The 2026 Edition of the PRCA Theological Journal: Common Grace

 

Recommended Article:  "John Bolt, Common Grace, the PRCA, and Theological Modernism"

 by David J. Engelsma

Protestant Reformed Theological Journal.  Vol. 59, No. 2., 2026.  Pp. 49-65.

Reviewed by Charlie J. Ray

In a time when supposedly Evangelical and Reformed denominations are compromised with the pragmatic church growth movement and other theological heresies, Dr. David J. Engelsma's article is a breath of fresh air.  The Presbyterian Church in America, the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church are the Presbyterian denominations with which I am most familiar because I grew up in Florida, and now I live in South Carolina.  All of these denominations downplay their doctrinal standards because they wish to be evangelistic and mission minded.  While the PCA does not ordain women to the church offices of teaching elder or deacon, there is no vow taken for membership that even mentions the Westminster Standards.  The ARP ordains women deacons in violation of 1 Timothy 3:8-12 KJV.   (See:  Reasonable Christian:  Should Women Be Ordained to the Office of Deacon?)

The ARP First Presbyterian Church in Columbia, South Carolina has had three Reformed ministers from the supposedly conservative Ligonier Ministries movement of the late Dr. R.C. Sproul.  Yet, all three agreed with the session to ordain women to the male only office of deacon.  The present minister is Dr. Neil Stewart, who told me that if I objected to women deacons that I should probably not join as a member.  The other two pastors were Derek Thomas and Sinclaire Ferguson.

Moreover, the dangers of the pragmatic church growth movement are that the emphasis is on keeping the peace and unity at the cost of doctrinal purity and true Christian discipleship.  As Dr. Engelsma points out in this article, it all began with the adoption of the Three Points of Common Grace in 1924 by the Christian Reformed Church.  Practically all of the Presbyterian denominations quickly unofficially adopted the Three Points of Common Grace because the colleges and seminaries teach this doctrine as if it were an official doctrinal standard.  The doctrine then trickled down to the denominations and churches.  (See my open letter to the pastor of an ARP church plant in Lexington, South Carolina:  Lexington ARP.  The response I got from Jeff Tell by email was short and to the point:  I hope you can find a perfect church.)

Theological modernism shows up most clearly in the rejection of doctrinal standards and in the adoption of modern translations of the Bible that are based on the liberal biases of lower and higher biblical criticism.  Dr. Engelsma mentions that modernism began in the CRC before the ministers of the PRCA were expelled from the CRC.  At least one seminary professor at Calvin Theological Seminary, Ralph Janssen, who taught Old Testament, was expelled for teaching that the Pentateuch was not historical narrative.  Janssen taught what could be called a neo-orthodox view of Genesis 1-11, a view that is popular among fake Evangelicals today.

The failure of theological liberalism to see that humanity is not good was clearly visible during the first world war.  Apparently, the liberals doubled down.  The following quote from Engelsma's articles is pertinent to this point:

In 1924, the attack of modernism upon Christian orthodoxy was raging. The highly regarded and influential German heretic, von Harnack, published his popular attack on orthodox Christianity in 1900, Das Wesen des Christentums (What is Christianity?). In 1903, the Presbyterian Church (USA) revised the Westminster Confession of Faith to affirm a love of God for all humans. The unbelieving, modernistic Auburn Affirmation was published in 1924—in 1924! Harry Emerson Fosdick preached his popular sermon, “Shall the Fundamentalists Win?” in 1922. 

And the CRC itself wrestled with sheer modernism in the Janssen case, Calvin Seminary Professor Ralph Janssen being deposed in 1922. 

In the ecclesiastical atmosphere of this theological and spiritual struggle, the CRC adopted the doctrine of common grace, affirming a oneness of the church and the world in a common grace of God.  (Engelsma, pp. 62-63).

The current controversy over the issue of lower textual criticism and the reasoned eclecticism of the approach to textual variants and fragmentary apographs of the Greek New Testament is related to this compromise with common grace as well.  Unfortunately, the modern science of textual criticism is a dismal failure in regard to the stated goal of objectively reconstructing the precise wording of the original autographs.  (See:  Reformation Bible Society).

I highly recommend this article if you are at all concerned with the theological modernism and liberalism that is creeping into Evangelical churches today.  Even more concerning is the leftward drift of the Reformed churches due to the heresy of common grace:

From the Netherlands, the infection of modernism in the form of a common grace uniting church and world has spread to the CRC. It threatens all the supposedly “conservative” Reformed and Presbyterian churches that have been influenced by Kuyper and the CRC to embrace the doctrine of a common grace of God. They have the essence of modernism at their vitals. This is, in reality, the issue for the churches of NAPARC, not the issue of women in church office, which is merely a symptom of the real issue, and not the most important, but the issue of common grace, which obliterates the antithesis between church and world.  (Engelsma, p. 63).

You can read Dr. David Engelsma's article by clicking here:  Protestant Reformed Theological Journal, Vol. 59, 2026.  Then click the download button to download and read the PDF version of the journal.  Dr. Engelsma's article is on pages 49-65.

The peace of God be with you.