The Deceiver and the Royal Wedding
As a committed Christian, I was happy to see the open presentation of the Christian faith at Saturday's Royal Wedding. Many watching choose to turn their backs on the truths of God's word and live a secular, non-believing life. That is their choice. They were kind enough to tolerate the message by sitting through it without making faces, and I thank them for their indulgence.
But for some who have never consciously made the decision to be secular, it was a great opportunity to hear a loving viewpoint that society has done its best to block. This includes the Millennial generation, who are the first to have been indoctrinated from the first grade through college into the liberal orthodoxy.
Bishop Michael Curry's sermon started off well, sharing the message of Christ. I thought, "How great! A black American preacher is presenting the message of the love of Christ to hundreds of millions of people." An accomplished preacher and speaker, he was certain to gain the attention of the listener.
Then the Deceiver stepped in. In a quick moment, Bishop Curry turned to the socialist world message of "Love." It snuck in through the side door of the church and landed on the lectern with hardly a noise. Curry later compounded his mistake by going down several rabbit trails that had nothing to do with a wedding, including a discussion of slavery. Worse were comments on Dr. King, who certainly was rolling over in his grave by that point, including quoting Dr. King's favorite Scripture passage from Amos 5:24 about justice. Again, what does that have to do with a wedding?
Why was his talk on "love" so wrong and misguided? Because he wasn't talking about the love of God as Christ defined it – or even as it is defined in the New Testament's first letter of John, Chapter 4, which he also quoted. He just made it sound as though he was.
In dealing with antonyms, we all know that the opposite of "hot" is "cold" and "day" is "night," but the opposite of "love" is not "hate." The opposite of love is indifference, because as God defines love, it is an action, not a feeling. Feelings can change, but actions accomplish things. Jesus's command to love one another means to take the action of being concerned about others, to help and pray for them and their lives, and not to be indifferent to their sufferings and trials.
But the socialist worldview and their semantical twisting of a lot of words have equated hate and love. In this way: If you want secure borders, then you don't "love" your neighbor. If you speak out against the mass invasion of Europe by specific groups who refuse to assimilate, then you are a hater. And Curry's argument would be, "Well, you certainly aren't showing love to these people."
See how easy it is to mislead the masses? A peppy sermon, delivered with emotion and containing socialist buzzwords, means that Curry will be promoted as the star of the wedding by the left media. Jesus was not a socialist (sorry, my friends on the left). Jesus said to call out sin and to hate the sin but to love the sinner. He did not mean that one should enable the sin, but to help the person in sin to free himself of it. So when the citizens of Europe cry out that a large group of people from other cultures are invading, and refusing to assimilate, to learn the language, and to obey the laws, they are not haters.
The nonviolent movement worked for Dr. King and the Civil Rights movement because America is a good country, with a moral population who obeys the law. But had he or Gandhi tried their movements in Nazi Germany, they would have been crushed under the jackboot, just as Europe today is being undercut by the misguided policies of its leaders.
It's sad to see the Royal Wedding become a platform for social justice sloganeering. Bishop Curry has set back the cause of Christ, and, I submit, even the progress of black American leaders, by this little homily today. Jesus warned us that Satan prowls the earth looking for his next victim who can be converted into sin. I'm sorry we saw his little victory on Saturday.