"In the early days of Christianity the exercise of chastity was frequently combined with a close and romantic intimacy of affection between the sexes which shocked austere moralists"

Havelock Ellis, a popular figure in the study of human sexuality, delivers an interesting observation in this quote about the characteristics of early Christian practices and social norms. Here, Ellis is highlighting a complicated interaction between ascetic chastity and intimate social relationships within early Christianity.

In the nascent days of Christianity, chastity was a substantial virtue, representing a dedication to spiritual pureness and a disciplined life lacking physical desires. This virtue was not simply a personal endeavor however was connected deeply to the spiritual identity and neighborhood practices. However, Ellis points out that this pursuit of chastity did not exist in seclusion. It frequently existed side-by-side with intense, mentally charged relationships in between males and females. These bonds, characterized by deep affection and psychological intimacy, were not purely platonic nor totally without romantic elements.

For austere moralists-- those who advocated strict adherence to values that stressed restraint and self-denial-- this juxtaposition was disturbing. Such moralists likely saw chastity as an unambiguous renunciation of all elements of physical and psychological attraction. They would have viewed these close relationships as possible dangers to the perfect of chastity, fearing that affection could result in temptation or perhaps sin. This tension highlights a more comprehensive historical struggle within spiritual and ethical structures: stabilizing the neighborhood's spiritual worths against specific expressions of human connection and emotion.

Ellis's observation implicitly critiques the rigid moralists who failed to value the nuanced ways people experience affection and spirituality. It recommends that human relationships are diverse and can not be easily codified into basic classifications of 'ethical' or 'immoral.' Rather, they show a spectrum of feelings and connections that can exist side-by-side with religious perfects, even when such coexistence difficulties traditional moral expectations. In essence, the quote invites reflection on how human beings browse their requirement for emotional intimacy while adhering to spiritual or ethical concepts.