In this series of posts on the Constitution of the Kingdom of God we have been concerned with how the Kingdom of God on earth is actually constituted. This subject has been long neglected by the Church generally, but must be addressed. We have been taught by our Lord to pray, “Thy Kingdom come” but we have given little thought to what it is we are praying for. The parallelism, “Thy will be done on earth, even as it is in heaven,” tells us that God's Kingdom on earth consists of a comprehensive and universal obedience to the will and commands of God. But what does that actually mean? How can we tell whether a community is more under the aegis of the Kingdom of God. What would the community “look like”? How would it be organised and structured? How would it function? What instruction and pattern is laid down in the Scriptures, which are the constitutional documents of God's Kingdom upon earth? What is the will of God upon earth?
Historically, when Jerusalem has thought in these terms—and has sought to operate within a paradigm of Christendom—it has fallen into the trap of making simplistic assumptions. A traditional, but spurious, version is that the coming of the Kingdom of God upon earth will be characterised by a state where the Church has dominion and control over all of life. A second spurious version is that the coming of the Kingdom will be reflected in a withering away of the Church and the State. Heaven on earth will be characterised by unstructured, decentralised communal living. A third spurious alternative is that the Kingdom will be constituted around a supreme Christian monarch, or governor who will ultimately direct affairs in Church, Family, and Individual.
All of these variants suffer from the same error—that of taking a component or aspect of the Kingdom and elevating it into a central organising principle over the Kingdom as a whole. So, we have had proposed historically that the Kingdom will be marked by caesaro-papism (state controlling the church), or papo-caesarism (church controlling the state), or anabaptist communalism (state and institutional church ceasing to exist). All of these are equally wrong and contrary to the teaching and directives of the constitutional documents. All of these reflect pagan themes, not Christian concepts.
In fact, the Kingdom is unlike anything seen or found upon earth. There have been glimpses of it to be sure. There have been aspects manifested. But human history has not yet seen a state or culture where all of life, all culture, all institutions, all schooling and so forth has been organised and structured around the constitutional documents of the Kingdom. We can put this another way: imagine a society where over eighty percent of the population of a particular society are genuinely professing Christians. Now, how would such a society be organised? How would it work? What institutions would it have? How would it operate?
Human history has not yet seen such a society. But as the Kingdom of God comes, we believe it will be progressively manifested within human history. All enemies are to be placed under His feet, before the last enemy (death) is abolished.
One of the outstanding characteristics of the Kingdom when it dominates a culture is that no one person, no one institution can represent or hold the Kingdom. Christ alone is King. He will not share His glory with another. His rule is universal. Therefore, the Kingdom of God upon earth as far as we creatures are concerned is a radically decentralised Kingdom. No one institution is dominant. Christ rules over individuals, families, church, and state in a totalitarian fashion, such that neither individuals, families, churches or civil government can usurp control nor laud it over the other. The constitution of the Kingdom forbids it.
Each institution, each aspect of the Kingdom has its own legitimacy because each has its calling to obey and serve the King as He commands. And Christ commands submission and service of each institution to the others. So the state must serve church and families; the church must serve state and families, and so forth. Christ Himself establishes true unity, and at the same time, establishes, protects and preserves diversity. In the Kingdom, the one and the many are equally ultimate—even as it is within the Trinity.
Fallen man, as exemplified in the Tower of Babel, is always seeking to unify everything under one central controlling principle or institution. It is an inevitable outcome or result of desiring to be god in place of the Living God. In recent modern history, the false central unifying principle has been the State. Increasingly, all of life revolves around the government and its powers.
As the Kingdom comes it breaks down statism—the belief and practice of the state being the ultimate reality upon earth. This breaking down occurs as other, equally legitimate institutions within God's Kingdom re-establish their assigned place, position, function, and authority.
In this regard we have been focusing upon the reformation of families and households, and emphasised the need for households to re-establish their front line responsibility for care, nurture, and welfare, first of all to family members, then extended family, and then to those who are genuinely in need. In order to do this, households and families must progressively recapture and reform our stewardship over property and wealth. Households can only take care of others if they have the means with which to do it; otherwise they themselves will need to be taken care of.
But the Bible has sober warnings about wealth. A love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. Those who aspire to be rich fall into temptation and a snare and many foolish and harmful desires which lead to destruction. The longing for money can lead men to fall away from the faith. The man of God is to flee such things, and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, and so on. (I Timothy 6: 6—11) We are admonished to be content with what we have, and that if we have food, clothing, and shelter it is enough.
How, then, can these two apparently contradictory teachings be reconciled? Very simply. It is the Bible's teaching that with respect to wealth and capital, in God's Kingdom, we are never owners. We are only, ever stewards. The Greek word “steward” (oikonomias) means a manager or a trustee. A manager and a trustee deal with the property of another; they must deal with it in a trustworthy manner; it does not really belong to them at all, and they must never act or think as if it did. As soon as they do, they become unfaithful stewards.
God alone is the original and final owner of all things. To Him belongs the cattle on a thousand hills (Psalm 24:1; Psalm 89:11; Psalm 50: 10). We instinctively understand this concept. Take our children. Do parents own their children? To whom do they belong? Clearly we all understand that we do not own our children; they belong to God. He gives them to us. He entrusts their care and nurture to us. He will require an accounting from us for our service to our children in His behalf. The ownership of wealth and capital is exactly the same. It is not really ours at all. It belongs to Him. He gives it to us for a time. He will require an accounting from us for how we have acted as trustees of His wealth.
Thus, a faithful Christian lives as possessing all things, yet as though he had nothing. Such a man can control a fortune, but riches will have no control over him. The more Christians adopt this basic Christian duty, with all its accompanying necessary attitudes, the more capital and wealth the Lord will entrust. Such a servant does not love money; He loves the Lord, and uses the Lord's wealth as the Lord requires.
John Wesley had it right. He captured this essence of stewardship in a nutshell. He said a Christian steward (that is, every Christian) has three responsibilities:
Earn all you can.This threefold injunction captures the heart and essence of what it means to be a steward in God's Kingdom.
Save all you can
Give all you can.
No comments:
Post a Comment