Sodomy also includes homosexuality. Jo Ann Hoeppner Moran’s article (which can be
found on Dr. Hayton’s website), “The Roman de La Rose and Thirteenth Century
Prohibitions of Homosexuality”, informs the debate over homosexual relations existed in
the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries. Those accused of homosexual acts in the
middle ages were disciplined in various ways which included castration and capitol
punishment. Hoeppner Moran also includes an argument presented by John Boswell, a
historian from Yale University. He believes “homosexual behavior was reinterpreted in the
late twelfth and early thirteenth century Europe as unnatural and even horrific.”
Whereas in the early Christian Church, Boswell claims, same-sex marriages were not
considered offensive.

    John Boswells book Same-sex Unions in Pre-modern Europe, published in 1994,
added fuel to the contemporary debate of homosexuality and gay marriages. In his work,
he talks about the sin of Sodom: this represented homosexuality in medieval Europe, the
medieval rabbinical authority considered the sodomites evil, and the Rabbis also used
Genesis 19 as proof that sodomy is a sin. Boswell offers extensive research regarding the
issue of same-sex unions and informs, “Same-sex unions were commonplace in early
medieval Byzantine society, even among the prominent and notable. Of course, bringing to
light that homosexuality was once tolerated by early Christians made Boswells book
controversial, or as he calls it “taboo”.

    Shortly after Boswell’s book was published, Phillip Lyndon Reynolds (a theologian
from Emory University) offered a rebuttal in the “Christian Century“. In Regards to
homosexuality and the modern church he says, “Its suppression or marginalization in the
churches today would appear baseless and contrived. Is this the conclusion toward which
Boswell directs us?” Reynolds also attacks Boswell’s organization and his analysis of
ancient texts. He argues that he did not explain what he meant by same-sex union and he
thinks his book does not apply to gay marriages or gay union in the church today.

    Another article in “The New Republic“, written by Brent D. Shaw, gave a specific
example of Boswell’s textual misrepresentation. Shaw argues Boswell used an
ecclesiastical ritual adelphopoiesis to mean “union of two men”. According to Shaw this is
inaccurate. He believes it simply means “a creation of a brother”.What is interesting about
John Boswell’s extensive research, and the contemporary theologians who opposed his
work, is that it gives us an example of the timeless debate and passionate opinions
regarding the issue of homosexuality.