It is often said that when the pope catches a cold, the Lutherans sneeze.

Most of these “Romanizations” are within the realm of Vatican II liturgical adiaphora, such as receiving communion in the hand while standing and going through a continuous reception line, the handshake of peace, the three-year lectionary, the freestanding altar, etc. Some of these innovations impinge more on doctrinal matters, such as the use of lay readers, vested woman in the chancel (some wearing stoles with the title of deacon, others as acolytes or altar servers, and laymen of both sexes bidding prayers during the liturgy). Some of our recent innovations come from Protestantizing tendencies, such as lay preachers (most commonly employed with laymen of both sexes preaching “children’s sermons” and leading chapel services), and our historical move away from crucifixes, art, and vestments. So indeed, it’s not only the pope who makes us sneeze, but also Big Eva (“Evangelicalism, so-called - for some reason we allowed them to rob us of our own self-chosen reformational identity).

But in matters of sexuality, we are seeing both of these outside influences bear down upon us.

It has been shocking how quickly once staunchly biblical denominations and confessions - those who stood with us during the Battle for the Bible half a century ago - have been invaded by, and in some cases, been toppled by, the advocates of unnatural and unbiblical sexuality. Wokeness surrounds us in terms of our fellow Christian confessions all around us, as well as the secular culture in which we live, our country’s laws and ethics, the institutions we participate in, whether by choice or necessity, and increasingly in church discussions, publications, and leadership.

We used to be able to just roll our eyes at Lesbian ELCA “pastors” receiving abortion payments from their health care providers and the celebration of homosexuality and transgenderism in mainline denominations. We used to be able to shrug off the Lavender Mafia in the Roman Catholic Church. But there comes a point that we need to realize that this is no time for triumphalism or complacency.

These cultural pressures to woke conformity are explored by the following podcast. Though it should not be necessary to issue a disclaimer, considering the hostile work environment that Christian confessors always labor under - sometimes from our own leadership and our putative co-communicants who have anointed themselves entertainment-based online inquisitor-clowns armed with clickbait and the unholy trinity of the broad brush, the straw man, and guilt by association - I have to say the obvious: I don’t know whom these people support politically, their philosophical or historiographical views, who their friends, family members, and ancestors are, what podcasts they listen to, or what podcasts the podcasters that they listen to listen to. I don’t know what kind of music they like, what brand of beer they drink, or their favorite flavor of ice cream. I’m not playing the six-degrees-from-Kevin-Bacon game. I’m not endorsing all of their their theology - including their discussion of Calvin’s Institutes. I happen to find their discussion in this one hour presentation which examines where we are culturally in the American Christian context of the present day (and how we got here) to be intriguing, and think it warrants reflection: especially the first half of the podcast. If this outrages you, feel free to email Dr. Eckardt, who will promptly refund every penny you were charged for reading this blogpost. Just put “I’m Offended” in all caps, followed by twelve exclamation points for ease of identification. In the words of Jeeves, “We endeavor to deliver satisfaction.”

The pressure regarding sexual deviancy fits the Gramscian “Long March” strategic model prefigured by the 19th century Lutheran scholar the Rev. Charles Porterfield Krauth in his 1871 The Conservative Reformation and its Theology, pages 195-6:

When error is admitted into the Church, it will be found that the stages of its progress are always three.  It begins by asking toleration.  Its friends say to the majority: You need not be afraid of us; we are few, and weak; only let us alone; we shall not disturb the faith of others.  The Church has her standards of doctrine; of course we shall never interfere with them; we only ask for ourselves to be spared interference with our private opinions.  Indulged in this for a time, error goes on to assert equal rights.  Truth and error are two balancing forces.  The Church shall do nothing which looks like deciding between them; that would be partiality.  It is bigotry to assert any superior right for the truth.  We are to agree to differ, and any favoring of the truth, because it is the truth, is partisanship.  What the friends of truth and error hold in common is fundamental.  Anything on which they differ is ipso facto non-essential.  Anybody who makes account of such a thing is a disturber of the peace of the church.  Truth and error are two co-ordinate powers, and the great secret of church-statesmanship is to preserve the balance between them.  From this point error soon goes on to its natural end, which is to assert supremacy.  Truth started with tolerating; it comes to be merely tolerated, and that only for a time.  Error claims a preference for its judgments on all disputed points.  It puts men into positions, not as at first in spite of their departure from the Church's faith, but in consequence of it.  Their recommendation is that they repudiate the faith, and position is given to them to teach others to repudiate it, and to make them skillful in combating it.

The Roman Catholic Church’s Catechism describes homosexuality to be “intrinsically disordered.” But there is enormous pressure to revisit this doctrinal statement, to either abolish or soften it. And indeed, while the current pope has recently been castigated for using a so-called “homophobic” slur (and the Vatican has issued an apology), the same pope has also opened the door to the blessing of same-sex unnatural and unbiblical sexual activity - which is actually happening in Roman Catholic churches by Roman Catholic pastors today. In one case, a vested Chicago priest performed the same-sex blessing rite for a Methodist lady “pastor” and her same-sex paramour in the church - and posted it on Youtube.

He has since apologized for “violating the norms of the church.” That sounds a bit like using the salad fork for one’s main dish. Oops!

Other instances of Roman Catholic same-sex blessings have not been followed up by an apology. And in the case of the Jesuit homosexual activist Fr. James Martin, he has gotten the pope to write the forward of his new book about the raising of Lazarus (which he interprets as a pro-homosexual narrative), even applying our Lord’s command, “Lazarus, Come out!” to be connected to homosexuality.

Homosexuality has become largely acceptable in the Roman Catholic Church, and even applauded - even in the case of the clergy. This article (chock full of trendy euphemisms used to normalize the abnormal) is a case in point, as the incongruity of the language of “intrinsically disordered” in a primary doctrinal theological text clashes with the real-world ministry of sexually intrinsically disordered men at the altar, font, and pulpit. These self-confessed homosexuals are in a position to catechize, counsel, and influence young men - even meeting with them one-on-one. As recent (and not so recent) history has shown, there is a price to be paid for this incongruity between doctrine and practice.

So what does this have to do with the LCMS? Our typical attitude can be summed up in the words of the old country song, “it’s so hard to be humble when you’re perfect in every way.” But there is cause for vigilance. While we can’t alter our catechisms, whose words are etched in sixteenth century German and Latin stone - various interpreters can apply “contemporary applications” to downplay the increasingly acceptable perversions that surround us in church and society.

We can fall for the hermeneutical trap that all sins are created equal and are endowed by their creator [sic] with certain unalienable rights. For while any unrepentant sin can cast us into hell, it is simply sophistry to equate the severity of driving 36 in a 35 to genocide. While our Lord condemns heterosexual lust as truly violating the sixth commandment, to equate a misguided natural attraction with an unnatural sexual rebellion against the created order itself is a way to open the door for treating socially-popular sins as peccadillos to be tolerated (at first), eventually to be excused (later), then to be celebrated (finally) in the church. We are right to be introspective about judging sin as an individual, taking the log out of our own eye. But the official publications of our church are going to be treated as normative dogmatic statements. And in a world that seeks to muddy the waters of acceptable sexuality, the authors and publishers of these publications have the obligation to be confessionally clear - even when it means being at odds with the world and the evolving consensus of the various denominations in the church. If we must, we should be prepared to stand alone, Athanasius contra mundum, if necessary.

I do think we are on a trajectory to be tested by homosexual pastors and rostered teachers “coming out of the closet” and/or applying to study at seminary with the understanding that they promise to be celibate and sexually inactive. And I do think if, and when, this happens, there will be great division in our synod, with an ugly fight following. We may be surprised as to where the fault lines will lie. I want to be wrong about this. And I can be - if we start addressing this now.

More than five decades ago, we tolerated liberals in our synod - even as seminary professors. It bore the rotten fruit of the walkout and Seminex. The good news is that the liberals were driven out. They were made to feel unwelcome, and many of them left. The bad news is that many of them simply went underground. The Left understands the long-game, how to win by attrition, by incremental steps, bit by bit infusing error to be tolerated, by stressing the need to be welcoming “for the sake of the Gospel.” And while our Evangelical confession is our strength, if it becomes misapplied, if we don’t distinguish Law and Gospel, if we allow blurred lines concerning what we believe, teach, and confess - our inclination toward the Gospel can be used against us by diabolical deception. And that is the way of Satan: using our strengths against us, like a robber taking the gun from a cop and using it against him.

We need to be wise. We need to be clear. We need to confess with integrity. We need to have no fear of the devil, the world, and our sinful nature. When we start to feel a cold coming on, we need to take action. When someone sneezes, it is common to reply “Gesundheit.” While it’s unlikely that most English-speakers understand what the word literally means, it is a wish for good health.

While the entire Christian world seems to be increasingly infected and contagious, let us pray for good health, for fidelity to the Holy Scriptures and to our Confessions, and to our Lord’s design for creation itself - even as our Lord has said many times, “Your faith has made you well.”