Below is part of a discussion I had on Facebook. A person posted a “quote” attributed to St. Francis of Assisi and found himself without much “friend” support. The original poster is highlighted in blue, and I am highlighted in red. I will change all names but my own to protect the privacy of everyone else involved, but feel free to jump in with comments of your own at the end.
Dan posted: “Preach the Gospel at all times. When necessary use words.” –St. Francis of Assisi
Mike replied:
I don’t really like this quote, although I understand Assisi’s intent. I believe Scripture points us to speaking and singing of Christ and sharing the Gospel in Word and in deed.
Greg replied:
I agree with Mike, Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
Rom 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things
Tommy replied:
The Gospel is proclaimed (preached) in Reading of Scripture, Teaching, Baptism, Lord’s Table, Prayer and Hymns. This is what “Church” is suppose to be, not shouting screaming dancing speaking in gibberish and singing 24/7 songs off the wall (7 verses sang 24 times) Most of these “worship songs” are taken from scripture but are taken so far out of context it is sad. Many think the Gospel is only spoken.
Dan replied:
St. Francis of Assisi would probably agree with you both about the importance of preaching, Mike and Greg. He was just reflecting on the fact that far too many people preach the gospel but do not live it.
St. Francis was just reflecting on what Jesus said in Matthew 5:15-16: “Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.”
Gary replied:
Lot’s of people like this quote because they think it gets them off the hook of preaching the gospel with words before men. Actually preaching the gospel requires study and understanding of God’s Word. In order to think one is preaching the gospel with their life, they simply need to believe they are living the golden rule. There you have the life of the modern day false convert/hypocrite.
Greg replied:
Agreed Dan, some Christians lack works and others rely on their works and lack love. There must be a balance.
Dan replied:
Abraham Maslow once said, “If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.” That’s probably why preachers dislike this quote by St. Francis of Assisi. They too often forget the purpose of their preaching is for people to live lives that bring honor and glory to Jesus Christ.
Preaching is not the end, it is a means to an end. If people were living authentic Christian lives as St. Francis of Assisi envisions, verbalization of the Gospel would be less necessary. Anyone can preach the gospel, very few can live it.
Tracy replied:
I disagree with this.It is always necessary to preach the Gospel. And wouldn’t the devil be happy if all we Christians just did this.People will generally not ask why we are different, because they are spiritually discerned. They will know we are different as far as being kind, and living morally, but the Gospel must be proclaimed so they know why, and what they must be saved from. They will generally not ask, by us just being kind.We have a responsibility to fulfill the Great Commission given to all of us.And TRUE Christians that are faithful to proclaim God’s word, live lives that are evident of this transformed life, found only in Christ, too.
Stephen Macasil replied:
Francis never said these words, they are erroneously attributed to him. The only way to disprove this is to provide a citation, a task that no Assisi scholar has been able to do so far (that I’m aware of). The preaching of the Gospel requires words. It is a propositional message with specific content that cannot be conveyed via charades – it requires the use of words.
Dan replied:
The preaching of the Gospel REQUIRES words? No, there is no magic in the words.
The OT is filled with words, but still God found it necessary to send his Son to Earth in the flesh to live out God’s redemptive message. Preaching is great, of course, but it should never be used as an excuse for not living a Godly life. We need fewer “propositional messages” and more Godly living.
Tracy, there is no command to preach in the Great Commission of Matt 28. Disciple-making/teaching is mentioned (math?teu?), but that is far different than the kind preaching you describe (k?ryss?). Yes, Jesus did both, but if He could have done the job without becoming an incarnate example, living a holy life, then He would have just shouted his message down from the clouds.
Contrary to what some others have said, preaching can just be an excuse for not living the Christ-life. Many preachers love to sit in their study’s parsing Greek verbs (which better scholar’s have done millions of times before) and think that’s enough. All talk, no walk. Churches are filled with such pastors and people and that’s the hypocrisy of our age.
Gary replied:
Obviously, we should live godly after we preach the gospel. If we don’t, our witness is destroyed. However, if you go back and listen to those who most often fall into sin, it wasn’t the true gospel they were preaching. Some preach so much about holy living that we all know it’s impossible for anyone, including the one doing the preaching, to be that perfect. I feel that also renders their preaching ineffective. It doesn’t slow down the invitations that they get, however. I refuse to preach that message just to make a living. To each his own. God will hand out the rewards. Also, I preach the gospel, so that men will be saved from hell, not so much that they begin to act as if they are qualified for heaven.
Tracy replied:
Dan, Sorry, but we are to proclaim and share the Good News.That does require words. Faith cometh by hearing. God chose the foolishness of the preaching of the gospel to convict sinners, and call them to repentance, and belief.
Of course, we have to live it, but that is not where our responsibility stops. Or we are passive and unloving to not share the truth that unless men repent and put their faith in Christ and Christ alone, they will perish in their sins.
And true Christians know better that sharing the Good News is enough for living the Christian life. We have our marching orders in the NT. It is of course both.No one here has said it is an excuse to not live it, too. But true born again people will live it. And I am not trying to split hairs,over greek text, and the meaning of preaching or to be argumentative, Dan, really, but we know what the Great Commission means.
Tracy replied:
For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.Hebrews 4:12
Dan replied:
Perhaps we could agree we should live Godly lives WHILE we preach. That’s what St. Francis was saying, I think. He did not disavow preaching.
I’m not sure I could agree on the part about “those who most often fall into sin… wasn’t the true gospel….” Both Judas and Peter got the message from the Source and they both denied the Lord in their own way.
I always worry when I hear someone talk about the “true Gospel.” I sense a theological agenda behind that term and I tend to want to flee from such people. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is what it is. Embellishing it with an adverb is a distraction.
Stephen Macasil replied:
“The preaching of the Gospel REQUIRES words? No, there is no magic in the words.”
Yes, it REQUIRES words. How else do you suppose the sufficient content can be communicated in order for it to be believed?
“We need fewer ‘propositional messages’ and more Godly living.”
…which is a propositional message itself, thank you. You see, apart from propositional communication (words in a sentence in a language, etc.) there can be no transfer of intellectual thought from one mind to another. You cannot “demonstrate” to me through non-propositional actions that “we need fewer ‘propositional messages’ and more Godly living” any more than you can effectively demonstrate the Gospel unto salvation. Like the Bible says, it must be preached (1 Cor. 1:21)!
Stephen Macasil replied:
Also, I want to share a couple of quick thoughts that I think may be helpful here. 1) Francis did not say those words. Please do the research. 2) Let us not confuse *the Gospel* with a life lived that commends the Gospel. They are not the same thing.
Stephen Macasil replied:
Not to hog this thread, but Father Pat McCloskey, OFM (Franciscan) wrote:
**I had been a Franciscan for 28 years—and had earned an M.A. in Franciscan studies—before I heard the “Use words if necessary” quote. That was during Msgr. Kenneth Velo’s homily at Cardinal Joseph L. Bernardin’s funeral in 1996.
About a year ago, a friend of mine used the Internet to contact some of the most eminent Franciscan scholars in the world, seeking the source of this “Use words if necessary” quote. It is clearly not in any of Francis’ writings. After a couple weeks of searching, no scholar could find this quote in a story written within 200 years of Francis’ death.**
And, Mark Galli, Sr. Editor of Christianity Today, wrote:
**Preach the gospel; use words if necessary” goes hand in hand with a postmodern assumption that words are finally empty of meaning. It subtly denigrates the high value that the prophets and Jesus and Paul put on preaching. Of course we want our actions to match our words as much as possible. But the gospel is a message, news about an event and a person upon which the history of the planet turns.**
Galli’s CT article http://bit.ly/CQlqV
Dan replied:
Stacy, John 1:14: “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” It is Jesus who is living and powerful, not the words or pages in a book. When Paul (or whoever) wrote Hebrews 4:12 the NT canon was incomplete and the for hundreds of years was transmitted by people, in word and deed.
Dan replied:
Stephen, St Francis or not, it’s a good point that emphasizes a corrective balance needed in our present day where talk seems more important than the walk. If I ever use the quote I will use the phrase “ascribed to St Francis of Assisi.” Okay?
I really don’t know how to respond to what you say about “propositional messages.” To me that is a part of Logical Positivism, a philosophy alien to Christianity. I think you might be lost in that minefield, but I’m not sure.
These days “Propositional preaching” is code for a particular rhetorical and logical style of preaching which is a throwback to the Greeks. Paul was heavily influence by the Greeks of course. On the other hand, Jesus was the most effective preacher ever (I’m not alone in this view) and he used a narrative form, not a propositional form. Propositional preaching is for those who like to be argumentative, not those who wish to declare truth.
Stephen Macasil replied:
I’m not sure you understand Logical Positivism if you think I may be caught in that minefield. Perhaps you do and it’s me that you don’t understand, nevertheless, no verificationist of any sort would welcome me on their team.
Think about it, if the Gospel is news about an event in history nearly 2,000 years ago, it follows that for the news to be received today it must be communicated, right? And how is it to be communicated if not with words? Can someone that manages their finances well, cares for the poor, counts others more important, etc., be observed by an onlooker to the point where the onlooker deduces her need for a Savior and from what she’s observed place faith in Jesus Christ to restore her to a right relationship with God? If so, please explain how…no one has been able to yet!
Check out this quote from Graeme Goldsworthy that spells it out nicely:
“If something is not what God did in and through the historical Jesus two thousand years ago, it is not the gospel. Thus Christians cannot ‘live the gospel,’ as they are often exhorted to do. They can only believe it, proclaim it and seek to live consistently with it. Only Jesus lived (and died) the gospel. It is a once-for-all finished and perfect event done for us by another.
Surely you will not charge Goldsworthy with being a positivist, nor would anyone charge the Vienna school’s greatest critic, Gordon H. Clark, as a LP, who, by the way, represents my position on this almost to the tee.
You wrote: “St Francis or not, it’s a good point that emphasizes a corrective balance needed in our present day where talk seems more important than the walk.”
I must respectfully disagree, for it breeds the very confusion that got us here in the first place. The Gospel can’t be lived – it’s news about what God did in Christ to save those who believe. The quote is contradictory because it claims to preach without the essentials of preaching: words. If anything, the quote says “always preach the Gospel with words,” since they are *necessary.*
—–end of quoted discussion—–
What do you think about all this? Does anyone have better arguments for the other side that says the Gospel can be preached without words? I’m sure that many here have heard this quote or a variation of it at one time or another. How did you respond? Or, did you?
{ 48 comments… read them below or add one }
I don’t have to study history, specifically Napoleon, I can just live like him and allow people to play historical “Charades”. So if the logic is followed, we play redemptive “Charades” and only use words if the lost players cannot guess who I am imitating?
I see Peter on Pentecost dramatically feeding a poor person and looking to the crowd as if inviting a guess. They don’t get it. He then helps an elderly lady across the path. He looks again at the crowd excruciatinly desiring them to guess who he is imitating. They don’t get it. He changes the bandages on a sick man and turns emphatically to the crowd expecting them to undertsand now. They still do not get it.
With frustration, which is common in Charades, he loudly says, “It’s Jesus. He died for your sins and He resurrected from the dead. He was God in the flesh!!”
The crowd gets it and at least 3000 players desire baptism.
Well said, Rick! And may we not forget that the game of charades has a sense of urgency given that the pantomimist is up against the clock!
“Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.”
“How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?”
It seems the auditory system is involved, and oh yeah, the Word of God. I’m not sure God wants us to attempt to “improve” on His plan. Is it not the zenith of self righteousness that someone can live so righteously that he actually communicates Jesus to the lost? If so, Gandhi was saved.
A person later in the same thread said to me: To me “living the Gospel” is viscerally experiencing the unconditional love of God towards ME, a helpless sinner, and then having that exude from my very inner being to everyone I meet…The words would be simply my attempt to explain to others what has happen to me in my encounter with God’s amazing love.
I replied: That would be preaching yourself and not Christ crucified. That’s the opposite of the apostles that preached *not* themselves but Christ crucified. Your experience won’t save anyone, only God does through the preaching of the Gospel.
The church is embarrassingly shallow in our humanitarian efforts, and colossal in our hedonism and culturally tethered lifestyles.
However nothing can replace the preaching/sharing of the gospel, which is good news, not good pantomime. The wise it is foolishness, and to the foolish it the power of God. How can anyone believe that a dead Jew on a Roman cross of punishment is the only way to eternal life? No one can actually believe that unless the Holy Spirit reveals it to a sinner. So unsophisticated, so barbaric, and so unlike a deity of love.
You desire to see the color white in definition? Place it upon a background of pure black. You want to see the love of God in manifestation? Place it upon the background of sin painted upon a canvass of ripped flesh, writhing pain, and disgusting amounts of spilled blood. Reject that and you’ve rejected God…forever.
The “voiceless” Gospel is an aberration. Preaching is by definition the use of words to convey thoughts or ideas concerning God’s plan of salvation for sinners. The problem, as I see it, is that the “evan-jellyfish” Christians have been so kowtowed by the PC pagans in this world that they do not want to take a stand for Christ and raise His banner.
In addition, Christians are so much like the world, that they can’t preach. Their own ungodly lives have disqualified them from preaching. When you look at the professed church you really see no difference from the world, so why should they preach?
Further, the “voiceless” gospel is another factor indicative of the self-centered life. Those that adhere to this only care about themselves. It’s as if they got their ticket punched to an eternity with God, but don’t care a lick for those that are still lost and bound by the enemy. How selfish is it to have the remedy, but to keep it to yourself? More and more the professed church is turning into a bless ME club with little or no regard for the lost.
I love to preach. I love street evangelism. I love sharing my faith with those that are lost. Watching the Holy Spirit use this crooked stick to draw the straight lines of the gospel, and make an impact for eternity. What a privilege it is to be a part of God’s “foolishness” in order to bring salvation to those that are lost.
Derek,
You encourage me by your comments, kinda off subject is the way missiology forgets to preach outside of our work and inner circle.
Thanks for the reminder
This so-called Assisi comment is of more value than the scriptures to some. Their adherence to it we find out, is based upon a philosophical idea and not upon anything the Spirit of God was teaching them.
When the Spirit of God sanctifies, He sanctifies in a way that enables the Christian to be a witness, not only a witness but salt, not only salt but light, not only light but ambassador. We are not one-dimensional tools like paper hammers or screwdrivers, we are living examples in word and deed. When the scriptures exhort us to ‘put on Christ’, are we putting on a silent lamb led to the slaughter? Well, maybe in some cases, but in most cases we are putting on the Christ that taught, the Christ that prayed, the Christ that ministered, the Christ that loved, the Christ that rebuked and any other thing that accurately represent him.
Any teaching that speaks of living like Christ which is devoid of his teachings is not living like Christ, but someones manufacture of a false Christ and a false gospel.
I dont say these Christians are trying to go that far, I am saying that in the end, this is what they end up with. Ive always hated this saying, because it is used as an excuse to live not a life devoted to Christ, but a life devoted to comfort, where their morality is welcomed by the ungodly and their silent gospel message (as if there is such a thing)does not bring them into the ‘life of Jesus’ where they will be persecuted for their beliefs.
Its ironic isnt it? To pretend to live a life that represents Jesus Christ, yet live it in such a way that the most important thing of all is to avoid the hardships, trials and sufferings which Jesus faced. That is a ‘life of Christ’ that never existed’.
John
“Dan” seems to forget or just neglect to understand Rom 1:15 – Rom. 1:17
“Rom 1:15 So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also. Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. Rom 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
The apostle says that preaching the gospel is the “power of God unto salvation”, not living the good example. In fact, the ungodly despise good works, they aren’t convicted by them [examples of good works] unless the Word of God has been preached–law and gospel.
I suspect Dan’s statement quoted here:
“Abraham Maslow once said, “If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.” That’s probably why preachers dislike this quote by St. Francis of Assisi. They too often forget the purpose of their preaching is for people to live lives that bring honor and glory to Jesus Christ.”
reveals that he’s not under any authentic shepherd to have this kind of disdain for preachers. I guess his example of a preacher is one who demonstrates a “do as I say, not as I do” attitude–sad.
Some good points from all here. It seems as though I will run into difficulty in finding people to argue for the other side. Maybe they exist in this thread and are not arguing it, just living it!
I am glad though that we all seem to be united on this one!
So much discussion takes place these days as to what content to preach. I think we all see the greater issues, namely, the issue over whether or not to preach at all.
“Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!” (1 Cor. 9:16c)
P.S. I notice that our “Recent Comments” feed is not showing in the right column. I’ll contact the webmaster and see if we can get that taken care of.
My statement stand in 1John. 1-10 We all know that the Word is God and His Son Jesus cleanses us from all sin 1John 1.7.
But how do you hear unless someone preaches 1John 1.5 The bible interprets the bible thus the world(our reality) Save yourself some time Dan. These so called words are inspired of our God. Psalm 143 is off topic but you must use scripture to interpret scripture. Not human wisdom of men. John 3 verse 3 you must be born again. Shout out to my brothers. God bless you all and many blessings on our Lords birthday.
OH yea brad almost forgot my favorite scripture. Live it!!!!!!!!
Galatians2.20 I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the “life” which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. That life is not our own since we were purchased at a price. Praise the Lord Ps. 112
I would say you can preach the Gospel without words in some way, I mean it seems that Peter promotes wives not to necessarily preach the word by mouth but by their life in order that the husbands would be saved and hear the gospel message. But I do think there is a context that the husband might know that they have accepted Christ? But any way here is the verse:
1 Peter 3:1-2- In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior.
Dr. Karen H. Jobes comments “Observing this, the man himself may be won to Christ “without words,” for in that culture it is shameful for a wife to presume to instruct her husband (which may also be a concern in 1 Tim. 2:11-12). Here is a situation where silence is the more effective means of communication” page 204 in her commentary on 1 Peter.
I asked Ashley from this blog
http://ifnecessary–usewords.blogspot.com/
if she would come on and discuss her view on this issue, since her blog is named “if necessary use words”
hopefully she comes on.
I once had an argument with a Youth Pastor some years ago about this very quote he had hung up in his office!
I was simply written off as argumentative. *sigh*
Agilius, argumentative?, nah…
Jon, I have really appreciated some of Jobes’ commentary in the past. I think she is an excellent scholar. I have agreed with her on some issues, and disagreed strongly with her on others. I am not familiar though, with her take on 1 Pet. 3. Do you know if she interacts with the exegetical commentators that interpret this passage other ways?
For example, RCH Lenski translates the second logos as “argument,” meaning that “without words” means “without argument.” Given the absence of the definite article (and the presence of it in the previous logos), Lenski emphatically states that this does not mean “without words” as if a husband can be converted without the Gospel message ever spoken to him.
Other commentators have affirmed that the “husbands” in view in this passage are those that have already indeed heard the Gospel preached at one time or another and have remained in unbelief, making the point of “winning him over” by “conduct” rather than “argument.” Some label the wife’s conduct as “Gospel witness,” not in place of but because of the “Gospel message.”
In either case, I don’t see a parallel between this passage and the general evangel of the church. Peter here is giving instruction to believing wives on how to deal with “their own” husbands. This is no way teaches that the Gospel can be preached without words.
>> Agilius, argumentative?, nah…
Yer momma! 0.o
It is impossible to preach the gospel without words. But it is possible, and very desirable, to let works cultivate curiosity and authenticity.
I think part of the confusion of this quote is what we count as the Gospel. Now if the quote is saying that we can proclaim the Gospel in the sense of justification only, then I would disagree and say it is impossible; we need to proclaim that verbally. But if it is the Gospel of sanctification, then it is perfectly fine. Furthermore, the Gospel is not just limited to justification only, but also includes sanctification and glorification. The Gospel is thick and not thin in that it is only a message of justification; it would basically be useless if this was true. However, the Gospel also teaches sanctification, which is the truth of Christ lived out and that truth shining out of your life. How can we be disobedient to the Gospel message as in 2 Thessalonians 1:8 “in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.” and 1 Peter 4:17 “For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?” if it is only about proclaiming justification? The Gospel message does include a lifestyle which we live, which proclaims (through action) the gospel of sanctification. I think 1 Peter 3:1 and many other biblical verses point this out (gospel through action); that verse just happens to talk about wives, but that is one of the points (gospel through action) of the whole book. I think Dr. Wayne Grudem and Dr. Sailhammer point out a key theme in the text of 1 Peter chap 2 and 3. They say that the point of 1 Peter chap 2 and chap 3 is that the Christian’s life will spark a nonbeliever to ask them of their Hope. Grudem points out “The word ‘conduct’… is frequent in Peter. He uses it to refer to the evil pattern of life of unbelievers…and the good pattern of life of believers, which is intended to lead to the salvation of others who observe it (2:12; 3:1,2,16) Page 76. He goes on to say on pg. 138 that chap 3:2: “Emphasis on conduct rather than words is also applicable to other situations in which Christians find themselves in regular daily contact with unbelievers……he does indicate that the means God will use to ‘win such persons will generally not be the Christian’s words but his or her behavior (pg138). Grudem also talks about how the word “their” for their husbands in verse 2 is not in the Greek, meaning that not only does it mean submissive behavior but full conduct in marriage and conduct with in a Christian community. But I do think that what Grudem said above does apply to living out the Gospel message or at least it does show it is part of the message in some sense. Part of the Gospel is a changed life and as Peter points out, part of the changed life and message is submission to earthly authorities, a moral life, etc., because we are different people and now do things unto the Lord because of the Gospel. Grudem comments on 1 Peter 3:15b: “ However, since the questioning is concerning the hope that is in you, Peter must be assuming that the inward hope of the Christians results in lives so noticeably different that unbelievers are prompted to ask why they are so distinctive (cf. 4:4) Page 153. The Hope that I have is the Gospel; the Gospel is the Hope that is in me so I live it out which indirectly is proclaiming Gospel message through my life. So I would say there is some sense to the Gospel being preached at all time without words. But obviously I do not think that is the only way we preach or the best way. I think open air sermons, bible studies, etc., are preferred ways of delivering Gospel. But I do think there is some truth to the quote because our daily conduct in life is a very important part in the Christian walk; living out what we believe shows that we believe it. Part of the Gospel message is having us strive to live a moral life before God. Here is a side point—I know this is a controversial passage—1 Peter chapter 3:18-20 might also show this concept. Now depending on the interpretation you take, if it is Christ who preached the Gospel through Noah by the Spirit, then you would have a situation of the Gospel being proclaimed without words but action. If we go back to the Genesis account we never see Noah directly proclaiming the Gospel, but only in that he obeyed God. To say he talked about it would be adding to the Genesis text. But that is if you take that view and if you take the view that he was proclaiming the Gospel and not condemnation. Just though I would add that little tidbit to the conversation.
Important: – I do think need it is necessary to use words as much as possible contrary to the quote, But I do not think we should discredit our life as a witness of the Gospel. Also I do not think the Gospel can be separated in to multiple sections, it needs to be thought of as one unit but is only divided in the context to which it is being spoken in. Nor are we saved by any other means other than Christ merit alone, him being our propitiation.
Travis- thank you for asking me to stop by!
Yes, the idea for my blog came from this version of the quote: “Preach the Gospel at all times; if necessary, use words.” Whether or not St. Francis of Assisi wrote it, I still try to imitate the life that Christ lived as is written in the Gospels, as well as the life of St. Francis.
Why do I believe that doing such a thing is possible? I hope you don’t mind me delving into a part of my life, but it is essential to explain. Growing up I learned the “universal basics” about Christ, living like a Christian, etc. from those around me. I knew who Jesus Christ was, I liked this Person very much, and I sort of knew what church was. But going to church and reading the Bible weren’t tenets in my household.
I didn’t attend church much until I moved to my current home about 8 years ago. That is when I lived with my grandparents for some months, where I received the very sturdy, solid foundation for my faith and relationship in and with Christ that I have expanded upon ever since.
I witnessed the kindness, caring, compassionate, helpful, loving natures of both my grandparents, and I wondered where it came from. How could people be just naturally that good? Then I saw the cross on the wall. That must be the origin, the inspiration, of how and why they act, I thought.
At their business, customers weren’t just a way to make money, they were people. People who, because of my grandparents’ Christlike ways, became good friends with not only them but me as well. Then we as a family started going to Sunday Mass. And I absolutely fell in love with worshiping the Lord. The church was where I met parishioners who’ve helped me on my spiritual journey, where I met people who helped me find the good in others, where my family came closer together, where I learned to try and be the face of Christ to others every moment of my life.
Sure, some days I didn’t want to get up out of bed and go to mass, but I had found a home. A home, but I had also discovered the greatest friendship that I’ve ever had with anyone, and that person was and is Jesus.
Now, it wasn’t all because of various peoples’ actions that I came to believe. Not by a long shot. Scripture read either aloud or silently and preached and meditated upon has influenced (and still influences) the way I try to live my life. But for someone like me, who grew up without people preaching the Word, the life of Jesus to me, being able to preach the Gospel without words is crucial.
How else would I have been reached through by God? You can’t answer that fellow readers, only God can. I have a feeling that my grandparents, my mother, my priest, and other individuals were put in my life for a reason by God to SHOW me and TELL me about Jesus.
I am not by any means saying that preaching isn’t necessary. I believe that it is necessary, but I believe that you should also be able to show (hence preach) God’s love and message by your actions as well. If you say something, you should be able to do it. Words and actions. If you tell me one thing and then do another, I may be tempted to discredit your words and actions in the future. Then what value will your words and Scripture quoting have on down the line?
I wear a cross around my neck, an unusual one. It is a Jerusalem cross, and it has been on more than one occasion mistaken for a waffle. That, I have yet to understand. Anyway, people are constantly asking me about ‘that thing on my neck.’ It is a perfect opportunity to share my faith and love of Christ to someone. So logically, living and acting like Christ should give someone a reason to ask me, “Hey, why are you doing that?” or “What are you doing that for?”
If I knew nothing else about Mother Teresa, if I didn’t know that she was a follower of Christ, I would still come to the conclusion that God’s hand has been in her life. That she has been touched by Jesus…all purely based of off her actions towards others.
I know that I am not perfect. At times I fail to live the way I ought to, which is like Christ. At times, I fail to preach the Gospel both in word and in action. We are all guilty of falling short of the mark. I’m only 19, and I have a long ways to go and a lot more to learn. For sure I know and firmly believe that Christ never gives up on us, so we shouldn’t give up on Him.
Yes, I try to live out preaching the Gospel at all times, and if it is necessary, I use words.
We preach best what we need to practice the most.
Ashley,
I’ve known Mormons and JW’s with similar stories. Is it your position that living a nice life is enough to lead people to Christ?
Ashely,
I appreciate you taking time to come on and post.
I will have to agree with Agilius, how are they going to believe something unless someone tells them there is something to believe. Another way to determine if this would work is if you went to a tribe in south america, and decided to just live and be nice to people, assuming they never heard of Jesus, which a lot havent, how would they obtain salvation? By ther good works, by acting like you? They must know, and how will they know without a preacher?
Also – since I notice you referred to mass – Catholicism, proper, preaches a different Jesus than the Apostles; Catholicism is a Jesus-plus-works religion.
Check out this article on Catholicism:
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/c16.html
There is a point Ashley is trying to convey and you all are failing to comprehend. It seems to me that Ashley is stating that living you life like Christ is better than only preaching his word but not living it. It is better to live a life like Christ then to falsify his word by choosing not to live like him. Ashley is not stating that Christ’s word needs not to be spoken. Not at all. She is saying that his word needs to be lived before it can be spoken. I could never fully listen to someone preach the word who does not live a Christ-like life. This is what Ashley is trying to convey. Actions sometimes speak louder than words, but words are still needed.
I don’t see a problem with this quote when understood in the right context and from the correct worldview. It didn’t say that it was talking specifically to those in ministry.
–Stephen said:
In either case, I don’t see a parallel between this passage and the genera evangel of the church. Peter here is giving instruction to believing wives on how to deal with “their own” husbands. This is no way teaches that the Gospel can be preached without words
–
I also don’t see where it says it’s referring to only the whole evangel of the church. Are not saved women “dealing with” their unsaved husbands with the gospel?
Many nonbelievers hate christianity (man’s view here, as we know the root reason which is not the issue in this discussion) because of hypocrisy. The two faceness of many proclaiming to be christian makes others sick. And often times it’s not a purposeful deceit, the christian may not even realize they are doing it.
One has to know when to fight. When it’s not time, then comes the quiet kindness. You can live the gospel more often and easily without words than come the opportunities to verbally preach.
And being a woman I find this especially relevant. I can never be a preacher. Few men are called to pastorship. A general life of walking the walk and not ONLY talking the talk seems to be what the quote here is referring to.
Alsoo I know many of you are going to be ready to disregard everything ashley said just because she is catholic, but I think that would be a mistake. We know that there is some truth that can be agreed upon so her words should be considered at face value. Don’t bunny trail onto a debate about catholicism.
The translatable fact is that you can talk at a person all you want, but it is often deed and not word that will finally be the means (again, I am talking about man’s view here, the earthly means God uses) to salvation. Everybody has a different conversion story so those who just heard the word and were saved would have a harder time understanding, but that’s not an excuse not to try. I heard the gospel fairly regularly from when I was four until I was twelve but wasn’t saved until I was twenty-one.
I’ll also echo what Jonathan said about the gospel for santification. I’m encouraged when I hear the gospel, sure, but also other times when I see an example of the gospel in life. I’ reminded of the good news same as if I heard it.
That stuff causes people to click and it’s like “oh, THAT’s what so and so meant when they were tell me” because we can’t think it’s only one person God will use as the (earthly) means to save a body. It could take a series of people, some talking and others doing, until a person is saved. God is creative like that, so I wouldn’t shortchage him as to throw out a quote.
Also, just because something is abused doesn’t mean it should be abandoned. Yes, that quote can and has been misinterpreted and misapplied. Doesn’t make it absolutely irrelevant.
And remember it’s not saying to never use words. Many of the replies here seem to be inferring such. I don’t think anyone would argue to never verbally preach the gospel. There is just many situations and it’s beautiful that life is variable and not a set and predictable pattern.
Agilius and Travis, it is not my position that just good works alone will help someone believe. I am just saying that from my personal background, others’ Christlike actions helped me believe before I ever really heard the word. I know that I am not the only one who has come to believe in this way, so that is why I think it is possible to preach the Gospel without words. But please understand me, I do think preaching the word verbally is completely necessary. I do. In my particular case however, actions came before the word. Does that make my belief in Christ any different?
Nathaniel, you basically summed up my first response in one paragraph. Thank you for finding the key points in all of those words. I tend to get a long-winded at times. Your last line is awesome, “Actions sometimes speak louder than words, but words are still needed.”
Becky: “I also don’t see where it says it’s referring to only the whole evangel of the church.”
The quote implies that it is possible to preach the Gospel without words. This is a claim that refers to the nature of the Gospel and the nature of preaching, thereby affecting the evangel of the whole church. This is a claim that I deny. It is akin to saying that you can breathe a chicken dinner. One may indeed state that, but it is clear that “breathe” is not meant literally, nor can it be unless an ontological change takes place. One may argue that she can smell the chicken dinner by inhaling and thus she is breathing her dinner in a sense, but we could simply correct her and explain that she has confused the smell of her dinner with her dinner itself. This is a basic example of a category fallacy. This is why I said (in the OP):
—–
The preaching of the Gospel requires words. It is a propositional message with specific content that cannot be conveyed via charades – it requires the use of words.
Let us not confuse *the Gospel* with a life lived that commends the Gospel. They are not the same thing.
Check out this quote from Graeme Goldsworthy that spells it out nicely:
“If something is not what God did in and through the historical Jesus two thousand years ago, it is not the gospel. Thus Christians cannot ‘live the gospel,’ as they are often exhorted to do. They can only believe it, proclaim it and seek to live consistently with it. Only Jesus lived (and died) the gospel. It is a once-for-all finished and perfect event done for us by another.
—–
If it is your life that is preached, then you are at odds with the apostles that did not preach themselves but Jesus Christ. They considered themselves servants for Jesus’ sake, but not an incarnation of the Gospel of Jesus.
All of this seems to be an attempt to figure out how to increase the effectiveness of evangelism. John Robbins had a pretty good take on this when he said:
“The Church’s lack of power is the result of its lack of truth. The Gospel is the power of God, not religious experience or personal relationship. The Church has no power because it has abandoned the Gospel, the good news, for a religion of experientialism.” (Crisis of our Time)
James White said, “what you win them with is what you win them to.”
If you are won over *by* moralism then you are won over *to* moralism which is the enemy of Christianity.
I Think we are all in agreement with this
stephen said
Let us not confuse *the Gospel* with a life lived that commends the Gospel. They are not the same thing.
Am I wrong?
Travis – the african tribe thing would obviously be a “when necessary” instance
Correct that would be necessary, but I guess the point would be the gospel can not be known even in America, unless someone tells you about it.
How did people become Christians in the time of Christ? by “word” of mouth and by watching Jesus and believing what he said. but those not fortunate enough to see Jesus had to hear the gospel, so I would say the majority did not come to the knowladge of Christ based on Christ’s works or the diciples works but by words. Plus, I dont see any where in scripture where it says to live the gospel I see preach the gospel and live a life according to that gospel.
>> Don’t bunny trail onto a debate about catholicism.
I brought up her Catholicism because the general acceptance of [all forms of] Catholicism actually serves to highlight the importance of the point being made.
But, yes; Technically, this is a bunny trail. Well done. No more bunny trails.
So, after reading these many posts, for the most part, we are all agreed.
Gospel preaching must contain words, not just when a supposed necessity arises, but rather the gospel itself is defined by its message.
Moralism cannot be understood to be ‘the gospel’, the gospel is much more than that.
What I do read from some is a defense of the quote itself. The quote seems to carry some weight with different people, but the quote dies the death of a thousand caveats.
Grace is the issue, and grace is never understood spiritually by spiritually dead men. All the ungodly can know is what is in the heart of man, which to them the only semblance of spirituality is moralism. To me, this is why this quote has lasted so long. Its recognized because it strikes the moralistic heart-string and that resonates in the minds of so many as sufficient to represent the gospel. But gospel-ers reject such a notion as a denial of the true light which has come into the world.
I can see where the quote can be used for good. It can be used as an opening line “when a person does something good for someone else, do you think their motive in doing good is clear to everyone?”
A point that may have been missed, although I didn’t read every word of every post, is that, as sinners saved by grace, we cannot live a life that raises to the level of the Gospel. So what then? If the truth of the Gospel relied on the daily actions of the messenger we’d all have rejected the faith. The Jews rejected the Messiah, even after they saw Him heal the sick, restore sight and raise the dead. They also saw Him live a perfect life, a life without sin, but still did not follow Him and even supported His execution. If Jesus “Gospel without words” didn’t produce believers why would ours?
OverCommiTad2theWord
Well put. I havnt thought about it like that before.
I recently blogged on this supposed St. Francis quote, and I still don’t understand its appeal. It doesn’t even make sense from my reading of it. The very word “preach” pre-supposed verbal, propositional proclamation…
What a great thread! great posts! I can only add this: Mother Theresa is a good example to use. Because her ‘gospel’ that she was preaching without words was a false gospel. The hand of God was not in her ‘ministry’. This mistaken conclusion that her ministry shows God’s hand must be in it, is just one huge Exactly Why. Mother T’s example is Exactly Why we do not use any ministry to validate the theology behind a man-made ministry. People who are doctrine illiterate get fooled by the Mother T’s of the world. That to me is exactly why we never settle for a wordless gospel. It’s dangerous. Hope I made sense.
I’ve been away for a while but I’m back. You BT people are way to smart for me btw and there is a little intimidation in me to actually respond to this post but I will make an attempt.
I could be wrong but it seems to me that there might be an over emphasis on either NOT using words or using words to preach the gospel. Personally, I would say that preaching the gospel can only be done through proclamation. I would say when Christians live generously towards others, they are living the gospel (2 Cor
or at least demonstrate the reality of the gospel.
I would say BOTH, using words and a demonstration is NOT sufficient in bringing a person to saving faith. EVEN if they intellectually understand the proposition of the gospel or the example done by the believer, they will not come to saving knowledge apart from the work of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 2:1-5). The big question is not which one is the better, but which would would the Holy Spirit use?
I read that someone said it’s not possible to live the gospel. I disagree. I think as one who have been saved from darkness into the light, we are obligated to live this reality out.
At any rate, if a person uses the allege Francis quote because he has no backbone to preach the gospel, he’s a coward. But if a person only preaches the gospel but fails to live out its realities, he is a hypocrite.
nicely put,
on a similar note, I have been told that around the world Muslims are coming to church saying the Lord told them to come in a vision and find out about Him, apperently its not one or two but many Muslims.
Thought that was kinda of encouraging have to find the report though.
I ask for your prayers, reguarding this topic, I am recently part of a church plant in Aurora, Co (prayer 1) thecrossingaurora.org, (Prayer 2) What are some specific things without being programatic that a small church can focus on serving our community and preaching the gospel?
We have been very encouraged by what is going on with a lot of you in SOCAL, keep up the good work.
Hi Travis, good to know where you’re at and what’s going on there. I have also been involved in a church plant that is thriving. During the first year as different people came and checked the worship services, the growth seemed anemic, but the Lord was faithful to give us endurance to keep on in authentic worship services with good preaching, law/gospel, sacraments, and even some disclipline along the way. Now there are about 90-100 regular attenders, many of them members with children. Now, space is our next challenge!
Anyway, give attention to proper worship [regulative principle-ish]. I say “ish” to avoid seeming “programatic” to use your word, but let the Lord give the increase, you all just preach the word faithfully.
Laura M – Who are you to judge Mother Theresa’s life and ministry? Wow, do you have a nerve! I’m not Roman Catholic, and I would most certainly disagree with her on many points, theological and otherwise, but I’m not prepared to condemn her or her ministry to the poor of Calcutta as Godless. I hope you are prepared to be judged by the same standard you are holding Mother Theresa to.
As for the main thrust of this discussion, as I read it, the author of the quote might as well be saying “Be doers of the word and not hearers only.” ( http://www.bibleanswer.com/jas1_doers.htm ) I mean, he says “use words” – there’s no claim that anyone can preach exclusively by actions, but as James 1:21-27 says: “Be doers of the word and not hearers only, deluding yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his own face in a mirror. He sees himself, then goes off and promptly forgets what he looked like. But the one who peers into the perfect law of freedom and perseveres, and is not a hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, such a one shall be blessed in what he does.
If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, his religion is vain.Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to care for orphans and widows in their affliction and to keep oneself unstained by the world.”
Use words when necessary, but for Christ’s sake, live like you mean it.
Yes, I think you CAN preach the Gospel without words because it is not us who speak to people’s hearts, but God himself. I am convinced of this for two reasons a) I myself, and atheistic non church attender, came to faith without the Church’s preaching and teaching being involved at all, but through God seeking me out. and b) I take prayer painting retreats which occur in silence, and in them God himself speaks to people in the silence through the Holy Spirit.
I am not saying that this is the only way, but that, because we are all created differently, for some people words are the sign-posts,and for others they are the stumbling blocks.
How about this John T,
Use words always live like Christ always, seek wisdom and discernment always.
If someone is Christ (NOT GOD) less than what are there works reguardless where they are at (Calcutta, LA, Japan…) they are Christless.
You say you disagree with her theologically, what do you disagree with her on? Are those issues salvation issues? Then it might just be her works are “Godless.”
Jessica,
Can a Pastor preach without words? Can the president speak without words?
Silly questions right, that is what is being said, preaching=speaking
So you are saying you never heard the gospel before you were saved?
To Jessica: Then explain Romans 10:14 where Paul says that faith comes by hearing the word of God and..how will they hear without a PREACHER.
Satan sure conjured up a good lie with this one, it gets people to the point where they do not have to use words, thus no one will be able to be saved.
In order to believe the gospel you must KNOW the gospel, and how can you know the gospel without reading it or hearing it.
I ask the question, who would want to preach the gospel without words?
If you have any real passion fired by the love of God and have experienced the riches of his kindness and have understood just a fraction of God’s beautiful grace there’s nothing to shut you up. Once I became born of God, it has been a fire in me that is not quenched. Even in the worst moments in my life, when I was darkend and hurt…yet a believer…I had within me a gospel that went beyond my inner turmoils and expressed itself in hope.
I dont know how anyone can keep quiet about Jesus Christ. Im at a loss to understand anyone that calls themselves a believer and doesnt look for a way to express the gospel. I know even the worst situations where persecution rages, the preaching of the gospel goes forth.
What is inside of them that hazards everything and then places their bodies on an altar to be cruely treated by their persecutors…yet they spill over in ‘words’ that express the glorious power of God to save sinners.
Ive never known anyone to ask me what makes me different. They already know it. Theyve heard me speaking, theyve been silent hearers of my conversations about Jesus Christ. At the bare minimum they seem my bible at work or at lunch. They dont have to guess at what Im about, so when someone asks me, they dont assume Islam, Hindu, Krishna, Occult, they dont assume Mormon either or JW they ask me…are you a Christian?
If Satan can get a person to keep quiet about Jesus…they are probably grieving the Spirit of God. But if that person begins to say
“my moral life speaks loud enough”….something is strangely different about them compared to a disciple of Jesus empowered by his Spirit.
There is nothing natural about me speaking about Jesus Christ. I am not naturally a talkative person, Im not naturally confrontative or interested in injecting contraversial subjects into someone and then creating an issue over it. Ive never naturally cared two hoots about people in general. It wasnt until Jesus Christ saved me that such a radical change occured. Now its the opposite, I must preach the gospel and all that God made me would die if I couldnt express the testimony of Jesus Christ and his glorious gospel.
John
{ 1 trackback }