Systematic Theology, by Louis Berkhof - New Leaven

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
477