Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Religious Music & Entertainment
Common Grace, 2.34

Common Grace, 2.34

Last updated on: April 27, 2021 at 8:00 am by Coyle Neal

Common Grace, 2.34 2021-04-21T13:29:27-06:00 Coyle Neal

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

This post is part of a series walking through the second volume of Abraham Kuyper’s Common Grace.

Having discussed the difference between the institutional church and the church organic, Kuyper turns to the question of that most institutional of all churches: the national church. This is out of the orbit of most of us in America, having not had an official church in the nation ever or on the state level since 1838. But what is the role of an “official” state church?

The proponents of the national church want one with all the nation as members, not just believers (and their children, given Kuyper’s theology). This is so that such a church will “bless the ordinary civic life in a broader sphere and have an educating effect” on the people. (291)

We agree on 1) the church’s impact on the elect and 2) the church’s impact on society. But

“we differ on a point: to achieve this good goal they incorporate civil society into the church, whereas for this same purpose we plant the church, like a city on a hill, in the midst of civil society.” (291)

This contrast isn’t one of mere terms–we can use whatever terms we want here. The question is one of who is in the church. We all agree on the wider impact of Christianity on society. We disagree about whether that impact is direct through bringing the whole nation into the church or indirect through the influence of a church that dwells in the midst of the nation.

We must certainly admit that the “national church dominates virtually all of church history.” (291-292) It is therefore difficult to resist, especially given that

1) even Calvinist nations fall to this idea, albeit in modified form (the modification being tolerance for other churches, though not always/often full tolerance). (292) Even America has an informal and reflexive version of this, albeit one broken slightly by American mobility.
2) opposition unfortunately “has emerged almost exclusively from the spiritualist sects.” (293) These go to the opposite extreme and tear down the covenant and infant baptism, even as they turn to Gnosticism and a rejection of the world entirely. They, as it were, form a “sect”

Kuyper here takes a minute to discuss what a “sect” is (what we would call “cults” today). We don’t want to just use that term for everyone and everything we disagree with and every denomination that forms–especially those that form in opposition to the state church. Specifically, the sect is the entity that engages in

“denying the covenant of God, abolishing infant baptism, tearing asunder nature and spirit, and letting the church exist exclusively for the sake of heaven, while simply turning their back o the ordinary, natural human life in spiritual one-sidedness and haughty pride…. a group is a sect only when it places itself outside human life. It becomes a sect when a number of individuals place their association outside the life of humanity and view themselves as a little holy circle that still mistakenly remains on earth but in fact has nothing to do with life here on earth. Such a group is not a sect until it ceases to confess Jesus as the Son of Man.” (293-294)

By contrast, as Protestants we recognize a “multiplicity” of churches as well as the “life of humanity” from which “a little holy circle” cannot escape, but instead must continue to live within and witness to. (294)

These cults are not the proper response to the national church. Instead, it is to point out that the church is for believers–with the understanding that an over-spiritualization of this idea will cost us the covenant of infant baptism. By contrast we are to hold that Scripture teaches that

We must hold to the covenant;
The link between believers and their children “is a sacred, organic link that must be honored carefully” (295)
Therefore “only adult baptism [credobaptistm] starts from a false premise” and so this spiritual individualism is a false premise. (295)

We also see in Scripture that the church “has significance for the world” which is lost in the spiritualist view. This too becomes a cutting off from the “life of the world” and moves towards sect-ishness, ultimately rejecting not just the national church but “any conception of church” in favor of “sweet, pious societies.” Their peace of soul removes them from “influence on the course of events.” (295-296)

Instead, the true, covenantal, church is the real alternative to the national church. This only comes from Calvinists, whose doctrines of particular and common grace allow both a healthy church and faithful life in the world. (296) Without this distinction, the national church is the only logical option, lest the world be utterly abandoned to darkness. This claim “is not an exaggeration”–there must be grace outside the church (common grace), else all that is outside must be brought in and exorcised. (296)

Common grace helps us have a healthy view of the relationship between the true church and the world, as well as between true churches and sects. Common grace shows us that outside of the church there can be (non-saving) grace. The national church goes so far that it flips this, tolerating atheists even as it expels believers, while still leaving much of life outside of the church. Which we are fine with because of common grace, but which–as the natural sciences have flourished–forces the national church into a choice between spiritualism and hostility to the sciences, or the out-and-out weakening of orthodox doctrine.

Dr. Coyle Neal is co-host of the City of Man Podcast and an Associate Professor of Political Science at Southwest Baptist University in Bolivar, MO

Previous Post

April 23, 2021

We should fear God

Next Post

April 30, 2021 More than one

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Action AFI Top 100 Animation Best Picture Winner BFI Top 250 Biography Biopic Books Childrens Christian Classics Classics Comedy Crime Documentary Drama Editor's Choice Family Fantasy Fantasy Films Foreign Historical Historical Fiction History Horror Horror IMDB Top 250 Indie Memoir Modern Novel Musical Mystery Non-Fiction Oscars Philosophy Poetry Popular Literature Reading and Writing Reality Romance Science Fiction Science Fiction Silent Sports Thriller TV Show Uncategorized Western Westerns Young Adult

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 June 2017 January 2017 December 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who is the "chosen lady" addressed in a New Testament letter?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Mary Phoebe Unspecified church Lydia