The sovereign rule of God over the universe is generally accepted among Christians. However, the advocates of open theism—theologians who teach that God essentially reacts to events rather than determines them—ignore this clear teaching of Scripture. Question 27 of the Heidelberg Catechism asks, “What do you mean by the providence of God?” The answer illustrates how the church has historically understood divine sovereignty:

“The almighty and everywhere present power of God, whereby, as it were by His hand, He still upholds heaven, earth, and all creatures, and so governs them that herbs and grass, rain and drought, fruitful and barren years, food and drink, health and sickness, riches and poverty, yea, all things, come not by chance but by His fatherly hand.”

It is appropriate to speak of the sovereign rule of God in a general way as applying to the three per-sons of the Godhead: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There is, however, a sovereignty attributed to the Son that is special and unique. This sovereignty is associated with His role as Mediator, and it belongs to Him in consequence of His great work of atonement on the cross. This sovereignty is called Christ’s mediatorial sovereignty, or mediatorial kingship.

Scriptural Foundation of Christ’s Mediatorial Sovereignty

While the New Testament church, the church fathers, and the Reformers all recognized the lordship of Christ, it was William Symington, RP minister of Stranraer, Scotland, who clearly distinguished between Christ’s kingly rule as God and His kingly rule as mediator. He convincingly presented the scriptural grounds and practical implications of Christ’s mediatorial sovereignty in his book, Messiah the Prince.

One of the key New Testament passages with reference to this topic is Philippians 2:5–11. These verses refer to Christ’s humiliation and exaltation. The exaltation came as a consequence of the humiliation. This is clear from two Greek words, dio kai (“therefore also”), that begin verse 9. As Paul Thielman indicates, “This is a strong way of showing that in what follows Paul describes a response to the selfless humility and obedience depicted in the first part of the passage.” With reference to this passage, Peter T. O’Brien rightly points out, “In his exalted state Jesus now exercises universal lordship.”

This begs the question: Since Jesus never ceased to be God when He became flesh, was He not always sovereign? This question must be answered in the affirmative. This means that there is a special sovereignty granted to the second person of the Godhead in relation to His position as mediator. In the words of Symington, “Christ, besides the dominion which belongs to him originally and essentially as God, is invested with a delegated and official dominion as Mediator.”

This mediatorial sovereignty of Christ is prophetically announced in the Old Testament. For example, in Psalm 2, the Father, referring to the Son, declares: “As for me, I have set my King on Zion, my holy hill” (v. 6). The concluding verses of this psalm speak of the Messiah’s rule over the nations and His claim on their allegiance.

The evidence in Acts indicates that the preaching of the New Testament church emphasized the kingdom of God. It is impossible to have a kingdom without a sovereign, and the disciples unambiguously taught their listeners about Jesus Christ and His sovereign status. When Paul and Silas were preaching in Thessalonica, a section of the population became angry. These enemies of the gospel provoked a riot. They dragged some of the young converts before the city authorities and accused them of supporting those who say, “[T]here is another king, Jesus” (Acts 17:7). The word another is significant. It is the Greek word heteros, meaning another of a different kind, in contrast to allos, which means another of the same kind. From this, it is clear that the apostles preached Christ as King, a King who was utterly unique and distinct—another of a different kind, King of kings and Lord of lords.

Historic Recognition of Christ’s Rule

By the Reformers: In the 16th Century, Luther, Calvin, Knox, and the other Reformers rejected the false claims of the Pope and Roman Catholicism, recognizing Jesus Christ as the source of all authority.

While the Continental Reformers recognized the kingship of Jesus Christ, as did the Scottish Reformers, it was in the heat of controversy in 17th Century Scotland that the implications of Christ’s kingship were further developed with reference to church and state. J. D. Douglas, writing about the situation in Scotland, makes the comment:

“Where the 16th century Reformers followed Luther, they took as their watchword ‘none but Christ saves,’ those of the 17th century were forced by political developments to add a further word, ‘none but Christ reigns.’”

By the Covenanters: The tyrannical reign of Charles I provoked the Scottish nation to take a stand against autocratic measures. They drew up a National Covenant in which they asserted Christ’s claims in church and state. The signing of this covenant took place in Greyfriars church-yard by the ministers and nobility of Scotland on Feb. 28, 1638, and then subsequently by the vast majority of the nation. On that momentous occasion, Alexander Henderson declared, “This was the day of the Lord’s power—the day of the Redeemer’s strength on which the princes of the people assembled to swear their allegiance to the King of kings.”

The signing of the covenant and the meeting of the General Assembly (Nov. 1638) provoked royal opposition. Charles I sent an army from England to crush the Covenanters. In such circumstances, the Covenanters believed that they were justified, according to the Word of God, to defend them-selves. Scotland was still a separate nation, even though it shared a king with England. It was in this conflict with Charles I that the blue banner of the Covenanters was first flown. The banner displayed the words “For Christ’s Crown and Covenant.” This is an example of a nation taking a stand for the crown rights of King Jesus and the covenant that defined those rights.

Pastoral Application of Christ’s Rule

Christ’s mediatorial sovereignty applies to all of life: to churches and their office bearers, to institutions of learning, to the legal profession, to the arts and the sciences, to home and family life. However, it is the purpose of this article to apply this doctrine to Christ’s pastoral care of his flock.

Christ as mediatorial King makes His people willing. In the exercise of His kingly office, Christ makes the recipients of salvation willing to yield to the Messiah and receive Him as Savior and Lord. It is in the context of Christ’s mediatorial sovereignty that the statement is made in Psalm 110:3: “Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power.” Symington makes the point:

“God, from the very perfection of his nature, could not, in his absolute character, deal with rebel sinners in any way with a view to their salvation.…Hence the necessity of another being appointed, not only to purchase and to offer redemption through his blood, but to apply it, to give it effect, to bestow the benefits of grace on the destined subjects of salvation.”

Christ as mediatorial King enables His people to triumph. As king, Christ ensures that His people will not be overcome by their enemies. The Christian faces a formidable array of opposing forces. Some of these forces operate within the citadel of the heart; the others arise from the forces of evil in the world opposed to Christ and His kingdom. With respect to the heart of the believer, Symington writes: “ndwelling corruptions wage incessant warfare against the quickening, sanctifying and comforting work of the Spirit” (See Rom. 7:21–23).