Tag Archives: Herman Bavinck

Book Review: Herman Bavinck

Herman Bavinck: Pastor, Churchman, Statesman, and Theologian, Ron Gleason, Phillipsburg: P&R, 2010.  Paperback, 511 pages, $29.99.

Over the last decade we’ve seen a surge of interest in the great Dutch theologian Herman Bavinck (1854-1921).  With the translation of his monumental four-volume Reformed Dogmatics, the English-speaking Reformed world is finally coming to recognize the valuable contributions of Bavinck to theology.  His influence upon men like Louis Berkhof and Cornelius Van Til was legendary, but now the evidence is readily available to everyone.  The only thing missing has been a book-length biography of this giant.  We’ve had some biographical essays in various books and journals, but nothing to compare with what has been available in Dutch.  Ron Gleason’s volume has therefore been much anticipated.

Gleason himself has a unique biography that qualifies him for writing this work.  He is an American, but his theological training includes time spent at the Free University in Amsterdam.  He served as a pastor in a Liberated (Vrijgemaakt) Reformed Church in the Netherlands.  His proficiency in Dutch allowed him access to both primary and secondary sources for the research of this biography.  Canadian Reformed readers may remember Dr. Gleason for his years spent pastoring the Bethel Canadian Reformed Church in Toronto, Ontario.  Currently he serves as the pastor of the Grace Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Yorba Linda, California.

It’s not my intent to rehearse Bavinck’s biography here in this review.  It will suffice for me to say that Gleason covers the full breadth of Bavinck’s years.  He surveys his family background, his upbringing, his theological education, his marriage and family life, his first and only pastorate, his years teaching at the seminary in Kampen, his time at the Free University in Amsterdam, his role in various church disputes, and his political involvement.  There’s a lot of detail and the story is generally well-told.  A couple of highlights:  Bavinck visited Toronto in 1892.  Gleason reports on Bavinck’s impressions of what was then known as “Toronto the Good”:  “The Puritanical principle dominates there visibly and clearly” (148).  Later in life, Bavinck made another trip to North America and this included a brief visit with U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt (361).

We often read biographies not only to give us a sense of who a person was, but also to understand the issues of days gone by.  Sometimes the issues are similar to ones we face today.  In the discussions regarding a merger of the Canadian Reformed and United Reformed Churches, one of the big and (to this date) unresolved issues has been theological education.  Should a united church federation have its own seminary or should this be left to outside institutions?  Can we do both?  Before and after the union of the Secession (Afscheiding) and Doleantie churches in 1892, Herman Bavinck also dealt with this issue.  He taught at the federational seminary in Kampen for many years.  But yet he also had many friends and contacts within the Free University in Amsterdam.  Later, with matters still unresolved, he went to teach there.  These were thorny issues then and they remain so.  Bavinck’s biography provides a cautionary tale about what happens when church unions are forced without resolving real differences.

There is nothing like Gleason’s book in English.  For that reason alone, it needs to be in the hands of pastors, aspiring pastors, scholars, elders, and interested lay-people.  However, not only will people with a theological bent benefit, but also those with an interest in politics.  Towards the end of his life, Bavinck served as a politician.  He was elected to a position in the Dutch government and gave careful thought to the application of Christian principles to the political realm.

Unfortunately, the book does have some problems.  There are numerous typos and formatting errors.  The footnotes (especially the biographical ones) are sometimes repetitive, as is the text.  Sometimes the book suffers from a lack of clarity.  As an example in chapter 16, Gleason deals with the question of whether Bavinck changed theologically later in life.  Initially, he says that Bavinck didn’t change (399).  But then three pages later, the answer becomes “yes and no” (402).  A sharp editor would have caught this.  Basically the problems in this book boil down to poor editing.  My hope is that a second edition will someday resolve these infelicities and make a good book even better.

Despite those foibles, I enjoyed this biography.  Gleason’s writing is lively and there are often humorous moments.  Most importantly, he loves Bavinck and it shows.  The book concludes with several appendices including summaries of two sermons by Jan Bavinck (Herman’s father) and a summary of Herman Bavinck’s inaugural address when he began his career at Kampen.  I’m glad to see that English-speaking readers can finally get the full story of this imposing and multi-faceted figure in our Reformed church history.


The Rationalistic Attack on Scripture (Louis Praamsma) — 4

Today I’ve got the final installment of Dr. Louis Praamsma’s article from the December 1979 issue of The Outlook.  Praamsma was responding to a weakening of the doctrine of Scripture in the CRC especially with men like Allen Verhey and Harry Boer.  Within five years, the exodus out of the CRC began.  Some of those who were the first ones to leave ended up at Canadian Reformed churches.  Now these people are watching with deep concern as history seems to be repeating itself.  One correspondent reminded me of the old saying, “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”

Will the Canadian Reformed Churches succumb to the spirit of the age?  If the experience of the CRC is indicative, this question will be answered by what parents tolerate in our elementary and high schools, whom we allow to teach at our seminary, the questions that are asked of seminary students/graduates at classis exams (and how the answers are evaluated), and where we send our children for post-secondary education.

**********************

Bavinck and Machen

Must I mention more names?  Must I speak of Herman Bavinck who absorbed all the wisdom of liberal Leyden of his days and kept his faith, faith in an infallible Bible?  Must I mention Gresham Machen who absorbed all the wisdom of liberal Germany in the beginning of our century and wrestled with it until he had conquered it and then became that outstanding champion of truth?  Machen wrote, “I hold that the biblical writers, after having been prepared for their task by the providential ordering of their entire lives, received, in addition to all that, a blessed and supernatural guidance and impulsion by the Spirit of God, so that they were preserved from the errors that appear in other books and thus the resulting book, the Bible, is in all its parts the very Word  of God, completely true in what it says regarding matters of fact and completely authoritative in its commands” (The Christian Faith in the Modern World, 36-37).

The point is again that not the valiant Machen wrote those words, but that Machen, who wrestled with all the intellectual problems which then and now are brought in against inerrancy and had conquered them, wrote those words.

Must we draw the conclusion now that Augustine and Calvin, that Kuyper, Bavinck and Machen, not to mention many more, belonged to a certain kind of Reformed tradition which should be described in Dr. Boer’s words as “an unprincipled ruthless exercise that bends any desired Scripture in its foreordained meaning”?

Mind well what Dr. Boer means: he wants to tell us that those men made use of their own logical foreordination, not of that of God.

Escape from Unbelieving Rationalism

We should not draw that conclusion.  We should say that those theologians had escaped from that rationalism which wants to mould and model Scripture after a pattern of time-bound human logic.  Their eyes had been opened to the limits, the defects, often the arrogance of that human logic.  They knew that even the best-informed human scholar does not know everything.

Those “best-informed scholarly theologians” are now referred to as form-critics.  They always speak about documents which they can never produce.  They always refer to a tradition-behind-a-tradition which they construct with all the ingenuity of first-class detectives.  They are the professionals who know – know what?  Next year they will tell you which hypotheses are more probable than those of last year.


You Can Pray to Christ!

One of the strangest teachings floating around some Reformed churches is the idea that we are not allowed to pray to the Lord Jesus, but only to the Father.  By that same token, hymns of praise to Christ are also out of the question.  The problem with this view is that we find examples in Scripture of the early church and the apostles praying to Christ.  I mentioned this in my sermon yesterday morning:

While he was being stoned to death, we hear Stephen praying, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” and “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.”  Stephen prayed to the Lord Jesus and in the centuries to follow, thousands of martyrs would repeat his prayer. In 1 Corinthians 12, we read of how Paul prayed to the Lord Jesus and pleaded with him to remove the thorn in his flesh.  In 1 Corinthians 16:22, we read the brief prayer of Paul for the coming of the Lord Jesus, “Maranatha!  Come, O Lord!”  The apostle John echoes that prayer in Revelation 22:20, “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.”  If the apostles and early Christians prayed to the Lord Jesus and their example is in the Bible, certainly we also have that freedom.

This morning as I was preparing my notes on Volume 2 of Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics, I noticed that he commented on this as well:  “…the Holy Spirit dwells in and among us, with the result that our prayers are directed more to the Father and to the Mediator than to him” (311).  Notice that Bavinck speaks of directing our prayers to the Mediator — and this is fine.  It’s also okay to pray (and sing) to the Holy Spirit, though it would not be our regular practice.  Wherever this thinking came from, it didn’t come from Bavinck.

For those who do think that it is sinful to pray to the Lord Jesus, I would want to ask:  which commandment is being broken?  Further, if it is sinful to pray to the Lord Jesus, then it is also sinful to sing to him — in which case the Canadian Reformed Churches (and other Reformed churches) are living in sin and should be called to repentance.

Finally, I am convinced that this line of thinking contributes to the depersonalization of the Saviour.  It robs our faith of vitality.  By saying that it is a sin to speak with him, we are in danger of making him into an abstract concept rather than recognizing him as a person and treating him as such.  Think about it:  what sense does it make to have a Mediator with whom you’re not even allowed to speak?


Bavinck on Terminology

“Under the guise of being scriptural, biblical theology has always strayed further away from Scripture, while ecclesiastical orthodoxy, with its extrabiblical terminology, has been consistently vindicated as scriptural.”

Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 2, 297


Synopsis of Polanus’ Syntagma (8)

Somebody reminded me the other day that 2010 is the 400th anniversary of the death of Amandus Polanus.  Too bad nobody seems to be planning a Polanus-palooza.  All the world’s Polanus scholars could gather together in Basel and have a great time, all two or three of them.  But seriously, I do think Polanus deserves more attention.  I’m doing my part by continuing this translation of the synopsis of his Syntagma.   We’re at Book V and this is a long one.  Thankfully, he does divide it up into more manageable chunks.  Today’s part deals with creation in general and the angels in particular.

Polanus speaks of the image of God in the angels.  I have not read his full discussion of this in the book — I imagine that he works this out in considerable depth there.  Last week, I mentioned Herman Bavinck and his interactions with Polanus in his Reformed Dogmatics.  Bavinck also discusses this point and cites Polanus.  He does so in a footnote to this statement:  “But Lutheran and Reformed theologians also often have lost sight of this distinction between humans and angels, and called the angels ‘image-bearers of God.’”  Bavinck goes on:

Only a handful, such as Theodoret, Macarius, Methodius, Tertullian (et al.) opposed this confusion.  Augustine expressly states, “God gave to no other creature than man the privilege of being after his own image.”

However great the resemblance between humans and angels may be, the difference is no less great.  Indeed, various traits belonging to the image of God do exist in angels, but humanity alone is the image of God.  (Vol. 2, 461)

**********************

Book V

The external works of God are two:  Creation and Providence.

Creation is considered in the following ways:  efficient cause, material, formal, purpose, effects, etc.

The efficient cause of creation is God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The material cause of creation is found with the Will, the Goodness, the Wisdom, and the Power of God.

The form of creation is either with regards to the things all creatures have in common, or those things which are proper [or unique] to them.

The proper is either worked from nothing, or formed [from existing matter].

The formation is either making (factura) or forming (figuratio).

The purpose of creation is two-fold:  the ultimate and penultimate.

The penultimate end is in our use in teaching, rebuking, censuring, instructing and comforting.

The effects of creation on the creature are considered either jointly or in its parts.

Jointly, the creation is comprehended in the name ‘world.’  It is considered with regards to efficient cause, material, formation, end, and the things added.

The material of the world is either that from which it was created, or from which it was constituted after creation.

The form of the world is sometimes the world taken together, other times separately.

The form of the world taken together is first internal, then external.

The purpose or goal (finis) of the world is either universal or particular.

The creation considered in its parts is distinguished by way of the days on which they were produced.

The works of the first day were:  heaven and the angels; the internal principles of natural bodies, with their inseparable appearances (accidentibus), space, time, finity, motion; the primal light, and thus the element of fire separated from the other elements; night and day.

Heaven is both the highest and then the starry sort.

The angels are considered either in general or individually.

Generally, the angels are considered in the following way:  1. They are.  2.  They are substantial beings.  3.  Spirit.  4.  Created.  5.  Created in the image of God.  6.  Incommunicable.  6.  Some did not remain upright.  8.  They are not parts of one another.

The image of God in the angels is of two parts:  first it is in the very incorporeal substance of angels.  Second, it is in their excellent properties.

Their properties are:  life & immortality, blessedness & glory.

The life of the angels is either natural or supernatural.

The immortality of the angels is either natural or supernatural.

The blessedness of the angels consists in their wisdom & will, power & freedom.

The wisdom of the angels is observed in their submission, manners, and variety.

The angels individually considered are either good or evil.

In good angels, the name and the substance are to be considered.

The names of the angels are general and proper.

The good angels have a two fold office:  either the works for God or the works for human beings.

The works for human beings are again two-fold:  either dispensing the favour of God and ministering to those who have been chosen to eternal life; or carrying out the judgments of God on human beings.

The judgments of God are carried both in this life and after this life.

The things to be noted of the evil angels:  malice, intelligence, free-will, power, rank.

Thus far with regards to the angels.  What follows concerns the internal principles of natural bodies.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 36 other followers