A Life of Prayer – My Testimony

 

 

Before I share some of my testimony, a couple of comments. I am not very keen on teaching methodologies of prayer because “how to” approaches can become rote, legalistic, and are not, I think, relationally natural. If God is our Father, and if Jesus is our Elder Brother, and if the Holy Spirit lives within us, then conversation and communion with God and prayer in its many forms, is essentially organic. That being said, the Psalms provide 150 invitations to participate in prayer, along with many other prayers in the Bible. Also, as noted previously we have centuries of examples of prayer which are also invitations. The Scriptures ought to be our nexus for prayer, most Scriptures can be prayed in some fashion.

 

There are indeed principles in prayer, and models, Jesus speaks of these, but they are not mechanical but found in the context of filial relationship and servanthood.

 

Andrew Murray has two devotional books on prayer, each consisting of 31 days, With Christ in the School of Prayer and With Christ in the School of Intercession. These books contain daily Scripture readings with Murray’s reflections on how they speak to us of prayer. Because they are rooted in Scripture and point us to Jesus, they are foundational. Practicing the Presence of God by Brother Lawrence presents an organic and relational approach to praying as a way of life.

 

Now I want to share just a little about my life of prayer, and I’m going to use the workplace as my setting. Let me first say that I am a very imperfect person. I can be harsh, I can be angry, I can be abrupt, I can be sarcastic, I can be a real jerk. Thanks to the grace of God and the Holy Spirit I know what it is to apologize and ask forgiveness in the workplace. As I look back over my life in the workplace, I see times when I should have apologized and asked forgiveness but didn’t, I see things clearer now with advancing age. I see so many times I failed to abide in the Vine and missed opportunities to be a blessing to others and be a better testimony for Jesus.

 

Yet, I truly loved my people, both my direct reports and the people who worked for them. I loved my coworkers, and I worked with contractors whom I loved and had great affection for. I often took opportunities at large employee gatherings to not only share Jesus, but to tell my people that I loved them. I prayed with many people I worked with and received prayer requests from many more. It got to the place where folks expected me to pray for them when there was sickness or tragedy in their families. I have now been retired from business for over seven years, and I still receive prayer requests from former coworkers.

 

When a contractor’s father was in the hospital, I visited him and prayed with him. When another contractor was in the hospital for heart surgery, I was there to pray. When I visited apartment communities, it was not unusual for me to pray with my managers and others in their offices, and pray with residents of the communities, or with contractors doing work in the communities. When people had needs, I prayed. Sometimes I took their prayer requests, and other times we prayed on the spot.

 

I believed that my first calling was to be the Presence of Christ and to serve those around me.

 

I would pray for all the people in the office I worked in by visually walking down the hall and going into each office, I’d visualize the person and pray for him or her. I would also pray for their families and any specific needs I knew about. This is a practice (a method I guess!) that I used for decades.

 

If I had special meetings scheduled on a particular day, I’d pray for those meetings ahead of time, asking for wisdom, asking for help in preparation, asking to be a blessing to others in the meetings. During meetings I would also pray, asking my Father and Lord Jesus for wisdom, for peace, for grace and favor.

 

I had some particularly difficult clients, and meetings could be tense and stressful, but Jesus was always with me and I was always communing with Him during my meetings – this was my way of life in Him. I wanted my work to glorify God, to serve my clients, to serve my company, and to bless my employees and residents.

 

I worked in some fairly dangerous areas in housing, places where there was significant drug dealing, where people were shot and killed in broad daylight. I prayed for my people, the residents, and for my own safety when I walked those streets. Once, when I was inspecting a property with staff members and a representative from a state housing agency, we sought refuge in a vacant townhouse because of gunfire, gunfire which killed a drug dealer in a spot I had just walked by not less than 5 minutes before.

 

I was never afraid for myself, I was cautious but not afraid, my life belonged to Jesus. I was, however, often fearful for my people…and I prayed and prayed and prayed for them, and for the residents. Most folks living in difficult places are fine people, people who love their families and who do right by their neighbors, often working 2 or 3 jobs – it is a tragedy that they are marginalized by others in society and in the professing church. Shame on us.

 

Praying during conversations with others was a way of life for me, I was always asking my Father how I could be a blessing to the other person, how I could share the love of Jesus. O for sure there were times I missed opportunities. Sometimes I realized missed opportunities immediately, other times not until I’d arrived home. I can be dense and stupid and self – centered. When I am tired, I am more likely to miss a nice pitch over the plate than when I’m fresh. When I am in a hurry, I am more likely to miss being a blessing because I can be caught up in my own agenda rather than God’s. When I am stressed I can be particularly self-centered and not be attuned to the needs of others. All the more reason to live a life of prayer, for when my communion with God is interrupted by my foolishness, I am more likely to quickly sense it and ask God for help.

 

I believed the Trinity lived in me because this is what Jesus teaches in the Upper Room. The workplace was where God had me, and He had me there to serve others and be His Presence. I was willing to be misunderstood because of my rather simple faith, and I was also willing to take the heat for refusing to lie or place spin on problems and insisting on treating everyone with equity and respect, including paying them decent wages. I have put my job on the line for my employees more than once over the years – after all, I was in the workplace not to be served, but to serve.

 

I had a successful career, and better than that, I had a good testimony within my industry. My peers respected me and trusted me and honored me in a number of ways over the years. Of course, had the quality of my work not been superior, had I not offered my work to God, the story would no doubt have been different. My work was a form of worship, and the workplace was a place of spiritual formation to me, and then it was a place of witness for Jesus. God was always forming me into His image at work, and He was always using me as His Presence in the lives of others.

 

Since we have this treasure in jars of clay (2 Cor. 4:7), I realized that there was no need for me to pretend to be something I wasn’t, I could trust God to make it clear that any success I had was to His glory…and as I wrote above, I know what it is to apologize and ask forgiveness at work. When I made a relational mess of things, I saw it as an opportunity to make amends, to ask forgiveness, and to show the world that in Jesus relationships can be restored – the world does not see that very often. I do not recommend that we deliberately make asses of ourselves in order to share what reconciliation looks like in Jesus, but if we do make asses of ourselves, let us not waste the opportunity to be witnesses for Christ, to show others Jesus as the better Way to live.

 

I spent my days at work speaking to our Father and listening to Him, praying for others and looking for ways to serve them. I loved being with my people and coworkers. I loved being part of a team. I loved watching people grow.

 

I have had many people influence my understanding of our abiding in Christ, many of them lived long before me, and a few I have personally known. I am convinced that Jesus’ relationship with the Father is to be our relationship with the Father, I hope we are seeing this as we travel through the Upper Room, and I sure hope we see this when we move into the Holy of Holies of John Chapter 17.

 

There is no joy quite like the joy of praying with friends, where one minute you can be talking and the next naturally praying together. I have been blessed to have friends like these, even though with advancing age more of them are moving ahead of me into the City – but what shall it be like when we are all there! I trust those who have gone before are continuing to pray for me, I surely need it.

 

If we are going to spend eternity with our Father, doesn’t it make sense to spend our days with Him now? In much the same way, I once sensed our Father saying to me, “Bob, instead of thinking in terms of a prayer life, wouldn’t it be better if you learned to live a life of prayer? Instead of thinking in terms of intercessory prayer, wouldn’t it be better if you learned to live an intercessory life?”

 

Of the many influences I’ve had in my life of prayer, outside of the Bible Francois Fenelon may be the most vital, and since he influenced Andrew Murray this gives Fenelon a place of double honor. Fenelon’s life and writings speak to me many ways and continually bid me come up higher and deeper into Jesus. Fenelon is a great model for people in leadership in business, education, politics, and of course the church, for he served in the court of the Sun King, Louis IX, and influenced many at the pinnacle of power in the French court.

 

Fenelon was banished to his diocese for his refusal to abandon his friend, Jeanne Guyon, and his refusal to deny his understanding of our life in Christ. We must be willing to follow the Lamb wherever He goes, including in rejection (Hebrews 13:13). If we are not willing to be sacrifices for Christ and others we’ll never truly witness and our faithfulness to Jesus will always be contingent on ourselves – an unstable foundation, don’t you think?

 

Fenelon taught me to pray and listen to God while in conversation with others. I don’t recall how it began, but now it is as natural as breathing and I have not thought about it for many years, it is just what I do. I find great joy in listening to others and listening to God at the same time. We all do it, the question is how we do it. We’ve all been in a restaurant and engaged in conversation with a friend, while at the same time listening to a discussion at an adjacent table. Might it be more fruitful to listen to our friend and God?

 

Lives of prayer begin in the morning, when the page of the day is blank. We allow the Holy Spirit and the Word of God to make the first impressions on our hearts, minds, and souls. The only thing we should turn on may be the coffee pot as we began our daily conversation with God. No phone, no email, no radio, no TV, no news…just us and God…once the day begins this way it can continue this Way. There is only one first impression each day…ought it not be that of the holy Trinity?

 

My first mentor was George Will. George talked to God all the time, sometimes his conversations where quiet and within himself, and many times they were vocalized as naturally as if Jesus was right with us – which of course He was. He was like that in 1966 when I first met him, and he was still like that around 2012 when I last spoke with him over the phone. I imagine some folks thought him a bit crazy. Well, Jesus’s family and friends thought He was a bit touched too (Mark 3:20 – 21). Not bad company George, not bad company.

 

Much love,

 

Bob

 

The Archbishop and the Cardinal - 15 Years Later

 

The Archbishop and the Cardinal – 15 Years Later

 

Good morning,

 

It is hard to believe that I’ve been writing Mind on Fire and Kaleidoscope for over fifteen years, beginning both in early 2010. It has been an amazing journey for me, one which would not have started were it not for the encouragement of Pastor Michael Daily (Mind on Fire) and Debby Eure (Kaleidoscope). There have been some subjects which I’ve taken up at the request of friends and readers, and I am deeply thankful for their suggestions and comments. There is also content which others have introduced me to which I’ve enjoyed interacting with, and which has most certainly challenged me.

 

The nature of Kaleidoscope changed a few years ago from free – ranging to more focused reflections. While I miss the often whimsical nature of the original format, I felt that I needed to devote my energy to the seriousness of our times – we do not live in flash flood zones (which would be bad enough), we are experiencing a tsunami…and most of us don’t know it. No, “this too” will not pass. We need to get folks into the Ark of Jesus, this is what matters.

 

Yesterday I came across a piece I wrote and posted on July 19, 2010 – 15 years ago.

 

Prescient?

 

From July 19, 2010

 

The Archbishop and the Cardinal

 

I’ve been rereading a study of Cardinal Richelieu’s rise to political power and in doing so have found myself contrasting the Cardinal with another French Catholic leader, Archbishop Francois Fenelon.

 

Richelieu (1585 – 1642) is best known as the architect of the centralized French state; Fenelon (1651 – 1715) is not widely known, but his influence continues in the church to this day.

 

While there are many interesting contrasts between these two Frenchmen, two particularly strike me; character and priority.

 

With Richelieu, the end justifies the means and relationships are utilitarian; with Fenelon the end and the means are inseparable, and relationships are sacred to the point of self-sacrifice.

 

Richelieu strives to establish a strong French state; Fenelon seeks first the Kingdom of God. Richelieu sacrifices others, Fenelon sacrifices himself. Fenelon desires to impart Christian character to the French Court; Richelieu instills the power of the sword. Fenelon suffers banishment; Richelieu comes to be considered the world’s first Prime Minister – though not a Prime Minister in the parliamentary sense, for he wields an autocratic government.

 

Richelieu gives his heart to the State of France; Fenelon gives his heart to Christ and His Church. If you read Oswald Chambers, A.W. Tozer, John Wesley, William Law, or Andrew Murray, to name just a few Protestant writers with longevity, you are reading men who have been touched by Fenelon.

 

Fenelon ministered to troops on both sides of the fighting between England and France as they marched through his diocese of Cambrai; Andrew Murray ministered to both English and Boer troops during their war. The difference was that the English and French respected Fenelon; while the English and Boers vilified Murray – they insisted he take sides, which he refused. Perhaps in Fenelon’s time the church was seen as transcendent, while in Murray’s time it had degenerated into an arm of nationalism. (Much like our own time?)

 

I wonder which model the American Church follows today? Richelieu, or Fenelon and Murray?

Devotional Reading (4)

 

Whiston writes:

 

“Certain analogies will throw revealing and helpful light upon this mood, which is so necessary in devotional reading.  First, there is the analogy of coming to know and appreciate great works of art.  No passing and hurried glance at a great painting, as we stroll down the corridors of an art gallery, will ever suffice to reveal to us the richness and secret message of any painting.  It is necessary that we sit down in quietude, and limit our attention to a single painting, and sit humbly before it and let it act upon us.  It is the painting, which is the active agent, and not we.  The painting is subject: we are object. We must let the painting act upon us and in us. Furthermore, no single visit will be sufficient.  Many, repeated visits to the same painting are required even to begin to receive its revelations.  We must wait patiently and humbly until the painting reveals in its own time and way its richness to us.

 

“So it is with the devotional reading of this book.  We shall need to read and reread it over many years; to sit quietly in its presence, and reading, to let it reveal its truths to us.”

 

What Whiston writes about our approach to Fenelon’s writings in Christian Perfection (let’s keep in mind that the title is not Fenelon’s), is even more true of the Bible. Why? Because the Bible is unique among all writings, while God does speak to us through what men and women write today, He has Spoken in and through, and continues to Speak in and through, the Bible, the Scriptures, the holy Word of God. I hope that God will speak to you through what I write; I know that God will Speak to you through the Bible, and I know of no other way to communicate the Gospel than by basing what I write and speak on the Bible, and I hope that my quotation of the Bible and referencing the Bible points people to the Bible, to the Christ of the Bible and to the Holy Spirit who breathed the Word through various men in different languages over centuries in many historical settings.

 

We are called to read the Scriptures (1 Tim. 4:13), to study the Scriptures (2 Tim. 2:15), and to meditate on the Scriptures (Psalm 1:2). These are three legs of a stool and at any given time we ought to be meditating, studying, and reading. Reading is akin to driving through an area at a reasonable speed to get to know the area. Studying is like taking a slow walk down a street, paying attention to the houses, the architecture, the trees and landscaping, the colors, the hardscapes. Meditating is sitting on a park bench with coffee and a pastry, and maybe even with some birdseed and peanuts for the squirrels and  friends who are feathered, as you people watch and soak in your surroundings. 

Sitting on the bench means that time passes by but not your surroundings, your surroundings enter into you and you enter into them. Hours after you leave the park bench you can still return to it in your mind and imagination, you can still recall it a week later, a month later, perhaps ten years later. When you drove by the park bench in the weeks and months before sitting on it, it didn’t mean much to you, but once you sat on it for an hour or two that bench would never be the same to you – now when you drive by it you recall when the park came to you and surrounded you and invited you to experience it – to taste it, to feel it, to sense it. The park has remained with you and you have remained with it.

 

Reading the Bible devotionally is when the text absorbs us and we absorb the text. To borrow an image from C. S. Lewis, devotional reading is when we go through the wardrobe and enter into the Biblical text; in Christ it is when we “go in and out and find pasture” (John 10:9), it is when our Good Shepherd makes us lie down in green pastures and leads us beside tranquil waters (Psa. 23:2). To borrow another image from Lewis, it is when we go “further up and further in” and with Reepicheep, “take the adventure that Aslan gives us.” For devotional reading is indeed an adventure with Christ and in Christ – it is when Jesus Christ unveils Himself through His holy Word.

 

And this is one reason why making intellectual noise with “trying to figure things out” gets in our way of receiving Christ, for we must submit ourselves to Him, and that means our minds, hearts, and our wills – it means sitting at the feet of the Master and being taught by Him and responding to Him, by His enabling grace, in obedience. It means being quiet and waiting and looking for Him…always looking for Him as we ponder and meditate on His Word. We have an assurance that He will always be with us, that He will never leave us or forsake us; and let me say that He desires to be with us each and every day, far more than we want to be with Him – consider that He gave His life for us, to be with us – so that we might live in the holy Trinity. Do we realize how much God loves us?

 

Christ Jesus isn’t interested in giving us answers so that we can play spiritual trivial pursuit, He desires to give us Himself. He isn’t interested in teaching us to be the greatest of all, He desires to teach us to be the sacrificial servants of all. Jesus isn’t going to give us fancy hood ornaments for lifestyles of glitz and glitter, He is going to give us His Cross…a Cross stained by His own blood.

 

Devotional reading of the Bible is a lifetime experience and ushers us into eternity, its wonders never cease for Christ Jesus is revealed through those wonders, and He is the unifying Wonder. Devotional reading is like the air hose of the deep-sea diver – we need it to survive in a hostile environment – Christ through His Word is our Divine oxygen.

 

Whiston has another helpful analogy that we’ll consider in our next post in this series.  

 

 

 

Devotional Reading

 

One of my treasured volumes is Christian Perfection, by Francois de Salignac de La Mothe Fenelon, better known as simply Fenelon. This is a collection of letters and short essays, translated by Mildred Whitney Stillman from the 1858 French edition and edited by Charles F. Whiston (who compared it to the 1823 French edition), first published in 1947. Perhaps if I had not been so lazy, or had a little more confidence, and a bit more trust in God, after seminary I would have sought a Ph.D. with Fenelon as my focus; then again if I had been super good at baseball I may have played for my hometown team, the Washington Senators.

 

Revisiting Christian Perfection allows me to enjoy Whiston’s introduction and his prefaces to parts I (letters) and II (essays). In the introduction Whiston encourages the reader to exercise devotional reading with Fenelon, explaining what he means by “devotional reading.” Whiston’s explanation is valuable in that it can help us see one of the ways we ought to be reading the Bible, along with its underlying principles – the principles, which Whiston illustrates, are critical. Below is Whiston’s explanation of devotional reading, I will interact with Whiston in following posts.

 

“What is meant by devotional reading?  It is unlike every other type of reading which we do.  Our natural practice of reading newspapers, magazines and novels will be of little help to us in this book.  Devotional reading requires a very different mood or temper.  In study our minds are critical, analytical, argumentative.  In such reading our own minds take the initiative, and are active and energetic.  In reading newspapers and magazines we normally skim over them hurriedly.  But in devotional reading our whole being (not only our intellects) must be quieted; and made open, receptive, expectant; and above all else, humble. It is not so much the work of the intellect as the attentive receptiveness of the whole man.  Any spirit set upon ferreting out the hidden mysteries of God will result in total failure.  Humility will accomplish what cleverness and pride cannot accomplish.

 

“Certain analogies will throw revealing and helpful light upon this mood, which is so necessary in devotional reading.  First, there is the analogy of coming to know and appreciate great works of art.  No passing and hurried glance at a great painting, as we stroll down the corridors of an art gallery, will ever suffice to reveal to us the richness and secret message of any painting.  It is necessary that we sit down in quietude, and limit our attention to a single painting, and sit humbly before it and let it act upon us.  It is the painting, which is the active agent, and not we.  The painting is subject: we are object. We must let the painting act upon us and in us. Furthermore, no single visit will be sufficient.  Many, repeated visits to the same painting are required even to begin to receive its revelations.  We must wait patiently and humbly until the painting reveals in its own time and way its richness to us.

 

“So it is with the devotional reading of this book.  We shall need to read and reread it over many years; to sit quietly in its presence, and reading, to let it reveal its truths to us.

 

“Another helpful analogy is that of the farmer and his seed.  The farmer places his seed in the ground.  He then knows that great and mysterious powers and energies must act upon it.  Rain, sun, air, soil—all these work together to bring about the slow processes of germination and growth.  Long before any visible action occurs above ground, there is the sinking downward into the soil of the tap-root, upon which the later growth and harvest will depend. All of this prior, underground work is hidden from the sight of man, going on in the darkness.  Only after this hidden work is accomplished does there then appear above ground the green shoot.  Only after weeks and perhaps months will the harvest come.

 

“Devotional reading is farming, the sowing of word—seeds in the ground of the mind and spirit, with no expectation that the harvest is to be reaped at once.  The word-seeds must have time to germinate, sink tap-roots deep into the mind and heart.  The harvest of the word-seeds sown to-day may not come until years later.  The harvest will come when least we expect it, and always with the note of being a revelation given to us from God, and not the work of our own minds.”

 

CHARLES F. WHISTON, September, 1946

Which Kingdom? What Voice?

“Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then my servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, my kingdom is not of this realm,’ ” (John 18:36).

What would have happened had the followers of Jesus Christ stirred up the populace and attacked the Jewish and Roman leaders? Could they have freed Jesus? Could they have freed Jerusalem and Judea from Roman domination? Would the church have been born on the Day of Pentecost? Would there have been a Gospel? Would we be yet in our sins? Would Jesus, the Prince of Peace, today be associated not with a cross but rather with a bloody sword due to the actions of His followers?

One of His followers did indeed use a sword in Gethsemane and was rebuked by Jesus. Prior to arriving in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday this same follower sought to convince Jesus that Jesus should save Himself from rejection and death and was not only rebuked by Jesus but told that he was playing the role of Satan and not setting his mind on the things of God but the things of man (Matthew 16:21 – 23). Jesus followed this rebuke by stating that to follow Him meant taking up the cross, denying self, and losing one’s life for His sake and the Gospel’s. This remains the call of Jesus Christ, it remains the requirement of Jesus Christ – as Bonhoeffer wrote, “When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.”

Do we desire the Kingdom of God or the kingdom of man? Are we seeking to preserve the Gospel by loving Christ and others and peacefully articulating, in word and deed, the message of Jesus Christ? Or, are our hearts and minds engaged in self-preservation – desiring the kingdoms of this world, the American “dream”, and agendas which draw our souls away from the Kingdom of God?

At a time in our nation when our nation needs (as it always does) the church to be the church, the voice of Jesus Christ, articulating the hope of the Gospel and the coming Kingdom of God; our shallow theology and thinking, our tenuous confession of Christ, and lack of identity as the People of God, has shown us to be a confused and manipulated people – without unity, without the confession of Jesus Christ, and without moral courage – for it takes courage to say in word and deed, “I will stand with Christ and with Him alone. His kingdom is not of this world and I am in His kingdom.”

We can only have one God and we can only serve one master and we can only desire one kingdom…and we can only look to one savior. Our nation or political or economic agenda must not be the god of the Christian nor can these things be our savior. To be sure we must pray for our leaders and be good citizens, but no earthly citizenship should take precedence over our heavenly citizenship, and no interest should take precedence over the interest of Jesus Christ and His kingdom and His Gospel.

Where is the clear articulation of the church in America that we are the people of God and that we will live within a nation in chaos loving people, serving people, and clearly sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the peril of our own well-being? Where is our willingness to suffer and be marginalized for the sake of Jesus Christ? Where is our voice for the defenseless, for the stranger, for the politically and economically and socially disenfranchised?

Are we able to say that we will love and minister to people of all political agendas? Or are we so embedded in the political and economic life of this nation that we can no longer live as citizens of God’s kingdom? Have our actions and words renounced our heavenly citizenship?

Two of my historical mentors are François Fenelon and Andrew Murray; the former a French Roman Catholic archbishop and the latter a Dutch Reformed pastor in Africa. During wars between the English and French, Fenelon ministered to soldiers on both sides – yes, he was a subject of Louis XIV but he was first and foremost a subject of Jesus Christ.

During the Boer War Murray also ministered to combatants on both sides. In Fenelon’s case both sides respected him for his ministry; in Murray’s case many on both sides disdained him for they thought he should choose sides. Sometimes people will understand us and accept us, other times they will not – that should not be our consideration. Both of these men were citizens of the Kingdom of God first and foremost – there could be little confusion about their testimony.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer is often quoted by religious people with political agendas, using him as an argument to vote one way or another. What these people miss is that Bonhoeffer came to the place early on, during Hitler’s rise to absolute power, when he realized that the church must stand as the church and speak from the Kingdom of God into the world as a distinct voice, the voice of Jesus Christ. Bonhoeffer realized that the politicization of the church would be the death of its testimony to Jesus Christ. Bonhoeffer became increasingly isolated, he was considered too radical, he was not taking political and economic realities into consideration, those who had once stood with him separated themselves. Yes, there were others like Bonhoeffer, but they were few. Pragmatism and self-preservation caused many pastors, theologians, and the church to capitulate to evil – foolishly thinking that things would get better, stupidly arguing that they could moderate evil. They used the “lesser of two evils” as an argument and found that the lesser of two evils is still not only evil…it is absolute evil – for evil is evil and when we baptize an agenda as the lesser of two evils we anoint it as the authority in our lives – we subject our hearts and minds to it – we pollute ourselves and those around us. The lesser of two evils becomes the evil in our hearts and minds.

The choice of the church is not a choice to vote one way or the other – the choice before the church is whether we will live in the Kingdom of God and speak from that kingdom and live as citizens of that kingdom – serving all around us in love and charity and grace and seeking to bring them to Jesus Christ. If we must vote, then let us vote with our lives and not with our ballots – the world does not need our ballots, it needs our lives – it needs to hear and see the clear articulation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

We have lost our voice for Christ for we have not used our voice for Christ; let us recapture an awareness of who we are in Jesus Christ – let us return to our first love – perhaps the light of our candlestick will be rekindled. 

The Cardinal and the Archbishop

I’ve been rereading a study of Cardinal Richelieu’s rise to political power and in doing so have found myself contrasting the Cardinal with another French Catholic leader, Archbishop Francois Fenelon.

Richelieu (1585 – 1642) is best known as the architect of the centralized French state; Fenelon (1651 – 1715) is not widely known, but his influence continues in the church to this day.

While there are many interesting contrasts between these two Frenchmen, two particularly strike me; character and priority.

With Richelieu, the end justifies the means and relationships are utilitarian; with Fenelon the end and the means are inseparable and relationships are sacred to the point of self-sacrifice.

Richelieu strives to establish a strong French state; Fenelon seeks first the Kingdom of God. Richelieu sacrifices others; Fenelon sacrifices himself. Fenelon desires to impart Christian character to the French Court; Richelieu instills the power of the sword. Fenelon suffers banishment; Richelieu comes to be considered the world’s first Prime Minister – though not a Prime Minister in the parliamentary sense, for he wields an autocratic government.

Richelieu gives his heart to the State of France; Fenelon gives his heart to Christ and His Church. If you read Oswald Chambers, A.W. Tozer, John Wesley, William Law, or Andrew Murray, to name just a few Protestant writers with longevity, you are reading men who have been touched by Fenelon.

Fenelon ministered to troops on both sides of the fighting between England and France as they marched through his diocese of Crambrai; Andrew Murray ministered to both English and Boer troops during their war. The difference was that the English and French respected Fenelon; while the English and Boers vilified Murray – they insisted he take sides. Perhaps in Fenelon’s time the church was seen as transcendent, while in Murray’s time it had degenerated into an arm of nationalism? (Much like our own time?)

I wonder which model the American Church follows today? Richelieu, or Fenelon and Murray?