"Calvinism for a Secular Age" ed. by Joustra and Joustra. A Review

I cut my young Calvinist teeth on the work. It gave me such a boost in my perceptions and has lingered in the back of my head for decades. It was Abraham Kuyper’s “Stone Lectures” which he gave at Princeton Theological Seminary in 1898. Recently a new 248-page work has arrived on the scene to revive interest in Kuyper’s “Stone Lectures” for our time in history, “Calvinism for a Secular Age: A Twenty-First Century Reading of Abraham Kuyper’s Stone Lectures”. The editors, Jessica R. Joustra, assistant professor of religion and theology at Redeemer University and associate researcher at the Neo-Calvinist Research Institute at the Theological University of Kampen, and Robert J. Joustra, associate professor of politics and international studies and founding director of the Centre for Christian Scholarship at Redeemer University College, have pulled together a team of writers to address Kuyper’s lectures, the history of the lecture manuscripts, and Kuyper’s role in South African apartheid. It is clear that the authors and editors have affectionately gained from Kuyper, and desire to further his reach into a coming generation.

The writers are an army of academics and thinkers. Bruce Ashford, Vincent Bacote, James Bratt, Adrienne and Jonathan Chaplin, James Elington, Deborah Haarsma, George Harnick, the Joustras, and Richard Mouw. They dwell in the spheres of politics, theology, astronomy, art, and ethics. It’s an impressive list.

The work begins with background information about Abraham Kuyper, how the lectures came to be, and the theological stream Kuyper swam in. It ends with an intriguing discussion on the history of Kuyper’s manuscripts and how we have the document we now possess. The next-to-last chapter addresses Kuyper’s sad role in the rise of apartheid in South Africa and how to understand his responsibility intelligently and graciously without casting him aside altogether. That chapter would benefit many who have similar troubles with 18th and 19th Century American theologians who have comparable faults regarding slavery. I was deeply grateful for Bacote’s wise perspective – Kuyperian perspective – in this chapter.

The meat of the book walks through each of the six Stone lectures, taking them one lecture at a time. These were extended reflections on each of the subject – worldview, religion, politics, science, art, and the future. It’s in these central chapters that a reader has time to contemplate Kuyper’s project, including how he promoted sphere sovereignty, where each sphere (social institution) has “their own God-given nature and purpose and possess a corresponding right to self-governance (sovereignty) from intrusive control from government or other institutions” (53). This central concept moves through each of the chapters giving readers a “feel” for how it works out.

Each chapter follows the same pattern. They first look at Kuyper’s background and the subject of a given lecture. Then they evaluate the impact a given lecture had in North America. Finally, they examine some blind spots and make suggestions for improvement. This format was helpful in processing and digesting each subject and chapter. None of the authors is exhaustive in their analysis, but they do benefit readers in picking up the direction and taking it forward into the future.

“Calvinism for a Secular Age” is a useful read for anyone who wants to stretch their understanding of Abraham Kuyper’s neo-Calvinism. It is a good study guide that allows a reader to enter a healthy discussion on any of the six topics Kuyper raised, as well as his racial missteps. If a study group wanted to actually revisit Kuyper’s lectures, this would make good “background” material for anyone facilitating that study. While reading this book it gave me the idea to do this in my congregation, which I’m planning on doing early next year. I highly recommend the work. 

My thanks to IVP Academic for responding to my request for a review copy. They happily sent me my own volume which I read and have used in this evaluation. They didn’t make any demands on me. Therefore, this review is freely made and freely given.