by Theodore Plantinga
Afrikaners are the long-dominant racial community in South Africa. Their population is made up of descendants of German, French and Dutch settlers, most of whom were Calvinists. Their language, called Afrikaans, is an offshoot of Dutch; people who read Dutch can usually learn to read Afrikaans without much difficulty. The South African white population also includes a substantial segment of people descended from the British, who came a little later and use English as their working language. Therefore Afrikaner leaders almost invariably speak English reasonably well (but with an accent), and if they are academics, they can keep abreast of intellectual developments in the Netherlands, as the reformationals in South Africa generally do. Return to text of Essay 3.
See Agnes Amelink, De Gereformeerden (Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Bert Bakker, 2002), pp. 180 and 196. Return to text of Essay 3.
The name of the party was an implicit reference to the French revolution, whose principles and mentality needed to be opposed -- a Groen van Prinsterer emphasis. Kuyper and some of his followers took a more positive attitude toward what many call the American revolution. It should also be remembered that "Protestant" is likewise an essentially negative and antithetical term, although many people now called Protestants seem unaware of this. It is noteworthy that a group broke away from Kuyper's political leadership and sailed under the banner of "Christian Historical" as its party name. Return to text of Essay 3.
A conservative Christian gentleman in Canada who was a generation older than me informed me many years ago that he had just written a letter to the President of South Africa urging him to "nie give up nie." In other words: don't let the foes of apartheid deflect you from the course you are steering. Because this Christian gentleman was very dear to me, he shall remain unnamed. Return to text of Essay 3.
There is some terminological confusion in Schuurman's writings, for he likes to speak on the one hand of the "Babel culture" and of Christians as "exiles in Babel," and on the other hand of our culture as "Babylonian." Some of the confusion may be due to inconsistencies in translation: see the use of the terms "Babel" and "Babylon" in Schuurman's Christians in Babel, trans. James van Oosterom (Jordan Station, Ont.: Paideia Press, 1987). When he introduces the notion of a "Babel culture" in Tussen technische overmacht en menselijke onmacht (note schuurman66), he includes a famous illustration of the Tower of Babel (see pp. 34ff), thereby anchoring his exposition in Genesis 11:9 ("Its name was called Babel, because there the LORD confused the language of all the earth; and from there the LORD scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth"). The reference to exile (exiles in Babel) brings the Babylonian exile of the Israelites to mind. And then he also refers to Revelation 18, where Babylon is identified as the "great city" whose hour of judgment has come. These references need some exegetical unification in their application to technology. Is our secularized technological culture setting itself up in opposition to God as a new Tower of Babel? Are we as Christians being drawn together with non-Christians in an all-embracing community that permits us no spiritual independence (and thus no verzuiling)? Or are we being marginalized and driven into exile, leaving us ample opportunity for verzuiling, and thereby even more irrelevance, as we talk only to one another in a discourse not understood by Babylon, whose hour of judgment is at hand? Schuurman loves the language of Biblical prophecy and tells us: "... in the Old Testament various cities are condemned as manifestations of Babel." See Tussen technische overmacht en menselijke onmacht, p. 37. Prophets sometimes run together times, names and places, leaving exegetes to talk about multiple and overlapping fulfillments. Philosophers find this sort of thing confusing. Return to text of Essay 3.
Vincent Bacote observes: "... critics of neo-Calvinism will point to the recent dissolution of the Gereformeerde Kerken, the current state of the Vrije Universiteit, and the current state of pillarization (verzuiling) and suggest that a secularizing tendency was present all along in Kuyper's advocacy of public engagement. In my judgment, this criticism blames Kuyper for the manner in which his legacy was mishandled after his death ...." Bacote's emphasis falls on Kuyper's relevance for us here in North America, but in the process of making his case, he seems to minimize the shortcomings of the Kuyperian world as it now exists in the Netherlands: "While it is certainly true that the legacy of neo-Calvinism has struggled in the Netherlands, it is a mistake to regard Kuyper as a failure." See The Spirit in Public Theology: Appropriating the Legacy of Abraham Kuyper (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), p. 153. Return to text of Essay 3.
Anthony Bailey, The Light in Holland (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1970), p. 178. Return to text of Essay 3.
The Light in Holland (note bailey33), pp. 172-173. Return to text of Essay 3.
See Gregory Baum, Religion and Alienation: A Theological Reading of Sociology (New York: Paulist Press, 1975), pp. 184, 182, 180. Return to text of Essay 3.
Some words were deleted in 1905, as follows: the task of the government includes "... the protection of the Church and its ministry in order that [begin 1905 deletion: all idolatry and false worship may be removed and prevented, the kingdom of antichrist may be destroyed, end 1905 deletion] the kingdom of Christ may come, the Word of the gospel may be preached everywhere, and God may be honored and served by everyone, as He requires in His Word." The translation is from the Canadian Reformed version of this creed, printed in the denominational hymnal (called Book of Praise), see p. 470. Return to text of Essay 3.
James Bratt, Dutch Calvinism In Modern America: A History of a Conservative Subculture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), p. 19. The notion of a strict antithesis requiring a strict separation between believers and unbelievers is more often associated with the Anabaptist tradition, but there are indeed Calvinists with Anabaptist leanings. The Schleitheim Confession, an Anabaptist creed of 1527 stemming from Switzerland, is very explicit about how the implementation of a policy of separation unites those who truly believe. In the fourth article we read: "We have been united concerning the separation that shall take place from the evil and the wickedness which the devil has planted in the world, simply in this; that we have no fellowship with them, and do not run with them in the confusion of their abominations. So it is; since all who have not entered into the obedience of faith and have not united themselves with God so that they will to do His will, are a great abomination before God, therefore nothing else can or really will grow or spring forth from them than abominable things. Now there is nothing else in the world and all creation than good or evil, believing and unbelieving, darkness and light, the world and those who are [come] out of the world, God's temple and idols, Christ and Belial, and none will have part with the other. To us, then, the commandment of the Lord is also obvious, whereby He orders us to be and to become separated from the evil one ...." Available online at http://members.iquest.net/~jswartz/schleitheim/art4.html (translation by John Howard Yoder). Return to text of Essay 3.
"Piety and Progress: A History of Calvin College," in Keeping Faith: Embracing the Tensions in Christian Higher Education, ed. Ronald Wells (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), p. 34. Return to text of Essay 3.
See the interview with Burger in George Puchinger, Hergroepering der partijen? (Delft, W.D. Meinema, 1968), p. 23. Return to text of Essay 3.
In a celebrated incident of April 2004, a Chinese journalist sent an anonymous message from China to New York, passing on information critical of the Chinese government, which in turn ordered Yahoo, the email provider, to reveal the source of the email. Yahoo complied, thereby illustrating how technology can facilitate repression, but it was strongly criticized for doing so. It appears that there is not much appetite for sophisticated technologies that will promote verzuiling and thereby encourage me to stay in my small corner -- and you in yours. Return to text of Essay 3.
Runner was not entirely consistent in this matter. Back in 1968, when opposition to the Vietnam War was in high gear, Runner spotted John Cooper wearing a Eugene-McCarthy-for-president button and reproved him. Cooper reports that Runner himself was supporting Nixon for president that year (personal communication of August 8, 2005). The standard line among Groen Clubbers was that conservative vs. liberal, or Republican vs. Democrat, was a false dilemma. In his later years, Runner sounded more like a straightforward political conservative than he ever did when I was his student. A major component of his seemingly conservative stance was strong opposition to Communism (he was quite interested in the Whittaker Chambers affair). Because of all the changes since 1989, principial anti-Communism is no longer well understood as an ingredient in an authentic Christian political outlook. Return to text of Essay 3.
A definition is in order: "... under the `traditional' marriage, a couple is entitled to a no-fault divorce after a six-month separation. When a couple opts for the `covenant' marriage, they agree to waive their right to the no-fault divorce. In the event that the marriage does fall apart, only adultery, abuse, abandonment or a lengthy separation will allow a divorce to take place." From http://marriage.about.com/od/covenantmarriage/a/lacovenant.htm. Return to text of Essay 3.
Among Runner's opponents on the question of verzuiling and separate Christian organizations was John T. Daling, a Calvin College psychology professor, who wrote: "I have now become convinced that the Dutch way is part of the Dutch system; that the Dutch system is a highly integrated, very involved, and delicately balanced system; that this system has been greatly conditioned both historically and sociologically; and that many of the Reformed `positions' and `practices' in the cultural areas are, almost inevitably, more a result of historical and sociological conditioning than of `principial' considerations. Consequently, to incorporate without significant qualifications a part of the Dutch system, whether from the social, economic, political, educational, or ecclesiastical area -- even on the ground of `Reformedness' -- into another system (be it American, South African, Hungarian, North African, Ceylonese, Japanese, etc.) is, at the very least, to have an unintelligent disregard for history and sociology. The Dutch way, including `Reformedness' in cultural areas, works out fairly well for the Dutch because they are Dutch, that is, because their whole historical and sociological complex is peculiar to them. It is folly to argue whether the Dutch system is better than the American or the American better than the Dutch. That would be like arguing whether a pear is better than a peach. Both systems or ways can be described and analyzed with respect to various features and characteristics, but to compare them as to betterness is futile. They are simply different. ... Now that I have visited the Netherlands I am beginning to question more seriously whether the Reformed faith is such that its applications to the cultural areas of life must always be applied in exactly the same way to the `same' problem, regardless of the time, the country, and the circumstances in which the problem presents itself. I now think that it will be a sad and tragic day for the Reformed faith if its `positions' and `practices' become frozen to a given time, country, and circumstance; if, in other words, these positions and practices must be universally accepted throughout the Reformed world because they are accepted in some part of it." See "A Look at the Dutch," in Reformed Journal, May 1957, p. 27. Another Calvin professor involved in this debate was Henry Stob, to whom Groen Clubbers were known to take particular exception. James Bratt numbers Stob among the "permeationists" (the gospel works like a leaven in existing organizations), whom he contrasts with the "organizationalists" (separate, antithetical organizations are mandatory). See "Dutch Calvinism in America," in John Calvin: His Influence in the Western World (note noll33), pp. 304-305. Bratt tells us that Stob and his allies "... advanced the thesis that the question of separate, antithetical organizations is not a matter of principle but one of Christian strategy. They asserted that there is no biblical demand for them, that the texts usually advanced (e.g., Matt. 12:30; 1 Cor. 15:33; 2 Cor. 6:17) apply to the individual and his relationship with the world and cannot be extended to cover Christian organizations without doing violence to the Scriptures." [Page 306] Return to text of Essay 3.
Lew Daly, "Bush's Faith-Based Initiative Is Bigger Than You Think," available online at www.bostonreview.net/BR30.2/daly.html (originally published in the April/May 2005 issue of Boston Review). Daly's essay establishes connections between Kuyper and George W. Bush, a notion which is not altogether far-fetched: when President Bush spoke at the Calvin College graduation held on May 28, 2005, he worked in some material about Kuyper fed to him by John Bolt, one of the moderate reformationals, via a speechwriter! Return to text of Essay 3.
Harry der Nederlanden has translated a fair amount of Van Ruler over the years and has published much of it in Christian Courier, the periodical he edits. He has also placed some Van Ruler on the Christian Courier website: www.christiancourier.ca/Feature.htm. Return to text of Essay 3.
Vernieuwing en bezinning: Om het reformatorisch grondmotief (Zutphen: J.B. van den Brink & Co., 1959). The book consists of articles written by Dooyeweerd after the war; they were edited for book publication by J.A. Oosterhoff. Much of the material in this book was published in English in the book entitled Roots of Western Culture: Pagan, Secular and Christian Options, trans. John Kraay, and ed. Mark Vander Vennen and Bernard Zylstra (Toronto: Wedge Publishing Foundation, 1979). On the historical context of the debate over the "breakthrough" idea, see Kraay's "Translator's Preface" to Roots, pp. vii-x. Return to text of Essay 3.
New Critique of Theoretical Thought, Vol. 1, p. 524. Also worth noting is what Dooyeweerd writes about the concept of antithesis in Vernieuwing en bezinning (note dooyeweerd33). This book consists of articles published by Dooyeweerd shortly after the second world war, when the "doorbraak" (breakthrough) movement in the Netherlands proposed doing away with the notion of separate organizations for the various communities of faith and conviction. The Dutch have a word for such a dismantling: ontzuiling (de-pillarization). They also have a word for the opposite: herzuiling (re-pillarization). Dooyeweerd thought that the "breakthrough" movement was misguided, and so he started his series of articles (which was made into a book) and in this context proceeded to explore the concept of antithesis: see pp. 1-10 in particular. This material is available in English in Dooyeweerd's book Roots of Western Culture (note dooyeweerd33). Dooyeweerd spoke of "great spiritual confusion" in this new postwar era (see Vernieuwing, p. 10; Roots, p. 11), and so it was time to go back to basics. Runner always wanted to go back to the Greeks in order to get clarity on an issue or problem. Dooyeweerd did something similar in this book, which therefore contains a lot of history. Return to text of Essay 3.
See New Critique, Vol. 1, p. 524. Return to text of Essay 3.
Ellul's position on technology comes to expression especially in his books The Technological Society and The Technological System. When he was asked by Patrick Chastenet to summarize his position on technology, he responded: "I would say that I have tried to show how technology is developing completely independently of any human control. Carried away in some Promethean dream modern man has always thought he could harness Nature whereas what is happening is that he is building an artificial universe for himself where he is increasingly being constrained. He thought he would achieve his goal by using technology but he has ended up its slave. The means have become the goals and necessity a virtue. We have become conditioned in such a way that we take on every new technology without once wondering about its possible harmfulness. There is nothing worrying about technology as such but our attitude towards it is very worrying." Available online at http://www.jesusradicals.com/library/ellul/interview/chapter13.html. This formulation makes Ellul come across as somewhat more moderate than many people take him to be. The "jesusradical.com" website informs us that Theodore Kaczynski (better known as the Unabomber) had a copy of The Technological Society in his cabin and claimed to have read it five times. Return to text of Essay 3.
Friesen reports: "I was disappointed in van Riessen's teachings. I did not see anything particularly Dooyeweerdean in his view of theory as the abstraction of universals. I expressed disagreement with him on a few occasions in class; this type of interaction with the professor was not encouraged. At one of my oral exams (tentamens), he told me, `You Americans do not know how to read a book.'" Available online at www.members.shaw.ca/jgfriesen/Mainheadings/LifeSearch.html. (Friesen is a Canadian -- not an American; in my own days as a graduate student in Europe, I also got called an American on occasion.) For more on Friesen's disagreement with Van Riessen on the abstraction issue, see his treatment of the concept in his "Linked Glossary of Terms": http://members.shaw.ca/jgfriesen/Definitions/Abstraction.html. Return to text of Essay 3.
Private communication of August 17, 2005. Friesen also maintains that "... the problem of abusive and ad hominem argumentation [TP: in reformational circles] originates in the wrong idea of religious antithesis. The [problem stems from the] us-versus-them view, instead of Dooyeweerd's view that we need to examine our own hearts and our own positions." Private communication of November 22, 2005. Return to text of Essay 3.
"Antithesis," in the Linked Glossary of Terms, available online at www.members.shaw.ca/jgfriesen/Definitions/Antithesis.html. Return to text of Essay 3.
Frisian, although the second language in the Netherlands, is spoken by only a tiny minority, most of whom live in the province called Friesland. And even in the Frisian homeland, church services are conducted in Dutch, as are many medical consultations. Frisian is hardly used as a language of instruction in the schools, although Frisian literary works do get some attention. Therefore Frisians need to be able to speak a second language -- Dutch. Nowadays English would nicely serve in that capacity, since it is widely spoken in the Netherlands as well. Moreover, Frisian and English are close cousins: indeed, Frisian is the closest living language to English -- especially the English of old, before the Normans injected a whole lot of French grammar and vocabulary into what we now call English. Return to text of Essay 3.
Goheen's role in putting Newbigin on the reformational stage was partly a matter of happenstance. He set out to write a doctoral dissertation on Herman Bavinck but got bogged down. He needed to try something else and hit upon Newbigin. The result was a substantial dissertation: "As the Father Has Sent Me, I Am Sending You": J.E. Lesslie Newbigin's Missionary Ecclesiology (Zoetermeer: Uitgeverij Boekencentrum, 2000). Return to text of Essay 3.
George Harinck, "A Historian's Comment on the Use of Abraham Kuyper's Idea of Sphere Sovereignty," in Journal of Markets & Morality, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Spring 2002), p. 278. Return to text of Essay 3.
There did not seem to be much knowledge of Hegel and philosophy of history at Calvin in those days. As an undergraduate, I made so bold as to point this out to the philosophy department. And as president of the Plato Club (made up of students majoring in philosophy), I undertook to write and present a paper on Hegel's philosophy of history at one of our meetings. When I returned to Calvin twelve years later as a fledgling professor, I was assigned to teach two upper-level courses in addition to the introductory courses and the interim course (January only) for which I was responsible: they were on Hegel and philosophy of history respectively! Return to text of Essay 3.
For an explanation of this ecclesiastical term, see the heading "Reformed Churches in the Netherlands" in the Institutions and Organizations web page that makes up part of this series. Return to text of Essay 3.
In private conversation, August 8, 2005. Return to text of Essay 3.
James C. Kennedy, "The Problem of Kuyper's Legacy: The Crisis of the Anti-Revolutionary Party in Post-War Holland," published in Acton Institute for the Study of Religion & Liberty (Volume 5, Number 1, Spring 2002), available online at www.acton.org/publicat/m_and_m/2002_spring/kennedy.html. Return to text of Essay 3.
"The Problem of Kuyper's Legacy" (note kennedy33). Return to text of Essay 3.
In The Idea of a Christian Philosophy, which is a Vollenhoven Festschrift (Toronto: Wedge, 1973), p. 57. S.J. Ridderbos (1914-1998) also criticizes Kuyper on this point, although his 1947 dissertation defends him on many other points: see Theologische cultuurbeschouwing (note ridderbos33), pp. 320-322. It is worth noting that although the term "common grace" enjoyed considerable currency among reformational thinkers, Runner was quite suspicious of it and of the people in his immediate environment (Calvin College and Seminary) who made substantial use of it. In his 1953 speech "Rudder Hard Over!" (given in Dutch as "Het roer om!"), he observed: "... such terrible offences are committed in our circles in the use of the terms `general revelation' and `common grace.'" He passed on his suspicion to me. And he had learned it in part from Vollenhoven, who complained of a "total misunderstanding of common grace," such that it was understood in terms of an "activity of the heathen" rather than as "God's goodness." See De Noodzakelijkheid eener Christelijke Logica (Amsterdam: H.J. Paris, 1932), p. 61. Return to text of Essay 3.
I am quoting from the abridged English translation, which is entitled Principles of Sacred Theology, trans. J. Hendrik De Vries (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954). The page numbers are as follows. "In every expression ..." (143). "These two streams ..." (156). "If palingenesis ..." (162). Return to text of Essay 3.
Principles (note kuyper33). The page numbers are as follows. "The entire domain ..." (157). "Not only ... enforce itself" (158). "... palingenesis does not ..." (179; see also 160-161). "Let no one think ..." (178). Return to text of Essay 3.
See Lectures on Calvinism (note music33), pp. 132-140. The two quotations are from pp. 137 and 134 respectively. Return to text of Essay 3.
Linus Torvalds is not a Christian and certainly no Kuyperian in a theological sense. Yet his unique approach to software owes a debt to Andrew Tanenbaum, a Free University professor who wrote an operating system called Minix. Philosophically speaking, Linus does share with Kuyper an interest in the "organic." He advocates what he calls "a more organic way of spreading technology, knowledge, wealth." See his book Just for Fun: The Story of an Accidental Revolutionary, coauthored with David Diamond (New York: HarperCollins, 2001), p. 163. It happens that Linus's father was a lifelong Communist and passed on to his son a disinclination to amass wealth or to claim exclusive ownership or control of manufactured goods (including software) or of the capacity to produce such goods. For his views on intellectual property, copyright issues and patents, see pp. 94-97 and 204ff. Return to text of Essay 3.
De eeuw van mijn vader (Amsterdam and Antwerp: Uitgeverij Atlas, 1999), p. 404. Return to text of Essay 3.
Geert Mak's father, Catrinus Mak, was a minister in the "synodical" denomination that expelled Schilder, but he had nothing to do with the struggle because he spent the war years in Indonesia and only found out about it after the fact. When he returned in 1946 and appeared on a pulpit in his homeland for the first time, he was immediately asked by an elder: "Are you for Schilder or the synod?" See De eeuw van mijn vader (note mak33), p. 365. Mak's book also includes distressing stories about how the choice between the "synodical" camp and the "liberated" camp was made in this and that local community (see pp. 367-368). To say that people were not well informed would be an understatement. Return to text of Essay 3.
See De eeuw van mijn vader (note mak33), pp. 445-446. Mak's observation is a reminder that there is an interesting sociological and cultural-historical side to the development of the reformational community and its struggles. Some readers may find this series too long and wish I had written a digest that eliminated 95% of the material, retaining only some conclusions. My own feeling is that when it comes to the social and historical details, I am only scratching the surface. I hope others will delve into this material as well, as Agnes Amelink has already done with regard to the Dutch side of the story (see note amelink33). Return to text of Essay 3.
For example, Alister E. McGrath says of Niebuhr's Christ and Culture that it "had a major impact on mainline denominational thinking" but also observes that it is "now seen to be fatally flawed." See The Renewal of Anglicanism (Harrisburg: Morehouse Publishing, 1993), p. 122. Return to text of Essay 3.
In the first essay in this series I made the point that there is much more diversity within the reformational camp than most of us used to realize in the old days when we were students of Evan Runner. Schuurman talks as though Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven held to pretty much the same philosophical position, and although he acknowledges the work of his teacher Van Riessen (who had significant differences with Dooyeweerd), he points to J.P.A. Mekkes (1898-1987) as having inspired his work: "The philosophizing of Mekkes was a constant inspiration to me as I worked on the philosophical elaboration of the central themes that are indispensable to reflection on technological development." See Technology and the Future (note schuurman22), p. 403, note 5. Mekkes is not well known in the English-speaking world because his major writings have not been translated. Return to text of Essay 3.
Responsible Technology: A Christian Perspective (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986). The six thinkers and authors who contributed to the book are Monsma (who was working in social services), Clifford Christians (a communications professor), Eugene R. Dykema (an economics professor), Arie Leegwater (a chemistry professor), Egbert Schuurman (more on him below), and Lambert Van Poolen (an engineering professor). These six scholars worked together as a research and discussion team for about a year at Calvin College. Two of them are well known in the reformational community (Leegwater and Schuurman), and so there are passages and sections in which the book strikes a reformational note. For example, it pays homage to Dooyeweerd (see pp. 69-70 and 168). It uses "direction" and derivatives thereof in a manner slightly reminiscent of Al Wolters and his "structure vs. direction" distinction (see pp. 9, 23, 101-2, 148, 153). Yet it also tells us that "... men and women [are] religious beings in a way no plants, animals or physical objects can ever be." [Page 38] This claim would seem to limit religious direction to the human users of technology, thereby running the risk of leaving people to suppose that technology is "neutral." The final paragraph of the book (p. 244) places the responsibility squarely upon humans to use technology in an appropriate manner, even though there is a passage earlier in the book that speaks of giving "proper direction to modern technology" itself (p. 9), and a couple of others that assign such a task to government (pp. 148, 153), although not exclusively. The book is therefore somewhat ambivalent in its discussion of Jacques Ellul (see pp. 16, 205-207, 233-234), ultimately rejecting his thinking in favor of the fashionable "transformational" emphasis upon which certain reformationals and Calvin College intellectuals who had kept their distance from Runner eventually came to agree (see pp. 206-209), which agreement in turn made it possible for a committee comprised of both reformationals and non-reformationals to co-author such a book as Responsible Technology. Return to text of Essay 3.
Richard J. Mouw, "Dutch Calvinist Philosophical Influences in North America," in Calvin Theological Journal, Volume 24, Number 1 (April 1989), p. 102. Return to text of Essay 3.
In the Stone Lectures Kuyper seems to minimize the notion that the arts in general might somehow depend on regeneration as the basis for achieving excellence. He tells us that Calvinism "... has taught us that all liberal arts are gifts which God imparts promiscuously to believers and to unbelievers, yea, that, as history shows, these gifts have flourished even in a larger measure outside the holy circle." See Lectures on Calvinism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961), p. 160. But he seems to make an exception for music: "I fully acknowledge that Calvinism exercised over some arts only an indirect influence, by the declaration of their maturity, and by affording them liberty to flourish in their own independence, but on music, the influence of Calvinism was a very positive one ...." [Page 169] Return to text of Essay 3.
To what extent Niebuhr was actually preaching in that book (as opposed to merely typologizing) could be debated. Niebuhr acknowledged that he was essentially updating what Ernst Troeltsch had done at greater length in The Social Teachings of the Christian Churches (a work that had very little to say about Kuyper, as it happens). At the beginning of the book Niebuhr told his readers: "It is the purpose of the following chapters to set forth typical Christian answers to the problem of Christ and culture and so to contribute to the mutual understanding of variant and often conflicting Christian groups. The belief which lies back of this effort, however, is the conviction that Christ as living Lord is answering the questions in the totality of history and life in a fashion which transcends the wisdom of all his interpreters ...." [Page 2] Niebuhr was hardly a firebrand in the tradition of Evan Runner with the capacity to stir up Kuyper's "kleine luyden" (little people). Moreover, he invoked the enigmatic Kierkegaard by labeling his final chapter a "Concluding Unscientific Postscript." See pp. 179-181 and 242-244 for his specific comments on Kierkegaard. Far from falling into the perfectionism and triumphalism of which Kuyperians are sometimes accused, Niebuhr wrote cautiously: "We have not found and shall not find -- until Christ comes again -- a Christian in history whose faith so ruled his life that every thought was brought into subjection to it and every moment and place was for him in the kingdom of God." [Page 235] Hardly the "geen duimbreed" ("not a square inch") rhetoric we associate with Kuyper! Neither does he strike the antithetical note that Kuyper was also capable of, for in the course of his concluding chapter he tells us: "[F.D.] Maurice had a principle, gained from J.S. Mill, that commends itself to us. He affirmed that men were generally right in what they affirmed and wrong in what they denied." [Page 238] Return to text of Essay 3.
Reinhold Niebuhr is appreciated by some of the critics of the reformationals and also by some within the camp who pitch their tent on its fringes, such as John Bolt. I learned about Reinhold Niebuhr from a non-reformational: Lewis Smedes, who taught a stimulating course in Contemporary Theology at Calvin College in 1967, in which a number of Groen Clubbers were enrolled. The Niebuhrs are not quite up there with the Torrance clan, but it should be noted that there is also a Richard Reinhold Niebuhr, an eminent theology professor who retired from the faculty of the Harvard Divinity School in 1999; he is the son of H. Richard. Gustav Niebuhr, the father of the Niebuhr brothers, was a pastor. A grandson of H. Richard (son of Richard R.), also named Gustav, is a journalist specializing in religion and theology. Return to text of Essay 3.
See Mark Noll, "A Century of Christian Social Teaching: The Legacy of Leo XIII and Abraham Kuyper," available online at www.acton.org/publicat/m_and_m/2002_spring/noll.html. Originally published in Journal of Markets and Morality, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Spring 2002). In the same work Noll observes: "For Kuyperians, principialism became dangerous when it was exported to Africa and entangled with race. During his Stone Lectures, Kuyper himself spoke about the desirability, as he put it, `of the mingling of blood,' but also during his American trip ... Kuyper spoke a great deal about essential affinities between Calvinism and Dutch national character, about how in 1898 the United States was joining a long, Dutch tradition of battling the Spanish, about his pride that `two men of Dutch blood' were contending for governorship of New York in that fall's election, and about the essential Calvinist leaven that had made both Holland and the United States singularly blessed. Such archly romantic organicism was relatively harmless in Kuyper's Dutch context ...." In South Africa, then, Kuyper's preoccupation with "blood" (of which there is much mention in his Stone Lectures) proved mischievous, to say the least. That Kuyper -- and even Dooyeweerd -- sounded suspiciously like supporters of apartheid has also occurred to Gideon Thom, who writes: "South African Calvinism received a major setback when certain scholars ostensibly succeeded in using the concept of sphere sovereignty to justify the legally enforced and systematic separation of races. The result was that the majority of ministers in sympathy with Kuyper and Dooyeweerd were effectively silenced where they were most urgently needed, namely in a courageous and constructive criticism of apartheid." See "Calvinism in South Africa," in John Calvin: His Influence in the Western World, ed. W. Stanford Reid (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982), p. 361. Return to text of Essay 3.
"The Wages of Change," in Out of Concern for the Church: Five Essays, by John Olthuis et al. (Toronto: Wedge Publishing Foundation, 1970). This essay was first presented as a speech at the annual meeting of the Committee for Justice and Liberty held on February 28, 1970. The first quotation is from pp. 20-21 and the second (with italics omitted) is from p. 24. Return to text of Essay 3.
See Freda G. Oosterhoff, "Christian Politics: What Does It Involve?" in Clarion: The Canadian Reformed Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 1 (January 6, 2006), pp. 4-9. The quotations are from pp. 6 and 7. Return to text of Essay 3.
"Christian Politics" (note oosterhoff33), p. 8. Return to text of Essay 3.
Pinnock warned: "The global context of discipleship is simply grim, and beset with crises, on a colossal scale. We are being reminded from every quarter of the awful disparities in wealth between nations, of the enormous investments in deadly armaments, and of the frantic consumption and irresponsible pollution of the earth's limited resources. The North American continent, on the other hand, in relation to the global one, sees itself as a safety island, not affected by these harsh realities, and largely indifferent to cries for help issuing from the Third World." Pinnock demanded action, just as a reformational would do: "I believe that God is calling North American Christians to a life which is simpler -- simpler in diet, in housing, in entertainment, and so forth -- a life that celebrates God's jubilee, his good news for the poor and a righting of economic wrongs. Let us accept for ourselves the spartan life which we have asked missionaries to live in our stead in the past ...." He also used one of our favorite buzzwords -- "radical." He pleaded: "Jesus has called his church to be a servant people ministering to all the needs of mankind. Much progress in social history has come about through the impact of radical biblical ideas upon the human spirit. ... Let us repent and return to our radical roots." See "A Call for the Liberation of North American Christians," in Where Are We Now? (note zionism33), pp. 358, 361, 363. Return to text of Essay 3.
In Philosophers Who Believe: The Spiritual Journeys of Eleven Leading Thinkers, ed. Kelly James Clark (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1993), pp. 81-82. Return to text of Essay 3.
Available online at http://forum.refoweb.nl/viewtopic.php?p=581663&sid=8ae0d44d3ef773f8886affbdeb41d785. Return to text of Essay 3.
S.J. Ridderbos, De theologische cultuurbeschouwing van Abraham Kuyper (Kampen: J.H. Kok, 1947), p. 327. Return to text of Essay 3.
Jack Rogers, Confessions of a Conservative Evangelical (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1974), p. 57. Return to text of Essay 3.
Can Canada Tolerate the C.L.A.C.? The Achilles' Heel of a Humanistic Society (Rexdale, Ont.: Christian Labour Association of Canada, 1967), p. 15. Return to text of Essay 3.
The Relation of the Bible to Learning, fifth revised edition (Jordan Station, Ontario: Paideia Press, 1982), pp. 72 and 84-85. Return to text of Essay 3.
Marinus Ruppert (1911-92), a Dutch Lutheran and a prominent supporter of Christian political action (i.e. the Anti-Revolutionary Party) and of Christian organizations, speaks at one point of "islands" rather than pillars. However, while the notion of an island gives us a clearer picture of what verzuiling actually comes to than that of a pillar, Ruppert intended the comparison partly as a criticism: what we should be doing is penetrating society with our Christian ideas rather than taking up residence on a little Christian island. See his interview with George Puchinger in Is de gereformeerde wereld veranderd? (Delft: W.D. Meinema, 1966), p. 240. Return to text of Essay 3.
"SEPARATISME is altijd wereldgelijkvormigheid." Schilder immediately adds: "But conformity to the world sometimes defends itself by -- wrongly -- interpreting as separatism a separation that people were forced to undertake as a consequence of obedience." See Verzamelde Werken: De Kerk, Vol. 1, ed. Jacob Kamphuis and published by Oosterbaan & Le Cointre of Goes in 1960, p. 381. Return to text of Essay 3.
Klaas Schoolland (1851-1938) was a professor in the "literary department" of the institution that began by training ministers for Christian Reformed pulpits and eventually grew into what is now Calvin College. He taught Latin, Greek and Dutch. His daughter Marian Schoolland (1902-84) was a writer and is remembered especially for her books of Bible stories: Marian's Book of Bible Stories and Marian's Favorite Bible Stories. Zwaanstra informs us that when De Calvinist, a paper for which Klaas Schoolland wrote regularly, published its very last issue, he reiterated for his readers what he had been telling them all those years: "... God's people could not go along with and cooperate with the world or unbelievers." See Reformed Thought and Experience in a New World: A Study of the Christian Reformed Church and Its American Environment 1890-1918 (Kampen: J.H. Kok, 1973). Zwaanstra deals with the "separatist Calvinists" on pp. 95-118; the quotation regarding Schoolland is from p. 106. Zwaanstra does not report that Schoolland wore a watch that kept Amsterdam time, but he does write: "Of the three mentalities and parties in the Christian Reformed Church, the Separatist Calvinists were indisputably the most critical of American customs and institutions." [Page 113] Zwaanstra's names for the other two groups are Confessional Reformed and American Calvinists. Return to text of Essay 3.
Paul Schrotenboer wrote a small book entitled Conflict and Hope in South Africa (Hamilton: Guardian Press, 1968) in which he reported that there was "no observable conflict between races in South Africa" (p. 37; see also p. 57). There was an important distinction behind this statement, for he also affirmed that there was conflict in how people thought about racial issues. I knew Schrotenboer during the 1960s and 1970s and even served as a volunteer chauffeur for him on occasion, but I do not recall raising the issue with him, which is something I now regret. For a time Schrotenboer served as executive director of the AACS. In those days it did not yet have a Toronto address; Schrotenboer did his work from his home in nearby Hamilton, where his wife served as principal of the Christian high school. He was a Christian Reformed minister, and from 1964 through 1988 he served as the General Secretary of the Reformed Ecumenical Synod (eventually renamed the Reformed Ecumenical Council). He was a careful man, and when he offered an apologia for what the Afrikaner leadership was trying to do, he weighed his words: see pp. 23-24, 31, 51, 83, 87-8, 112, 118, 121. For example, he wrote: "The separate development of the races, the upliftment of the non-White races to a position of maturity and equality [in] separate homelands -- that is big apartheid [TP: as opposed to petty apartheid]. It has much in its favor." [p. 31] Schrotenboer's book is, among other things, a curious artifact when one considers the extent to which political correctness has since restricted the domain of the sayable. On the subject of racial differences we read: "It is not within the scope of this study to consider the results of comparative research on physical and mental characteristics of the various races. Suffice it to say that a recognition of the existing racial differences does not mean a capitulation, not even in part, to a policy or practice of discrimination that fails to give every citizen his equal rights before the law and, what is worse, prevents persons of a particular race from recognizing persons of other (different) races as fully human, as fellow creatures of God and equal sharers in the divine likeness. ... It should, however, be possible for modern man to understand that a recognition of the distinction in physical characteristics along racial lines, as well as in character and personality traits, need not lead to suppression, bitterness, mass injustice, or bloodshed." [Page 120] Schrotenboer argued that the problem faced by the apartheid-defenders in South Africa was partly rooted in terminology. He quoted one informant who declared: "Everything was fine in South Africa until 1948 when Dr. Malan used the word `apartheid' and then all the trouble began." [Page 25] What to call it instead? Its defenders spoke of "separate or differential development" (see pp. 25, 27-8, 53). Schrotenboer himself associated "apartheid" with the odious system of petty restrictions and expressed a hope: "The government may be prevailed upon to remove some of these if it can be convinced that their removal does not endanger the over-all policy of separate racial development." [Page 36] Apartheid in the grand sense of separate development had a noble aim: "Apartheid intends to insure for each racial group the fullest opportunity for self-expression and realization of its aspirations and an unfettered existence." [Page 53] Today we shake our heads when we read such words, but it should be noted, in fairness to Schrotenboer, that he did not leave his reformational convictions behind when he toured South Africa; on the contrary, he offered a reformational understanding and critique of the situation: see pp. 69-70 and also pp. 101-103 (on the Broederbond). He refused to choose between individualistic Liberalism (by which he meant the liberalism that traces its roots to the French revolution) and Christian Nationalism (the prevailing ideology of the Afrikaners) but instead advocated a "third way," which he dared to characterize as a "Christian Liberalism" (see pp. 63-64). Does this phrase ("third way") ring a bell with you? See Peter Heslam, "Prophet of a Third Way: The Shape of Kuyper's Socio-Political Vision," published in Journal of Markets and Morality (Vol. 5, No. 1, Spring 2002). Return to text of Essay 3.
Egbert Schuurman, Technology and the Future: A Philosophical Challenge, trans. Herbert Donald Morton (Toronto: Wedge Publishing Foundation, 1980), p. 372. Return to text of Essay 3.
It is my impression that Schuurman is clearer when he speaks in his own voice than when he joins a committee. His major publication on technology served as his doctoral dissertation: Technology and the Future (note schuurman22). On Ellul, see pp. 125-158, and 317-318. He informs us that Ellul "... does not point to any way of escape from the difficulties engendered by technology." [Page 144] It is on the basis of reformational convictions that Schuurman takes issue with Ellul: "Technology, as he sees it, is not advanced by Christianity. Christianity has no interest in ruling this world." [Page 145] He laments what he finds missing in Ellul: "... he is not interested in integrating Christian belief and technology; rather, he stands for their separation." [p. 318] See also Schuurman's discussion of Ellul in a more recent work: Faith and Hope in Technology, trans. John Vriend (Toronto: Clements Publishing, 2003), pp. 76-80. Return to text of Essay 3.
Some reformationals believe that the translation of Dooyeweerd's magnum opus, A New Critique of Theoretical Thought, was botched. There is no Dutch text against which the English can be checked, although some parts of the New Critique do correspond closely to the first edition of his magnum opus, published only in Dutch under the title Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee. This sad state of affairs leaves room for some scholars to postulate an unarticulated philosophy of Dooyeweerd (perhaps to be called an "Ur-Dooyeweerd") at which one must guess. Schuurman seems to be doing something of this sort when he quotes some passages having a bearing on what Dooyeweerd says about "actualization" and then observes: "I do not believe these definitions make it clear precisely what Dooyeweerd intended to say about technological designs and their execution. In the first place, the intentional representational relation as he has presented it might be taken to mean the framing (read: designing) of a law for a thing to be formed subsequently. Yet, I believe it should instead be construed to mean the actual forming of a thing in conformity with a law so framed. If this construction is faithful to Dooyeweerd's intention ...." Because of the translation problem, then, Dooyeweerd is granted more leeway than other thinkers in terms of having misspoken himself, in which case we base our reflection on what he must have meant rather than on what he actually wrote. And so Schuurman argues: "It is simply inconceivable to me that when he spoke of the unfolding or opening relation, he meant the actual forming or fashioning of a thing. What he must have meant instead is the subjective unfolding or opening of a closed objective thing structure -- for example, the perception that a stone might be used as a hammer. If I have understood Dooyeweerd correctly ...." See Technology and the Future (note schuurman22), pp. 378-379. I do not mean to criticize Schuurman's line of thought here. I am making a historical point: certain thinkers pay elaborate tribute to Dooyeweerd as having given us -- in principle -- the answer to this or that major philosophical question, but they do not deal in detail with what he actually wrote because it appears he was not able to articulate just what he meant. In short, what we face here is a classic Glenn Friesen issue! Return to text of Essay 3.
See Faith, Hope and Technology (note schuurman33), pp. 72-73. His cautious attitude toward Dooyeweerd also comes to expression on pp. 148-149 and 173-174. Return to text of Essay 3.
Tussen technische overmacht en menselijke onmacht: Verantwoordelijkheid in een technische maatschappij (Kampen: J.H. Kok, 1985), p. 37. His reference to Dooyeweerd within this quote is based on pages 70-110 of Vernieuwing en bezinning (note dooyeweerd44), which corresponds to pp. 73-115 in Roots of Western Culture (note dooyeweerd33). Return to text of Essay 3.
Faith and Hope in Technology (note schuurman33), p. 156. Return to text of Essay 3.
On February 15, 2006, Derek Schuurman and I presented a faculty colloquium at Redeemer devoted to an introductory discussion of this set of issues. Return to text of Essay 3.
The words are by Susan Warner (1819-1885). The final stanza mitigates the separatist effect somewhat. Stanza 3: "Jesus bids us shine, / then, for all around / many kinds of darkness / in the world abound -- / sin and want and sorrow; / so we must shine -- / you in your small corner, / and I in mine." Return to text of Essay 3.
Stoker, who was even a member of the editorial board of Philosophia Reformata, wrote: "... the policy of apartheid intends to insure for each group the fullest opportunity for self-expression and realisation of its aspirations, and an unfettered existence. The execution of this policy will accordingly not necessarily result in race tensions and clashes, but will provide a better guarantee of mutual respect, understanding, peace and friendship. It accepts the duty of creating and of helping to create the separate opportunities for development of the Bantu group to a control of its own affairs in all human spheres. It expects of the advanced Bantu individuals to identify themselves with, to seek as leaders, the welfare of their group and to acquire within their group the privileges and positions that Europeans enjoy within their group. ... There is no middle way between apartheid and integration, as it would lead to assimilation. In the present racial crisis the only and inescapable choice is that between apartheid and integration." See "At the Crossroads: Apartheid and University Freedom in South Africa," in Oorsprong & rigting, Vol. 1 (Capetown: Tafelberg Uitgewers, 1967), p. 216. He calls his own position the philosophy of the creation-idea (skeppingsidee). In an extensive outline of his position he pays tribute to Bavinck and Hepp (the enemy of Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven) as having prepared the way for Calvinistic philosophy and then goes on to salute both Vollenhoven and Dooyeweerd, with the latter getting the credit for being the real systematician of the philosophy of the law-idea. He quotes G.E. Langemeijer's often-cited praise for Dooyeweerd as the most original philosopher ever produced by the Netherlands. He goes on to say: "I acknowledge gratefully that I have learned an especially great deal myself from Dooyeweerd and Vollenhoven and the others who joined with them in building the Philosophy of the Law-Idea. (I must also say this of Bavinck.)" See "Wysbegeerte van die skeppingsidee," in Oorsprong & rigting, Vol. 2 (Capetown: Tafelberg Uitgewers, 1970), pp. 202-330; see pp. 220 and 202 for the specific quotations and references. Unlike certain of the North American reformationals, Stoker is generous in his praise and presents his readers with a lengthy list of professors who have somehow contributed to the growth of Calvinistic philosophy, including a "Prof. dr. Yellema" in the USA (he means William Harry Jellema of Calvin College), and also a certain "Prof. dr. E.V. Runner." On the other hand, he does take issue with the Amsterdam philosophers, especially Dooyeweerd: see pp. 243ff (where Van Riessen is also discussed), 270-272, and 316ff. In the first volume of the New Critique, Dooyeweerd, in turn, refers to the "interesting writings" of Stoker and offers a brief response on the question of "law-idea" vs. "creation-idea"; he also observes that apart from his dissent on certain issues (including the notion of being as meaning), Stoker does accept the philosophy of the law-idea (wetsidee in the Dutch, and "cosmonomic idea" in the English translation): see pp. 94-96. Cornelius Van Til takes Stoker's side in this debate, arguing that a Christian thinker's view of law should be grounded in his view of creation. See Jerusalem and Athens (note vantil33), pp. 303-304. But the many critical references to Dooyeweerd in "Wysbegeerte van die skeppingsidee" do not support the conclusion that Stoker accepts Dooyeweerd's philosophy. Just as Dooyeweerd downplayed his differences with Vollenhoven when making public pronouncements, he chose not to emphasize the points on which Stoker dissented. Hendrik Van Riessen supports the thesis that Stoker is a genuine reformational: he hails him as the greatest philosopher of his day in South Africa and adds: "He is unmistakably a member of the Calvinistic philosophy movement, which is more specifically characterized as the philosophy of the law-idea." See "Enige opmerkingen over entiteiten," in Truth and Reality: Philosophical Perspectives on Reality Dedicated to Professor Dr. H.G. Stoker (Braamfontein, South Africa: De Jong's Bookshop, 1971), p. 241. In pondering this assessment, it should be remembered that Van Riessen was also quite free in taking issue with Dooyeweerd's position. Return to text of Essay 3.
John Van Lonkhuyzen was a Christian Reformed minister and played a role in the church struggle (including the Janssen affair) that ended with the expulsion of Herman Hoeksema from ministry in the Christian Reformed denomination. He is the author of Heilig zaad (Holy Seed), printed in Grand Rapids in 1916. He eventually returned to the Netherlands and got involved in church-order debates there, where he supported the thinking of F.L. Rutgers (1836-1917), a close associate of Abraham Kuyper. Rev. Henry Baker (1887-1985), a Christian Reformed minister and the grandfather of my late wife Mary, used to tell a Van Lonkhuyzen story that indicated that the man had a good sense of humor. It seems that Van Lonkhuyzen and an associate of his had both been honored by the awarding of a ribbon of some sort. Van Lonkhuyzen insisted that his was the more Calvinistic of the two. How so? He told his associate: Yours is based on merit, but mine is based on grace! Return to text of Essay 3.
"... kreeg de filosofiebeoefening in Nederland in de eerste decennia van de twintigste eeuw een `verzuild' karakter, doordat denkers van verschillende wijsgerige stromingen zich organiseerden in eigen verenigingen." See Ronald van Raak, "Filosofen in de branding," available online at www.nwsbank.nl/inp/2005/06/01/V076.htm. Return to text of Essay 3.
Van Riessen's own doctoral dissertation was also devoted to these matters: Filosofie en techniek (Kampen: J.H. Kok, 1949). Van Riessen's best-known publication in English (also relevant to issues of technology assessment) is The Society of the Future, trans. David H. Freeman (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1957). Return to text of Essay 3.
See "Kuyper en Hoedemaker over de Volkskerk," available online at www.xs4all.nl/~pvrooden/Peter/publicaties/1998c.htm. Originally published in Kerktijd (1998), pp. 48-56. Van Rooden is a professor at the University of Amsterdam (not to be confused with the Free University) and is also the author of Religieuze Regimes: Over Godsdienst en Maatschappij in Nederland, 1570-1990 (Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 1996). Return to text of Essay 3.
See "Kuyper en Hoedemaker" (note vanrooden33). Return to text of Essay 3.
A.A. Van Ruler, Kuypers idee eener christelijken cultuur (Nijkerk: G.F. Callenbach, 1940), p. 109. Part of what Van Ruler means by "extreme" is that Kuyper's standpoint would allow for no cooperation between the two camps (see p. 112). In other words, the world of higher education and science and scholarship needs to be strictly verzuild (pillarized). Return to text of Essay 3.
See Kuypers idee (note vanruler33), p. 111. For Van Ruler, this is not a fatal objection, for in another work he observes: "If there is one thing clear in contemporary theology it is this: a certain degree of gnosticism is unavoidable." See "Christ Taking Form in the World: The Relation Between Church and Culture," in Calvinist Trinitarianism and Theocentric Politics: Essays Toward a Public Theology, trans. John Bolt (Lewiston, New York: Edwin Mellen Press, 1989), p. 105. Return to text of Essay 3.
A.A. Van Ruler, "Christ taking Form in the World" (note vanruler44), pp. 130-131. Van Ruler appeals to Calvin in this context and speaks out against Barth: "Calvin thus once again pushed creation to the fore, and Calvinism saw ever more clearly that the world cannot be fathomed only from the vantage point of Christ. ... One should, contrary to Barth, retain a certain independence for creation as such, and not mix in anything of Christ, the Son of God in the flesh." [Page 131] Return to text of Essay 3.
Van Til makes this observation in response to Robert Knudsen's piece in the Van Til Festschrift, which is entitled Jerusalem and Athens: General Discussions on the Theology and Apologetics of Cornelius Van Til, ed. E.R. Geehan (Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company), 1971, p. 300. In assessing Van Til's words, one should bear in mind that he was directly addressing Knudsen, who was a strong supporter of Dooyeweerd and thus stood in the tradition that Van Til deemed not sufficiently radical. Return to text of Essay 3.
Vriend's monograph is entitled Understanding Differences in Christian Education and was published by the Ontario Christian School Teachers Association in 1992. He acknowledges that his division into types is largely derived from James Bratt's book Dutch Calvinism In Modern America (note bratt33), but he leaves out the Reformed Church West group because it was not involved in Christian day school education (see p. 8). The quotations are from p. 10. A chart contrasting the main themes and emphases in the three camps appears on p. 30. Vriend concludes his monograph with some "Antithetical Reflections" (pp. 31ff) and affirms: "... my own view is the closest to what Bratt calls the Antithetical mentality ...." [Page 31; see also p. 38] Even the friends of John Vriend are known to accuse him of cynicism on occasion, and he himself admits to an inclination in that direction (see p. 31). But his antithetical stance seems to be rooted mainly in a certain assessment of our culture and the direction it is taking: "... I find contemporary culture so clearly post-Christian that those who accept Christ as the only way to salvation and His Word as the standard for living must set themselves apart from the main direction of contemporary society." [Page 38] The positive Calvinists are simply too open-minded, whereas the confessionalists hanker after parochial schools (see p. 37). Return to text of Essay 3.
Lou Ann Walker, A Loss for Words: The Story of Deafness in a Family (New York: Harper & Row, 1986), p.22. Of late there has even been talk of forming a deaf "classis" (local church district or administrative unit) within the Reformed Church in the United States (sometimes called German Reformed). Return to text of Essay 3.
"What is to be done ... toward a neocalvinist agenda?" (October 2005). Available online at wrf.ca/comment/article.cfm?ID=142. Return to text of Essay 3.
Wolterstorff writes: "It ought to be noted that Dooyeweerd's thought has regularly been used by social conservatives to undergird their position .... Dooyeweerd's thought is one more example in that long line of `creation ordinance' theologies and philosophies that have been used to support conservative positions." See Until Justice and Peace Embrace (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), p. 59 and also p. 58. Return to text of Essay 3.
"Will There Be a Christian Problem?" in Where Are We Now? The State of Christian Political Reflection, ed. William A. Harper and Theodore R. Malloch (Washington: University Press of America, 1981), see pp. 374, 370. The other reprint was in Harper's Toward a New Politics (New York: MSS Information Corporation, 1973), pp. 193-199. The overall title of the series was "The Jewish Problem as a Challenge to Christians." Part I: "Anti-Semitism and the Jewish Dilemma" was published in Vanguard, January-February issue of 1973, pp. 8-11 and 19. Part II: "The Zionist Option" appeared in the March issue, pp. 25-28. Part III appeared in the April-May issue, pp. 11-12 and 29-30. In characterizing assimilation as a fate comparable to death or obliteration I was pointing to the experiences and feelings of some Jews during the Holocaust. In his compelling account of what happened at Treblinka, Jean-François Steiner informs us that a Jew named Choken told his fellow Jews in the death camp about an agonizing choice faced by Jews in Warsaw: "It seems that the Catholic Church had offered to hide five hundred Jewish children in convents, and that it had even promised not to try to convert them. I don't know whether the offer was finally accepted, but many people were against it. They said, `If we turn the children over to them, they will convert them in spite of their fine promises. For a Catholic, to convert people is a duty. So whatever we do, our sons are lost. When they died at the stake, our fathers taught us that a dead Jew was better than a renegade Jew.'" See Treblinka, trans. Helen Weaver (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1967), pp. 120-121. The strong feelings of the Jews of Warsaw reflected what had happened earlier in Jewish history on a number of occasions when Jews faced the agonizing choice between being put to death or converting to Christianity -- and chose suicide as a third option. A website devoted to the theme "This Month in Jewish History" gives us a sad example from 1096, which is to be commemorated each May 27: "Count Emicho enters Mayence [in Germany]. The Jews took refuge in the Episcopal Palace and committed mass suicide rather than convert. One Jew by the name of Isaac, his two daughters and a friend called Uriah allowed themselves to be baptized. Within a few weeks Isaac, who was remorseful of his act, killed his daughters and burned his own house." See www.wzo.org.il/en/resources/view.asp?id=269. About one fourth of the Jewish population of Germany and northern France was killed during this period (the First Crusade). Yosef Yerushalmi notes that the story of Abraham being commanded by God to sacrifice Isaac (Genesis 22) was sometimes appealed to in connection with such situations. See his book Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory (New York: Schocken Books, 1989), p. 38. Return to text of Essay 3.
"Will There Be a Christian Problem?" (note zionism33), pp. 372-373, 378. Return to text of Essay 3.
See "Common Grace and Christian Action in Abraham Kuyper," in Zuidema's book Communication and Confrontation: A Philosophical Appraisal and Critique of Modern Society and Contemporary Thought (Toronto: Wedge Publishing Foundation, 1972), pp. 76 and 53. Zuidema accuses Van Ruler of wanting to shove Kuyper and his followers into a "Christian ghetto'' (p. 97). Van Ruler was a proponent of the "volkskerk" idea (national church, or church of [all] the people), which Kuyper stoutly resisted. But the issue, for Van Ruler, lay deeper: he maintained that Kuyper's very conception of God was responsible for the confusion. Wrote Van Ruler: "Here is the fundamental problem: Is common grace (gemeene gratie) something wrought by grace (genade), or is it a power (kracht) of nature? Both positions are equally precarious. If we were to retreat to the second, if we were to let common grace operate on its own, if we were to let it arise from nature as originally created, we would regard it as a continuation of creation. The result would be a trivialization of the fall into sin; it would be an obstruction that nature itself is able to get beyond. But if instead we were to adopt the first position, if we were to accentuate the breaking-in or supplementary or special-deed character of common grace, then it would be necessary to inquire further into its origin. If it rests on neither creation nor the cross, and if there are two kinds of deeds of grace on God's part, are there then two sources of his working? It all threatens to end up in an intolerable dualism in the concept of God. As far as I can see, Kuyper never gave a clear answer to the question: Where does common grace find its origin?" See Kuypers idee (note vanruler33), p. 64. Return to text of Essay 3.
See the references and quotations in note zuidema33 above. Return to text of Essay 3.
"Common Grace and Christian Action in Abraham Kuyper" (note zuidema33), pp. 69 and 73. Return to text of Essay 3.
See Zylstra's "Preface to Runner" in Runner's book The Relation of the Bible to Learning (note runner44), p. 17. Return to text of Essay 3.
"Preface to Runner" (note zylstra33), p. 14. Return to text of Essay 3.