# Difference between effectual calling and regeneration



## Confessor (Jul 27, 2009)

This seems like a pretty basic question, but from what I have briefly looked up I have not found a consensus. It seems that some sources, perhaps unwittingly, treat them as identical, whereas other sources assert that they are different but extremely close.

So, are they different, and if so, how? Here's the appropriate paragraph from the WCF: CHAPTER X.
Of Effectual Calling.

I. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ: enlightening their minds, spiritually and savingly, to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good; and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.​


----------



## TeachingTulip (Jul 27, 2009)

Confessor said:


> This seems like a pretty basic question, but from what I have briefly looked up I have not found a consensus. It seems that some sources, perhaps unwittingly, treat them as identical, whereas other sources assert that they are different but extremely close.
> 
> So, are they different, and if so, how? Here's the appropriate paragraph from the WCF: CHAPTER X.
> Of Effectual Calling.
> ...



Is there any difference of intent contained within the "Ordis Salutis?" (Romans 8:29-30)


----------



## Herald (Jul 27, 2009)

The effectual call is the process which God uses to draw the sinner to Himself. Regeneration is the act of the Spirit in transferring the sinner from death to life. There is a symbiosis between the two, although they are different in function.


----------



## CharlieJ (Jul 27, 2009)

*Mostly Same*

Ben, they are basically the same, but the term "effectual calling" speaks more pointedly of the process (through Word and Spirit), whereas regeneration speaks specifically to the resulting state (enlightening, renewing, drawing).

It seems to me that the "and" serves to unite the two concepts more than divide them, especially given the similarity of the description given with Ch. X.



WCF 13.1 said:


> They, who are once effectually called and regenerated, having a new heart and a new spirit created in them, are further sanctified really and personally, through the virtue of Christ's death and resurrection,(1) by His Word and Spirit dwelling in them;(2) the dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed,(3) and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified,(4) and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces,(5) to the practice of true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.(6)


----------

