R2K Virus (Radical Two Kingdom Theology) – Page 44

Historical Calvinism & Political Resistance … Contra R2K

‎”For earthly princes lay aside their power when they rise up against God, and are unworthy to be reckoned among the number of mankind. We ought, rather, to spit upon their heads than to obey them.”

John Calvin,
Commentary on Daniel, Lecture XXX Daniel 6:22

Calvinist Francis Hotman posed this question,

“If a state was once free, but later was conquered by a tyrant, was it not lawful to overthrow the tyrant and revert to that ancient Independence?”

“The nature of wicked princes is much like to warthogs, which if they be suffered to have their snouts in the ground, and be not forthwith expelled, will suddenly have their snouts in all the body; So they if they be obeyed in any evil thing be it ever so little will be obeyed in all at length.”

John Ponet
Magisterial Reformer

‎”When therefore the supreme ruler has become a tyrant, he must be deemed by his own perjury (as against the covenant document with the people) to have freed people from their oath, and not to the contrary, when the people assert their rights against him.”

Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos
(Thought to have been written by a one of two men … both of whom were Calvinists)

“As often as the Magistrate commands anything that is repugnant EITHER to the worship which we owe unto God OR to the love which we owe unto our neighbor, we cannot yield thereunto with a safe conscience. For as often as the commandment of God and men are directly opposed one against another, this rule is to be perpetually observed; that it is better to obey GOD than men.”

Theodore Beza
Calvin’s Successor in Geneva

“Resistance to tyrannical governors was, according to (Calvinist Pierre) Viret, a legitimate act of self defense. He even endorsed the use of disinformation if the tyrant were persecuting as analogous to resisting a band of robbers. If the political leader acted like a criminal, Viret thought he should be treated like a one, and the citizens were justified in resisting him.”

The Political Ideas of Pierre Viret
Robert Dean Linder — p. 131

According to William Naphy’s “Calvin and the Consolidation of the Genevan Reformation, (p. 159-160)” Calvin, in his preaching confronted the Magistrates in his congregation. Naphy concludes that Calvin’s preaching was at times direct, confrontational, and “politically informed.” One of Calvin’s 1522 sermons landed Calvin in front of the Council to explain why he spoke of the senators and the other civil rulers in a sermon as

“Arguing against God”
“Mocking him,”
“Rejecting all the Holy scriptures to vomit forth their blasphemies as supreme decrees

And as (my personal favorite)

“Gargoyle monkeys [who] have become so proud”

Interesting material from Peter Martyr (Calvinist)

Martyr stipulated that others in the public weal, who were in ‘place and dignity lower than princes’ and yet in positions of responsibility to ‘elect the superiors,’ have power by existing laws to govern the commonwealth. If, therefore, a prince does not preform his covenant as promised, ‘it is lawful to constrain and bring him into order and by force compel him to fulfill the conditions and covenant which he had promised, and that by war when it cannot be otherwise done.’

And who does Martyr include in his list of “others in the public weal’ who had a responsibility to keep an eye on wandering Magistrates?

Why Peter Martyr includes “Ministers of the Churches,” as those who had a responsibility to keep an eye on wandering Magistrates.

“Loyal shoulders should sustain the power of the ruler so long as it is exercised in subjection to God and follows His ordinances; but if it resists and opposes the divine commandments, and wishes to make me share in its war against God, then with unrestrained voice, I answer back that God must be preferred before any man on earth.”

-John of Salisbury, Policraticus, 1159

A. A. Hodge Contra The Christ-less Public Square of R2K

“It is simply absurd that a man can be thoroughly convinced that God exists and that he is a Moral Governor who will demand an account for all the deeds done in the body-that he can have his heart fully of loyal affection and devotion to God as an individual while engaged in private business, and then be perfectly oblivious of the existence and of the claims of God as soon as he begins to act politically as a citizen of the State. If a man knows that God has forbidden theft, or incest, or divorce except on certain conditions, or the pursuit of worldly business on the weekly Sabbath, he cannot as a citizen do otherwise than make and execute laws in conformity to the known will of God.”

– the Rev. A.A. Hodge

“If a State in its public law acts atheistically, it can only be because a majority of its citizens are in heart atheists, no matter what religious professions they may make. Middle ground, a negative position, is absolutely impossible. God… is either recognized or denied, he is either carefully obeyed or rebelliously disobeyed; and this impossibility of a negative position is just as true in political societies and in their conduct as in any other departments of human life. Every nation has a religion or is positively, aggressively atheistic; indifference is antagonism.”

– the Rev. A.A. Hodge

New motto for R2K churches.

“All the numbers, and all the piety with none of the conviction.”

“R2K … all the convenience of Christianity with none of the persecution.”

R2K & Sola Scriptura

Darryl keeps trying to wave his hand insisting that Stellman’s departure has no implications for R2K. He writes,

First, on the matter of sola scriptura, 2k theology does not pit ecclesiology against the word of God but in fact limits the ministry of the church precisely to what Scripture teaches.

But R2K does pit ecclesiology against the word of God every time R2K insists that God’s explicit word is not the norm that norms all norms in the common realm. When R2K introduces limits upon the ministry that the Scripture does not recognize, at that point R2K pits ecclesiology against the word of God. As such Stellman’s need for a high ecclesiology as found in R2K translates well in his move away from sola scriptura.

R2K Acolyte Swims The Tiber

http://www.creedcodecult.com/2012/06/heartfelt-farewell-to-pca.html#comment-form

I have nothing but sympathy for Mr. Stellman. I do not intend to gloat over the shipwrecking of his faith. However, I do intend to note that “ideas have consequences.”

Mr. Stellman was a graduate from Westminster West R2K Seminary. Mr. Stellman had drank so deeply from that R2K well that he had even written a book supporting R2K. However what was a trickle in terms of his R2K theology became a Tiberian flood.

R2K holds that Scripture alone is not the norm that norms all norms in the common realm. No sola Scriptura for the common realm for R2K where most of our living is done. If Scripture is not the norm that norms all norms for the common realm, where we do 99% of our living, how much deeper of a dive is it to find that Scripture alone also is not the norm that norms all norms in the the last 1% of our lives in the Redemptive realm? If Natural Law is the norm that norms all norms in the common realm then why not a Church as a norm that norms all norms in the Redemptive realm?

Second, Thomistic Natural Law and the Nature vs. Grace divide that are identity markers of R2K have always been the stock and trade for Rome with its two paths to truth motif. Really, in crossing the Tiber, Mr. Stellman is really only returning home, as the philosophical dualism that informs R2K is Mother’s milk for Rome. Why go with the cheap imitation R2K when you can get the real McCoy with Rome?

Of course the solas of the Reformation stand and fall together. If one gives up sola Scriptura one is sure to give up sola Fide, sola Christus, and Sola Gratia.

But make no mistake about it. Mr. Stellman’s journey to Rome (or Constantinople) was greased by the Thomistic dualism theology that underlies the R2K project. I should not be surprised to be finding others who have embraced R2K taking the plunge.

Linkage In The Theologies of Cultural Marxism & R2K?

The cultural Marxists are forever shrilling over the separation of Church and State. This is because they want to make sure that the public square is kept sanitized of any Christian influence. Meanwhile R2K is also forever shrilling about the separation of common realm from the redemptive realm — two realms that are largely analogous to the Church and State of the Cultural Marxists. The reason why R2K wants the common realm to be recognized as compartmentalized from the redemptive realm is the mirror reason of the Cultural Marxists. As noted above, the cultural Marxists want Church and State separate so Christianity can’t effect and so despoil culture. R2K wants common realm and redemptive realm compartmentalized so none of the common realm leaks into the redemptive realm so despoiling the redemptive realm. Both Cultural Marxism and R2K want to make sure that the realms that they are concerned about stay sanitized from unhealthy influence from the other realm. Both R2K and Cultural Marxism clears the common realm / civil realm from any interference from conservative Christianity and so allows so form of collectivism to rule. Both R2K and Cultural Marxism both believe that the other realm they are not primarily concerned about is not where the real action takes place. (Hence R2K refers to the common realm as “Kingdom of God’s left hand” and Cultural Marxists refer to the Church with any number of epitaphs.) Both R2K and Cultural Marxists are led in their respective attempts to compartmentalize their respective realms by their wise men. Both R2k and Cultural Marxist push their compartmentalization as a non-negotiable item of faith. Both R2K and Cultural Marxism work to silence the voice of Biblical Christianity in the public square. R2K wants it silenced in the name of Christian love for neighbor. Cultural Marxists wants it silenced in the name of Cultural Marxist love for neighbor.

The symbiotic relationship of R2K and Cultural Marxism is so convenient that I can easily see Marxist organizations funding R2K Institutions through popular front movements. In point of fact so symbiotic is the relationship between the two that one wonders if R2K, at it hits the street, is in point of fact a baptized version of Cultural Marxism.

Now, of course it must be realized and admitted that there are differences between Cultural Marxism and R2K as well. Cultural Marxism practices philosophical materialism while R2K leans more towards a Gnostic dualism. Cultural Marxism doesn’t really believe that some realm belongs uniquely to the Church though it is willing to posit that irrelevant realm as long as the Church can stay fenced behind it. R2K isn’t atheistic though it has spiritualized Christianity to the point that atheism must look awfully inviting to the serious minded person. Eschatologically speaking both miss the mark, though they miss the mark in different directions. Cultural Marxism is teleologically optimistic and humanistic Utopian while R2K is teleologically pessimistic and Christian Dystopian. However — and this is important — at the very moment when the Cultural Marxists arrive at their Utopian state the R2K Jesus returns in order to crush this present wicked age as successfully built by the Cultural Marxists. What was Utopian to the Cultural Marxists was Dystopian to the R2K and Jesus breaks in to bring all things to an end.

One can see that there are similarities and differences but where these similarities converge there is a great opportunity for each to work alongside the other in order to achieve their parallel goals.