This locating of Simon by the Preacher is speculative. What we can safely say is that the Synoptic tradition identifies Simon by name, while Mark adds the striking detail that he was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mark 15:21), perhaps indicating that members of Simon’s family were known to Mark’s audience. It does not indicate Luke knew of Simon’s sons. This is important because speculation concerning Simon goes further by suggesting he was transformed by his experience that Luke recounts. There is no Scriptural evidence of Simon being transformed by these events and it is wrong to make assumptions because his sons are identified favourably

For this sermon, Simon’s sudden and involuntary involvement in carrying Jesus’ cross exemplifies the sacrificial and costly nature of discipleship. It may be argued that the text suggests that Simon may not have been a follower of Jesus prior to this moment; he was likely an ordinary passer-by, pressed into service by the Roman soldiers. Yet, in this unexpected and difficult circumstance, Simon is sovereignly placed by God to bear the cross alongside Christ. This act symbolizes the call to take up one’s cross and follow Jesus, a call that is often sudden, painful, and without warning. Discipleship, therefore, is not merely a voluntary or comfortable commitment but a profound participation in the sufferings of Christ, involving physical, emotional, and spiritual cost according to this sermon.

It is possible that in the example of Simon that we can witness a possible experience that embodies the reality that discipleship may come suddenly and without premeditation, thrust upon the believer in ways that challenge every dimension of their being. The sermon though links Simon’s experience with Jesus’ own teaching in Luke 9:23, where He calls His followers to deny themselves, take up their cross daily, and follow Him. Now whilst the sermon would have us believe that Simon’s story concretizes this call, making it tangible and immediate for the hearer or reader, Simon being compelled by Roman soldiers should not simply be equated with the Spirit's effectual calling or the conscious response of faith.

Moreover, the sermon states that Simon’s placement in the narrative underscores God’s sovereign providence in the process of discipleship. Though Simon’s involvement appears involuntary, it is not accidental. God’s hand is evident in positioning Simon to share in Christ’s burden, suggesting that God’s grace can work through even the most unexpected circumstances to bring about transformation. The text intimates that Simon was changed by this experience and became an example for others to follow. This transformation points to the broader biblical truth that God’s providence and grace are active in the lives of His people, calling them to participate in Christ’s sufferings and to be conformed to His image.

However, while all these observations about Simon are interesting and the passage may lend itself to being used to powerfully illustrates the call to discipleship, the sermon notably lacks an explicit call to discipleship, the new birth or spiritual regeneration. The sermon lacks any searching of conscience or direct call to deny oneself in the manner that the gospel requires. Instead, the focus remains on what God can do, without pressing the hearer to active repentance or self-examination. This is a significant experiential and theological gap that is actually a central concern of The New Birth in Exile series. The Reformed theological tradition emphasizes that true discipleship is inseparable from the new birth; the radical transformation wrought by the Holy Spirit that enables sinners to respond in faith and obedience. Nevertheless, regeneration and discipleship must be distinguished without being separated: regeneration is the sovereign work of the Spirit by which the sinner is made spiritually alive, whereas discipleship is the life of faith, self-denial, and obedience that flows from that renewing work. In a similar manner, justification and sanctification are distinct doctrines and works of God’s grace, yet they are inseparably joined in the salvation of the believer. Without this distinction, the sermon risks fostering a passive spirituality that observes biblical events without engaging the heart’s deepest needs.

In conclusion, Simon of Cyrene’s role in Luke 23:26 is multifaceted and somewhat elusive. He is an historical figure known to the early church, and an example of God’s sovereign providence in salvation. This sermon does well to look at a passage that is often overlooked in Good Friday sermons. And while the passage in Luke does not explicitly call for new birth, it powerfully portrays the sacrificial nature of following Christ. This leads to the experiential confrontation that could have taken place through this sermon. Do we have to be disciples of Jesus? What would have happened to Simon had he not carried the cross? What are the repercussions for us if we don’t carry “the cross of Jesus”? And even further, what is the cross of Jesus that we, today, must carry in our lives to be true disciples?

There are many more questions that could be asked for preaching and pastoral application. This would mean affirming the necessity of the call to discipleship while also recognizing the necessity of pressing hearers toward the new birth and active repentance. Only then can the full gospel call be faithfully proclaimed, bringing sinners not only to bear crosses but to be born again into new life in Christ.