Alexis de Tocqueville's 'Democracy in America' is full of nuggets of interest and value. For instance...
On Equality
Men's taste for freedom and equality are two different things but their passion for equality is greater. 'Democratic nations are at all times fond of equality but during certain ages their passion for it verges on excess...The passion for equality sinks deeply into every corner of the human heart, expands and fills it entirely...Do not bother to show men that their freedom is slipping from their fingers as their gaze is elsewhere; they are blind, or rather they can see only one advantage worth pursuing in the whole world.
'I think that democratic nations have a natural taste for freedom; left to themselves, they seek it out, become attached to it, and view any departure from it with distress. But they have a burning, insatiable, constant, and invincible passion for equality; they want equality in freedom and, if they cannot have it, they want it in slavery. They will endure poverty, subjection, barbarism but they will not endure aristocracy.'
On Individualism
'Individualism is a recently coined expression prompted by a new idea, for our forefathers knew only of egoism. Egoism is an ardent and excessive love of oneself... Individualism is a calm and considered feeling which persuades each citizen to cut himself off from his fellows and to withdraw into the circle of his family and friends in such a way that he creates a small group of his own and willingly abandons society at large to its own devices. Egoism springs from a blind instinct; individualism from wrong-headed thinking rather than from depraved feelings...Egoism is a perversity as old as the world...; Individualism is democratic in origin and threatens to grow as conditions become equal.'
On American love of associating
'Americans of all ages, conditions and all dispositions constantly unite together. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations to which all belong but also a thousand other kinds, religious, moral, serious, futile, very general and very specialized, large and small. Americans group together to hold fetes, found seminaries, build inns, construct churches, distribute books, dispatch missionaries to the antipodes. They establish hospitals, prisons, schools by the same method...The English often perform great things as single individuals, whereas scarcely any minor initiative exists where Americans do not form associations... A government could take the place of some of the largest American associations and several individual states have already tried to do so. But what political power could ever substitute for the countless small enterprises which American citizens carry out daily with the help of associations?'
And thus - my 100th blog-post since beginning this digital pin-board in December 2009!
Friday, 31 August 2012
Wednesday, 29 August 2012
Zeal for Godliness
My attachment to devotional books is not as great as it used to be and that may say something about me, but occasionally I find a good one and 'Zeal for Godliness' is one.
It is subtitled 'Devotional Meditations on Calvin's Institutes'. Would it make any difference, I think to myself, if 'Devotional' had been left out of that title?
However...
It consists of about 240 meditations of three or four paragraphs, each one covering a few chapters of the Institutes. The contributors comprise some of the great and the good of Reformed theology: Sinclair Ferguson, Paul Helm, Philip Ryken,Iain D. Campbell, Ligon Duncan, Justin Taylor, Derek Thomas, Carl Trueman and others. Inevitably the content is theological but with a challenge to the heart. Sometimes one feels the need to refer to Calvin himself - which is I suppose no bad thing but could be time-consuming if it happens too often.
There is a certain danger in doing one's devotions not only at one remove (comments on the Bible) but at two removes (comments on a book based on the Bible) so it is no substitute for biblical meditation. But it is fresh and stimulating.
If you want something a little different to refresh your spiritual exercises, then this could be the book for you.
(Published by EP, 2011).
It is subtitled 'Devotional Meditations on Calvin's Institutes'. Would it make any difference, I think to myself, if 'Devotional' had been left out of that title?
However...
It consists of about 240 meditations of three or four paragraphs, each one covering a few chapters of the Institutes. The contributors comprise some of the great and the good of Reformed theology: Sinclair Ferguson, Paul Helm, Philip Ryken,Iain D. Campbell, Ligon Duncan, Justin Taylor, Derek Thomas, Carl Trueman and others. Inevitably the content is theological but with a challenge to the heart. Sometimes one feels the need to refer to Calvin himself - which is I suppose no bad thing but could be time-consuming if it happens too often.
There is a certain danger in doing one's devotions not only at one remove (comments on the Bible) but at two removes (comments on a book based on the Bible) so it is no substitute for biblical meditation. But it is fresh and stimulating.
If you want something a little different to refresh your spiritual exercises, then this could be the book for you.
(Published by EP, 2011).
Monday, 20 August 2012
Green pastures in Brittany
The time has gone incredibly quickly but a week last Saturday we returned home from a wonderful family holiday in Brittany.
Our home for two weeks was a cottage on 'Le Venec', a farm near the village of Loperec in central Finistere, about 8 miles inland and slightly north from Chateaulin. John and Jo Bryant who own the farm (which has two other attached cottages on it) live next door and their generosity and warmth made the holiday special. John would pop in each day with something - courgettes the size of marrows, eggs, beans or an invitation for the boys to go to walk the dogs or paint the hen house with him. They did not really need much more to make their holiday. They could go out early in the morning; we could relax. Vacances completes.
But of course we did do a lot of other things. The beach - Pentrez Plage was the best with acres of clean sand and free parking on the edge of the beach so no miles to walk over pebbles carrying chairs, tent, spades and bags. A little beach near Douarnenez was good too but a bit hot and very busy the afternoon we visited. A swimming pool with water chute and wave machine was a good alternative one day when we visited Quimper.
Pont l'Abbe was the little town where I lived for 6 months in 1975 working as an assistant in the Lycee Laennec. It has not changed much. I could see the room in which I had lived and the classrooms in which I had conversed in English with groups of French teenagers.
We walked along the riverside path in Huelgoat, strewn with massive boulders, and revisited a week later for the boating lake - Thomas and Hilary in the 'police' boat, Nathaniel and I in the 007 boat. Then a family pedallo round the lake.
We visited Locronan, a highly commercialised but very picturesque medieval town, and the abbey at Landevennec, founded, like a lot of religious establishments in Brittany by a Welsh monk (this one by St Guenole, a big noise in early Breton Christianity). I had once stayed a night in a guest room there on a hitch-hiking trip, in the absence of a local youth hostel.
We twice visited the nearby village of Pleyben, with an immense junk-shop about two kilometres away, to which we walked, and poked around at loads of interesting and not so interesting stuff sourced from house and shop clearances. Pleyben also has a chocolaterie!
We could not stay in Brittany without eating crepes which we did in style twice, once in Le Faou and once in a delightful creperie on the edge of a lake a few miles north of Le Venec - a lake which has its own beach, so no problem in entertaining the boys afterwards.
Our one visit to church (the first Sunday we listened to a sermon in the house and sang some hymns with the help of a CD) was to an evangelical church in Brest where we were given a warm welcome and heard a good message on Jeremiah 1, translated for us by Jo Bryant. In the afternoon we took a picnic into a local botanical garden where it rained heavily for a while but we had a lovely walk down to the beach and back.
Meanwhile back at the ranch - we read, played Scrabble (Hilary usually wins), watched the Olympics and the boys enjoyed playing around on the farm, 'helping' John or scooting in the yard.
A great holiday; it went too quickly. Even the 11 hour drive back to Dunkerque did not erase the relaxation or the memories!
Our home for two weeks was a cottage on 'Le Venec', a farm near the village of Loperec in central Finistere, about 8 miles inland and slightly north from Chateaulin. John and Jo Bryant who own the farm (which has two other attached cottages on it) live next door and their generosity and warmth made the holiday special. John would pop in each day with something - courgettes the size of marrows, eggs, beans or an invitation for the boys to go to walk the dogs or paint the hen house with him. They did not really need much more to make their holiday. They could go out early in the morning; we could relax. Vacances completes.
But of course we did do a lot of other things. The beach - Pentrez Plage was the best with acres of clean sand and free parking on the edge of the beach so no miles to walk over pebbles carrying chairs, tent, spades and bags. A little beach near Douarnenez was good too but a bit hot and very busy the afternoon we visited. A swimming pool with water chute and wave machine was a good alternative one day when we visited Quimper.
Pont l'Abbe was the little town where I lived for 6 months in 1975 working as an assistant in the Lycee Laennec. It has not changed much. I could see the room in which I had lived and the classrooms in which I had conversed in English with groups of French teenagers.
We walked along the riverside path in Huelgoat, strewn with massive boulders, and revisited a week later for the boating lake - Thomas and Hilary in the 'police' boat, Nathaniel and I in the 007 boat. Then a family pedallo round the lake.
We visited Locronan, a highly commercialised but very picturesque medieval town, and the abbey at Landevennec, founded, like a lot of religious establishments in Brittany by a Welsh monk (this one by St Guenole, a big noise in early Breton Christianity). I had once stayed a night in a guest room there on a hitch-hiking trip, in the absence of a local youth hostel.
We twice visited the nearby village of Pleyben, with an immense junk-shop about two kilometres away, to which we walked, and poked around at loads of interesting and not so interesting stuff sourced from house and shop clearances. Pleyben also has a chocolaterie!
We could not stay in Brittany without eating crepes which we did in style twice, once in Le Faou and once in a delightful creperie on the edge of a lake a few miles north of Le Venec - a lake which has its own beach, so no problem in entertaining the boys afterwards.
Our one visit to church (the first Sunday we listened to a sermon in the house and sang some hymns with the help of a CD) was to an evangelical church in Brest where we were given a warm welcome and heard a good message on Jeremiah 1, translated for us by Jo Bryant. In the afternoon we took a picnic into a local botanical garden where it rained heavily for a while but we had a lovely walk down to the beach and back.
Meanwhile back at the ranch - we read, played Scrabble (Hilary usually wins), watched the Olympics and the boys enjoyed playing around on the farm, 'helping' John or scooting in the yard.
A great holiday; it went too quickly. Even the 11 hour drive back to Dunkerque did not erase the relaxation or the memories!
The Power of Parliament
In 1796 in 'The Constitution of England, or An Account of the English Government' J.L. De Lolme wrote: 'It is a fundamental principle with English lawyers, that Parliament can do everything but make a woman a man, and a man a woman'.
Perhaps the expected proposals to legislate for same sex marriage will be the next best thing, and the most self-exalting ambition yet for the sovereignty of Parliament.
Perhaps the expected proposals to legislate for same sex marriage will be the next best thing, and the most self-exalting ambition yet for the sovereignty of Parliament.
Tuesday, 14 August 2012
Casualness
You can of course lead a service of worship perfectly well wearing a tee-shirt and jeans. You can lead it very badly with a suit and tie and snow white shirt. Spirituality and ability are not affected by what we wear. Casualness is not just about our appearance.
In recent months I have for various reasons had occasion to worship in other churches in this country and abroad. 'Casualness' is the abiding impression left with me - due mainly to the person or persons leading the service, but also to some extent to the congregation. On one occasion (abroad) I did come away feeling I had worshipped God. The way things were led was conducive to worship and I felt edified. In other cases sadly I came away feeling as if I had not worshipped.
Casualness. What is it? Not just what we wear, though that may be an expression in some cases of a desire to be casual. Sometimes it is seen in the use of jargon. In two services recently in quite different places the preacher described the teaching of his text as 'heavy stuff'. Is that language coming back from the sixties?
Casualness is really more an attitude of mind.
I hope it isn't (though sometimes I fear it is) an attitude that says: Sunday is no different from any other day.
I hope it isn't (though sometimes I fear it is) an attitude that says: church is no different from any other place, and what we do there is no different from any other activity.
Above all it comes across as a refusal to show that we are making any effort. It is not 'cool' (there you are, jargon) to put effort into anything. We can dawdle into church (can we say 'God's presence' today - do people believe church gatherings are any more in God's presence than watching the Olympics or relaxing on the beach?) and be casual about how we dress, how we behave and how - we worship. We sing casually, read Scripture casually, pray (if we do at all - one service was horribly lacking in anything approaching serious prayer, certainly of intercession), and preach casually. And - yes, listen casually, of course.
Then, perhaps we live casually.
We are bound to absorb something of our culture. No generation of Christians can avoid that. What we can and must do is be sure that we are not absorbing worldliness. Is casualness sometimes at least a form of worldliness?
Does not God deserve, indeed demand, effort? One of the earliest books I read as a young Christian was entitled 'The Best that I can Be'. That doesn't sit easily with casualness. As Christians our worship and all else we do should be the best that we can do. God is worth no less.
Perhaps it is a sense of God that was most lacking in those services where worship did not seem to happen. God is not a casual God. Spiritual worship is the most difficult thing we can attempt. Striving, not casualness, should be the keynote of our lives and of our meetings.
Especially in those charged with leading the worship of the people of God.
In recent months I have for various reasons had occasion to worship in other churches in this country and abroad. 'Casualness' is the abiding impression left with me - due mainly to the person or persons leading the service, but also to some extent to the congregation. On one occasion (abroad) I did come away feeling I had worshipped God. The way things were led was conducive to worship and I felt edified. In other cases sadly I came away feeling as if I had not worshipped.
Casualness. What is it? Not just what we wear, though that may be an expression in some cases of a desire to be casual. Sometimes it is seen in the use of jargon. In two services recently in quite different places the preacher described the teaching of his text as 'heavy stuff'. Is that language coming back from the sixties?
Casualness is really more an attitude of mind.
I hope it isn't (though sometimes I fear it is) an attitude that says: Sunday is no different from any other day.
I hope it isn't (though sometimes I fear it is) an attitude that says: church is no different from any other place, and what we do there is no different from any other activity.
Above all it comes across as a refusal to show that we are making any effort. It is not 'cool' (there you are, jargon) to put effort into anything. We can dawdle into church (can we say 'God's presence' today - do people believe church gatherings are any more in God's presence than watching the Olympics or relaxing on the beach?) and be casual about how we dress, how we behave and how - we worship. We sing casually, read Scripture casually, pray (if we do at all - one service was horribly lacking in anything approaching serious prayer, certainly of intercession), and preach casually. And - yes, listen casually, of course.
Then, perhaps we live casually.
We are bound to absorb something of our culture. No generation of Christians can avoid that. What we can and must do is be sure that we are not absorbing worldliness. Is casualness sometimes at least a form of worldliness?
Does not God deserve, indeed demand, effort? One of the earliest books I read as a young Christian was entitled 'The Best that I can Be'. That doesn't sit easily with casualness. As Christians our worship and all else we do should be the best that we can do. God is worth no less.
Perhaps it is a sense of God that was most lacking in those services where worship did not seem to happen. God is not a casual God. Spiritual worship is the most difficult thing we can attempt. Striving, not casualness, should be the keynote of our lives and of our meetings.
Especially in those charged with leading the worship of the people of God.
Friday, 20 July 2012
The Origins of Life: Calling, union with Christ and regeneration
This snappy title is not guaranteed to attract the crowds but accurately tries to describe what this brief post is about.
For some time, and for some reason I cannot now recall, I have been interested in a matter which is not of earth-shattering importance but which has a certain attraction for those who love systematic theology and particularly the mysterious stages of the origins of the Christian life. If we are intrigued by how life in the universe began, should we not be at least as interested in how our personal spiritual lives began?
In what order do we place effectual calling, regeneration and union with Christ? Effectual calling and regeneration have often been treated as virtually or actually the same thing, or the same thing from different viewpoints. Union with Christ (and here we are talking about experiential or actual union with Christ, not union with Christ in eternity) is sometimes seen as the fruit of faith, sometimes its origin. How do we sort it out?
I shall begin with writings of Dr Lloyd -Jones. In his sermons on doctrine in 'God the Holy Spirit' (the second of three volumes) he has several sermons dealing with the issues of calling, regeneration and union with Christ. In one of them, 'A Child of God and in Christ' he writes: 'Regeneration and union must never be separated. You cannot be born again without being in Christ; you are born again because you are in Christ. The moment you are in him you are born again...Regeneration and union must always be considered together and at the same time because the one depends upon the other and leads to the other; they are mutually self-supporting.' He then goes on to look at how the union is established and says that logically (but not chronologically) union should be put first.'We are regenerated because of our union with Christ; it is from him we derive our life; it is from him we derive everything'. He then says of the origin of the union, firstly, it is a work of the Holy Spirit, quoting Eph 2:5 - God 'hath quickened us together with Christ'. 'So in the effectual call, in our regeneration and in all that we have been considering, the main work is done by the Holy Spirit'. Secondly, he looks at the role of faith. Our faith 'helps to sustain the union, to develop it and to strengthen it...It is only as faith becomes active that we become aware of the union and of our regeneration...'
Dr Lloyd Jones therefore appears to see the Holy Spirit through the effectual call bringing us into union with Christ and at that point we are regenerated. Faith begins to operate and 'strengthens' and 'develops' union with Christ, it does not originate it.
Similarly on page 112 of his second volume on Ephesians, dealing with Eph 2:4-7, he again says:'We have already seen that what makes us Christians is our union with Christ. This doctrine of our union with Christ is absolutely vital. The first thing to which it leads is regeneration, as we have already seen'.
This seems to be right. The use of Eph 2:5 supports it. 1 Peter 1:3 where Peter says we are 'born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Christ from the dead' again seems to support the idea of our spiritual life coming through Christ and union with him. Regeneration is the beginning of spiritual life and it is surely wrong to see any spiritual life coming to God's people, who after all have been elected in eternity in Christ, outside Christ. The work of the Holy Spirit is after all to take what is Christ's and declare it to us (John 16:14). This taking of what is Christ's must include regeneration. Regeneration is not an independent work of the Holy Spirit apart from Christ. As Dr Lloyd Jones says, we derive everything from him.
John Murray in 'Redemption Accomplished and Applied' affirms that even the elect remain 'Christless' until we are effectually called into fellowship with him (p 165). In his essay on 'faith' however he describes justifying faith as 'the initial and primary act of faith in Jesus Christ by which in our effectual calling we are united to Christ' ( p 129). So does faith effect union with Christ? This seems to go against Lloyd Jones who by insisting that regeneration is effected by union with Christ must be placing faith after union with Christ, as faith (as all parties here agree) follows regeneration. However, in discussing effectual calling (p 93) Murray says, that it is 'calling that is represented in Scripture as that act of God by which we are actually united to Christ. And surely union with Christ is that which unites us to the inwardly operative grace of God. Regeneration is the beginning of inwardly operative saving grace.'
This latter statement seems to be consistent with Lloyd Jones' position, and I take Murray's statement about faith uniting us to Christ as being rather the conscious awareness of union with Christ, the grace that sustains and strengthens union with Christ, as Lloyd Jones says, but which itself is the fruit of regeneration which itself only comes in union with Christ and is therefore prior to faith.
The blessings of special grace, says Louis Berkhof, 'can be received and enjoyed only by those who are in union with Christ...Every spiritual blessing which believers receive flows to them out of Christ' (Systematic Theology, p. 447). This is not eternal union with Christ, but actual. God elects us in Christ, calls us in Christ to actual union with Christ and in that calling we are regenerated, the first exercise of the regenerate person being saving faith and repentance.
What of the distinction between logical and chronological order? I see the point; we cannot separate chronologically these acts of God at the beginning of the spiritual life. Yet I fail to see how any 'order' in the finite world can be without some time sequence. Can anything be logical in order but not chronological? They may be inseparable but I cannot see how they can be anything but in a certain order - which, to my small time-bound mind at least, must be, for want of a better word, chronological.
For some time, and for some reason I cannot now recall, I have been interested in a matter which is not of earth-shattering importance but which has a certain attraction for those who love systematic theology and particularly the mysterious stages of the origins of the Christian life. If we are intrigued by how life in the universe began, should we not be at least as interested in how our personal spiritual lives began?
In what order do we place effectual calling, regeneration and union with Christ? Effectual calling and regeneration have often been treated as virtually or actually the same thing, or the same thing from different viewpoints. Union with Christ (and here we are talking about experiential or actual union with Christ, not union with Christ in eternity) is sometimes seen as the fruit of faith, sometimes its origin. How do we sort it out?
I shall begin with writings of Dr Lloyd -Jones. In his sermons on doctrine in 'God the Holy Spirit' (the second of three volumes) he has several sermons dealing with the issues of calling, regeneration and union with Christ. In one of them, 'A Child of God and in Christ' he writes: 'Regeneration and union must never be separated. You cannot be born again without being in Christ; you are born again because you are in Christ. The moment you are in him you are born again...Regeneration and union must always be considered together and at the same time because the one depends upon the other and leads to the other; they are mutually self-supporting.' He then goes on to look at how the union is established and says that logically (but not chronologically) union should be put first.'We are regenerated because of our union with Christ; it is from him we derive our life; it is from him we derive everything'. He then says of the origin of the union, firstly, it is a work of the Holy Spirit, quoting Eph 2:5 - God 'hath quickened us together with Christ'. 'So in the effectual call, in our regeneration and in all that we have been considering, the main work is done by the Holy Spirit'. Secondly, he looks at the role of faith. Our faith 'helps to sustain the union, to develop it and to strengthen it...It is only as faith becomes active that we become aware of the union and of our regeneration...'
Dr Lloyd Jones therefore appears to see the Holy Spirit through the effectual call bringing us into union with Christ and at that point we are regenerated. Faith begins to operate and 'strengthens' and 'develops' union with Christ, it does not originate it.
Similarly on page 112 of his second volume on Ephesians, dealing with Eph 2:4-7, he again says:'We have already seen that what makes us Christians is our union with Christ. This doctrine of our union with Christ is absolutely vital. The first thing to which it leads is regeneration, as we have already seen'.
This seems to be right. The use of Eph 2:5 supports it. 1 Peter 1:3 where Peter says we are 'born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Christ from the dead' again seems to support the idea of our spiritual life coming through Christ and union with him. Regeneration is the beginning of spiritual life and it is surely wrong to see any spiritual life coming to God's people, who after all have been elected in eternity in Christ, outside Christ. The work of the Holy Spirit is after all to take what is Christ's and declare it to us (John 16:14). This taking of what is Christ's must include regeneration. Regeneration is not an independent work of the Holy Spirit apart from Christ. As Dr Lloyd Jones says, we derive everything from him.
John Murray in 'Redemption Accomplished and Applied' affirms that even the elect remain 'Christless' until we are effectually called into fellowship with him (p 165). In his essay on 'faith' however he describes justifying faith as 'the initial and primary act of faith in Jesus Christ by which in our effectual calling we are united to Christ' ( p 129). So does faith effect union with Christ? This seems to go against Lloyd Jones who by insisting that regeneration is effected by union with Christ must be placing faith after union with Christ, as faith (as all parties here agree) follows regeneration. However, in discussing effectual calling (p 93) Murray says, that it is 'calling that is represented in Scripture as that act of God by which we are actually united to Christ. And surely union with Christ is that which unites us to the inwardly operative grace of God. Regeneration is the beginning of inwardly operative saving grace.'
This latter statement seems to be consistent with Lloyd Jones' position, and I take Murray's statement about faith uniting us to Christ as being rather the conscious awareness of union with Christ, the grace that sustains and strengthens union with Christ, as Lloyd Jones says, but which itself is the fruit of regeneration which itself only comes in union with Christ and is therefore prior to faith.
The blessings of special grace, says Louis Berkhof, 'can be received and enjoyed only by those who are in union with Christ...Every spiritual blessing which believers receive flows to them out of Christ' (Systematic Theology, p. 447). This is not eternal union with Christ, but actual. God elects us in Christ, calls us in Christ to actual union with Christ and in that calling we are regenerated, the first exercise of the regenerate person being saving faith and repentance.
What of the distinction between logical and chronological order? I see the point; we cannot separate chronologically these acts of God at the beginning of the spiritual life. Yet I fail to see how any 'order' in the finite world can be without some time sequence. Can anything be logical in order but not chronological? They may be inseparable but I cannot see how they can be anything but in a certain order - which, to my small time-bound mind at least, must be, for want of a better word, chronological.
Tuesday, 26 June 2012
The Desire of the Nations (2)
Long ago, and far far away, I set out with the good intention of summarising Oliver O'Donovan's book of the above title. Having completed a summary of chapters 1 and 2 I got lost in time and inertia. Meanwhile, however, I have discovered a good brief abstract of the book by David vanDrunen in 'Natural Law and the Two Kingdoms'. It is a footnote on page 431 (yes, it is one of those books with half page footnotes). So here is vanDrunen's precis of O'Donovan, slightly abridged by me.
Remember that vanDrunen is approaching O'Donovan from the perspective of the latter's handling of the 'two kingdoms' doctrine in Reformed theology, but it is nonetheless a helpful outline of O'Donovan's thesis.
O'Donovan acknowledges something of a two kingdoms reality in parts of the Old Testament, but he emphasizes Christ's proclamation of the kingdom which announces the unity of the religious and political realms under the reign of God and challenges the two kingdoms situation (ch.3).
In Christ's resurrection, the earthly powers have been subdued and made subject to divine sovereignty; yet the sovereignty of God is not now completely manifest, and the powers are still given a certain (secular) space and authority to exercise their judicial function, though they ought to serve the church's mission (ch. 4).
After Christ's ascension, therefore, the terms on which political authorities function are not the same as they were before; see also O'Donovan's 'The Ways of Judgment' (Eerdmans 2005), p 5. Society is to be transformed and its rulers disappear. Christendom (" the idea of a confessionally Christian government") is not a project of, but a response to, the church's mission, as the alien powers become attentive to the church. The Christian state may be disclosed from time to time but it should not coerce belief or try to protect its own existence (ch.6).
In 'The Ways of Judgment' he speaks of the redemptive, transforming work of the church, gospel, and Holy Spirit on the state as the sphere of human judgment and therefore argues that there is a place for mercy in civil judgement (ch. 6). Here he also discusses the proclamation of the cross and the coming of the kingdom as a challenge to the conditions of the earthly political authority and opposes an a-political theology disinterested in social life (231-34).
From the other direction, in 'The Ways of Judgment', he critiques the two swords idea, originating with Gelasius, for teaching that there are certain spheres of social life that are in principle beyond the reach of governmental intervention (62).
Remember that vanDrunen is approaching O'Donovan from the perspective of the latter's handling of the 'two kingdoms' doctrine in Reformed theology, but it is nonetheless a helpful outline of O'Donovan's thesis.
O'Donovan acknowledges something of a two kingdoms reality in parts of the Old Testament, but he emphasizes Christ's proclamation of the kingdom which announces the unity of the religious and political realms under the reign of God and challenges the two kingdoms situation (ch.3).
In Christ's resurrection, the earthly powers have been subdued and made subject to divine sovereignty; yet the sovereignty of God is not now completely manifest, and the powers are still given a certain (secular) space and authority to exercise their judicial function, though they ought to serve the church's mission (ch. 4).
After Christ's ascension, therefore, the terms on which political authorities function are not the same as they were before; see also O'Donovan's 'The Ways of Judgment' (Eerdmans 2005), p 5. Society is to be transformed and its rulers disappear. Christendom (" the idea of a confessionally Christian government") is not a project of, but a response to, the church's mission, as the alien powers become attentive to the church. The Christian state may be disclosed from time to time but it should not coerce belief or try to protect its own existence (ch.6).
In 'The Ways of Judgment' he speaks of the redemptive, transforming work of the church, gospel, and Holy Spirit on the state as the sphere of human judgment and therefore argues that there is a place for mercy in civil judgement (ch. 6). Here he also discusses the proclamation of the cross and the coming of the kingdom as a challenge to the conditions of the earthly political authority and opposes an a-political theology disinterested in social life (231-34).
From the other direction, in 'The Ways of Judgment', he critiques the two swords idea, originating with Gelasius, for teaching that there are certain spheres of social life that are in principle beyond the reach of governmental intervention (62).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)