Grant Van Leuven
Puritan Board Freshman
As someone who trained at RPTS for ten years (part-time), worked at RPTS for five years (full time), was a member in the RPCNA for two years (and under care of Presbytery and completing all but two exams before getting the call to the church I now serve) and who is continuing to strive to be a student of the original Westminster Standards while now in the ministry (presently having "evolved" into a full subscriptionist, hopefully not naively), I've been wrestling with these aspects of this post for a while (I think the great debates on related issues end up being more with applications by various camps in related debates, uh, discussions ). I thought I'd share a few things to contribute for consideration which I've found along my "journey" seeking wisdom in many counselors.
First, per a pondering about Hoeksema above, not that it directly answers it (at least in full). I typed this up a while ago to share with and assure my PRCA brethren with whom I was especially close and in discussions with on this topic that there is a place given to the mediatorial reign of Christ in their own dogmatics (once I came to agree with Gillespie years later I emailed them to let them know we had even more in common now on the topic).
Herman Hoeksema, “The Kingly Office” in “The Offices of the Mediator”, in Reformed Dogmatics, Volume 1, 563-564:
Second, something that really began to adjust my thinking and connect some dots that always seemed straying within my covenanter-influenced leanings and some Scriptures I had in mind that left me unsettled.
J.V. Fesko, The Theology of the Westminster Standards: Historical Context and Theological Insights, 299-214:
Fesko offers an intriguing analysis of the historical context of the Westminster Assembly’s on-the-floor discussion of the relation between church and state while working on chapter 23. His summary breakdown of George Gillespie’s influence to preserve Christ’s rule as Creator over civic affairs as distinct from His rule as Mediator over church affairs, and Gillespie’s influence on the Assembly to change “Christ” to “God” in three places in chapter 23 of the Westminster Confession of Faith, is elucidating (and for me convincing) especially with 1 Cor. 15:24-25, Col. 1:12-18, WSC 102, and WLC 191 in view. I encourage a careful reading of that section of his book. (Note: I do not agree with nor do I find logically necessary certain overlapping topical applications in the book or in greater contexts such as the idea that government should not enforce the first table of the Law -- I agree with the Confession's establishmentarianism; nor the popular "common grace" way of understanding and relating to the non-Christian world (The Standards provide more careful language for this such as "common operations of the Spirit", "general providence" (remembering the Scriptures teach we are all still the image of God, though shattered, per Gen. 9:6; James 3:9), and especially Christ's mediatorial reign as is being discussed in this post: He restrains and subdues His and our enemies so the world is not worse than it is and should be so as to preserve His elect).
Also, the Confession’s “contemporary” commentator David Dickson explains: “ … God the creator and governor of the world is the efficient of the power of the civil magistrate … But God-Christ, our blessed Mediator and Lord of his church, is the efficient of the church particularly and of its government.” (Truth’s Victory Over Error: A Commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith, Banner of Truth, 242). His closeness to the Confession is compelling to me while considering its careful and official ecclesiastical consensus. He also has a lot of other things to say about the relation of Church and State throughout that is well worth the reading.
The important clarification would seem to be with Christ's formal government over the two spheres of sovereignty, civil and ecclesiastical (I’m avoiding two-kingdom discussions here) in terms of isolating Christ’s incarnate mediatorial rule to that of the Church and that of His eternal deity to that of the Civil Magistrate (Andrew Melville's challenge to King James also comes to mind). Otherwise, Hoeksema's distinction (rather new to me here at least in terms of revisiting and digesting it) of Christ’s mediatorial reign as God-man still having something to do in terms of “power” over the world seems reasonable and helpful to me (and not contradictory to Gillespie's influence in its specific context of the Confession), but it would seem to be a distinction that is broader in scope as “general providence” than immediate or direct ruling nation-states as Christ so governs the Visible Church (Presbyterianism and specific officers are required ecclesiastical rule by Christ over His Church, but He allows various forms of civil rule over nations, whether or not many in modern Presbyterianism on certain sides of the pond want to recognize it). Hoeksema’s qualifications above of "power" and "grace" make sense to me and sound similar to what A.A. Hodge wrote, which I share next below.
Third, something that we just studied at church this week in our Wednesday Night Prayer and Bible Study that was the impetus of my sharing here today with this post I had noticed yesterday before the study (quite timely for me!).
A.A. Hodge, “Christ and His Kingdom”, in The Work of Christ, Issue 225 (Fall 2013), Free Grace Broadcaster (originally from “Christ the King” in Evangelical Theology, The Banner of Truth Trust.)
Fourth (and maybe most importantly), I highly recommend reading the chapter by David McKay, "From Popery to Principle: Covenanters and the Kingship of Christ", in The Faith Once Delivered: Essays in Honor of Dr. Wayne R. Spear (originally a lecture at RPTS I attended and didn't realize its significance at the time especially considering its print and event context until later reading it after having marinated on all this for a while; incidentally, the chapter was actually suggested by an RPCNA minister when I shared I was having Gillespie leanings after reading Fesko).
Hope this all might prove helpful for further study. It's a bit of a heady topic and while I'm not exactly just getting my feet whet on the subject I am still trying to get them grounded (Thinking through the distinctions of "power" and "grace" both under the mediatorial reign by Hoeksema especially in view of the recent study with Hodge has been helpful, which I was influenced by this post to revisit, so thanks!). May our studies further cause us all to bow lower and say more loudly that Jesus Christ is Lord as we pray and live, "Thy Kingdom Come"!
First, per a pondering about Hoeksema above, not that it directly answers it (at least in full). I typed this up a while ago to share with and assure my PRCA brethren with whom I was especially close and in discussions with on this topic that there is a place given to the mediatorial reign of Christ in their own dogmatics (once I came to agree with Gillespie years later I emailed them to let them know we had even more in common now on the topic).
Herman Hoeksema, “The Kingly Office” in “The Offices of the Mediator”, in Reformed Dogmatics, Volume 1, 563-564:
“The kingship of Christ as mediator may not be confused with his eternal royal power as the Son of God. These two are not the same. Royal power he possesses of himself, together with the Father and the Holy Spirit, from eternity. It is called the regnum essentiale or the regnum naturale, the essential or the natural kingship of the Son of God. The kingship that he possess as mediator is the authority and power with which the person of the Son according to his human nature is invested by the Father for the purpose of completing his kingdom, preserving and protecting his church, and leading his people on to eternal glory. This is called the economical kingship (regnum oeconomicum) or mediatorial kingship (regnum donativum), which in turn can be distinguished as the kingship of power (regnum potentiae) and the kingship of grace (regnum gratiae).
"By Christ’s kingship of power is meant his royal power and authority over all creatures, including devils and ungodly men. He is king over all things, even over all the powers of evil; all principalities and powers are made subject unto him. He has received a name above all names and all power in heaven and on earth. He uses his mighty power for the preservation of the elect and unto the coming of the day of his return and the establishment of his eternal kingdom in glory (Ps. 2:6-12; Matt. 28:18; Phil. 2:9-11).
"The second aspect of his kingship is called the kingdom or rule of grace (regnum gratiae) because by it is mean his royal power over his people, whom he rules by his grace, by his Spirit and word (Eph. 1:22). This royal power, this regnum gratiae, has its basis or ground in Christ’s purchasing of his people by his own blood, their redemption from sin and death. It is spiritual in character, a dominion of love, so that his people are made willing by his grace to keep his commandments. It embraces all the redeemed, the entire church; it has for its purpose the manifestation of the glory of God in the church, and it endures forever.”
"By Christ’s kingship of power is meant his royal power and authority over all creatures, including devils and ungodly men. He is king over all things, even over all the powers of evil; all principalities and powers are made subject unto him. He has received a name above all names and all power in heaven and on earth. He uses his mighty power for the preservation of the elect and unto the coming of the day of his return and the establishment of his eternal kingdom in glory (Ps. 2:6-12; Matt. 28:18; Phil. 2:9-11).
"The second aspect of his kingship is called the kingdom or rule of grace (regnum gratiae) because by it is mean his royal power over his people, whom he rules by his grace, by his Spirit and word (Eph. 1:22). This royal power, this regnum gratiae, has its basis or ground in Christ’s purchasing of his people by his own blood, their redemption from sin and death. It is spiritual in character, a dominion of love, so that his people are made willing by his grace to keep his commandments. It embraces all the redeemed, the entire church; it has for its purpose the manifestation of the glory of God in the church, and it endures forever.”
Second, something that really began to adjust my thinking and connect some dots that always seemed straying within my covenanter-influenced leanings and some Scriptures I had in mind that left me unsettled.
J.V. Fesko, The Theology of the Westminster Standards: Historical Context and Theological Insights, 299-214:
Fesko offers an intriguing analysis of the historical context of the Westminster Assembly’s on-the-floor discussion of the relation between church and state while working on chapter 23. His summary breakdown of George Gillespie’s influence to preserve Christ’s rule as Creator over civic affairs as distinct from His rule as Mediator over church affairs, and Gillespie’s influence on the Assembly to change “Christ” to “God” in three places in chapter 23 of the Westminster Confession of Faith, is elucidating (and for me convincing) especially with 1 Cor. 15:24-25, Col. 1:12-18, WSC 102, and WLC 191 in view. I encourage a careful reading of that section of his book. (Note: I do not agree with nor do I find logically necessary certain overlapping topical applications in the book or in greater contexts such as the idea that government should not enforce the first table of the Law -- I agree with the Confession's establishmentarianism; nor the popular "common grace" way of understanding and relating to the non-Christian world (The Standards provide more careful language for this such as "common operations of the Spirit", "general providence" (remembering the Scriptures teach we are all still the image of God, though shattered, per Gen. 9:6; James 3:9), and especially Christ's mediatorial reign as is being discussed in this post: He restrains and subdues His and our enemies so the world is not worse than it is and should be so as to preserve His elect).
Also, the Confession’s “contemporary” commentator David Dickson explains: “ … God the creator and governor of the world is the efficient of the power of the civil magistrate … But God-Christ, our blessed Mediator and Lord of his church, is the efficient of the church particularly and of its government.” (Truth’s Victory Over Error: A Commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith, Banner of Truth, 242). His closeness to the Confession is compelling to me while considering its careful and official ecclesiastical consensus. He also has a lot of other things to say about the relation of Church and State throughout that is well worth the reading.
The important clarification would seem to be with Christ's formal government over the two spheres of sovereignty, civil and ecclesiastical (I’m avoiding two-kingdom discussions here) in terms of isolating Christ’s incarnate mediatorial rule to that of the Church and that of His eternal deity to that of the Civil Magistrate (Andrew Melville's challenge to King James also comes to mind). Otherwise, Hoeksema's distinction (rather new to me here at least in terms of revisiting and digesting it) of Christ’s mediatorial reign as God-man still having something to do in terms of “power” over the world seems reasonable and helpful to me (and not contradictory to Gillespie's influence in its specific context of the Confession), but it would seem to be a distinction that is broader in scope as “general providence” than immediate or direct ruling nation-states as Christ so governs the Visible Church (Presbyterianism and specific officers are required ecclesiastical rule by Christ over His Church, but He allows various forms of civil rule over nations, whether or not many in modern Presbyterianism on certain sides of the pond want to recognize it). Hoeksema’s qualifications above of "power" and "grace" make sense to me and sound similar to what A.A. Hodge wrote, which I share next below.
Third, something that we just studied at church this week in our Wednesday Night Prayer and Bible Study that was the impetus of my sharing here today with this post I had noticed yesterday before the study (quite timely for me!).
A.A. Hodge, “Christ and His Kingdom”, in The Work of Christ, Issue 225 (Fall 2013), Free Grace Broadcaster (originally from “Christ the King” in Evangelical Theology, The Banner of Truth Trust.)
“As the second Person of the Trinity, equal in power and glory to the eternal Father, the Word of God possesses an absolute, inherent sovereign dominion as King over the whole universe. This authority is intrinsic, un-derived, inalienable ...
“But in His office as Mediator, and in His entire Person after the incarnation as God-man, He was constituted a King by the authority of the entire Godhead as represented in the Father. His mediatorial sovereignty is...given to Him by the Father as the reward of His obedience and suffering ... This authority, thus bestowed upon Him by the Father, is special, having particular reference to the salvation of His own people, and, to that end, to the administration of all the provisions of the covenant of grace, of which He is the gracious executive ... A MAN sits upon the mediatorial throne of the universe ...
“Theologians have accordingly made a distinction, designed to classify the different aspects and methods of this vast administration of royal power, between Christ’s [mediatorial, GVL] kingdoms of power, of grace, and of glory.
I. Christ’S KINGDOM OF POWER: This is the providential reign of the God-man over the whole universe in the interests of His mediatorial work as Redeemer of His own people. The universe in all its provinces, material and spiritual, constitutes one system. The certain attainment of any end, the absolute control of any single department, necessarily involves the control and the coordinate administration of all the parts ...
“ ... the God-man, as mediatorial King, has, during the present...world-age, brought the whole mechanism of the material universe [under His command] as means to secure the establishment of His mediatorial kingdom. He guides the marshaled hosts of heaven to that supreme result [The Revelation seems to be all about this, GVL.]. The great currents of all the world-forces are directed to that end ...
“He controls all events for the good of His people. Especially, He directs events to the end of effecting their complete discipline and education, and consequent preparation for the enjoyment of His glory. The end is the complete redemption of His people. But in order to secure this, all the members of the human family in their successive generations and in their various family and national groups must be dealt with as subjects of the same government.
“II. Christ’S KINGDOM OF GRACE. This spiritual kingdom, which is the special care of Christ, for the sake of which His government of the universe is undertaken, respects, first, His own spiritual people individually, and, second, His professed people collectively organized in the visible Church.
“He has in His inspired Word and through His ever-indwelling Spirit provided for the government of this Church through all ages. He has therein ordained the conditions of membership, the laws, and offices...
“Christ declared that His kingdom is ‘not of this world’—that is not one kingdom associated with the other kingdoms, with like organizations, laws, methods of administration, and ends. But it is a spiritual kingdom, embracing and interpenetrating all others ...
III. Christ’S KINGDOM OF GLORY. During the present age Christ is set forth principally as a conquering Captain, reigning at the head of His militant host, the Captain of our salvation (Heb 2:10), the conqueror of His and our enemies, and the subduer of the world (Rev 19:11-16). But hereafter the Scriptures reveal a final consummation, when Christ’s kingdom shall be complete in all its members, and shall be developed to its perfect state—when all the redeemed shall be gathered, the crisis of judgment past, the glorified bodies of the saints reunited to their perfected spirits: then ‘shall the Son of man sit in the throne of his glory,’ and ‘there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: and they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads’ (Rev 22:3-4).”
“But in His office as Mediator, and in His entire Person after the incarnation as God-man, He was constituted a King by the authority of the entire Godhead as represented in the Father. His mediatorial sovereignty is...given to Him by the Father as the reward of His obedience and suffering ... This authority, thus bestowed upon Him by the Father, is special, having particular reference to the salvation of His own people, and, to that end, to the administration of all the provisions of the covenant of grace, of which He is the gracious executive ... A MAN sits upon the mediatorial throne of the universe ...
“Theologians have accordingly made a distinction, designed to classify the different aspects and methods of this vast administration of royal power, between Christ’s [mediatorial, GVL] kingdoms of power, of grace, and of glory.
I. Christ’S KINGDOM OF POWER: This is the providential reign of the God-man over the whole universe in the interests of His mediatorial work as Redeemer of His own people. The universe in all its provinces, material and spiritual, constitutes one system. The certain attainment of any end, the absolute control of any single department, necessarily involves the control and the coordinate administration of all the parts ...
“ ... the God-man, as mediatorial King, has, during the present...world-age, brought the whole mechanism of the material universe [under His command] as means to secure the establishment of His mediatorial kingdom. He guides the marshaled hosts of heaven to that supreme result [The Revelation seems to be all about this, GVL.]. The great currents of all the world-forces are directed to that end ...
“He controls all events for the good of His people. Especially, He directs events to the end of effecting their complete discipline and education, and consequent preparation for the enjoyment of His glory. The end is the complete redemption of His people. But in order to secure this, all the members of the human family in their successive generations and in their various family and national groups must be dealt with as subjects of the same government.
“II. Christ’S KINGDOM OF GRACE. This spiritual kingdom, which is the special care of Christ, for the sake of which His government of the universe is undertaken, respects, first, His own spiritual people individually, and, second, His professed people collectively organized in the visible Church.
“He has in His inspired Word and through His ever-indwelling Spirit provided for the government of this Church through all ages. He has therein ordained the conditions of membership, the laws, and offices...
“Christ declared that His kingdom is ‘not of this world’—that is not one kingdom associated with the other kingdoms, with like organizations, laws, methods of administration, and ends. But it is a spiritual kingdom, embracing and interpenetrating all others ...
III. Christ’S KINGDOM OF GLORY. During the present age Christ is set forth principally as a conquering Captain, reigning at the head of His militant host, the Captain of our salvation (Heb 2:10), the conqueror of His and our enemies, and the subduer of the world (Rev 19:11-16). But hereafter the Scriptures reveal a final consummation, when Christ’s kingdom shall be complete in all its members, and shall be developed to its perfect state—when all the redeemed shall be gathered, the crisis of judgment past, the glorified bodies of the saints reunited to their perfected spirits: then ‘shall the Son of man sit in the throne of his glory,’ and ‘there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: and they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads’ (Rev 22:3-4).”
Fourth (and maybe most importantly), I highly recommend reading the chapter by David McKay, "From Popery to Principle: Covenanters and the Kingship of Christ", in The Faith Once Delivered: Essays in Honor of Dr. Wayne R. Spear (originally a lecture at RPTS I attended and didn't realize its significance at the time especially considering its print and event context until later reading it after having marinated on all this for a while; incidentally, the chapter was actually suggested by an RPCNA minister when I shared I was having Gillespie leanings after reading Fesko).
Hope this all might prove helpful for further study. It's a bit of a heady topic and while I'm not exactly just getting my feet whet on the subject I am still trying to get them grounded (Thinking through the distinctions of "power" and "grace" both under the mediatorial reign by Hoeksema especially in view of the recent study with Hodge has been helpful, which I was influenced by this post to revisit, so thanks!). May our studies further cause us all to bow lower and say more loudly that Jesus Christ is Lord as we pray and live, "Thy Kingdom Come"!