of civil unions, a license can't create a marriage any more than a licensed electrician can produce power by taping two same-sex plugs together."


     I mention this for two reasons. The fist is, naturally, to mock Concerned Women for America. Bunch o' fucktards and closeted dykes. The second is to emphasize the lengths to which some people will go to find a rational for not legalizing same-sex unions. When all other reasoning fails, use the old "two same-sex plugs" analogy. Jesus, what did these people use for an analogy when they wanted to keep interracial marriage illegal? "Excuse me, your honor, but you if you mix mud and snow you'll get slush. I rest my case."

     Personally, I don't understand why this issue bothers Christians so much (Jews don't seem to care and Muslims aren't speaking out…about anything, because they know that we'll drag their asses off to Guantonomo Bay). After all, isn't the Rapture "just around the corner"? If Jesus is coming back in a week to ten day, max, they won't have to live next-door to Adam and Steve for very long.

     By the way, the above seems to have been Christianity's original take on the whole marriage thing. Originally, the Church was of the opinion that, since the Big J.C. was due back at any moment, the ideal marriage was one between a person and God (monks, nuns, and priests). Second place went to couples who married, but remained celibate (like Tom Cruise and Mimi Rogers. I'm just kidding, Tom. Please don't sue me.). By 1215, Jesus was ten centuries overdue , so the Church decided that it would probably be a good idea to make marriage (As we know it today - more-or-less) a sacrament.

     "1215?" you might say "Well that sure-as-shit leaves a lot of the early History of marriage unaccounted for." It sure does. And despite what Julia Roberts and the entire marriage industry would have you believe, that History is not always a pretty one.

     When people talk about defending the "Institution of Marriage" they forget to mention the biblical patriarchs who had hundreds of "wives" or the fact that, in many areas, abduction was a valid for of matrimony (The tradition of carrying the bride over the threshold most likely is a nod to marriage by abduction), or that for centuries marriage had nothing to do with love but was about property and bloodlines or the fact that Saint Augustine (From whom the early Church got many of it's ideas about marriage) had a concubine for fifteen years (with whom he had a son) whom he "dismissed" so that he could marry a wealthy woman.

     Oh, and they tend to forget that for hundreds of years, the Church had a ceremony for marrying people of the same sex.

     Extraordinary claims, like the one above, require extraordinary evidence (The same way that extraordinary crimes require extraordinary crime fighters - the Avengers). In his incredibly well researched book , Same-Sex Unions In Premodern Europe, the late John Boswell set out to prove that not only did the Church once have such a ceremony, but it was not as uncommon as one might think. This was one of the greatest uphill battles of all time.

     Boswell's first obstacle was language. Or, to be more specific, the Greek language. For example, the Greeks tended to use erwj ("passionate love) and filia ("friendship") interchangeably. So Boswell started off behind the eight ball, so to speak. Add to this the almost total lack of early writing about female sexuality (Since women were mostly seen as property, their sexuality was deemed inconsequential) and prevailing modern prejudices about the ancient world (For example, may people still believe that ancient Rome was one giant orgy) and you'll get some idea of the mountain that Boswell had to scale. So if you pick up Same-Sex Unions In Premodern Europe hoping to find a smoking gun, you may be disappointed. However, there is enough circumstantial evidence, in my learned (and occasionally sober) opinion to prove Boswell right.

     What kind of evidence? Well, there's implied evidence. For example, Boswell does a great job of proving the existence of same-sex unions in "pagan" Europe. So, since the Christian Church's rituals slowly began to replace the old pagan rituals (the transformation for Pagan to Christian didn't happen in one fell swoop.) it only stands to reason that Christians would've also performed same-sex unions. And then there's more concrete evidence. Like the butt lovin' story of Saints Serge and Bacchus.

     The dynamic duo lived in late third/early fourth century Rome. They were soldiers and close friends of the emperor. They were also Christians who were untied in their love for each other:

It was then that Serge and Bacchus, like stars shining joyously over the Earth, radiating the light of…faith in…Jesus Christ, began to grace the place. Being as one in their love for Christ, they were also undivided from each other in the army of the world, united not in the way of nature, but in the manner of faith, always singing and saying, "Behold, how good it is for brothers to abide in oneness."


     OK. That's kinda gay. But it really doesn't prove anything…yet. When the emperor ordered Serge and Bacchus to make offerings to idols, they refused:

Immediately [the emperor] ordered their belts cut off, their tunics and all other military garb removed …and women's clothing placed on them; thus they were paraded through the middle of the city.


     I think we can all see the point the emperor was trying to make. Bacchus was put to death first. He was flogged to death. The effort is said to have been so intense that it exhausted his executioner. Alone and imprisoned, Serge called out "No longer, brother and fellow soldier, will we chant together, 'Behold, how good and pleasant it is for brothers to abide in oneness!' You have been unyoked from me, leaving me alone on earth, now single, without comfort."

     It is then that Bacchus supposedly appeared to him and said "Why do you grieve and mourn, brother? If I have been taken from your body, I am still with you in the bond of union, chanting and reciting 'I will run the way of thy commandments, when thou shall enlarge my heart'

     "Hurry then, yourself, brother, through beautiful and perfect confession to pursue and obtain me, when you have finished the course. For the crown of justice for me is to be with you."

     In the morning, Serge was forced to run almost ten miles wearing shoes into which nails had been driven. He was later beheaded.

     It's really quite a sad and touching story. It's a shame that more people don't know it.



* RATYHTL is NOT responsible for any damage (mental or physical) suffered by visiting the Concerned Women for America web site.