Sermon Video: Take up your Cross and follow Jesus - Mark 8:34-35

 What does it take to be a follower of Jesus? The blessings are well known, but what about the cost? Salvation is free, 100%, but discipleship is costly. To be a follower of Jesus is to embark on a path of self-denial (not asceticism, but submission to the lordship of God, to his will), to take up your own cross of self-sacrificial service to others, and to follow after Jesus. Jesus went wherever he could help people, wherever he could make a difference, and he gave them what he had: truth, compassion, and love. We must do likewise.

The Truth will set you free: the context of a timeless truth

"Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (John 8:32)  The Gospel of John contains many memorable phrases, including Jesus' powerful "I am" statements.  The idea that truth is capable of making people free has penetrated Western culture to the extent that the two ideas, freedom and truth, have become inextricably linked, especially in the light of the penchant of oppressive regions for propaganda and outright lies.  For examples of the cultural triumph of a linkage between freedom and truth and conversely oppression and lies, see George Orwell's 1984 , Aldous Huxley's Brave New World , or Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451.  In their own way, each of those novels is championing the ideal of Truth (with a capital T) and warning of the danger of falsehood to society.  In this they are certainly correct, for no society or government founded upon, or maintained by, lies can long endure apart from oppression.  While true, and certainly beneficial to society, this was not the reason why Jesus said that truth would set people free.  The concerns of Jesus were far more immediate, and far more specific, than championing the idea of Truth (as good and honorable a cause as that is).

By the point in the Gospel of John where Jesus says, "Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."  he has already declared, "I am the bread of life" (John 6:35-48) and "I am the light of the world" (John 8:12, repeated in John 9:5) The Truth that Jesus was offering that would set those free who were willing to accept it, was that he did indeed come from the Father to warn them regarding their sins, and to offer them salvation by believing in him.  It was deliberately a very specific truth, embodied personally by Jesus, that had the power to set people free.  Free from what?  Not merely free from oppression, as wonderful as that is, but free from something far more universal and dangerous, free from slavery to sin.  As descendants of Abraham, and heirs to that Covenant, those who listened to Jesus believed that they were already free.  It was painfully true that they were not politically free, the presence of Roman troops in Jerusalem made that obvious, but they considered themselves to be morally and spiritually free as a people who endeavored to follow the Law of Moses.  They were wrong.  Jesus sought to shatter this false complacency by warning them, "If you were Abraham's children, then you would do the things Abraham did." (John 8:39)  Abraham believed God, and took steps to demonstrate that faith, even when difficult circumstances offered excuses to doubt God.  As a result, Genesis tells us, "Abraham believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness." (Genesis 15:6, quoted by Paul in Romans 4:3,20-24 and Galatians 3:6 as well as by James in James 2:23).
Knowledge of the truth is not sufficient.  Humanity is exceedingly capable of ignoring the truth, of subverting it to our own desires, and of paying lip service to it while continuing on our own path.  Without a commitment, without allowing it to change one's behavior, truth alone is powerless.  While that is true in many areas (for example: the advice you receive from your doctor; it doesn't help you if you ignore it), it is supremely true regarding our relationship with God.  There are many people who know who Jesus was (and is), who are aware of his life, death, and resurrection, but for whom those truths have no discernible impact upon their lives.  Unless truth produces transformation, it fails. 
Which brings us back to Jesus.  Belief in Jesus is the truth that will set us free from our slavery to sin.  Trust in Jesus is the beginning of the path of righteous obedience to the will of God, and hope in Jesus is what will allow us to live our lives confident that his vicarious death and resurrection are the keys to God accepting us into the kingdom of heaven.  The Truth will certainly set us free, we just need to make sure that our journey begins with a very specific truth, belief in Jesus.

The idolatry of 'relationship but not religion'

 

Remove the 'not' in both of the above memes and we're doing fine.  The internet teems with sentiments like those above, including, "I'm spiritual, not religious", and "relationship not religion".  And while these thoughts appeal to those who have been hurt by, or disappointed in, a particular manifestation of the Church, they are misguided at best, and dangerous at worst.  This is not in any way to dispute the valid criticism of the actions of those who represent the Church, whether that be a local independent church where judgmental attitudes have replaced the spirit of grace, or an institutional church where self-protection has protected child predators.  The Church, both historically (see for example the martyrdom of Jan Hus) and today has much to answer for, flaws both mundane and monstrous, both isolated and systematic.  The Church is far from perfect.  Christianity without the Church, or following Jesus without Religion, thus has an emotional appeal, but it has one fundamental, inescapable problem.  Christianity, or even more simply, following Jesus, without the Church does not exist.  Temporarily, through difficult circumstances, a follower of Jesus might find him/herself disconnected from the Church, but long-term the option of going it alone has not been given to us by God.  We are both incapable of thriving as disciples of Jesus apart from the regular support and encouragement of fellow believers who will share our faith journey, and cut off from the commands of God that we serve one another when we decide to put our own, perceived, spiritual health above the needs of the many.  The Gospel was not given to me, it was given to us.  Discipleship is not my task, it is our task.  Worship is not individual people approaching God with praise, it is his people gathered together in community uplifting his name.  The grace of God is manifested in the shepherd's willingness to leave the 99 and seek the 1, but the glory of God is maximized when the entirety of those redeemed by that grace gather together to praise his name.
Throughout redemptive history God chose to work through Israel, an entire nation called to be holy before the LORD, and the Church, a gathering of people from all nations called to be united in their devotion to Jesus.  The elevation of my own spiritual pursuit, or my own spiritual need, above that of the other people who I should be in community with, and whose needs I ought to be prioritizing, is a form of idolatry.  Individualism above community is idolatry.  To find this sentiment growing in post-modern Western culture is hardly surprising.  We have journeyed a great distance in our worldview from the much more collective/community outlook of our ancestors.  We have staked out individualistic positions in economics, law, politics, and even marriage and family obligations.  It should be no surprise that the Church, as collective an organization as can be imagined, would eventually receive a backlash against its call to subsume the ego-centrism of post-modernity beneath a life of service to others.  {FYI, the Prosperity Gospel, with its focus on what God wants to do for you, rather than what God requires of you, fits well with this, 'its all about me' attitude.}
I understand why people want to emphasize their relationship with Jesus, or even their 'spirituality' above commitment to, the easy to find flaws with, 'organized religion'.  To be a part of the Church is to rub elbows with flawed people.  To be a part of the Church is to risk getting hurt.  As long ago as St. Augustine it was necessary to defend the idea that the Church is made up of people who are being made holy, not people who are already holy.  And yet, in the end the solo path leads nowhere.  Hermits were never the path to holiness that their admirers claimed them to be.  To be a disciple of Jesus Christ is to journey with other disciples, to be a part of a community, and to serve that community.  You may not love religion or the Church, but you certainly need it, and it needs you.

A final thought, if you reject religion/the Church, you're also rejecting the sacraments/ordinances.  There is no baptism or communion without the Church, for baptism is a rite of initiation into the people of God, and communion is a communal meal with the people of God.

For a selection of Scripture that informs this topic, consider these verses below:
Matthew 16:18 New International Version (NIV)
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
John 13:14-16 New International Version (NIV)

14 Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. 15 I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. 
John 17:20-23 New International Version (NIV)

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.
Galatians 5:13 New International Version (NIV)

You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love.
Ephesians 1:22-23 New International Version (NIV)

22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.
 Hebrews 10:24-25 New International Version (NIV)
24 And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, 25 not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

The fault in an argument about the Catholic Church firing a gay teacher

 Below is the text of an article written by Ellen Kobe, a professed Catholic.  I will intersperse my response to her argumentation (not the question of whether or not a Christian school should hire/fire any particular staff member per se) throughout using brackets and bold: {Like this}  This is not a question of what ought to be legal in America regarding employment, but rather what moral principles ought to guide any institution/organization which claims to be following the teachings of Jesus Christ.  Ellen Kobe has charged the Church with "repulsive" "bigotry", but on what  basis?

Ellen Kobe is an associate producer on CNN's social publishing team. She is a 2009 graduate of Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School. The views expressed here are solely those of the author.

Why a Jesuit School was right in refusing to fire a gay teacher

(CNN)Catholics in my hometown of Indianapolis are in the midst of a culture war -- a battle between church leadership and some of its parishioners that could be played out in other communities if it hasn't already.
Last month, news broke that the Archdiocese of Indianapolis would no longer recognize my alma mater, Brebeuf Jesuit Preparatory School, as a Catholic school. Why? The Archdiocese insisted the school dismiss a longtime teacher who is in a civilly-recognized, same-sex marriage, a statement from the school said.
The archdiocese also released a statement saying: "This issue is not about sexual orientation; rather, it is about our expectation that all personnel inside a Catholic school -- who are ministers of the faith -- abide by all Church teachings, including the nature of marriage."  {An important question: What moral standard ought a Christian school/charity/church require of its non-ordained personnel?  We ought to expect those who have taken ordination vows to uphold a higher moral standard (sadly we are too often disappointed) but what about people for whom their work is more akin to a job than a calling?  The expectation of the Catholic Church, at least regarding school teachers, is that they support Church teaching with the way they live their lives.  If this is unreasonable, are there any standards at all that the Church could enforce without being accused of imposing morality upon its employees?}
Brebeuf firmly pushed back, saying this "highly capable and qualified teacher" will continue to teach here.
Brebeuf's actions protected this employee and other LGBTQ members of its community by sending the message: You are welcome here; you are safe here. On my social media feeds, it was a day of celebration among the Brebeuf community and local Catholics. I saw only positive messages about the decision.  {This is not a moral argument, of any kind, let alone one pertaining to what Christianity ought to be.  Social media opinion is the last place we should turn to gauge a question of theology...Secondly, in order to be "welcome" and "safe" within the Church, the Church must accept/celebrate the choices made by people?  All choices, regardless of what they are, or just the choices being celebrated here?  What happened to the idea of the Church as a place for sinners seeking repentance and depending upon grace?}
But the mood took a turn just days later when nearby Cathedral High School was faced with the same command by the Archdiocese regarding a teacher in a same-sex marriage. Cathedral decided to dismiss, not support, its teacher.
There was resounding anger, heartbreak and disappointment from members of the Cathedral community on social media. It's not lost on me that my social media feeds could be reinforcing my own beliefs or that those who believe these employees should've been fired aren't voicing their opinions. {At least she sees the danger of living in a self-reinforcing bubble.  Again, social media feeds have ZERO to do with what is morally acceptable for a church that claims allegiance to Jesus Christ.  Christianity is NOT a democracy, nor even a representative republic.  It is a benevolent dictatorship; one founded by, directed by, ruled by, and in service to, Jesus Christ.  What we think, how we feel, what we want, is immaterial compared to this question: What promotes holiness and righteousness?  What brings glory to God and empowers the Gospel to save the Lost?}  Nonetheless, there is a distinct fissure in the way many practicing Catholics feel about the LGBTQ community versus how the Church's leaders believe we should treat them.  {Has the Church in the past, and in the present, treated some sins as "acceptable" while harshly condemning others?  Absolutely.  This is human failure, our sinful nature and weakness in action.  At the same time, "the way many practicing Catholics feel" is once again NOT a theological/moral argument but an appeal to numerical support.  Might the majority, or even a vocal minority, be theologically/morally correct on an issue and the Church's leadership wrong?  Certainly, but not on the basis of, "this is how we feel", instead the question must hinge upon a proper understanding of the Word of God, an appeal never made in this opinion piece, nor even hinted at.}
The stark contrast in these schools' decisions is just one of reasons I strongly identify with the Jesuit philosophy. When I think of my Catholic identity, nearly all of it stems from the values instilled in me at Brebeuf.
The Jesuit tradition focuses on the education of the person as a whole, emphasizing these five virtues: being open to growth, intellectually competent, loving, religious and committed to promoting justice. These "grad at grad" values, as the Jesuits call them, might sound like a hokey mission statement, but they were taken seriously at Brebeuf. They weren't just written on hallway walls, T-shirts and in the school handbook, they were preached and exemplified by each of our teachers on a daily basis. Living out these qualities wasn't simply a goal, it was a duty.
It is the last of these principles -- committed to promoting justice -- that launched me into a career in journalism. When my teachers saw I was interested in writing, they didn't just teach me how to write better. They encouraged me to write for the greater good.  {The Greater Good!  Absolutely, but on what basis is the Greater Good to be determined?  Hopefully not social media support, nor the whims of the culture at large.  Surely Ignatius Loyola and Francis Xavier had some objective standard in mind built upon the Word of God, Apostolic teaching, and Church tradition.  The Greater Good cannot blow where the wind takes it, it must be anchored or it will twist about endlessly and be capable of justifying anything.}
When Brebeuf defied the Archdiocese's demand, I thought of the "grad at grad" moral standards that Brebeuf is living out and which the Archdiocese sorely lacks.  {This is a high-handed claim, the Archdiocese lacks a moral standard, but the portion of the Jesuits in question have one?}
The Archdiocese is unfairly targeting members of the LGBT community, bigotry {Christianity (as Judaism before it) is inherently bigoted.  Let that sink in.  The Gospel of Jesus Christ claims to be the sole path to God, the only means of salvation, and the necessary answer for every man, woman, and child who has ever lived.  It condemns as false all other paths, whether self-help or organized religion.  It condemns as immoral a host of human behavior that affects everyone, and declares that none are righteous apart from a righteousness gifted to us by Jesus Christ.  It declares a moral standard that must be present in its followers and condemns those who speak but don't act as Christ-followers.  There can be no Truth without condemnation of falsehood.  There can be no Morality without condemnation of immorality.  If this essence is removed from Christianity, it ceases to be, becoming devoid of all power and less than meaningless...To make the case that to single out one particular type of sin is unfair, while ignoring others, is one thing (a sense of balance Pope Francis has repeatedly called for), but to label that bigotry is to reject Christianity for what it is and must be.} that is beyond repulsive in 2019 {What does 2019 have to do with a question of morality?  Is the standard by which we are to judge matters of morality based upon the year in which we live?  We all know that our ancestors had blind spots concerning certain immoral behavior (slavery comes to mind, as well as antisemitism) but they were still wrong to behave that way, even if they couldn't see it for themselves...Evidently, by 2019 the author thinks the Church ought to have capitulated and abandoned its teaching regarding sexual ethics and marriage, the past 3,500 years of Judea/Christian ethics be damned.  The "failure" to do so, is evidently repulsive.} but all too real in religious communities across the globe. {The anger here is directed inward toward Christianity, but other religions will be targeted next.}  Gay or otherwise, Brebeuf employees provided me with a rigorous education and a caring environment. Brebeuf's tolerance -- no, outward support -- for its LGBTQ faculty and students has fostered thousands of accepting and loving alumni.  {Results based morality.  A person can accomplish good and positive things without being morally upright, the Church always works with flawed people.  However, "accepting and loving" is an odd standard for gauging success the way it is being used here.  We, as Christians, certainly are called to be loving, and to love both friends and enemies, both family and strangers, but the relatively recent choice to connect "acceptance of behavior" with "loving people" as a take it or leave it, all or nothing, proposition is not associated historically with Christianity.  Jesus called people, all sorts of people, to follow him, but he did so on the basis that all of them needed to repent, to leave their lives of sin, and be like him.}
Fr. James Martin, a Jesuit priest, tweeted about the contradictions of what the Archdiocese is asking Catholic schools to do. If employees must be "supportive of Catholic teaching," as Martin points out, a wide swath of Catholic school employees would be subject to termination, including straight people living with a significant other outside of marriage, married couples using birth control and Catholics who don't go to Mass, {Because Justice is not applied to all, evenly and thoroughly, it must be abandoned?  Fr. Martin is correct that the Church has often focused more energy upon certain sins than upon others, and he is correct that the sins of people who are unlike ourselves are more readily condemned than sins that hit closer to home.  This is a failure of God's people that is neither new nor acceptable.  However, this is NOT an argument against having a moral standard at all, but only one against having a poorly articulated/applied moral standard.} as well as those who practice another religion or none at all. {Do Fr. Martin and Ellen Kobe believe that Catholic schools should be forced to hire teachers who are Muslims, Hindus, and Atheists?  This is a new frontier facing Christian Education, the demand that they abandon the reason why they exist in the first place and replace a Christ-centered education, and a Christ-following staff with something more broad and less restrictive.} I think that's pretty much every person I know.  {I know this is meant to be sarcasm, but really?  Everyone you know is either defying the Church's teaching on marriage, birth control, and/or not going to Mass at all?  You don't know anyone who lives according to the traditional teachings of the Church?  Is this not a cause for concern?  How can one claim ownership over the direction of the Church, call it "repulsive" and "bigoted" when one's viewpoint is surrounded by those who reject the teachings of, and participation in, that same Church?}
Brebeuf didn't have much to lose in its relationship with the Archdiocese, which doesn't provide the school with any funds or ministers, according to the Indianapolis Star. Cathedral's defense of their decision notes everything they would've lost, including permission to refer to itself as a Catholic school, the ability to celebrate the Sacraments and its status as an independent nonprofit organization.
These would be tough challenges to face. But when leaders of Catholic institutions focus solely on doctrine, status or other rules of the Church, {Agreed.  To focus solely upon doctrine is to lose touch with its application among human beings.  Is this really what Catholic institutions are doing?  Have all the hospitals, orphanages, schools, and charities ceased to exist?  Have the thousands of parishes living in community together while seeking Christ disappeared?  When you disagree with a particular doctrine, make a rational case for that disagreement, one that seeks some grounding in Scripture.  To claim those who disagree with you are heartless is not the same as making a case for your position...On the flip side, when doctrine/theology is no longer central, when Truth is relegated to secondary status, Christianity's days are numbered, its churches are adrift, and its people will latch on to all manner of ideas and beliefs that would have found no home among the Apostles.} they lose sight of what this religion is all about -- {What is the purpose of religion?  An important question, but far more relevant here ought to be: What is the purpose of the Church created by Jesus Christ after his resurrection and empowered by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost?  What religion, in general, is all about is not a relevant discussion for what Christianity should be.}  God's unconditional love for all people. {Not the right answer by a long shot for one very important reason: God's love is not unconditional.  Period.  God's love is in complete harmony with his holiness and justice.  If God's love for all people was unconditional, why do we worship a crucified and risen Savior?  Why did God institute the Mosaic sacrificial system, why did he call Abraham and replace his polytheism with monotheism?  Even a cursory reading of the Scriptures reveals God's anger at sin, his judgment upon those who defy him, and his absolute insistence upon obedience.}
Brebeuf unified around faith. Cathedral allowed doubt to take over. What good is the designation of being a "Catholic" school if you lose your values in the process? {A very important question: What is the point of wanting to be Catholic, or any subset of Christianity, if that designation is no longer anchored to the teachings of Jesus, the Apostles, and Holy Scripture?...Is it truly "doubt" to remain committed to what the Church has taught for 2,000 years?  Is standing firm in the midst of change somehow a lack of faith?} As Martin says, Brebeuf protecting its LGBTQ employee "is the most Catholic thing that the school, and the Jesuits, could do."  {Wow, "the most Catholic thing"?  Again, what is the basis for this claim?  Upon what Biblical principle does this rest?  What teaching of Jesus, and how is that being applied?}
By the way, wasn't June Pride Month?  {And this has what to do with a moral question within the Church of Jesus Christ?}

{In the end, this article is an opinion piece, what it is not is any reason to justify its author's very strong moral condemnation of the Catholic Church with anything beyond how the author feels, a reference to the "greater good" that is not defined, and the consensus of a particular social media bubble.  While reasoning such as this may be standard within the culture as a whole, or in the political realm, it is not how the Church of Jesus Christ discusses, debates, or even changes theological positions.} 

Revenge belongs to God alone, not you.

"If someone screws you, screw them back 10 times harder, at least they're going to leave you alone, and at least you'll feel good."  This is an entirely human sentiment, something that expresses well our sinful nature as children alienated from our Heavenly Father.  It is also, however, a sentiment in direct opposition to the Word of God.  What does God say about vengeance, what is our response supposed to be as followers of Jesus Christ?

Romans 12:14-21 (NIV)

14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse.15 Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position.  Do not be conceited.

17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord. 20 On the contrary:

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
    if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”

21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Matthew 5:38-48 (NIV)

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

The sentiment expressed in the quote at the beginning of the post came from a rich businessman in 2005, that same businessman is now one of the most powerful people in the world, Therefore his attitude regarding vengeance carries serious weight.  The thirst for vengeance, the desire to see enemies crushed, is not, nor can it ever be, the attitude of a disciple of Jesus Christ.  Revenge doesn't belong to you, it belongs to God, he will defend the righteous and punish the wicked, he will uphold the poor and the weak against the rich and the strong.  

Politics and Dangerous Assumptions

Presuppositions can be dangerous.  We all have them, they’re the foundational ideas that we hold, often without even being aware of them, that underpin our beliefs and belief systems.  There is a presupposition that was once assumed in the American political landscape, even if our nation didn’t always live up to its lofty ideal, yet now it is being directly challenged.  You ought, I hope, to recognize this presupposition, it is after all something we hold to be self-evident: all men are created equal.  The belief in the equality of humanity is directly connected to the belief in God who created mankind.  Because God made us all, we must therefore be equal.  How could any race or nation be valued more, and more importantly, how could any be valued less, if all were alike created by God?  And yet, this idea is under assault in the political discourse today.  It isn’t being directly stated as such, but the assumption that American lives are worth more than non-American lives underpins many of the issues as they are being discussed today, from refugees and immigration, to trade agreements and foreign policy.  It may seem natural for an American politician to value American lives more, after all a Roman politician would have valued the lives of Roman citizens far above those of non-citizens, let alone the “barbarians” beyond the Empire’s borders, but if those same politicians are claiming to be themselves Christians, and are claiming to represent Christians, it must be pointed out that their belief system is built upon an idea that is anti-Christian.  The idea that God’s people don’t have to care about the lives of Syrians, Mexicans, the Chinese, Muslims, or any other group, is a grave insult to the cross upon which Christ died to offer salvation to the world.  That some of those being labeled in political discourse as the “them” that “we” don’t have to care about (and can even hate), are in fact our fellow Christian brothers and sisters, is a grave sin.  If those claiming the name of Christ don’t have love for their fellow Christians, how can the love of God be in them? (I John 3:16-17) Likewise, those of the “other” who are not Christians fall into the second category of people, for in the Christian mind there can be only two, the Redeemed and the Lost.  How should we treat the Lost?  If we treat them with disdain, if we dismiss them, revile them, hate them, how can we possibly share the Good News of the Gospel of Jesus Christ with them?

Are you a Christian?  Do you care about those living in abject poverty around the world, or is American prosperity more important to you than their suffering?  Do you care about the rights of people who don’t look or think like you?  If you let a politician sell you on the idea that you must choose “us” over “them”, you are walking away from the call of the Son of God to share the love of God.  Politicians love to have villains, it is an age old tactic to make the foreigner the enemy, but it is not, nor can it be, a Christian one, for it was our king who said, “Love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you”, and “take up your cross and follow me.”  There isn’t any room near the cross for the politics of division and hatred.

Sermon Video: "I have come to bring fire on the earth" Luke 12:49-53

Contrary to the expectations of the people that Jesus had come to bring peace, following his parables on the faithfulness needed by the servants of God, Jesus goes on to explain that his mission is actually to bring "fire" to the earth, and not peace but division.  Since we know that he is the Prince of Peace, and that he is the creator of the reconciliation between God and man that is our peace, it seems odd that Jesus would talk of such things resulting from his ministry as fire and division.
The "fire" in this context is closely related to his previous remarks about the faithfulness required of God's servants, a refining fire, that melts away impurities.  Before that process of transformation of God's people can begin, Jesus himself must undergo his own baptism, a time of trial unlike any that other.  Once Jesus' mission is accomplished, his people can begin to be made new by the fire that he will send of the Holy Spirit.  It is because of that transformation process, a process of leaving behind the old life and adopting new life in Christ, that Jesus' mission of reconciliation actually causes division within the families of those who believe.  Why?  Because all those who follow Christ walk upon a path that diverges greatly from those who remain on the path of self-destruction, even if it is their own families.  Father and son, formerly as close as can be, drift apart as one follows Christ and the other remain enslaved to sin.  This same division can occur between spouses, parents and children, siblings, and friends.  It is inevitable, to an extent, as long as one follows Jesus and the other remains apart from God's redemption.  What then do we do, knowing of the fire and division that Christ has brought?  Continue to pray for our Lost loved ones, continue to show them the compassion of Christ, continue to demonstrate to them the righteous living of his disciples, and continue to hope; hope that the same Gospel that saved you and I out of the darkness will one day bring them into the light of the Son as well.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Don't look back, follow Jesus - Luke 9:51-62

What does it mean to be a “follower” of Jesus Christ?  That’s a phrase we often use, and something that we’ve been commanded to be, so understanding it becomes rather important.  One way to be a follower of Jesus would be to observe how he chose his own path and utilize the same approach.  In Luke 9:51, we’re told that Jesus “resolutely” set out for Jerusalem.  The choice of going to Jerusalem, to finish the mission of the Father, was a deliberate one.  It was also a choice made with the ultimate goal of being reunited with the Father in glory at the forefront.  How was Jesus able to endure the hardship of his passion and death?  He knew that one the other side of it lay victory and glory.  It is this sort of focus and determination that is required of those who would follow in the footsteps of Jesus.

                If any of us was trying to recruit new volunteers for an important project, we’d stress the potential benefits of being a part of the endeavor, when Jesus recruits disciples, he makes sure to focus upon the high cost to anyone who chooses to follow him.  In this passage, three people who are potential followers are all given difficult answers, even enigmatic ones, from Jesus, such that the only conclusion we can draw from this interaction is that Jesus only wants those who are willing to pay the price to begin this journey.  To the first potential follower, Jesus stresses that following him will not lead to ease and comfort, to the second, he speaks of the need to begin following now because life will always give us important reasons to wait, and to the third, he warms that only a consistent and focused devotion will allow someone who follows him to be useful in the Kingdom of God. 

                Jesus set out resolutely for Jerusalem, knowing what awaited him there.  What does it mean to be a follower of Jesus?  It means we too must know our purpose in serving God, and we too must begin to fulfill it with complete devotion no matter what it costs us in the end.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video