Castaway's ...

Are we so dull we just don’t see it anymore?  Perhaps so over-exposed that our senses just do not even detect the warnings anymore?  For many in the world, the Bible is just anecdotes and fairytales.  For those folks, the central characters in the Bible are no more real than Mickey Mouse or the Easter Bunny.  And that is the level of comparison that is often made … something harmless compared to the Bible.  But if good comprises the descriptions of God, then evil comprises the description of His enemy.  Satan is not Mickey Mouse, nothing like what Mickey represents.  Satan earned a name change, after destroying the Lucifer he was, and becoming the evil incarnate he chose to embrace and now is powerless to be changed from.  Satan does not want a change.  Satan wants to hurt, destroy, cause death, and control everything he touches before he kills it.  Satan and his now demonic hoard were not cast out of heaven because of a few parking infractions.  They invented war there.  They invented pain there.  They invented lies there.  These castaways were forced out of perfection, away from the love of God, because their evil would have killed every living thing in proximity if it were allowed to remain.

And most modern Christians are content to ascribe red skin, a forked tail, hooves, and a pitch fork to how they consider what Satan is … this, while intently watching episodes of Lucifer on Fox.  And this is hardly a rant against a single show.  Our media is full of the fantastic, all rooted in stories of good and evil, where evil spans a gamut of things intended to scare us, or entertain us, or make us somewhat sympathetic to it.  The word castaways itself is hardly something that strikes fear into the hearts of readers, it is innocuous enough, subtle enough, but it represents a horror that is unrivaled, and a danger we have become so blunted to, that we invite it into our lives and make it dinner, as if it were just an estranged friend with a harmless agenda.  It’s not.  And demon possession is not just something that makes up good horror stories in the movies, with awesome special effects applied.  It is something intended to ruin your life, estrange those you love, disintegrate your family, and indulge lusts within you that would turn you from mild-mannered-you, into the mindset of a serial killer with no remorse or regret; not instantly, but slowly and imperceptibly over time, where there is little defense made, or request for defense.

Modern Christians hardly look for defense against it.  It is easier to comprehend why those who lack a real faith in the Bible, would pick up a Ouija board and dabble.  They are looking to experiment with the supernatural and see if something more truly exists.  Interesting to me, they do not try prayer to the God who represents love and good.  Instead they pick up the tool of evil and invite it to interact with them.  Seems like the answers of a God who loves them deeply would be better for them, than the answers of an entity who would wish to destroy them from within.  Yet Ouija boards are not burned today, they are manufactured today.  The castaways that answer are not harmless, they represent a picture of evil your mind has yet to imagine.  And instead of running from it, too often, it is opened up in the living room and treated as if it were no different than the game of Monopoly or Chess.  It is different.  It has consequence, whether you perceive it or not.  For in this method, as well as a host of others, we take down the “not welcome” signs, and invite demonic castaways to find their homes in our homes, and our hearts.  Even if the special effects we envision never actually materialize in front of us.

I imagine everyone misses those they have lost.  I imagine the idea of continuing to communicate with a dear departed one, who surely exists in heaven (no one we know ever goes to hell in our minds, that is unthinkable); would be great to talk to just one more time.  So because the devil convinces us of the immortality of the soul, that we cannot be truly killed, as he told Eve way back in the Garden of Eden.  We buy his lie.  We begin to believe we are never truly killed, that we simply pass on to the next dimension.  Hell for those other enemies we have.  Heaven for literally everyone we know (and love).  Since their disembodied souls live there, why is it so hard to believe that they may wish to travel back to earth, in some ghostly or spirit-y form to talk to us, perhaps give us advice.  King Saul of Old Testament times believed this, and consulted a witch to get his answers.  But it was not Samuel he raised, only a demon that resembled Samuel.

The departed love one you seek to converse with, may come, but in truth you are now only conversing with a demon who knew your lost one, as well as you do.  They can imitate expressions, gestures, sayings, and looks.  They understand how to mimic us down to the DNA level (why would we think we are the only ones to begin to understand DNA).  So the show is spectacular.  That is if you like watching a horror movie in 4D, that is bent on destroying you, while it portrays the villain as the hero.  And because Christians, let alone atheists, do not believe in the “sleep” of death.  They invite this horror movie into their lives, and do not even ask for a defense.  But this idea is not new.  I imagine two men of long ago, tried this same thing around the campfire.  I imagine at first it was a great experience, getting lots of advice from the long departed they admired, even perhaps loved.  But then something went sideways.  Instead of just talking to them, the demons entered them, and refused to leave.  This would make the men slaves to the will and strength of demons, that up to that point, they did nothing to deter.  And voila, demon possession of the type in the time of Christ.  While it may be more subtle in our day, it is no less effective, brought about by the same ideology, and methods.

Matthew records the story of what had happened to two men who had invited castaways to find a home within themselves, and now were powerless against that earlier decision.  Picking up in chapter eight, and verse 28 he begins … “And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way.”  Jesus had moved locations from Capernaum (Peters house) across the lake.  The devil had already brought out a great storm on the sea intending to kill the entourage before it could make the far shoreline.  But Jesus simply quieted it with a word, and distance was negated.  Getting out of the boats however, they had landed in demon territory.  These two men, possessed of many many demons, were so fierce, and so superhumanly strong, that no one tried to pass by this way.  Interesting that they lived in a graveyard, a foretelling of what was to become of them, and a perfect metaphor of those who stand without Christ, and in the arms of His enemy.  But what is the strength of mortal men against the fury of thousands of demons?  The word castaways now hardly does the terror justice.  Fear rules this land.  And none of the Rabbi’s or Sanhedrin rulers have any kind of solution.  It would appear the organized religion of God stood powerless against the might of the Satanic kingdom established in these two men.

Matthew continues in verse 29 saying … “And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?”  The demons make the argument that they did nothing to seek out Christ.  They remained in their home territory.  So why was Jesus here?  Being next to the Son of God, the source of all love and life, now reminds them of the beings they once were, and the proximity they once held near the throne of the Father.  Their former lives and existence are now pure torture to remember.  They cannot bear to be so close.  They must get away.  They must get away from the presence of Jesus.  They ask if Jesus is here to torment them with memories of what it is to love so purely, or stand so close to love, or to be who they once were?  It is torment to them.  It is anguish to them.  There are no fires present, except the fire of love.  But the torment remains.

Matthew continues in verse 30 saying … “And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding. [verse 31] So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine.”  The devils, the demons, had planned to kill their hosts over time.  The hosts of this hoard would not benefit in any way.  They would be slaves, until they would be killed.  The methods are no different today, even if the fury is less evident.  Entering your home and sowing discord and fury between husband and wife, or parent and child, is no less effective at destroying relationships, and the love that would normally accompany them.  After all we invite them in.  They come through our habits, our choice of what we focus upon, our sins that we indulge over and over and over again without abandon, or remorse.  And somehow we are surprised that the enemy of the Lord still exists?  The demons knew they were to be cast away, they only wished to move from one target to another.  Have we presented them with a current one?

Matthew continues in verse 32 saying … “And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters.”  What the demonic legion had in mind for their original hosts, was now accelerated in the herd of swine.  Destruction, death, frenzy.  Note, that the demons would not be destroyed in this action, only the hosts.  The demons were free to find a new host, in a new time, perhaps in every time.  Only the hosts suffer, are enslaved, and eventually die.  The demon is free to move on.  They hate the love of Christ, but crave the destruction of mankind.  The math is easy.  Since they cannot hurt God directly, they hurt what God loves, and in so doing, they torture the God of love and life.  They will do this as much as they can, until the appointed time comes, and they can do it no more.

Matthew continues in verse 33 saying … “And they that kept them fled, and went their ways into the city, and told everything, and what was befallen to the possessed of the devils. [verse 34] And, behold, the whole city came out to meet Jesus: and when they saw him, they besought him that he would depart out of their coasts.”  Here is where the story goes sideways.  You would think that the town’s people would want a savior to cast away every demon in that area, to free them from the fear of it.  You would think the liberation would be welcomed, even if at the loss of the material possessions of the pigs.  What is the price of a herd of swine to have every demon cast away from this region?  But whether they feared an even greater loss of wealth, or whether they feared they were meeting the boss of all demons, or whether they just refused to believe the Son of God would ever come to see them because they did not deserve it.  The results were all the same, they asked Jesus to leave their region.  How do you ask the one who would liberate you to leave you alone?  How do you choose to be a castaway, or make God one?

Perhaps the same way we do it today.  Perhaps we choose to cling to our habits, our entertainment, our sins of the flesh; until we would rather have Jesus give us some space, than see these attributes about our lives change into something else.  You see only Jesus can drive away the demons of our lives, and out of our homes, and away from us.  But then, Jesus does exactly that.  When we invite Jesus into our homes, the sins we treasure tend to leave.  So the struggle in the human mind begins.  Do I really want change, or do I like my slavery to self?  Do I enjoy the sins I commit, thinking them to be the fun in my life, the spice of my life, believing self-less-love to be boring or too demanding?  And too many of us, like the people of that region, would rather have Jesus a little distant from our real lives, a little ways outside of our hearts.  We will claim to be His followers, but in real life, we only follow a little.  And the demons we entertain instead will allow us to feel as though we are doing “ a good job”.  Demons love us to think we are “good people”.  After all, none of the folks we know and love ever go to hell when they die, always only to heaven, right?  God’s mercy, and all that.  But while we live, we entertain that which would destroy us, even if we do not perceive it.

It is an old saying that “the greatest trick the devil ever pulled off, was making us think he does not exist”.  There is truth to that.  Modern Christians have seemed to have all but forgotten it.  None of us even consider we face the same demonic hoards, those two men succumbed to so long ago.  None of us even consider that tinkering with Ouija board might actually have permanent consequences.  How could watching the show Lucifer ever present any real kind of problem, it is only a show right?  And for that matter, how could watching any show that presents the ideas of good vs evil, as something man gets to choose, present a risk.  It is only entertainment right?  Nobody believes it is real.  Nobody believes that what we focus on might actually change how we think, or what we believe.  Nobody that is, except a huge group of castaways that intend to dominate our lives, imperceptibly, so that we never even know they are there.  Jesus acts just like demon repellent.  But then, do you have Jesus?  Have you made Jesus a permanent part of your home, or is He just a periodic guest, from time to time, when it is “convenient”? 

Man cannot defeat these castaways.  Jesus can.  The math is simple.  What will you do about it?

 

Who Leads, Who Follows ...

Speaking from the side of a mountain, offers the ability to have many listeners in the venue.  Speaking from a modest home in the time of Christ does not.  As crowds began to gather at the home of Peter in Capernaum, before things got out of hand, Jesus decides it would be better to move locations across the Sea of Galilee on to distant shores.  This will offer both a better venue for handling large crowds, as well as the change in locale for new local residents to hear firsthand what they may not have been able to travel to hear thus far.  It is solid and logical reasoning.  It is a good plan.  But does that matter?

In America today, we like the idea of having teams solve problems.  We are enamored with the concept, that where applying one mind to a problem may be OK, applying several minds is bound to make the solution better.  But does it?  When the mechanics of teamwork actually takes place, nearly all such gatherings produce (or identify) a leader.  Round tables of ideas are facilitated.  Brain storming is coached and guided.  Voting on suggestions is often requested at the behest of a natural leader who tends to call these meetings, guide them, and often create the first straw man idea from which the other team members will edit and critique.  If nature hates a vacuum, then so do I.  But I am not afraid to speak in groups, to share my opinion, and to listen to truly hear what someone else is saying.  Stick me in a team setting however that has no leader, and I will become one; or sit in my chair tortured, akin to listening to nails on a chalk board, for the waste of energy that occurs in a team setting with no direction.  I can follow.  But if there is no one to follow, I will lead.  I just cannot sit still and shut up, and do nothing.  I have learned this about myself.

This personality trait follows me into the church.  Put me in a group study situation, let the teacher pose a question, if there is silence, I will fill it.  It is not the silence I hate, it is the lack of participation from others.  It is seeing the teacher worried that no one is really listening or cares, or has a clue.  So I speak.  And then temptation begins.  It is all too easy for me to quietly take leadership of the class from the teacher, and begin posing my own questions, directing the conversation, and making a series of points.  This is a bridge too far.  It is not my place to teach where I have not been invited to do so.  Because I have opinions does not make them right, or dominant.  Because I can speak, does not mean that I should.  Perhaps my silence is exactly what was needed.  Wresting control from a struggling teacher is not my place, nor should it have ever entered my mind or lips.  Being the student is the place I should have maintained in the body of Christ, at least during the time I describe above.

It would seem though, that the temptation I struggle with in the church, is not isolated to me alone.  Speakers over time begin to think of themselves as the defacto leaders of any situation they enter in.  How many pastors are able to remain silent in someone else’s group study?  This problem is made worse, because the believers begin to look to the pastor for answers more than they look to the leader of the class to keep them on point, and arrive at the conclusion they were intended to study to reach.  It is easier to simply ask the pastor for the answer.  He is bound to know, right?  Why study if you can jump right there.  And in the mind of the pastor, they begin to think of themselves in this light.  As if it is their perpetual place to be, because of the role they have embraced.  At all times, in all situations.  Evangelists so much the more.  Evangelists have the added burden of passion (trying to get attention), and brevity (they are not here long and need to make their points before they depart).  So the mindset of leaders in ministry is that they should become perpetual leaders, almost never the follower.

This is human folly.  In the body of Christ, we are each enriched by the perspectives of others in the body.  No perspective should ever be considered dominant, or needed at the exclusion of others.  Each perspective is equally important, and should be equally treasured.  When attempting to learn more about our Lord and Savior, we should realize that each holds only one point of view.  All the other points of view, outside of our own, are what give us all a better perspective on Jesus, and how He interacts with His church.  In the church that Jesus owns, He is the only true leader.  Everyone of us is intended to follow Him, not each other, no matter what role we may play in His overall ministry.  This is a very flat organizational model.  It is also not one of consensus, but one of autocratic benevolence.  Jesus did not ask the disciples for ideas about what to do next, He consulted His Father in heaven, then took action.  Jesus did not need a team to support His ideas or plans.  He expressed His intention to move, it was now up to others how they responded, but no matter what they did, Jesus was moving.

Matthew records how this story progresses in his gospel in chapter eight, picking up in verse 18 saying … “Now when Jesus saw great multitudes about him, he gave commandment to depart unto the other side.”  You will notice Jesus gave “commandment” to depart.  This was not a suggestion.  This was not a question.  This was a directive.  It was time to move.  But extending this notion a bit further.  When Jesus gives us direction, it is never a suggestion, or a request to vote by committee to determine what to do. If Jesus says it, it is a “commandment”.  Most of us think the only commandments in the Bible are back in Exodus limited to Ten items that form the basis of how to love.  But in fact, commandments are given all through scripture, every time there is a record of what Jesus asks, and where that might be applied to more than just the person He was speaking to.  Jesus does not manage His church through suggestions, or by committee, those are human constructs.  Jesus is the leader of His church, there are no other leaders, just Him.

Matthew continues in verse 19 saying … “And a certain scribe came, and said unto him, Master, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest. [verse 20] And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.”  Looking at this interchange, our first inclination is that what Jesus said would have discouraged this scribe from following Him.  But in truth we don’t know that.  What we may be doing when we read this, is transferring our own fears about being homeless, and without possessions, on to the scribe who was pledging to follow Jesus.  In similar circumstances it is likely we who would have retreated from being a “full time” disciple.  And instead followed Jesus, only when He was in our area, you know, like a part time disciple, when it was convenient.  Just like it is today with all too many of us.  But it is possible, that this scribe was not like us, and was undeterred by Jesus’s truth in advertising.  It is possible the scribe was willing to be homeless, to be with Jesus full time, undeterred by setting aside his possessions to be with Jesus up close and personal.

Matthew continues in verse 21 saying … “And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. [verse 22] But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.”  This one stings quite a bit more, but it is no less true than the other warning Jesus offered.  This one is beyond homelessness.  This one states a fundamental truth.  If you are not connected to Jesus, you are already dead.  Your body may still have spark in it.  But you have no life, only slavery to self and sin.  While you may claim a religion, without a direct connection to Jesus, you are as spiritually dead as any atheist would choose to be.  Following Jesus brings life.  The condition of your body is not the indicator of that.  Because the spark of life has gone out, does not mean you are truly dead, any more than being “alive” without a direct connection to Jesus means you have life.  Those who sleep in Jesus will one day experience resurrection in Jesus, with eternal life to follow.  Those who believe themselves to be alive today, without Jesus, face only pain and death to come.  A direct connection makes all the difference.

Then there is the family thing.  This request to delay the plans of Christ to cross the Sea of Galilee until after this man’s father could be buried were denied.  There was no exception made for family.  There was no “consideration” made.  Jesus needed to move, and He was going to.  The man could either follow Jesus, or turn away to tend to the cares of this world, even the sensitive concerns of burying a loved one like a parent.  Jesus was moving.  There was no time for distraction, even for concerns of the heart for family.  The connection to Jesus was more important than that.  More important than anything.  We do not know if this potential disciple got into the boat with Jesus to move, or chose to delay.  There is no indication of that.  The plan to move was made by Jesus.  The timing was immediate.  And so the plan moved forward.

Matthew continues in verse 23 saying … “And when he was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him. [verse 24] And, behold, there arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch that the ship was covered with the waves: but he was asleep.”  Now comes an assessment of the plan of Jesus.  What was logical before seems utterly ill timed at present.  Getting into that boat, and leaving when they did, resulted in a full-blown storm strong enough to sink the ship (and the other ships that were attempting to follow, perhaps with these other two newly minted disciples in tow).  This plan was poorly timed at best.  Thinking in retrospect, we would criticize this plan, and blame the leader who forced it upon us (though He did no such thing).  This is how we react in the business world today.  It is the price of leadership, to be blamed for when things in life do not go smoothly.  It does not matter that conditions change beyond the control of the person who created the plan, it only matters that they did, and therefore someone must take the blame.  It was no different on those boats.  And what was worse, Jesus was taking a nap, as if there was not a care in the world.

Matthew continues in verse 25 saying … “And his disciples came to him, and awoke him, saying, Lord, save us: we perish. [verse 26] And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm. [verse 27] But the men marvelled, saying, What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him!”  The plans of God rarely make “sense” to humans, or from a human perspective.  We are finite.  God is not.  We see things through the lens of what is in our own best interest, God sees our greater interests.  The question boils down to who leads, who follows.  Too much of our religions are often subtly based on the idea that we get God to do what we want, throwing out scriptures to prove our points and demands.  But in truth, a direct connection to Jesus may lead us in completely other directions, with other methods, for reasons we fail to comprehend. 

These disciples were all led into boats.  Satan caused the storm.  Jesus repealed it.  Faith in God’s plan does not lead to our eternal disaster, even if this story had another outcome.  But trust in a leader who loves you with a passion you cannot even comprehend, may lead you to do what does not make sense, because He asks you to.  Imagine Abraham, being asked by God to sacrifice the only son he has.  This request is completely out of line from a Biblical perspective - case closed.  No scripture could have ever proved the validity of this request.  Abraham was being asked to murder, and by God.  He obeyed.  And his faith is memorialized because of it.  That does not change the request, or the nature of it.  It did not make sense.  But it has stood as an example of faith for thousands of years.  What God did to intervene for Abraham, He did not do for Himself.  He gave His Son for us, and held back His hand from intervention.  That plan makes even less sense.  But it is the plan He constructed to redeem you and I.  It reveals a love that is infinite in proportion.

Those of us, who believe it is our role to lead in ministry, must re-examine what that means.  We are not truly leaders, we are only servants with a bigger constituency.  We follow, not lead.  Our peers follow not lead.  There are no teams or committees.  Just bodies of believers who dedicate themselves to Jesus, and to a direct connection with Him.  He leads, We follow.  There is nothing more to it than that …

 

A Woman's Place ...

Most sentences in conversation that begin with the words “a woman’s place is in …” don’t end well; at least for the person speaking.  There are in fact few ways to end that sentence that will not be found offensive.  The problem is not the “where” so much as it is “the edict” of where by the person speaking.  Many women work.  Many women do it for no wages, nearly zero recognition, and often time despite ridicule from the teenagers they are trying to raise, in the houses they make homes from their labors.  To say a woman works is simply a statement of fact … it is the “where” again that conjures up the prejudices of value derived from a commercial enterprise as somehow having more value than the value that comes from turning a building into a home.  Perhaps then the best way to end that sentence “a woman’s place is … is wherever she wants it to be.”  That will at least save the person speaking, and perhaps offer more truth than the chauvinist mind is ready to grasp.

Men like to measure themselves.  We like to compare and use yardsticks to do it.  In sports, there is a winning team and a losing one.  Children may all be “winners” for having competed; men like the idea of only one team being a winner, and the other losers.  In life, men tend to gravitate to their careers as another yardstick to measure each other by.  If my job title sounds more professional than yours, guess who wins that battle.  If you make more money than I do, we are back to a draw.  If my wife is the most beautiful woman in the room, then I will have done my job appropriately (as determined by my wife), and I will be permitted to sleep in our bed this evening. 😊  But again, if my wife is more beautiful than every other wife, I win.  This is a competition women are not so disparaging of, as long as their husband always wins.  The problem with all of this thinking is where value is derived from.  Possessions should not define our value, service should.

In that context, I may be the biggest loser.  How much I serve, even how much I serve my wife, is not up to a standard I would set for myself.  It is easier to define value in possessions, and in commercial accomplishments, than it is in humble service (where credit does not exist, nor should it).  It would seem I need a re-wire of my thinking to begin to appreciate humble service for the value that should be derived from it.  If I appreciated it properly, then the service done in the home would become of vastly more value than anything done in an office, for mere compensation.  Careers like garbage collector would be esteemed not ridiculed.  And the waitress who fills your coffee cup, would be appreciated (not just in your mind, but reflected in the tips you leave).  Appreciating humble service changes where you think value comes from, and what services people do, to achieve it.

But shouldn’t that apply in the church as well?  We have our estimation of importance as upside down in church as we do in the world.  We esteem conference leaders, the pope, the bishops, or people holding roles over the organization of the body.  Evangelists or people with great speaking abilities are esteemed over simple believers.  The folks in the pews are seen almost like cattle.  We attend events, fill up the pews, sing when directed to, kneel, fill up offering coffers, and then go home.  Next week, the same routine.  But some simple believers are also prayer warriors.  Warriors not because “they” are special, but because their “belief” is so strong it is as if they sit in the living room with the Lord, every time they bring up His name.  Their prayers are answered because their expectations are so high.  And most of us hardly know their names.

In the church, we begin to assume we know who should take up a particular role based upon the profile we set for that role in our minds.  Tradition colors our thoughts.  Where we would not dare utter the sentence “a woman’s place” in our personal lives, when it comes to church we happily utter the same phrase and do not end it with open possibilities.  We end it with predefined notions of where a woman’s value should be derived from a traditional perspective.  In like manner, we expect men to fill other roles, our only differentiation based on competence, never gender.  However, it does seem like men are allowed to fulfill nearly every role, but women only a few.  Forward thinking churches have gotten past this traditional view point most often because they view chauvinism as bad history.  But that is not perhaps the best reasoning.

Everyone uses the Bible to prove their own perspectives.  Everyone uses the Bible to prove their own pre-dispositions.  We do not ask our God, we tell others what He has to say, through us.  But if we were open enough to ask, are we ready to accept the answer, whatever that might be?  For my liberal friends on this topic, I offer the simple story Matthew relayed in his gospel in chapter eight picking up in verse 14 saying … “And when Jesus was come into Peter's house, he saw his wife's mother laid, and sick of a fever.”  The story begins with Jesus entering Peter’s house (in Capernaum) as we learn in the previous texts.  If we paid better attention we might realize that Peter has a wife, a home, and a mother-in-law.  The idea that ministers of the gospel should in some way be celibate goes out the window.  Peter has his priority on Jesus, but it does not negate that he has a family.  It is his family home he has invited Jesus and the crew to visit.

Matthew continues in verse 15 saying … “ And he touched her hand, and the fever left her: and she arose, and ministered unto them.”  Here is the tricky part.  Jesus heals her not because of what she will do.  Jesus is not purchasing her healing for service.  Jesus does not save you, because he wants something from you.  What you offer and how you respond is up to you.  How you love is up to you.  How much you submit is up to you.  How much you allow Him to change you, is ultimately how much you submit to Him.  But what He offers is a pure gift, that can never be repaid, nor does He ever ask for repayment.  That means that what the mother-in-law of Peter does in response to a touch from Jesus, is the “choice” Peter’s mother-in-law makes.  She serves Jesus and the disciples in humble service, because this is what she chooses or wants to do.  She could have left the home, went into the streets, and danced and celebrated the fact that she was just very sick, and now she is made well by Jesus.  She could have shouted what the Lord did for her to anyone who would have listened.  Other women did this.  The woman of Samaria was probably the most successful evangelist in all of scripture.  That was her response to Jesus.  Peter’s mother-in-law did something far more quiet, with far less recognition.  She just acted our humble service.

You can imagine that mother-in-law jokes did not begin in this century.  The tension between husband and wife when dealing with in-laws is nothing new.  I am certain that tension dates back nearly to Adam and Eve, or at least to Seth’s grandsons and daughters.  The jokes that stem from the tension as probably equally as old, and just as circulated as they are today.  Now even though Peter may not have told his share (or at least after he encountered Jesus), a mother-in-law may know they are not the most welcome person in the household.  This does not deter her at all.  She rises from her illness, and immediately does what she chooses to do.  She serves in humility, without a second thought.  She could have been a prophet.  She could have become a disciple (perhaps she did both of these after the gaze of Matthew had long since departed from her company).  What she chose to do later would be up to her, and more importantly up to the Holy Spirit.  But her choice that night was no less important, or appropriate, or of value.

Her service would be needed as the needs multiplied.  Matthew concludes this snippet picking up in verse 16 saying … “When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick: [verse 17] That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.”  Those people who were sick and waiting in line to be healed might have needed refreshments.  They might have needed help to get to Jesus.  The needs they had in the conditions they were in before they met Jesus might have been substantial.  Are not ours?  So how she served when the multitudes arrived we do not know, nor was she credited, nor did she want to be credited.  But she served, in the manner she chose to serve.  No one dictated to her what to do.  No one told her where her place was.  She filled a place she wanted to fill and was honored to do so.

Too many of my liberal brothers and sisters spend so much time fighting for the rights of women in the church, they forget that the right to choose what she chose, is equally important.  Perhaps more important, as she was honored to serve the Lord of our Universe in what she did.  The choice to be humble, to seek no recognition, to “not” be a public speaker or minister, is of equal value to any other choice made.  Perhaps within the church “a woman’s place” is anywhere she is willing to serve, and anywhere the Holy Spirit makes her fit to serve.  And if the Holy Spirit decides, who are we to criticize His choice or hers …