2011/01/01 by Theodore de Bruyn · 1 citation
Arts and Humanities · Social Sciences · #Biblical Studies and Interpretation #Historical and Linguistic Studies #Augustinian Studies and Theology
paper · doi:10.1163/157007211x561635
openalex publication_date 2011/01/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Abstract Scholarly discussions of patristic interpretations of Romans 1:26-27 have overlooked the fact that Ambrosiaster revised his reading of the passage. In the first version of his commentary on Romans, Ambrosiaster understands verse 26 to refer to “unnatural” sexual relations between women and men, whereas in the second and third versions he understands the verse to refer to “unnatural” sexual relations between women. The paper examines the differences between the three versions, explains Ambrosiaster’s remarks, and situates his interpretation within the moral outlook and exegetical tradition of Latin Christian writers.