De Regno Christi

While I have tremendous affinity for the overall position of Westminster Two-Kingdom advocates, I remain skeptical of their proclivity to distinguish between the 2nd table of the 10 commandments which is said to bind all men as well as nations, and the 1st table which is restricted to the individual, the family, and the Church. While I appreciate theological and practical reasons for freeing to the Civil Magistrate from the duty to suppress heresy and idolatry, I  fear that the two table division is artificial and unconvincing.

So should Barack Obama take on the role of inquisitor general?   Should the Congress go to work on establishing a church and purging the land of its idols?  Let me answer with a resounding, hell no.  Reasonable Christians must reject theonomic sharia and anti-Augustian “transformationalism”.  Despite their theological peculiarities, the American founding fathers cut the Gordian knot of Western Christendom and gifted us a system that wisely insulates the Church from the domination of the state while allowing Christians to live as faithful citizens of this city which is passing away.  Church and State can be friends without extending the relationship into a romance.  This is wisdom.

But what about the commandments?  In posts to follow want to try to explore the 10 commandments, their relationship to the natural law, and their application to the nation-states in high hopes of developing a more satisfying answer than 2-Kingdom theology has provided to date.

Mark Kalthoff’s talk, ” Science, Scientism, and Republican Government,” at the most recent Philadelphia Society meeting is excellent–and well worth listening to.

http://www.phillysoc.org/kalthoff2010.mp3

There’s nothing Jim Otteson (Yeshiva University; Fund for American Studies) does that isn’t interesting.  He’s just started a new website: Pileus.  It is certainly worth checking out.

From Jim:

I recently reviewed Miller’s classic, Canticle for Leibowitz.  If you’re interested. . . .

http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2010/bbirzer_canticle_apr2010.asp

Why the Great Books approach to high education cannot fix the problem of relativism.  Here.

Brad asks an interesting question… where did all this talk of Resurrection Sunday come from? I agree that the whole thing seems a bit unseemly.  Protestants of the purest variety shunned Easter as superfluous, after all every Sunday is a celebration of the resurrection of Christ.  Further, the Bible does not sanction setting aside one Sunday over another to commemorate Christ and His victory over death.  All Sunday’s are equal.  Puritanism showing its egalitarianism.

Of course, Lutherans and Anglicans have been less “radical” in their purifying tendencies and tried to keep continuity with the Christian calendar.

But what do we make of the evangelical tendency to shun Church tradition,  embrace puritan egalitarianism, and still celebrate Easter while giving it a cheesy name to assuage their conscience?  Muddled indeed.  If Easter’s pagan pedigree is the concern, why embrace the title Sunday?  Is the word Sunday not compromised with its own pagan past?  Should they not be celebrating Resurrection Lord’s Day?  But again you are back to being redundant.

As for me, I embrace those Pagan origins that cause such angst among Evangelicals. Christ has conquered the old gods and plundered their treasures.  The Pagans groped in the darkness, and Christ was the light they sought.  Easter and Sunday pointed the Pagans beyond their paganism and to the true hope of man.  Christ is King and His glorious reign allows us to find the past sanctified rather than erased, fulfilled rather than forgotten.  Salvation is of the Jews, but lets not extinguish the light of the barbarian!

Therefore, I say without hesitation…. Happy Easter

Dear Bill,

A quick question for you.  Is the title “Resurrection Sunday” new and/or limited to a certain segment of Protestants?  I’d never heard this term until this year, and I was seeing it everywhere–from California to Texas to Michigan–over spring break.

I’m posting one picture from Hillsdale.

I must admit, though ‘Easter’ is, in origin, a pagan term, it now sounds far more Christian to my ear than does “Resurrection Sunday.”  The latter title immediately brought to my warped imagination the landing of spaceships and the drinking of laced kool-aid.

Respectfully,

Brad

Last night we attended our first Tenebrae service at the local Anglican Church (a part of the Anglican Church in America/Traditional Anglican Communion).  What a beautiful and moving service.  This is a long way from our former Puritanism but I have fallen in love with the Church Calendar and its liturgical movement through the cadence of seasons.   Last night, as the events of the Passion were recounted from Mark’s gospel, the candles illuminating the sanctuary were, one by one, extinguished.  In the end, darkness.  Silence reigned.  It was finished.  We somberly, and silently, walked from the Church.  Moving.

The Catholic abuse scandal has me burning in hot anger.  Can you imagine if one of these abused boys was your own?  What would it do to your family?  Your faith?  Trusted Priests were about the work of killing souls.  If it has been my son, what would I do?  Could there be enough grace to keep me from embedding a bullet deep in the brain of the offending priest?  Lead me not into temptation.

But before we join the angry mobs who want to burn the Vatican and crucify the Pope?  No mobs, please.  This is the time for prayer for the Roman Church and for its leaders, including, especially, the Pope… this Pope.  If there is a chance for the forces of good within the Roman Church to get the upper hand against the rebellious Bishops and their miserable minions among the degraded clergy, that chance rests upon the shoulders of Pope Benedict.  I am praying for him.

This is probably more angry than profound.  My thoughts as a lay person on Pope Benedict’s talk as well as the Irish reaction:

http://www.bradleybirzer.com/2010/03/catholicism-sexual-abuse-and-multiple.html