Common Grace, 3.11

Last updated on: July 19, 2022 at 8:00 am by Coyle Neal

Common Grace, 3.11 2022-07-12T13:18:07-06:00 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 third volume of Abraham Kuyper’s Common Grace

In the previous chapter, Kuyper examined the relationship between common grace and government. In this chapter, Kuyper is going to explore the relationship between government and the people. Does common grace come only through government? Or does it come from elsewhere as well?

These questions are important, for if common grace comes only from government,

“we consequently stand unresistingly and without any rights over against it [government]. In that case, we are nothing apart from it, and all good gifts must come to us through it. At that point, its rule over us, over our lives, and over our possessions must be absolute and unlimited. We then end up in the most extreme form of dictatorship.” (85)

Obviously this isn’t either the way reality works or what we want to see in the world. The problem is that some have argued for rights and freedom from “the basis of human need or the constitution of human nature.” (86) Both of these foundations ignore the depths of human depravity. Ignoring how far our sin goes leads towards the spirit behind the French Revolution. If depravity is indeed true (and it is), then “we must acknowledge the folly of granting civil rights and civil liberties to such people.” (87) Clearly this is also not true. But to go the other way and suggest that because of the “small sparks” of the Image of God that remain in human beings we should grant some rights and freedoms to people, we are basically “saying that the depravity of sin was not so comprehensive after all, and from this… it would follow that both the psalmist and Paul were exaggerating.” (87)

So rights and liberties must not be based on human nature. Instead, with an understanding of common grace as something from outside of human beings, we can be both depraved fully by nature and the recipients from God directly of “those rights and freedoms that are needed for civil society.” (87) In this view, society flows from grace, albeit unevenly, around the world.

Yet some demand “equality of conditions,” based on our equality of human nature. Yet if common grace is the source of rights and freedoms, our existence as human beings must be diverse (albeit evolving and developing!) Over time, common grace expands and matures. But again, does it come only through government? Kuyper gives us a resounding NO. Both post-fall and post-flood common grace pre-dates government, and “works fully apart from government” as we’ve seen extensively across the last two volumes. (88-89)

Government arrives within an existing society with a limited purpose:

“Government exists not to encompass all of human life, but only for the purpose of fulfilling a limited task in that life. Government thus emerges within existing conditions.” (89)

So we see a “contrast between state and society.” (89) Common grace works in both, not through the state on the people exclusively. Society exists in other spheres as well–family, agriculture, commerce, etc. These may even interact beyond politics with other nations…

The individual also has a sphere beyond government, as does the broader society. Therefore there must be strict limits on government. As common grace unfolds, rights and liberties expand–often leading to conflict between society and the government. This happens both because government tends to expand and because it tends not to want to let go.

At the end of the day, if people are basically good then we need no revelation and no grace. Human nature is sufficient and we need not consider God when thinking about the state-society relationship (and this even without bringing active rebellion into consideration). Without Scripture, we either end with “popular sovereignty” or “state sovereignty.” (91) Popular sovereignty (what we might think of as social contract theory) is clearly historically false and doesn’t explain why we can’t all just withdraw from the society. State sovereignty (we might think of this as a sort-of proto-nationalism) likewise falls apart as it tends to absorb all things into itself.

Dr. Coyle Neal is co-host of the City of Man Podcast an Amazon Associate (which is linked in this blog), and an Associate Professor of Political Science at Southwest Baptist University in Bolivar, MO

Previous Post

July 15, 2022

Loving the Middle Ages

Next Post

July 22, 2022 You should still see "I still see you"

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 built the Ark of the Covenant?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Aaron Bezalel Moses Joshua