Basic HTML Version
413
III. Common Grace
In connection with the general operations of the Holy Spirit the subject of common grace also
calls for attention. It should be understood, however, that Reformed theology does not, like
Arminian theology, regard the doctrine of common grace as a part of Soteriology. At the same
time it does recognize a close connection between the operations of the Holy Spirit in the
sphere of creation and in that of redemption, and therefore feels that they should not be
entirely dissociated.
A. ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF COMMON GRACE.
1. THE PROBLEM WITH WHICH IT DEALS.
The origin of the doctrine of common grace was
occasioned by the fact that there is in the world, alongside of the course of the Christian life
with all its blessings, a natural course of life, which is not redemptive and yet exhibits many
traces of the true, the good, and the beautiful. The question arose, How can we explain the
comparatively orderly life in the world, seeing that the whole world lies under the curse of sin?
How is it that the earth yields precious fruit in rich abundance and does not simply bring forth
thorns and thistles? How can we account for it that sinful man still “retains some knowledge of
God, of natural things, and of the difference between good and evil, and shows some regard for
virtue and for good outward behavior”? What explanation can be given of the special gifts and
talents with which the natural man is endowed, and of the development of science and art by
those who are entirely devoid of the new life that is in Christ Jesus? How can we explain the
religious aspirations of men everywhere, even of those who did not come in touch with the
Christian religion? How can the unregenerate still speak the truth, do good to others, and lead
outwardly virtuous lives? These are some of the questions to which the doctrine of common
grace seeks to supply the answer.
2. AUGUSTINE’S ATTITUDE TO THIS PROBLEM.
Augustine did not teach the doctrine of
common grace, though he did not use the word “grace” exclusively as a designation of saving
grace. He spoke of a grace which Adam enjoyed before the fall, and even admitted that man’s
existing as a living, sentient, and rational being might be termed grace. But over against
Pelagius, who stressed the natural ability of man and recognized no other grace than that
consisting in the natural endowments of man, the law and the gospel, the example of Christ,
and the illumination of the understanding by a gracious influence of God, — he emphasized the
total inability of man and his absolute dependence on the grace of God as an inner renewing
power, which not only illumines the mind but also acts directly on the will of man, either as
operating or as co-operating grace. He employs the word “grace” almost exclusively in this
sense, and regards this grace as the necessary condition to the performance of each good act.
When the Pelagians pointed to the virtues of the heathen, who “merely through the power of