A Brief Word About Tradition

 

 

One question which I believe essential to be answered is how to reconcile transsexualism with Holy Tradition.  Obviously many of the Church Fathers do not speak kindly of anything that is not a strictly genetic and monogamous heterosexual relationship.  Thus, how do we get these apparently two opposing extremes?

 

 

First of all, it must be understood that many of the references against practices were spiritual in nature.  For example, one word used “pederasty” often refered to the now (in)famous practice of older Greek and Roman men having a young boy with whom they would engage in sexual relations.  However, one must understand that contrary to common belief, this was often not done for personal enjoyment or passion.  Rather, it was seen as a spiritual bond between the man, who was the tutor, and the young boy, who was the student.  The tutor by it would teach the boy dominance and other masculine traits.  (It must be remembered that at this time, many regarded the man to be a more perfect form of human than the woman.  Thus, this was a purer relationship).  Also, the tutor’s semen would be said to contain special spiritual qualities.  Thus, many of the anti-homosexual comments which were used, probably had this pagan practice in mind

 

Certain saints acted as the other sex including St. Joan of Arc, St. Ksenia, etc.  There was also a saint that acted as a woman, but I do not remember her name.  If anyone knows, please tell me her’s and other such saints. 

 

There also exists the Eastern-Rite Adelphopoiesis of uniting two men.  Of course, I am mainly speaking about homosexuality, but my point is that the sexual relations were not as clear cut as some would like it to be.  

Other good points that must be remembered:

  • Enuchs were prevelant in the Byzantine Empire till its fall, and Castarati in the west up to the 19th century!
  • Blessed Augustine even allowed prostitution as a neccesary evil.  (I’m not endorsing prostitiution, but again my point is to show that this is not a black and white issue. )

 

I could write many more examples, but again there are many good articles.  One that I highly recommend is On Inclusiveness.

Anyways, it is not as clear cut in tradition as some think. 

Now, let us pretend that there were no examples of sexual varience in tradition.  It was neutral.  Let us then examine what tradition exactly is. 

Unlike the west, Orthodoxy has never felt the need to pass down dogma after dogma.  Strictly, the dogmas of the Church are the Seven Ecumenical Councils.  That is

  • The Nicene Creed: Jesus is truly God, begotten eternally from the Father and the Holy Spirit, truly God also procees from the Father.
  • Jesus is of two distinct natures (Fully God and Fully Man) in one person. 
  • Mary is the Ever-Virgin and Mother of God
  • Icons are of benefit to the believer and not heretical
  • Dogmas can only be determined by all the bishops in an ecummenical council.

Of course, I grossly over-simplified it; however, that is it in a nutshell.  Nothing more.  Nothing about the assumption of Mary, no great patriarchs and not transsexualism is wrong.  Many of those are termed theologuma (Private opinions).  Some may even be write, but there not neccesary beliefs for a Christian to hold.  Thus, what you are truly seeing with tradition that seems to speak against Transgenderism is not Tradition.  Christ never taught this.  It is an opinion gathered by theologicans based on there reading of scripture.  All I have writen is also theologuma.  It is all speculation.  The point though is that Christ never taught that cross dressing, transsexualism, homosexuality is wrong.  He condems certain things, but that is one which is never mentioned.  Thus, do not dwell on such a matter for long.  Rather, dwell on the true message of Christ.  A message that preeches inclusivness and love for one’s neighbour and love for one’s ownself.