The Doctrine of Providence
I. Introduction
The eternal work of God by which He causes the created universe, as far as its substance is concerned, to continue to exist. Concerning its power, He causes it to operate, and concerning its operations, to reach the goal intended by Him.
There are essentially three classes of providence passages in Scripture: (1) those connected specifically with salvation (soteriological passages), (2) references to God’s more general governance (common grace passages), and (3) defenses of God’s ways in the world in spite of the reality of evil (theodicy passages)
The promise, rather, is that even calamities cannot frustrate God’s salvation of his elect, but, on the contrary, are turned to our ultimate good.
II. Cultural Challenges to the Doctrine of Providence
Luther spoke of the milkmaid and the baker as “masks” God hides behind in order to answer our prayer for daily sustenance. In every gift, God is ultimately the giver; yet tenderly he hides his blinding majesty and otherwise terrifying sovereignty behind the creaturely means that are familiar to us.
Somewhere in between these extremes lies the biblical perspective, which affirms God’s active involvement in every moment of history but in indirect, ordinary, and thoroughly mediated ways
Second, a secularized notion of providence was used as a sentimentalized and cheerful divine sanction for the triumphant progress of particular cultures, nations, and ideologies that left devastation in their wake.
Providence seemed to be a “truth” which could rely upon universal assent—in distinction from other truths like the virgin birth, the resurrection, and the ascension, which were the scandalon of the nineteenth century. Anyone who accepted the existence of God usually believed as well that he sustained and ruled the world. The Providence doctrine was often used as another way of stating man’s belief in progressive evolution. God was discernibly leading the world to his own benevolent end.…
All this in our century is radically altered. The friendliness of God, which man thought he saw reflected in the stream of history, has become increasingly disputable.
III. Systematic-Theological Categories for Understanding the Doctrine of Providence
A. Direct/Indirect Cause: The Doctrine of Concursus
From the Latin verb concurrere, “to run together,” the idea of concursus, or concurrence, in theology refers to the simultaneity of divine and human agency in specific actions and events.
So must we infer that, while the disturbances in the world deprive us of judgment, God out of the pure light of his justice and wisdom tempers and directs these very movements in the best-conceived order to a right end. And surely on this point it is sheer folly that many dare with greater license to call God’s works to account, and to examine his secret plans, and to pass as rash a sentence on matters unknown as they would on the deeds of mortal men. For what is more absurd than to use this moderation toward our equals, that we prefer to suspend judgment rather than be charged with rashness; yet haughtily revile the hidden judgments of God, which we ought to hold in reverence?
Nothing is more contingent than the killing of a man by a woodcutter contrary to his own intention, and yet this is ascribed to God, who is said to deliver him into the hand of the slayer (Ex 21:12–13; Dt 19:4–13). Nothing is more casual and fortuitous than lots [dice], and yet their falling out is referred to God himself: “The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord” (Pr 16:33). Nothing was more contingent than the selling of Joseph and his incarceration and exaltation, yet Joseph himself testifies that these were all ordered in the providence of God: “So now it was not you that sent me hither, but God” (Ge 45:8). “Ye meant it for evil, but God meant it for good, that he might preserve in life a great people as he has done this day” (Ge 50:20). Innumerable similar events, plainly contingent and fortuitous, are expressly ascribed to providence (cf. Ge 22:8, 13; 24:12–61; 27:20; Pr 21:31; Mt 10:29–30).
Even Thomas Aquinas says, “When the free will moves itself, this does not exclude its being moved by another, from whom it receives the very power to move itself.”
These two things we derive most clearly from the Scriptures: that the providence of God concurs with all second causes and especially with the human will; yet the contingency and liberty of the will remain unimpaired. But how these two things can consist with each other, no mortal can in this life perfectly understand.” We have no warrant to deny a revealed mystery simply because we cannot explain it.
God therefore can be considered neither the author of evil nor the passive spectator of evil. He only actively determines to permit evils that he has already, at great personal cost, determined to overcome for his greater glory and our ultimate good.
Ironically, many today who would not affirm a classic Christian notion of divine sovereignty in salvation nevertheless often speak as if God does all things in their daily lives directly, without any instrumental means or “secondary causes.” If one attributes a remarkable recovery from an illness to the skill of the physicians, well-meaning Christians are sometimes inclined to reply, “Yes, but God was the one who healed her.” In more extreme cases, some believers even excuse their laziness and lack of wisdom or preparation by appealing to God’s sovereignty. “Just pray about it”; “If God wants it to happen, it will happen.”
The principal feature that distinguishes the classical view from these rival accounts is its presupposition that being is analogical rather than univocal. As we have seen from the examples of Pharaoh, Joseph’s brothers, and Jesus’ crucifixion, God’s intention and action are qualitatively distinct from those of human agents—even in the same event. Understood analogically, God’s activity in providence never threatens the reality of human agency, nor vice versa. Navigating between these extremes is the classical Augustinian, Thomistic, and Reformed view that God is directing all of history toward his purposes without in any way canceling the ordinary liberty, contingency, and reality of creaturely causes.
B. The Revealed/Hidden Distinction
Some of God’s decrees are always hidden, never revealed, while others are hidden until God reveals them “in the fullness of time.” For example, one may never know the reason for particular tragedies in one’s own experience, but the gospel is the revelation of the reason for Christ’s death. This distinction between things hidden and things revealed is maintained throughout Scripture.
In fact, often God’s providence in the world is not apparent to us except by the clear promises in his Word. So we are directed to seek out God’s will only in that which he has revealed—“in the law and the gospel.”
Just as we can know God only according to his works, not in his hidden essence, we can know God’s will only insofar as he has published it
C. Common Grace/Special Grace
We have seen that in Roman Catholic theology, nature and grace are related as lower and higher, respectively—or, to change the analogy, dimmer and brighter. Consequently, Rome speaks of a “saving providence” through which non-Christians (even atheists) come to an implicit faith in God apart from the explicit knowledge of the gospel. However, in Scripture God’s providence belongs to his common rather than saving grace, although the former ultimately serves the purposes of the latter as he gathers a bride for his Son. Common grace makes human society possible, but saving grace creates a church. In both his general care for all that he has made and his redeeming grace toward the elect, the Father rules in his Son and by his Spirit.
What later came to be called common grace was treated by Calvin under the heading of general providence
As Murray points out, common grace is responsible for a variety of benefits to all people indiscriminately. First, it is a restraint on sin.
Second, God’s common grace is a restraint on God’s own wrath.
Third, common grace not only restrains his wrath (i.e., shows mercy) but positively gives (grace). Murray observes that God motivates unbelievers as well “with interest and purpose to the practice of virtues, the pursuance of worthy tasks, and the cultivation of arts and sciences that occupy the time, activity, and energy of men and that make for the benefit and civilization of the human race.
Even in its fallenness, the world—including humanity—reflects God’s wisdom and goodness, truth and justice, beauty and love.
To affirm common grace as Christians is to take this world seriously not only in all of its sinfulness but in all of its goodness as created and upheld by God. Not only in salvation, but in God’s continued upholding of creation and its history, all things hold together in Christ (Col 1:15–17). Christ is therefore the mediator not only in salvation but in creation and providence. Believers are encouraged to participate in secular culture, to wisely enjoy relationships with unbelievers, and to work beside them in common vocations and toward common goals, without always having to justify such cooperation and common life in terms of ministry and outreach.
D. Providence/Miracle
Unlike God’s ordinary providence, his miraculous intervention involves a suspension or alteration of natural laws and processes in particular circumstances.
The question is not whether God is involved in every aspect of our lives but how God is involved. Therefore, with respect to providence, the question is never whether causes are exclusively natural or supernatural, but whether God’s involvement in every moment is providential or miraculous.
There are innumerable practical effects of being able to distinguish these related themes without surrendering one or the other. God is Lord, whether in his secret counsel or in his revealed will, whether in his common grace or saving grace, whether in his direct and immediate activity in the world or through his indirect and mediate works, whether in miracle or providence.
IV. Providence and Natural Revelation: The Meaning of History in Christ
Monism, whether naturalistic or pantheistic, cannot account for diversity in history any more than in the natural world, Herman Bavinck observes
Without its vertical (eschatological) dimension, our collective existence loses its meaning; without its horizontal (historical) dimension, it becomes assimilated to a gnostic flight of the soul beyond.
Ultimately, then, a Christian defense of providence must always return to Christ and his victory over sin and death. How do we know that God works all things together for our salvation, even in the midst of prevailing circumstances to the p 372 contrary? Not because we see their resolution here and now or can grasp their resolution in our intellectual vision, but because we have heard God’s promise. And this promise is already confirmed by the fact that at the moment of the greatest injustice, when God seemed to be most hidden and absent, God was most active and victorious.