John Chrysostom
Thus all passions are dishonorable, but mad love for males is especially dishonorable, because in these sins the soul suffers and is humiliated more than the body in diseases. See how the apostle here too deprives the Gentiles of excuse. He says of the women, as he said concerning doctrine, that they "changed the natural use." No one can say, he says, that they reached this point because they were deprived of the ordinary manner of union. Nor can anyone say that they gave themselves to such extraordinary frenzy because they could not satisfy their lust. One can change only what one has.
Read more (348 words)
The apostle said the same in his discourse concerning doctrine: "They changed the truth of God into a lie." Again he said the same of men, though somewhat differently: "Leaving the natural use of the female." He equally removes excuse from women and men. He accuses them not only because they had enjoyment and, leaving what they had, turned to something else. He also accuses them because, despising the natural manner, they fled to what is against nature. What is against nature is both more difficult and more unpleasant, so that it cannot even be called pleasure. True pleasure is according to nature. When God abandons, everything falls into disorder. For this reason among the Gentiles not only was the doctrine satanic, but the life was devilish. When the apostle spoke about doctrine, he pointed to the world and to human reason. He said that, by the power of understanding given by God and through the mediation of all that is visible, men could have risen to the Creator. But they did not want this and remained without excuse. Here, instead of the world, he points to pleasure according to nature. They could have enjoyed it with greater freedom and greater delight, being free from shame. But the Gentiles did not want this. Having insulted nature itself, they proved to be beyond every excuse. Most dishonorable of all is that women too strove after such unions, of which they ought to have been more ashamed than men. Here the prudence of Paul is worthy of wonder. While attacking two opposite things, he reached his goal with complete exactness. He wished both to speak decorously and to wound the hearer. Yet both were impossible, for one hindered the other. If he spoke decorously, he could not move the hearer. To strike him more powerfully, it was necessary to present the matter more clearly, in all its nakedness. But Paul's wise and holy soul precisely overcame both difficulties. He strengthened the accusation by naming nature and used this word as a kind of covering for the propriety of the speech.