Meaning: The quote by Havelock Ellis, a psychologist and writer, touches upon a fascinating aspect of the early Christian era: the complex relationship between chastity and romantic intimacy. To fully grasp the significance of this quote, it is essential to delve into the historical context of early Christianity and the societal norms prevalent during that time.

During the early days of Christianity, a strong emphasis was placed on the virtue of chastity. The teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles underscored the importance of purity and self-restraint, particularly in matters of sexuality. This emphasis on chastity was rooted in the belief that adhering to moral and ethical principles would lead to spiritual purity and a closer relationship with God.

However, the quote by Havelock Ellis suggests that alongside the exercise of chastity, there existed a "close and romantic intimacy of affection between the sexes" within early Christian communities. This intimate affection may have included expressions of love, emotional closeness, and a deep bond between individuals of opposite sexes. Ellis further notes that this romantic intimacy was shocking to austere moralists of the time.

The juxtaposition of chastity and romantic intimacy within early Christianity raises intriguing questions about the dynamics of relationships and societal expectations during that era. It challenges the common perception that strict adherence to chastity precluded any form of romantic or intimate connection between individuals. Instead, it hints at a more nuanced and complex reality where emotional closeness and affection were intertwined with ideals of chastity.

One possible interpretation of Ellis's observation is that within early Christian communities, individuals sought to navigate the delicate balance between upholding the values of chastity while also experiencing deep and meaningful connections with one another. This suggests that the early Christians grappled with the tension between the spiritual pursuit of purity and the natural human inclination towards intimacy and affection.

Moreover, the quote alludes to the existence of differing perspectives within early Christian society. While some individuals may have embraced the intertwining of chastity and romantic intimacy, others, described as "austere moralists," were evidently alarmed or scandalized by such expressions of affection between the sexes. This points to the existence of moral and social tensions within the early Christian community regarding the appropriate boundaries of romantic relationships and expressions of intimacy.

It is important to consider the broader societal and cultural context in which early Christianity emerged. The Greco-Roman world, with its diverse traditions and cultural practices, likely influenced the ways in which early Christians understood and navigated issues of chastity and romantic intimacy. Additionally, the presence of various philosophical and religious schools of thought, each with its own teachings on morality and human relationships, would have contributed to the complex tapestry of beliefs and practices within early Christian communities.

In conclusion, Havelock Ellis's quote offers a thought-provoking glimpse into the intricate interplay of chastity and romantic intimacy within early Christianity. It prompts us to reconsider our assumptions about the nature of relationships and moral values in the ancient world, and invites further exploration of the multifaceted dynamics at play within early Christian communities. By examining the historical, cultural, and philosophical contexts surrounding this quote, we can gain a deeper understanding of the complexities inherent in the human experience of love, intimacy, and moral ideals in the early days of Christianity.