Faith in the Public Square: Why Common Grace Still Matters

This article has been adapted from MARSCAST Episode 261 featuring Dr. J. Mark Beach, Dr. Andrew Compton, and Rev. Steve Swets of Redeemer United Reformed Church in St. John, Dyer, IN. 

The doctrine of common grace remains one of the more nuanced and often misunderstood theological categories within the Reformed tradition. While widely affirmed across various denominations, its implications—both historically and in present-day Christian life—have been the subject of deep reflection, debate, and even division. This article concludes our series on common grace, revisits the complex history surrounding the events of 1924 in the Christian Reformed Church (CRC), engages recent scholarship that seeks to reframe those events, and considers how common grace shapes Christian engagement with culture today.

The Historical Flashpoint of 1924: A Church at a Crossroads

In North American Reformed theology, the year 1924 stands out as a moment of theological and ecclesiastical significance. That year, the CRC adopted what came to be known as “the three points of common grace,” which articulated God's benevolence toward all humanity, not only toward the elect. These points affirmed that God shows favor even to the non-elect in a temporal sense; that He restrains sin in individuals and society; and that unbelievers are capable of performing civic good, albeit without salvific merit.

The adoption of these points did not happen in a vacuum. They were, in many respects, a response to theological and cultural tensions brewing within the denomination. Yet the formalization of these points triggered a church split. A significant faction, led by Rev. Herman Hoeksema, objected to what they viewed as extra-confessional statements being imposed upon ministers, ultimately leading to the formation of the Protestant Reformed Churches in America (PRCA).

Much of the disagreement centered not on whether God providentially governs all people, but on the perceived theological imprecision and ecclesiastical overreach involved in how the CRC formulated and enforced these doctrines. Opponents of the three points argued that requiring assent to non-confessional statements—especially when those statements had not undergone extensive synodical scrutiny—set a dangerous precedent. Supporters, on the other hand, believed that the three points were a necessary clarification of scriptural and confessional truth in the face of growing theological confusion.

Reassessing the Split: The Work of John Bolt and Contemporary Reflections

Nearly a century later, scholars have returned to the events of 1924 with fresh eyes and a more reflective distance. Among the most notable is John Bolt, professor emeritus of Calvin Theological Seminary, whose recent work in the Calvin Theological Journal seeks to reexamine how the controversy unfolded and what might have been done differently.

Bolt does not reject the doctrine of common grace. In fact, he affirms its biblical grounding and theological utility. However, he questions whether the process and tone of the 1924 synod were necessary—or wise. Could the church have avoided a split by formulating the doctrine in a more measured or diplomatically sound way? Could more time have been spent engaging the objections in a spirit of charity and theological dialogue? These are not merely hypothetical questions. They point to broader concerns about how churches manage internal dissent and how they balance theological precision with pastoral sensitivity.

One of Bolt’s more provocative contributions is his suggestion that alternate formulations of the three points might have avoided the schism altogether. In more recent writing, he proposed revised statements that retain the core affirmations of common grace but are phrased in a way that potentially bridges the divide. While it is impossible to know whether these hypothetical versions would have changed the outcome, they do prompt useful reflection on ecclesiastical process and the dangers of theological overreach.

Bolt's work has yet to receive a comprehensive public response from within the PRCA tradition, although earlier writings indicate that there has been some appreciation of his efforts to treat the debate with fairness. At the very least, his reassessment challenges modern Reformed Christians to think critically about the importance of tone, procedure, and confessional boundaries when navigating theological controversy.

Common Grace and Cultural Participation: Education, Art, and Vocation

The doctrine of common grace has significant implications for how Christians understand and engage the world around them. One of the most practical areas where this doctrine matters is in the realm of education.

In both the CRC and PRC traditions, Christian education has long been a priority. Yet even in a strongly theistic educational setting, it is readily acknowledged that unbelievers have made profound contributions to fields such as mathematics, science, and the arts. A student does not become better at algebra simply by being baptized; the mental acuity and analytical skill involved in such subjects are gifts that often transcend religious identity.

Common grace provides a theological framework for understanding how this is possible. It teaches that God restrains the full effects of the fall and continues to bestow gifts—intellectual, moral, creative—on all people, regardless of their spiritual standing. The doctrine affirms that unbelievers can contribute meaningfully to human knowledge and culture because they are still image-bearers of God, albeit fallen ones.

This insight has great implications for Christian vocation. Whether it is the surgeon performing a delicate operation, the lawyer advocating for justice, or the artist capturing something true about the human condition, common grace affirms that these activities—when done with excellence and integrity—reflect the gifts and upholding hand of God, even if the practitioner does not consciously acknowledge Him.

Common Grace in a Shifting Cultural Landscape

In recent years, the Western cultural landscape has undergone significant upheaval. Political polarization, the redefinition of foundational social concepts, and the erosion of widely shared moral values have left many Christians disoriented. For some, these shifts have raised a pressing question: Has the influence of common grace diminished in society?

While this is not a theological assertion in a strict sense—common grace, by definition, remains a divine act—it does speak to the perception that cultural norms are becoming increasingly detached from biblical morality and the created order. In previous eras, one could appeal to shared moral intuitions or natural law assumptions in public discourse. Today, those common reference points are less assured.

This perceived decline in the effects of common grace has led to increased reflection on its relationship to special grace. While common grace restrains evil and enables civic good, it is through special grace—the grace of regeneration and redemption—that true transformation comes. Yet the two are not opposed. Christians who live faithfully, love their neighbors, and seek justice in society contribute to the broader well-being of their communities. Their presence can act as a conduit through which God extends His restraining mercy.

Therefore, common grace not only offers an explanation for the relative order and goodness that persists in fallen societies, but it also provides a call to action. Christians are not to retreat from cultural life, but to engage it—bringing the aroma of Christ wherever they go, even in vocations or public settings where Christ is not named.

Antithesis Without Isolation: Guarding the Balance

One of the risks of downplaying common grace is an overemphasis on the antithesis—the theological distinction between belief and unbelief, light and darkness, church and world. While the antithesis is an essential Reformed concept, it can become problematic when it is allowed to dominate Christian thinking to the exclusion of common grace.

When Christians focus solely on the antithesis, they risk retreating into intellectual and cultural isolation. All cooperation with the world becomes suspect. All cultural artifacts become tainted. Yet this is not the vision of Scripture, which calls God’s people to be salt and light—not separated in monastic detachment, but embedded in the world in such a way that God's truth is visible through them.

The doctrine of common grace allows for such engagement without compromise. It provides a theological justification for recognizing goodness and truth in non-Christian sources, and for working alongside non-believers in causes that align with God’s moral order. In today’s world, this can mean partnering with secular feminists on issues related to biological sex or aligning with non-religious advocates in defense of the unborn. These partnerships do not erase theological differences, but they reflect a common grounding in God’s created order, upheld by His sustaining hand.

Practical Theology: Teaching Common Grace in the Home and the Church

The doctrine of common grace finds its most concrete expression not in theological journals, but in the everyday rhythms of Christian life. Parents seek to raise children who can navigate a complex world with both discernment and compassion. Pastors strive to equip congregants to be in the world, but not of it. In both cases, common grace offers crucial tools.

Teaching children that they live in a world where God’s goodness is reflected—even in the lives and work of those who do not acknowledge Him—can foster a more balanced and hopeful view of culture. It helps them avoid cynicism and see their future callings as valid platforms for service, creativity, and witness.

In the church, preaching and discipleship can benefit from a more robust incorporation of common grace. Instead of portraying the world as a wasteland of rebellion, believers can be shown how God is still at work, restraining evil, revealing beauty, and providing for human flourishing. 

Conclusion: A Doctrine Worth Holding Onto

A century after it contributed to one of the most significant church splits in North American Reformed history, the doctrine of common grace remains as vital as ever. Its historical development invites reflection on how churches handle controversy and protect confessional integrity. Its theological insights help explain the presence of good in a fallen world. And its practical applications equip believers to live faithfully in the complexity of modern life.

Common grace reminds us that while the world is not as it should be, it is not as bad as it could be—and that every good gift, wherever it is found, ultimately comes from the hand of a gracious God.