The Kingdom, the Kingdom, the Kingdom!
But why all this repetition?
Because there are those among us, notably a cluster of scholars with headquarters at Toronto, who are incessantly talking about the Kingdom.
And that’s good. Why? Because the Bible speaks of it so often. A. A. Hodge, one-time Professor of Systematic Theology at Princeton Seminary is authority for the following: “The word basileia. [Kingdom] . . . occurs one hundred and thirty-seven times in the entire New Testament, and one hundred and ten times in the gospels, fifty-three times in Matthew alone . . . twenty times in the epistles . . .” (Outlines of Theology, p. 430).
No reason at all then why we should not, in season and out of season, preach, advocate, and pray for the coming of the Kingdom, the Kingdom, the Kingdom! But the rub comes in when clear thinking about the Kingdom is being called into question. And I cannot escape the conviction that the article by Rev. John D. Hellinga, elsewhere in this issue, and also other recent utterances on the Kingdom unfortunately steer us in that unfortunate direction.
A Lament from Dordt’s President – It is this that comes to my mind in reading an article by Rev. D. ). Haan, President of Dordt College, in the March 1973 issue of Dordt College Voice. Writing about the Kingdom and distinctions to be made between the Church and the Kingdom, Rev. Haan laments: “Failure to recognize these basic distinctions is bound to lead, and has already led us into all kinds of confusion. In fact, it is extremely disconcerting to be accused of peddling strange and unfamiliar views when one 6nnly advocates and promotes the thinking of Kuyper, Mecter, Berkhof, and a mighty host of other Calvinistic thinkers. Yet this is the tragic state to which we have, in large measure, fallen . . .”
Now it is difficult for me to believe that this is the whole story. For example, the sturdy elementary and secondary Christian Schools in Northwest Iowa, as well as the almost phenomenal growth of Dordt College itself, would seem to refute the idea that the kingdom concept as heretofore advocated among us has now become suspect.
Fact is that there are good reasons to believe that the Christian Reformed Church may be second to none as a Kingdom-conscious and a Kingdom-seeking body of believers. From ten years of serving on the board of what was formerly known as the Christian Psychopathic Hospital (Pine Rest) I know that the CRC constituency has for years been high up on the honor roll in supporting that institution financially. And to mention more: our Christian schools, Christian labor organizations, and the magnificent work of the Christian Reformed World Relief Committee are monuments of dedication to Kingdom activity. Because familiarity so easily breeds contempt, let’s now be on our guard lest we sell the CRC short and indulge in unwarranted disparagement of the CRC’s appreciation of and enthusiasm for the Kingdom. Although we are still miles and miles away from the ideal and goal, let no one despise what has been at least the day of small beginnings.
Getting the Kingdom Clearly in Focus – What now is the special aim in my writing once again about the Kingdom? Simply this: to put forth an effort to get the Kingdom of God clearly in focus to the end that we may know precisely, according to the command of our Lord, what we are we to be seeking first. Once again, it appears to me that Rev. Hellinga’s article and also other recent utterances among us on the Kingdom are confusing rather than clarifying the matter, however good they intend their Kingdom emphasis to be.
The simple, clear, and true-to-Scripture definition of the Kingdom of God or the Kingdom of Heaven (a definition long familiar among us) is the following:
The Kingdom of God (Heaven) is the rule of Christ in the hearts and lives of His people. This is known as the Kingdom of grace and it is the Kingdom we are to seek to promote in every area of our lives: home, school, church, labor, politics, art, science, recreation, business, industry, and also everywhere else. Nothing—absolutely nothing!—may be set aside as secular or set off from this rule of our Lord and King.
But there is more. Christ as the Theanthropos (the God-man) is the Messianic King also over the whole universe, all of which He governs in the best interest of His Church. This has long been recognized as the Kingdom of power. It was of this Messianic kingship that our Lord spoke when He said: “All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth” (Matt. 28:18). This is to be clearly distinguished from His supreme rule over all as the Second Person in the Holy Trinity, a rule that He exercises together with the Father and the Holy Spirit from everlasting to everlasting.
Setting aside a Distinction – This simple, clear, and true-to-Scripture distinction between Christ’s Messianic Kingdom of Grace and His Messianic Kingdom of Power is one that finds no favor in the article of Rev. Hellinga. He writes:
“Even though the Kingdom is a central teaching in the Scripture, it remains a reality that is hard to define (italics added) and one that is certainly not easily grasped by a casual reading of the Scriptures.” It may be suggested that in all likelihood he would not find this nearly so difficult if he would allow himself to be served in this by the clear thinking of Professor Louis Berkhof who taught with distinction at Calvin Seminary for thirty-eight years and thus had no small part in the training of more than a generation of Christian Reformed ministers.
Rev. Hellinga says in his article: “Furthermore, the Scriptures clearly teach that Cod is not only King of His people, of His Church, of Israel, but He is also the majestic King of the earth. Are these two separate Kingdoms, one of ‘grace’ and one of ‘power’?” Obviously, the clear-cut distinction (not separation) between the Kingdom of grace and the Kingdom of power finds no favor in his article.
He goes on to say: “When we see the Kingship of God in this perspective, we can never speak of two kingdoms, namely a kingdom of grace and a kingdom of power. For the Kingship of Christ that was seen and acknowledged in Israel is one and the same rule of the Christ that is seen and acknowledged in the world.”
And in speaking of the Kingdom as “a territory or terrain,” Rev. Hellinga states: “Please keep in mind that this is not a second, separate form of the Kingdom, distinct from His Kingly rule. It is not to be called a ‘Kingdom of grace’ in distinction from ‘the Kingdom of Power’.”
That Rev. Hellinga gets himself into a difficulty by setting aside this distinction between Kingdom of Grace and Kingdom of Power should, it appears to me, be obvious when, in the closing paragraph of his article, he writes: “By His Word He [God] placed His people under His gracious and recreative rule and made them. citizens of His-Kingdom” (Italics added). How could this be if no distinction is to be made between the Kingdom of grace and the Kingdom of power?
Testimony of Others – That the distinction between the Kingdom of Grace and the Kingdom of Power is in good repute among Reformed scholars is evident from the following:
1. Charles Hodge – “This messianic or mediatorial kingdom of Christ, being thus comprehensive, is presented in different aspects in the Word of God. Viewed as extending over all creatures, it is a kingdom of power, which, according to I Corinthians 15:24, He shall deliver up to God even the Father, when his mediatorial work is accomplished. Viewed in relation to his own people on earth it is the kingdom of grace. They all recognize Him as their absolute proprietor and sovereign . . . . Viewed in relation to the whole body of the redeemed, when the work of redemption is consummated, it is the kingdom of glory . . . (Systematic Theology. Vol. III, p. 856).
2. A. A. Hodge – “It [Christ’s mediatorial kingdom] has been distinguished as – (1) His kingdom of power, which embraces the entire universe in his providential and judicial administration. The end of this is the subjection of his enemies (Heb. 10:12, 13; I Cor. 15:25), the vindication of divine righteousness (John 5:22–27; 9:39), and the perfecting of his church. (2) His kingdom of grace which is spiritual alike as to its subjects, laws, modes of administration, and instrumentalities. (3) His kingdom of glory is the consummation of his providential and gracious administration, and will continue forever” (Outlines of Theology, p. 428).
3. H. Henry Meeter – “This great ideal, the Kingdom of Cod, that perfect State, will alone be realized by Jesus Christ, and not by natural means but by supernatural grace. That Kingdom He has already planted in this world. It is begun in regeneration, continued in sanctification, consists in this present dispensation in spiritual realities only” . . . (The Basic Ideas of Calvinism, p. 105. Italics added).
4. L. Berkhof – “In general we may define the mediatorial kingship of Christ as His official power to rule all things in heaven and on earth, for the glory of God, and for the execution of God’s purpose of salvation. We must distinguish, however, between a regnum gratiae [Kingdom of Grace] and a regnum potentiae [Kingdom of Power] .. . . The spiritual kingship of Christ is His royal rule over the regnum gratiae, that is over His people or the Church. It is a spiritual kingship, because it relates to a spiritual realm. It is the mediatorial rule as it is established in the hearts and lives of believers . . . . By the regnum potentiae we mean the dominion of God-man, Jesus Christ, over the universe, His providential and judicial administration of all things in the interest of the Church” (Systematic Theology, pp. 406 and 410).
5. Peter Y. De Jong – “Consisting as it [the Kingdom of God] does in tile rule of God in Christ over the hearts and lives of his people, it comes from above. It is of God himself, who through his Spirit on the basis of Christ’s perfect work renews the lives of those who are redeemed. Thus it transforms first and foremost the heart. Unless a man is born again, he shall neither see nor enter the kingdom.” And with good reason Dr. De Jong adds: “Too many in their reflection on the kingdom-gospel, however, stop here. They don’t seem to realize that as the principle of the new life in Christ Jesus it must and will demonstrate itself as a renewing principle for all of life . . .” (The Messenger, Feb., 1973, p. 11. Italics added).
6. William H. Rutgers – “Nevertheless, not the kingdom of power but that of grace is the burden of the prayer, ‘Thy kingdom come.’ In this kingdom, God, and very especially Christ, our Mediator is the King . . . The kingdom of God in this sense may then be defined as the rule or will of God established in the hearts of regenerated men, which rule or will is and progressively increases to be the operative principle that motivates the Christian’s life, gives direction to and determines the purpose of living” (Sermons on the Lord’s Prayer, pp. 65, 66. Italics added).
Teaching of Scripture – Now it remains to ask whether this recognition of a Kingdom of Grace is also the teaching of Scripture. We may quote authorities, many and at great length, but unless it is established that their teaching is based on what the Bible says it will all be of no avail. Consider then what Scripture teaches on the following matters as a clear indication that it speaks repeatedly of the Kingdom of God in a very special sense as a Kingdom of Grace:
1. Entrance into the Kingdom – The well-known words of Jesus to Nicodemus establish beyond a doubt that regeneration is the gateway to the Kingdom: “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born anew, he cannot see the Kingdom of God . . . Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he can· not enter in the kingdom of God” John 3:3, 5). Charles Hodge comments: “The condition of admission into that kingdom is regeneration John 3:5), con· version (Matt. 18:3), holiness of heart and life, for the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God; nor thieves, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners (I Cor. 6:9, 10; Gal. 5:21; Eph. 5:5)” (Systematic Theology, Vol. III, p. 587). This clearly does not refer to inclusion in the Kingdom of Power (which is all-inclusive) but to membership or citizenship in the Kingdom of God as a Kingdom of Grace.
2. Keys of the Kingdom – In Matthew 16:19 Jesus the King says to Peter and to His Church: “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind On earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” In Lord’s Day 31 of the Heidelberg Catechism we confess that these keys of the kingdom are: “The preaching of the holy gospel, and church discipline or excommunication out of the Christian Church. By these two the kingdom of heaven is opened to believers and shut against unbelievers.” What sense does this make unless it means that membership in Christ’s Church is coextensive with citizenship in His Kingdom of Grace?
3. Blessings of the Kingdom – In Romans 14:17 we are told: “The kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” Obviously, these great blessings arc not the property of all men under the universal rule of Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords. They are given to believers as citizens in His Kingdom of Grace.
4. Consummation of the Kingdom – Our Lord speaks of the glorious consummation of His Kingdom as the end of time on the Judgment Day in Matthew 25: “Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand [the sheep]. Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (vs. 34). “The goats” as well as “the sheep” are all, without exception, subjects of Christ’s messianic Kingdom of Power but only “the sheep” are citizens in His Kingdom of Grace. The Kingdom, the Kingdom, the Kingdom! – But is not all this effort love’s labor lost? Have we perhaps needlessly belabored this matter of making clear-cut and Scripturally sound distinctions with respect to the Kingdom? I think not. First and foremost in our calling as Christians is to seek Christ’s Kingdom and His righteousness (Matt. 6:33), and prominent in our prayers is to be the petition: Thy Kingdom come! But, unless we first know and see clearly what we are to seek as life’s summum bonum and that for which we are to pray, our eye will not be single and our common goal will elude us in our search. It is of the essence that we see eye to eye as to what we arc after lest we be at cross-purposes with each other.
“Let every creature rise and bring
Peculiar honors to ow-King,
Angels descend with songs again
And earth repeat the loud Amen.”
But why all this repetition?
Because there are those among us, notably a cluster of scholars with headquarters at Toronto, who are incessantly talking about the Kingdom.
And that’s good. Why? Because the Bible speaks of it so often. A. A. Hodge, one-time Professor of Systematic Theology at Princeton Seminary is authority for the following: “The word basileia. [Kingdom] . . . occurs one hundred and thirty-seven times in the entire New Testament, and one hundred and ten times in the gospels, fifty-three times in Matthew alone . . . twenty times in the epistles . . .” (Outlines of Theology, p. 430).
No reason at all then why we should not, in season and out of season, preach, advocate, and pray for the coming of the Kingdom, the Kingdom, the Kingdom! But the rub comes in when clear thinking about the Kingdom is being called into question. And I cannot escape the conviction that the article by Rev. John D. Hellinga, elsewhere in this issue, and also other recent utterances on the Kingdom unfortunately steer us in that unfortunate direction.
A Lament from Dordt’s President – It is this that comes to my mind in reading an article by Rev. D. ). Haan, President of Dordt College, in the March 1973 issue of Dordt College Voice. Writing about the Kingdom and distinctions to be made between the Church and the Kingdom, Rev. Haan laments: “Failure to recognize these basic distinctions is bound to lead, and has already led us into all kinds of confusion. In fact, it is extremely disconcerting to be accused of peddling strange and unfamiliar views when one 6nnly advocates and promotes the thinking of Kuyper, Mecter, Berkhof, and a mighty host of other Calvinistic thinkers. Yet this is the tragic state to which we have, in large measure, fallen . . .”
Now it is difficult for me to believe that this is the whole story. For example, the sturdy elementary and secondary Christian Schools in Northwest Iowa, as well as the almost phenomenal growth of Dordt College itself, would seem to refute the idea that the kingdom concept as heretofore advocated among us has now become suspect.
Fact is that there are good reasons to believe that the Christian Reformed Church may be second to none as a Kingdom-conscious and a Kingdom-seeking body of believers. From ten years of serving on the board of what was formerly known as the Christian Psychopathic Hospital (Pine Rest) I know that the CRC constituency has for years been high up on the honor roll in supporting that institution financially. And to mention more: our Christian schools, Christian labor organizations, and the magnificent work of the Christian Reformed World Relief Committee are monuments of dedication to Kingdom activity. Because familiarity so easily breeds contempt, let’s now be on our guard lest we sell the CRC short and indulge in unwarranted disparagement of the CRC’s appreciation of and enthusiasm for the Kingdom. Although we are still miles and miles away from the ideal and goal, let no one despise what has been at least the day of small beginnings.
Getting the Kingdom Clearly in Focus – What now is the special aim in my writing once again about the Kingdom? Simply this: to put forth an effort to get the Kingdom of God clearly in focus to the end that we may know precisely, according to the command of our Lord, what we are we to be seeking first. Once again, it appears to me that Rev. Hellinga’s article and also other recent utterances among us on the Kingdom are confusing rather than clarifying the matter, however good they intend their Kingdom emphasis to be.
The simple, clear, and true-to-Scripture definition of the Kingdom of God or the Kingdom of Heaven (a definition long familiar among us) is the following:
The Kingdom of God (Heaven) is the rule of Christ in the hearts and lives of His people. This is known as the Kingdom of grace and it is the Kingdom we are to seek to promote in every area of our lives: home, school, church, labor, politics, art, science, recreation, business, industry, and also everywhere else. Nothing—absolutely nothing!—may be set aside as secular or set off from this rule of our Lord and King.
But there is more. Christ as the Theanthropos (the God-man) is the Messianic King also over the whole universe, all of which He governs in the best interest of His Church. This has long been recognized as the Kingdom of power. It was of this Messianic kingship that our Lord spoke when He said: “All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth” (Matt. 28:18). This is to be clearly distinguished from His supreme rule over all as the Second Person in the Holy Trinity, a rule that He exercises together with the Father and the Holy Spirit from everlasting to everlasting.
Setting aside a Distinction – This simple, clear, and true-to-Scripture distinction between Christ’s Messianic Kingdom of Grace and His Messianic Kingdom of Power is one that finds no favor in the article of Rev. Hellinga. He writes:
“Even though the Kingdom is a central teaching in the Scripture, it remains a reality that is hard to define (italics added) and one that is certainly not easily grasped by a casual reading of the Scriptures.” It may be suggested that in all likelihood he would not find this nearly so difficult if he would allow himself to be served in this by the clear thinking of Professor Louis Berkhof who taught with distinction at Calvin Seminary for thirty-eight years and thus had no small part in the training of more than a generation of Christian Reformed ministers.
Rev. Hellinga says in his article: “Furthermore, the Scriptures clearly teach that Cod is not only King of His people, of His Church, of Israel, but He is also the majestic King of the earth. Are these two separate Kingdoms, one of ‘grace’ and one of ‘power’?” Obviously, the clear-cut distinction (not separation) between the Kingdom of grace and the Kingdom of power finds no favor in his article.
He goes on to say: “When we see the Kingship of God in this perspective, we can never speak of two kingdoms, namely a kingdom of grace and a kingdom of power. For the Kingship of Christ that was seen and acknowledged in Israel is one and the same rule of the Christ that is seen and acknowledged in the world.”
And in speaking of the Kingdom as “a territory or terrain,” Rev. Hellinga states: “Please keep in mind that this is not a second, separate form of the Kingdom, distinct from His Kingly rule. It is not to be called a ‘Kingdom of grace’ in distinction from ‘the Kingdom of Power’.”
That Rev. Hellinga gets himself into a difficulty by setting aside this distinction between Kingdom of Grace and Kingdom of Power should, it appears to me, be obvious when, in the closing paragraph of his article, he writes: “By His Word He [God] placed His people under His gracious and recreative rule and made them. citizens of His-Kingdom” (Italics added). How could this be if no distinction is to be made between the Kingdom of grace and the Kingdom of power?
Testimony of Others – That the distinction between the Kingdom of Grace and the Kingdom of Power is in good repute among Reformed scholars is evident from the following:
1. Charles Hodge – “This messianic or mediatorial kingdom of Christ, being thus comprehensive, is presented in different aspects in the Word of God. Viewed as extending over all creatures, it is a kingdom of power, which, according to I Corinthians 15:24, He shall deliver up to God even the Father, when his mediatorial work is accomplished. Viewed in relation to his own people on earth it is the kingdom of grace. They all recognize Him as their absolute proprietor and sovereign . . . . Viewed in relation to the whole body of the redeemed, when the work of redemption is consummated, it is the kingdom of glory . . . (Systematic Theology. Vol. III, p. 856).
2. A. A. Hodge – “It [Christ’s mediatorial kingdom] has been distinguished as – (1) His kingdom of power, which embraces the entire universe in his providential and judicial administration. The end of this is the subjection of his enemies (Heb. 10:12, 13; I Cor. 15:25), the vindication of divine righteousness (John 5:22–27; 9:39), and the perfecting of his church. (2) His kingdom of grace which is spiritual alike as to its subjects, laws, modes of administration, and instrumentalities. (3) His kingdom of glory is the consummation of his providential and gracious administration, and will continue forever” (Outlines of Theology, p. 428).
3. H. Henry Meeter – “This great ideal, the Kingdom of Cod, that perfect State, will alone be realized by Jesus Christ, and not by natural means but by supernatural grace. That Kingdom He has already planted in this world. It is begun in regeneration, continued in sanctification, consists in this present dispensation in spiritual realities only” . . . (The Basic Ideas of Calvinism, p. 105. Italics added).
4. L. Berkhof – “In general we may define the mediatorial kingship of Christ as His official power to rule all things in heaven and on earth, for the glory of God, and for the execution of God’s purpose of salvation. We must distinguish, however, between a regnum gratiae [Kingdom of Grace] and a regnum potentiae [Kingdom of Power] .. . . The spiritual kingship of Christ is His royal rule over the regnum gratiae, that is over His people or the Church. It is a spiritual kingship, because it relates to a spiritual realm. It is the mediatorial rule as it is established in the hearts and lives of believers . . . . By the regnum potentiae we mean the dominion of God-man, Jesus Christ, over the universe, His providential and judicial administration of all things in the interest of the Church” (Systematic Theology, pp. 406 and 410).
5. Peter Y. De Jong – “Consisting as it [the Kingdom of God] does in tile rule of God in Christ over the hearts and lives of his people, it comes from above. It is of God himself, who through his Spirit on the basis of Christ’s perfect work renews the lives of those who are redeemed. Thus it transforms first and foremost the heart. Unless a man is born again, he shall neither see nor enter the kingdom.” And with good reason Dr. De Jong adds: “Too many in their reflection on the kingdom-gospel, however, stop here. They don’t seem to realize that as the principle of the new life in Christ Jesus it must and will demonstrate itself as a renewing principle for all of life . . .” (The Messenger, Feb., 1973, p. 11. Italics added).
6. William H. Rutgers – “Nevertheless, not the kingdom of power but that of grace is the burden of the prayer, ‘Thy kingdom come.’ In this kingdom, God, and very especially Christ, our Mediator is the King . . . The kingdom of God in this sense may then be defined as the rule or will of God established in the hearts of regenerated men, which rule or will is and progressively increases to be the operative principle that motivates the Christian’s life, gives direction to and determines the purpose of living” (Sermons on the Lord’s Prayer, pp. 65, 66. Italics added).
Teaching of Scripture – Now it remains to ask whether this recognition of a Kingdom of Grace is also the teaching of Scripture. We may quote authorities, many and at great length, but unless it is established that their teaching is based on what the Bible says it will all be of no avail. Consider then what Scripture teaches on the following matters as a clear indication that it speaks repeatedly of the Kingdom of God in a very special sense as a Kingdom of Grace:
1. Entrance into the Kingdom – The well-known words of Jesus to Nicodemus establish beyond a doubt that regeneration is the gateway to the Kingdom: “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born anew, he cannot see the Kingdom of God . . . Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he can· not enter in the kingdom of God” John 3:3, 5). Charles Hodge comments: “The condition of admission into that kingdom is regeneration John 3:5), con· version (Matt. 18:3), holiness of heart and life, for the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God; nor thieves, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners (I Cor. 6:9, 10; Gal. 5:21; Eph. 5:5)” (Systematic Theology, Vol. III, p. 587). This clearly does not refer to inclusion in the Kingdom of Power (which is all-inclusive) but to membership or citizenship in the Kingdom of God as a Kingdom of Grace.
2. Keys of the Kingdom – In Matthew 16:19 Jesus the King says to Peter and to His Church: “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind On earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” In Lord’s Day 31 of the Heidelberg Catechism we confess that these keys of the kingdom are: “The preaching of the holy gospel, and church discipline or excommunication out of the Christian Church. By these two the kingdom of heaven is opened to believers and shut against unbelievers.” What sense does this make unless it means that membership in Christ’s Church is coextensive with citizenship in His Kingdom of Grace?
3. Blessings of the Kingdom – In Romans 14:17 we are told: “The kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” Obviously, these great blessings arc not the property of all men under the universal rule of Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords. They are given to believers as citizens in His Kingdom of Grace.
4. Consummation of the Kingdom – Our Lord speaks of the glorious consummation of His Kingdom as the end of time on the Judgment Day in Matthew 25: “Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand [the sheep]. Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (vs. 34). “The goats” as well as “the sheep” are all, without exception, subjects of Christ’s messianic Kingdom of Power but only “the sheep” are citizens in His Kingdom of Grace. The Kingdom, the Kingdom, the Kingdom! – But is not all this effort love’s labor lost? Have we perhaps needlessly belabored this matter of making clear-cut and Scripturally sound distinctions with respect to the Kingdom? I think not. First and foremost in our calling as Christians is to seek Christ’s Kingdom and His righteousness (Matt. 6:33), and prominent in our prayers is to be the petition: Thy Kingdom come! But, unless we first know and see clearly what we are to seek as life’s summum bonum and that for which we are to pray, our eye will not be single and our common goal will elude us in our search. It is of the essence that we see eye to eye as to what we arc after lest we be at cross-purposes with each other.
“Let every creature rise and bring
Peculiar honors to ow-King,
Angels descend with songs again
And earth repeat the loud Amen.”