For the past five years, the Protestant Reformed Churches (PRC) have been engaged in continuous internal doctrinal controversy. The controversy has appeared at almost every meeting of Classis East since 2016, and has appeared at every synod since 2016. By now everyone in the churches is aware that there is controversy. But does everyone also know what the controversy is about? Could all identify the doctrinal issue at the heart of the controversy? In order for the PRC to do justice to the truth and to profit doctrinally and spiritually from the controversy, we must know the issue at heart. In this editorial let us make a beginning of getting to the issue of our present controversy.

To state the issue in one sentence: The controversy in the PRC is whether a grace principle or a works principle governs the believer’s experience of covenant fellowship with God. At its heart the controversy is as simple as could be: grace or works? The controversy is also as serious as could be: grace or works?

The key issue is the antithesis between a grace principle and a works principle. The issue is who saves man. Does God save man? Or does man save man? Is man’s salvation of God? Or is man’s salvation of man? God? Or man? If God saves man, then salvation is by grace. This is the grace principle of salvation. If man saves man, then salvation is by works. This is the works principle of salvation. Therefore, when we speak of a grace principle or a works principle, we are simply describing who saves man: God, or man? 

These two principles are absolutely antithetical. They cannot be reconciled. Either salvation is by grace, or salvation is by works. Either God saves man, or man saves man. There is no common ground between these two principles, but only warfare and enmity. It is God’s own judgment that these two principles are opposed, for scripture constantly holds them over against each other. Speaking of Abraham’s justification by faith alone, Paul writes, “Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness” (Rom. 4:4–5). On one side is the works principle: “him that worketh.” According to this works principle, man saves man, for the reward of righteousness is given to him as his “debt,” that is, as his earned right and as something that is owed him. On the other side is the grace principle: “him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly.” According to this grace principle, God saves man, for the reward of righteousness is “reckoned of grace,” that is, it is given as a free gift to one who is ungodly and undeserving of that gift.

Again, speaking of God’s eternal decree of election, Paul writes, “Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work” (Rom. 11:5–6). On one side is the grace principle: “if by grace.” On the other side is the works principle: “if it be of works.” There is no common ground between these two principles because of the very nature of grace and work. Grace is God’s free and unmerited gift that has no reference whatsoever to the quality or the activity of man. Work is man’s diligent and obedient keeping of God’s law. If election, and the salvation to which man is elected, is given by grace, then it is entirely a free gift without any reference to man’s works; otherwise grace is no more grace. If election, and the salvation to which man is elected, is given by works, then it is entirely given as the payment of what man is owed for his work; otherwise work is no more work.

Again, speaking of salvation, Paul writes, “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8–9). On one side is the grace principle: “by grace are ye saved.” On the other side is the works principle: “of works.” These two principles are irreconcilable due to the praise that follows from each. The grace principle means that all praise goes to God for the salvation of man, for “it is the gift of God.” The works principle means that “man should boast,” for salvation is “of yourselves.”

Again, speaking of our salvation and our holy calling, Paul writes, “[God] hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began” (2 Tim. 1:9). On one side is the works principle: “according to our works.” On the other side is the grace principle: “according to his own purpose and grace.” These two principles are antithetical because Jesus Christ is found only in the grace principle and not in the works principle. God’s grace is “given us in Christ Jesus.” To be saved by works means to be saved apart from Christ. To be saved by grace means to be saved entirely by Christ. The works principle not only overthrows the grace principle; it also overthrows Christ. “I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain” (Gal. 2:21). The grace principle not only overthrows the works principle; it also establishes Christ. “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified” (v. 16).

These, then, are the two antithetical principles: the grace principle and the works principle. 

Note that the antithesis is always between the grace principle and the works principle, not between grace and works. God’s grace is not at odds with man’s work. In fact, God’s grace produces the believer’s good works. Therefore, man’s work is entirely in harmony with God’s grace as the fruit of his grace and the effect of his grace. “God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work” (2 Cor. 9:8). “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13). The controversy in the PRC is not whether man works or does not work. Attempts to make this the issue miss the point and only confuse the issue. The controversy is whether man is saved by man’s work or whether man is saved by God’s grace. The issue is the grace principle of salvation versus the works principle of salvation. The issue is whether God saves man or man saves man.

These two principles appear over against each other again and again in the history of the church as the great controversy of the ages. When Adam and Eve disobeyed God and knew they were naked, they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons. By their own works, they tried to cover their sin and shame in the sight of God. The works principle of salvation! But God gave them the promise of the seed of the woman who would save them, and covered their sin and shame through the shed blood of an animal (Gen. 3:7, 15, 21). The grace principle of salvation! Cain brought an offering of his own sweaty labor to God—the works principle—while Abel brought a substitutionary atonement—the grace principle (4:3–4). Abraham tried to bring about God’s promise of the seed by marrying Hagar—the works principle—while God brought about the promised seed through Sarah after they both were dead to procreation—the grace principle (vv. 16, 21). The Pharisee in Jesus’ parable boasted of his own righteousness—the works principle—while the publican cried out for God’s mercy—the grace principle (Luke 18:9–14). The Judaizers bewitched the Galatians to believe that righteousness comes by the law—the works principle—while Paul declared salvation by faith in Jesus Christ—the grace principle. Pelagius taught that man was born good and could keep himself good—the works principle—while Augustine taught man’s total depravity and need of God’s grace—the grace principle. The Roman Catholic Church taught the merit of man’s good works—the works principle—while the reformers taught salvation by grace alone—the grace principle. The Remonstrants taught salvation by man’s right use of God’s universal grace—the works principle—while Dordt taught salvation by the power of God’s sovereign grace—the grace principle. The well-meant offer of the gospel teaches salvation by man’s acceptance of God’s universal offer—the works principle—while the confessions teach salvation by God’s sovereign will—the grace principle. The conditional covenant teaches membership in the covenant by man’s fulfilling conditions—the works principle—while the unconditional covenant teaches unconditional covenant membership for the elect—the grace principle. On and on it goes.

It becomes evident that although there are two principles, there is only one salvation. God saves man! Man does not and cannot save man! “So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy” (Rom. 9:16). Therefore, though there are two principles, there is only one truth. The works principle is a lie. It is false doctrine. It is heresy. It is an error out of hell (Canons of Dordt 2, error and rejection 3). The grace principle is God’s own truth and the heart of Reformed soteriology.

The controversy in the PRC has been between the works principle and the grace principle. On one side of the controversy is the teaching that man’s experience of covenant fellowship with God depends upon man’s obedient good works—the works principle. On the other side is the teaching that man’s experience of covenant fellowship with God is entirely a free gift of God’s grace that is given him without any help from man’s works—the grace principle. The theology of one side is essentially Arminian; the theology of the other side is Reformed. The theology of one side is contrary to the confessions; the theology of the other side is confessional. The theology of one side is false doctrine; the theology of the other side is biblical truth. The works principle versus the grace principle!

One might ask whether this is really the issue. Has the controversy really been the works principle versus the grace principle? Has it really been heresy versus truth? The controversy is often characterized as something less than this. It is proposed that there have been mistakes, or misstatements, or lack of clarity, or confusion, or improper phrasings, or the like, but that at bottom the doctrine of the PRC is intact. This analysis of the controversy is wrong. The controversy in the PRC has not been a matter of semantics or clarity, but the irreconcilable conflict between two opposing principles: the works principle and the grace principle. Therefore this controversy has been between an error out of hell and God’s own truth from heaven. That may sound harsh; that analysis might be unwanted; but for the PRC to emerge from this controversy with the truth intact, they must see with clear eyes that the issue in the controversy is between the works principle and the grace principle.

But you don’t have to take my word for it. Here is the judgment of synod regarding an integral part of the controversy: “The doctrinal error is that the believer’s good works are given a place and function that is out of harmony with the Reformed confessions” (Acts of Synod 2018, 61, art. 62 B.1.). Good works given a place and function out of harmony with the confessions? The works principle of salvation! 

Next time we will see exactly where the works principle of salvation was applied: the believer’s experience of covenant fellowship with God.