(But the first and the second are hard enough ….)

Second. I’d just like to share something from St. Ignatius of Loyola, who distinguished among what he called three degrees or modes of humility. (Later on, I learned that many of the saints talked about degrees of humility: Augustine, Anselm, Thomas Aquinas, St. Benedict.)

Ignatius described the first mode as humbling one’s self enough to obey the law of God so that I would be willing to give up anything on earth rather than commit a mortal sin (which, for Catholics, refers to the kind of sin that could separate me from God’s sanctifying grace). In other words, I should be willing to give up everything that could lead me to grave sin.

The second mode is humbling one’s self enough so that I would be willing to give up anything on earth that could hinder me from serving God better. I should be able to make myself so spiritually free (i.e., so detached from my self-centeredness) that I would be equally willing to choose either riches or poverty, honor or shame, a long life or a short one, depending on which of the two would allow me to serve God more.

The third mode is humbling one’s self so much, that, assuming that it leads me to serve God better, I should in fact desire the more difficult choice: to enter into Christ’s poverty rather than the world’s riches, and to endure the shame that Christ endured rather than to receive the world’s honor, so as to accompany Christ more fully in His Passion and suffering. (A spiritual mentor of mine later advised me that we should be careful, though, not to fall into a kind of self-righteousness disguised as humility. There is a thin line between sinful pride and authentic humility.)

I know that some of your readers might disagree with St. Ignatius’ discussion, but I thought of sharing it nonetheless, just to give your readers something to ponder.

Could learning humility in general be similar? We need to get clear that our humility (or lack of it) affects our day-to-day relationship with the Lord, and value that relationship enough to keep the humility. The key may be focusing on the relationship (and making sure we value it highly) rather than focusing on ‘being humble’.

I was probably less than clear when I spoke of “re -evangelizing.” What I meant was Christ’s Person and work proclaimed,for you, the believer. This is different from the harangues to re- commit or re-dedicate yourself because you’ve “backslidden” and maybe weren’t saved the first time.
A decent example can be heard here:http://crosebrough.typepad.com/cwirlapodcast/lent/index.html

Listen to the sermon for the third Sunday in Lent.(It is,typical of Lutheran sermons,rather short.) I think you will find it quite a bit different than what you were expecting.

I am a fan of Pirate Josh,and have run into those of whom he speaks, but those guys are the exceptions, and I don’t count myself among them.

I don’t think you have misrepresented Jesus. Upon further reflection I think this conversation hinges on the task of preaching and a difference regarding what it is supposed to accomplish.

I sometimes wonder if we truly appreciate just how humble Christ was, relative to who he Is. I wrote a reflection on this recently. I’ll never read the Psalms the same way again after coming to this realization.

If you knew the extent to which I nag my chapel preachers over a lack of gospel….

A Christian community or a church is a preaching/teaching context. 6 sermons a week here. If the gospel is plainly preached as a rule, it does not have to be preached the same way in every text.

I am not at all following you at this point of “re-evangelizing.” I grew up being re-evangelized. All it did was make thousands of people doubt their salvation and submit themselves over and over again for “real” salvation.

Kerygma and Didache are not opposite Bibles. They are the same Jesus. The Jesus of Romans 3 is the Christ who spoke the parable to “humble yourself” and to do many other things yourself.

Pirate Josh used to point out his frustration with some of his Lutheran brothers who objected to any kind of “piety” as “pietism.” WHen Paul says the Law is for lawbreakers he is not canceling out the proclamation of the Law of Christ or the message of the Kingdom for disciples.

I’m happy to be criticized for law preaching as I know what the thrust of my ministry is. But it is a tad disturbing that I may be misrepresenting Jesus. Am I misrepresenting Jesus’ application of this parable? Are we commanded to “come down?”

But every sermon is not evangelism. I actually believe the Lordship of Jesus causes the sermon on the mount to make plain sense.

I note that a number of gospel-loving Christians struggle with any kind of admonition to live the Christian life. If we don’t run back to Romans 3 and justification by faith, then they are uncomfortable.

I believe the gospel.
The Christian lives under the Lordship of Christ and in the Kingdom of Jesus.
In that Kingdom, Jesus teaches a subversive, new ethic of, among other things, humility. We humble ourselves. That’s the text, and there are several others.

It’s not an imbalance to preach the commands of Christ.