Where's Waldo Wednesday: Union and Two Kingdoms Together

Published on by D. G. Hart


Now this is union-with-Christ piety that is more like Calvin than Kuyper:

Grant Almighty God, that as thou deignest so far to condescend as to sustain the care of this life, and to supply us with whatever is needful for our pilgrmiage, — O grant that we may learn also to rely on thee and so trust to thy blessing as to abstain not only from all plunder and all other evil deeds, but also from every unlawful coveting; and to continue in thy fear, and so to learn also to bear our poverty on the earth, that being content with those spiritual riches, which thou offerest to us in thy gospel, and of which thou makest us now partakers, we may ever cheerfully aspire after that fullness of all blessings, which we shall enjoy when at length we shall reach the celestial kingdom and be perfectly united to thee through Christ our Lord. Amen. (Prayer of John Calvin from lectures on Habakkuk)

And for good reason.

In fact, I continue to scratch my head that the leading proponents of union are not openly on the side of the spirituality of the church and opposed to the this-worldly activism of neo-Calvinists.

6 thoughts on “Where's Waldo Wednesday: Union and Two Kingdoms Together”

  1. I’m one of those neo-Calvinists, youngish, coming out of a baptistic heritage. I was Kuyperian until I taught a Sunday School class on Christ and Culture. When I did, I realized how fraught with difficulties the position is, and how reformed (and biblical) the two kingdom approach is. Thanks for your writing – it was a big help.

    Like

  2. Could it be that one’s misunderstanding of the relational and existential as being held in priority (or equally ultimate) over justification/forensic (which is Judgment Day’s declaration breaking in this present-age) bears negative weight upon one’s understanding of how the already/not yet co-mingle?

    Could it be that the emphasis on union and definitive sanctification as the basis for the Christian life de-emphasizes the actual spiritual manner in which Christians are apart of the kingdom of Christ (simul justus et peccator) for something that is more of a theology of glory (i.e. emphasizing existential union through word and Sacrament and the wholistic piety in the now as the definitive/glorious foundation for sanctity)?

    Like

  4. When I read the ‘Unionists’, I guess I cannot help but see some other form of a theology of glory that will collapse the kingdoms and the already/not yet just like they collapse the ordo salutis into the Resurrection of Christ.

    The cause of sanctity is not something we don’t see but something we do, definitive sanctification. The existential understanding of union (at least in Gaffin’s Resurrection and Redemption) is paradigmatic for our Christian life. The relational and existential in the here and now is the ground for our sanctity according to them.

    Would this not turn the corner towards a more besetting view of the Christian’s relationship to culture? I am seriously asking this because Martin Luther directly related the Law/Gospel distinction to the two kingdoms. We see this less with Calvin but primarily being true of the Reformed concept of natural law and the two kingdoms.

    Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.