Should we pray for the Lord's return?

The idea of the return of our Lord Jesus Christ is a lovely one, however, I find it difficult to actively pray for Christ's return when I think of the unsaved all around me. For them the Lord's return would not be a lovely prospect but would only herald the great day of His wrath for them.

I was in Israel recently and as such spent a number of days in Jerusalem. Our guide on the trip was a lovely Messianic Jew and I have precious memories of the trip and the lessons we learned from our guide. One day while standing below the temple complex she encouraged us to 'pray for the peace of Jerusalem' as taught in Psalm 122 v6. I had always taken this verse to mean that we should pray that Jerusalem would be a peaceful place i.e. the absence of violence. Our guide taught us that this command in Psalm 122 goes much further than that, it is in fact a prayer that the Prince of Peace would come and rule from Jerusalem, then and only then will Jerusalem have real peace.

As our guide offered this teaching my mind immediately went to the Model prayer.

'Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.' Matthew 6 v10

Praying for the 'Prince of Peace to come' is just the same as praying 'Thy Kingdom come' for then and only then will God's will be done on earth as it is in heaven. As I thought about these things I began to think that perhaps we as God's people should actually actively pray that the Lord Jesus would come back again as He has promised He will. As I though about this another scripture popped into my mind.

'He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.' Revelation 22 v20

It would seem that when the Apostle John was confronted with the promise of the Lord's return, 'behold I come quickly' he could not help but say, 'even so come Lord Jesus'. Should we be saying Amen to the Apostle John's prayer? Food for thought!

But that's not the point!

I was listening to a debate on BBC radio 5 live on the way to work the other morning. They had two people from the Church of England debating the latest thorny issue of making women bishops. One was meant to be a traditionalist/conservative and the other a more liberal minded cleric (who happened to be a woman priest). In my opinion after listening to them it was a liberal and an extreme liberal.The interviewer tried hard to bring in the even thornier issue of the ordination of 'gay' bishops but neither of them were having any of it and were not for biting.

What a mess this institution is in! It is riven by splits over gay priests and women priests, there is a Evangelical wing, an Anglo-Catholic wing and a Liberal wing. Their big problem is their abandonment of the literal interpretation of the Scriptures. I mean to say how else are we to understand the Bible, God says what He means and He means what He says.

They should not be debating as to whether or not they should have women bishops, that is not the point, they should not have women clerics of any kind. I do not say this out of any sort of male chauvinism but merely out of regard for what God's word teaches. The Bible is clear on this matter, the Apostle Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit told the young Pastor Timothy.

'Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.' 1st Timothy 2 v 11-13

The letters of Paul to Timothy are often referred to as Pastoral Epistles, Paul was teaching this young preacher how to order the local Church. Why would we ever want to abandon God's order of things as revealed in His word?