The Error that Fallen Men and Women Can Increase Common Grace and so Achieve Salvation— The Rejection of Errors, Third and Fourth Head of Doctrine, Canons of Dort (5)

Synod rejects the errors of those . . .

Who teach that corrupt and natural man can make such good use of common grace (by which they mean the light of nature) or of the gifts remaining after the fall that he is able thereby gradually to obtain a greater grace—evangelical or saving grace—as well as salvation itself; and that in this way God, for his part, shows himself ready to reveal Christ to all people, since he provides to all, to a sufficient extent and in an effective manner, the means necessary for the revealing of Christ, for faith, and for repentance.

For Scripture, not to mention the experience of all ages, testifies that this is false: “He makes known his words to Jacob, his statutes and his laws to Israel; he has done this for no other nation, and they do not know his laws” (Ps. 147:19–20); “In the past God let all nations go their own way” (Acts 14:16); “They were kept by the Holy Spirit from speaking God’s word in Asia”; and “When they had come to Mysia, they tried to go to Bithynia, but the Spirit would not allow them to” (Acts 16:6–7).

________________________________________

Of course, Arminians do not want to say that sinful people are saved by personal merit gained through accumulated good works or human effort. But they do seek a way to affirm that God enables all people to seek grace, and then upon finding that grace, and provided they continue to seek grace, the more grace they will attain, eventually leading to the exercise of saving faith. To put this in popular jargon, “God helps those who help themselves.”

To circumvent the biblical and Reformed doctrine of total inability articulated throughout the previous articles of the canons, which teaches that that no one can come to Christ unless they are first made alive through regeneration, Arminians stress a universal, potential grace. Arminians affirmed that anyone who takes advantage of this universal grace (which they spoke of as described as “common grace,” and which has a different meaning than current Reformed uses of the term), can eventually receive sufficient grace to exercise “evangelical” or “saving faith.” Recent Arminians often base their view on contemporary notions of “fairness”— it isn’t right for God to give grace to some and withhold it from others since that would not be “fair.” So grace must be universal in some sense. But early Arminians—such as those singled out by the Canons—usually framed the matter in semi-Pelagian categories. Adam’s fall corrupted human nature. Nevertheless although remaining corrupt and sinful, humans still retain the ability to seek grace, gain more grace, and act upon it by exercising faith and repentance.

The specific issue addressed here is how Arminians understand “common grace” (the light of nature) which is an end-run around the Reformed stress upon an efficacious, particular grace. This becomes clear when the canons identify the two errors addressed here. The first error is that sinners supposedly “make such good use of common grace (by which they mean the light of nature) or of the gifts remaining after the fall that he is able thereby gradually to obtain a greater grace—evangelical or saving grace—as well as salvation itself.“ Depravity, yes. Total depravity and inability, no.

The second Arminian attempt to circumvent biblical and Reformed teaching regarding a particular and efficacious salvation is identified as “God, for his part, shows himself ready to reveal Christ to all people, since he provides to all, to a sufficient extent and in an effective manner, the means necessary for the revealing of Christ, for faith, and for repentance.” The logical outcome of this should be obvious. If God provides a universal and provisional grace—but countless people don’t come to faith, and then they perish—it is assumed to be their fault (they chose poorly), and is not the result of God’s judgment upon those guilty for Adam’s sin, their own corrupt nature, as well as their actual sins. For Arminians, original sin and the resulting corruption of human nature do not damn (having been removed by prevenient grace), but by failing to act upon universal grace there is no possible escape from God’s punishment for actual sins only.

As the Canons have repeatedly made this clear in previous articles and refutations under the third and fourth head of doctrine, here, in rejection of errors #5, the biblical proof-texts focus upon God’s specific purposes in dealing with his people, and not with the entirety of the human race, fallen in Adam, and therefore guilty before God and unable to take avail of grace, unless and until God grants them grace (regeneration) first.

Note: While common grace is taught by most Reformed churches, this is the only place in the Reformed confessions where it is mentioned—and that negatively. There is an ongoing in-house debate among the Reformed (most notably the Protestant Reformed Churches) to deny such a thing as “common grace.” That is a debate for another time and place.