This post is part of a series walking through the second volume of Abraham Kuyper’s Common Grace
Once upon a time, before he started talking about vaccination and insurance, Kuyper had been talking about the “connection between common grace and God’s providence.” (683) Wrapping up this discussion, Kuyper notes that the two are connected
“primarily in the process of steady development that ‘common grace’ opened up for the implementation of God’s providential ordination. Without common grace there would be preservation and rule, but no divine government in providence, for governing aims at reaching a chosen goal.” (683)
In this connection between providence and common grace, suffering is so large a part of our lives that it merits special attention. Which is the point of this chapter.
We must avoid the tendency to theological liberalism that enhances dependence and ignores the covenant. This influence inclines us towards passivity in the face of suffering. Since this is a belief often held by professing Christians, we must tread gently here. That’s one reason Kuyper has spent so much time on suffering as an enemy that needs to be fought (including by means of vaccination and insurance).
One last point here: we need to correct an interpretation of the Old Testament that connects “suffering and the guilt of the people>” (685) There are numerous examples of this (say, when Israel suffers for its disobedience). This Old Testament pattern gets applied to the church by modern interpreters without accounting for the distinction between ancient Israel and the New Testament church.
There is no longer a theocratic nation, and as a result we no longer have a 1:1 link between suffering and sin (aside from specific instances).
“The person who gets drunk and has an accident in his drunken state knows that this specific accident is causally related to the particular sin of his drunkenness. But for the rest, we lack any particular indication from God. Consequently, none of us has the right to establish such a direct link, either for ourselves or for others, in any specific case. Such attempts are directly contradicted and judge by Jesus’ clear statement that God makes his sun rise on the unrighteous and the righteous, and that those who were crushed under the tower of Siloam did not perish because of their greater sins.” (686)
We see some of this even in the Old Testament, where we see Godly people suffer and the wicked flourish. On the other side of the New Testament we must not make connections between sin and suffering, except in very limited circumstances. What’s more, without special revelation we must assume that “the guilt of all brings the suffering that should have affected all of us, but common grace now limits that to a few.” (687)
Returning to the topic of God’s governance: common grace has progressed and expanded since the fall: first restraining nature; second restraining sin in the human heart. This allows for “preservation and governance.” (687-688) Beyond that, there’s a progression in common grace towards a goal, through which we can see the purpose of human existence and history. We steadily move forward. (688-689)
Likewise, common grace works both extremely and internally in man. Restraint and creation are both part of common grace. And here Kuyper makes yet another of his unfortunate racial comparisons, which clearly haven’t aged well (but which also must not be ignored). Kuyper’s broader point, however is that man is God’s instrument for progress. Our forward movement is from God, albeit corrupted by the ongoing effects of sin.
And with that we finally shift to the question of history itself in the next chapter.
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
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In