Christ and the Kingdoms of Men: Foundations of Political Life

by David C. Innes

What are a Christian's civic responsibilities, and why? David Innes provides a principled political theology for understanding our civic "life together" in God's world. God calls our human officeholders and their civic business to a high moral purpose. His involvement in earthly rule reveals the nobility of political life-‚"a practice it rarely conforms to but to which we should aspire."

Genres: Politics, Theology, Cultural

264 pages, Paperback

Published August 1, 2019

Reviews

[Bob · Rating 4 out of 5]

Summary: Explores the civic and political responsibilities of Christians and the proper purposes of government.

This past electoral season underscores the urgency for the need of principled foundations for our political life and civic engagement. Here, as elsewhere, Christians ought look first at the foundations of their faith, as revealed in the scriptures. David C. Innes sets out to do this. It is important to note at outset that this is framed within a Reformed perspective reflecting theological convictions of Calvin and Abraham Kuyper.

Innes begins by grounding this theology in the Kingdom of God, revealed in his rule over creation, working through the vice-regency of human beings, even pre-fall, to fill and govern the creation, and in a fallen world, to provide various institutions of authority from the family to government to restrain evil and to provide for peaceable conditions allowing people to flourish secure in their life, health and possessions. With the coming of Christ comes not only redemption but the inauguration of God’s kingdom or rule that will transcend all earthly kingdoms, of which we are still necessarily a part, until the return of Christ.

Centering on Romans 13:1-7, Innes develops the proper role of government in the punishment of evil, protecting life and property, and positively protecting the exercise of piety and morality and liberty. Good governments praise the good. The challenge is governing in a fallen world, one where trust may not be assumed. Innes writes thoughtfully about the “political problem,” the tension between the power involved in government’s exercise of its proper role, and the restraints needed against excessive power. He explores Lockean government, upon which western democracies are modelled, both in the limits placed upon government and the creation of individual self-sovereignty under the law and its assertion of radical personal freedom.

Innes would argue for an ordered civil society in place of radical individualism, with limited government by the consent of governed under the rule of law. Running through this is the idea of subsidiarity, that what can be done at a lower level ought not be done at a higher or central one. Rights are what we would expect of one another. Following Romans 13, the proper response of one is submission to the government, save where this conflicts to obedience to God.

Up to this point, I would find myself in basic agreement. It is where Innes goes with the question of resistance that troubled me. He speaks of the role of inferior magistrates who ought act when those above them fail to act in the interest of the people. By this, he offers theological justification for the American Revolution. My problem is two-fold, at least. I do not find this principle of the inferior magistrate in scripture but only cited by the author in Calvin’s Institutes. Secondly, the same principle has been used to justify nullification in the lead up to the Civil War, and the secession of states that led to this costly and bloody war. Some use similar principles to argue for overturning authorities exercising public health powers in pandemics by mandating masks and other prudent measures for the common good (while ignoring ordinary measures like traffic laws that exist for similar reasons). At very least, it seems this idea, unless hedged about by the rule of law, may be arbitrary and dangerous to the public order.

I’m also troubled that this is the only form of resistance Innes proposes. I do not find any treatment of either the prophetic resistance of the Old Testament, nor the faithful resistance of the church against empire evident in Revelation. I do not see him put forward warrants for protest and non-violent resistance on the part of citizens that arguably in many societies has brought about political changes (I think of the Velvet Revolution of the Czech Republic). It does not seem that Innes envisions a society where people are subject to political oppression and do not have “inferior magistrates” to act on their behalf, unless this doctrine allows that leaders of such movements act in this role.

However, I must commend Innes on the concluding chapter for his discussion of citizenship and statesmanship. I do find here some of what I missed in the previous chapter in the role of a good citizen under tyranny. In more ordinary times, he also stresses the civic duties of citizens in the pursuit of the common good and the role of those who govern as statesmen who work, even in a pluralistic society, to preserve the liberties of all and the common good.

I think Innes offers a good, clear outline of a Reformed theology of government and the citizen. I would suggest that if one wants to read in this area, one not confine oneself to this book, but read more widely. Some suggestions may be found in the recommended readings. I would also suggest James Skillen’s The Good of Politics (review). Skillen comes out of the Reformed tradition, but draws on a much wider array of sources. However, this book lays out good basic groundwork for the basis and purpose and limits of government within God’s purposes, and the proper role of citizens.

____________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

David Innes has given us a good, solid general introduction to thinking about Christ and the political realm. Innes opens with 5 key points, as to why this is an important topic:

1. God presents Himself in political terms as to what he is doing in the world;
2. Political power carries with it the power of life and death – the civil ruler bears the sword;
3. Political authority provides the peaceful context for doing everything else that’s worthwhile;
4. Politics is important because we were not made for ourselves but for one another – in love;
5. Politics shapes the way people see everything.
In summary, politics is important because life is important.

But it iws not everything, as CS Lewis in "Learning in Wartime", wrote: “The rescue of drowning men is, then, a duty worth dying for, but not worth living for. It seems to me that all political duties (among which I include military duties) are of this kind. A man may have to die for his country, but no man must, in any exclusive sense, live for his country. ”

1 THE KINGDOM OF GOD: The Theological Framework for Political Life
God has ultimate authority as the Lord of creation, thus man, as the Image of God, bears dominion, authority, rule... we are derivative of the supreme ruler. But the Cultural Mandate is not just "rule", but is philosophical, aesthetic and intellectual.

2 THE AUTHORITY OF GOVERNMENT
Authority is real because God is King – not force or might. And here we discuss sphere sovereignty, the catholic doctrine of subsidiarity, Romans 13 – as the source of all political power is legitimate because from God.

3 PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT
Roms 13 shows the focus to be on that government is for our peace.The discussion of the “common good” was helpful here, avoiding government interventionism and statism and an unrealistic libertarianism.

4 PUNISHING EVIL: LIFE AND PROPERTY
On Ps 72:4 Calvin wrote: “God takes a more special care of the poor than of others, since they are most exposed to injuries and violence. Let laws and the administration of justice be taken away, and the consequences will be, that the more powerful the man is, he will the more able be too oppress his poor brethren. David, therefore, particularly mentions that the King will be the defender of those who can only be safe under the protection of the magistrate."
Thus property is important for it is protecting the conditions of prosperity which benefit everyone.

5 PUNISHING EVIL PIETY AND MORALITY
Calling on 1 Tim 2:1-2, Innes describes the role of the state as, not indifferent, but as facilitating the conditions suitable for the flourishing of the church. Thus he argues that the restraining influence of the state is for the benefit of the church, that it be unhindered in its mission.

There follows a very handling of freedom of religious practices as a matter of prudence; freedom of belief and expression in public of religious practices(these are not the same thing); social duties and good order are to be held in place; suppression of non-Christian views leads to a persecuting mentality – it stifles evangelism and counters the voluntary nature of submission to the gospel in the NT. The state is to protect the conditions for morality, e.g. prohibition of public displays of drunkenness, sexual practices, pornography, … But civil rules can only address external behaviour, not beliefs, attitudes etc.

6 PUNISHING EVIL: LIBERTY
The role of government is not supervisory. But the central role of government is to provide the context for liberty – not safety or removal of all barriers. “To be happy at home, it's the ultimate result of all ambition, the end to which every enterprise and Labour tends. “ - Samuel Johnson
In contract John Stuart Mill defined liberty as “being able to do what one desires” which is a different thing altogether. Therefore, freedom depends on self-government, not a kind of libertarian freedom.
Liberty can be defined as follows: National - throwing off tyranny and defence/warfare; Public - our self-government toward one another ; Private - self-government; and Moral - with respect to our own passions and desires and their restraint.

“Men are qualified for civil Liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains on their own appetites ... Society cannot exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite will be placed somewhere, and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.”
Edmund Burke (“A letter from Mr. Burke to a member of the National Assembly; In answer to objections to his book on French affaires". 1791)

7 PRAISING GOOD
1 Pet 2:14 is clear that the government has a moral orientation – it is not just preventing evil, but also rewarding the good.

8 THE PROBLEM OF GOVERNMENT AND THE MODERN SOLUTION.
The loss of civic community – trust and freedom without fear or unsafety - this is because we have departed from the truth. Thus, Lamech (Gen 4) is an example of the lawless and brutish man.

However, the “genius” of modern social organisation is that is assumes that people are not good and uses that to build a stable order that protects everyone, however, the modern liberal solution contains the shift is towards individualism, and then the government as the point of unity and cohesion, as the warring self-interest of the people is held together. The church has been complicit in that thrust toward individualism.

9 THE PROBLEM OF GOVERNMENT AND THE CHRISTIAN RESPONSE.
The restraint of the Rule of Law on government is key as are checks and balances. In Is 33:17,22 we read of judge, lawgiver and king, which can be safely combined in God, but not in human government – they need to be institutionally separated.

10 RESISTANCE
We have an abiding obligation to honour and respect those in authority over us. Ex 20:12. Hence in Roman 13, with Caesar in view, Paul teaches humility, respect and recognition to authorities, as they have a divine mandate in principle, but not for every action that perform.
Hence the Reformers taught that resistance to tyranny is allowable in some circumstances, because all authority is in submission to God’s ultimate authority. Biblical examples are the apostle Peter (Acts 5), Daniel etc.
There is then a good discussion of Calvin on resistance (see Inst. 4:29.7, 23), the doctrine of the lesser magistrate, and Beza: "On the Rights of Magistrates".

11 THE PRACTICE OF GOVERNMENT: CITIZENSHIP AND STATESMANSHIP
Augustine on citizenship: “An assemblage of reasonable beings bound together by a common agreement as to the object of their loves. ” Innes counsels us to live our distinctive life: submission to scripture, prayer, corporate worship – these are the marks of our heavenly citizenship. And then we are equipped to love our neighbour.

This is the book I will be recommending when people ask me for "something on politics".

[Stephen Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty solid book. It's very well sourced and helps construct the building blocks of a political philosophy for a Christian. I appreciated that it only makes a qualified defense of the Enlightenment's liberal order, but I'm not sure it goes far enough in developing an exposition of church-state relations. Perhaps it's outside the scope of the book, but I was hoping for more of that. The doctrine of the lesser magistrate was well explained, and it was interesting to see how that was applied to the American Revolution. Overall, I think this is an excellent place to start and will help Christians to think carefully about our place and what to aim for as we may be approaching a post-liberal order.

[Eric Yap · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 stars. The succinctness of this short book is deceiving. The book is compacted with the comprehensive theological presentation and reflections on the historical political development and current political climate of the secular West, along with the exhortation to a charitable and nuanced Christian response that demonstrates excellent, responsible and biblical political engagements and statesmanship. As with any good theological and biblical primer, Innes opens with the constructing of the biblical worldview upon the metanarratives of redemptive history, giving careful attention to the theological implications of the kingdom of creation, the creation mandate, the imago Dei, the fall, and redemption. Innes masterfully locates the Christian political and civil worldview in the kingdom of God that was initially created on earth to reflect God’s glory, fallen through Adam’s sin, and is currently being redeemed and restored by the person and work of Jesus Christ. Along with it, Innes critics from Romans 13 the popular notion that divine ordination of government and political authority on earth as only for the sake of restraining and punishing evil by locating the centre of a chiasm in Romans 13:4 (he is God's servant for your good), concluding that the government’s responsibility to restrain evil is an implication of working “for your good” (common good) that flows from a divine mandate. Hence, the divine purpose for government and political authority is twofold: 1) for people as created, and 2) for people as fallen. Innes then spent the rest of the book expounding on this twofold purposes of government, on areas such as preserving life and property, preserving the conditions for the development of morality and the practice of piety, restraining, punishing evil, preserving liberty and praising good, as well as highlighting the historical development of the political thought in the secular West that resulted in today's political climate. A highlight in the book is Innes' identification of the common problems and tensions with modern secular politics, such as the challenges of human selfishness, trust and distrust, power and restrain, and especially addressing the insufficiency of the modern civil rights notion that is grounded in Lockean-Tocqueville natural laws to preserve oneself, inevitably expressing itself in postmodernism's overt individualism that bears no implications for one's social responsibilities. Instead, Innes argues for a Christian response with the idea of "divine rights" that is grounded in the imago Dei and the commandment to love one's neighbour (divine laws/transcendental metaethics/morality). It is not an easy book to read, however, due to Innes’ succinct writing style, one needs to work through short and punchy sentences that are compacted with profound theological and political reflections. With the caveat that perfect political engagement is impossible in this fallen world, I couldn't agree with all of Innes' conclusions or practical outworking of broad biblical principles, some of which seems contradictory or driven by preconceived alignments. For example, Innes convincingly champions the doctrine of Christian submission (even to tyrannical powers), but provides a caveat in "lower magistrates" or subsidiary powers that bears the responsibility of protecting those under their cares (citing the reformers and some theologians) and therefore is warranted for political resistance, even violent resistance, as a means to justify theologically the American revolution (i.e. the responsibilities of the established thirteen Colonies to resist British tyranny). However, this argument seems to be me a slippery slope (or I lacked the ability to comprehend his argument entirely), because subsidiary, derived, or lower forms of authorities can be found in all spheres of life (for example, the responsibilities of a father to his children), and therefore violent political resistance can be justified on any of these grounds. Another example, where Innes have suggested that the common good that the government is responsible for "people as created" must necessarily be tasks that individuals cannot achieve by their own unconsolidated effort (for example, the development and management of public facilities that enable day to day living), but contends that the best civil manner in promoting and praising moral good is by leaving socioeconomic-charity works to private organisations and individuals so as to preserve liberty and avoid unnecessary coercion, and therefore by implications preserving the free market (i.e. socialism is not the solution to poverty). However, though Innes concedes that exact boundaries for the definition of "for people as created" is hard to delineate precisely, I cannot concur fully with his workings because there are many socio-economical problems that cannot be addressed apart from the political-national level. Nevertheless, Innes did exemplify the conviction from the biblical worldview which understands that a perfect government is impossible in this fallen world and this side of the Parousia and a gospel-driven charitable demeanour allows for Christian to agree on broad gospel convictions but disagree charitably with differing principles or applications. Too often political engagement in the 21st century is driven from a polarized and polemical Hegelian praxis and siege mentality, where a nuanced but biblical view is no longer appreciated. Innes' book is a great primer to understand the historical political development and the current political climate of the secular West and for Christians to begin to think theologically, biblically, comprehensively, and responsibly for excellent political and civil engagement. A final note, since Innes has written this book from the context of the secular West (though post-Christian, there are underlying religious overtones in the culture and society), therefore one from a different political climate and context (for example, a Christian in the Middle-Eastern theocracy) needs to make intentional effort to contextualize these comprehensive theological reflections.

[Benjamin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had the opportunity to read this in a pre-pub form. It is a book on the Christian and politics. It is intended for the general/student audience. It does its job very well. Innes has read widely and well in preparation for writing this book. His bibliographies are well-selected to be accessible to the general/student reader. Most readers will want to follow the discussion further by reading in those bibliographies. Innes is to be commended for this work.

[Peter Voorhees · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book was frustrating to read. While Innes cites numerous sources, his analysis lacks nuance regarding the complexity of human nature and governance. His interpretations of scripture seem simplistic, leading to conservative conclusions that I often disagreed with. For example, his assessment of the purpose of government comes across as vague and politically biased.

There are likely more balanced, insightful books on this topic. I would be hesitant to recommend this book given its slanted perspective and inability to capture the nuances involved when examining the roles of human nature and government. Readers may come away with a narrowed view rather than a deeper understanding. More rigorous scholarship on this subject is available elsewhere.

[Justin Dillehay · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good primer on a Christian view of government from David Innes, a rare combo of someone with expertise in both theology and political philosophy.

[Steve Herreid · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the best books I have read on politics from a Christian worldview. I loved this book.

[Dave · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoughtful, wise, and both biblically and historically based and informed. A must-read for those interested in political theology and practice.

[Forrest P · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well-written and well-sourced. A great introduction to Christian Politics with helpful study tools for individual reflection or group discussion.

[Josh · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a well-written, learned yet simple overview of political theory from a Christian perspective. Even if you disagree with some of his particular formulations, you will benefit from the clarity with which he states the questions and issues.