Moral Government sort of falls under Open Theism but also stands on it's own. I know there are many negative views on open theism so I don't want to strictly put it into that category. It's basically the way God governs His creation and what we, as moral beings, are held accountable for.
I guess I haven't heard of "Open Theism" either.
I found this in wikipedia (not that that is a reliable source, but it can give me a starting point):
{G}overnmental theory holds that Christ's suffering was a real and meaningful substitute for the punishment humans deserve, but it did not consist of Christ receiving the exact punishment due to sinful people. Instead, God publicly demonstrated his displeasure with sin through the suffering of his own sinless and obedient Son as a propitiation. Christ's suffering and death served as a substitute for the punishment humans might have received. On this basis, God is able to extend forgiveness while maintaining divine order, having demonstrated the seriousness of sin and thus allowing his wrath to "pass over."
This sounds like an interesting theory.
I have problems with a lot of the aspects of the substitution theory. I feel it makes God out to be a vengeful, wrathful being, without the love that Jesus taught. The concept that anyone could purchase anything from God with blood as a currency just seems wrong. I subscribe to the "Christus Victor" theory myself.
I would like to hear more from others on this topic.