A Word from Bob
You’re reading part of a series of posts on Reformed thinking on “common grace.”
In my first post, I shared a collation of quotations on 7 Reformed Theologians on “Common Grace.” That included what John Calvin, Abraham Kuyper, John Murray, John Frame, Charles Hodges, Tim Keller, and R.C. Sproul said about common grace and what believers can learn from unbelievers. As those quotes showed, the Reformed doctrine of common grace explains how unsaved, unregenerate, totally depraved people under the noetic impact of sin can still make a legitimate contribution to culture, to the arts, to science, to research, and more.
In my second post, I added quotes from an 8th reformed theologian: Herman Bavinck on “Common Grace,” Part 1. I derived that post from: Bavinck, Herman. “Herman Bavinck’s ‘Common Grace.” Raymond C. Van Leeuwen, Translator. Calvin Theological Journal, 24(1), April 1989.
Today, I continue with additional posts from Bavinck on common grace. Some seek to create a division between Bavinck and Calvin on common grace. While Bavinck, a tremendous theologian in his own right, developed his own biblical thinking on common grace, he also was a thorough student of Calvin’s teaching on common grace. This is why the next set of quotes comes from:
Bavinck, Herman. “Calvin and Common Grace.” Geerhardus Vos, Translator. The Princeton Theological Review, 7(3), 1909, 437-465.
Calvin and Bavinck on the Christian View of Non-Christian Resources
In his introduction to Calvin and Common Grace, Bavinck moves immediately to the issue of what Christians do with non-Christian knowledge.
“But if Christianity bears such an absolute character, this fact immediately gives rise to a most serious problem. The Christian religion is by no means the sole content of history; long before Christianity made its appearance there existed in Greece and Rome a rich culture, a complete social organism, a powerful political system, a plurality of religions, an order of moral virtues and actions. And even now, underneath and side by side with the Christian religion a rich stream of natural life continues to flow. What, then, is the relation of Christianity to this wealth of natural life, which, originating in creation, has, under the law there imposed upon it, developed from age to age? What is the connection between nature and grace, creation and regeneration, culture and Christianity, earthly and heavenly vocation, the man and the Christian?” (PDF, 1) (all page numbers are from the PDF linked above).
In his Introduction, Bavinck traces historically the Christian Church’s engagement with non-Christian thinking.
“Only gradually could the Church rise to the higher standpoint of trying all things and holding fast to that which is good, and adopted an eclectic procedure in its valuation and assimilation of the existing culture” (2).
Historically, the Church used the Bible to assess extra-biblical resources, “holding fast to that which is good,” and assimilated, to varying degrees, “the existing culture.” Bavinck is not naïve. He understands that this could lead to a charge that the Church has compromised with the culture. Bavinck will have none of this. Instead of compromise, Bavinck traces a long history—going back to the Gospels themselves—of careful scriptural engagement with culture.
“For not only is the Gospel not ascetic, but even the Christian Church, at least in its first period, never adopted this standpoint. However much it might be on its guard against paganism, it never despised or condemned natural life as in itself sinful. Marriage and family life, secular calling and military estate, the swearing of the oath and the waging of war, government and state, science and art and philosophy,—all these were recognized from the beginning as divine institutions and as divine gifts. Hence theology early began to form relations with philosophy; the art of painting, as practiced in the catacombs, attached itself to the symbols and figures of antiquity; architecture shaped the churches after pagan models; music availed itself of the tunes which Graeco-Roman art had produced. On every hand a strong effort is perceptible to bring the new religion into touch with all existing elements of culture” (2).
Bavinck outlines the theological basis for Christian engagement with non-Christian thought.
“It was possible for the first Christians to do this because of their firm conviction that God is the Creator of heaven and earth, who in times past has never left Himself without witness to the heathen…. But in addition to this there existed in paganism a continued revelation through nature and the reason, in heart and conscience,—an illumination of the Logos, a speech from the wisdom of God through the hidden working of grace…. No doubt among the heathen this wisdom has in many respects become corrupted and falsified; they retain only fragments of truth, not the one, entire, full truth. But even such fragments are profitable and good. The three sisters, logic, physics and ethics, are like unto the three wise men from the east, who came to worship in Jesus the perfect wisdom. The good philosophical thoughts and ethical precepts found scattered through the pagan world receive in Christ their unity and center. They stand for the desire which in Christ finds its satisfaction; they represent the question to which Christ gives the answer; they are the idea of which Christ furnishes the reality. The pagan world, especially in its philosophy, is a pedagogy unto Christ; Aristotle, like John the Baptist, is the forerunner of Christ. It behooves the Christians to enrich their temple with the vessels of the Egyptians and to adorn the crown of Christ, their king, with the pearls brought up from the sea of paganism” (2-3).
Had you not known that this quote was contained in a document in which Bavinck develops Calvin’s theology of common grace, surely many would be crying out, “Bavinck is an integrationist! He suggests that we spoil the Egyptians and plunder the pagans!” If so, then Augustine, too, needs to be so accused.
In On Christian Doctrine, Augustine, commenting on Exodus 3:21-22, 35-36 (“plundering the Egyptians”), used a similar metaphor for how Christians might engage with non-Christian thinking.
“If those who are called philosophers, and especially the Platonists, have said aught that is true and in harmony with our faith, we are not only not to shrink from it, but to claim it for our own use from those who have unlawful possession of it . . . all branches of heathen learning have not only false and superstitious fancies and heavy burdens of unnecessary toil, which every one of us, when going out under the leadership of Christ from the fellowship of the heathen, ought to abhor and avoid; but they contain also liberal instruction which is better adapted to the use of the truth, and some most excellent precepts of morality; and some truths in regard even to the worship of the One God are found among them… These, therefore, the Christian, when he separates himself in spirit from the miserable fellowship of these men, ought to take away from them, and to devote to their proper use in preaching the gospel.”
Augustine, Calvin, and Bavinck used God’s all-sufficient Scripture to assess extra-biblical resources and to determine whether or not, and to what extent and in what ways the Christian might use such resources. That is a historical fact. It is also a historical fact that they understood both sin and (common) grace.
Calvin and Bavinck on God’s Gifts to All People
Bavinck presents Calvin as delicately balancing the scriptural truths of the depravity of the unregenerate person and God’s gift of common grace which is the foundation for the legitimate contribution of the unregenerate person.
“…with Calvin reprobation does not mean the withholding of all grace. Although man through sin has been rendered blind to all the spiritual realities of the kingdom of God, so that a special revelation of God’s fatherly love in Christ and a specialis illuminatio by the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the sinners here become necessary, nevertheless there exists alongside of these a generalis gratia which dispenses to all men various gifts. If God had not spared man, his fall would have involved the whole of nature in ruin. As it was, God immediately after the Fall interposed, in order by His common grace to curb sin and to uphold in being the universitas rerum…. Although for man’s sake the whole of nature is subject to vanity, nevertheless nature is upheld by the hope which God implanted in its heart. There is no part of the world in which some spark of the divine glory does not glimmer. Though it be a metaphorical mode of expression, since God should not be confounded with nature, it may be affirmed in a truly religious sense that nature is God. Heaven and earth with their innumerable wonders are a magnificent display of the divine wisdom” (9).
Though fallen and unsaved, “there is no part of the world in which some spark of the divine glory does not glimmer.” This is not at all limited to material creation. In fact, humanity, including fallen humanity, as the pinnacle of God’s creation, especially is a mirror revealing God.
“Especially the human race is still a clear mirror of the operation of God, an exhibition of His manifold gifts. In every man there is still a seed of religion, a consciousness of God, wholly ineradicable, convincing all of the heavenly grace on which their life depends, and leading even the heathen to name God the Father of mankind. The supernatural gifts have been lost, and the natural gifts have become corrupted, so that man by nature no longer knows who and what God seeks to be to him. Still these latter gifts have not been withdrawn entirely from man. Reason and judgment and will, however corrupt, yet, in so far as they belong to man’s nature, have not been wholly lost. The fact that men are found either wholly or in part deprived of reason, proves that the tithe to these gifts is not self-evident and that they are not distributed to men on the basis of merit. Nonetheless, the grace of God imparts them to us” (PDF, 9).
Calvin and Bavinck on Honoring and Making the Most of Art and Science
Based upon their theology of common grace, both Calvin and Bavinck teach that unregenerate persons can make contributions in the arts, sciences, and other areas that regenerate persons should not despise.
“The reason whereby man distinguishes between truth and error, good and evil, and forms conceptions and judgments, and also the will which is inseparable from human nature as the faculty whereby man strives after what he deems good for himself,—these raise him above the animals. Consequently it is contrary to Scripture as well as to experience to attribute to man such a perpetual blindness as would render him unable to form any true conception. On the contrary, there is light still shining in the darkness, men still retain a degree of love for the truth, some sparks of the truth have still been preserved. Men carry in themselves the principles of the laws which are to govern them individually and in their association with one another. They agree in regard to the fundamentals of justice and equity, and everywhere exhibit an aptness and liking for social order (PDF, 9-10).
“Sometimes a remarkable sagacity is given to men whereby they are not only able to learn certain things, but also to make important inventions and discoveries, and to put these to practical use in life. Owing to all this, not only is an orderly civil society made possible among men, but arts and sciences develop, which are not to be despised. For these should be considered gifts of the Holy Spirit” (PDF, 10).
“Sagacity” is wisdom, knowledge, understanding. Bavinck (and Calvin) taught that “sagacity” is given to (fallen) men.” Rather than despising these and claiming that common grace does not include discoveries and contributions from the non-Christian, instead, “these should be considered gifts of the Holy Spirit.”
“It is true the Holy Spirit as a spirit of sanctification dwells in believers only, but as a spirit of life, of wisdom and of power He works also in those who do not believe. No Christian, therefore, should despise these gifts; on the contrary, he should honor art and science, music and philosophy and various other products of the human mind as praestantissima Spiritus dona, and make the most of them for his own personal use” (PDF, 10).
What does the Bible say that we should do with extra-biblical resources? What does Scripture teach about the Christian use of non-Christian resources? We should “honor art and science, music and philosophy and various other products of the human mind… and make the most of them for his own personal use.”
“In the diversity of all these gifts we see the remnants of the divine image whereby man is distinguished from all other creatures” (PDF, 10).
“Calvin affirms, it is true, that the virtues of the natural man, however noble, do not suffice for justification at the judgment-bar of God, but this is due to his profound conviction of the majesty and spiritual character of the moral law. Aside from this, he is more generous in his recognition of what is true and good, wherever it be found, than any other Reformer. He surveys the entire earth and finds everywhere the evidence of the divine goodness, wisdom, and power (PDF, 10).
While Calvin and Bavinck each understand the noetic effect of sin, and the need for saving grace, they also each recognize the noetic effect of common grace—finding everywhere even in the non-Christian “the evidence of the divine goodness, wisdom, and power.
Join the Conversation
Which of the quotations from Bavinck stand out to you as most important? Why? What implications do these quotes have for how we view the arts, science, and research?
