Last week in the Wicker Park Grace Movie Group we watched the next 10 minutes of A Fish Out of Water, and talked about the Holiness Codes of Leviticus, and the Romans 1 text which talks about “natural” and “unnatural” sexuality.

The Holiness Codes, of which Leviticus 18:22 is a part, gave guidelines to the Israelite people of history about how to make their lives consecrated within the ritual system they followed. To follow this system gave the people a communal identity. To break the codes, to not follow the rules, was to make something to/ebah. This Hebrew word gets translated as “abomination.” It is an abomination to touch the skin of a dead pig (hence, football would be an abomination). It is toebah to mix different kinds of fibers together (for example, cotton-polyester.) It is toebah to mix different kinds of seeds into one furrow of a garden. How do we decide which of these codes still apply today?

One new thing I learned is that having sex with a woman was the way a man asserted that he owned her, as women were the property of men in those days. So the text that says a man should not lie with a man as with a woman might also be saying, “a man cannot own a man the way a man can own a woman.” Is this relevant today?

About Romans 1:26-27, the film focusses on the meaning of the word “natural,” which did not mean “morally wrong”, but meant “culturally expected.” Paul, who wrote Romans, also said that it is unnatural for a man to have long hair. Did he believe that it was morally wrong for a man to have long hair? Do we? Personally, I think it is good and healthy that cultural expectations change over time.

The film also points out that “homosexuality” is found in the “natural” world–it is observed among many kinds of higher mammals.

At the discussion group we handed out in-depth papers for people who want to study these texts more thoroughly. (There’s a lot more to say about them!) Here’s the enotes which includes links to the study guides we’re using.