Biblical Teaching on Sexual Immorality in 16th Century Anglicanism (Homily XI) and Its Relevance for Today

 

Introduction

One aspect of the reformation of the Church in the 16th century had to do with reforming the beliefs and practices of the culture regarding sexual immorality.  A homily that became one of the fundamental teachings for the Anglican Church, written in 1543, aimed to correct the loose morals of the times.[1]  It was titled ‘Homily Against Whoredom and Adultery,’ but it has in view every form of sexual immorality: adultery (breaking wedlock), whoredom, fornication, and uncleanness.  This essay will provide an outline of the teaching, with the intention of pointing out how it remains relevant.

Culture

First, the homily points out that it is timely.  Sexual immorality was considered by many as no sin at all.  The context of the time was permissive and needed correction.  The sin in this day reigned above other sins.  The immorality of the time was not limited to one culture or region but appeared to be worldwide.  We see in this point that the homily was arguing from Scripture against the stream of culture.  Instead of accepting that culture might reform Christian practice, the Reformation insisted that Scripture should challenge the culture.

Scripture[2]

Second, the beginning of a reform based on Scripture regarding this matter is found in the Ten Commandments.  The seventh commandment states, ‘You shall not commit adultery’ (Exodus 20.14).  ‘Adultery’ specifically means a married person having sex with another outside marriage, but the homily argues that the commandment covers all sexual immorality.  It does not point out that this broad understanding has a very long history as the Ten Commandments were taken as headings for related sins.  Some have argued that Deuteronomy in part is an expansion on the Ten Commandments.  Paul offers an example of applying the Ten Commandments to related sins in 1 Timothy 2.8-10.  In the same century, the Jewish author, Philo, wrote a longer work expanding the Ten Commandments to other sins (see Special Laws).  So, this homily is in good company in its broad reading of the Seventh Commandment.  This point receives further proof from Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, in which Jesus’ expands the teaching to include lust (Matthew 5.27-28). 

Acts and Desires

Third, still in reference to Jesus’ teaching, the homily says that sexual immorality is not to be understood only in terms of outward adultery—that is, acts—but also to filthy desires and impure lusts.  We are to be concerned not only to keep our bodies undefiled; we must also keep our hearts pure and free from ‘evil thoughts, carnal desires, and fleshly consents.’  Christ is our Master, whom we are to obey, and He calls on us to ‘forsake all uncleanness and filthiness both in body and spirit.’  In further proof of this point, the homily points to Jesus' teaching in Matthew 15.19-20 (cf. Mark 7.21): what defiles a man comes from the heart—it is not just external actions.

Consistent Teaching in Scripture

Fourth, the first part of the sermon overall makes the point that Scripture consistently teaches that sexual immorality is sinful, and sin is punished by God.  Abstention from ‘whoredom’ (sexual immorality) is necessary for salvation.  The Old Testament agrees with the New Testament—there is no development in Scripture of views on what is immoral or not.  Jesus’ teaching agrees with the teaching of the Church at the Jerusalem council (Acts 15.28-29).  What we read in John’s Gospel is consistent with Paul.  In the second part of the homily, further New Testament texts are brought into the argument to prove the seriousness of the sin of sexual immorality.  Scripture gives warnings against adultery and exhortations to embrace cleanliness of life, by which a person is made a member of Christ.

Relation to Other Sins and Social Corruption

Fifth, also in the second part of the homily, the point is made that sexual immorality is a sin that encourages and produces other sins.  Some particular examples are given.  The sin is not only serious in its own right but also produces in a person other sinful pursuits and corrupts society as well.

Divine Punishment

Sixth, the third part of the homily drills down further on the point that God punishes sexual immorality.  Noah is called by Peter the ‘preacher [ESV, 'herald'] of righteousness’ (2 Peter 2.5), and God punished people in Noah's day for their sin with the flood.  The sin given focus in this passage is sexual immorality, but Genesis 6.1-5 offers support for this point in saying that the crest of the wave of human sin was the sexual comingling of the ‘sons of God’ with the ‘daughters of men’ (Genesis 6.4).  The homily next mentions the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah, which God punished with utter destruction (Genesis 19).  While some interpreters have attempted to identify the sin of these cities in other ways than sexual immorality (and they were sinful in many ways), this homily offers it as an example of sexual sin—homosexuality (‘sodomy’)—as do 2 Peter 2 and Jude.  The homily offers other Biblical examples of God’s punishment of sexual immorality.

Universal Law

Seventh, the homily offers examples of pre-Christian cultures that punished fornication and adultery.  These examples not only make the point that there is a general revelation about this—a more universal agreement than just Christian teaching.  They also make the point that the immorality of the culture in the 16th century had even surpassed that of non-Christian peoples.  In this argument, the homily quotes Paul’s list of sins in 1 Corinthians 6.9-10, which includes the sexual sins of adulterers, effeminate persons, and Sodomites.  These shall not inherit the Kingdom of God.

Remedies Against Sexual Immorality

Eighth, the homily ends with remedies to avoid fornication and adultery.  First, when tempted to commit sexual immorality by Satan, we should resist him by saying, ‘It is written, “Thou shalt not commit whoredom”.’  Second, we should live in the fear of God.  Third, we should set ourselves to avoid certain practices of intemperance, unclean conversation, filthy company, and idleness.  Fourth, we should practice other things like reading holy Scripture, protracted prayer, virtuous meditation, and godly ‘travails’ (not just works but ones that require something of ourselves).  In particular, marriage itself—and singular devotion to one another in marriage—is a prescription against sexual immorality.  All masters and rulers should ensure that their servants not practice uncleanness.  That is, there is a role for all with authority to make this a matter of their concern and not leave people to do as they please.

Conclusion

This summary of the content of the 11th Homily captures most of what was said as Scripture was used to encourage cultural reform in the 16th century.  It offers a challenge in the 21st century even more so, point by point. 

(1) The culture needs to hear from the Church that sexual immorality is a sin.  For that matter, many in the Church need this message too, including entire denominations that have sought to revise Christian teaching on the subject. 

(2) Arguments in the Church about these matters need to be Scriptural from beginning to end.

(3) Furthermore, sexual immorality is not merely a matter of outward behavior but also of the heart or desires.  Especially in the confusions over homosexuality that have undermined the Church in our day, this point has been put forward by distinguishing acts from orientation.  The homily concerns itself with this wrongful argument in some detail. 

(4) Scripture is consistent in its opposition to sexual immorality of every kind, including cohabitation among the unmarried, adultery among the married—including serial adultery by divorce—and homosexuality. 

(5) As was clear in the 16th century, the corruption of the whole person and the whole of society is abundantly clear. 

(6) In the 21st century, too little is heard of God’s warnings and punishments.  We might do well to consider with this homily how thoroughly Scripture challenges a witness that only attempts to woe people to a good life without warning them of the consequences of a bad life. 

(7) On the seventh point of the homily, offering examples of other cultures that have agreed with Christian teaching seems a rather weak argument.  From other research done by this author, however, one can argue that opposition to adultery in antiquity was, indeed, the norm across various cultures of the day.  The point needs qualification, but it will not challenge relativism.  This makes Christian witness more challenging in the 21st century than in the 16th century. 

(8) Spiritual disciplines do need teaching today.  For many, there is little to the Christian life than prayers of repentance and the assurance of God’s grace—an important start.  In fact, more might have been said in this homily about how spiritual disciplines following from Divine grace in Christ Jesus for sinners—all of us.  Reformation Anglicanism was and is firm on this conviction, however.

The topic of spiritual disciplines is also relevant for the present discussion about ‘conversion therapy.’  Some governments have or are trying to pass legislation against counsellors or the Church encouraging and helping people with same sex attraction to change.  Some therapies may well be inappropriate or inadequate, but the Church does not offer therapy.  Pastoral guidance is a spiritual matter, and corrections to behavior are also spiritual disciplines.  Yet more needs to be said, and it is only hinted at in this homily.  The Church’s teaching on conversion applies to all: we all need to turn from one path to walk in another.  Moreover, this turning is not something that can be done in our own strength—it is not, again, a therapy.  It is something that requires the empowering presence of God.  While we can speak about things that we can do to change our lives—acts, habits, and virtues of character—we must recognize the need for God’s forgiving and transforming grace in our lives.  The world not only does not want to convert; it wants to make the call to conversion illegal.  Some within the shells of what were once vibrant, orthodox churches also want to outlaw any discussion of changing homosexual desires.  They either affirm homosexuality itself or allow homosexual desires while counselling people to avoid homosexual acts. 

Finally, one thing that the homily does not address that is a challenge facing the Church today is the claim that there are more than two genders, male and female.  The Church needs to avoid using language like ‘LGBTQ+’ or ‘transgender’ if by doing so it allows people to think that Christians in any way affirm the notion that gender is distinct from biological sex.  The errors that Homily XI has in mind are ones of discounting the seriousness of sexual immorality, not an outright attack on God the Creator: ‘male and female he created them’ (Genesis 1.27).

---

[1] Homily XI may be read online: http://www.anglicanlibrary.org/homilies/bk1hom11.htm.

[2] My previous blog presented some key texts in Scripture on sexual immorality: https://bibleandmission.blogspot.com/2022/02/an-apostolic-roundtable-on-christian.html.