A Book Review of Scott Aniol’s Citizens and Exiles
Previously I had blogged (here and here) that ministry stability and progress require unity in vision, mission, philosophy, and doctrine. I believe that Scott Aniol’s book, Citizens and Exiles, provides clear direction for bringing about such unity. Much of the disunity that can be observed in the church today (whether in conservative evangelical circles or fundamentalist circles) can be explained by variant cultural philosophies and church missions. Therefore, I highly recommend Aniol’s book as a biblically sound portrayal of the mission of the church and a cultural philosophy for the church.
Citizens and Exiles begins with a brief Forward by Owen Strachan who, like me, is coming from a Kuyperian framework (footnote). But he has also grown to appreciate some strands of Two Kingdoms theology. At the same time, he recognizes the pitfalls from those who seek to use Kuyper to redeem the culture or Christianize society in ways that do not rest on New Testament support.1
The Introduction identifies multiple approaches of the church’s response to our deplorable culture: 1) Christ Against Culture isolationists who withdraw from culture in favor of spiritual only pursuits; 2a) Christian Nationalism Transformationalists who want to forward an external Christianizing of nations enforced by the Mosaic law; 2b) Integrationist Transformationalists who want to accommodate the current culture to gain power and influence so that the world will respect, like, and accept the Christian agenda for redeeming the culture; 3) an antithesis between the common kingdom of this world in which Christians live as exiles and the redemptive kingdom in which Christians are citizens of Christ’s redemptive kingdom.
The key to keep the church on mission is to recognize and order one’s responsibilities in both the common kingdom (God’s sovereign rule delegated to the first Adam) and the redemptive kingdom (God’s sovereign rule delegated to the Second Adam). This framework guides Christians to properly engage culture in the common kingdom while staying on mission as a church in relation to the redemptive kingdom over which Christ rules. Now, we await His return to reign eternally and we live in an age between these two Adams and thus with these two kingdoms.
Chapter one explains the two kingdoms (how God sovereignly reigns over all) and summarizes the biblical support.
Chapter two explains our dual citizenship: citizens of this world (the common kingdom) and citizens of a heavenly or redemptive kingdom. This understanding impacts our engagement with culture—especially if our responsibility no longer centers on taking dominion of the common kingdom but awaiting the Second Adam to do so at His return. This is in stark contrast to the transformationalist approach (e.g., Christian Nationalism).
Chapter three answers how we should live in the culture around us based on how God works in the world in two distinct kingdoms. We are dual citizens in these two distinct kingdoms guided by common grace general revelation in the common kingdom and special revelation in the redemptive kingdom (see esp. 1 Pet. 2). Although we strive to live peaceably even with outsiders in the common kingdom (Rom. 12; 1 Pet. 3:8; 1 Tim. 2), we also ought to expect to be persecuted (2 Tim. 3:12; 1 Pet. 3:16).
Chapter four begins a more specific focus on directions for living in the common kingdom—specifically related to family and vocation. God works through all professions (Ps. 147:13) and providentially assigns us to our roles where we can serve Him (1 Cor. 7:17) in order to preserve order and peace in this world. Whatever your work, do it to the Lord (Col. 4:1, 23).
Chapter five continues a more specific focus on directions for living in the common kingdom—specifically related to government. This chapter rejects a Christian nationalism (Christendom) approach in favor of a common grace approach. Christendom has both benefits and drawbacks. But ultimately it does not fit with God’s administration of His rule in this age in the common kingdom. We should support Christian involvement in every sphere to promote righteousness and oppose evil (the second table of the law in the public square), but we must also understand that in this age we are exiles who will be persecuted and generally lack power and influence (1 Tim. 3:1, 12). Our main posture should be submission, recognizing the limited jurisdiction of government under God’s ultimate rule.
Chapter six continues a more specific focus on directions for living in the common kingdom—specifically related to Culture making. Since we are made in God’s image and blessed with the task of the Creation Mandate, we produce culture. Culture making begins with properly interpreting and communicating God’s general revelation through His special revelation in order to present proper conclusions about God’s reality to others through various forms. Art is an interpretation of God’s world that should correspond with truth, goodness, and beauty; culture, then is not neutral.
Chapter seven begins a more specific focus on directions for living in the redemptive kingdom: the Church. There are distinct missions and responsibilities as a gathered church and as individuals (redemptive and common kingdom distinctions). Jesus’ authority and Commission directs the Church (Matt. 28:18-20). His rule over all is not currently fully realized and won’t be until He returns to vanquish His enemies (Heb. 2:8-9). As a church, we do what Christ has commanded and this is enunciated in particular by the apostles in the epistles to direct our work as a church. The only authority to guide how the church should operate is found in the epistles.
The mission of the Church is exclusively redemptive in nature. Our mission is not cultural or social transformation. The church’s mission is spiritual—how to live regardless of the social situation you find yourself in. It is true that churches should instruct individuals on how to live Christianly in all of society. But our job is not to transform society, but to best influence the word by making disciples who live faithfully to God in all of life.
Chapter eight focuses in on worship and highlights the aspect of warfare—commitment to God and His things means we must fight sin. That means there is a place for the church to confront sin in this world. Confrontation begins with compassionate appeal (2 Cor. 10), and confrontation demands courage to take a stand when appeals are rebuffed. But our real warfare is not against enemies in the flesh. And we need an eternal focus to persevere through persecution (2 Cor. 4:16-18).
In the appendix, Aniol provides a detailed response and review of Doug Wilson’s Mere Christendom.
I greatly appreciate Aniol’s careful treatment of a Christian response to the cultural compromises and mission drift of the church rampant in our day. He carefully navigates between Christian nationalism on one side and moderate accommodation to progressives on the other side—both sides of which are guilty of the transformationalist error. Whether or not one is convinced of the two kingdoms theology versus a one kingdom framework, this book rightfully guards against an over-realized eschatology that underlies the cultural compromise and mission drift so common in the church. May conservative Christians find unity by rallying around many of the ideas helpfully enunciated in this book.
Kevin Collins has served as a junior high youth leader in Michigan, a missionary in Singapore, a Christian School teacher in Utah, and a Bible writer for the BJU Press. He currently works for American Church Group of South Carolina.
- My commitment to the Kuyperian framework has been focused on the genius of sphere sovereignty while others apparently are committed to a one-kingdom administration of Christ’s Lordship over all. I myself, even as a progressive dispensationalist, am wary of an over-realized eschatology and limit the “already” aspect of the New Covenant or kingdom to that which is redemptive or spiritual (and not the physical, social, or political—that primarily awaits the “not yet” with the return of Christ). Thus, I seek to consistently maintain a Christ and Culture philosophy of antithesis rather than being pulled into a philosophy of accommodation and transformationalism all too common to progressive dispensationalists with an over-realized eschatology who make use of the Kuyperian framework. [↩]