quare id faciam?

Jesus regnant

There's fascinating & highly accessible discussion happening, in the last month or so, at De Regno Christi, a blog set up to parallel publication of a series of articles in a Reformed Presbyterian denominational mag. Contributors to the blog have been drawn together from several backgrounds, all apparently with confessionally Reformed ties of some sort but not all from the RPCNA denomination. Learned of De Regno Christi last week via Brian Janaszek, and today Gregory Baus, a contributor, has mentioned the unfolding discussion as well. Caleb Stegall of the provocative New Pantagruel and Darryl Hart, with whose work I've had some remote acquaintance, are also contributors – special cause, as far as I'm concerned, for taking interest in the conversation.

I was encouraged to read this, from Dr Hart's entry of a week ago – beginning with a quote from Calvin:

"We have said that we can perceive the force and usefulness of Christ's kingship only when we recognize it to be spiritual. This is clear enough from the fact that, while we must fight throughout life under the cross, our condition is harsh and wretched. What, then, would it profit us to be gathered under the reign of the Heavenly King, unless beyond this earthly life we were certain of enjoying its benefits? For this reason we ought to know that the happiness promised us in Christ does not consist in outward advantages – such as leading a joyous and peaceful life, having rich possessions, being safe from all harm, and abounding with delights such as the flesh commonly longs after. No, our happiness belongs to the heavenly life" [2.15.4]
    This understanding of Christ's kingship has a twofold import. One concerns the sorts of ills our societies now face. Could those be part of the hardships we face in life whether because we as saints are at odds with the world or because to look for solutions to moral and social ills is to immanentize the eschaton. That's not to say that social conditions are of no concern. But it does mean (to me at least) that Christ is king even when pornography escalates or the Da Vinci Code rules at the box office.
    The second and more significant import of this understanding of spiritual kingship is that it makes sense of the cross. The kingdom of God and the reign of Christ came through the great injustice of executing an innocent man who happened to be the very Son of God. If we have an understanding of Christ's kingship that equates it with the elimination of immorality in our societies or nations, then we have no way of making sense that Christ triumphed over sin, death and the Devil through what appeared to be the defeat of his reign. I don't see how we can separate Christ's executing the office of king from his death on the cross. In which case, the evidence that we seek for his kingship may need to be sufficiently broad to include the notion that Christ reigns and his kingdom advances even through the sinful acts of wicked men.

What it may mean that Jesus now for the ages is reigning over a world rife (within & without the various manifestations of Christianized culture & the Church itself) with every sort of thing contrary to the spirit of Christ declared in the gospel, is of course the overarching problem De Regno Christi is concerned with. Taking discussion back to basic matter, reckoning on the singular event of Jesus's crucifixion as an immeasurable good in an otherwise unspeakable evil, as Dr Hart seems in part to aim to do here, I take as a good sign for the blog's fruitfulness.

Came across what seems to be a good sign of a slightly different kind via Jeff Cavanaugh, also last week. Jeff, a recent Patrick Henry College grad, indicates (without going into depth) some of his concern about recent controversy around actions of the school (news I'd become aware of, distantly, through mention by Jeremy Abel and Mr Baus). One of the things Jeff links to is this admirable student address, a charge to graduates whose point I think nicely complements Dr Hart's comments above. Here, the paradox of Jesus ascendant & dominant in spite of every appearance to the contrary is brought (reversing, in a way, the movement Hart's use of the bit from Calvin follows above) down by way of the societal to the individual perspective/prospective:

Which do you want more, a perfect America or the exaltation of God? You might say this is a false dichotomy? Isn't our "leading the nation and shaping the culture" one of the primary ways by which we might exalt God?
    The riches, the wisdom and the power you will attain do not exalt God. God exalts Himself. He is more permanent than nations. He is more powerful than all the governments of the earth. His wisdom is greater than wisest council, and his wealth extends beyond the whole earth.
    Victory is not yours to win. It has already been achieved in the person of Jesus Christ the Son of the living God. Jesus Christ is not a concept. He is not a stamp of approval for your personal ambition and desire. Jesus Christ is a person. He is the face of God in whom all glory dwells. Whether you succeed or fail, He will be glorified, and whether America stands or falls, He will be exalted.
    ... Seek that place where you will find his glory thickest. That is your vocation. For some of you, you will know the Person of Jesus in prosperity, for others in poverty; for some in reputation, for others in obscurity; for some in power, for others in weakness. In all of these things, whichever you pursue remember this: victory is to know Him and be known by Him.

This – here's as good a place as any to call it to mind – is the Gospel as I for one need to hear it addressed to me again and again.

posted by paul bowman @ 10:22 PM