Prevenient Grace in Calvinism?

[Afterthought]

Does prevenient grace exist in the Calvinistic system? Or to put it another way, is the Calvinist distinctive merely that the prevenient grace is irresistible, rather than a denial of prevenient grace? Is irresistible grace a kind of prevenient grace? What about common grace? Doesn't regeneration "come before" and could be seen as a prevenient grace? And if there is some sort of preparatory work before conversion, would common grace then be seen as prevenient grace?

For example, we see,

"II. This effectual call is of God’s free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man; who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it."

So it would seem the person is passive until acted upon by grace, and then the person is active, either by himself or cooperating (?) with grace at that point?

 

[Edward]

Does prevenient grace exist in the Calvinistic system?

No. It's a construct found in Methodism. It's probably best not to use foreign terms to try to define domestic concepts.

 

[Mr. Bultitude]

My understanding is that Methodists simply deny irresistible grace and that "prevenient grace" means resistible common grace. The Eastern Orthodox seem to have a similar idea of grace, and would even say that "all of life is sacramental."

 

[KeithW]

The current Theopedia entry called Resistable Prevenient Grace seems to cover the definitions for prevenient grace, common grace, etc., quite well.

A similar view of the definitions is given in this forum thread Good Scripture Against Prevenient Grace - post #6.

 

[Afterthought]

A similar view of the definitions is given in this forum thread Good Scripture Against Prevenient Grace - post #6.

That's what I thought:

Calvinists could argue that they believe in prevenient grace since electing grace does come before any human decision in regard to salvation, but they generally [d]o not use the term because of its association with Arminianism

 

[KeithW]

In the previous sentence Jared said,

What differentiates Calvinists from Arminians is that the former view “electing grace as given only to some (the elect) and insist that this grace cannot ultimately be resisted. The latter argue that prevenient grace is given to all people and that it can be resisted.”

Calvinists call the latter, that full idea, "prevenient grace". That is the same technical term which the Arminians, Methodists, Wesleyans, Roman Catholics, etc. use. That is why the term is not applied to the Calvinist point of view. To do so would confuse everyone.

 

[MW]

From the Cyclopaedia by McClintock and Strong:

Strict Calvinists maintain that the decrees of God with regard to the salvation or damnation of individual men are absolute; Arminians, that they are conditional. The Pelagian doctrine is that God's will to grant grace to men is always conditioned on their so using their natural power as to merit that grace. To say that God decrees to save all men if they will, i.e. if they, without grace, are willing to obey God, is Pelagian; to say that God wills to save all men if they will use the prevenient grace given to them, which they are left at liberty to resist, is Arminian.

Technically the term has been adopted by those holding to universal grace to distinguish it from a naturalist scheme. It could possibly be adapted to particular grace but it would require modification and lead to equivocation when speaking with Arminians. Shedd's History of Christian Doctrines explains its use by Augustine.