What makes someone "Radical 2k"?

[ZackF]

Ian Paisley mentioned no-fault divorce in a sermon back when it was being introduced into the UK. I think he said something to the effect that it would reduce marriage to nothing more than a human equivalent of a dog licence. In many ways, he was prescient on this point, as no-fault divorce seems to be the root of much of the lunacy that we have today.

I think NFD is just one box-car on the train. Contraception and other things were closer to the engine.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

I think NFD is just one box-car on the train. Contraception and other things were closer to the engine.

You are right that there are definitely multiple factors; we could add abortion, childlessness, women's "liberation", delayed marriage, and various other things to the list.

 

[User20004000]

I am just quoting this so the moderators can see this. You realize you are making these charges about an elder in good standing in a NAPARC church?

Perhaps the moderators missed it but it’s sure to get attention now.

“Well I don't think Hart is converted...”

I don’t see that remark as a charge but an opinion. Perhaps I can understand one’s temptation to have such an opinion about someone, but I agree it should not have been voiced. Both because Hart is an elder and because he’s a member of a true church.

 

[A.Joseph]

Well I don't think Hart is converted so I suppose my unintentional use of the same language was providential.

I haven’t heard that word in a while and I don’t hear it in opc circles. It’s having to do with a changed life, correct?

 

[User20004000]

I haven’t heard that word in a while and I don’t hear it in opc circles. It’s having to do with a changed life, correct?

Repentance and faith together.

Interestingly enough, a person texted me a quote from Oswald Chambers the other day. This babe in the Lord was excited about what Chambers had to say. The sad part is, Chambers put forth the notion of people being “converted” while not yet regenerate. Chambers was referring to worldlings who hadn’t yet received the Spirit. Chambers held to a second blessing of sorts. Anyway, I explained a few things and my wife ordered and gave him Morning and Evening. He went so far as to recall an Utmost For His Highest he had given to someone else.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Amongst R2Kers there’s a weird bifurcation that leads to soft egalitarianism as well. Women can’t be ordained leaders in church because of the creational differences between men and women, but when it comes to society those differences disappear somehow and they can be firefighters, police officers, soldiers, etc.

I'm not interested in carrying any water for the people you have encountered, who apparently have traded-in a biblical appreciation for at minimum the needful institution of local human governance, i.e. some form of communal law (legislation, enforcement, judgment); and offered nothing in its place. Reformed anthropology is concerned for both the requirement of external constraint, and the tendency to tyranny of all government staffed by sinners.

That said, I am quite unsure that the above statement accurately conveys the opinion of some significant portion of those who (whether they own the label or not) are being defined here as "R2K;" I'm especially concerned for some of the named folks in this thread. Because, I can say for certain that there are some of those named who would never say on account of "creational differences" "women can't be ordained." Never.

And why? Because, they would say: the reason women may not occupy ordained position in the apostolic NT church under the Lordship of Christ is that the Bible prohibits it. Full stop.

It's not 2K or "R2K" (that I've encountered) who are embarrassed to stand on the simple authority, the ipse dixit of divine authority. God's mere "say so," can govern and rule the church, and he doesn't have to give us (or expect us to come up with our own) rationale for that command.

The idea that there needs to be some additional "here's how reasonable God is, when he tells us to do X," so that the law of God is made palatable, and men's contending passions are assuaged, partakes more of the spirit of rebellion. Here is the twisting of God's word as in the garden once again, "...lest ye die." No, not "for fear that ye will die; but ye will, and justice will require it, and none dare bid God stand before any other judge and prove him justified for so ordering.

How men do chafe under His raw authority! But I don't believe that faithful, confessional men feel much need to stand with any supplemental, creation-order prop.

As I myself have argued elsewhere here on the PB, women (who can meet publicly defined qualifications, which so far as I'm concerned might even include sex-restrictions if that's what human law ordains) are not forbade by the Bible from taking up occupations such as firefighting. Foolish legislation and judicial rulings may unnecessarily risk public safety by mandating quotas for hiring; which imbeciles will answer to the Judge-of-all for such unnatural attempts at social engineering. "Their condemnation is just." But, there isn't anything laid down in law from God in the Bible that sets those limits.

But there is such a law for the CHURCH. And it is SIN to flout it, and to defy the ordinance of God. And the only ones I can see who are bumbling about in a "soft-egalitarianism;" or some other effort at merging the scientific paradigm, the reigning cultural mind, and biblical counsels; are those who are ashamed of being seen as "fundy" for a simple resting on the law-word of Christ.

 

[greenbaggins]

I have not, though I can sort of expect what Frame will say. Frame will press the Lordship in all areas angle. Frame, however, is weak on historical distinctions and nuances when it comes to the 2 kingdoms debate. I don't think either side has a knock-out argument.

I have read this book, and I cannot recommend it. There is a reason it is self-published, and why NO presbyterian or Reformed, or even generally evangelical publisher would take the manuscript: if they did, they would never be able to publish any WSC professor ever again. In one section he claims that his own personal treatment at the hands of WSC has nothing to do with why he wrote the book. Then, in another section, he goes on and on about how he was treated at WSC. The book is a hit piece. There are FAR better critiques of R2K out there, in my opinion, starting with the CPJ exchange.

Mod Hat On:
R2K discussions have a very annoying habit of bringing out sinful tendencies in people. Believe me, I saw it plenty on my blog, where several threads ran to comments in the thousands. Accusations fly thick and fast because someone comes from a different perspective. People don't tend to listen very well. Slow down, calm down, and don't say anything about someone that you wouldn't be willing to say if that person were standing right in front of you.

 

[Stephen L Smith]

The book is a hit piece. There are FAR better critiques of R2K out there, in my opinion, starting with the CPJ exchange.

Lane, are there any books out there you can specifically recommend which give a balanced, fair, and edifying discussion of R2K? I am interested in the topic.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Been gone for a few days guys. Spent a few days out of town with my middle son and also had a furnace situation. Had to diagnose why it wouldn't stay on and heat the house. It ended up that I needed to clean the flame sensor. In the meantime this thread surely got terribly heated up.

Something that ole D.G. and I went back and forth on was on his blog back in 2012. He decided to give a critique of something my Ole Pastor Dr. Blackwood wrote without having even read it.

https://oldlife.org/2012/10/27/what-hath-jerusalem-monarchy-to-do-with-athens-democracy/#comments

 

[RamistThomist]

Lane, are there any books out there you can specifically recommend which give a balanced, fair, and edifying discussion of R2K? I am interested in the topic.

Without presuming to speak for Lane, my guess would be "no." The modifier "R" already poisons the well against the position. This means no advocate of this position would defend it, so you won't find any respectable critiques of it (since no one would defend it).

I do think the issue can be dealt with on meta-ethical levels, but that's a different level of analysis.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

One point that I have noticed, which is a fault shared by both neo-2K advocates and many theonomists, is that they make their view of the two kingdoms, the judicial law, or whatever else the front and centre of their identity. They are theonomists or neo-2Kers before they are anything else.

In Precious Remedies Against Satan's Devices, Thomas Brooks warns that such "majoring on the minors" is a mark of a false teacher. That conclusion is not true in all cases, though the fact that some from both these camps have departed for the FV on the one hand or to Rome on the other is a warning sign, but, either way, it is not spiritually healthy to be so obsessed with a lesser matter.

 

[RamistThomist]

One point that I have noticed, which is a fault shared by both neo-2K advocates and many theonomists, is that they make their view of the two kingdoms, the judicial law, or whatever else the front and centre of their identity. They are theonomists or neo-2Kers before they are anything else.

I was thinking about something similar this morning. If you are in a group or denomination that emphasizes its distinctives more than anything else, you might be in a cult.

 

[greenbaggins]

Without presuming to speak for Lane, my guess would be "no." The modifier "R" already poisons the well against the position. This means no advocate of this position would defend it, so you won't find any respectable critiques of it (since no one would defend it).

I do think the issue can be dealt with on meta-ethical levels, but that's a different level of analysis.

In a word, yes (meaning I agree with Jacob).

 

[User20004000]

“There is a reason it is self-published, and why NO presbyterian or Reformed, or even generally evangelical publisher would take the manuscript: if they did, they would never be able to publish any WSC professor ever again.”​

Lane,

That observation could be taken a couple of different ways. Obviously you don’t mean that publishers were fearful of siding with Frame’s interpretation of things while agreeing with him. Yet we mustn’t deny (not that you necessarily do) that such could apply to some publishers. It’s certainly conceivable that a publisher might have agreed with Frame yet didn’t care to weigh in on the dispute for various reasons.

 

[greenbaggins]

Ron, I am not quite sure what distinction you are seeking to articulate here. It is certainly conceivable that a publisher might have agreed with Frame, and yet decided not to publish the work. All I am saying is that I don't believe any WSC prof would publish anything with a publisher willing to publish that book, and that I also think publishers would have been savvy enough to recognize that fact.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Here are a few resources I have appreciated.


https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=41131323494

https://www.amazon.com/Kingdoms-Apart-Engaging-Two-Perspective/dp/1596384352

Here was something I found interesting some time ago.


Thomas Boston wrote (Works, 4:156-157):
“There is one thing, which, from experience, we are taught they may lay their account to lose, namely, the countenance and protection of the civil magistrate in their duty. This is in itself a great loss. And seeing God has promised to a church, when he is well pleased with her, “that kings shall be her nursing fathers, and their queens her nursing mothers;” the withdrawing of it must be a sign of the Lord’s displeasure. Yea, and if we trace the sins of rulers that bear hard on the people to their first spring, we will find that it is some quarrel that God hath with the people, 2 Sam. 24:1. This should humble us, and stir us up to pray for them, and be dutiful to them, to whom the Lord has said, “ye are gods,” in every thing that is not inconsistent with your duty to God himself. But this is a trial to us, whether we will regard God or man most; and the saints will ever prefer the countenance of the Lord to the countenance of the highest powers on earth, and depend upon his protection alone when they are deprived of all other.”



“If Thomas Boston’s viewpoint were accepted, the loss of the nursing father would be seen as a trial from which we should seek deliverance through ordained means. Those who hold to a dualist form of two kingdom theology regard the lack of a nursing father as ideal and normal for the church’s condition in the world, and would not see it as a trial or practically seek any improvement on the state of affairs.

To get down to the nitty-gritty of it, what love is it to your neighbour, what honour to your superiors, to wish the national interest to remain alienated from the life of God and strangers to His blessings? What Christian in his right mind is content to see God dishonoured and a plethora of other gods worshipped in His place?

We are not able to change the moral conditions of society apart from our own personal response to them, but our personal response should include vexation of soul and grieving over the ungodliness of our fellow-men. The idea of building a doctrine from Scripture which supports and justifies being content with the dissolution of Christian standards in a society runs contrary to everything the Scripture tells us about the righteous Lord loving righteousness and hating wickedness.” I can't remember who I quoted here.

In a blog I did years ago (2012) I pointed out that Dr. Kinneer rightly conveys this is a problem with a poor Christology.
https://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.c...ngdoms-view-vs-the-biblical-one-kingdom-view/

This topic is being discussed and exposed a bit finally. Finally, it is being done with some balance and correct thinking. There are a few posts in this discussion “One Kingdom vs. Two Kingdom’s” on the Puritanboard which lead to some great comments and links. One link is an interview with Dr. Jack Kinneer who is a Professor at Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary discussing this topic.

It is found here.

http://www.viewcrestchurch.org/ompodcast/om1002.mp3



Listening to the interview with Dr. Jack Kinneer I walked away with this…

Here are very brief Stereo-Typical ways of understanding these issues according to the Host of the show.

The Non Two Kingdom View is a Tranformationalist and or a Theonomic view saying, “If we can just make the culture Christian everything will Change and Christ’s Kingdom will come.”

The Two Kingdom view says that Culture Transformation is not the job of the Church. The Church receives the Kingdom. It doesn’t create one. The job of the Church is to take the sacraments, hear the word preached, be fathers and mothers and plumbers and just go on with our life. If Jesus wants to do something through it and for us He can.

Those are the two extremes…

The Host then asks Dr. Kinneer if his definitions are correct.

Dr. Jack Kinneer of Reformed Presbyterian Theological Seminary
replies,
“What you have is the American A view and the American B view.”
What you don’t have is the Historical C view.

Amen Dr. Kinneer! That is what I have been trying to tell some of the guys who are writing and discussing this issue now days.

Also Dr. Kinneer notes, that as all aberrations and heresies in theology tend to distort the doctrine of Christ, some of the of Two Kingdoms teachers distort the doctrine of Christ (Christology) also. A lot depends on how you define Two Kingdoms Theology. I believe it should be called a two fold government, to be more precise.

Both definitions the host defined were basically true but fall short of the Historical doctrine. And I would declare that the most vocal Modern Day Reformed Church Seminary Professors have no idea what the Historic view is. I deduce this by what I am hearing come out of the mouths of today’s Seminary Students, Graduates, and their Professor’s writings and comments. I can also assess this by the personal discussions I have been having with these men and younger theologians who have been taught by these guys.

These Authors and Professors are arguing against a view that is easily knocked down by their arguments. When they finally start to deal with the Historical view that Dr. Kinneer is declaring then their arguments will start to hit a brick wall. For one thing the historical view is not liberal and that is one of the main associations attributed to One Kingdom Theology.

This issue has a root problem in my estimation. It is the Law / Gospel issue that is being discussed in the Reformed Church. Some people are separating the Law so far from life and the gospel that the very Gospel of Christ is being truncated. They have gone from one extreme of refuting self-justification (works righteousness) to something that is turning into antinomianism. They view Sanctification and Glorification as separate from the Gospel. Dr. Michael Horton and many others around him teach that the Gospel is only an outward declarative statement about what God has done to pay a penalty for sin. According to past interaction with these guys, those of us who hold to the view the Reformed Divine’s held to, that the Law turns into Gospel, are in “Serious Error.” They are divorcing the Law of Christ from the Gospel. They are also divorcing the work of Christ in us, the hope of Glory and a life of being conformed in the image of Christ, from the Gospel.

Newer Blog posts….. https://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.com/2014/05/14/the-law-turned-into-gospel-gospel-obedience/

https://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.c...-not-about-distinction-it-is-about-dichotomy/

The root problem in a lot of this is a poor Christology (understanding His Mediatorial Kingship) and a poor understanding of the Covenant of Grace. The Covenant of Grace administers both the Old and New Covenant. Some say the Old Covenant is not the same in substance as the New Covenant. According to them the Mosaic Covenant differs in substance from the Abrahamic Covenant also. They say that only the Abrahamic Covenant is renewed in the New Covenant. This is in direct contradiction to the Westminster Confession of faith Chapter 7 sections 5 and 6 which states that they are of the same substance as they are administrations of the Covenant of Grace. The Old Covenant is the same in substance as the New and Abrahamic Covenant because they are Administrations of the Covenant of Grace. The same people that are saying this are the same people voicing this Newer Natural Law / Two Kingdom model that is being criticized here. At the root they all have Meredith Kline as a Mentor and hold to his thought concerning the Old (Mosaic) Covenant. Dr. R. Scott Clark voices it in his Covenant Theses point 13 of Biblical / Exegetical section. In so doing all this they are becoming Lutheran in their view of the Mosaic Covenant and saying that the Law is opposed to the Gospel. This is having a terrible affect upon the Church and Society in my estimation. They are dichotomizing the law and the gospel in a way that the scriptures don’t. Even Anthony Burgess a Divine and Scottish Commissioner of the Westminster Confession of Faith recognized this problem of the Lutherans back then. https://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.c...k-during-the-time-of-the-westminster-divines/

Oh yeah, they may claim to have a majority of the old guys as their teachers but they are propagating them through the eyes of a few who held to minority views or Klinean eye wear. The below is where you can find Dr. Clark’s thoughts.

http://clark.wscal.edu/covtheses.php
Biblical / Exegetical section….
13.The Mosaic covenant was not renewed under Christ, but the Abrahamic covenant was.

Some have titled this theology Klhortian I call it Modern Reformed Thought because a lot of Western California Guys have adopted it and are promoting it with their media machine. It is a shame this is being propagated so loudly. It kind of reminds me of how dispensationalism got such a strong hold by media presentation through the Scoffield Reference Bible. I think I have made my point.

Klhorotonian Theology

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdo...EjIiyRBcm895iEGrpYFZ5RYppsXxF7DG6A7pKKK8Oa9NE

I hope I am understanding things aright. Orthodoxy and Orthopraxy are so closely linked. I believe this is being proven in this situation. May we all be graced by the King and have eyes to see and ears to hear what the Spirit is saying. I hope I am seeing and hearing correctly. Weigh what I say heavily. Don’t just accept it as truth. I am a man. I can be just as deceived as I believe others to be.

Be Encouraged,

As a side note and recommendation this will be a topic in the upcoming Confessional Presbyterian Journal. It won’t be Polemic as I have been because it will be done by Scholars from various sides of the issue if I am not mistaken. I am not a Scholar. Please Remember That! But that doesn’t make anything I have said any less true. Just weigh it more heavily. LOL

The Confessional Presbyterian Journal should be out sometime this Winter. Here is the link to it.

http://www.cpjournal.com/

 

[Stephen L Smith]

Without presuming to speak for Lane, my guess would be "no." The modifier "R" already poisons the well against the position. This means no advocate of this position would defend it, so you won't find any respectable critiques of it (since no one would defend it).

Sorry I really meant 2K. I have not looked into the issue as much as I would like and I am aware it impacts on a number of areas of theology.

 

[A.Joseph]

I don't know, maybe Alexander is on to something. Not specific to Dr. Hart, necessarily. Although I think I understand his reasoning.

Is "true conversion" the experiential antidote to what is carnal and trivial or may it be a gateway to high minded legalism?

Maybe having all those earthly pursuits that cling to us be stripped away is what we truly need. Is this a fruit of initial conversion or something that comes much later in sanctification and a mortifying of sin? These are the things that I've been exposed to and wrestled with...




How can we influence the world if we still have these inner conflicts? It's hard to address and engage with the world, earthly institutions, and our fellow man appopriately without this level of spiritual life and maturity.

 

[greenbaggins]

Stephen, I forgot to mention this, since I thought at first you were only interested in critique. However, your question was broader, so I would recommend the books of David Van Drunen as a moderate, articulate, 2K guy.

 

[RamistThomist]

Sorry I really meant 2K. I have not looked into the issue as much as I would like and I am aware it impacts on a number of areas of theology.

2K is Reformed and only the most rabid reconstructionists and neo-calvinists would reject it. Turretin would be the best place to start. Then Gillespie,.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

However, your question was broader, so I would recommend the books of David Van Drunen as a moderate, articulate, 2K guy.

I wouldn't but that is something between klineanism and results of it as opposed to historical Two Kingdom thinking.

 

[Stephen L Smith]

Stephen, I forgot to mention this, since I thought at first you were only interested in critique. However, your question was broader, so I would recommend the books of David Van Drunen as a moderate, articulate, 2K guy.

Thank you Lane. Actually while you were replying to my comments, I was looking up "Messiah the Prince: The Mediatorial Dominion of Jesus Christ" by William Symington. I understand he deals with avery similar issue from a 'broader' Scottish Covenanter perspective. Would his book be relevant from this perspective. From what I can see the modern edition sold today is an abridged edition of Symington's original.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Dr. Blackwood was a Symington Scholar. He wrote a booklet that I have posted on my blog. I think you would appreciate it.

https://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/the-king-and-his-kingdom-part-1/

Used by permission by the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals

http://alliancenet.org/


Dr. Roy Blackwood

Dedication

To Margie, my beloved wife of 57 years.

“Her children rise up and call her blessed; her husband

also and He praises her.” (Proverbs 31:28)

And to the King of Kings who has made us a “Kingdom of Kings and priests to His God and Father.” (Revelation 1:6)

Acknowledgement

In grateful appreciation for Bud Wilson without whose help it would not have been finished and whose persistence in editing and helping has made this possible.

This article was originally published © Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals Inc, 1716 Spruce St Philadelphia PA 19103 USA

The Alliance calls the twenty first century church to a modern reformation by broadcasting, events, and publishing. This article and additional biblical resources can be found at AllianceNet.org.

All rights reserved. Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, © 2005 ARALL009

FOREWORD

I had just presented Friedrich Nietzche’s powerful and godless philosophy of the “Will to Power” to a recent class. Knowing that Nietzche had been declared clinically insane, and that he had lived his last decade in a vegetative state (probably related to his syphilis), a student nearly cried out, “How can people find his thinking powerful—when they know the tragedy of his life?”

The student was correct. Here was a philosopher who had praised the supposed “inner Superman,” yet was himself both weak in body and mentally out of touch with reality.

Dr. Blackwood and this book represent the diametrical opposite to Nietzche and his godless thinking. For Blackwood, there is only one King, only one Godman. There is one “super” Man— Jesus Christ the Righteous. Also, in contrast to Nietzche, those who know Roy Blackwood see in him the embodiment of this theology. While Blackwood is no Superman (even though it is at times hard to keep up with someone thirty years older!), Roy has been tireless in his efforts to communicate the nature of Christ’s Kingdom and to apply the lessons of this mediatorial Kingdom to believers’ personal walks—in our families, in the church, and in the state.

It is good that we have in our hands such a readable presentation of Dr. Blackwood’s life, thinking and work. For that, thanks go to the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals

May our great Lord use this booklet to raise up many more who will take up the banner for The King and His Kingdom!

Richard C. Gamble

INTRODUCTION

“Seek Ye First the kingdom,” because His Kingship and Kingdom is the one authority that can keep all others in balance and because this is becoming of the crown rights and royal prerogatives of the king.

THE KING AND HIS KINGDOM

In His “Sermon on the Mount” [as recorded in Matthew], Jesus, as the King Himself, made His own inaugural proclamation of His Kingdom. In 3 chapters, He outlined in broad strokes the description of His Kingdom. In Chapter 5, He told us who the “blessed” are, the character of people who are citizens of His Kingdom. In Chapter 6, He explained the kinds of things they will be doing; e.g. giving, praying, and fasting, and why they are doing everything they do. In Chapter 7, He warned us never to “judge,” or try to relegate people, either into or out of His Kingdom, but to be careful to “know” all men and then build on the solid rock of His “sayings” to make five responses to His proclamation.

1. To seek first the Kingdom (Matt. 6:33). So our highest priority in life will be:

Not the individual (Adam) whom He created in His own image, but who often “loves to have the preeminence”

Not the family, whom He formed out of man as the first social unit

Not the church, who is His bride, His darling, “the pillar and ground of my Truth,” the one of whom He said “I will build my Church”

Not civil government whom He has ordained to be “an ordinance of man”

But to seek first His Kingdom in all these other relationships of life, because His Kingship and Kingdom is the one authority that can keep all the other priorities in balance and because this is “becoming” of the Crown Rights and Royal Prerogatives of the King.

2. To pray for it – that His Kingdom come and His will be done “on earth as it is in Heaven.”

3. To recognize, know and understand how His Kingdom grows as He teaches us in all His sayings throughout the Gospels and in the Old Testament as well as New Testament, especially:

a. What the origin, reason, and purpose for His Kingdom is. Why He “needed” to be a King and to have this Kingdom.

b. What kind of Kingdom it is – the nature of it?

c. What the extent of His Kingdom is in terms of both space and time.

4. To “think” Kingdom as well as to know the facts about it, because He said “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus…”. His “Kingdom” is more than just a well constructed, long range plan for His world and His Heaven, it is a way of thinking which will affect everything we say and do in personal, family, church and political relationships.

5. And to expect with confidence to find ourselves caught up in our own lifetime in the reality of His Kingdom because the King of this Kingdom has also said “Fear not little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you this Kingdom.” (Luke 12:32)

So Jesus Christ, the King, directs us to seek, pray, know, think, and expect to be part of this Kingdom.

PART ONE

Defining the Kingdom “For the Kingdom is the Lord’s” (Psalm 22:28a)

What is this Kingdom? Three questions must be answered.

1 What is the source and origin? Why did Jesus Christ “need” to be King and to have this Kingdom? What is THE PURPOSE?

2 What kind of Kingdom is it, the nature of it?

3 What is the extent of Christ’s Kingdom? When did it begin? When will it end? Where is it? Who all and what all are included in Christ’s Kingdom? And where will this Kingdom be?

As God, the second person of the Godhead did not “need” anything. And so it is not an absolute legal necessity that mandates that Christ be a King and have a Kingdom. But it is a relative moral necessity rising out of Christ’s work of atonement that makes it “necessary” for Christ to have a Kingdom and to be a King. The doctrine of the Kingship and Kingdom of Christ must always be understood as the sequel to the doctrine of atonement. If God had never made the decision to save a number of souls, then there never would have been any “need” for Christ to die on the Cross, and no need for Christ to be a King with a Kingdom. But once God, motivated by a love, at once wondrous and divine, made that sovereign decision to save a number of the human race, then it became “necessary” for the second person of the Godhead to leave Heaven to become man, and to die on the Cross in order to make man to be at one with God and God to be at one with those souls.

That is also why it was a relative moral necessity for Christ to be a real king with a kingdom. Without the power and authority of a King with a Kingdom, everything Christ had done on the Cross would have been in vain. If He had simply returned to Heaven and “retired” from active duty, not one soul would have been saved. His blood would have been wasted. He “needed” the power and authority of a king with a kingdom to apply the benefits which He had purchased for us on the Cross. It is in this sense that He “needed” the power and authority that the Father appointed to Him and that He willingly accepted and proclaimed in that remarkable appointment statement which His dialogue stated so vividly in Psalm 2:6-9; John 17:1-3; and Hebrews 5:5. Armed with all power and authority, Christ, as “the lamb slain before the foundation of the world,” created His world as a platform in space to carry out His work of redemption. After the fall of man, the destructive influences of Satan and sin would have destroyed His world, but now Christ stepped forward to grasp the very pillars of the universe to hold these awful destructive influences in abeyance until those souls for whom He “ever liveth to make intercession”, shall have had time to repent and turn to Him.

In a more personal subjective sense, Christ the Messiah “needed” the power and authority of a King with a Kingdom to subdue your own will and then to apply the benefits He had purchased for you on the Cross in order to receive you to Himself; to make you able to trust in Him; to put His kind of life into your heart; and then to nourish and build you up into the accomplishments of His life’s purpose for you in His Kingdom today, and then on into those purposes which He has planned for you in eternity. All this is accomplished while defeating all His and your enemies. So it was for this purpose, to meet this need, that the Father appointed Him to this Kingship and Kingdom. The purpose of His kingdom can all be summarized by the one word–REDEMPTIVE.

But what is the NATURE of Christ’s Kingdom? What kind of Kingship and Kingdom does Christ have today? When Pilate, representing Caesar, asked Jesus about His Kingdom, Jesus answered guardedly, “My Kingdom is not of this world, else would my servants fight that I should not be delivered, but now is my Kingdom not from here”. When Pilate pursued his own question further by asking, “Art thou a King then?” Jesus answered more fully, “Thou sayest that I am a King. To this end was I born and for this cause came I into the world. . .” This may have been why Pilate later insisted on putting the inscription on His cross, “Christ, the King of the Jews”.

Christ’s Kingdom is a spiritual kingdom and a series of comparisons or contrasts with civil political kings and kingdoms may help to explain and define what it means for a kingdom and kingship to be spiritual.

1 Christ was appointed to this Kingship and Kingdom by the Father, not just “born” into it through a royal family or elected to it by a willing people, nor did He conquer His way into it by spilling the blood of other people. The Father appointed Christ to be a real King with a real Kingdom and that Kingship and kingdom is here with us now. Of the four ways by which kings come to be kings; 1) taking it by force, 2) being born into it, 3) being chosen or elected, 4) being appointed; Christ Himself made it very clear when He said to us in Luke 22:29, “I appoint unto you a kingdom as My Father hath appointed unto Me”. That is what the prophecies had promised (i.e. Psalm 2:6,7). And this was true from all eternity. When the Council of the Trinity appointed Him the second person of the Godhead to this particular responsibility, it meant there never was a time when He was not King. But the announcement of that appointment came at His baptism and then His official investiture or actual induction came at the time of His Ascension.

2 The grand purpose of Christ’s spiritual Kingship and Kingdom is to save souls, and not just to administer public justice, preserve peace, develop the morals of men and establish social order.

3 The means of administration in Christ’s spiritual Kingdom includes the teaching of the Bible, the proclamation of the Cross, and the example (the tupos or definitive example) of the King who came to wrestle with the very consciences of men. All these means are in contrast to the other means used exclusively by other kings and kingdoms (i.e. fire, sword and physical violence).

4 The principles of operation in Christ’s Kingdom and Kingship are scriptural and righteous as well as ethical and legal.

5 Almost everything related to Christ’s Kingdom is spiritual. Its King is from Heaven and its citizens are “born-again”, “spiritual” people. Its homage is of the soul and its service is according to the will of God.

These comparisons between the Kingdom of Christ, the regnum Christi, and the kingdoms of the world, the regna mundi, help to define the essentially “spiritual” nature of Christ’s Kingdom. They (as we shall see later) provide a base for the development of church-civil government relationships. These distinctions or differences do not necessitate separation. If some could misread these comparisons to mean “keep them separate because they are different”, then this doctrine of Christ’s Kingdom and Kingship would say “bring them together because they are different”. Christ’s spiritual Kingdom can and does include things that are physical and mundane. For example, when God converts a soul so that he becomes a spiritual person, He does not cease to have a physical body. So long as God maintains a visible, witnessing Church on earth, as one form of the Kingdom of Christ, it will involve the physical being part of the spiritual kingdom. Since Christ has told us He has “all power” and has been made head over “all things”, then we can know that in His (spiritual) Kingdom, there will be those things that are, in and of themselves, physical.

Even money, “dedicated” to the Lord becomes an important factor in Christ’s development of His spiritual kingdom. Anything which can, or can be made to have, a spiritual purpose can be seen to be part of Christ’s spiritual Kingdom. When Christ said, “My kingdom is not of this world”, He had no more thought of excluding physical things and political and social-family relationships than when He said to His disciples “ye are not of this world” (the Greek phrase is identical).

When we ask on behalf of the Christian businessman or the man in civil government or the father in a family, “but how can these physical things which occupy so much of my time ever be part of Christ’s spiritual Kingdom?”, we must know the question is caused by the statements in Scripture and so God will answer it. The answer is to be found in the fact that whatever is connected with Christ’s Kingdom is connected in some way to Christ’s spiritual objectives–objectives that live beyond the time and space restraints in our world. It is the ultimate objective which determines the nature of a thing. When the businessman or man in government can see a direct relationship between his daily work and Jesus’ reason for dying for him on the Cross, then he will see how his physical job is part of Christ’s Spiritual Kingdom.

Reason for a moment about how things natural are subordinate to things moral and things moral to things gracious (i.e. things having to do with Christ and His Grace, His work on the Cross). Those things which are gracious necessarily suppose the subordination both of those things which are natural and those that are moral. So it is that the natural and moral classes are also under Him officially as the appointed King. The result of all this then is that the essential dominion of Christ (i.e. what He owned and controlled as God Creator) and the mediatorial dominion of Christ (i.e. what He was appointed to as a direct result of His work on the Cross) are never subversive of one another but are always supportive of each other and perfectly harmonious and yet never so blended as to destroy the distinctive character of either one.

So anything physical in the regna mundi which can or can be made to have a spiritual purpose or to make a contribution to Christ’s spiritual Kingdom will be part of His spiritual Kingdom. This is why Christ was appointed to be “head over all things” to the Church. That includes His being head over such physical things as family and civil government. It is as though the Father has said to the Son as the direct result of His work on the Cross,

“Thou hast established thy right to rule that rebel world. Go through it now subduing sin and Satan and all other kings and kingdoms, building up your own individuals, families, civil government and church to accomplish your own purposes in time and on into eternity.”

The nature of His Kingdom can all be summarized by the one word—SPIRITUAL.

Having established the redemptive purpose and the spiritual nature for Christ’s Kingdom and Kingship, let’s move on to the EXTENT of Christ’s Kingship and Kingdom. In many ways it is the most important because His Kingdom is unlimited.

In Matt. 11:27, Jesus said to us “All things (ta ponta) are delivered unto Me of My Father”.

In Matt. 28:18, He said “All power (exousia) has been given to me”.

In Acts 10:36, Peter said, after living with Jesus for five years,”He is Lord of All”.

In Eph. 1:22, Paul said, “And (He) hath put all things under His feet and made Him to be head over all things to the Church”.

In Col. 2:10, Paul said, (I believe with special reference to angel powers) “And ye are complete in Him which is head of all principality and power”. He is the King of all angels.

In I Cor. 15:17, Paul specifies the one exception which surely does “prove” the rule, “For He hath put all things under His feet. But…it is manifest that He (the Father) is excepted which did put all things under Him.

In Heb. 2:6-8, Jesus quotes the words from Psalm 8,“…Thou hast put all things in subjection under His feet. For in that He put all in subjection under Him, He left nothing that is not put under Him,” as does Augustine, Martin Bucer, and John Calvin.

Christ is God-Creator, (John 1:3). As such, He had certain essential power and authority over all He had created. This was His Essential Kingdom and His power and authority in it could not be said to have been given unto Him. You cannot give to a person something which he already has. And yet, in every one of the references above, the power and authority is said to have been “given or “delivered” or “put upon” or “put under” Him. It is this distinction that causes us to know whether a reference in Scripture is referring to the inherent Essential Kingdom which is Christ’s by virtue of the fact that He is God-Creator or whether it is a reference referring to that Mediatorial Kingdom which was bestowed upon Him as the direct result of His work on the Cross. (Using this method, you may wish to find other references which describe Christ’s Mediatorial Kingdom). [It is] true that Christ’s Mediatorial Kingdom is as unlimited as is His Essential Kingdom. All that was included in His Essential Kingdom is now included in His Mediatorial Kingdom. The difference lies in the fact that the powers and things which He formerly used and ruled by inherent and original right as Creator He now uses and rules as Mediator for a new purpose, namely the salvation of souls and the best interests of all His people, the Christians or the church. very thing which He had formerly created and controlled as God-Creator, he now rules and uses for His redemptive purposes as God-Savior. Everything is—or must be made to—contribute to the salvation of souls. These things include:

1 Inanimate and irrational things such as sun, moon, stars, animals, fish and birds–anything which can be shown in Scripture to be made to serve Christ’s redemptive purposes. Throughout the Gospels, we see Christ controlling all these things to accomplish His redemptive purposes.

2 Angels, both Holy angels and fallen angels (even including Satan himself) are made to serve Christ’s redemptive purposes.

3 Men, “all flesh”, elect and non-elect, alive or dead–in their official and their private capacities–are under Christ’s Dominion.

4 Associations of people of every kind: family, civil or political, church, and business, because individuals by forming themselves into organizations or corporations, or societies may not get out from under Christ’s Lordship and Kingdom.

5 The very “wheels of Providence” are directed and controlled by Christ to serve His redemptive purpose.

So everything that exists, except the Father, has been put under Christ’s Dominion. Had it not been for that, the world never would have been able to survive the curse. With this unlimited power, he steps forward and grasps the very pillars of the universe to hold off the destructive forces of sin and Satan, until His redemptive purposes are accomplished. The extent of Christ’s kingdom can all be summarized by the one word— UNLIMITED.

Christ’s Kingdom then is:

• Redemptive in origin and purpose

• Spiritual in nature and

* Unlimited in extent

Download pdf here.

http://www.allianceradio.org/EternityArticles/KingandKingdom.pdf

https://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/the-king-and-his-kingdom-parts-2-4/

Used by permission by the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals

http://alliancenet.org/

PART TWO


The Application of the Mediatorial Kingdom “And He rules over the nations.” (Psalm 22:28b)

From Part II forward, the Kingdom discussed is the mediatorial Kingdom as defined in Part 1.

How does this Doctrine of the Mediatorial Kingship and Kingdom of Christ apply to:

The Individual (chosen of God)

The Family (basic unit of the Church)

The Church The Church—Civil Government Relationship

The Business and Life Walk

The Mediatorial Kingdom and The Individual


When we begin with the Kingdom in the life of the Individual, we find that this is the plan and program that Christ builds down into the mind and life purpose of every soul who comes to know Him as Savior and Lord. It is this way of thinking that is that outline of Christian life which He can look forward to growing up into. When Christ saves a soul, He builds His particular life purpose down into that person’s life—His particular reason for dying on the Cross for that particular person. And that soul begins growing up into that purpose, through the three stages of kingdom development, that Christ described in Mark 5; 1) the blade stage, 2) the green ear stage, and finally 3) the full corn in the ear stage. He can grow up to realize that he’s been called by the King who is now His Lord and that he’s not been saved just to get his own soul out of Hell and into Heaven, but to be Christ’s witness on Christ’s earth so long as Christ chooses to leave him there. He has been saved to be a witness to others who do not yet know Christ as King and then to help them to grow up into spiritual maturity just as Jesus taught His disciples to “think” Kingdom and grow up into it. In the same way, the Apostle Paul taught Timothy not to be satisfied with just becoming a Christian, or even leading someone else to Christ, but to work and plan and pray two spiritual generations, beyond that to see a “faithful man” reaching “others also”. That is “kingdom-thinking” and an essential factor in Jesus’ long-range Kingdom plan for the evangelization of His world. That is true “apostolic succession” and an essential factor in glorifying God and enjoying Him forever.

The Mediatorial Kingdom and The Family


When we begin with the kingdom in the family, we find that Christ has also built this kingdom plan down into the “mind” or purpose of the Family. So that the man and woman, bridegroom and bride, who are thinking with the mind of Christ will know that their marriage and family are not just for the purpose of developing a new level of romantic “love” nor just for the purpose of the propagation of the family name, but that they would be a two-person demonstration of the salvation relationship that exists between any soul who comes to know Christ as Savior and Lord and the Savior Himself. So that, as the world sees the way He, as the bridegroom, lays down his life for his bride-wife, they would begin to understand what was involved in Christ (as the bridegroom and King) laying down His life for His Bride (i.e. the church whose every soul comes to know Him as Savior and King). And as the world sees how she submits her whole life to her husband and puts herself into his hands without reservation, the world begins to understand what would be involved in surrendering without reservation to Christ, as Savior and Lord. The two of them will be a two-person demonstration of the salvation relationship. When this kind of kingdom-thinking or “mind” is the foundation and long-range plan for the family, then that family will grow up into spiritual maturity. “Father” will be more than just the oldest male member in the family. He will represent the Father in Heaven and he will pray for his family the way Job prayed for his children. Mother will “remind” them all of the place called Heaven and of what Christ wants His Church to be. The children will understand “grace” because they see and receive the grace and acceptance and purposefulness that is being demonstrated by both father and mother on a horizontal level and they will understand confession and forgiveness because they see it being demonstrated in the day to day relationships and conversations between a father and mother who begin with the Kingdom and Kingship of Jesus Christ. And Paul’s prayers for the family of Philemon, Apphia and Archippus will apply (i.e. “that the communication of your faith may become effectual in every good thing which is in you in Christ Jesus,” (Philemon, verse 6). Other believers will say, ‘every time I think of you and your home, I just thank God’, and the extent of that family ministry will carry on beyond the four generations described by Paul to Timothy in 2 Timothy 1:2, from grandparents to parents to children and grandchildren to the end of time—wherever they may travel throughout His world.

The Mediatorial Kingdom and the Church


When we begin with the Kingdom, in our thinking and planning for the church, there have been those who, by accident, oversight, or by design, would limit the doctrine of the Kingdom to the church, saying that the Kingdom is the church or the church is the Kingdom. The Kingdom includes, as we have seen, far more than the church. But Christ intends that the (redemptive) origin and purpose of His Kingdom, rising as it does out of His work of atonement on the Cross, will determine the origin and purpose and message of His Church. The (spiritual) nature of His Kingdom will provide the standard of spirituality for His Church in all her “services,” especially her worship services, and that the (unlimited) extent of His Kingdom will be the “mission vision” for His Church. It is not that the Church defines and determines what the Kingdom is, but rather that the Kingdom determines and defines what the Church is, and what she will become. The Kingdom is that overarching dome, of which the Church is a reflection. Just as it is never the blue of the lake that determines the blue of the sky, but always the blue of the sky that determines the blue of the lake; so then it is the pattern of the Kingdom that determines the origin and redemptive purpose of every church; and the spiritual nature of the Kingdom that determines the standards of spirituality in all the “services” of the church; and the (unlimited) extent of Christ’s kingdom that determines the mission vision of each church.

I Will Build My Church


When Jesus, the Christ, made that remarkable promise, “I will build my Church”, over 2000 years ago, He had in mind a clearly-defined plan, a plan that He continues to implement throughout His world today. In Exodus 25:40, He had commanded Moses to build the Tabernacle according to “the pattern” which He had shown to him on the Mount. Throughout the Old Testament years, He led Israel and “the church in the wilderness” into the promised land. Now in the four gospels, He explains His Kingdom and His Plan for His Church in more detail and shows the relationship between His Kingdom and His church.

It is important to see how Christ begins in Matthew 6 with the command to “seek first the kingdom”, and then ten chapters later in Matthew 16:18 makes that remarkable promise “I will build My Church”. In Matthew 16:16-17, Christ first praises Peter with the highest commendation for making the kind of confession “thou art the Christ, the son of the Living God”, which is the rock of confession in every generation, upon which Christ’s promise to build His church is founded. When Christ proceeds to tell us about how He must be crucified in order to do this church building, and Peter begins to rebuke Him; saying in effect that he will find some easier way to do Christ’s work, Christ rebukes Peter with his sternest condemnation, calling Him Satan and saying the same thing to Peter that He had said to Satan on the Mount of Temptation. In effect, Christ is saying here to Peter and to all of us: Your responsibility is to “seek the kingdom”. I will build My church and when I do it My way then the very gates of Hell will not be able to hold out against it. You must learn to do My work , My way.

The Very Purpose of His Kingdom has been built down into His Church by the Lord Himself.

When we begin with the Kingdom, then the origin and purpose of the Kingdom become the origin and purpose of the Church. Both Kingdom and Church have arisen out of God’s sovereign will and redemptive purpose which is motivated by love to save souls. Once that decision had been made, then Christ was appointed and “became obedient unto death, even the death on the Cross, wherefore God also highly exalted Him” and gave Him the Kingdom (Philippians 2:5-11). Now He, in turn, builds His Church as a very important part of His Kingdom. Just as it was the primary and ultimate purpose of His Kingdom to glorify God, honor Christ Himself, and make it possible for Him to apply the benefits of redemption to His people and also meet their continuing needs for growing up into spiritual maturity, so now, these become the primary and ultimate purpose of His Church. Both Kingdom and Church are controlled and empowered by Christ and both are primarily concerned with the application of that redemption which He has worked out on the Cross. The Kingdom is not limited to the Church, but in these respects, they are the same.

There is a great difference between this and the idea that the Church originated in the minds of people as a voluntary spontaneous association who call themselves together in order to meet their own spiritual and social needs. This is Christ calling together His people, and ultimately it is not so much for man’s benefit as it is for God’s glory.

When we look at the Church beginning with the Kingdom, then there is a functional mission purpose that becomes very important. The Church becomes less “ours” and more “His”— not so much the place to which we come to add to our numbers and preserve ourselves, as it is the place to which He brings us, equips us, and sends us on to multiply into more congregations to evangelize His world.

On the one hand, there is a difference between the purpose Christ has built into an individual and a family and the purpose He has built down into His Church. Even a casual review of the works (erga) that Christ was reviewing in each of the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3, will show that He has assigned a particular ministry to a particular congregation. On the other hand, all churches have certain things in common and when we review them, beginning with the Kingdom, there is less emphasis on drawing distinctions and more emphasis on ultimate purpose and mission. Beginning with the Kingdom brings less emphasis on what one church “has”, that another “does not have” and more emphasis on what Christ has designed and called all of us to do to the Glory of God.

The spiritual nature of His Church also has been “built” down into her by her Lord


Christ has also “built” the spiritual nature of His Kingdom down into His Church in such a way that the spirituality of the Kingdom provides a basis or standard for evaluating the spirituality of a particular congregation. Some churches are almost more dead than alive. They sing dead and pray dead and give and think dead. Others are “alive” in Christ and their services on earth can be seen as a kind of choir rehearsal for Heaven. That spirituality is also one practical basis for the Church’s independence of the power or control of all other organizations such as the civil government. Because she is a spiritual organization, she is not dependent on the State for her establishment or continuing existence. Her foundation is Christ alone. And because Christ has built her to be a spiritual organization, she is subject to Him alone. He is her only head and she is subject to Him as God has said, just as any person’s physical body is subject to the head. So the spiritual nature of Christ’s Kingdom built downward into His Church, provides the basis for 1) the spirituality of a church and especially the standard of spirituality for her worship services; 2) her independence to all other organizations and influences; and 3) her subjection to Christ alone. Also, as we shall see in a later section, this spiritual nature provides one basis for a healthy working relationship between Church and civil government.

The spiritual nature of the Church not only provides protection for Christ’s Church against the attacks of other organizations, like the civil government, from outside the Church but it also protects her against the attacks of the organizations from within the Church herself. It is clear in the records of history that the Church has been seduced or raped as often by those “legitimate” church boards (colleges, cardinals, assemblies, synods) that operate from within as she has been seduced and raped by emperors, kings, judges and other legislative bodies working from without. Whether it be hierarchical, congregational or Presbyterian form of church government, Christ has prescribed a form of church government simply because edification requires order and order requires government. The moment men begin to forget that their authority within His Church is not legislative but solely ministerial (the administration of the Word He has legislated), then they are usurping Christ’s authority within His Church. He never has permitted that and He never will. Whatever form of church government causes us to know that the Church is more “his” and less “ours” is what He was demanding and promising when He said that day to Peter, and to all the rest of us, “I will build My Church”.

When Christ built the unlimitedness of His Kingdom downward into His Church, He was establishing her unity, her universality, and her perpetuity. Today, we tend to think of unlimitedness in terms of the dimension of space but when we apply unlimitedness to the dimension of time, it means there never was a time when Christ was not a King with a Kingdom and there never will be. In the dimensions of space it means there is no “place” on the face of Christ’s world (or in outer space either, if we ever find souls in outer space), where we should not expect to find Him building His Church and using believers to do it. We catch a glimpse of the unity, universality, and perpetuity of His Church in that Passover-communion table stretching clear back into the Garden of Eden where we see Abel, the first man into Heaven, and then moving forward to include Job and Abraham and Isaac and Moses and the Prophets, all of them, looking forward through the Passover to the coming of the Messiah; and then, in the very center of that long table, Jesus the Messiah and His disciples; and then, Luther and Calvin and all the rest of the saints since then sitting at that same table looking back to the same Messiah/Christ to whom the Old Testaments saints looked forward. There never has been salvation in any other and never will be. All over His world! And universe from the beginning of time! His Kingdom will continue to grow and extend to the end of time and then on into eternity! And so will His church!

By building the specifications of His Kingdom downward into His Church, He provides his standards for:

1 Her purpose

2 Her spirituality

3 Her independence of all outward control

4 Her subjection to Himself alone

5 Her unity

6 Her universality

7 Her perpetuity

All this then translates into the order and program of His Church as she makes progress through time toward bringing His world into conformity to the regnum Christi totum. This doctrine of the unlimitedness of Christ’s Kingdom projected downward into the mission vision of His Church promises to develop a strongly united, universally expanding, perpetually existing Church which will one day confront the State in such a way as to require their working together. But what is the relationship between Christ’s Kingdom-Kingship and the civil government?

The Mediatorial Kingdom and The Civil Government


Everything Christ has been teaching us about His Kingdom provides reasons which imply that He is also Lord of civil government:

• His being invested with the mediatorial dominion in no way supposes His abrogation of any of His Rights of Dominion as God.

• His moral qualifications to rule over all things and especially “all flesh” would imply that such a vastly important thing as civil government would not be exempted from his mediatorial rule.
• And without such power over nations, Christ would be seriously handicapped in overruling the rebellions of men in order to bring about that time when “the kingdoms of this world shall become the Kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ” (Revelation 11:15).

This doctrine of the unlimitedness of Christ’s Dominion gives us every reason to believe that Jesus Christ is now King and Lord over all nations’ civil governments as well as Lord of the individual, the family, and the church.

But more important than reasons and implications such as these are the specific statements from the following Scripture. The commands of Scripture, e.g. Psalm 2, as quoted in Acts 4:25,13:33, Hebrews 1:4, 5:5 and Revelation 2:27. The Prophecies of Scripture; e.g. Psalm 47:2, 3, 8, 9; Psalm 72; Isaiah 49:22-23; 60:11, 12, 16; Ezekiel 45:17; Daniel 7:13-14; Revelation 11:15; 21:24,26: And such designations in Scripture wherein the Mediator is addressed as “Governor among the nations” (Psalm 22:28); “higher than the Kings of the earth” (Psalm 89:27); “King of nations” (Jeremiah 10:6-7); “King of Kings” (Revelation 17:14; 19:16). All of these assert Christ’s actual Lordship over civil government. To ascribe such titles to Him if they were not true, would be to mock Him.

We may summarize Christ’s Lordship over civil government under 8 topics, the eight things Christ does for civil government. These are followed up by 4 responses civil government can make to Christ’s Lordship:

1 The very origin of civil government is in the Hands of Christ. Of the Church, He has said “I will build my Church”. There is, however, a difference between the origin of the Church and the origin of civil government because He says—“civil government is an ordinance of man” and “the powers that be are ordained of (by) God”. This means that the God of nature has put the desire into man for a voluntary social compact. Civil government originated with God morally not less than providentially. God not only permitted it, He caused it and since, as we have seen earlier, the matters of Providence have also been put into the hands of Christ, then He is, as Mediator, the one who instituted and constituted civil government. It can never be the ordinance of man in any sense in which it is not ordained by God.

2 It is Christ who continues to oversee the affairs of civil government. Throughout the history of the Old and New Testaments, we see him influencing the counsels of statesmen and the prowess of armies to set some up and take others down, in order to accomplish His redemptive purposes.

3 Christ issues those commands through His Word which direct civil rulers in promoting the public good, restraining evil, administering laws with justice, promoting and protecting His Church and doing all this in such a way that it will promote the plans and holy name of the Mediator.

4 It is Christ who overrules the rebellions of those who oppose Him.

5 It is Christ who executes the judgments of God on those rulers and people who refuse to be guided by His moral law.

6 It is Christ who also works through civil government to disseminate the Gospel throughout His world. As King of Kings, He authorizes those whom He has commissioned to enter and evangelize any nation on earth. So it is not only what He does for them and to them, it is also what He does through them that proves His Lordship over nations. He is Lord of “common” grace.

7 Christ works through civil government in such a way as to gather together and protect and promote His Church. Because of the character of nations as they now are, there could be no hope for the Church if it were not for the fact that Christ is Lord of the civil government as well as Lord of the Church.

8 Christ promises to bring about an entire change (reformation) in the character and constitution of the nations of the world and in Isaiah 9, He adds this promise, “the zeal of the Lord of Hosts will perform it”.

In all these eight ways, Christ, as King, asserts His Lordship over His civil government, working through them to carry out the purposes of His Kingdom Plan. Conversely, at each of these points, civil government is thrust more and more up into the light and plan of Christ’s Mediatorial Kingdom. One practical result of all this is that men are thus confronted in civil government, as well as in church with the mediatorial authority and plan of Christ. This is something more than Theocratic, it is Christocratic. Christ’s authority in the civil government becomes as absolute as it is in the Church. Everything here points to civil government being an ordinance of God—a moral ordinance, a divine institution. This is a very high doctrine of civil government.

Now what response can a nation make to Christ and His Lordship in civil government? There are at least four responses civil government can make to Christ’s Lordship:

1 The Glory of Christ, her King, can and will be the chief end or highest purpose of the State. It is just not enough to be satisfied with the promotion of domestic tranquility, peace, social order, happiness among men or the patriotic good of our own community. Everything the civil government does, every constitution and law and treaty she writes, every home and foreign policy she makes, every appointment she makes, must be reviewed with an eye to the excellency of her Lord. Even indifference or neglect of this can be seen as an insult, dishonoring to the King. This tends to equate civil government with what is commonly known as moral government. It means that the best interests of God, government, and men are one. Government is intended to do more than guard, defend, and protect the civil rights and properties of her citizens, it is also intended to hold together moral and political truth.

2 The Law of Christ can and will be the rule of conduct. Since God has commanded His people in Old Testament times to use His Laws and Precepts as the basis for their governing and civil government, then less could not be expected of those of us in New Testament times who have access to the whole of God’s Revelation in Scripture. This means then that the State, by virtue of being an instrument of Christ, a moral ordinance, is not just limited to such grounds as common consent, protection of property, or physical needs as a basis for her laws. But she can, and therefore should, go on directly to God’s moral law in the Scriptures as the best basis for all her laws. Those who break those laws would be, disciplined not only because of what they have done against man, but also because of what they have done against God. In both legislation and the restraint of irreligion, the most important thing would be, what is most honoring for Christ as the Lord of Civil Government.

3 The standards that Christ demonstrated in His own character as King will be the base for evaluating or electing men for office in civil government. Using Christ’s character as the basis for our evaluation of the character of those seeking our vote, we would want to see in their lives:

• His kind of dignity or respectability

• His kind of “near relationship” to us

• His kind of knowledge and wisdom

• His kind of power—ability to get things done

• His kind of moral purity

• His kind of compassion

• His kind of authority

Throughout both the Old Testament and the New Testament, God has defined and described these character qualities as essential prerequisites for one who will be both “a terror to evil” and “a minister of God for good”. And because of Christ’s Lordship over Civil Government, Christians, in voting, are bound to rule out choice based on passion, prejudice or party and subject their choice to the character standards and policies found in God’s Word. Yes, the franchise is a civil right, but it is to be exercised to the will and honor of Christ. This does not mean that non-Christians will ipso facto cease to be magistrates but it does mean that in a nation that has received God’s revealed will, it is unfitting, even dishonoring to Christ to elect to office those who have rejected Him. At the same time, Christians who are elected to office need to remember that they are not just the servants of their constituencies, but are “the ministers of God” and regulate both their public and private conduct accordingly.

4. The authority of magistrates and the submission of Christian citizens in any nation which has access to the Gospel is dependent on these standards. Power and obedience in this nation does not arise out of either slavish fear of “my constituency” or from selfish motives but from love and respect for the Redeemer-King. It will include a respectful kind of fear, well doing, paying of taxes and customs, and giving of honor, as described in Romans 13. Disobedience become disobedience to Christ.

At this point, it becomes necessary to make a distinction between “power” and “authority”. God has invested people with democratic power in political matters and those people have the right to exercise that power. This is moral power as distinguished from physical-strength kind of power. It is the power to organize their own social relationships, agree on constitutions and laws, and to elect and invest certain individuals to rule over them. This is just the basis for the secular state. But we are going beyond this when we make a distinction between this kind of power, and the kind of authority which Christ as King has given to a Christian magistrate. Both moral power and moral authority come from God. But the moral power comes immediately from God as a natural thing. The moral authority comes mediately as an added thing. And there are two essential prerequisites for a person’s getting the right or title to this moral authority:

1 A moral capacity, i.e. he must have some age of maturity and a sound mind; and

2 A moral ability, which is not necessary for him to have moral power, but is necessary for him to have moral authority. For example, a man who is of age and a sound mind may have demonstrated his moral inability to rule his own children. And yet his (terrible) moral power over those children cannot be denied. Such a man cannot be said to have moral authority. And since God has not given such a man any such authority, then Christian citizens who desire to honor Christ as Lord of civil government should not attempt to give him any such moral authority by electing or appointing him to rule over them. It may not be the responsibility of a Christian citizen to investigate the moral authority of the man who makes his shoes, but before electing a man to rule over him, he must examine carefully his natural, moral, and spiritual qualifications by evaluating his qualifications against the very character of Christ the King of all civil governments.

Beginning with the Kingdom lays a foundation for the development of Christian influences in civil government and the purpose, nature, and extent of civil government. It provides a Kingdom-based initiative for the further study of church and civil government relationships, that would be honoring to the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

The Kingdom and the Business and Life Walk


When we begin with the Kingdom in Christian Life, then we can see how surely some men are “called” into business just as directly as others are “called” to be pastors or missionaries. Those men will see a relationship between whatever they do or produce or build, and Jesus’ reason for dying for them on the Cross. The purpose or reason for their business will be directly related to the purpose of Christ’s Kingdom. The spirituality of Christ’s Kingdom will permeate the very character of their personnel and corporation and the honesty, integrity and dependability of their services and products. They will be as successful as was Job and Abraham and Joseph and Solomon and Lydia. The unlimitedness of the extent of Christ’s Kingdom will unlock the entreprenurial creativity and initiative of owners and employees. Their attitude toward the wealth of the world and their control of that portion of it which the King entrusts to their stewardship will be directly related to the fact that in one sense they do not “own” anything. Everything they “have” belongs to the King Himself and is to be managed by them as stewards of the Lord in such a way as is useful to Him in His building of His Kingdom.

Christ’s promise is the promise of the King Himself and these men who have been “called” into business have learned that when they seek first the Kingdom of God in their business, then all these other things will be added unto them. No man who has learned to do that has ever been known to “fail”.

PART THREE The Conclusion of the Matter


“Therefore since we are receiving a Kingdom which cannot be shaken, let us have grace, by which we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear.” (Hebrews 12:18)

Beginning with the King and His Mediatorial Kingdom does make a difference in the Christian walk.

The Individual Soul who comes to know God in the person of Jesus Christ discovers that the One who gave His life for him on the Cross is the King with all this Kingdom. Lordship takes on new reality. He has been “saved” or called, not just to get out of Hell, but to be a witness to this King so long as the Lord chooses to leave him on His earth, and then on into eternity. Something of the mind and purpose of Christ begins to “renew” his mind so that he thinks with the mind of Christ (Romans 12:1-2). He becomes a “spiritual” man with a sense of responsibility (vision) for what Christ, His King, is doing all over his world. He becomes a friend of Christ, not just a servant in His Family. He will have a redemptive purpose for living, a spiritual nature, and a world vision. He will see a relationship between his occupation or work and Jesus’ reason for dying for him on the cross.

The Family who learns to begin with the Kingdom will know and rejoice in the fact that their family relationships are not a do-it-yourself work. But “unless the Lord builds the house, they labor in vain who build it” (Psalm 127:1a) and that, as a matter of fact, the Lord is building their family and that the King who formed the first family in the Garden of Eden has also formed them into His family. He designed the father to be the demonstration or illustration of Christ’s kind of self-sacrificing love and the mother to be the demonstration of the submission of any soul to Christ as Savior, and all the family to demonstrate the spirituality of Christ’s Kingdom and the children, from generation to generation, to demonstrate the unendingness of Christ’s Kingdom. So Christ the King designs and directs the family to explain and demonstrate the redemptive purpose, the spiritual nature and the unending extent of His eternal Kingdom. It will keep on multiplying to the end of time.

The Church who learns to begin with the Kingdom will be a family of families. She will recognize that Christ is not only Her only King and Lord, but that He is Her beloved Bridegroom and She will be very jealous for all His Crown Rights and Royal Prerogatives. She will want His purposes and plan to be the purpose and plan for everything She does. Since He is a reaching God who is always reaching out to evangelize, She will want to be a reaching church. Since He is an equipping and sending God, She will want to be an equipping and sending Church. She will reflect the nature of His Kingdom by the way she worships Him and the way she maintains her independence of all other controls and Her submission to Him alone as Her only King and Head. Her very unity, universality and perpetuity will be reflections of the spiritual nature of His Kingdom. Her growth and multiplication will be a reflection of the unlimitedness of the Kingdom and of Her King.

The Civil Government who would learn to begin with the Kingdom would find a God-given basis for working and for working together with the church. This would be more than a faith-based initiative, it would be a Kingdom-based initiative. W. E. Gladstone (Prime Minister of England) had made a careful study of Church-State relationships in the light of Christ’s Kingdom and published a book titled The State in Its Relationship to the Church. His opponents condemned him for making a political blunder that almost cost him his political life (his election). They condemned him for believing that the State revolved around the Church. They insisted that churches came and went–revolving around the State.

They might have said the same thing about any one of the social units we have been looking at. Some individuals, dictators or emperors or even church leaders, have thought that everything and everyone else revolved around them. Some others have insisted that everything and everyone else; church, state, and individual must revolve around the family. Others have insisted that everything else, including the family must be sacrificed for the church. Pastors have sacrificed their children and family life “for” the church and some have chosen celibacy instead of family life.

The doctrine of the Kingship and Mediatorial Kingdom of Jesus Christ provides God’s answer to all this imbalance. The proper relationship between church and civil government and all these other social units rests on three foundations.

1. This doctrine of the Kingdom and Kingship of Jesus Christ “beginning with the Kingdom” provides ample basis for Church- State relationship. The spirituality of Christ’s mediatorial dominion has been built down into the very nature of the Church in such a way as to provide a basis for resolving Church- civil government conflicts and the continuing close cooperation of the two. It is also the basis for the assurance that the Church will continue to remain independent of the control of the civil government and subject to Christ alone as her only King and Head and it will prohibit the Church from ever dominating the civil government. The unlimitedness or universality of Christ’s mediatorial dominion has also been built down into the very nature of the Church in such a way that the powerful principles of a multiplying ministry of the Gospel of Jesus are sending a closely unified, universally expanding, perpetually existing Church, moving throughout the world. It will, one day, require a coming to terms between Church and civil government.

In all this, the basic essential difference between Church and civil government will continue to be preserved. They are different insofar as their immediate origin, their immediate ends and their forms of administration are concerned. They are particularly different in their means of operation, their attitude toward their subject citizens or members, and the character or results of their work. But having said all this, the fact is that the origin of both is in the hands of Christ. His Word is the ultimate rule and standard for both. His Glory is the ultimate objective for both. Both are subject to Him, whether they know and want it or not. Both are subject to Him as King and distinction does not mandate hostility. Things can be diverse without being adverse. The Church-civil government relationship can be a practical working out of the spirituality of Christ’s Mediatorial Kingdom. It is a reflection of the relationship between the regnum Christi and the regna mundi. There is a clear, sharp distinction, but that does not mandate a further separation of the two. In fact, it is the distinction which makes the “separation” of Church and civil government unnecessary. It is actually because of their differences as well as their similarities that the two are designed to work together to the glory of Christ and the establishment of His Kingdom. The fact which is seen so clearly in history that “help” given by the State to the Church has been misused, does not mean that it must always necessarily be misused to “secularize” and corrupt the Church, or otherwise blend and confuse Church and civil government anymore than it means that civil governments, by virtue of having suffered in history, especially the medieval years, from the encroachments of the Church, no longer have need for the Church. Both Church and civil government are ordinances of God and the fact that Christ has been made Lord of both, guarantees that the necessary distinctions can/will be preserved when they form a right Church-civil government relationship. It is the overarching dome of Christ’s unlimited Kingdom and in particular His moral Lordship over nations that provides the grand basis for the alliance of Church and civil government, as well as the motive for bringing these two historically unruly persons together. They are two different moral provinces but they are under the same King as separate departments of one vast moral empire. Ptolemy may have initiated the idea of the overarching dome of the kingdom, but he found it in the Scriptures.

2. The second foundation for this Church-civil government alliance is to be found in the Scriptures. God’s Word authorizes these kinds of working relationships. In the New Testament, God defines the magistrate as the “minister of God” who is a “terror to evil”, so he must necessarily be concerned with the suppression of irreligion and the discouragement of offenses against religion. And as the minister of God for good, he must necessarily be concerned with the promotion of the true religion. The important thing is that God put no restriction on either of the two words “evil” or “good”. That is God’s New Testament definition of a magistrate, and the Old Testament provides three kinds of God-approved examples of this principle.

A.) In the pre-Jewish patriarchal economy, Melchisidek demonstrated a combination of sacred and civil things which were pleasing to God.

B.) During the Mosaic economy, the Jewish kings demonstrated a combination of things civil and sacred which were pleasing to God.

C.) The Gentile princes, such as Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes, who made contributions to the work of the Church helped to destroy the idea that such civil government support was purely Jewish, and therefore without God’s approval for any other dispensation. Scripture, when not limited to either Old or New Testaments, authorizes an alliance that produces a good working relationship between Church and civil government.

3. The third foundation for a good Church-civil government relationship is just to review again what the civil government can do for the Church (faith) and what the Church (faith) can do for the civil government. The civil government, on the one hand, can do more than just restrain irreligion and protect the work of Christ and His Church. She can carry out Her own part in that work by making Her own profession of faith in Christ and pledging Her loyalty to Him. She can demonstrate His standards of character and conduct in her magistrates and laws. She can contribute to the extension of the special work of His Kingdom through the exercise of Her official or diplomatic influences.

On the other hand, true faith, as taught by the Church is a very important factor in the establishment of that kind of a sound political economy which is most honoring to Christ and most conducive to the progress of His Kingdom and the welfare of her citizens. She teaches magistrates that they are “vice-regents” of Christ with real authority from Him and directly responsible to Christ as well as to men, for putting down all selfish temptations to dominate or tolerate, legislate, administrate, or judge in any way that will run counter to His revealed law. She teaches the citizens the value of true liberty and the real source of it—which results from their knowledge of the true faith. The Church teaches the citizens of the State to restrain natural tendencies toward anarchical licentiousness and indifference which are dishonoring to the Lord of the State and detrimental to the efficiency of civil government. The Church, as the teacher of true faith is also directly concerned with the natural wealth of the nation and, to some extent, responsible for securing new industry through the development of habits of honesty, industry, creativity and thrift without at the same time actually becoming involved in that industry or acquiring that wealth for herself. She is involved in the prevention of indulgence, waste, and poverty, and the establishment of the real “moral” prosperity of the nation. History and current events show that when this is neglected whole civilizations and nations have collapsed. The Church can use the means peculiar to her own nature to reach (far beyond where the State can go) into the very hearts and consciences of men to promote the cause of peace and go to the very sources of lawlessness, profligacy, and impiety, to points that lie far beyond the scope of civil law and its physical means. Beginning with the Kingdom does make a difference.

4. But what does Christ mean when he directs us to “think Kingdom”? In Philippians 2:5-11, God says it this way, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus” and in Romans 12:1-2, he calls it being “transformed by the renewing of your mind”. In Philippians 2, God continues to give us a detailed outline of the steps of incarnation, the thought processes of the Messiah in leaving Heaven to come to earth to that last step when “He became obedient unto death even the death of the Cross, wherefore God also hath mightily exalted Him and given Him a name which is above every name. That at the name of Jesus, every knee should bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the Glory of God the Father”. That is the description of the Father’s appointment of the Son to His Mediatorial Kingdom and His statement of the extent of it. Now He says, in effect, I want you to think with the mind of Christ—the way He thought (and still does think) about leaving Heaven to come to earth to face death and then to receive this Mediatorial Kingdom. I want you to have that kind of love. To think Kingdom is a process. In Romans 12:1-2, God said, “Be not conformed to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God”.

From the time of conversion, perhaps before that, God begins breathing through His inspired Word, His Kingdom Plan for each particular soul that He redeems—not only the general redemptive purpose and spiritual nature and unlimited mission vision of His Kingdom, but also the particular application of it all for that particular soul—His particular reason and life purpose for dying for that particular soul on the Cross. And the obedient soul will grow up into every day of that Life Plan.

That can be called “thinking Kingdom”. Understanding the redemptive purpose, the spiritual origin and the unlimited extent of Christ’s Kingdom can sometimes help us to recognize where Christ will be leading us next—his next “development” in our life. Then seeking His Kingdom may mean that we will begin praying; asking him to show us more about his atonement; about greater spiritual maturity in working with others; and for more mission vision and understanding of what He is doing in other parts of His world. It was that kind of prayer and desire that He put into our hearts as a family that sent us to drive around the whole world in 1974-1975. That mission was directly related to this doctrine of the unlimited extent of Christ’s Kingdom. We came back with a new sense of responsibility for what He is doing all over His world.

What does God mean when He promises to “give you the Kingdom”. (Luke 12:32)?

He means what He had kept explaining privately over and over again to his disciples—His long-range Kingdom plans for His world and how they will keep on working after He leaves them; what He was saying in John 15:15, “hereforth, I call you not servants (slaves) but friends, for the servant knoweth not what his Lord doeth, but I have called you friends for all things that I have heard of my Father, I have made known unto you.” This Kingdom will be yours—it is yours now.

PART FOUR


The Author’s Personal testimony


“You therefore, my son, be strong in the grace which is in Christ Jesus. And the things you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” 2 Timothy (2:1-2)

Allow me to step back for a moment to personalize all of this in the form of a personal testimony that the King might use to make someone reading it to be sure of his/her own relationship to the King. Let me be the “individual” that the King is bringing into His Kingdom and building down into my own life something of the redemptive purpose, the spiritual nature and the unlimited extent of His Kingdom.

I realize now that He is the King who loved me in a manner wondrous and divine, who caused me to be born in 1925. He took my Mother to be with Himself when I was just three years old. He put it into the heart of my Father to give me away to his sister, a maiden lady and schoolteacher who loved me and taught me to memorize God’s Word (especially Psalm 19, wherein God speaks so precisely about how the “line” of the sun, the moon and the stars speak without words, in every language all over the world). As King, He had put me into the U.S. Navy (1942-1946) and made me the Acting Navigator on board that aircraft carrier, the U.S.S. Petrof Bay, where those stars and their timing made the difference between life and death. He kept me alive and then brought me to the point of knowing that things were not “right” between Himself and myself. I did not think or talk or live the way He did. There were big differences between us, and there was nothing I could do to make things right between us. At that juncture, He caused me to remember and to know what I had learned as a boy, that He Himself had come down to earth in the form of Jesus Christ and deliberately given His life on that Cross at the other end of the Mediterranean Sea in order to make things “right” between us—if I would but trust in Him. He put it into my heart to trust in Him and I did.

It was 1948. He began “breathing” the facts about His Kingdom down into my heart/life through the study of His Word. He sent me through three years of seminary, and then directly on to graduate school to begin study of the doctrine of His Kingdom (1948-1953).

In 1953, He brought me back to the United States and called, ordained and installed me to be Pastor of the Reformed Presbyterian Church in Bloomington Indiana, home of Indiana University (40,000 students and 40,000 citizens), where He sent two friends who began to show me how to apply and communicate what He had been teaching me about His Kingdom—how to do His work His way. He then called me back to University (1960-1963) to study more of His Kingdom and then brought me to Indianapolis where He wanted to use me in His building of Second Reformed Presbyterian Church. In the last 40 years, He has allowed me to be involved in the lives of a dozen or more other pastors who can do everything I can do, but better than I can do it. He lets me be close enough to His Church “building” to see Him build six other churches (and three or more developing) and twelve more men working to become pastors.

Readers: In Philippians 2:8-11 (NKJ), “. . . and being found in appearance as a man, He humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and those on earth, and those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God, the Father.” Since this is the will of the Father for the Son, then why not join Him in that express purpose for your own life, that is the exalting of Jesus in all that you are, know, and do, in a prayer of personal commitment.

Father, whatever it was You committed Yourself to by highly exalting Your son Jesus, a name above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow in Heaven and of those below the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord. To Your glory, Dear Father, I hereby now commit myself to full obedience of this command and make this the ultimate purpose of my life in Your Kingdom. Amen.

In 1948, after a four-year stint (1942-1946) in the U.S. Navy as Navigator and Division Officer in the South Pacific and Atlantic theatres, Dr. Roy Blackwood obtained his Bachelors degree in Chemistry from Geneva College in Ohio. Also in 1948, he married his wife Margie with whom he has three children. Roy obtained a graduate degree from RP Seminary in 1953 and became Pastor of the Reformed Presbyterian Church in Bloomington Indiana. In 1961, Roy and his family moved to Scotland where he received a Doctorate in The History of Theology from New College, University of Edinburgh. Dr. Blackwood became Senior Pastor of the Second Reformed Presbyterian Church, Indianapolis, Indiana in 1966 where he serves to this day.

http://alliancenet.org/

pdf

http://www.allianceradio.org/EternityArticles/KingandKingdom.pdf

I also recommend Pastor Phil Pockras' work.
https://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.com/2012/09/06/Christ-the-king-of-all/

I appreciate Pastor Pockras’ concise way of putting things. May you be encouraged in seeing Christ’s Mediatorial Dominion. Thanks for allowing me to post this Pastor Pockras.
RMS


Christ the King of All
By Philip H. Pockras, minister
Belle Center Reformed Presbyterian Church
Belle Center, Ohio
http://www.bcrpchurch.org/


STATEMENT OF THE DOCTRINE

God the Son, as the second Person of the Holy Trinity, is King over all things. This exalted position He holds in common with the other Persons of the Trinity. Jehovah God is King in His essential Deity. This no orthodox believer denies, at least in theory. As well, the Lord Jesus Christ, the God-man Mediator, reigns as Mediatorial King over all things, for the benefit of His Church to the glory of the Father.

“1. Jesus Christ, as mediator, governs all creatures and all their actions for his own glory. Submission is due to Him from all men and angels. All men, in every possible relation and condition, are under obligation to promote His gracious purposes according to His Law. The holy angels minister, under His direction, to the heirs of salvation. Eph. 1:20-22; Heb.2:8; Phil. 2:9-11; Ps. 2; Heb. 1:4.

“2. Jesus Christ, as Head over all things for the sake of the Church, rules in perfect wisdom and justice over all parts of His creation including wicked men and devils. He makes them, and all their counsels and efforts, serve God’s glory in the plan of redemption. Rom. 8:28; Eph. 1:22-23; John 17:1-5; Luke 9:26” The Testimony of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, Chapter 8: “Of Christ the Mediator” (1980).

This teaching, unknown or poorly understood within much of the evangelical church, is one of the doctrinal linchpins of the Reformed Presbyterian Church throughout the world. Historically, Christ’s Mediatorial Kingship has been asserted, during the whole of the RP Church’s existence, against several errors: Popery and Erastianism in Britain, and secularism in other nations in which she has been planted. As we look to Scripture, we see this doctrine taught in both Testaments.

“1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? 2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, [saying], 3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. 4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. 5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. 6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. 7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee. 8 Ask of me, and I shall give [thee] the heathen [for] thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth [for] thy possession. 9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel. 10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. 11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. 12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish [from] the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed [are] all they that put their trust in him.” (Ps 2)

“13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, [one] like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion [is] an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom [that] which shall not be destroyed.” (Dan 7:13-14)

“18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.” Mat 28:18-20)

“20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set [him] at his own right hand in the heavenly [places], 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all [things] under his feet, and gave him [to be] the head over all [things] to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.” (Eph. 1:20-23)

“5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven, and [things] in earth, and [things] under the earth; 11 And [that] every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:5-11)

Certainly, more references could be multiplied. Enough have been cited to show, however, that there is a distinct Dominion given to Messiah. This Mediatorial Dominion is distinct from, additional to, and coterminous with that Dominion which He retains essentially as the Second Person of the Godhead. Note that this additional Dominion is given to Him. It is bestowed upon Him. The reasons for this bestowal by the Father are given, too. This bestowal is a reward for Christ’s “doing and dying.” The Mediatorial Dominion is by purchase. Further, we see that this economy is bestowed in order to bless Christ’s body, the Church.

The extent of this Mediatorial Dominion is universal. This is absolutely necessary for Messiah, as He must rule over all things in order to make them work together for good for those who love Him, and who are the called according to His purpose (Rom. 8:28). It may be objected that the reprobate cannot be under His Mediatorial Reign, for how could He be a Mediatorial King to those who do not benefit from His work of redemption? Let us remember that, in our common experience, we see many who live lives of continual criminality, yet we do not deny that they are under the jurisdiction of the civil magistrate. So it is with the reprobate. Indeed, they get no benefit from the King; only judgment and condemnation (Mat. 25:31ff). Nonetheless, the King sovereignly directs them and all their ways, that His church may be benefitted and the Father made glorious.

Again, it may be objected that the doctrine of a universal Mediatorial King derogates from the dignity, glory, activity, and even the immanence of the Father and the Holy Spirit. Further, Christ’s high dignity as the only-begotten Son is lost sight of. In reply, it should be noted that the orthodox church concurs that the Lord Jesus Christ is Zion’s only King and Head. Does anyone seriously believe that, in the church, the dignity, glory, and activity of the other Persons of the Godhead are in any way impaired? Is there a soul who maintains that teaching that Messiah alone is King of Saints removes the presence of the Father and the Spirit from the Church? And who will say that such teaching leads to the eclipse of His Deity? Who? Such a man, in any orthodox Protestant denomination, would be condemned in the courts of his church for maintaining such positions. If Christ’s Mediatorial Kingship in the church be so obviously acceptable, then there should be no objection of this sort to teaching that He holds sway over all the creation.

One further objection comes to mind. It is that someone else exercises sovereign rule over all things extraneous to the Church. An objector may say that this someone is the Son in His essential Deity. It must be remembered that, although Christ has two distinct natures, He is one Person, one Savior. “Is Christ divided?” (1 Cor. 1:13a) remains a relevant question just at this point. Such an assertion goes against clear Scripture teaching already cited, declaring Christ’s universal dominion as the Mediator. Some bizarre attempts at “exegesis” have been tried in order to elude this conclusion, but such attempts would have been laughable had the subject not been so solemn and majestic.

If not the Son Himself, then perhaps another Person of the Godhead, or the undifferentiated Deity rules in all things extraneous to the Church, it may be said. A problem arises in connection with this proposal. God has determined all blessing, all redemption, all things necessary to the accomplishment of His gracious purposes, to come through the Covenant of Grace. The Covenant, of course, cannot be separated from Him who is its Head. To attempt to approach God apart from a Mediator in these post-Fall times is fatal. To seek any blessing from the Holy and Righteous Judge, deeply offended at sin, is absurdity. To expect anything but God’s wrath and curse, apart from a Mediatorial administration, is folly. If all things extraneous to the Church are in the hands of God essentially, then the Church cannot repose in confidence and trust that all will work for her good. Might they not work for wrath upon her who is still stained, wrinkled, blemished, impure and unrighteous in her current experience? Should she not cower at the approach of the Holy One, strong to smite? Of course she does not, because all things are now ordered through the Covenant of Grace for her benefit. All things, internally and externally, are under the feet of her glorious and loving Husband, the King. His Father becomes Her Father in heaven, strong to save, not the offended Judge mentioned. Her Beloved’s Spirit is sent abroad to be at work as the King’s agent. All Providence, at the King’s command, is ordered for her ultimate good, ultimate purification, ultimate salvation. In the Universal Mediatorial Dominion, and only in it, blessing is certain.

APPLICATIONS

I. For the Church

As noted above, there is a general concensus among Reformed churches that Christ is Mediatorial King of Saints. The Church is His Kingdom of Grace, His “special Kingdom”. As we look at this particular aspect of Christ’s Mediatorial Kingship, we should assume that there would be implications for doctrine, discipline, government, and worship. In these four areas, it must be asserted that the Word of Christ alone determines matters, either as it is “expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence…deduced from Scripture” (WCF 1:6). Therefore, the Church of Christ, and every branch of it, must see that it holds and practices the directions of Him Who is Head and King of Zion. Everything that is truly attained from Scripture must be held tenaciously and perseveringly. Anything that is added must be excised. That which has been dropped must again be carried aloft. This is the reason that the RP Church has retained what she believes to be Scriptural doctrine, although it keeps her apart from other brethren whom she holds dear. This is why the RP Church has tried, though grieving over much of her own inconsistency and negligence, to maintain Scriptural church discipline, especially in the matters of common confession, testimony bearing, and the Sacraments. This is why the RP Church still professes to believe in jure divino Presbyterianism. This is why the RP Church, despite unpopularity and ridicule, retains what she believes to be Scriptural worship principles and practices. These things she believes to be binding upon all the Church of Christ, not mere quirks of her own little circle. Any change on her part must occur as she is convinced that she has erred in her understanding of the Word of God, as has happened in the past. Of course, this is the required basis for change in any part of the Apostolic Church.

This leads to a consideration of church union. That this is a desirable goal, and commanded by Christ no one can deny. Can it come legitimately by the scuttling of the truth of the Bible? Our Savior has commanded His disciples to disciple the nations, teaching them to observe everything that He has commanded (Matt 28:18-20). Putting aside one part of Christ’s commandments in order to effect another is wrong. The one is sinfully ignored and the other is not truly brought about. Both end up lost. Union must be a union in truth. Any true union within the Church of Christ must be a union in the truth, where the formerly divided brethren come to a concensus in their understanding of the King’s gracious decrees. Further, there should then be a corporate pledging of allegiance to the King. In the past, this has been called “public social covenanting”.

2. For the State

Christ is King of nations as well as saints. Nations are distinctly part of His universal Mediatorial Dominion. They are part of His Kingdom of Power, His “subordinate Kingdom”. A very obvious a fortiori argument to this point could be inserted here, but there is no need. Suffice it to say, that since a universal Dominion is demonstrated, there can be nothing remaining outside it, but what is specifically excluded. We have such an exclusion from Messiah’s sway mentioned, but it is not the Civil Magistrate/Civil Government/Nation. “For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under [him, it is] manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.” (1 Cor 15:27).

That Christ, as the Mediatorial King, claims the allegiance of earth’s nations is quite explicit in Scripture passages already cited. To these testimonies we could add more: “1 O clap your hands, all ye people; shout unto God with the voice of triumph. 2 For the LORD most high [is] terrible; [he is] a great King over all the earth. 3 He shall subdue the people under us, and the nations under our feet. 4 He shall choose our inheritance for us, the excellency of Jacob whom he loved. Selah. 5 God is gone up with a shout, the LORD with the sound of a trumpet. 6 Sing praises to God, sing praises: sing praises unto our King, sing praises. 7 For God [is] the King of all the earth: sing ye praises with understanding. 8 God reigneth over the heathen: God sitteth upon the throne of his holiness. 9 The princes of the people are gathered together, [even] the people of the God of Abraham: for the shields of the earth [belong] unto God: he is greatly exalted.” (Psalm 47) In connection with this citation, it ought to be remembered just who it is that has ascended. It is not God considered in His unity, nor the Heavenly Father, nor the Holy Spirit, nor yet the Son essentially considered, but Messiah. He is the One addressed as God in Psalm 47. The fulness of revelation that we now have in these last days shows us that it is God-man Who is ascended, Who is King, Who reigns over nations, before whom officials, as officials, assemble to learn and to do His will.

Further witness to Christ’s Mediatorial Kingship over the nations can be found in Revelation:

“And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become [the kingdoms] of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.” (11:15)

Of Him Who rides forward to conquer the nations with the sword of His Word we read, “And he hath on [his] vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.” (19:16)

Further official statements on this doctrine as currently confessed by the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America are in its Testimony, chapter 23, “Of the Civil Magistrate”, pp. A69 – A78 in its Constitution.

From time to time different objections to this teaching come forth. One of the most common comes from misunderstanding the words of our Savior when, before the judgment seat of Pilate, He said, “My kingdom is not of this world.” (John 18:36) Some say that these words are in conflict with a notion of nations formally pledging allegiance to Christ as King. The apparent tension relaxes when we remember what Jesus means when He says that His Kingdom is not of this world. He surely does not mean that it is a purely privatized affair, or something irrelevant to matters of this earth, something of grace as opposed to nature, or something noumenal as opposed to the phenomenal. He does mean that His Kingdom is of a different order, not merely one more kingdom in the midst of many others. He does mean that it is one that acknowledges Him as its immediate supreme overlord, instead of others claiming that role. He does mean that the weapons of conquest are the preaching and teaching of His Word, which bring sinners and societies under Him. He does mean that it is established by the power of the Spirit, rather than that of man. He does mean that it is established in the righteousness and holiness of heaven, not the pride and cruelty of man. This Kingdom is in the world, although not of the world. The nations of this world, along with all else, can, should, and shall be explicitly under the aegis of Christ the King.

Another objection commonly mentioned is that this doctrine seems to force a union of Church and State, with one or the other in ascendancy. While some have perverted this teaching to such an end, proper practical application militates against either an Erastian or Romanist conception of church-state relations. It remains true that Christ alone is Head of the Church, not a pope nor yet a civil magistrate. The proper civil powers remain in their place, too. Scripturally, both Church and State have distinguishable subjects, different ends, different officers, and different sanctions, among other things. Both, nonetheless, are under the same Mediatorial King, the King of Zion and the King of kings. Both Church and State are under the same obligation to covenant with Him in their own appropriate ways, yielding loyalty to their Lord. Both are obliged to support each other in appropriate ways, that the King may be glorified by men in their public lives. Both are obliged to conform to God’s Law, in ways proper to each institution. The State is under constraint in these areas just as much as the Church, in order that it may fulfill its role as God’s ordinance, His ministry for good (Romans 13:2,4). Especially in those nations where the Gospel has been preached, to “Kiss the Son” is an absolute necessity for the national well-being. To resist or refuse such submission is to invite total national annihilation from the offended “King on Zion’s hill.”

In this matter of national submission to Messiah, the Church of Christ has a prominent responsibility. Part of her duty in supporting the State is declaring what is true and false, what is right and wrong, as defined by the Old and New Testament Scriptures. The Church catholic must declare that the State is morally compelled to own Messiah as King and His Law as the law of the land. She must declare the State immoral at these extremely critical points, if it does not repent. Christians, in such a case, in such as we live now, cannot participate in any action that would entrap them in such immorality themselves. There can be no unqualified allegiance sworn to immoral constitutions of government that do not themselves swear allegiance to Christ.

In connection with this national submission, often called “national reform”, the Church has the duty of calling the nation to formal public social covenanting with the King. This follows approved Scriptural example in the times of Joash, Hezekiah, Josiah, Nehemiah, and others. Some may say that the situation of OT Israel was unique. It is true that, in OT times, Israel was unique among the nations of the world in containing the visible Church, and that no nation in these last days can ever make a legitimate claim to be the sole Christian nation. This precludes no land, however, from covenanting to be a Christian nation.

In the matter of putting men into civil office, the Christian citizen must recall, first, that only personally godly men who espouse Scriptural righteousness and justice are worthy of office (Deuteronomy 17:14-20, 2 Samuel 23:3), not those who are of a certain political party or those considered the “lesser of two evils”. Further, these candidates must, themselves, hold to the Christian view of civil government that has just been explained. To elect a man to office who has no conscience qualms about swearing to uphold and defend, without proper qualification, a Christless constitution of government involves both him and the elector in treason to Jesus.

Many, when receiving these teachings for the first time, react negatively. They call them quixotic, out of touch with the rampant ungodliness within our nation. Such principles are unrealistic, they declare. In initial reply, a simple question is appropriate: “But aren’t they Biblical?” If so, then no matter how contrary to common sense they may initially seem to be, we must embrace the doctrines and emplace their practical applications. Many are the times that God has blessed faithful obedience to His Word despite what appear to be pretty long odds, as man perceives. Who knows but that, as we follow the command of Christ to call the nations to repentance in this matter, we shall see them turning contritely to their King by the power of His Spirit? So it happened with Nineveh in the days of Jonah. Our preaching and teaching Christ’s Mediatorial Kingship over the nations will pull people from their pietism and privitization of Christianity. It will prepare the people of God, the Body of Christ, for proper action when the time comes to enact changes in the constitution of civil government, changes that will reflect proper, godly national submission to Messiah.

Another word that may spring up in the mind of some is “triumphalism”. It must be admitted that, historically, the Reformed Presbyterian Church has been postmillenial. Even now, whether they call themselves postmillenial or amillennial, most members of the Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church would consider themselves to be optimistic in their eschatology. This optimism, however, is not absolutely necessary in order to hold to the doctrine of Christ’s Mediatorial Reign over the nations, as is known from personal acquaintance. Is it “triumphalist” to teach and act on plain teachings of the Bible? If so, let us triumph in being “triumphalist”! In hoc Christo vinces! (In this Christ conquer!) Really, though, this name-calling is no more profitable in this discussion than that of my fellow theological/eschatological optimists who castigate “pessimillenialists”.

CONCLUSION

This, then, is a very condensed presentation of the doctrine of Christ’s Mediatorial Kingship, with some practical application. The Reformed Presbyterian Church believes it to be Biblical and binding on all the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Christ. Much of this material may be new to brethren in other branches of the Church, even those branches very near in most points of doctrine, discipline, government, and worship.

The Interchurch Committee of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America originally assigned this essay in the spirit of obedience to the church’s Covenant of 1871. In the actual engagement, paragraph 4, we read, “That, believing the Church to be one, and that all the saints have communion with God and with one another in the same Covenant; believing, moreover, that schism and sectarianism are sinful in themselves; and inimical to true religion, and trusting that divisions shall cease, and the people of God become one Catholic church over all the earth, we will pray and labor for the visible oneness of the Church of God in our own land and throughout the world, on the basis of truth and of Scriptural order. Considering it a principal duty of our profession to cultivate a holy brotherhood, we will strive to maintain Christian friendship with pious men of every name, and to feel and act as one with all in every land who pursue this grand end. And, as a means of securing this great result, we will by dissemination and application of the principles of truth herein professed, and by cultivating and exercising Christian charity, labor to remove stumbling-blocks, and to gather into one the scattered and divided friends of truth and righteousness.”

It is hoped that this essay will lead to a better understanding of this vital, yet much overlooked, doctrine; a greater unity in the Church of Jesus Christ; and a determination to work for the recognition of Christ’s crown rights in the nation. May He Who is Head and King of the Church, Zion’s only Potentate; He Who is King of kings and Lord of lords bring it to pass, to the praise of His Name and the glory of His and our Father!

By Philip H. Pockras, minister
Belle Center Reformed Presbyterian Church
Belle Center, Ohio


SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boyle, Samuel E. The Christian Nation. Pittsburgh: The Christian Government Movement, n. d. [1971].
Edgar, William. “The National Confession Position.” In God and Politics, pp 176-99. Edited by Gary Scott Smith. Foreword by John H. White. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1989.
Hodge, Archibald Alexander. Evangelical Theology. 1890; Reprint ed., Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1976.
McAllister, David. Christian Civil Government in America. 6th ed. Revised by T. H. Acheson and Wm. Parsons. Pittsburgh: National Reform Association, 1927.
Oburn, William. The Dominion of Our Savior Jesus Christ as Mediator. Galion, OH: By the Author, 1878.
Palmer, Benjamin Morgan. “Christ’s Universal Dominion.” The Southern Pulpit I:9 (September, 1881): 526-36.
_____________________. “Sermon, Preached in the First Presbyterian Church, Augusta, Ga., December 4th, 1861, at the Opening of the First General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of the Confederate States of America.” Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America, 1861.
Reformed Dissenting Presbytery. An Act, Declaration, and Testimony of the Reformed Dissenting Presbyterian Church, in North-America. West-Union, Ohio: Reformed Dissenting Presbytery, 1839.
Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America. The Constitution of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America. Pittsburgh: Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America Board of Education and Publication, 1989.
Reformed Presbytery. Act, Declaration, and Testimony. Ploughlandhead, Scotland: 1761; reprint ed. with added historical and declaratory supplement, Philadelphia: Reformed Presbytery [“Steelite”], 1876.
Symington, William. Messiah the Prince, 2nd ed. Edinburgh: John Johnston, 1840.
Thornwell, James Henley. “Relation of the State to Christ. (A Memorial).” The Collected Works of James Henley Thornwell. Vol IV: Ecclesiastical, pp. 549-56. Edited by B. M. Palmer, 1875; reprint ed., Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1986.
United Presbyterian Church of North America. “The Testimony of the United Presbyterian Church of North America,” The Subordinate Standards of the United Presbyterian Church of North America, pp 535-92. Pittsburgh: United Presbyterian Board of Publication, 1903.
Note: William Symington’s tremendously important Messiah the Prince and the Act, Declaration, and Testimonyfrom 1761 are currently in print and obtainable from Still Waters Revival Books Edmonton, AB.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

From what I can see the modern edition sold today is an abridged edition of Symington's original.

It has been a while since I read the manuscript of J. K. Law's book. He is from here and was mentored here on the topic. It has been many years since I read a few editions of Symington's books. There are some variants. Some are more Post Mil than I perceived than other editions.

 

[User20004000]

“There is a reason it is self-published, and why NO presbyterian or Reformed, or even generally evangelical publisher would take the manuscript: if they did, they would never be able to publish any WSC professor ever again.”

Lane, let me try again. You said there was a reason no Reformed publisher took on the book. You then seemed to offer a concrete reason.

One thing I was trying to distinguish is I wouldn’t want to say that the publishers avoided the book for financial pragmatism (i.e. they’d never in the future be able to publish a book by an Escondido professor if they published Frame’s book).

Whether they were for or against Frame, publishers could have just not wanted to touch the topic because it’s just too divisive. Or perhaps they thought it was badly argued by Frame. Maybe the book was junk in their opionion. That faculty would not publish with such publishers (had those publishers taken on the book) might not have entered into the reasoning of those publishers was my point. There are many other possible reasons. Your point seems to index a rationale that I’m unable to infer with any confidence. I was trying to soften your strong inference, that’s all. Thx

 

[Clark-Tillian]

Daniel, do you recognize any of the men and women shown on the masthead?

I'm hardly on ANY forum lately. Rather burned out on "social media", but I lurk on PB a good deal and this thread caught my eye, and took a fair amount of my time (lol). I can tell you that Hart's avatar is Richie Allen--a great baseball player who should probably be in the HOF. Allen made a lot of enemies in his day, but man could he thwack a baseball. I don't think Richie Allen is R2K.

 

[greenbaggins]

Ron, fair enough. I was not intending to imply any purely monetary incentive on the part of publishers. I was thinking of it in more positive terms as, say, publishers wanting to keep their options open for future writers. In which case, the divisiveness of the issues would be of paramount concern.

 

[Susan777]

I'm hardly on ANY forum lately. Rather burned out on "social media", but I lurk on PB a good deal and this thread caught my eye, and took a fair amount of my time (lol). I can tell you that Hart's avatar is Richie Allen--a great baseball player who should probably be in the HOF. Allen made a lot of enemies in his day, but man could he thwack a baseball. I don't think Richie Allen is R2K.

Thanks. I thought it was maybe an old blues singer. Do you recognize any of the people on his blog masthead? They change with every screen refresh.

 

[Clark-Tillian]

Thanks. I thought it was maybe an old blues singer. Do you recognize any of the people on his blog masthead? They change with every screen refresh.

Well, I do recognize Machen! Some are actors, and a few of them in the past have definitely been characters from The Wire.

 

[User20004000]

Ron, fair enough. I was not intending to imply any purely monetary incentive on the part of publishers. I was thinking of it in more positive terms as, say, publishers wanting to keep their options open for future writers. In which case, the divisiveness of the issues would be of paramount concern.

That was my inclination. I was trying to tease it out so that you weren’t misunderstood. Badly done at my end!