"Preach the Gospel at all times. When necessary, use words."
This is, perhaps, the best known and most commonly quoted statement made by St. Francis of Assisi. It might surprise some to discover that he did not, in fact, say this. At least not as far as we know. Whether he said it or not, the idea has taken hold of the imagination of many, some who embrace it as great wisdom and some who reject it as compromise. While Francis never made the statement, it does reflect something of a Franciscan quality. However, the saint's actual words were far more nuanced:
"It is no use walking anywhere to preach unless our walking is our preaching."
"...As for me, I desire this privilege from the Lord, that never may I have any privilege from man, except to do reverence to all, and to convert the world by obedience to the Holy Rule rather by example than by word."
From these words (and his example), it is hard to deny the deep commitment St. Francis had to both the proclamation and embodiment of the Gospel. He lived deep within the tension between the two. That tension is very much present in our current context. Some will be concerned by how the first quote might be too easily co-opted by the postmodern tendency to mistrust of words. Indeed, if the quote is used to diminish the importance of verbal preaching/proclamation, then it is a betrayal of the spirit of St. Francis. Yet others fear that too much of Christianity has become nothing more than a product of the Enlightenment, where belief is equated with the affirmation of propositional truths with little demand for lived expression.
Perhaps to better understand this quote and its underlying message we must better understand St. Francis himself. First, it must be noted that Francis lived in a largely pre-literate society -- that is, most of the population could not read or write. Therefore the role of public preaching played an essential role in spiritual formation. While verbal proclamation is still essential today, we need to acknowledge the elevated importance of verbal communication as a means passing on knowledge and information in Francis' time. Further, the majority of those who heard his preaching were already nominal Christians, and thus passingly familiar with the faith.
For Francis, then, the quote would need to understood in the context in which it was said and not, for example, as a universal truth where words should always be of secondary in importance to actions. Instead it is a context-specific corrective to an age and culture that gave lip-service, verbal allegiance to the faith, but whose actions betrayed entirely different beliefs and values. In this way, our own increasingly post-Christian context is at risk of making the same mistakes, where we can all too often worship God without actually following Jesus.
While not a priest, St. Francis was given a dispensation by Rome to preach. However, more often than not, he did chose to do so outside the context of a church, the formal place of worship. He became widely known for his extra-liturgical preaching, with sermons being delivered in the open air of piazzas and pastures. He used styles and tactics borrowed from the troubadours of his day, both through romantic prose and foolish frolicking. Without rejecting the traditional liturgies of the Church, he broke past the norms and conventions of both the church and the culture to preach in ways that caught peoples attention.
Even when he did preach in churches, he would use living examples and props to bring life to the message. One of the most well known traditions popularized by St. Francis is the live nativity. While we might see this as a creative and sentimental example, it was, in fact, a powerfully prophetic gesture. He brought into the heart of the church and the Scriptures the messy reality of the nature of the incarnation (cow manure and all). He saw the story of Scripture to be something to be lived and experience, not merely commemorated. So, while we can defend that preaching is central to Francis' example, we cannot do so without recognizing that he preached in ways that were intentionally disruptive to nominal faith, pointing instead to active participation in the Communion of Christ as His Body.
St. Francis never sought to elevate action over speaking in the task of bringing the Gospel, but neither did he believe that Gospel was only a message to be communicated. Francis recognized that the Gospel was all consuming, the work of God to restore all of Creation unto Himself for His glory. He embraced the truth that the authority of the Gospel he proclaimed with his mouth was given authority by the nature and character of the life he led. And in the same way, he knew that, in spite of his own failings (and that of other Christians), the proclaimed message of hope and love would find fertile soil in the hearts of others, and so that Gospel must be proclaimed.
The example of St. Francis of Assisi in these respects stand as a challenge to Christians today. In the face of our increasingly post-Christian context, we must resist the temptation to fight to sustain our place of power and privilege. In truth, such a position has largely compromised our authority and credibility before a watching world. Instead, let us rediscover the radical life of peace, grace and love that was characterized by Christ and seek to live it. Perhaps then, in the light of a community of believers known for humility and love (rather than self-righteousness and bigotry), the words we proclaim will carry the credibility and authority worthy of the Christ we follow.
Follow Jamie Arpin-Ricci on Twitter: www.twitter.com/missional
"... Christianity has become nothing more than a product of enlightenment, where belief is equated with the affirmation ... with little demand for lived expression"
This is true of some professing Christians, but its not true for 'true' believers.
From the last paragraph "In the face of our increasingly post-Christian context, we must resist the temptation to fight to sustain our place of power and privilege. In truth, such a position has largely compromised our authority and credibility before a watching world. Instead, let us rediscover the radical life of peace, grace and love that was characterized by Christ and seek to live it..."
I completely agree that we do need to pursue the radical life of peace, grace and love that Jesus modeled. As individuals and church communities, we need to spend more time and energy on this. I do also think however, that we need to be stewards of the "power", "position", "resources" that we find ourselves in. Not fight to keep it/them (especially in the culture-war sense), but to share them generously. I say that because at times I feel people in our camp are implying that power and privilege are evil of themselves. It seems to me more about what we do with them (how we "acquire" them).
Again, loved the post, just some conversation over the nuances.
I like the maxim: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"
Those craving power can be destructive in holding on to it. I agree that we should be better stewards; using power to benefit the masses.
I appreciate the push back. Thanks!
This is why James advised people not to take the position of being a teacher -especially of His word (James 3:1-2. These people will come under stricter judgment. We keep hearing these types of people keep promoting this lie about Jesus that He was about peace, peace and more peace. While it is true that He is a God of Love, What did Jesus say? He said, "I DID NOT COME TO BRING PEACE BUT A SWORD (Matthew 10:34). Here is the truth: He didn't come to earth to for people to be liked or to cave into political pressure-He came to earth to as an influence to CHANGE the hearts of those who would respond to Him. He did not come to earth to have His Gospel compromised. He did not come to earth to be a "pal" of the people so that they could manipulate Him any kind of way. He didn’t come to earth to accept moral relative behavior as representing His truths. He didn't come to earth to hear, “Jesus you know my heart. “He came to stir things up and to sift eh wheat from the chafe.
End part 1…
Does this mean the things you have listed? No, but to suggest that it is a lie that peace is central to the person of Jesus- to God, Three-In-One, is to deny the very Scripture you quote from.
Here is truth: the ONLY peace that a person will experience when his/hers soul is safely behind those Pearly Gates in Heaven (Revelation 21:6-8). We know that any reference to peace that is identified with Jesus is about Jesus and not the world. The Book of Hebrews discusses those who had not the faith to profit from the preaching of the Gospel, DID NOT enter the rest ( peace) of Jesus. As it is written, "But without faith, it is impossible to please Him (Hebrews 11:6).The rest (peace that a person seeks) ONLY can occur when one has humbled himself and has the necessary faith to please God/Jesus. Again, Jesus said that He brings a sword (Matthew 10:34). To make his point clearer, Jesus said that, “I came to send fire on the earth an also says that he brings division (Luke 12 49, 51. He also spells it out in Luke that He did not come to bring peace on the earth (Luke12:51). On his return to the earth, from His mouth is a sharp sword that He will use to strike (destroy His enemies) the nations (Revelation 19:15).. While Jesus was not about provoking people in chaos, it is clear that just speaking His name too often irritates many people. Folks can talk for days about sexual perversion and can’t get enough. But talk passionately about the Gospel and folks will limit your words.
End part 3
By the way ta study of Francis should include study of Clare.
To approach someone to "save" them from their religious tradition is to say not only are they wrong but that they might lack morals entirely. This is particularly true of atheists and the baffling presupposition that they can't live a moral life.
Lead by life example, preach in your church, preach in the public square, pray to yourself where ever you like, but leave others to their own traditions unless they approach you or come to your door on Sunday morning. Leave your tracts and flyers to those of your own church. Do not have to told twice when someone does not wish to be accosted by you. Do not knock on their doors to interrupt their days and possibly their religious traditions.
Well, it seems that the good minister, who wrote this article, was the one giving the party and you're the one who came uninvited. If you don't like articles like this, then, why do you bother to come here in the first place. Maybe, you're doing your own preaching from a soapbox full of hate.
I've got a novel idea...why don't you go find yourself a life to your own making. Wherein, your contentment can be derived from hiding yourself away from people like this minister who speaks of the goodness of St. Francis. If you're an "atheist" simply stay away from anything to do with religion, God, or religious influence.
However, you won't do it will you! No, you would rather throw your garbage at a good man while eating from your own table of spoiled meat thinking you're so special.
I actually agree with some of the comments that Christianity is divorced from creative formalisms which I 100% agree there is no acceptance so yes I have walked away never to come back. That ilk also gets frustrated when you jump off their rat wheel. I am off their cloud as Mick Jagger would say.
Amen!.....God will restore ALL of creation unto Himself for His glory! Nobody will be left out in the end. Some will go through "the lake of fire," but not many realize that this is for purpose of cleansing.
After over 50 years of watching Christianity action I've yet to be persuaded to become a Christian. too much conflicting messeges that often comes across as unkind and callous.
Words are hollow if no action is given to fill them.
I see alot of Christians speaking words of love and forgiveness. Yet go over to the any Gay Voices article and you see tons of Christians damning and judging gays as abominations and sinners who god will have nothing to do with. You see this supposed love of thier god by ther actions of Christains doing their damndest to deny marriage equality, calling the love between gay folks as unholy and demanding gays to never love the one that makes thier heart and soul sing. It's not just gays; but Christianity also seems to not love anyone or anything non-Christian.
Watching all this, I have to ask; Is this what is Christianity is all about? Is that what god realy wants?
Realy?
~continued in next post...
So thanks.
Christians believe God used the human sacrifice of his own son (who is also magically himself) as a means by which to forgive his own wrath against his creation, and thereby allow them, according to his rules, to potentially escape eternity in a human oven which he created, if they will only believe he did all this out of love.
I guess that sort of belief would translate into the sort of behavior and policy we see out of the Evangelicals in this country, so...
Good work, Christians! You are successfully living out your Gospel.
I am aware there are versions of Christianity that view the significance and meaning of Jesus's death differently. There are many theological differences among denominations, all of whom label themselves as 'Christian'.
And the problems Christianity presents are varied. Beyond substitionary atonement. I can only assume you hold some more traditional, orthodox views on certain aspects of the Christian faith? If not, what is the point in calling yourself a Christian?
What about eternal conscious punishment in hell? Resurection of Christ? Virgin birth? Original sin? Which doctrines will you allow and which are not allowed in your view?
It seems you have a found a nice little "emerging" niche that allows you to be more hip to progressive social movements, and avoid difficult conversations about sin and hell. Congrats.
I'm not sure which kind of Christian you are, but I'd wager (a good amount) you are (much) closer to Rob Bell or Brian McLaren than Albert Mohler or Pat Roberston. That is great! It means, to me, you are (1) thinking and (2) have been alotted a good amount of compassion for humanity.
Keep going with that. The thinking and compassion. Follow wherever it goes. I think you'll find it leads to a place where dogma isn't relevant. A place where it doesn't matter what the hell you believe about Jesus.
Although, God is not a physical being all things associated with man are physical. Jesus Christ became flesh in order that man can become spiritual.
Anyone thinking that should read Hebrews 6:1-6. Christ paid the penalty for "sins that are past" (Rom.3:25); ensuing sins are our debt to pay (Heb.10:26) Those you speak of will find salvation is not a guarantee if the actually read the Bible. False Christians do more harm to Christianity through ill concieved dogma than any other group.
Or at least come up with something better than "God had his kid killed because he was mad at you, so that he could stop being mad at you if you believe that it happened".