by Dr. Nelson D. Kloosterman (Executive Director of Worldview Resources International)
T&T Clark Handbook of Neo-Calvinism. Edited by Nathaniel Gray Sutanto and Cory Brock. New York: T&T Clark, 2024. 582 pages, with index.
This handbook joins the growing corpus of English-language reflection on the origin, essence, and relevance of neo-Calvinism (hereafter: N-C), drawn from recently translated sources and professional level studies.
Perhaps this review can be most clearly organized by briefly stating the book’s constitutive sections (with brief commentary consisting of “thoughts arising as I was reading”), offering a brief statement of the book’s lasting value, and concluding with some personal reflections on the book’s blank spots and on its unresolved challenge facing N-C.
1. The constitutive sections of the Handbook
Part I is entitled “Theological Loci” (topics belonging to systematic theology), and includes chapters on the N-C development of the theological topics of God and Trinity, creation, sovereignty of God, revelation, Scripture, anthropology, common grace, Christology, faith and salvation, theological ethics, ecclesiology, and eschatology.
Commentary:
1.1 Any reader familiar with the classic loci arrangement of Reformed dogmatics (systematic theology) should be surprised by the inclusion, in this section of the book, of an entire chapter entitled “common Grace.” Throughout this chapter, the author speaks repeatedly of “the neo-Calvinist doctrine of common grace” (italics added). Naturally, the phenomenon of common grace features prominently in virtually every analysis of Kuyper’s project and legacy. To label this, however, as “the doctrine of common grace” (begun already in the Introduction), and to align it as an entire chapter on a par with chapters on the loci of creation, anthropology, ecclesiology, and eschatology, is a form of question-begging that obscures an important reality. For many Calvinists, “common grace” is and will remain a theologoumenon. A theologoumenon is a theological opinion. Within the classical Reformed tradition, “common grace” is a fourth-tier truth, which follows behind Scripture, creeds and Confessions, and classical Reformed dogmatics which comprise first-, second-, and third-tier truths, respectively. The promotion of “common grace” to the status of a distinct locus within Reformed dogmatics might well be a Kuyperian presupposed elevation belonging to “the neo-Calvinist development of the theological loci” (3), but such a promotion certainly warrants some discussion and defense somewhere in these pages.
As evidence for this claim, consider the Table of Contents of both the 4-volume Reformed Dogmatics of Herman Bavinck, the single-volume Concise Reformed Dogmatics, by J. van Genderen and W. H. Velema, and the recent single-volume Christian Dogmatics: An Introduction, by G. van den Brink and C. van der Kooi. In each of these, there is no heading, no chapter, about “common grace.” A discussion of “common grace” appears briefly in the Van Genderen/Velema volume under the topic of divine providence, as part of divine preservation. Even the Subject Index of the Van den Brink/Van der Kooi volume has no separate entry for “common grace.”
1.2 In his chapter on “Common Grace,” rather than offer his own critique of Kuyper’s thought on this matter, Cory Brock refers the reader to a subsequent chapter on Klaas Schilder (by Marinus De Jong) for a review of Schilder’s Reformed critique of Kuyper’s theologoumenon. This reader finds rather distressing, however, the complete omission, by both authors, in both chapters, of interaction with two of the most incisive and recent Reformed evaluations of Kuyper’s theologoumenon of common grace, to wit: Common Grace in Kuyper, Schilder, and Calvin: Exposition, Comparison, and Evaluation, by Jochem Douma (ed. William Helder, trans. Albert H. Oosterhoff [Hamilton, ON: Lucerna CRTS Publications, 2017]); and S. U. Zuidema’s important essay: “Common Grace and Christian Action in Abraham Kuyper,” in Communication and Confrontation: A Philosophical Appraisal and Critique of Modern Society and Contemporary Thought (Assen/Kampen: Royal Van Gorcum Ltd., 1972).
1.3 Students of Reformed ethics will return, time and again, to the insightful essay of Jessica Joustra, “Theological Ethics,” in which she explains the ethical views of the first-generation neo-Calvinists Kuyper and especially Bavinck, followed by a discussion of second- and third-generation neo-Calvinist ethics (Harry Kuitert, Jochem Douma, and Richard Mouw, but not Lewis Smedes[?]).
Part II of this Handbook, entitled “Key Figures,” supplies very helpful portraits of the important people whose thought and writings have fueled and continue to fuel international commitment to N-C. These figures include Groen van Prinsterer, Abraham Kuyper, James Orr, Herman Bavinck, Geerhardus Vos, Klaas Schilder, D. H. Th. Vollenhoven, Herman Dooyeweerd, J. H. Bavinck, and G. C. Berkouwer.
Commentary:
2.1 Any reader familiar with the key figures of N-C will be surprised on two counts. First, the inclusion of a chapter on James Orr, well-written and solid as it is, seems justified simply because Kuyper mentioned him in his opening Stone Lecture as a nineteenth century pioneer of worldview theology in general. Beyond that, it seems difficult to point to any specific influence of Orr on N-C itself, and subsequent N-C literature rather studiously avoids interacting with Orr. Could this be due to his authorship of ninety essays comprising The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth, which gave birth to something (“fundamentalism”) that N-C has generally dismissed as inconsistent with its own vision?
2.2 Secondly, any reader familiar with the key figures of N-C will be sympathetic to the challenge of selecting those figures who “made the cut,” but will perhaps be distressed that there was no sustained interaction in these essays with the significant contributions to N-C from the following figures: H. Evan Runner, Gordon J. Spykman, H. G. Stoker, Johan Heyns, Egbert Schuurman, Francis Schaeffer, C. Veenhof, J. R. Wiskerke, John Bolt, and Willem Ouweneel. Most surprising of all, in this connection, is the glaring omission of any sustained discussion of how N-C emerged from, and differes from, the thought of John Calvin.
2.3 To be sure, at least nine of the ten figures included could be dubbed “the big hitters,” and reading their chapters will enrich your appreciation of the varied personalities and their unique intellectual expertise as either originators or second-generation processors of N-C.
Part III, “Neo-Calvinism in Historical Perspective,” offers a multi-dimensional historical perspective of N-C, tracing its relationships to medieval theology, Reformed theology, post-Reformation Reformed theology, Dutch thought and practice, Roman Catholicism, Karl Barth, and Islam/other religions.
Commentary:
3.1 Here readers receive a competent wide-angle view of the depth and scope of sources, interpretations, and conversations that have been part of N-C throughout its history. These authors deploy their scholarship and skill in bringing the reader within reach of the truly global, genuinely ecumenical, and penetratingly intellectual content of N-C.
3.2 I believe that the Handbook’s presentation of N-C and Roman Catholicism should have been fortified and enriched with the inclusion of, and interaction with, a contemporary Roman Catholic neo-Calvinist like Dr. Eduardo Echeverria, whose own labors under G. C. Berkouwer and engagement with the latter’s ecumenical conversations with Rome, would have provided us front-row seats to this important dialogue. Interested readers should consult Echeverria’s latest work: Roman Catholicism and Neo-Calvinism: Ecumenical and Polemical Engagements (New York: Peter Lang, 2024).
3.3 Let’s return for the last time to the matter of common grace, this time to the chapter on “Neo-Calvinism and Reformed Theology.” In his section entitled “Affirming Common Grace” (308–310), the author is impressed with Kuyper’s insistence that the doctrine of total depravity does not obviate the reality of common grace among unbelievers. God tempers, so Kuyper argued, our depraved nature and its evil impulses by common grace.
The author then suggests, however, that Kuyper could have strengthened his case with a brief reference to Canons of Dort 3/4.4. According to the author, Canon 3/4.4 fortifies Kuyper’s hallowing of common grace when it teaches that we are “‘unfit for any saving good,’ thus emphasizing the fact that any good things the non-elect may produce by way of truth, goodness, or beauty do not have any salvific merit—which fits nicely within Kuyper’s common grace framework” (310).
But—and this deserves your careful notice—we are not being given the whole statement of Canons of Dort 3/4.4, but only its first half! Read the whole paragraph, and notice the underlined words:
Art. IV. There remain, however, in man since the fall, the glimmerings of natural light, whereby he retains some knowledge of God, of natural things, and of the difference between good and evil, and discovers some regard for virtue, good order in society, and for maintaining an orderly external deportment. But so far is this light of nature from being sufficient to bring him to a saving knowledge of God, and to true conversion, that he is incapable of using it aright even in things natural and civil. Nay farther, this light, such as it is, man in various ways renders wholly polluted, and holds it [back] in unrighteousness; by doing which he becomes inexcusable before God (https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds3.iv.xvi.html; italics and underline added).
Nota bene! Natural man “is incapable . . .”! Natural man renders this light “wholly polluted, and holds it [back] in unrighteousness . . .”!
Clearly, then, it remains to explain whether, and if so, how, this full Reformed Confessional doctrine “fits” with Kuyper’s common grace framework.
Finally, Part IV aims to document the ongoing legacy of N-C, especially in its North American context. Attention is given to its relevance for modern discussions of public theology, missiology, political theology, global Christianity, race, continental philosophy, analytic philosophy, science, art, and pastoral ministry.
The book concludes with a very helpful annotated bibliography by Dmytro Bintsarovskyi, and an index of names and subjects.
*
2. The lasting value of the Handbook
Organization: The four constitutive sections of the Handbook accomplish the aims of what this volume purports to be: definitional, historical, systematic, applicational, and monumental. By “monumental,” I mean that future students of intellectual history will find in this work the signposts, trails, and vistas that were part of the route traveled by our current generation of guides whose contributions make up this volume. This Handbook is a 21st century monument constructed in honor of earlier pioneers and travelers.
Vistas: All the essays provide moments of grandeur that have come to be reflected in my own marginal notes and highlighted sentences, visual cues inviting me to return, again and again, to reread, rethink, and reformulate. There are many such moments, each of which prompts my own dialogue with the text, each of which provides opportunity to grow, to question, to be formed. For the most part, these discussions are refreshing, contemporary, and valuable testimonies about the multi-disciplinary impact of N-C. As this volume takes its place among the numerous and reputable T&T Clark Handbooks, the editor and authors are to be commended for this signal achievement.
*
3. Of blank spots and the unresolved challenge
This Handbook is limited by a number of regrettable blank spots. Let’s formulate them as clues for N-C Jeopardy!.
1. Clue: They lived in this country, were devoted adherents of N-C, and produced numerous works in N-C philosophy, theology, and ethics—yet all discussion of them and their contributions is omitted from this Handbook.
Answer: Who were H. G. Stoker and Johan Heyns, and where is South Africa?
2. Clue: This issue was the single most prominent political-cultural issue in the public life and achievements of Abraham Kuyper, and became the single most important “Kuyperian pursuit” among members of the Christian Reformed Church in North America—and yet any sustained discussion of either its historical development or contemporary urgency is omitted from this Handbook.
Answer: What is Christian education?
3. Clue: Granted that in a presentation of N-C, people are disinclined to give a voice to its critics, nonetheless this person was among the most vocal, most intimate, and most competent critics of the project and principles of Abraham Kuyper—yet the mere mention of his name and engagement with his significant arguments are omitted entirely from this Handbook.
Answer: Who is P. J. Hoedemaker?
4. Clue: This current author, thinker, and writer has done more work than anyone in our generation to bring rapprochement between N-C and Roman Catholicism, yet is nowhere mentioned or engaged in this Handbook.
Answer: Who is Eduardo Echeverria, Professor of Philosophy and Systematic Theology at Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit, MI.
And now for the unresolved challenge:
Throughout this volume, the claim is made repeatedly that, by virtue of its themes, principles, and applications, N-C has “something to say about” every sphere of life—education, politics, economics, philosophy, race, science, art, and more. What is surprising, then—and this constitutes the unresolved challenge to the credibility and acceptability of today’s N-C among Christ-followers—is the total absence in this Handbook of any demonstration that N-C is relevant for matters/issues relating to human sexuality, marriage, and family.
No attempt is made in this Handbook to deploy extant N-C sources in order to analyze the modern revolutionary ground-motives of egalitarianism and identitarianism, evidenced in modern cultural commitments to redefining marriage, to expanding abortion, and to social, Marxist, and sexual identitarianism. (This silence is all the more remarkable despite two positive references in the volume to Carl R. Trueman, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self: Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution [Wheaton: Crossway, 2020].)
It is not the case that Kuyper, Bavinck, and others in the N-C tradition have been silent on these matters. Consider this brief list of readily-available, relevant sources:
Abraham Kuyper, Common Grace, vol. 3: “The Family,” chapters 41–51, pp. 339–428
Abraham Kuyper, Pro Rege, vol. 2: “Series III: Christ’s Kingship and the Family,” pp. 299–462
Herman Bavinck, The Christian Family
J. Douma, The Ten Commandments
J. Douma, Homofilie
E. L. Hebden-Taylor, The Reformational Understanding of Family and Marriage
Lewis B. Smedes, Sex for Christians: The Limits and Liberties of Sexual Living
One reality continues to define this unresolved challenge to the credibility and reliability of N-C in the 21st century. That reality is the clear and suppressed disagreement about this unresolved challenge among those who claim to advocate and speak for N-C. There exists among today’s N-C leaders (1) public advocacy of homosexuality and so-called “homosexual marriage,” (2) soft endorsement of so-called “alternative lifestyles” associated with what is called the “LBGTQ+ movement,” and (3) inexcusable silence about the contemporary social and cultural revolution being fueled by what I’ve termed the ground-motives of egalitarianism and identitarianism.
In light of recent overwhelmingly destructive cultural advances of egalitarianism and identitarianism throughout the West, a sympathetic critic might well be tempted to ask: Your (principled, structural, political, or whatever) pluralism—how’s that working for you?
Given this challenge and these disagreements, the relevant question remains: What are the prospects for making good on the promise embedded in the volume’s opening definitional description: “Neo-Calvinism is the critical advancement of Reformed orthodoxy for the sake of modern life” (1)?
Or to say it with words attributed to Martin Luther: “If I profess with loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the truth of God except that little point which the world and the Devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christ. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved, and to be steady on all the battlefield besides, is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point.”
Perhaps, then, Luther can help us restate the question: How will neo-Calvinism survive its flinching?
The Laymens Lounge is giving away a copy of T&T Clark Handbook of Neo-Calvinism. To be entered to when a copy:
- Follow us on Twitter @LaymensLounge and
- Share this review with a comment
