Review of James Bratt, Abraham Kuyper: Modern Calvinist, Christian Democra

Smith, James K.A.

English

Calvin Digital Commons (Calvin University)

Calvin University Calvin Digital Commons University Faculty Publications and Creative Works University Faculty Scholarship 2-2014 Whose Kuyper? Which Inheritance? James K.A. Smith Calvin College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.calvin.edu/calvin_facultypubs  Part of the History of Christianity Commons Recommended Citation Smith, James K.A., "Whose Kuyper? Which Inheritance?" (2014). University Faculty Publications and Creative Works. 680. https://digitalcommons.calvin.edu/calvin_facultypubs/680 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the University Faculty Scholarship at Calvin Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in University Faculty Publications and Creative Works by an authorized administrator of Calvin Digital Commons. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@calvin.edu. Whose Kuyper? WhichInheritance?By James K.A. Smith January 1, 2014 No CommentsJames K.A. SmithIn certain sectors of North American Protestantism — sectors, I would say, that seem tohave disproportional influence on public discussions — everyone wants to hitch theirwagon to Abraham Kuyper. From Chuck Colson’s How Now Shall We Live? to MarkNoll’s Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, evangelicals have found in Father Abraham amodel for robust public engagement rooted in unapologetic Christian orthodoxy. Kuyperis the exemplar of a Christian visionary and pragmatic scrapper, one who spent alifetime sketching “principial” programs while also delving into the nitty-gritty ofimplementation.However, the inheritance of Kuyper is often selective. Some are eager to embrace hisaffirmative notion of common grace but are a little hard of hearing when it comes toKuyper’s invocation of the antithesis. Others champion the intellectual vision of thisuniversity founder but are either ignorant of or embarrassed by Kuyper’s lifelong piety.Some are thrilled by the champion of a “free” church and a “free” university and assumethat Kuyper would share their enthusiasm for unfettered “free” markets — ignoring someparts of his corpus that complicate this picture a bit. Still others are happy to piggybackon his vision of cultural engagement but do so as if it could be simply unhooked from hisorthodox, never-waning Calvinism. Perhaps it almost has to be the case. Someone ofKuyper’s stature looms over us like the elephant in that proverbial room of blind men.We’re all just feeling our way around different aspects of his enormous legacy.But there is something at stake in being sure that we inherit the whole Kuyper. Inparticular, as more and more of Kuyper’s works are being translated into English, NorthAmerican readers need to be wary of a particular version of Kuyper landing on ourshores in the twenty-first century — a Kuyper cut to the measure of the libertarianleanings of his translation sponsor, the Acton Institute. This particular patron of hislegacy is invested in painting a very specific picture: the Tea Party Kuyper. And unlessreaders and students have resources to see the gaps and excisions, that selectiveportrait might become the de facto authorized version.Hence my concern for inheriting the whole Kuyper. Rich Mouw’s marvelous little bookAbraham Kuyper: A Short and Personal Introduction (Eerdmans, 2011) is a good start.But Jim Bratt’s magisterial biography is now the definitive measure for ourunderstanding Abraham de Geweldige.That’s not to say that Bratt’s biography is partisan. This is not a reactionary picturetrying to recover or protect Kuyper. To the contrary, it is just the sort of capacious,well-researched, comprehensive account we need, steadfastly resisting a “presentism”that would haunt Kuyper’s story with our ghosts. Reading it reminded me of my awe inreading George Marsden’s award-winning biography of Jonathan Edwards. Bratt hasdone the same for Kuyper.Bratt’s prose is lively and engaging, characterized by the same verve and wit he exhibitsin person. One of his colleagues, the film scholar Bill Romanowski, recommended thatBratt organize the biography like a screenplay, and that is reflected in the book’sdramatic pace. It was, hands-down, my favorite nonfiction book of 2013.Bratt’s mastery of the archival materials is remarkable. He takes us back, for example,to early sermons and captures their key themes in ways that bring Kuyper to life beyondhis published legacy. So, again, in the spirit of retrieving the whole Kuyper, Bratt givesus insight into not only Kuyper the theologian and prime minister but also Kuyper thestudent and pastor.Perhaps above all, in Bratt’s biography I finally met Kuyper the human being, in all hisbeautiful brokenness and tortured complexity, which begins to emerge in Kuyper’s loveletters to his fiancée, then wife, Jo. As Bratt puts it, “Father Abraham” was a romantic inmore ways than one. But the humanity emerges in the failures, too.You can feel the loneliness that was a product of Kuyper’s combative personality — thesame trait that led him to accomplish so much (recalling, for me, the Steve Jobs we metin Walter Isaacson’s best-selling biography). Even one of his closest friends, AlexanderIdenburg, lamented this aspect of Kuyper’s legacy. No one else could haveaccomplished what Kuyper did, he recognized. The times required “not only someone ofgreat knowledge and great competence, or extraordinary talent as a thinker and writerand speaker, but also someone with an iron will, with a thick skin, and with a rock-hardhead.” But these virtues came with their defects, too. What Idenburg saw at the end wassomething “extraordinarily tragic” — that “a man who has done so much, and so muchgood, should toward the end of his life by his character-traits place himself outside thecircle of those who have been formed by him, and thereby lose his power andinfluence.” In the end, Idenburg said, Kuyper had “disciples but no colleagues . . . sheepbut no watch-dogs.” Equally moving and sad is some later correspondence withKuyper’s prodigal son, Jan Frederik, who went to dental school at the University ofMichigan but then settled in the East Indies, ending up in “the courts of theosophy,” asBratt puts it. As his father lamented, “his soul sleeps . . . in Theosophical dreams.” Dadwas heartbroken by the son’s wandering from Reformed orthodoxy. And yet, sadly,“Freddie” seems to have found a peace that his father did not. In a 1905 letter, heoffered something of his own prayer for his father: “I would love to see you spend yourfuture years in peace and easier affairs. You have battled your whole life and undergonemuch strife; [you have accomplished enough] for at least three lives; have experiencedsuccesses almost exclusively in your ventures; have reached the highest rung on theladder. Let it go, then, dear Father.”Kuyper never quite achieved that ease, the peace of letting go. On the other hand, herewe are a century latter, still trying to get a measure of the giant. Perhaps finitude willalways mean there are prices to be paid.In this limited space, I won’t even try to touch the breadth and complexity of Bratt’sportrait, except to counsel: Receive other “Kuypers” with healthy suspicion until youhave let Bratt’s tour of his life and work orient you to the whole.James K.A. Smith is professor of philosophy at Calvin College, Grand Rapids, Michigan.He holds the Gary and Henrietta Byker Chair in Applied Reformed Theology andWorldview and is the author of sixteen books.James K.A. Smith© 2024 Reformed Journal. Powered by Public Platform.

Whose Kuyper? Which Inheritance?

https://digitalcommons.calvin.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1678&context=calvin_facultypubs

Whose Kuyper? Which Inheritance?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Calvin Digital Commons (Calvin University)