III-4 Resistible Grace and Restorative Grace
II-4-1 Meaning of Resistible Grace (Arminian doctrine)
The word “resistible” contrasts with the Calvinist notion of irresistible grace. Arminianism affirms that God’s grace, while necessary for salvation, can be resisted. According to Arminianism, resistible grace is the prevenient and salvific grace that God offers to all humans, giving them the capacity to believe in Christ. However, this grace can be accepted or rejected by free will. It is universal (offered to all) but not decisive: its effectiveness depends on the human response. Humans have free will to accept or reject God’s offer of grace.
John 1 :9 « The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world.”
Titus 2:11 “For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.”
Matthew 23:37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.”
III-4-2 Meaning of Restorative Grace (Wesleyan Doctrine)
Wesleyans believe that restorative grace is a continuous and transformative grace that works after conversion to restore, sanctify, and bring the believer back to God, especially after a fall or estrangement. It is not merely an initial offering, but an active and persistent work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the Christian. According to Wesleyanism, this grace is linked to progressive sanctification and Christian perfection, where the believer can be fully consecrated to God and restored to a deep relationship with Him, even after setbacks.
1 John 1 :9 « If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.”
Psalms 51:12 “Restore to me the joy of your salvation and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.“.
III-4-3 Complementarity of Resistible Grace and Restorative Grace
Resistible grace and restorative grace are not opposed—they complement each other. They describe two different moments in God’s journey toward humanity.
Resistible grace is God’s first call, offered to all. It is the gentle voice that knocks at the door of the heart, inviting each person to come to Him. This grace can be accepted or refused, for God respects human freedom.
But when humanity responds to this call and crosses the threshold, God then acts more profoundly. This is restorative grace: the grace that lifts up, heals, sanctifies, and brings the human heart back into communion with its Creator.
Thus, resistible grace invites, and restorative grace transforms—two expressions of the same divine love that seeks to restore the whole person.
This complementarity is part of a sequential logic centered on the human experience of salvation:
- Resistible grace (Arminianism): This is the prevenient grace that precedes conversion. It is universal, offered to all, and makes the response of faith possible. It emphasizes the human freedom to say “yes” or “no” to God. It is the initial call, like an invitation to cross the threshold of the house (the door of salvation).
- Restorative grace (Wesleyanism): Once the individual has accepted the invitation and crossed the threshold (conversion), this grace comes into play to support, sanctify, and restore them throughout their Christian life. It is like God’s ongoing work within the house, transforming, purifying, and bringing the believer back after their falls.
To better understand them, I use the metaphor of the door, inspired by the Wesleyan vision, which aptly illustrates the chronology and the shift in focus:
- Before the door, or before conversion: Resistible grace (the initial call) acts as a light illuminating the path and an outstretched hand inviting entry. “Will you enter?” is the metaphor for resistible grace.
- After passing through the door, or after conversion: Restorative grace becomes God’s internal work to nourish, heal, and perfect the believer. It includes sanctification, restoration after sins, and the pursuit of holiness. “How will you grow and persevere in this house?” is the metaphor for restorative grace.
The Parable of the Lost Sheep in Luke 15 perfectly illustrates these two graces.
- Resistible grace: The father allows the son to choose whether to leave or return (free will). He does not force him, but invites him to return (prevenient grace).
- Restorative Grace: When the son decides to return (free will), the father fully restores him (new clothes, a feast), illustrating God’s ongoing love and mercy for those who repent.
III-4-4 Opposing Visions Calvinism and Arminianism/Wesleyanism
At this stage, we present the three following main opposing views between Calvinism and Arminianism/Wesleyanism.
The main point of divergence between Calvinists and Arminians lies at the heart of their doctrines of salvation (soteriology), particularly concerning the decisive cause of faith. The fundamental difference resides in the question of whether faith is a work initiated by God (God is the ultimate author of salvation) or whether it depends on a human decision in which God intervenes (The individual has a more active role in their own salvation).
Comparison of these two visions
Calvinism versus Arminianism/Wesleyanism
| Theme | Calvinist vision | Arminian/Wesleyan view |
| Nature of free will | Man is free in his natural choices, but incapable of choosing God because of his sinful nature. His will is enslaved to sin. | Man is affected by sin, but made capable of responding to God through prevenient grace. His freedom is restored by grace. |
| Initiative in salvation | It is God alone who acts first, without any prior human condition. | God acts first, but man can cooperate with or resist grace. |
| Order between faith and regeneration | Regeneration precedes faith: God regenerates the heart, and then man believes. | Faith precedes regeneration: man believes thanks to prevenient grace, then God regenerates him. |
| Nature of grace (Irresistible and Resistible) | Irresistible: it acts effectively on the chosen and infallibly produces faith. | Resistible: it acts on everyone, but can be freely accepted or refused. |
| Effect of regeneration | God transforms the heart, changes desires, and makes the response of faith certain. | God renews the heart of the one who has believed, thus confirming his faith and his salvation. |
| Human responsibility | Man is responsible, but his response depends on divine plan. | Man is fully responsible for responding or not to the grace offered. |
| Perseverance | The chosen ones will necessarily persevere until the end. | Believers can lose their salvation if they abandon the faith. |
1-Regeneration and Free Will
In Calvinist theology, because of sin, spiritually dead people are incapable of turning to God of their own free will. Regeneration is a sovereign and prior act of God, by which the Holy Spirit transforms the human heart before any response of faith. Thus, faith is not the cause of regeneration, but its fruit, for it is God alone who enables people to believe and freely respond to His call.
In contrast to the Arminian and Wesleyan perspective, regeneration is a consequence of faith. Through prevenient grace, God first acts in each heart to make a free response to the Gospel possible. When people choose, by faith, to turn to God, the Holy Spirit then effects regeneration—that is, the spiritual rebirth. Thus, grace is necessary but resistible, and faith becomes the condition for inner renewal.
2-Predestination versus free will
John Calvin, a gifted theologian with a brilliant mind for God, emphasizes God’s absolute sovereignty by teaching that God unconditionally chooses who will be saved, while Jacobus Arminius and Wesley focus on God’s universal love and goodness and propose that salvation is a process of cooperation between God’s irresistible grace and a person’s free choice.
3-Graces irresistible and resistible
According to Calvinists, grace is irresistible and sovereign, while Arminians/Wesleyans believe that man cannot refuse it. Grace can be resisted, and man cooperates with God.
Theological Presuppositions and Hermeneutical Method
The differences between Calvinist and Arminian interpretations of Scripture often rest on key biblical passages that are read through different theological presuppositions. Calvinists assume that God is sovereign and that humanity is incapable of contributing to His salvation. Arminians assume that humanity is responsible and that God respects its freedom.
Each side uses its own hermeneutical method. Calvinists read the passages on election as literal and absolute. Arminians read them as conditional or dependent on the human response.
Each side tends to favor the Scriptures that support its position, while interpreting differently those that seem to favor the opposing side. This does not signify bad faith, but rather the use of its own hermeneutical method (method of interpretation) influenced by its theological presuppositions mentioned above.
Calvinists read the passages on election as literal and absolute. Arminians read them as conditional or dependent on human response.
Here are just a few key examples among many others:
John 6:37 “All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away.”
John 6:44 “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
Calvinist interpretation:
“All those the Father gives me”: This means that God has chosen a specific group (the elect) and that these elect will unfailingly come to Christ.
Coming to Christ is the result of the Father’s irresistible attraction.
Implication: Only the elect are effectively attracted, and they will necessarily come.
“No one can come to me unless the Father draws them”: The Father’s attraction is sovereign and effective: it guarantees that those who are attracted will come to Christ.
Man, in his depraved state, cannot choose God on his own.
Arminian interpretation:
“All those the Father gives me”: This refers to those who respond to God’s universal call through faith.
The Father’s “gift” is not unconditional predestination, but a response to the faith of those who believe.
Implication: All who believe are “given” to Christ, but this depends on their choice.
“No one can come to me unless the Father draws them”: The Father’s attraction is universal: God draws all people (cf. John 12:32, “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”), but this attraction can be resisted. Human beings have the capacity to respond to or reject God’s grace.
It should be noted that each side provides a response with arguments and biblical evidence to the opposing interpretation, which we will not elaborate on here.
In summary, both sides acknowledge that the Bible presents a tension between God’s sovereignty and human responsibility. Their difference lies in how they resolve this tension. Calvinists resolve the tension by subordinating human freedom to divine sovereignty. Arminians resolve the tension by affirming that divine sovereignty includes human freedom.
III-4-5 Molinist Vision (inspired by the 16th-century Jesuit theologian Luis de Molina)
This is an attempt to reconcile the absolute sovereignty of God with the authentic freedom of humankind, without falling into the extremes of Calvinism or Arminianism. It is often seen as a third way in the debate on predestination, grace, and perseverance.
Molinism is often presented as a middle ground between Calvinism and Arminianism. It is an attempt to reconcile the absolute sovereignty of God with the authentic freedom of humankind, but it does not fully reconcile them.
Without going into detail, the Molinist vision rests on the following:
God can order the world in such a way that the free choices of humans correspond to His sovereign plan, without forcing these choices.
Thus, God remains sovereign (Calvinist intuition) and humankind remains truly free (Arminian intuition).
This means:
- Preservation of God’s sovereignty: God controls everything that happens, including the free choices of humans, knowing in advance how they would react in every situation.
- Preservation of human freedom: Human choices are truly free: God does not force them, but He knows how they would choose and arranges the world accordingly.
Instead of reconciling, Calvinism and Arminianism become spiritual opponents of Molinism.
Some theologians see Molinism as an unstable compromise between Calvinism and Arminianism because it does not truly resolve the tension between predestination and free will, but rather shifts or complicates it.
Molinism:
- Gives the impression of an intellectual construct to reconcile irreconcilable positions, rather than an organic solution derived from Scripture.
- May seem artificial, because it attempts to intellectually resolve a tension that the Bible presents as a mystery to be lived.
III-4-6 Coexistence and Respectful Dialogue between Calvinist and Arminian/Wesleyan Visions
To unite theological reflection and express my heartfelt praise, I conclude at this point with the following synthesis point:
Although Calvinist and Arminian/Wesleyan doctrines diverge on the relationship between grace and human freedom, they converge in their shared affirmation that salvation originates and is fulfilled in God alone. Calvinism highlights the efficacious sovereignty of divine grace, while Arminianism and Wesleyanism emphasize humanity’s free and responsible response to this grace. These perspectives, even seem far from being mutually exclusive, can paradoxically be understood as complementary, together expressing the mystery of a Trinitarian God who saves through love and invites humanity to freely cooperate in his redemptive work.
Despite their differing views, both Calvinists and Arminians/Wesleyans recognize that salvation is a miraculous grace bestowed by God and that this miraculous grace is considered the greatest miracle, as it is perceived as a supernatural work that leads to eternal life.
From a purely doctrinal standpoint, the two views are mutually exclusive in their classical formulations. However, in the life of the Church, they can coexist in respectful dialogue, each acknowledging the complexity of the divine mystery. The debate remains open and fruitful, reflecting the richness of Christian reflection on grace and freedom.
In Christ's Love
