Sexual Fidelity – Alvin Schmidt

Transcript (edited for readability).

As I said a moment ago, ordinarily you're supposed to say a funny or two, but I'm not very good at funny, so I won't say one — I'm going right to my topic. I appreciate being here, and I hope what I will be able to share with you will benefit the good Lord's church, and you personally, as well.

My topic that was assigned to me was sexual fidelity in a decadent society: lessons from the early Christians. We have all heard the old saying, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." However, when the Christians in the earliest years of Christianity came to Rome, they did not do as the Romans did. The pagan practices they encountered in Rome's decadent culture appalled them, and so they were not about to imitate the pagan Romans.

They encountered numerous sinful, immoral customs, all culturally established — for instance, enjoying games when men died as a result of fighting wild beasts in Rome's many amphitheaters; killing men in Rome's gladiatorial contests; the pagan practice of cremating deceased human beings; the miming of sexual acts in Roman theaters; the degrading value assigned to marriage; and the widely accepted practice of homosexuality, together with the practice of pederasty, as it was known in those days, as love, and supposedly compatible with Roman ideology and philosophy.

The widespread, licentious sex practices — at least a century before St. Paul's time — were already threatening the institution of marriage in Roman society. Therefore, Emperor Caesar Augustus, in 18 BC, decreed an anti-adultery law that tried to curb people's addiction to widespread illicit sex. But this law had little or no effect, primarily because it only punished a wife, and never the husband, in an adulterous act. Roman marriages had badly deteriorated. They had become, according to one historian, quote, "a loose and voluntary compact; religious and civic rites were no longer essential," end quote. Another historian said that marriage among the Romans was "detested as a disagreeable necessity," end quote.

The debasement of sex in Roman culture has now been pictorially corroborated archaeologically. A recent book by John Clarke, Looking at Lovemaking: The Construction of Sexuality in Roman Art from 100 BC to 250 AD, depicts numerous relief portraits of different sexual activities visually depicted on household items such as pottery, vases, frescoes, and other artifacts. Children grew up in households seeing these visual portrayals of heterosexual acts, oral sex, group sex — men and women in sexual intercourse, two men and two women copulating, fellatio scenes, homosexual sex including man-boy love acts — all visible on these household items. Thus, when children reached the age of puberty, they imitated what they had seen and had now internalized regarding the different ways of human sexual behavior. This was the world that the Christians stepped into.

In the second century AD, the pagan orator and satirist Juvenal said that his society had lost its sense of shame through its widespread addiction to promiscuous and impure acts, in his book Satire 6. He mentioned sexually loose women who lecherously gave themselves to gladiators, actors, comedians, and others who were in the public spotlight. Another Roman writer, Ovid, in his book The Art of Love, notes that male-female sexual relations had become sadistic and masochistic; in another of his books he reveals how heterosexual love for the Romans had turned into a sport. Still another Roman writer, Catullus, who died in 54 BC — a Roman poet as well — in the Palatine Anthology refers to fellow citizens practicing group sex. This kind of sexual behavior was also noted and condemned by the early church father Tertullian, in his book De Spectaculis, translated "Concerning Public Shows," written in the last decade of the second century.

Decadent sexuality in Roman culture was also common in the lives of its emperors — hence the Roman saying, "Qualis rex, talis grex," translated "like king, like people." For example, Suetonius, a Roman biographer of the emperors, reports that Emperor Tiberius, who, by the way, ruled at the time of Christ's crucifixion, often had nude women wait on tables at which he dined. Suetonius also reports that Emperor Caligula, who succeeded Tiberius, had a licentious sex life given to habitual incest with all of his sisters. Emperor Titus, who ruled until 81 AD, liked to surround himself with catamites and eunuchs for sexual enjoyment. And Emperor Domitian, who ruled from 81 to 96 — under whose reign there was one of the first severe Christian persecutions — similar to Caligula, also engaged in sexual debauchery of all kinds, including incest.

According to one historian, quote, "There was nothing in which the Romans did not indulge which they thought a disgrace," end quote. They had no compunctions or guilt feelings about their immoral sexual behavior, for, unlike Christianity, paganism did not define these acts as sinful or immoral. Sexual decadence was so pronounced that a chaste Roman wife was often a rarity, and according to the second-century historian Tacitus, many married women of high-ranking social families even asked to have their names registered in the public registry as prostitutes, so that they might not be punished for adultery.

Catullus, whom I mentioned a moment ago, revealed that the Roman wedding ritual in his day had become a facetious mockery, evidently because of the low regard Roman culture had for marriage as a whole. One historian's analysis says that the Roman wedding was so degraded that it did not improve until Constantine the Great, the first Christian emperor, revolutionized Rome's view of marriage, when he brought it, quote, "more in line with Christian ideas," end quote. Christians, unlike the Romans, saw marriage as undefiled; thus the wedding ceremony preceding it was accorded dignity and honor — a dignity and honor still largely present in Western societies, even though that dignified ceremony is often soon forgotten as a result of many American divorce proceedings. The dignity and honor of the marriage ceremony, I might add, is now especially tarnished and blemished by homosexual marriage.

Sexually decadent behavior surfaced also in the Corinthian church. In about 55 AD, the no-holds-barred practice of Greco-Roman sexual immorality reared its ugly head in the Corinthian church; some members of this church had reverted to their culture's decadent practices. Earlier, in 51 AD, Paul had told the Christians in Thessalonica to abstain from porneia, often translated "sexual immorality" — it has also sometimes been translated "fornication," which is not a good way of translating it. But he cited no examples in Thessalonica of the sinful behavior pertaining to porneia; evidently it was not a major problem in that church. However, when he wrote to the Christians in Corinth, about 55 AD, he specifically cited porneia, adultery, homosexuality, and sodomy in 1 Corinthians 6, and to the Christians in Galatia, Ephesus, Colossae, and Rome, Paul again named the sinful acts of porneia — in Galatians 5:19, Ephesians 5:3, Colossians 3:5, and Romans 1:29.

Some scholars say that Paul's use of the term porneia in these references indicates he saw it as a unique sin, unlike all other sins. It appears Paul regarded porneia as a sin that affected not only the body of the person who committed it, but a sin that also harmed the communal body, the church of God — which made it even more tragic. For in 1 Corinthians 6:19–20, Paul says that Christians are the temple in which the Holy Spirit dwells, and hence sexual deviancy cannot take place in the life of a Christian; such behavior destroys, he says, the temple in the human body.

St. Paul had founded the Corinthian church in 51 AD, and then spent eighteen months there teaching and preaching before departing for Ephesus. But only four short years later, some major moral breaches surfaced in the Corinthian church. While it is not my intention to explore why or how these moral breaches happened, it is nevertheless difficult not to wonder why or how these moral deviations occurred. Were the Corinthians inadequately catechized? Did the Corinthian church have poor leadership after Paul left? Were there unusual forces at play in changing the convictions of many members? I do not know the answers to these questions, nor does anyone else.

The effect of Paul's condemning of sexual immorality: along with admonishing the Corinthian church, Paul also condemned sexual immorality, porneia, again, as we have just heard, in the letters to the Christians in Ephesus, Galatia, Colossae, and Rome. However, in his letter to the Christians in Rome, he focused on one particular sin — homosexual behavior — and he added that those who engaged in it, whether men or women, had departed from the truth of God. For in this sinful act they had denied God's created order by exchanging the natural use of sex — namely, male-female sexual complementarity. Thus God gave them up, as Paul says, to vile passions, Romans 1:25–26.

Here it is important to note that although God tolerated plural, polygamous marriages in the Old Testament, he did not tolerate homosexual behavior. Thus Paul reflected what Moses wrote in Leviticus 18 and Leviticus 20, two references that strongly condemn homosexual behavior.

Paul's denunciation of immoral sex acts in the epistles was not lost on the early Christians, for soon some Christians wrote extra-biblical documents that reinforced his teachings. One such document, the Didache — a Christian manual written about 100 AD, the oldest non-New Testament document in existence, only found in 1871 — stated that there are two ways facing every Christian: the way of life and the way of death. Regarding the way of life, the Didache gives a long list of moral imperatives. The list begins with, quote, "Do not murder. Do not commit adultery. Do not engage in pederasty. Do not engage in sexual immorality" — porneia, again. Similarly, the Epistle of Barnabas, written in the early second century, exhorted Christians, quote, "Do not engage in sexual immorality, porneia; do not commit adultery; do not engage in pederasty," end quote.

Clearly these extra-biblical citations reflected what St. Paul had impressed on the Christians in his epistles, and the early Christians soon after his time. Thus by the second century, Christians were widely recognized by the pagan Romans for living morally upright lives, even though they were still a culturally despised people. Another early Christian document, the Epistle to Diognetus, late second century, told Diognetus, a Roman official, quote, "They, the Christians, marry like everyone else, and they have children, but they do not abandon them once they are born. They share their meals, but not their wives. They are found in the flesh, but do not live according to the flesh," end quote.

In a similar vein, we find Aristides, a second-century Christian philosopher in Athens, who wrote to the Emperor Antoninus Pius, who ruled between 138 and 147, defending the persecuted Christians. He told the emperor that Christians, along with living upright lives, quote, "Do not commit adultery or fornication," end quote. Aristides further stated that "the Christian wives, O Emperor, are pure as virgins, and their daughters are modest, and their men abstain from all unlawful wedlock and from all impurity," end quote. Hence, it is not surprising that by the mid-fourth century, the Greek sophist Libanius, a pagan friend of the Emperor Julian the Apostate, wrote, "What women these Christians have!"

The church fathers supported Paul's condemnation of sexual immorality. Some prominent church fathers, such as Polycarp, the Bishop of Smyrna, martyred in 156, wrote to the Philippian Christians urging them to be morally upright. He addressed young men, telling them, quote, "The sexually immoral, or effeminate, or male prostitutes will not inherit the kingdom of God," end quote — a clear reference to 1 Corinthians 6:9. Then, in the last decade of the second century, Tertullian, an African lay theologian, lawyer, and church father, argued for biblical morality in opposition to, quote, "the sexual immorality of the pagan Romans," as he put it. In the early fifth century, in the East, John Chrysostom, who died in 407, referred to Paul's denunciation of homosexuality in the first chapter of Romans, condemned all sexual immorality, and specifically cited homosexuality as, quote, "the worst of human passions," end quote. A little later, St. Augustine, also in the early fifth century, in his Confessions, spoke against all sexual immorality, and added that God did not create men for homosexual behavior. Additional church fathers could be cited, but I don't have the time.

So next, let me go to the church councils that supported Paul's condemnation of sexual immorality. In addition to the church fathers, we find church councils supporting St. Paul's condemnation of all sexual immoralities. The first council to meet was the Synod of Elvira, sometime between 306 and 309, in Spain. It issued eight canons addressing the sin of adultery, and Canon 71 stated, quote, "Those who sexually abuse boys may not commune even when death approaches," end quote. Then, in 314, the Council of Ancyra, now Ankara, Turkey, convened; it also condemned porneia, and issued two canons condemning bestiality as well — and I might add, Roman pictorial art depicts bestiality involving women and beasts.

Following these councils, other councils over the centuries addressed recurring sexually immoral behavior among some erring Christians in the church. The most plaguing sexual problem was homosexual activity. These were consistently condemned, so much so that by the Middle Ages, the Council of Paris in 1212 even advocated the death penalty for this sexually inverted behavior — apparently influenced by Paul's words that homosexuals are, quote, "deserving of death," Romans 1:32. In the following centuries, additional councils, too numerous to mention, condemned homosexual behavior.

The Christian emperors, in addition to the councils, supported Paul's condemnation of sexual immorality. As some of you know, in the first three hundred years of the church's existence, Christians were often severely persecuted in the Roman Empire — these centuries were grim, thousands were imprisoned, tortured, and often executed; there were ten major waves of persecution in those first three hundred years. Then, in 313, the Edict of Milan, brought about by Constantine the Great, the Roman emperor, gave legal recognition to Christianity. He had become sole emperor the year before, in 312, and also converted to Christianity that same year, just before he defeated Maxentius, a usurping emperor, at the Milvian Bridge in Rome on October 28, 312.

Constantine did much to promote Christianity — too much for me to mention here — but germane to our topic, he suppressed pagan homosexual priests, according to Eusebius's book The Life of Constantine. Then, in 342, Emperors Constantius II and Constans, two sons of Constantine, now holding the emperorship, decreed the death penalty for a man who took the passive role in sex. And in 390, Emperor Theodosius I, together with Valentinian II and Arcadius, issued an edict that criminalized homosexual behavior, punishable by burning. Following these emperors, other emperors also took strong stands against homosexual offenses. Thus, by the eleventh century, laws against homosexual activity, including pederasty, were enacted in every country in the Western world. These laws remained on the books until the last two or three decades, when they were repealed, often by judicial edict — and we live in that era now.

Of all the anti-sexual-immorality laws in the West, including laws against homosexual acts, only one still remains: the law against pederasty, today known as pedophilia, or the sexual molestation of an underage boy or girl. How long it will remain is not certain, for some countries have in recent years lowered the age of consent for man-boy sex to fourteen, including in Canada and most European countries. Moreover, we have in the United States and Canada an organization known as the North American Man/Boy Love Association, often abbreviated NAMBLA. It has over one million members, who actively engage in promoting the elimination of our countries' laws outlawing pedophilia. How long it will take, I don't know, but the best predictor of the future is the past.

The impact of the Enlightenment, also called the Age of Reason, on Western culture: in the mid-seventeenth century, a new intellectual movement known as the Enlightenment rose in the West. Its proponents argued that knowledge and meaning in life were to be acquired from the use of human reason, rather than from biblical authority and tradition. Its advocates rejected biblical revelation and the miracles recorded in the Bible. This ideology also resulted in questioning and rejecting many of Christianity's longstanding, biblically based practices, including biblical morality.

The great reversal — the West's return to pagan immorality: the Enlightenment had an immense impact on the West. It brought about a great reversal in biblical morality by returning the West to many of Rome's pagan practices. Moreover, these practices are not just confined to immoral sexual behavior, which we might think, but if we do, we're in error. The galloping increase in the rate of Christians in the West today cremating the dead bodies of their loved ones is just another example. Cremation, an old pagan custom, was consistently and vehemently condemned by Christians for 1,960 years, without exception. Today we have denominations — not just liberal, but conservative ones as well — who now accept and tolerate this particular practice, including our own LCMS, a fact I document in my most recent book: this biblically forbidden, God-forbidden practice is now practiced, like many other deviations from the morality — or, rather, immorality — that Christians so strongly resisted when they came to Rome.

But let me return today's focus to sexual immorality. In doing so, we need to ask: why and how did this great reversal happen?

The rejection of Christianity's condemnation of homosexuality — first example: by the latter half of the 1800s, the Enlightenment had produced individuals who argued that sexually inverted human behavior, particularly homosexual behavior, should be socially and culturally accepted. The Austro-Hungarian-born Karl Maria Kertbeny — who changed his name from Karl Maria Benkert — was the first known Western homosexual to argue that the acceptance of sexually inverted behavior should be embraced. In 1869 he coined the words "homosexual," "heterosexual," "monosexual," "heterogenic," and "normalsexual." He chose the word "homosexual" to replace the word "sodomy," which at that time was most commonly used for homosexuality.

In 1886, Richard Freiherr von Krafft-Ebing published Psychopathia Sexualis. This book is regarded by many as having established sexology as a scientific study. Then, in 1897, Havelock Ellis, a British physician and radical psychologist, co-authored the book titled Sexual Inversion — and by "sexual inversion" he did not see the term as negative at all. He was also the first to speak of, quote, "gender identity," unquote — a phenomenon that, as we know, has now been legitimated in our culture as well.

Then, in 1914, Magnus Hirschfeld, a German physician, published The Homosexuality of Men and Women. In 1920 he published the second edition of this book — the book runs to 1,200 pages. If you want to really understand homosexual behavior in the West at that point, read those 1,200 pages, immensely well done in terms of scholarly precision. The 1,200 pages cover the history of the Greeks and Romans up to the present day of his own existence.

Skipping over some sexologists such as, or after, Hirschfeld, such as Sigmund Freud, we now come to the United States — specifically to Alfred Kinsey, who, at Indiana University, published research on sexual behavior that caught the world's attention in 1948. He co-authored his findings in an 800-page book titled Sexual Behavior in the Human Male; five years later he published Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. His flawed, even fraudulent, research reported the following figures — they're not really accurate, but that's what was reported: that 69 percent of American men had had sex with prostitutes; 50 percent of men had committed adultery; 25 percent of married women had committed adultery; 87 percent of single pregnant women had had abortions; and 25 percent of married women had also had abortions.

These statistics led many to conclude that if certain sexual behavior, which for centuries was defined as immoral, is now so widespread and common, it must be normal and acceptable, and thus not morally wrong. This conclusion, by the way, a philosopher would call the "is-ought" fallacy — expressed in simple language, the fallacy means that if something exists, it must be normal. Hence, many Americans and others no longer see the sexually deviant behaviors reported by Kinsey as morally wrong. This faulty conclusion, together with the decline of biblically based Christian knowledge and conviction, also eventually resulted in the acceptance of homosexual behavior. And by the way, Kinsey himself was a pronounced homosexual, though hidden for most of his life — revealed now in some very interesting and illuminating books. And, of course, a lot of people today who call themselves Christians also accept homosexuality without seeing it as a sinful act.

The Enlightenment's impact on the churches: the Enlightenment's influence did not leave the Christian churches and their theology untouched. Before long it affected how the Bible's teachings were viewed and understood. Theologians in many denominations began to accept a historical-critical method of biblical interpretation. This method eventually resulted in some mainline denominations accepting sexual behaviors condemned in the Bible by centuries of Christian teaching. First, these denominations began accepting homosexuality; next, they accepted known homosexuals as clergy; then they accepted homosexual marriage; and after that came the acceptance of transgenderism. And, as one might have predicted, these denominations soon allowed homosexual clergy to marry one another. And more recently, the ELCA, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, for example, has even accepted a transgender pastor by placing him on its clergy roster. In short, these denominations embraced the arguments made by Kertbeny, Hirschfeld, Kinsey, and other sexual radicals. Centuries of biblical Christian condemnation of homosexuality was unequivocally and unabashedly rejected.

What can we learn from the early Christians? Having intensely studied the history of early Christianity, particularly over the last twenty years — which even resulted in my book a few years ago, How Christianity Changed the World — I never cease to be amazed when I look at the early Christians, at their strong conviction and their stalwartness — for instance, how they unfailingly resisted conforming to pagan practices such as abortion, child abandonment, infanticide, divorce, suicide, and — I'll mention it one more time — cremation.

What we can learn from them is the historical fact that, from their time on, these pagan practices were continually seen as anti-biblical and immoral by all Christians worldwide, up until World War II — in other words, the mid-1940s. To be sure, the church has always had some "half-Christians," as Origen once said in the third century, and it also experienced some apostates who denied the faith. There were also numerous doctrinal conflicts that prompted church councils to resolve and correct doctrinal errors. But when it came to the matter of sexually immoral behavior, the early Christians, and their spiritual descendants for centuries, did not waver. What is amazing is their stalwartness, which, as noted earlier, even influenced the first Christian emperors from the fourth century on, and the centuries following as well.

Pastors need to teach and preach biblical morality — this is one thing we can learn from the early Christians. This is exactly what we need to remember today: what the early Christians did. When we hear St. Paul, for example, defending biblical morality, and what we heard from the Didache, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Epistle to Diognetus — the early Christians took to heart St. Paul's words to young Timothy, when he told him that pastors and other leaders in the church must be, quote, "apt to teach," and that they must, quote, "do so with sound doctrine, and exhort and rebuke the gainsayers." Early Christianity's teaching and preaching, which underscored biblical morality consistent with Christians practicing sexual fidelity, made a revolutionary difference in the world in the past.

Paul Veyne, a non-Christian writer in France, in his recent book When the World Became Christian, states that many Romans were, quote, "moved by the passionate morality of the Christians. Their God was worshiped not with offerings, or with the sacrifice of victims, but with obedience to his law." The cardinal role that morality played in Christianity, he says, was largely alien to paganism — it was a feature of Christianity that made it, he says, different, end quote. Veyne also says, "I was greatly surprised to find that Christian texts are more prone to dwell on morality than on love." And he further adds, "Love did occupy the subconscious minds of believers and motivated their faith, but their primary preoccupation was morality, and it was this that they needed, and did, demonstrate. And they did." But today, said Veyne, quote, "The morality practiced by most Christians is indistinguishable from the general social morality of our age," end quote.

Veyne is right. Permit me to cite a couple of examples in support of his observation. First, numerous Christians today, including many Lutherans, similar to secularists and non-Christians, are sexually cohabiting outside of marriage. The Sixth Commandment seems to have evaporated even among many who claim to be Christian. St. Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 6:9–10, where he lists those who practice sexual immorality and equates it with idolaters and thieves, and then says, quote, "They will not inherit the kingdom of God," end quote — these words have little or no impact relative to the Sixth Commandment. And I might add that some pastors knowingly permit cohabiting couples to receive the Lord's Supper, while other pastors who bar a cohabiting couple from the Lord's Supper sometimes meet resistance from the board of elders. They have forgotten, quote, "If you love me," as Jesus said, "keep my commandments," end quote — and they have ignored these words, if they ever even knew them.

Second, research shows that marital divorce, clearly condemned by the early Christians, is basically as common among Christians today as among non-Christians — some studies indicate it's even higher — with little or no apparent repentance when it happens; most simply get married again. In fact, to mention the sinfulness of divorce in a Christian sermon is to risk offending many who have been through one.

Third, Christians are increasingly accepting homosexuality and homosexual marriage. The Pew Research Center, in a study done July 2nd of this year, reported that 63 percent of American Protestants see no conflict between their religious beliefs and homosexual marriage. And, as you may have heard, this past May, 62 percent of voters in Catholic Ireland voted to legalize homosexual marriage. This makes me often think of what our Lord said: "When the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?"

Pastors need to preach didactic sermons — this is the second thing we can learn from the early Christians. In my, by God's blessing, long life, in which I was called to be a college professor upon seminary graduation, I have been in the pew more than in the pulpit, and have heard countless sermons in LCMS churches in different parts of the country. I have also been privileged to speak to numerous pastoral conferences at the circuit and district level in many different states, and have heard sermons in that setting as well. But in all too many instances, I have heard primarily sermons that were devotional rather than didactic — meaning they did not teach the parishioners in the pews biblical facts and verities, including sexual fidelity, in the context of biblical morality. Sitting in the pew, I never once heard a sermon preached on the Sixth Commandment, or on any other commandment, for that matter.

This, in part, explains why our people do not know — or do not think they need to know — how to defend Christianity's rejection of homosexuality, as one example. We in the LCMS may have rested on our laurels, so to speak, by taking for granted the West's longstanding rejection of homosexuality and other kinds of sexual immorality — which, until recently, were seen as contrary to nature, biblically wrong, and, yes, sinful. But those days are gone.

So, brethren, take Sunday morning's Bible class into the pulpit. Do it for two reasons. One: as you very well know, in every LCMS congregation the vast majority of members, sad to say, do not come to Bible class — they either think they already know what the Bible teaches, or they do not care to know. What other conclusion can we draw? So take the Bible class into the pulpit, do it every Sunday, and preach didactic sermons — sermons that teach. For example, preach on the Ten Commandments, because most members have only a vague knowledge of these commandments. They may know the commandment that says, "Thou shalt not murder," "You shall not steal," "You shall honor your father and mother," and perhaps they might also know "You shall not commit adultery." But ask them what number that commandment is, and I don't know that they have a clue — I have tried this many times with lifelong members.

Again, we need didactic preaching. And, by the way, when we talk about not knowing the commandments — they certainly don't know Luther's explanations of those commandments either. Again, in order for them to know them, we need to preach didactic sermons. And we need to remember what Paul told Timothy in another context: "I charge you, preach the word, persist in it whether it is convenient or not. Convince, rebuke, correct, and encourage, with patience and teaching," end quote.

Some concluding comments. To learn from the early Christians, we can do no better than to remember what St. Paul taught Timothy: he told him that a time will come when people will no longer tolerate sound teaching, but according to their own desires they will gather around themselves teachers, because they have itching ears, to hear something new. So they will turn away from hearing the truth to accept falsehoods. Today's acceptance of homosexual marriage, for example, is such a falsehood, accepted in the name of so-called tolerance and political correctness. It is also a falsehood because its acceptance shows a gross ignorance of some hard scientific facts, not made known by the politically correct media. Let me explain and cite them.

To approve of homosexuality is to approve of a lifestyle that drastically lowers the life expectancy of homosexuals. You never hear that, right? Let me get more specific. In 1994, a scientific study called Omega published data showing that the life expectancy of homosexual men with AIDS was thirty-nine years; for homosexual men without AIDS, it was forty-two years; and for married heterosexual men, it was seventy-five years. Thus legalizing homosexual marriage means promoters of homosexuality are agreeing to a reduction in homosexual life expectancy of some thirty years.

Indeed, the leftist media pejoratively and falsely labels opponents — like you and me — of homosexuality as "homophobes," a label which, to leftists, takes the Greek word "phobia," which used to mean "fear," but to them the word "phobia" today means an unfounded fear. So when you and I are anti-homosexual, we are called guilty of homophobia, meaning we fear something that is, in reality, not something to be feared. That's what the term means today, not what it really meant once in the Greek language. Is it homophobia to say, or to be concerned about, the reduction of thirty years in the life of homosexuals? I think not. And, further, if opponents are "homophobes" as they call us, then the advocates of homosexuality must be "homophiles." Unfortunately, the latter is never heard in the mass media, for it would describe most reporters.

Finally, let us also remember St. Peter's warning, quote, "Be sober, be vigilant, because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour," end quote. In recent years, the devil has devoured the teaching of biblical morality in Western culture, and in numerous Christian denominations. Let us pray that God will give us in the LCMS, along with other biblically minded Christians, courage and wisdom to fight the good fight of faith. In doing so, let us remember one additional early Christian plea, made by St. Paul — also a first Christian — who said, quote, "Brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy, meditate on these things," Philippians 4:8.

These words underscore that for us Christians, sexual fidelity, adhered to according to his holy word, is true, noble, pure, lovely, and of good report, virtuous, and praiseworthy. Let us also remember the words the apostle John wrote, when he said, "We love him because he first loved us" — and let these words motivate us to imitate the early Christians, regardless of the ridicule or the cost.

So, as we live in this decadent society, that we might not capitulate to unbelief and political correctness — which today, in the West, has lost its soul and its moral compass, and it is affecting the church deeply and grievously — now is not the time for us Christians to withdraw from the world, as some are suggesting. Instead, let us remember God wants us to be in the world, but not of it. He wants us to let our lights shine before men, that they might see our good works and glorify our Father in heaven.

And finally, we can also learn one other thing from the early Christians. I have often used this example — it's very short and brief, but most of you know it, you've even seen it on bumper stickers, though I'm not advocating bumper-sticker theology, we already have too much of that. But you've all seen the fish symbol — the early Christians picked the word "fish" as a symbol that served as an acronym, for "Jesus Christ, God's Son, Savior," which spells out "fish" in Greek. And the early church picked the symbol of a fish — not a jellyfish. God, Lord, have mercy. Thank you for listening.