Well, as Jeff said at the beginning of the service,
good morning, welcome, especially if you're new.
My name's Tommy, I'm the rector here,
and if we haven't met and you're visiting,
I'll be hanging around after the church service.
I'll be up front for a little while,
and I really hope we get a chance to meet.
Before we have this baptism that we're excited about,
we're gonna spend a little time
looking at God's word together.
A couple of scholars at Vanderbilt
have developed something called the Unity Index,
and it's a way of measuring how divided our society is,
how polarized we are,
and their question was,
is it getting better or is it getting worse?
What would you think they discovered?
Yeah, things are getting worse.
Over the last 40 years,
we've become increasingly divided,
as a society,
and perhaps more so than we've ever been.
And there's a reason why you got that answer correct.
I think that we probably know that.
I think we've probably experienced it.
How many of us have lost friends
over the last few years?
Yeah, how many of us have maybe
lost friends over disagreements
about politics or culture or society?
Maybe you have people that you used to talk to
and then you just don't talk to them anymore.
How many of us have family members
that we avoid?
You don't have to raise your hand for that one.
That we avoid talking to
because we're afraid certain topics might come up.
How many are dreading Thanksgiving this year?
In particular,
it being an election year and all.
Sitting around that table
might be pretty interesting.
And so I don't have to tell you
that we live in a highly pluralistic society.
And the question that confronts us all the time is this.
How can people who have massive differences
when it comes to beliefs and values and lifestyle
live together in society?
When people are distressed
or even offended
by one another's beliefs and values,
are relationships even possible or not?
What we're going to see this morning
is that the gospel
has the power to transform every aspect of life,
including the way we treat
those with whom we disagree.
Time's up.
The way we treat
those with whom we disagree.
And I would actually go a step further
and say I think this is
maybe one of the biggest
or greatest tests
of any belief system,
sacred or religious.
How does your belief system
lead you to treat those
with whom you disagree?
The gospel has the power
to transform this
in the human heart.
And Paul gets into this issue
in 1 Corinthians chapter 8.
And actually this is part
of a larger argument
that goes through chapter 11 verse 1.
And then he picks this same issue up
in other places
such as Romans chapter 14.
So we're going to primarily focus
on the lectionary reading
which is 1 Corinthians 8.
But I'm going to be drawing
from these other places
because it's a larger argument.
And you really need to see
the whole argument
to understand the beauty
of what we're about to discuss.
First we're going to clarify
what Paul is not saying.
And then we're going to look
at what he is saying
and what makes such a thing possible.
Let's pray.
Our Heavenly Father,
we thank you
that your word
is not a dead word
nor is it
merely the product
of human ingenuity
or creativity
that this is a living
and active word
and that as we
gather together
in your name
you speak.
Speak to us
and through the power
of your Holy Spirit
make us receptive
to your word.
We pray this
in Jesus' holy name.
Amen.
So first of all
let me give you
a little context
of what's going on
and why Paul feels
the need to address this.
He gets into this
because there's
major disagreement
in the church
over food
that has been sacrificed
or dedicated
to a pagan deity.
In order to participate
in public life
in Corinth
it was almost impossible
to avoid
food that had been
dedicated
or sacrificed
to some pagan god.
So virtually
all the meat
sold in the meat market
had come out
of the temple sacrifices.
When people
would invite you
over for dinner
you could be
almost assured
that there would be
food that had been
dedicated to
a deity.
If it hadn't been
a part of a temple sacrifice
it could very well be
that your neighbors
if your pagan neighbors
invited you over
for dinner
that they would
offer a blessing
and dedicate
that food
to their pagan deity
before you ate.
At civic meetings
there would usually
be food of some kind
and whoever was
presiding over the meeting
would often bless
or dedicate that food
to a pagan god
or goddess
as a part
of the ceremony.
And so
there are Christians
living in this society
and so they're reacting
different ways.
Some Christians
are saying
hey listen
it's just food
it's just meat.
You know
it went on sale
in the market
I bought it
I don't care
where it came from
and it's just food.
Right?
And other Christians
are very very
scandalized by this.
They refuse
to touch this food
they refuse
to get near it
they're very scrupulous
about making sure
that the food
is spiritually clean
before they eat it
because they're afraid
of being defiled
and there's this sense
that the Christians
who do eat meat
must not be serious
about their faith
and they might even
be tainted by it.
So there was a lot
of argument happening
in the church
over what to do.
And the question is
how can these Christians
who disagree
over a pretty important issue
go to church together?
Right?
How do these Christians
eat together?
What do you bring
to the potluck meal
when you have
these major disagreements
and somebody
might be scandalized?
So here's what
Paul does not say.
Okay.
Paul does not say
well listen
all truth
is relative
and all that matters
is that you live
your truth.
Whatever you feel
is right
you do you
let them do them
and then we can
all get along.
That's not what
Paul says.
In the postmodern world
a lot of people think
that's the way
to overcome
these kinds of divisions.
If we could just
all agree
that there really
isn't any
objective truth
that all truth
is relative
and that even
if there is
an objective truth
it would be
so impossible
to know it
that it would be
better for society
if we all just
live with the idea
that your truth
is your truth
and your truth
is your truth
and my truth
is my truth
and then we can
all get along.
But of course
that does start
to fall apart
a bit.
If you push
the logic
you begin to realize
well that is itself
kind of an absolute
truth right?
You know
the one
absolute truth
that's allowed
to exist
is the truth
that there is
no absolute
truth.
It doesn't really
work.
Paul clearly
believes
that there is
an objective
truth
and Paul
believes that
it is possible
to know
and ascertain
things that are
more true
or less true
according to that
continuum right?
So it's what we
would call a
correspondence theory
of truth.
There is an
objective truth
there is an
objective reality
and what we
believe either
corresponds more
or less
with that
objective reality.
So he believes
there is a truth
and to some
extent it is
knowable.
And in this
particular case
he says
listen in this
particular case
it is totally
okay if you
want to eat
that meat.
If you want
to go to the
market and you
want to buy
that meat
and you want
to eat it
if somebody
invites you
over to their
home it's
okay to eat
the food.
And he lays
out his argument
in verses 4
through 6.
He says listen
we know that
idols don't
actually exist.
We know that
human beings
have created
them that they've
imbued them
with spiritual
significance but
they don't
actually exist.
We know that
there's only
one God.
Now in other
places he says
there's a danger
in idol worship
of corresponding
of relating
to demons.
But that's a
different,
that's a related
but distinct
issue.
He says we
know that
idols themselves
don't actually
exist.
There's only
one true God
and he made
everything including
that food on
the table so
eat it and
you'll be fine.
And he says
in verse 8
you know what
you eat is not
ultimately going
to have an impact
on your
relationship with
God.
Eating certain
foods is not
going to bring
you closer to
God.
You might feel
like it does
if it's really
good food but
it's not going
to ultimately
result in a
better relationship.
And eating other
foods is not going
to push you
further away from
God.
That's not what
this is about.
So Paul's saying
there is a correct
way of thinking
about this issue
but not all
Christians see it.
and there's a
significant number
of Christians
who are very
scandalized by
this.
And he says
you know those
Christians who are
refusing to eat
the meat the
issue is that they
have a weak
conscience.
Now normally
what we think of
as a weak
conscience is the
opposite of what
Paul actually says.
The way Paul
defines weak
conscience is he
says your conscience
is too weak to
protect you from
unnecessary guilt
and superstition.
Isn't that
interesting?
So we would think
of it normally as
the opposite.
A weak conscience
is a person who's
sort of licentious
you know.
But Paul's saying
no no no.
These people have a
weak conscience
because it can't
protect them against
superstitious guilt
and anxiety.
So these are people
who are the weak
Christians are likely
people who are not
as well theologically
informed.
They tend to be
more superstitious
as a result of that.
These are probably
people who like to
have things very
black and white.
They really want
there to be a rule
for everything.
They want somebody
to tell them exactly
what to do and not
to in every situation
which helps them feel
more in control.
Maybe these are people
that tend to overthink
to overanalyze.
Right?
These are the weak
Christians.
And Paul contrasts
those with the strong
Christians.
people who have
a strong conscience.
The reason they're able
to eat the meat
is because the conscience
is strong enough
to resist the unnecessary
guilt and superstition.
Now sometimes guilt
is unnecessary.
But sometimes
I'm sorry
sometimes guilt
is necessary.
It could be a good thing.
But in this case
it's not.
And so Paul says
these are the people
who are probably
more likely to be
theologically informed.
They don't need
all the rules
spelled out.
They have good instincts
about what faithfulness
looks like.
Very important
they probably have
a much higher tolerance
for ambiguity.
Some people have
a really hard time
tolerating ambiguity.
The strong Christians
probably have a much
higher tolerance
for ambiguity
meaning situations
that are very gray
and unclear.
And in Romans chapter 14
Paul actually
clearly identifies himself
as among the strong.
He basically says
these are the people
this is how I live.
Right?
And presumably
he hopes
that everyone
is going to grow
and get there eventually.
The desire would be
that the weak Christians
eventually
become more
theologically informed
more able to tolerate
ambiguity
less prone to superstition
and that they all
become strong eventually.
So in situations
like this
there is an objective
truth out there.
Paul is not saying
you do you
all truth is relative.
He's saying
there's a way
of thinking about this
that has a greater
correspondence
to what we believe
theologically.
However
not all Christians
are there yet.
They don't all
understand that yet.
Everybody is kind of
at a different place
on their journey
of maturity.
what this means
is that we can't
just in a situation
like this
just pretend like
everybody's truth
is equally valid.
Some people's
beliefs and stances
have a greater
correspondence
to what is true.
But the question is
how do we relate
across those lines
of disagreement
when people are
at different places
in that journey?
How do you relate
to people
when there is
strong disagreement?
think about
the conversations
that you have had
around theology
or social issues
or politics.
Think about people
in your life
who may
send you quotes
or send you articles
or in other ways
sort of convey
that they think
that you're way off base
in what you think
or what you believe
or what you value.
It's very tempting
when somebody's doing that
to just cut them
out of your life.
I mean it's very tempting
just to start
to wall your life off
and only relate
to people
with whom you know
you're going to have
very little conflict
around these issues.
Very understandable
why that would be tempting.
Here's what Paul says.
Notice that he aims
his correction
not at the weak Christians.
Christians.
The force of this
is aimed
at the strong Christians.
So he says
you know
you guys are correct
but
evidence of a changed heart
is found in two things
according to Paul.
Number one
the way we hold
our convictions.
The way we hold
our convictions.
What do I mean by that?
Chapter 8 verse 1
he says
now concerning food
offered to idols
we know that
all of us
possess knowledge
and then he says
but this knowledge
puffs up.
What's he saying?
The sin of pride
is always there
and it is always lurking
just under the surface
and what Paul is saying
is this
you can have
the right theology
you can be
theologically solid
and you can be
technically correct
in what you believe
but just under the surface
that pride
is simmering away
and in your correct theology
you can start to feel
pretty good about yourself
and you can start to feel
pretty smug
and you see this
all the time
especially online
you know
think about your theological beliefs
or your political beliefs
or your beliefs
about various issues
people with solid views
I see this all the time
people you know
who I rely on
who I look to
I say this person
has really solid thinking
on these issues
and yet
you see them online
like on Twitter
or X
whatever it's called now
treating their opponents
with contempt
right
with smug
condescending
belittling comments
going back and forth
and you ask
how could
this person
be so solid
and yet
there's such
smug
contempt
in the way
they talk to people
do you ever see this
in yourself
right
you ever read
or hear somebody
say something
and your first response
is to roll your eyes
you know
rolling your eyes
is a sign of contempt
you can't believe
anybody would be
so stupid
or so misguided
you know
as somebody
who I find myself
in lots of conversations
about theology
and culture
I constantly
feel this
in myself
that is knowledge
puffing us up
that is that pride
simmering up
bubbling up
to the surface
filling us
with hot
hot air
and so the question is
what do we do about it
and Paul goes on to say
in verse 2
if anyone imagines
that he knows something
in other words
if you think of yourself
as a person
with a good read on things
and you think of yourself
as a person
who knows a lot
right
about the situation
if anyone
you know
if there's an expert
on this issue
I'm probably it
and I probably have
a better understanding
than anybody else
on this issue
and why can't everybody
agree with me
he says
if you're that kind of person
listen
he says
if anyone imagines
that he knows something
he does not yet know
as he ought to know
in other words
if you think you know
everything about a given topic
chances are
that's evidence
that you know very little
right
if you think
that your perspective
is the only one
that's reasonable
that's evidence
that you don't actually
know what you're talking about
in other words
this is a call
to be intellectually humble
evidence of a changed heart
is that you are
intellectually humble
people who have had
their hearts changed
by the gospel
this quality emerges
you know
a person who talks
about this difference
in how we hold knowledge
is the great philosopher
Charles Taylor
he says
there are two ways
that people tend
to hold their views
the first group
assumes their view
is the only plausible view
right
they assume
that what they think
is the only reasonable way
to think
and they cannot imagine
any reasonable person
holding any other view
than their view
and this group
the first group
he says
you can
here's what is interesting
he says
you can find this
on the right
and the left
you can find it
on both sides
of any issue
so
a fundamentalist
from the Bible Belt
might say
there is a God
and anybody
who doesn't think so
is a moron
but then you go
into the secular academy
and you find
a secular academic
there is no God
and anybody
who thinks there is
is a moron
and Taylor would say
you know
they're on different
sides of the issue
but down deep
they're exactly the same
they're both
holding their views
in the same way
mine is the only
reasonable way
to think
and anybody
who disagrees
is clearly an idiot
that's the first group
here's the second group
Taylor says
the second group
is intellectually humble
so they hold on
to their view
and they
they
they believe
what they believe
but they also understand
that their view
is one view
it's a point of view
and they are open
to the possibility
that other points
of view
are understandable
that they
they might also
be plausible
there are people
who understand
you know
I've arrived
at my set of convictions
but I understand
how a person
coming from a different
perspective
might
might arrive
at a different place
that doesn't mean
they agree
it doesn't mean
they're saying
it's true
but it means
they can understand
how somebody
would get there
so you can hold
strong convictions
but you remain
open to the possibility
that there are things
maybe that you
don't know
or that there might
be certain aspects
of this
that you are wrong on
now a person
who has had their heart
changed by the gospel
holds their views
with intellectual
humility
it doesn't mean
they lack conviction
and this is a big
misunderstanding here
because we say
well does that mean
that they're weak sauce
right
that they don't
they don't really
have any convictions
absolutely not
right
a person
with a
who's intellectually
humble
can hold very
strongly to their
convictions
they might be
willing to die
for their convictions
under the right
circumstances
but they also
understand
the danger
of pride
they understand
what it's like
to wrestle
with sin
and they understand
the limits
of their ability
to understand
every angle
of the issue
because they are
human beings
and they understand
that no human
is capable
of knowing
everything
and these days
honestly much
of what we do know
especially in the realm
of culture
and politics
is skewed
by the algorithms
that literally
decide the content
that we consume
and so there's a certain
amount of humility
to understanding
I live within
a bit of an echo chamber
within a point of view
that is reinforced
but that's not
everybody's experience
so evidence
of a changed heart
is down number one
in the way we hold
our convictions
I believe this
and I would die for it
and I believe that it
corresponds to truth
but I understand
how and why
you might disagree
number two
the way we receive
those who disagree
not just the way
I hold my convictions
but the way we receive
those who disagree
this is truly breathtaking
verses 7 to 13
even though the strong
Christians are
theologically correct
even though Christians
according to Paul
have a right to eat
wherever they want
to eat whatever they want
they are completely
and totally free
Paul's primary concern
is the well-being
of the weak
brother and sister
if one of these
weak Christians
sees other Christians
eating food
sacrificed to idols
if they're walking
through the market
and they look up
and they see
in a temple courtyard
they see Christians
eating in that temple
courtyard
with non-Christians
and they know
that that food
was just sacrificed
and they see that
happening
they're going to be
deeply scandalized
by it
and they might
stumble in their
own faith
they might
they might then
go to the temple
the next day
and eat the same food
but they think
that they're actually
worshipping that idol
and that could lead
to spiritually
disastrous consequences
and so Paul says
the strong Christians
need to be guided
by this overarching
question
what is the impact
of my behavior
on my brothers
and sisters
what I choose
to do
with my body
what I choose
to do
with my time
what I choose
to do
with my money
what is the impact
of that
on the people
around me
including the people
I disagree with
right
and Paul says
if you ever
find yourself
in a situation
where your choice
to eat that meat
may in any way
scandalize
we brothers
and sisters
don't do it
verse 13
he says
therefore
if food makes
my brother stumble
I will never
eat meat
lest I make
my brother stumble
I mean
that is amazing
when you consider
how countercultural
that view is
so people
in our culture
right
we're all about
demanding our rights
right
we are taught
and we are encouraged
to insist
on our rights
our constitutional rights
our civil rights
human rights
our rights
as Christians
our rights
as Christians
right
those of us here
who are Christians
I would say
Christians
are as loud
and as insistent
about this
as anyone
out there
but what's
the motivation
behind all
of the clamoring
for our rights
what is the motivation
behind the marches
what is the motivation
behind the political
alliances
is it insecurity
at no longer
being the majority
is it a fear
of irrelevance
is it wounded pride
is it a fear
of losing
maybe some of the freedoms
that we have enjoyed
as long as we can remember
you know
the New Testament
scholar
N.T. Wright
says this
and by the way
he would fully affirm
the value
the importance
of rights
he would say
that these are things
that we need to be
grateful for
but here's also
what he says
insisting on one's rights
even insisting
on one's rights
as a Christian
is a sign
that something else
other than the true God
is being worshipped
saying
when that is your
sole focus
what is really
motivating you
a heart
that has truly
been transformed
by the gospel
is motivated
not by fear
not by insecurity
not by pride
but by sacrificial love
so when it comes
to our rights
we should be
thankful for them
we should praise
God for them
we should hope
to exercise them
freely
as often
as we can
but
we should always
ask
what the impact
of our free
exercise of rights
has
on the people
around us
and Paul says
if there's a chance
that we may do harm
we should be ready
to relinquish
our rights
immediately
out of love
for others
there was a recent
there's lots of examples
we could give of this
there was one recent
example of this
that came in the early
days of the
COVID pandemic
we were learning
more and more
about the virus
staying up late
at night
reading as much
as we possibly
could
there was a fear
that large public
gatherings could
accelerate the spread
of COVID
the word that people
used was the
super spreader
events
and because of that
they said that
big public gatherings
would put the more
vulnerable members
of society
the immunocompromised
the elderly
at greater risk
and therefore
local authorities
said churches
should temporarily
stop gathering
in person
until the transmission
rates go down
right
and Christians
were up in arms
about this
because we have a
right to gather
for worship
and the government
has no right
to tell us
that we can't do that
it's a fundamental
right in our society
and because of passages
like this
we chose as a church
to stop meeting
in person
as hard
as it was
not out of fear
of COVID
not out of fealty
to local governments
but because we looked
at passages
like this
and we decided
to temporarily
relinquish our right
to meet in person
in order to demonstrate
our love
and concern
for the broader
community
and it doesn't mean
that we don't
think that that right
is important
and it doesn't mean
that under certain
circumstances
we wouldn't fight
for that right
but in this case
we allow this ethic
from places like
1 Corinthians 8
to govern
our conduct
and I would say
if you're hearing this
and you disagree
I can point you
to a sermon
about how to interact
with people
you disagree with
and you can listen
to it
but it was a very
hard issue
it was a very
gray issue
I mean I understood
both sides
but at the time
we decided
this is the kind
of thing
that Paul
would call us
to do
and if you follow
Paul's argument
through the end
of chapter 10
where it picks up
and then Romans
chapter 14
we actually see
that we're called
to go even further
than this
not only should
I have a willingness
at times
to relinquish
my rights
for the well-being
of my brothers
and sisters
with whom I disagree
but Paul calls us
to go much
much much further
in Romans chapter 14
because see
these days
it is very common
for people to say
this
when it comes
to disagreement
people will say
this
agree with me
and then I might
accept you
but unless we disagree
I don't think
that we can be
in relationship
and so
I don't know
if you've noticed
this but a lot
of times
I find myself
in conversations
where the first
few comments
or questions
people are kind
of feeling
each other out
they're kind
of making
little references
and they're seeing
how you respond
and what they're
trying to do
is to sort you
and I do the same
thing
we're trying
to sort
each other
to figure out
is there a chance
that we agree
on the issues
that we see
the world
in the same way
or not
and many times
when people
start to get a sense
that I don't think
that we're coming
from the same place
there's kind
of a polite
distancing
where I'm not
going to talk
to that person
anymore
and it happens
all the time
because we have
the sense
that unless
we have a kind
of agreement
around the basics
I'm not sure
we can be
in relationship
Romans 14
says the opposite
it says
that when we
encounter someone
with whom we
strongly disagree
before we try
to correct them
before we try
to argue with them
Paul says
the first thing
that you should do
is to welcome them
and the word
in Greek
means much
much more
than just
you're welcome
to sit at my table
or you're welcome
to interact with me
John Stott writes
this means more
than to accept
people in the sense
of acquiescing
in their existence
or even in their
right to belong
it means more
even than to receive
or accept
in one's society
or into one's home
or circle of acquaintances
here's what
he goes further
than all of that
this isn't just
yeah you can come
you can be a part
of the group
you can be among
my kind of acquaintances
he says no no
it means to welcome
into one's fellowship
and into one's heart
it implies the warmth
and the kindness
of genuine love
I welcome you in
with warmth
and kindness
and genuine love
and then maybe
down the road
we start to sort out
where we agree
and disagree
it's a completely
different posture
and just take a moment
and imagine
how different
would our society be
if Christians
just Christians
regularly responded
this way
to people
who disagree
with us
not only within
Christian circles
but in the broader
society
it doesn't mean
we have soupy
convictions
but it means
the posture
is one of
open warm embrace
first
there are plenty
of places
where Paul
highlights
the importance
of correct theology
and working through
and making sure
to correct people
who are led astray
right
absolutely
right
but the ethic
says
the first thing
that you do
the posture
is
foregrounds
love
welcome
embrace
and in that context
differences can be
explored
imagine how different
it would go
at your Thanksgiving
table
if this were the
ethic
this Paul says
is evidence
of a heart
that has been
transformed by the
gospel
and we read this
and quite frankly
I think it raises
a question
how is such a thing
even possible
how could anyone
be expected
to be willing
to relinquish
their rights
or to welcome
and embrace
their enemies
with such
extravagant love
and the key
to the whole argument
is found in Romans
chapter 15
verse 7
where he says
welcome others
as Christ
has welcomed
you
why should we
be willing
to relinquish
our rights
to love people
who disagree
with us
because once
we stood
condemned
as enemies
of God
in our sin
and yet Jesus
the eternal
son of God
who had all
of the rights
who had all
of the glory
and all
of the power
relinquished
all of that
gave up
all of his
rights
to come
and to die
the death
of a common
criminal
out of love
for us
why should
I relinquish
my rights
because he
relinquished
his rights
for me
right
why should
we enter
into the world
and embrace
people who
disagree with us
because this
is what it
means to
welcome
this is what
John
this is what
it means
to welcome
others
right
you encounter
somebody
you disagree
with
what does
it mean
to love
and embrace
them
well
you enter
intellectually
into their
world
you work
to try to
understand
and sympathize
with their
viewpoint
their point
of view
right
a fundamental
rule of
debate is
you should
be able
to articulate
you should
be able
to articulate
the point
of view
of your
opponent
better than
they can
and you
should be
able to do
that before
you respond
so what I
hear you
saying is
and you
should do
when you
get done
they should
look at you
and be like
wow
that yes
that's exactly
what I
I couldn't
have said it
better myself
right
that's what
it means
to welcome
and to embrace
you enter
fully
and you
understand
their
perspective
you love
them as a
friend
even though
you disagree
Paul says
why should
we be willing
to do that
for the sake
of somebody
else
because that's
exactly what
Jesus Christ
did
the eternal
son of God
takes on
flesh
he enters
into our
world
he becomes
in every
way
exactly
like us
he takes
on our
weakness
he experiences
the human
condition
from the
inside
right
in every
way
he is
tempted
as we
are
and yet
without
sin
why does
he become
in every
way
like us
so that
one day
we might
become
in every
way
like him
and when
that truth
when the
truth of
the gospel
is driven
into your
heart
when you
recognize
that you
are the
one who
deserved
to be
cut off
and yet
Jesus Christ
was willing
to relinquish
his rights
and enter
into your
world
and welcome
you
and embrace
you
that fundamentally
transforms
the way you
see those
with whom
you disagree
and you
cannot help
but love
them as
Jesus has
loved you
let's pray
Lord we thank
you for your
word and we
thank you for
the gospel
and we thank
you that you're
a God who
doesn't sit
sternly and
distantly
away waiting
for us to get
our act
together
you're not
a God
who confronts
us with
all of the
ways that we
have fallen
short and
then leaves
us there
to wallow
hopelessly
but you're a
God who
cares about
holiness
above all
else
you care about
our holiness
above all
else
and yet you
are willing
to set
aside your
rights and
your power
and your
glory and
enter into
our space
to embrace
us while we
were still
sinners
Lord to
renew us
from the
inside out
Lord we
pray that
this would
govern
that this
would transform
the way we
see ourselves
that it
would transform
the way we
see people
across those
lines of
difference
that it
would give
us a new
set of
priorities
that it
would reorient
our hearts
to a posture
of sacrificial
love
we pray this
that we might
be as a
community
Lord a
beacon of
hope and
peace building
and reconciliation
in this city
that we might
bring you
glory
we pray this
in your son's
holy name
amen