by Clayton B. Cooke<\/p>\n\n\n\n
INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Abraham Kuyper is widely known in neo-Calvinist circles for his many public roles, and his pioneering public theology. In his most prominent post as a public figure, he served as Prime Minister of the Netherlands from 1901-1905.[1]<\/a> However, what is perhaps less commonly known is that Kuyper composed a collection of intimate meditations, To Be Near Unto God<\/em>, during this same period.[2]<\/a> The juxtaposition of Kuyper\u2019s most influential public role and the most comprehensive account of his practice of piety is not an aberration or coincidence. No matter what his public activity was, whether as a theologian, journalist, university founder, or politician, Kuyper always retreated to be alone with his God.[3]<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n This historical reality begs the question: was there a relationship between Kuyper\u2019s public activity and his practice of personal piety? And more generally, is there a link between Christian public life and Christian spirituality? Concerning the former, Kuyper developed a robust public theology, which argued biblically that it was a Christian\u2019s responsibility to cultivate and engage culture.[4]<\/a> With regard to the latter, Kuyper emphasized the importance of mystical nearness to God, and he published weekly devotions for nearly a half-century.[5]<\/a> Current neo-Calvinist scholars have written much about Kuyper\u2019s public theology and its implications for Christian engagement in culture. However, there has been minimal examination of his devotional writings and the relationship between these writings and his call to cultural discipleship. <\/p>\n\n\n\n As a result, the central focus of this paper will be on the profound connection between Christian personal piety and the call to cultural transformation. In order to assay this relationship, this paper will analyze (1) the historical account of Kuyper\u2019s practice of personal piety, (2) the inattention of neo-Calvinist scholars to this dimension of his Christian life and theology, (3) the content of Kuyper\u2019s devotional writings, and (4) the implications for neo-Calvinism and public theology. This analysis will conclude that the neo-Calvinist aim for cultural transformation finds its ultimate meaning when it is the result of Christ\u2019s work in the individual heart of the believer, which is in harmony with Abraham Kuyper\u2019s life and writings.[6]<\/a> PART 1<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n THE PERSONAL PIETY OF ABRAHAM KUYPER<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Views on Piety<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Abraham Kuyper recognized that there were great risks in encouraging a mystical form of spirituality. He knew how easy it was for mysticism to develop into an unhealthy practice,[7]<\/a> and admitted that in its very essence, mysticism was hermitic and aimed at avoiding worldly activities. Naturally, this threatened Kuyper\u2019s world-engaging, all-encompassing worldview known as \u201cNeo-Calvinism.\u201d[8]<\/a> Nevertheless, Kuyper fervently emphasized the necessity of mystical spirituality in the Christian life. In his view, faithful cultural discipleship[9]<\/a> was impossible without mystical nearness to God, for \u201ca Christianity that neglects the mystic element grows frigid and congeals.\u201d[10]<\/a> Kuyper was critical of those who had allowed this \u201ccongealing\u201d to occur. He felt that few people sought to cultivate the inner life by taking time to sit alone in prayer, contemplation, and the reading of Scripture.[11]<\/a> As a result, he believed that Christian cultural discipleship was often spurious, \u201cmechanical,\u201d and sapped of spirit.[12]<\/a> In order to properly and obediently \u201cfill the earth,\u201d Kuyper believed that a unio mystica<\/em>, or mystical union with Christ, was required and could not be ignored for even a moment.[13]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Historical Perspective on Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Piety<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Kuyper\u2019s unio mystica<\/em> with Christ illustrates that in addition to his public life, Kuyper\u2019s private life was also critically important to his faith, theology, and overall influence in the Netherlands. Presently, Kuyper is best known for authoring the theological work, Lectures on Calvinism<\/em>, but he also wrote and published more than 2,000 devotionals.[14]<\/a> Indeed, many aspects of Kuyper\u2019s life were dedicated to experiencing God while engaging with the world. Yet at the same time, Kuyper participated in multiple practices that aimed at encountering God in relative isolation from the world. While the former is emphasized in most scholarly and academic publications dealing with Kuyperian thought, the latter is often not. Kuyper repeats throughout his meditations that he spent time in seclusion with God for the purpose of communing with him.[15]<\/a> These morning and evening devotions formed a routine from which Kuyper never deviated. Even during the final days of his life when he could no longer read or write, Kuyper insisted that family and friends read his written devotions aloud to him.[16]<\/a> In addition, Kuyper spent two hours every day walking in solitude. He walked the same route each day, and he seldom asked anyone to accompany him. These daily customs demonstrate that in addition to a dynamic public life, Kuyper nurtured a vigorous private and internal life.[17]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The nature of Kuyper\u2019s private relationship with God is most lucidly portrayed in his meditations, which were printed in the Dutch religious newspaper, De Heraut<\/em> (The Herald<\/em>).[18]<\/a> During Kuyper\u2019s lifetime, De Heraut <\/em>was read widely in the Netherlands.[19]<\/a> Thus, Kuyper had a prominent role in shaping Dutch religious thought while he was editor of this newspaper, from 1871-1920.*<\/a> He was so inextricably linked to this publicationthat when Dutch citizens thought of De Heraut<\/em>, they thought of Kuyper as well.[20]<\/a> For nearly fifty years, Kuyper composed a meditation for this newspaper each week. Even when he became Prime Minister of the Netherlands, he never stopped publishing weekly devotions in De Heraut<\/em>. He relinquished all of his other public roles during this time, but he never abandoned writing meditations.[21]<\/a> It\u2019s as if these devotions were the one thing Kuyper could not give up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n By inviting people to get a glimpse of his internal life in his De Heraut<\/em> meditations, Kuyper established an influence that went far beyond his doctrinal ideas and public roles.[22]<\/a> Not everyone could grasp the fine points of Kuyper\u2019s theology, or all of the details of his public speeches, but even the most basic of thinkers could connect with his heartfelt meditations. For this reason, translator John Hendrik De Vries averred that Kuyper impacted, and thus mobilized, commoners in Dutch society very effectively.[23]<\/a> In De Vries\u2019 opinion, it was Kuyper\u2019s mystical experience with God, and not his theological or public views, that garnered such strong support among the Netherlands\u2019 plebeian population. Consequently, his theological teachings such as common grace, antithesis, and sphere sovereignty played secondary roles to Kuyper\u2019s devotions in rallying people to faithful cultural discipleship. For his readers, Kuyper was the paragon of intimacy with God, and through this intimacy Kuyper authenticated, legitimized, and invigorated his public policy and theology.[24]<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Piety from the Standpoint of His Contemporaries<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n In present neo-Calvinist circles, Abraham Kuyper is primarily recognized for his public theology. However, during his lifetime Kuyper was most widely known and respected because of his personal relationship with God. At his funeral in 1920, Kuyper was remembered for his mysticism above all else. Kuyper\u2019s close friend, Alexander Willem Frederik Idenburg, was with him during his final days and spoke at his funeral. He said of Kuyper:<\/p>\n\n\n\n This tenderness in the depths of his soul was a great love, which in the first place went out toward God, the God of his life. How his eyes could sparkle and his words glow when he talked confidentially about the experiences of his life and the way the Lord had guided him! It was that love which made him witness, even on his deathbed, that God was his refuge and his strength, a very present help in trouble\u2026He revealed that tenderness of his soul most clearly in his meditations. How deeply he experienced the blessedness of \u201cbeing near to God.\u201d [25]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n For Idenburg, Kuyper\u2019s piety was the focal point of his tribute to his beloved friend. In much the same way, the residing pastor at Kuyper\u2019s funeral, V. Hepp, offered encomiums that touted Kuyper\u2019s multifaceted talents, but most of all he stressed that Kuyper was one of the great mystics in the history of the Christian church.[26]<\/a> Idenburg and Hepp\u2019s remarks illustrate that Kuyper impacted people far beyond the realms of politics, education, journalism, and theology. He wielded an influence that pierced people\u2019s hearts and penetrated the deepest places of their souls. Kuyper\u2019s public roles were neither disregarded nor ignored during his lifetime. However, his contemporaries believed that his greatest legacy was not his impact upon society, but rather his personal faith. For those who knew him, it was agreed that Kuyper\u2019s piety was the most influential characteristic and behavior of his life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In addition to Idenburg and Hepp, translator John Hendrik De Vries provides a unique perspective on Abraham Kuyper\u2019s spiritual life. As the English translator for Kuyper\u2019s devotions, De Vries spent more time analyzing Kuyper\u2019s meditations than perhaps any other person. After innumerable hours of translating, De Vries concluded that Kuyper truly lived the mystical life. Kuyper fascinated De Vries because he was willing to openly bare his soul, despite his public stature. Kuyper was a household name in the Netherlands, yet he expressed the details of his own failures and struggles for all to see. Kuyper also intrigued De Vries because of his ability to articulate intimacy with God from every life circumstance.[27]<\/a> When his wife died of sickness in 1899, Kuyper meditated on the subject of death in Asleep in Jesus<\/em>.[28]<\/a> Moreover, when reflecting upon his family, Kuyper wrote a series of devotionals from the point of view of the home life, entitled When Thou Sittest in Thy House<\/em>. Although these titles only represent a few examples of Kuyper\u2019s multifarious meditations, he found intimacy with God in a wide range of situations.[29]<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n A final reason why De Vries found Kuyper so remarkable was because of his versatility as a person. While this trait is regularly highlighted in present Kuyperian discussions, De Vries offered a slightly different perspective on Kuyper\u2019s versatility than is typically considered today. De Vries was not only impressed that Kuyper was an erudite theologian, the founder of a university, a successful politician, and a flourishing newspaper editor, but he was also enamored by the fact that a man who accomplished all of these feats could maintain a \u201cchildlike simplicity of faith, mystical insight and sweetness of soul.\u201d De Vries substantiated this claim by quoting a reviewer of Kuyper\u2019s works who stated, \u201cKuyper\u2019s meditations disprove the idea that a profound theologian cannot be a warm-hearted Christian.\u201d[30]<\/a> For De Vries and essentially all of Kuyper\u2019s contemporaries, while the public Kuyper was impressive, the private Kuyper was extraordinary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n PART 2<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n NEO-CALVINISM\u2019S SUPPRESSION OF ABRAHAM<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n KUYPER\u2019S DEVOTIONAL LIFE<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Although Kuyper wrote devotionals his entire life, his practice of, and emphasis on, spirituality has largely been ignored. Kuyper\u2019s contemporaries valued his piety more than any of his other qualities, yet many of his successors have failed to acknowledge his attention to personal spirituality, and its critical role in his call to cultural discipleship. This lack of emphasis on spirituality has pervaded Neo-Calvinist circles since Kuyper\u2019s death, so much so that the difference between Kuyper\u2019s influence during his lifetime and after his lifetime is striking. The one characteristic that Kuyper was most identified with during his life, personal piety, has been the least recognized since his death.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Neo-Calvinism\u2019s Rejection of North American Pietism and Revivalism<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n In the early 20th<\/sup> century, Kuyper\u2019s North American followers developed arguments against Pietism*<\/a> in an attempt to distinguish themselves from Evangelicals.[31]<\/a> Emigrant Dutch Calvinists felt that pietists maintained too many otherworldly beliefs, and therefore did not properly encourage worldly activity. By the 1920\u2019s, these beliefs spread throughout the North American Neo-Calvinist populace as publications such as the Christian Journal<\/em> began inveighing against \u201cexcessive pietism.\u201d[32]<\/a> The practices and consequences of Pietism became identified as the problem with Evangelicalism. B.K. Kuiper, a prominent American Dutch Calvinist in the early 20th century, went so far as to blame Pietism for Christian \u201ccultural apathy.\u201d He and other Neo-Calvinists felt that it had led to isolationism, a false hope in perfection, the repression of the intellect, a diminishing of God\u2019s creation, and an unhealthy emphasis on individuality.[33]<\/a> In their minds, this conflicted with the Kuyperian call to cultural engagement, and as a result Neo-Calvinists moved away from Christian Pietism as a whole. <\/p>\n\n\n\n For Kuyper\u2019s North American heirs, as they broke from Evangelicalism, they also questioned the legitimacy of Revivalism. They disputed the narrowness of Revivalist emphases on the individual soul and \u201cfeeling\u201d as vital components of the Christian experience. Since the soul and emotion were essential components of Kuyper\u2019s devotional life, Neo-Calvinists tended to view Kuyper\u2019s meditations with caution. When Kuyper\u2019s successors looked to him as a model, they did not describe him as the \u201cspiritual counselor and guide\u201d that so many of his contemporaries looked to for inspiration.[34]<\/a> Instead, they saw Abraham Kuyper as someone who logically and faithfully argued for a broader Christian worldview, and a more cosmic-minded God. Ultimately, Kuyper\u2019s followers discovered in his theological writings a God whose intentions extended beyond the limited nature of Revivalism\u2019s priorities on individual salvation and the soul\u2019s relationship to God.[35]<\/a> These individuals latched on to Kuyper\u2019s notions that God\u2019s purposes touched every square inch of creation. Through his elect God would bring creation to its glorious end. Kuyper\u2019s heirs were right to point out these beliefs, but by excluding piety and its foundational role in cultural discipleship, they became narrow themselves. When Kuyper\u2019s followers contended that God\u2019s cosmic purposes outweighed and conflicted with the parochial perspective of Revivalism, they repressed many significant aspects of Kuyper\u2019s Christian belief. As a result, in their rejection of both North American Revivalism and the pietistic impulses of Evangelicalism, Neo-Calvinists were unable to hold personal spirituality and cultural discipleship together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Scholarly Neglect of Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Call to Personal Piety<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n In their scholarship Neo-Calvinists have failed to do justice to Abraham Kuyper\u2019s piety, by essentially ignoring his devotional life altogether. For example, as a professor and later as a president of Calvin College for nearly four decades, Louis Berkhof had a prominent role in shaping the life and thought of Neo-Calvinists.[36]<\/a> Although Berkhof was a proficient systematic theologian, he did not write about or encourage the same type of heartfelt spirituality as did Abraham Kuyper. For Berkhof, the Bible was primarily a rational case for orthodoxy, while for Kuyper it was a spiritual, life-giving \u201cfountain of living water.\u201d[37]<\/a> Instead of the \u201chand, head, and heart\u201d religion of Kuyper,[38]<\/a> Christian belief for Berkhof turned into rational and propositional knowledge. This type of theological construct viewed mysticism and feeling with extreme suspicion.[39]<\/a> Over time, Neo-Calvinists started to question whether impassioned spirituality threatened Christian faith in general. This was not Kuyper\u2019s concern. Although he admitted the potential hazards of piety, he did not feel that it endangered Christian faith. Instead, he believed that the absence of a mystical \u201cunion with Christ\u201d most jeopardized Christianity.[40]<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n Berkhof was not the only Kuyperian intellectual heir to ignore piety and its foundational role in the call to faithful cultural discipleship. This suppression has become widespread, as few Kuyperian scholars have taken seriously his devotional themes and their implications for Neo-Calvinist public theology. For example, it can be argued that under Neo-Calvinist scholars such as Herman Dooyeweerd, Dirk Hendrik and Theodoor Vollenhoven, Kuyperianism shifted away from an emphasis on piety, and became a solidified philosophical system. In this philosophical system, scholars suppressed the spiritual and relational significance of living before the face of God.[41]<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n In many present settings and texts, Neo-Calvinists have followed Berkhof, Dooyeweerd, and Vollenhoven by ignoring Kuyper\u2019s mystical form of spirituality. None of the English scholarly works published since Kuyper\u2019s death have taken an in-depth look at Kuyper\u2019s spirituality, and its implications on his public theology. In his article, What is to Be Done\u2026Toward a Neocalvinist Agenda?<\/em>, Al Wolters offers an indicting critique of Neo-Calvinists for their silence concerning piety. He writes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Generally speaking, neocalvinists are more noted for their intellectual ability and culture-transforming zeal than for their personal godliness or their living relationship with Jesus Christ\u2026[T]he neocalvinist polemic against pietistic otherworldliness can have the unfortunate effect of throwing out the godly baby with the pietistic bathwater.[42]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Wolters insists that in their determination to promote a culturally active Christianity, and to warn against the dangers of pietism, Neo-Calvinists have effectively silenced Kuyper\u2019s devotional life. James Schaap, in the introduction to his \u201cadaptations\u201d of Kuyper\u2019s To Be Near Unto God<\/em>, provides key clues as to why Kuyper\u2019s followers have de-emphasized his piety. He asserts that the Abraham Kuyper of To Be Near Unto God<\/em> is \u201crisky\u201d and makes his modern followers \u201canxious.\u201d[43]<\/a> Furthermore, he contends that Kuyper\u2019s mysticism is often \u201cembarrassing\u201d to his disciples.[44]<\/a> According to Schaap, Kuyper\u2019s heirs have downplayed his devotional life because it endangers his public theology. Mysticism and otherworldliness seemingly put the cultural mandate at risk. As a result, Kuyper\u2019s intellectual followers have concealed his spirituality, and without this cannot hold personal piety and cultural discipleship together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n PART 3<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n ANALYSIS OF ABRAHAM KUYPER\u2019S DEVOTIONS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n In Kuyper\u2019s devotions, he reveals a side of himself that is often difficult to discern from his other, better known writings. His devotions are intimate, tender, and have one driving purpose: \u201c[I]t is good for me to be near unto God.\u201d[45]<\/a> \u201cTo Be Near Unto God\u201d is Kuyper\u2019s signature devotional theme. His anthology of 110 devotions, which bears this title, is the apotheosis of all his meditations.[46]<\/a> With each scripture passage that Kuyper contemplates, relational nearness to God is always his primary motivation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When composing his meditations, Kuyper generally focuses on one topic for an extended period of time.[47]<\/a> Similarly themed devotions have been published into books, typically ranging anywhere from 50-100 meditations per volume. The following analysis will focus on a selection of these books, specifically those that have been translated into English.[48]<\/a> In these devotions, Kuyper seeks to \u201copen the eyes of as many as possible to the need of making communion with, knowledge of, and love for, God more than ever before [their] daily concern.\u201d[49]<\/a> The structure of Kuyper\u2019s meditations, in combination with his emphasis on five recurring characteristics, supports this overall objective. According to these characteristics, the 1) devotions are mystical<\/em> in nature, 2) otherworldly<\/em> in focus, 3) emphasize many worldly<\/em> ideas, 4) navigate how to balance<\/em> heavenly and earthly concerns, and 5) underscore that Jesus is the<\/em> Lamb of God<\/em>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Structure of Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Devotions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Each of Kuyper\u2019s devotions typically ranges from 1,200-1,800 words. They are constructed for both the educated and uneducated, and are formatted for the inclusion in newspaper publications.[50]<\/a> Given these parameters, Kuyper\u2019s devotions generally utilize a basic, straightforward structure. They include a single lesson or observation about one\u2019s relationship to God, a selected text from Scripture, and everyday imagery to clarify theological ideas. These three elements constitute the basic organizing principles behind Kuyper\u2019s devotions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Since Kuyper\u2019s devotions are designed to fit within the confines of a newspaper column, he is limited on how much he can express in a single meditation. For this reason, Kuyper chooses to expound upon only one core idea in each of his writings. This structural norm provides Kuyper\u2019s devotions with precision and intelligibility. Thus, he never leaves his audience wondering what he is trying to communicate. Kuyper\u2019s meditation, \u201cYour Body a Temple of the Holy Ghost,\u201d is a representative model of how he limits himself to one central lesson in his devotions. Just as the title suggests, Kuyper uses his 1,500 words to communicate that the human body is the temple the Holy Spirit. He never veers from this idea.[51]<\/a> He does not strive to portray intimacy with Christ as an overly intellectual or complex affair. His goal is clarity, and this is supported by his commitment to a singular idea in each devotion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Scripture serves as the underpinning of each devotion that Kuyper authors. In his meditation, \u201cGod\u2019s Word our Guide,\u201d Kuyper asseverates that Scripture must not only be the starting point of piety, but it must guide the entire process of piety as well.[52]<\/a> Scripture is therefore like a compass, and since Kuyper is extremely suspicious of his own desires and proclivities, he allows Scripture to dictate how he constructs his meditations. He gives a clear picture of how Scripture drives this process when he states:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Do you know what I myself usually do when I am preparing to write a sermon or meditation? I start by forming and idea of what Scripture tells us in the text I have in mind. When I see that idea sharply, I listen to the voices in my own heart that protest against it. Then I wrestle with those voices until I have silenced them, before the Word of God.[53]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Kuyper\u2019s point is that spirituality must be rooted in the Word of God. For this reason, he quotes many biblical passages throughout his devotions. However, there is usually one central verse that serves as the title and theme of each meditation. This verse, often cited near the middle of the text, is arguably the climax of Kuyper\u2019s devotions. Kuyper does not use the Bible as a wooden formula, nor does he allow it dampen the emotional intensity of his meditations. Kuyper uses the Bible as a relational tool that provides structure by highlighting the central theme and climax of his devotions.[54]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The final essential structural element in Kuyper\u2019s meditations is his use of descriptive, and metaphorical images. These images are not abstract or complicated; they are simple, everyday illustrations that all readers can relate to and picture in their minds. Kuyper draws on simple metaphors as a structural tool, in order to illuminate the driving point of his devotions. In some writings, he scatters various metaphorical images throughout. Yet in other writings, he employs a single metaphor at the beginning of his meditation, and then weaves this image into the basic framework of the devotion. For example, in \u201cThou Renewest the Face of the Earth,\u201d Kuyper utilizes the winter and summer seasons in order to convey his central devotional theme. Winter and summer metaphorically represent the internal and external lives of Christians. Winter represents a time when individuals must stay inside because of the weather, and Kuyper equates this to the belief that Christians must sometimes \u201cstay indoors\u201d and focus on the internal life. At the same time, summer represents a time when individuals are drawn outside because of pleasant weather, and Kuyper compares this to the Christian need to \u201cget outside\u201d and engage in culture. Kuyper contends that Christians must strike a perfect balance between the internal and external life, and he finds that the winter and summer seasons are a perfect metaphor for articulating this balance. Through these types of metaphorical images, Kuyper expresses important theological truths that relate to the ordinary experience of every person.[55]<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Mystical Nature of Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Devotions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Of the five themes that recur throughout Kuyper\u2019s devotions, the most prominent is his emphasis on mystical nearness to God. Kuyper\u2019s devotions are not didactic, exegetical, or even intentionally theological. Rather, they aim at an \u201cexperience\u201d of the soul in relationship to God. In his exploration of this \u201cexperience\u201d of the soul, Kuyper touches on many important traits of Christian mysticism. The first key attribute hinges on the idea of \u201cmystical union\u201d and what this union entails. For Kuyper, mystical union takes place between the human soul, whom the Holy Spirit enters, and Christ, whom the soul enters. Kuyper conveys this idea in his meditation, \u201cI in Them and Thou in Me.\u201d In this meditation he expounds upon the recurring theme of how two disparate entities, Creator and creature, relate to one another. In Kuyper\u2019s opinion, Creator and creature ultimately relate by coalescing. Christians actually \u201cbecome partakers of the Divine nature\u201d although they possess no part of this Divine nature.[56]<\/a> In this process something mystical happens; an unbreakable bond of love develops between the Eternal and the finite. The mystery of Divine\/human love is the experience that Kuyper seeks in his meditations. In his own words, \u201cThe mystical union must have laid the tie of love forever between Christ and your soul.\u201d This mystical \u201ctie of love\u201d is the foundation from which Kuyper effusively and unabashedly expresses his relationship to God.[57]<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n Yet, there is something hidden about this \u201ctie\u201d as well. Kuyper repeatedly refers to Christian mysticism as one\u2019s \u201chidden walk with God.\u201d[58]<\/a> His routines of morning and evening devotions[59]<\/a> and solitary walks[60]<\/a> aim at private fellowship with Christ. Although Kuyper acknowledges the biblical call to cultural discipleship, he also recognizes that public life can easily distract a person from deep communion with Christ.[61]<\/a> Thus, Kuyper believes that part of his life must be dedicated to mystically encountering God in isolation. This isolation is fundamental to his mysticism because he realizes that the deepest level of intimacy with the Divine happens only in \u201chidden\u201d moments. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In his mystical \u201chidden\u201d walk with Christ, Kuyper discovers that he is a child of God in a distinct and personal way.[62]<\/a> When encountering God as an individual, Kuyper develops a relationship with Him that lacks reserve. In his devotion entitled, \u201cI Love,\u201d Kuyper expresses his love for God with gushing, emotional declarations. He proclaims, \u201c[Y]es, this now is love, and therefore in ecstasy [the soul] exclaims: \u2018I love! I love! I love!\u2019\u201d[63]<\/a> These ebullient expressions are common throughout Kuyper\u2019s devotions and they demonstrate his passionate relationship with Christ. This relationship is predicated upon personal nearness to God, which involves a mystical encounter between the Eternal and finite. For this reason, one reviewer aptly summarized the genre of Kuyper\u2019s devotional columns as \u201cmelodies of holy mysticism.\u201d[64]<\/a> Kuyper was never ashamed of his mysticism. Instead, he put his private mystical experience with God out in public for all to see.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although Kuyper\u2019s devotions are highly mystical, he never divorces his mysticism from the Word of God. He realizes the potential risks of deviating from Scripture and allowing the Divine\/human interaction to be shaped by human fickleness.[65]<\/a> As a result, throughout his meditations he weds Scripture with mysticism, the former always shaping the latter.[66]<\/a> If this tie is severed, Kuyper rejects mysticism altogether.[67]<\/a> More than any other book in the Bible, Kuyper finds that the Psalms best aid him in articulating his mystical relationship with God.[68]<\/a> As a result, Kuyper bases many of his mediations on the Psalms. He finds that the Psalms are inimitable in their conveyance of the deepest longings, sufferings, and hopes of the human heart. In his own words, \u201cThe deepest question that governs our Christian life is that which touches our personal fellowship with God. And in the Book of Psalms\u2026you see how the inmost longings ever and again go out after this divine fellowship.\u201d[69]<\/a> For Kuyper, the Psalms are not merely the proper theological tool upon which to base his devotions. They also allow him to mystically draw near to the Divine by helping him articulate his innermost thoughts and feelings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Otherworldly Focus in His Meditations<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n In Kuyper\u2019s meditations, his mysticism engenders a distinct otherworldly focus. While he does not ignore Christian responsibility in the world, Kuyper spends most of his time contemplating the heavenly. His devotions are evidence that his Neo-Calvinist framework includes time to sit alone and contemplate the otherworldliness of God. Though at times Kuyper\u2019s devotional otherworldliness appears to conflict with his other Neo-Calvinist convictions, these writings demonstrate Kuyper\u2019s ability to hold these various theological convictions together. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Kuyper\u2019s theology and mysticism often seem discordant. In his meditations, Kuyper defines \u201cthe world\u201d slightly differently than he does in his theological writings. For example, in his meditations Kuyper states, \u201cThe way of the world\u2026is therefore fatal\u201d[70]<\/a> and, \u201cHe came into\u2026this heap of refuse which we call the world, into the ruins of human life.\u201d[71]<\/a> These devotional reflections do not provide the distinctions that Kuyper presents in his theological writings, where he nuances his definition of the world to mean \u201cthat which is sinful<\/em> in it.\u201d[72]<\/a> In his devotions, Kuyper rarely makes this same distinction.[73]<\/a> In these writings the world not only encompasses the sinful forces that struggle against God, but the entire physical realm as well. This means that along with Satan, sin, and death that war against God, the natural,[74]<\/a> visible,[75]<\/a> and material domains contend against God too.[76]<\/a> Kuyper\u2019s devotional definition of the \u201cworld\u201d inevitably means that part of faithful discipleship will entail striving against this world.[77]<\/a> This seems diametrically opposed to Kuyper\u2019s frequent expressions in his works such as Lectures on Calvinism<\/em>. Kuyper maintains in Lectures on Calvinism<\/em> that a \u201cCalvinist cannot shut himself up in his church and abandon the world.\u201d[78]<\/a> At the same time, in his meditations he states, \u201c[T]he cross\u2026seems to sever your connections with the world, does it not?\u201d[79]<\/a> Though these seem like antithetical statements, Kuyper simultaneously believes both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Kuyper\u2019s devotional writings, his notion of severing ties with the world leads him to contemplate the otherworldliness of God. Although he grasps the biblical mandate to \u201cfill the earth\u201d with God-glorifying culture, he nevertheless avows in his devotions that Christians must prioritize the eternal over the worldly. Ultimately, Kuyper acknowledges that eternal life must take precedence over cultural transformation.[80]<\/a> In addition, he recognizes that a public form of spirituality based on Coram Deo*<\/a><\/em> is somehow incomplete. Living Coram Deo<\/em> in all spheres of human interaction does not encompass Kuyper\u2019s entire spiritual life. A vital element of his piety also entails retreating to the \u201cFather-house\u201d above and fellowshipping with the Divine in his own space.[81]<\/a> In highlighting the significance of this practice, Kuyper stresses that nearness of God, per Coram Deo<\/em>, needs to be balanced by the distance of God who is disparate from his creation.[82]<\/a> Part of prayer then is praying to the Father who is in heaven, and through this process the otherworldly takes its place in Kuyper\u2019s earthly life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Kuyper\u2019s devotional writings, it becomes evident that communing with the otherworldly God is imperative to properly engaging in everyday, worldly life. In his meditation, \u201cWalks Among Those Who Stand Before God,\u201d Kuyper underlines the necessity of moving between the eternal and finite realms. He maintains that part of the Christian life entails escaping from the burdens of daily life and drawing near to the throne of God in heaven. Only when time is spent in this heavenly cogitation can one aptly \u201creturn to his life-task here below.\u201d[83]<\/a> Thus, reflection upon God\u2019s otherworldliness does not become an excuse to avoid the world altogether, but rather it reminds Kuyper of cultural discipleship\u2019s true meaning. Authentic discipleship means knowing the Divine in such an intimate way that the Eternal invades the temporal, making \u201cheaven…real even upon this earth.\u201d[84]<\/a> <\/p>\n\n\n\n World Engagement in Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Meditations<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n While the majority of Kuyper\u2019s devotional themes would seem to lead him to a life of monasticism, this type of withdrawn, insulated lifestyle is never his goal. The content of Kuyper\u2019s meditations make clear that he does not plan to perpetually remain in heavenly contemplation. In order for nearness to God to be a complete experience, mysticism must somehow come to bear on Kuyper\u2019s earthly life. In short, mysticism \u201cmust become reality.\u201d[85]<\/a> This statement elucidates how Kuyper holds seemingly paradoxical otherworldly and worldly emphases together in one belief system. Although Kuyper\u2019s mysticism and public life require a certain level of separation, there is not such a severance that his otherworldliness cannot be applied to his everyday life as well. Thus, there is both continuity and discontinuity between Kuyper\u2019s mysticism and public life. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Even in his devotions, Kuyper is clear that the Creator still concerns Himself with His creation, and therefore mystical union with this Creator must pertain to Kuyper\u2019s earthly experience. For all of his devotional emphasis on spirituality, in the end Kuyper declares, \u201cSpirituality must not be confused with unreality<\/em>.\u201d[86]<\/a> Spirituality for Kuyper is a real, tangible experience, and not completely independent of worldly life. Though his purpose in his meditations is mystical nearness to God, Kuyper\u2019s strivings for inner transformation always have implications for the external and visible world.[87]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n In his devotional writings, Kuyper explores how the \u201cFather-house\u201d above comes to bear upon the earthly domain primarily through the principle of Coram Deo<\/em>. Although he maintains the Creator\/creature distinction and emphasizes that God resides in heaven, he also underscores the fact that all of creation stands before the face of God. Thus, by means of Coram Deo<\/em>, the Invisible God draws near to the visible world, extirpating the distance between the Divine and human. This has drastic consequences for Kuyper\u2019s spiritual life. Union with God is no longer just an otherworldly endeavor, nor is it restrained to the afterlife,[88]<\/a> but it is to be experienced in the world<\/em>, by way of the Divine face. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In his meditation entitled, \u201cSeek My Face,\u201d Kuyper reflects upon why the face of God is imperative when speaking of the Divine\/human encounter. He asserts that the face is the most relationally intimate location on the human body, and thus he emphasizes the face of God when speaking of how God draws near to humanity. Kuyper states, \u201cWe reveal ourselves in the highest sense by speaking face to face, and so our walk with God could not be illustrated otherwise, than by the privilege of being permitted to meet God face to face.\u201d[89]<\/a> The principle of Coram Deo<\/em> becomes the avenue through which Eternal and finite literally do meet face-to-face.<\/p>\n\n\n\n By uniting the otherworldly and worldly realms, Coram Deo<\/em> adds an element to Kuyper\u2019s devotional life that extends far beyond typical monasticism. Although Kuyper seeks to live before the face of God in all areas of life, it is evident that Coram Deo <\/em>never develops into an excuse to ignore meeting face-to-face with God in solitude. Kuyper\u2019s devotions illustrate that just as Coram Deo <\/em>is relevant in public life, it is also applicable behind closed doors. In Kuyper\u2019s view, Coram Deo <\/em>is necessarily a public and<\/em> private experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Balancing Otherworldly and Worldly Concerns<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Abraham Kuyper recognizes that Christians must learn to incorporate both the otherworldly and worldly realms into their lives. A person does not live in one reality to the exclusion of the other. Instead, union with Christ requires living in both realms concurrently. Likewise, Kuyper does not think that earthly life is entirely dissimilar from heavenly contemplation. His goal is not to \u201cvaporize [himself] into the spiritual,\u201d but rather to discover the true meaning of worldly spirituality.[90]<\/a> As a result, the task of faithful discipleship encompasses learning how to live in the otherworldly and worldly spheres at the same time. Kuyper expresses this idea in his meditation, \u201cMine Eyes are Ever Toward the Lord:\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n This now brings you to a life in two phases. On one side a life toward what is without, and on the other side a life toward what is within. Though at first these two are strange to one another, gradually there is a mutual approach until they mingle themselves and permeate each other through and through.[91]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The essence of Kuyper\u2019s argument is that the inner and outer lives must invade and imbue one another. He concludes that in order for this to happen, a person must attain perfect balance between the two.[92]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Kuyper claims throughout his meditations that one of his primary goals is to strive toward equilibrium between the otherworldly and worldly domains. He desires to be \u201c[s]trong in this world, and at the same time inspired and charmed by the world which [is] to come.\u201d[93]<\/a> Kuyper confesses the difficulty of this task. He admits that most Christians lean too heavily to one side or the other. He contests that although many Christians do noble deeds in society, they remain ignorant of the \u201cage to come.\u201d At the same time, Kuyper also acknowledges that many people only incorporate the \u201ccoming age\u201d into their spiritual lives and thus omit the significance of the present age.[94]<\/a> What may surprise many of Kuyper\u2019s followers is that while he seeks a perfect balance between the Eternal and finite, he feels that if a person has to err on one side or the other, it is better to err on the side of mysticism. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Kuyper cogently portrays this idea in his meditation, \u201cMary of Bethany.\u201d In this devotion, Kuyper reflects on the Luke 10:38-42 pericope that describes Jesus\u2019 visit to Mary and Martha\u2019s home. Kuyper describes Mary as a mystical woman concerned predominantly with the internal life, and Martha as a devout woman committed to deeds of service. He asserts that both women have behaved properly and that both actions are necessary. Moreover, Kuyper maintains that Christians cannot survive without internal and<\/em> external acts of faith. If either of these acts is missing, the Christian life is only fractional. Yet Kuyper recognizes that fundamentally, what concerns Christ most is whether one intimately knows Him. He avers, \u201cAnd it is worth commenting upon that Mary appealed to Jesus more strongly than did Martha.\u201d[95]<\/a> Kuyper endeavors to balance both Mary and Martha\u2019s tendencies in his own life. Yet in the end, Kuyper deems Mary\u2019s mystical tendencies as being most important. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Devotional Emphasis on Jesus as the Lamb of God<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n When Kuyper references Jesus in his theological writings and public speeches, he most commonly speaks of Him as the \u201cascending Christ.\u201d[96]<\/a> Kuyper views Christ as the King who stands above the French Revolution and its claims of humanism.[97]<\/a> Moreover, Christ is the King who rules immediately over all spheres of human interaction and who triumphs over Satan.[98]<\/a> In his book about Abraham Kuyper, Let Christ Be King<\/em>, L. Praamsma highlights how in his public roles, Kuyper stresses that Jesus is the exalted King who sits at the right hand of God. Although Kuyper may accentuate that Christ is King in his theological publications and speeches, in his devotions, Kuyper encounters and emphasizes a different side of Jesus as well. He sees and refers to Jesus as the \u201cLamb of God.\u201d This imagery evokes the characteristics of suffering and sacrifice attributed to Christ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Much of the tenderness and passion in Kuyper\u2019s devotional writings come from his reflections on the suffering Christ. In his meditations, Kuyper falls to his knees and views \u201cChrist the King\u201d as \u201cJesus the sacrificing Lamb.\u201d In this moment, kneeling before his self-emptying Savior, Kuyper finds equal footing with his audience. He is no longer the unattainable Prime Minister or learned theologian; he too is a broken sinner, bowing down before his suffering Savior.[99]<\/a> Kuyper\u2019s experience of Jesus as Lamb primarily comes by way of the cross. Kuyper composed fifty meditations on the Passion of Christ. At the rate of writing one devotional per week, Kuyper would have spent nearly an entire year ruminating on Jesus\u2019 death. The cross is a place of tremendous emotion for Kuyper. It is not simply a place of theological significance, but it is also a place of \u201csentiment.\u201d[100]<\/a> This sentiment is clearly evident in his meditation, \u201cCrucify Him, Crucify Him!,\u201d when Kuyper declares:<\/p>\n\n\n\n He [a person of Christian faith] trembles every time he catches that crucify Him, crucify Him!<\/em> as an echo in his ear, even in his soul, and can not resist the impulse, as often as he lives that terrible hour of the past over again, with an ever fresh offering of love to make his approach to his Savior.[101]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n These remarks challenge the notion that Kuyper maintains a one-dimensional view of Christ. Granted, Kuyper mainly emphasizes that \u201cChrist is King\u201d in his public theology. Yet he focuses on Jesus as the \u201cLamb of God\u201d in his private meditations, indicating that he knows multiple sides of Jesus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Kuyper\u2019s devotional focus on Jesus as the Lamb of God he argues that true Christian faith involves suffering and death to self.[102]<\/a> He believes that hardship is inescapable for the person who truly seeks Christ. This is evident when he asserts, \u201cLife is at best a struggle\u201d[103]<\/a> and \u201cNever can we escape the cross.\u201d[104]<\/a> Kuyper is honest in his meditations about his own personal \u201cstruggles\u201d and \u201ccrosses.\u201d He admits that grief over his wife\u2019s death motivated him to write, Asleep in Jesus<\/em>.[105]<\/a> In addition, in His Decease at Jerusalem: Meditations on the Passion and Death of our Lord<\/em>, Kuyper describes his anxiety as \u201cawful\u201d and \u201cof hellish origin\u201d in a meditation entitled, \u201cAfflicted.\u201d[106]<\/a> These afflictions always lead him to the cross of Christ. Kuyper communes most intimately with Christ at the cross because he sees that Christ was also afflicted. At Christ\u2019s cross, Kuyper discovers that the proper path of discipleship entails such a deep connection to the death of Christ that he \u201cseem[s] to be hanging from the Cross in his stead.\u201d[107]<\/a> In order to know Jesus the Lamb, Kuyper affirms in his meditations that he must suffer for Christ in his own life.[108]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n PART 4<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONAL PIETY AND<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n CULTURAL DISCIPLESHIP<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The primary purpose of this examination of Abraham Kuyper\u2019s devotions and modern neo-Calvinist scholars\u2019 lack of attention to these devotions is not merely to encourage people to pay more attention to Kuyper\u2019s spirituality. While this is certainly needed, a simple affirmation of Kuyper\u2019s personal piety does not address the relationship between piety and the cultural mandate that he so clearly relied on. Thus, the chief goal of this analysis is to illustrate and argue that there is a profound connection between mystical nearness to God and the call to cultural discipleship. In order to develop this argument, it is essential to examine 1) the impact of the piety\/cultural discipleship link in Abraham Kuyper\u2019s personal life, 2) the importance of this link in Kuyper\u2019s theology, and 3) the significance of this relationship for neo-Calvinism as a whole. These three points will illustrate that like two sides of a coin, personal piety and cultural impact are two necessary expressions of a holistic and unified neo-Calvinist worldview.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Impact of the Piety\/Cultural Discipleship Link in Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Life<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n When examining the relationship life between being a mystic and making a cultural impact in Kuyper\u2019s life, one cannot ignore his parallel roles as a politician, theologian, university founder, journalist, and also mystic. In Kuyper\u2019s view, there is an unbreakable bond between these public and private roles because he sees no \u201cchasm between\u2026inward-looking spirituality and life all around.\u201d[109]<\/a> He believes that his mystical relationship with Christ correlates to all of his cultural responsibilities. As a result, the mystical encounter that occurs during his private meditations does not threaten the mandate to \u201cfill the earth,\u201d but instead provides the framework for how Kuyper should go about this \u201cfilling.\u201d As his inner life shapes his outer life, consequently Kuyper feels it is imperative \u201cnot merely to labor in the visible<\/em>, but also in the invisible<\/em>.\u201d[110]<\/a> When neo-Calvinists divorce Kuyper\u2019s \u201cvisible\u201d and \u201cinvisible\u201d practices, they overlook the link between piety and cultural discipleship, thus only offering a partial picture of his life and influence. In order to properly understand Kuyper\u2019s life within his proposed life-system, his followers must acknowledge that his discipline of secluded fellowship with Christ directly relates to his public activities. <\/p>\n\n\n\n For Kuyper, this relationship serves to authenticate his call to cultural discipleship. Although he upholds the biblical and intellectual accuracy of his public theology, he is wary of a disconnected intellectualism.[111]<\/a> Kuyper warns that intellectualism devoid of personal piety turns his public theology into \u201cbeautifully shaped, finely cornered and dazzlingly transparent ice-crystals.\u201d[112]<\/a> When this intellectual \u201cfreezing\u201d seeps into neo-Calvinism, he feels that cultural engagement loses its authenticity. Kuyper\u2019s public theology can be argued, defended, and worked out to the finest detail, but unless his theological framework is connected to a deep form of personal spirituality, it becomes desiccated and fake. Thus, authentic cultural discipleship occurs only when it is the result of what Christ is doing in the individual life of the believer.[113]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The public life of an individual must also authenticate one\u2019s private nearness to God. In other words, it is not enough to affirm that personal spirituality must come to bear on cultural activity, because cultural activity must also come to bear on personal spirituality. The essence of Kuyper\u2019s argument is that both piety and cultural discipleship are insufficient when forced to stand on their own. For this reason Kuyper professes, \u201cAnd therefore the mystic has something to learn form the zealot, and the zealot from the mystic. Only from the impulse of both can soul-satisfying harmony flourish.\u201d[114]<\/a> This is why Kuyper\u2019s mysticism need not threaten his call to cultural discipleship; only when the cultural mandate informs and counterbalances piety does piety find its proper expression, meaning, and validity. Thus, neo-Calvinists need to learn from Kuyper not only to encourage personal intimacy with Christ, but also to emphasize proper intimacy with Christ that is authenticated by cultural discipleship. Then, personal piety and cultural activity become \u201cmutually authenticating,\u201d with each guiding and substantiating the other.[115]<\/a> This \u201cmutual authentication\u201d is one of the most basic links between Kuyper\u2019s piety and cultural activity. It forces one to constantly oscillate between Kuyper\u2019s meditations and his public theology, viewing what he did in his public life through the lens of his devotional life, and vice versa.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Importance of the Piety\/Cultural Discipleship Link For Abraham Kuyper\u2019s Theological Principles<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Piety not only influences Abraham Kuyper\u2019s personal life, but also his entire public theology. When neo-Calvinists ignore Kuyper\u2019s spirituality and meditations, they fail to accurately and fully comprehend his theological principles. After all, personal intimacy with God is the foundation and springboard from which Kuyper\u2019s theological beliefs take shape. Kuyper underscores this connection when he asseverates:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thanks to this work of God in the heart, the persuasion that the whole of a man\u2019s life is to be lived as in the Divine Presence has become the fundamental thought of Calvinism. By this decisive idea, or rather by this mighty fact, it has allowed itself to be controlled in every department of its entire domain. It is from this mother-thought that the all-embracing life system of Calvinism sprang.[116]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Kuyper is insisting that the constitutional idea for the emergence of neo-Calvinism is personal nearness to God. Consequently, teachings such as a Coram Deo<\/em>, sphere sovereignty, common grace, and antithesis, do not form a hard-lined philosophical scheme, but instead provide a theological framework for cultural discipleship guided by individual communion with Christ. It is only when these theological principles are held in conjunction with intimacy with Christ that they attain full meaning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Coram Deo <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n A basic tenet of Kuyper\u2019s neo-Calvinist life-system is that all of creation stands before the face of God, i.e. Coram Deo<\/em>.[117]<\/a> This characteristic of Kuyper\u2019s theological framework is often confined to a rigid principle for entering public life. However, Kuyper\u2019s life-system must be distinguished from a set of hardened laws, because his concept of Coram Deo<\/em> is inherently relational and personal. [118]<\/a> In fact, his life-system is directly dependent on orientation to the face of God, as there is no substitution even in his theology for living Coram Deo<\/em>. <\/em>Neo-Calvinists are correct to contend that no part of the cosmos stands outside God\u2019s rule or his concern. Kuyper reinforces this interpretation when he says, \u201c[T]here is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all<\/em>, does not cry: \u2018Mine!\u2019\u201d[119]<\/a> Yet neo-Calvinists should also affirm that just as every segment of society stands before the face of God, so too does every individual.[120]<\/a> Unless Christians nurture an individual life that is Coram Deo<\/em>, they cannot \u201cproperly participate in the spheres that stand Coram Deo<\/em>.\u201d[121]<\/a> Hence, a proper understanding and application of Coram Deo <\/em>holds individual piety and public life together. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Sphere Sovereignty, Common Grace, and Antithesis<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Through personal Coram Deo<\/em>, Christians are given the responsibility of discerning how to apply the principles of sphere sovereignty, common grace, and antithesis.[122]<\/a> In reality, proper application of these theological teachings is not a straightforward process. This is why discernment is such an inherent part of their practical implementation. For example, in his explication of sphere sovereignty in Lectures on Calvinism<\/em>, Abraham Kuyper emphasizes that each societal institution has the God-given right to self-rule its particular sphere of influence. Thus, the \u201cUniversity exercises scientific dominion; the Academy of fine arts is possessed of art power, the guild exercises art power; the trades-union rules over labor,\u201d and so on.[123]<\/a> In order to seek the proper operation of the various societal institutions and ensure that they do not overstep their boundaries or fail to fulfill their purpose, discernment Coram Deo<\/em> is essential. For example if the free market oversteps its bounds and infringes upon the function of the art guild by making art solely profit driven, then Christians must be able to properly determine where these infractions occur. Or if the family does not fulfill its God-designed purposes, Christians must be able to discern where and why this \u201csphere shrinkage\u201d occurs.[124]<\/a> In Kuyper\u2019s view, what underlies and guides this discernment process is a faithfulness to publicly and privately coming before the face of God.[125]<\/a> For only in these very relational encounters with the Divine does a person receive Godly guidance. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Discernment, grounded in and directed by mystical nearness to God, is also indispensable to Kuyper\u2019s theological concepts of common grace and antithesis. There is a fundamental tension between these two ideas, and Christians must be able to discern in the midst of this tension what is in line with God\u2019s purposes, and what opposes them. This responsibility is far from obvious, because common grace and antithesis do not divide along \u201cChristian\u201d and \u201cnon-Christian\u201d lines. God\u2019s grace extends beyond the walls of the church as \u201ccommon grace,\u201d and rebellion against God affects all of society (including the church), as \u201cantithesis.\u201d[126]<\/a> As a result, distinguishing common grace and antithesis becomes a discerning enterprise. Kuyper likens this to a process of investigation.[127]<\/a> He asserts:<\/p>\n\n\n\n We are sorely in need of a reminder that there is only one guiding principle for all Christian activity, for every choice and action in the life of a Christian. That guiding principle asks: What is the will of God concerning this?[128]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Kuyper, in looking for that which is in harmony with the will of God and that which opposes it, holds everything up to the light of Christ to determine whether it points towards God\u2019s will or against it. This means that Christians must be able to determine when non-Christians or secular society corrects their wrongs through God\u2019s common grace. Likewise, Christians must be able to discern when Satan\u2019s wicked schemes invade the church. This process of discernment is not directed by a rigid philosophical system, but a tender and mystical relationship with the Divine. It is only through this relationship that common grace and antithesis can be properly identified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is essential then that neo-Calvinists rediscover the devotional writings of Abraham Kuyper, and examine how his mystical piety relates to his theological concepts. In concerning themselves with cultural development, they should realize that Kuyper\u2019s theological principles are not the source of cultural transformation themselves.[129]<\/a> When neo-Calvinists deem mystical intimacy with God as either irrelevant or as threatening to their worldview, their theological convictions for cultural engagement may become \u201ctinkling cymbals.\u201d Moreover, without personal nearness to God, neo-Calvinists as individuals may become \u201ctinkling cymbals,\u201d as they lose their connection to the One who enables cultural transformation.[130]<\/a> This is why personal piety is critical to neo-Calvinism as it moves forward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Significance of the Piety\/Cultural Discipleship Link for Neo-Calvinism<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n As neo-Calvinists turn to the future, it will be beneficial to recall that the primary feature of their life-system is its cosmic and comprehensive scope that touches every \u201cdepartment\u201d of human life.[131]<\/a> While this includes realms of society such as business, politics, and art, it also entails the closed space of one\u2019s personal bedroom, where he\/she retreats to be alone with the Divine. God\u2019s nearness not only reaches into every square inch of society, but also into the depths of the human heart. Christians are therefore called to intimacy with the Christ in both these places.[132]<\/a> When people are obedient to this call, neo-Calvinism extends to every relationship in human life just as Kuyper avows. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Kuyper advances this idea in
<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n