Volume 46 Number 3 Article 7
March 2018
The Disruption of Evangelicalism: The Age of Torrey, Mott, McPherson and Hammond (Book Review)
Keith C. Sewell
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/pro_rege
Recommended Citation Sewell, Keith C. (2018) "The Disruption of Evangelicalism: The Age of Torrey, Mott, McPherson and Hammond (Book Review)," Pro Rege: Vol. 46: No. 3, 40 - 42. Available at: https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/pro_rege/vol46/iss3/7
This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the University Publications at Digital Collections @ Dordt. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pro Rege by an authorized administrator of Digital Collections @ Dordt. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ProVolume XLVI, Number 3 Rege March 2018
Features Therapeutic Approach in Moral Education: A Critical Assessment Jan Hábl The Common Thread in Kuyper, Kuhn, and Cognitive Psychology: Interpretive Frameworks Daniel Hitchcock WANTED: Vegetarian Kuyperians with Artistic Underwear Calvin Seerveld A Letter to Dr. Sacha Walicord Chris Gousmett Reply to Dr. Chris Gousmett’s Open Letter Sacha Walicord Book Reviews Walton, John H. and Walton, J. Harvey. The Lost World of the Israelite Conquest. Reviewed by Justin Bailey. Treloar, Geoffrey R. The Disruption of Evangelicalism: The Age of Torrey, Mott, McPherson and Hammond. Reviewed by Keith Sewell. Tuininga, Matthew J. Calvin’s Political Theology and the Public Engagement of the Church: Christ’s Two Kingdoms. A quarterly faculty publication of Reviewed by Keith Sewell. Dordt College, Sioux Center, Iowa Pro Rege
Pro Rege is a quarterly publication of the faculty of Dordt College. As its name indicates (a Latin phrase meaning “for the King”), the purpose of this journal is to proclaim Christ’s kingship over the sphere of education and scholarship. By exploring topics relevant to Reformed Christian education, it seeks to inform the Christian community regarding Dordt’s continuing response to its educational task.
Editorial Board Mary Dengler, Editor Josh Matthews, Review Editor Sally Jongsma, Proofs Editor Carla Goslinga, Layout
Pro Rege is made available free of charge as a service to the Christian community. If you would like your name added to the mailing list or know of someone whose name should be added, write to:
Editor, Pro Rege Dordt College Sioux Center, Iowa 51250
or E-mail: [email protected]
The index for Pro Rege, now in its forty-fifth year of publication, can be accessed via the Internet: http://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/pro_rege/ The opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent an official position of Dordt College.
ISSN 0276-4830 Copyright, March, 2018 Pro Rege, Dordt College Therapeutic Approach in Moral Education: A Critical Assessment
There are many advocates, but some of the most notable should be named: Carl Rodgers, Jean Piaget, Lawrence Kohlberg, Sidney B. Simon, Louis Raths, and Merrill Harmin. For a proper understanding of these approaches, it’s necessary to review first the cultural-ideological context of their origin. After that I will analyze and evalu- ate their key tenets, which I consider problem- atic. Specifically, we will scrutinize these prob- lems: (1) the problem of process at the expense of content, (2) the problem of devaluation of the educator’s authority, (3) the problem of blurring of moral concepts and standards, (4) the problem by Jan Hábl of value pseudo-neutrality and indoctrination, (5) the problem of individualism, subjectivism, Abstract: and relativism. This study aims to critically assess the so- called therapeutic approach in moral education, Key words: which emerged in the postwar twentieth century, Moral, education, therapeutic, method, in- in the western part of the world. The proponents doctrination. of the approach used different terms to express its essence: value clarification method, or sometimes Historical and cultural context the decision-making method or the critical thinking Education, in the sense of therapeutic clarifi- method. These philosophies of education have the cation of values (and all related concepts), was in common feature of a personalistic, non-directive, many ways a reaction to the postwar crisis of val- or client-oriented approach to the individual. ues and culture in general. The coming genera- Therefore, I will refer to them here as therapeutic. tion openly distanced themselves from the “mor- als” of their parents. In addition to freedom of expression, emancipation of human rights, and Jan Hábl (doc, 2016, Charles University in Prague; PhD, emphasis on autonomy, the prevailing sentiment 2009, University of Wales) is a professor of pedagogy at of the flower children was resistance towards the universities in Hradec Králové and Ústí nad Labem (Czech Republic) and a research fellow in Comenius Institute in “stale” culture that priggishly preached, commis- Prague. sioned, and taught. The culture of their fathers—
Pro Rege—March 2018 1 because of the horrors of war that were still fresh the sick woman, borrowed from everyone he in their memories—had lost its moral legitimacy could and still had only half of the cost of the and become more of a source of shame than medicine. He begged the pharmacist to lower something to pass along pedagogically. From the price or allow him to pay it in install- such a background it was not surprising, there- ments. But the pharmacist wouldn’t budge. fore, that in the 1960s there arose a method that Desperate, Heinz broke into the pharmacy at emphasized discussion, openness, engagement, night and stole the medicine. no guidelines, and so on. The goal of the method was neither the formation nor transmission of Sharon and Jill were best friends. One day any kind of specific “bag of virtues,” in the words they went shopping together. Jill was trying of Lawrence Kohlberg, or other moral material; it on a sweater, when she suddenly put her jacket on over it and left the store. The guard arrived was indoctrination, which was considered one of immediately afterwards, stopped Sharon and the cardinal defects of all traditional educational 1 asked the name of her friend who had fled the approaches. Teachers and educators of this new store. At the same time, she threatened to call type were given the task of helping students the police if Sharon wouldn’t give the name. think independently and critically, based on the psychological assumption that if the individuals The questions for discussion are obvious: Was themselves identified their own values, the in- Heinz’s theft wrong or not? Should Sharon be- ternalization of those values would be easier and tray her friend or not? The discussion has to be more durable than if they were mediated by some well-controlled didactically in order to fulfill its adult. The students were thus guided to discover, task. Therefore, the authors present the follow- classify, and develop their own values, that is, to ing instructions. (1) Recapitulate the basic facts construct their own moral universe. of the story and ask a clear yes/no question. (2) Experimental findings by developmental Give the students enough time to think through psychologists such as Piaget and Kohlberg con- the question and answer independently, ideally veniently arrived just in time.2 Although their in writing, and with justification. (3) Next, the theories of the moral and cognitive development students say their answers aloud. If it happens of the individual were not originally intended to that most of the group agree, S. B. Simon rec- be educational, their application to pedagogy was ommends adding “balancing” information. For soon found. Different variations of Kohlberg’s fa- example, if most of the class vote for giving the mous micro-story dilemmas were used in lessons name, the teacher can draw attention to the im- as a tool for clarifying moral categories and val- plications that this judgment would have on the ues, a tool which was expected to both move the girls’ friendship, or bring a new variable into the students to a higher stage of moral development story—for example, what if Jill was from a weak and teach them independent moral judgment social background, and so on. (4) The teacher is and argumentation. to lead the discussion in a fundamentally non-di- How does the method work in didactic prac- rective manner. No interfering unless necessary, tice? For illustration, I present two mini-stories: only steering it by means of questions—either Kohlberg’s now famous “Heinz’s Dilemma” and stimulating (if the discussion lags), or regulatory “Sharon’s Dilemma” from the just-as-well-known (if the discussion gets off track) or clarifying (to teacher’s handbook of Simon and his colleagues:3 break down concepts or motives, etc.). Teachers must also avoid the temptation to express their A fatally ill woman lived in Europe. She suf- fered from a special kind of cancer. There ex- own opinions (even though the students request isted a medicine that was recently discovered it) because that usually ends the discussion. (5) by a pharmacist from the same town. To pro- The conclusion of the discussion should contain duce the medicine was very expensive, and a summary of the arguments (for and against), the pharmacist charged ten times more than as well as a re-stating of the beginning and end- it cost him to make. Heinz, the husband of ing opinions. Did the students change their view?
2 Pro Rege—March 2018 For what reason? And so on. Of course, the sto- pological assumption of the innate goodness of ries and strategies can also be subject to thematic human nature, the belief that people are unprob- changes and adapted to the age and circumstanc- lematically good—both ontologically and mor- es of the group. ally. In the 20th century we first saw this domi- The method spread quickly and gained popu- nance of process over content in Carl Rogers’ larity. In addition to Simon’s handbook, which personalistic concept of client-centered therapy. became a bestseller, many other similar textbooks Rogers says that people should accept themselves were published. By the 1980s, however, the first as “streams of becoming” in a life-long process problems and criticisms had appeared. I will not of self-actualization. Fully actualized individuals here critique Kohlberg’s would then see themselves theory as a diagnostic tool as a “fluid process, not a for identifying stages of Education, in the sense of fixed and static entity […], moral development (oth- therapeutic clarification of a continually changing ers have already done that), values (and all related concepts), constellation of potenti- but rather I will present a was in many ways a reaction to alities, not a fixed quan- critique of the didactic ap- tity of traits.”6 Later Rogers plication. the postwar crisis of values and explicitly states that the Critics admit that this culture in general. process of self-realization method brought about applies to education as some contribution to the moral educational dis- much as to therapy. “The teacher,” says Rogers, cussion. If it is used prudently, that is, with sen- “becomes a facilitator in the process of the stu- sitively chosen topics appropriate to the age and dents’ self-definition […], a resource-finder […]”. maturity of the children, circumstances, etc., this He would want the quality of his relationship to method can help make them sensitive to moral the group to be such that his feelings could be reality, sometimes even bringing them to a first freely available to them, without being imposed “awakening” —from, for example, the typical on them or becoming a restrictive influence on adolescent egocentrism, or even narcissism. From them.” 7 the viewpoint of the content of the selected top- This emphasis was enthusiastically corrobo- ics, this method proved to be very attractive, rated by many educators. William Glasser, for ex- especially in the critical teen years—what ado- ample, in his book School Without Failure, bluntly lescent isn’t interested in topics like sex, drugs, re- condemns education aimed at specific moral lationships, murders, or cannibalism (eating the content as preaching: “We teach mindless confor- last survivor of a shipwreck on a deserted island). mity to school rules and call the conforming child Non-directive and group strategies entertain, en- ‘responsible.’”8 Simon, Howe, and Kirshenbaum gage, or activate and thus motivate and stimulate speak in a similarly unequivocal way when they students—all results that are seen as the greatest say that contents of a traditional curriculum are didactic currency of this approach. But the criti- “out-dated, moralistic” and strive after the “in- cism is massive.4 culcation of adult values into the youth,” and as such are “indoctrination.” They, in contrast, seek Process at the Expense of Content a higher goal, “the facilitation of the process of This therapeutic approach to moral educa- moral judgment.”9 The same appeal comes from tion suffers, above all, from the “subordination of the constructivist camp. A school that would pres- content for the benefit of the process,” says James ent any kind of “objective morality” is compared Hunter: The presentation of certain moral con- to an “army camp,” and the teachers to “drill ser- tent (content-based instruction) is secondary and geants.” Proper education should consist of draw- completely overshadowed by questions about ing out values only “as the need arises,” say Rheta the “process whereby morality is acquired.”5 The DeVries and Betty Zan. They continue, “we are ideological source of this approach is the anthro- talking here about a process and not a product. In
Pro Rege—March 2018 3 this process, children wrestle with questions, what Devaluation of the Authority of the Educator to believe to be good and bad, right and wrong. The imperative of therapeutic non-instruc- They form their own opinions and listen, listen tion is not only a matter of the teachers’ didactic to the opinions of others. They construct their manner or conduct in the classroom; it basical- own morality out of daily life experiences.”10 The ly concerns their social role. Proponents of the last thing a teacher should do is to “dictate moral methods described above encourage educators norms to the children.”11 Instead, a teacher should to programmatically abdicate their traditional “cooperate with the children by trying to under- role as ones who instruct, interpret, and present stand their reasoning and facilitating the construc- moral content. We have seen a shift in the under- tive process.”12 standing of their role—teachers should act as fa- However understandable the resistance to tra- cilitators or consultants, sometimes as assistants. ditional moral content is, and however welcome They still have the responsibility of organizing the appeal for a helpful pedagogical climate, the classroom activities and academic discipline, but unilateral emphasis on the procedural side of the way of accomplishing it is different under the moral formation has had the effect over time of therapeutic conception. In 1963 Jean Piaget said emptying the contents of moral education as such. that the “imposition of the authority” of an adult The logic of the problem is simple: If the teacher is, in an educational context, “absurd” and “im- only therapeutically “recognizes, accepts and vali- moral.” In his judgment, an adult should only be dates”13 students’ moral feelings and perceptions an “elder collaborator and, if he has it in him, a without resorting to criticism (because it would simple comrade” to children.16 improperly interfere with the students’ process The same philosophy applied in Kohlberg’s of self-actualization), it’s inevitable that sooner or experimental community (Just Community)— later the teacher will agree with a completely im- “students and teachers participate equally in the moral construction on the side of the student, a re- creation and enforcement of rules.”17 Parents are sult which has also been confirmed in pedagogical also encouraged to take the same approach: “To practice. Thomas Lickona recalls, from his clinical achieve [the] parental goal of raising responsible research, the experience of a 9th- grade teacher who, children who grow into responsible men and within the framework of ethical education, used women, parent-child relationships need to be the technique of “voting on values.” The teacher based on democratic principles […] of mutual began the discussion with the question “Who of respect and equality.”18 To this, James Hunter you has ever stolen something from a store?” Most observes that the term “democracy” is used here, of the students raised their hands. “Don’t you but it is losing its specific historical meaning. The think that stealing is bad?” Lickona comments original—Greek—usage of the term expressed that the teacher forgot for a moment that such a a way of organizing the political life of a soci- question violates the rule of value neutrality. “We ety where the roles and relational responsibili- have a right to material things,” answered one of ties between the people (démos) and those who the students, and the others nodded in agreement. lead them, were defined in a concrete way. But The teacher remained clueless.14 educational therapeuticians use the term democ- In addition to similar narrative testimonies, racy without that context, and here it describes there are many empirical studies that unsurpris- the process of social organization without any ingly support the idea that the suppression of the further identification. Thus, it becomes a code content of education leads logically to its empty- or charm legitimizing the right of individuals to ing of content, and ultimately to its malfunction- participate and make decisions in any context.19 ing.15 If the individual is not exposed to moral The consequences are predictable. The estab- content, there is nothing to develop; moral devel- lished structure of pedagogical authority loses its opment simply does not appear. social significance.
4 Pro Rege—March 2018 Blurring of Concepts and Standards from their tendency towards wrong behavior and The growing reluctance to convey any kind also to motivate them towards correction, when a of moral content, however objective, accompa- wrong has been committed. But this potential is nied by the phenomenon of weakened teacher dependent on a shared consensus on the concepts authority to safeguard the content, had the effect of good and evil. By eliminating it, educators and of eroding moral terminology and, ultimately, therapists have made the concept of guilt power- moral standards as such. As in theory, so in prac- less and forbidden. The guilty one needs therapy, tice, the normative distinctions for seeing and not punishment. clarifying good from evil were lost. The concepts Hunter adds that neologisms such as the of good and evil, right and wrong, did not com- word prosocial are an unconcealed attempt to pletely disappear, but they avoid the encumbrance of were redefined, a result the old moral categories.23 that caused a fatal confu- If the individual is not exposed In principle, the meaning sion of terminology and to moral content, there is remains the same—so- was a source of misunder- nothing to develop; moral cially positive or negative standing. development simply does behavior matches with the When, for example, not appear. statement “what you did Kohlberg talks about mo- is good/bad,” but the hard rality or immorality, these emotional tip of the con- are always relative terms, defined according to cepts is broken off, and in addition the teachers the level of moral judgment the individuals are are enabled to distance themselves from termi- capable of using in this or that period of their nology that sounds judging or condemning. This development. So as people evolve and become phenomenon is well illustrated by the fact that more “moral,” their morality is not the same as the frequent use of the term prosocial didn’t used becoming good. For example, if selfishness or to be contrasted in literature with the word evil, other character flaws appear in the judgment or nor with antisocial. Rather, it was contrasted with behavior of individuals, these are considered the the somewhat amorphous word negative, in dis- result of developmental or cognitive immaturity, cussions about the deficiencies of pro-socialism, or general inadequacy in their cognitive func- but never to talk about evil. tionality.20 Thus, the concept of good and evil has If the moral concepts still appear in linguistic lost its ontological status, and with that also its usage, they do so only as categories of meaning objective meaning, and gradually also its mean- that individuals construct on the basis of their ingful referential framework in language, a loss experience. Teachers, then, have the task of en- that Alasdair MacIntyre very aptly pointed out.21 couraging students in that construction of moral In the therapeutic context, the concepts of reality, for example, by programmatically creat- good and evil have slowly become outdated and ing the opportunity for students to vote on rules incorrect, precisely because they have lost their for classroom behavior or the values that will be- ability to relate to anything that would be con- come the code of the group. But what happens sidered as moral reality. Adam Philips notes when the students—in their predictable inven- that the therapeutic approaches have literally tion and creativity—vote, say, that someone who developed a “phobia” to the word evil.22 I have doesn’t cheat is a “chicken” or maybe that they personally observed a similar fate for the word don’t wish to do certain school activities that re- guilt. The fact that there is a pathological form quire effort, such as grammar lessons or PE, on of this “emotion” has led to its stigmatization the grounds that these activities don’t belong to and the subsequent neglect of its healthy form. their value system? At the same time, the psychological strength of The obfuscation of moral language is also guilt is, in terms of healthy moral development, evidenced by pedagogical practice based on the irreplaceable. It has the “power” to save people therapeutic approach. Critics point out that
Pro Rege—March 2018 5 the fundamental misgivings and dangers of the ment, is “woefully inadequate,” because it comes method of moral dilemmas consist in their im- out of the assumption that children already have plicit relativization of moral principles. If stu- the “ABCs of morality,” and are therefore able to dents are programmatically exposed to unsolv- cope with questions requiring a higher level of able moral situations, they can get the impression moral judgment.26 In other words, Kilpatrick is that all morality is “unsolvable,” i.e., problematic, arguing that before children are exposed to moral controversial, and ultimately relative. Students complexity (remember Sharon: “Is it right to be who are confronted with one extreme situation loyal to a friend, or truthful to the authorities?”), after another in which it isn’t clear whether they they should be taught the basics of morality (“Is should steal, lie, kill, or eat each other, in the end it right to steal this sweater?”). If that doesn’t hap- become convinced that concepts such as good pen, the youth are put into moral confusion be- and evil are completely vague—evidence of a cause they are instilled with the preconceptions very sophisticated form of indoctrination because that (a) suppress the basic moral intuition that it is carried out on a latent level.24 But is the start- some things are really and unproblematically ing point of the premise of this approach correct? good and some bad; and (b) lead to a contradic- Is it possible to apply conclusions derived from tion between moral theory and moral practice. extreme situations to non-extreme situations? However possible it is to instill and hold the the- From abnormal to normal? From exceptional to ory of the relativity of moral norms, it cannot be common? Let us consider the example of Heinz’s meaningfully applied in practice. We start teach- dilemma. In a life and death situation, stealing ing children from the time they’re in the sand- seems acceptable, even moral. What would it box that there are some things they cannot do to be for a person who puts morals (not stealing) others, and we say the same thing to criminals above human life? Does it follow from these ex- in court. tremes that stealing is permissible—even under ordinary (or all) circumstances? The answer is Value Pseudo-neutrality and Indoctrination obvious (at least I hope so). And I believe that Critics of therapeutic pedagogy point to the neither Kohlberg nor any other supporters of the fact that, in spite of their claim that the thera- critical method would agree with a conclusion of peutic approach is completely value-neutral, the unrestrained robbery. Nevertheless, the method reality is the opposite. Kilpatrick presents an ex- of moral dilemmas really leads to such a conclu- ample of a favorite didactic strategy, “VV,” which sion, even if the teacher is not aware of it. is Value Voting.27 The exercise begins with in- Kilpatrick25 wonders how a dilemma about nocent questions like “How many of you like to theft could help young teenagers overcome the go for walks in the countryside?” or How many temptation to steal money from their parent’s of you love picnics?” or “How many of you love wallet. He says that most of the moral situa- yogurt?” But soon there appear questions like tions faced by both children and adults are not “How many of you approve of premarital sex?” dilemmas: most moral choices are unambiguous. or “Which of you are for legalizing abortion?” or We simply have to do what we know we should “How many of you are in favor of having homo- do, and not do what we know we shouldn’t. sexual couples married by priests, ministers, and The time spent in school would be much bet- rabbis?” Kilpatrick points out that the authors of ter used by considering (and practicing) virtues the method have made no effort to separate the such as friendship, loyalty, and honesty rather heavy-value questions from the light ones. They than focusing on unsolvable situations where are intertwined as though there were no signifi- truthfulness seems wrong, friendship is separated cant differences between them. The exercise is de- from honesty, and cannibalism is legitimized. signed to give young people the impression that Kilpatrick further notes that the method of di- “all values are questions of personal taste—as in lemmas, especially when applied to children at the case of yogurt,” says Kilpatrick. This kind of an early stage of moral and cognitive develop- design is not only not neutral, it is “indoctrinat-
6 Pro Rege—March 2018 ing” because it deliberately and somewhat de- is nothing more practical than good theory. If, ceitfully instills the doctrine of value relativity. however, the theory is dubious, the practical con- Whether or not it is the teachers’ intention, if this sequences will be dubious too, even though the method is used in pedagogical practice, it does way is lined with good intentions. indoctrinate (although students/teachers usually Not only the teacher but also the student is are not even aware of it). outwitted here. They were promised a tool to Proponents of the therapeutic method un- “stimulate” moral thinking, which would lead derstandably don’t like to be associated with to greater moral competence, but in reality they such a—for them almost vulgar—word and were subjected to the process of methodological vehemently defend them- relativization of values. It selves.28 Indeed, resistance is woven into the thera- to indoctrination was one In the therapeutic context, the peutic textbooks, not in a of the central motives of concepts of good and evil have neutral way but skillfully the alternative approach. slowly become outdated and (and probably uninten- But the problem is that incorrect, precisely because tionally) hidden. Despite they defined the term in- they have lost their ability to the rhetoric of value neu- doctrination very vaguely. trality that it proclaims in It didn’t occur to them that relate to anything that would theory, practice shows that they also held a set of spe- be considered as moral reality. the therapeutic educator is cific values and doctrines anything but neutral. that they perforce communicated to children by whatever indirect method. Once the term is Individualism, Subjectivism, Relativism defined, it becomes clear that their approach ful- In light of what has been said, it is unsurpris- fills every criteria of indoctrination. The defini- ing that therapeutic pedagogy has earned accu- tion of Downey and Kelley, to which Kohlberg sations of moral subjectivism, accompanied by referred in one of his apologies, is an illustration individualism and eventually leading to moral of the problem. The triad of indoctrinating crite- relativism. Conservative theoreticians and prac- ria—questionable content, questionable method, ticioners of education have been thoroughly questionable goals—is so general that even its heard from in this respect. See, for example, proponents fall into it. They communicate noto- Kilpatrick’s bestseller, Why Johny Can’t Tell Right riously questionable content or doctrine—values From Wrong, first published in 1992. In the title, are relative. They use questionable methods—the the author makes a deliberate reference to the therapeutists’ preferred non-directive methods of earlier book by Rudolf Flesch, Why Johny Can’t teaching. Non-directiveness, however, doesn’t Read. In it, Flesch clarifies the reason for the fail- guarantee anything. Teachers may (and often ure of certain didactic experiments carried out in do) indoctrinate in a non-directive way. That America in the postwar years. Briefly, the tradi- is, in effect, an effective trick. Intentional? asks tional phonetic method of language teaching was Kilpatrick.29 I won’t be as mistrustful as my col- replaced by the “look-say” method, in which the league here. I use the adjective “effective” as op- focus of reading acquisition was transferred from posed to “intentional” because I am not presum- teachers to students. The authors of the project ing that there is any premeditated or manipula- promised greater engagement of students, which tive intent. On the basis of my own pedagogical would lead to more effective acquisition of read- experience and personal interaction with fellow ing skills. The reality was just the opposite, and teachers, I have come to the conclusion that few the project was a total failure, but before it end- teachers actually seek to relativize moral values ed (for a certain time it had the approval of the on the part of their students. Rather, I think that federal authorities), it produced a whole genera- users of the therapeutic method simply haven’t tion of nearly illiterate “readers.” Kilpatrick says anticipated the implications of their theory. There that something similar happened in the area of
Pro Rege—March 2018 7 moral education. In his judgment, the dramatic therefore, if possible, they look for good answers decline in moral literacy, which can not only be or fundamentals, which would give meaningful documented statistically but also seen with the justification for moral values and rights—includ- naked eye, is the consequence of implementing a ing therapeutic educators. But on what basis? bad method. A whole generation of children have Moral ideals are rooted “neither in the conven- been fooled by its moral relativism and are now tions of social life or public discourse, nor in an unable to recognize the good from the bad. external or transcendent standard inherited from Proponents of therapeutic pedagogy defend any particular moral tradition,” explains Hunter; themselves against the accusation of relativism. and, he continues, “rather, these ideals are rooted They say that their method “definitely promotes in the rights (the desires, feelings, needs and po- the values of thinking, feeling, choosing, com- tentialities) of the autonomous individual. The municating, and acting” as well as “rationality, self, in brief, is both the source of all moral sen- justice, creativity, autonomy, and equality.”30 Alfie sibility and the final object of moral accountabil- Kohn denounces the “rampant individualism and ity.”34 Rodgers can in many ways be considered self-assurance” that threaten society as a whole the father of this concept: and argues for “community cooperation” as a key 31 The individual increasingly comes to feel that goal of moral education. Abraham Maslow sim- the locus of evaluation lies within himself. ilarly explains that “valuelessness” is the “greatest Less and less does he look to others for ap- 32 disease of our time.” The termdemocracy also of- proval or disapproval; for the standards to live ten appears as a non-negotiable value that should by; for decisions and choices. He recognizes be promoted by moral or civic education. (There that it rests within himself to choose; that the is even a subject called Education to Democracy only questions that matters is “Am I living or Democratic Thinking—as opposed to totali- in a way that is deeply satisfying to me, and tarian thinking). The same goes with respect, tol- which truly expresses me?”35 erance, empathy, and the so-called Golden Rule. So, no relativism?33 Elsewhere he adds, It is good, however, to ask all these sets of values these questions: Where are they coming Everyone possesses the capacity to expand, ex- from? On what ontological basis do they stand? tend, become autonomous, develop, mature. How are they anchored or validated? One way [Moral capacity] exists in every individual to avoid meta-ethical problems is simply to as- and awaits only the proper conditions to be sert that they are values of the type of univer- released and expressed. [...] Whether one calls sal maxims or ideals that are self-validating or it a growth tendency, a drive toward self-ac- tualization, or a forward-moving directional self-evident, and that no further justification is 36 needed. But such an evasive maneuver doesn’t tendency, it is the main-spring of life. work in education. From the earliest age, chil- In psychotherapeutic circles, Maslow speaks dren are wired in such a way as to need to know similarly about people. Everyone has an “inner the reasons for their actions, or the actions re- core,” which “as much as we know of it so far, is quired of them. The instruction “you should” do definitely not ‘evil,’ but is either what we adults in this or that, or behave in this way or that, calls our culture call ‘good’ or else it is neutral,” he ex- forth a child-like natural and unaffected desire plains.37 “Self-realization” and “self-fulfillment” to know why. It’s true that there are “why” ques- are, in his judgment, “instinctive.” Let Maslow tions and developmental stages that really don’t speak more extensively about human nature: need an answer, such as “Why shouldn’t I touch Man demonstrates in his own nature a pres- the burner?” But others literally cry out for an sure towards fuller and fuller Being, more answer: “Why should I be brave?” “Why must I and more perfect actualization of his human- control myself?” ness in exactly the same naturalistic, scientific Most educators know this fact very well; and sense that an acorn may be said to be “pressing
8 Pro Rege—March 2018 toward” being an oak tree, or a tiger can be ought to be.”44 In other words, a value can be- observed to “push toward” being tigerish, or a come one’s own only through choice. horse toward being equine. Man is ultimate- Pedocentrism of this type necessarily leads ly not molded or shaped into humanness or to moral subjectivism and relativism, as is well taught to be human. The role of the environ- illustrated by the handbook of one of the thera- ment is ultimately to permit him or help him peutic education programs with the title Growing 38 to actualize his own potentialities. up Caring. Let’s consider two examples. In the Fathers of liberal education like Rousseau chapter on cheating in school, a student discov- would have rejoiced: no molding, no teaching, per- ers a picture of a girl during an exam looking mission, letting the potential itself be actualized… over the shoulder of her classmate, with the ac- What potential? “Creativeness, spontaneity, self- companying text: “Cheating, in any form, is hood, authenticity, caring bad for your self-esteem.” for others, being able to A whole generation of children In another chapter in the love, yearning for truth are have been fooled by its moral book is a photograph of a embryonic potentialities relativism and are now unable young girl who is stealing belonging to his species- from a store, while the next membership just as much to recognize the good from picture shows two other as are his arm and legs and the bad. people watching her and brain and eyes.”39 recording it on camera. The therapeutic educational concepts are, The accompanying text says, “One way to test in their theory, true echoes of this anthropol- the impact a decision will have on your feeling of ogy. Again and again we read that “learning is self-worth is to imagine a picture being taken of a process whereby meaning, ethical or other- you implementing your decision.”45 The ethical wise, must be actively invented and reinvented, argument of these instructions is clear—the chil- from the inside out.”40 Or, write other authors, dren are not led to believe that cheating or steal- “The individual who is autonomously moral fol- ing are objectively wrong because they violate a lows moral rules of the self. Such rules are self- universal law. Cheating is wrong because it calls constructed, self-regulating principles”41 —hence forth an unpleasant feeling or threatens the self- the didactic emphasis on autonomous decision- confidence of an individual. Such an argument is making and choice, which are so characteristic of almost amusing to someone who grew up under this kind of education. True values “represent the a totalitarian regime in the seventies and eight- free and thoughtful choice of intelligent humans ies. In a culture deformed by Communist ideol- interacting with complex and changing environ- ogy, people felt downright happy if they could ments.”42 But the values must be chosen freely, manage to steal from the state-owned property, else they’re not “right”; or, at least, they are “cho- or at least get around some law. After all, the best sen from among alternatives,” but mainly, “after people—from a moral perspective—were usually independent consideration.” The imperative for “illegal” or in prison or exile. Things are different free choice has become so inviolable that educa- now in both the East and the West. The “feeling” tors have been encouraged to “help the children argument no longer works today—the number of look for value, as long as [emphasis mine] the chil- individuals whose self-esteem would be lowered dren make the decisions. It is also possible that by being exposed as a person who committed an the children decide not to develop values. The unethical act is rapidly declining everywhere. teachers’ responsibility is to support even such Subjectivism, which is behind the therapeu- a decision.” 43 Kohn adds pregnantly, “children tic concepts of pedagogy, has a direct connection must be invited to reflect on complex issues, to with the “cultures” of ethical utilitarianism and recast them in the light of their own experience emotivism (sometimes called expressionism). In and questions, to figure out for themselves—and utilitarianism, moral discourse determines the with one another—what kind of person one logic of expediency and usefulness; in emotion-
Pro Rege—March 2018 9 alism, the logic of psychological well-being. In the designation “green book” by the pseudony- both cases, it is the individual I who arbitrates mous authors “Gaius and Titus.” It was a book moral prudence. In this frame of reference, the written in 1939 called The Control of Language: A most important moral act is that of choice, mak- Critical Approach to Reading and Writing, by Alex ing a decision—not a decision for something, just King and Martin Ketley. Lewis analyzes the way making a decision, period, and deciding it your- in which the authors of the textbook subvert the self—Jean Paul Sartre in pedagogical robes. students’ values—not only the moral ones. When The results? Therapeutic pedagogies have a value statement is made, such as “that waterfall achieved their goals; and in doing so, they have is beautiful,” the authors teach that it is only the become part of the problem they wanted to solve. subjective statement of a specific feeling on the The therapeutically raised generation is truly au- part of the observer, not a statement about objec- tonomous, at least to the extent that they have tive reality. We think we’re saying something im- ruled out any commitment that would go be- portant about something real, but we are actually yond the borders of subjective choice and personal only saying something about our own feelings, well-being. It is the logical result of programmatic claim the authors. Lewis argues that such sub- questioning of objective moral reality. If I am be- jectivism in value judgments is flawed because ing convinced that the final arbiter of moral val- some subjects and some acts are actually real; ues is me or my feelings, eventually I will believe that is, they are objective and deserve an evalu- it. If I am methodically urged to self-identify my ation, whether positive or negative. A waterfall is existence through free choice, I will eventually do objectively beautiful, a villain is objectively evil. it. Who would have expected that, entirely freely, Understandably, an ethics which doesn’t believe I would choose evil? But it could have been ex- in the reality of objective moral values will avoid pected—at least since Zimbardo and Milgram.46 the concepts of good and evil. But if we replace But before them, Dostoyevsky already said it; and “good” with predicates like “necessary,” “progres- before him, Aquinas, Augustine, Paul of Tarsus, sive,” or “impressive,” we are using just a trick of and many others. language, a linguistic ruse, says Lewis, who ex- plains with the questions “necessary for what? In Place of Conclusion: The Abolition of Man progressing towards what? effecting what? In the Many of the problems of the therapeu- last resort they [Gaius and Titus] would have to tic approach were uniquely dealt with by C. S. admit that some state of affairs was in their opin- Lewis in his book The Abolition of Man, sub- ion good for its own sake.” In other words—it titled Reflections on education with special refer- is good to call things by their right names and ence to the teaching of English in the upper forms cultivate an “ethics without predicates.” of schools. Lewis’s treatise crosses lines not only According to Lewis, this ethics has been well in its form—concise, intense, brief, and all with taught by good teachers from time immemorial. typical Lewis readability—but most of all in that Lewis reminds us of the thinkers of antiquity Lewis almost prophetically predicted the moral such as Plato, Aristotle and Augustine, who, in problems that came later. Most observers or crit- one way or another, cultivated “ordinate affec- ics—including those I refer to here—normally tions,” that is, teaching people to love that which analyze the results of some phenomenon, but ought to be loved and to hate that which ought to Lewis, with unprecedented foresight, presented a be hated—to love good and hate evil. Although description of what was yet to come. Therefore, moral feelings and values are real, they don’t de- he deserves special attention in the conclusion of velop automatically in people, says Lewis. Hence this paper. the need for education. Those who don’t have The text of the book is based on three lec- these moral capacities are lacking the very thing tures Lewis gave in 1943.47 Lewis is reacting to that would make them specifically human. They a textbook on the English language which—so would be, in Lewis’s words, “men without chests” it wouldn’t offend anyone—was hidden under or “without hearts.” The Gaius and Titus book
10 Pro Rege—March 2018 produces such people by undermining the fact to affect our very language.” 48 Man’s conquest that people are capable of contact with objec- of Nature turns out to be Nature’s conquest of tive reality (moral, aesthetic or other) and thus Man. Man’s power over everything destroys him. taking away from them that which is humanely Lewis called the process of conquering, when the most valuable. (If such people were asked, people sacrifice one thing after another, and -fi “Do you think there is something real outside nally even themselves, in order to gain power of you—truth, goodness, beauty, the noumena?” over nature and human nature, a “magician’s they would answer, “No—there’s only you, the bargain.” Faust’s metaphor illustrates the fact subject, your impression, that modern “science” has phenomena, illusion.”) the same goal as the an- What will happen with Pedocentrism of this type cient magic, which is the the human world when we necessarily leads to moral submission of reality to the explain away and thus do- sujectivism and relativism, as is wishes of humankind—to mesticate moral reality? In command the wind and the last part of his book, well illustrated by the handbook the rain, to gain that hid- Lewis gives an unbeliev- of one of the therapeutic eous strength,49 which is in ably accurate sketch of the education programs with the fact to become a god. To contours of the modern title Growing up Caring. achieve their goal, they use dystopia that should soon magic and science to do emerge if this demoralizing trend were tp con- things that have long been considered “disgust- tinue. The power of human beings to do exactly ing and impious.” what they wish will grow with the so-called “con- The same applies to moral values and princi- quest of nature,” that is, the development of the ples. If they are conquered, people will have the natural sciences. However, every new power ac- power to freely modify, design, and even produce quired by Man is, at the same time, “power over them. Moral values and ethics are not things man,” says Lewis. Therefore, it is good to ask that determine a person, but things that persons whose power grows with every further sublima- themselves determine however they see fit, a situ- tion of nature. Lewis predicts that if the dream of ation that means the end of them. And this is the some scientists becomes a reality and we humans “tragi-comedy of our situation,” Lewis concludes: “take control of nature,” it will mean the suprem- we call loudly for precisely those qualities that we acy of hundreds of people over billions of others. ourselves have subverted: “In a sort of ghastly sim- The final stage of conquest will be conquest of plicity we remove the organ and demand the func- one’s self, that is, human nature. Human nature tion. We make men without chests and expect of will be the final bastion of the natural world that them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and will be conquered. The victorious ruling minor- are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We cas- ity will become a caste of Conditioners, that trate and bid the geldings be fruitful.”50 is, people who will have control tools (he men- tions eugenetics, genetics and psychology) and Disclosure statement who will knead, form, and cut out the nature of No potential conflict of interest was reported the succeeding generations however they want: by the author. “The process which, if not checked, will abol- ish Man goes on apace among Communists and Endnotes Democrats no less than among Fascists,” warns 1. Davison J. Hunter, Death of Character: Moral Lewis, I remind the reader, in 1943. He adds, Education in an Age Without Good and Evil (New “The methods may (at first) differ in brutality. York: Basic Books, 2000), 219. […] The belief that we can invent ideologies at 2. Jean Piaget, The Moral Judgment of the Child pleasure, and the consequent treatment of man- (London: Kegan Paul, 1932); also Lawrence kind as mere specimens, preparations, begins Kohlberg, Essays on Moral Development II (San
Pro Rege—March 2018 11 Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984). guuidancce Service, Inc., 1997), 5. 3. I freely edidted and shortened both stories. See 19. Hunter, 182. Lawrence Kohlberb, 1984, Sidney B. Simon, et 20. Cf. Ibid., 183. al, Values Clarification: A Handbook of Practical Strategies for Teachers and Students (New York: 21. MacIntyre’s book, with the title After Virtue, Hart Publishing, 1972). first published in 1981, presents a “disturbing hypothesis” about the current state of moral 4. See, for example, Carol Gilligan, In a Different discourse. Entire and coherent conceptual systems Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s have disappeared, according to MacIntyre, and Development (Cambridge, MA: Harvard U Press, in their place we have only fragmented sayings 1982); Craig R. Dykstra, Vision and Character: A and partial beliefs. The cause is not the decline of Christian Educator’s Alternative to Kohlberg (New morality in a superficial sense, but the deeper decay York: Paulist Press, 1981); Thomas Atherton, A of meaningful moral language into which these Critique of Lawrence Kohlber’s Theories of Moral fragments could be put and rationally developed. Devellopment and Moral Education. Unpublished MacIntyre believes this decline is connected to Dissertation (Boston University, 1979); and the expansion of modern individualistic morality. Davison J. Hunter, Death of Character (2000). I He shows that moral emotivism has degraded present here only a brief overview. every moral statement into a mere expression 5. See Hunter, 177-178. of individual preference. All statements like “it 6. Carl Rodgers, On Becoming a Person (Boston: should be” or “it’s right” can be decoded and Houghton-Mifflin, 1961), 122. reveal someone’s will behind them. In continental philosophy, the parallel to emotivism is primarily 7. Ibid, 289. Friedrich Nietzsche’s conception of morality. 8. William Glasser, School Without Failure (New MacIntyre opposes both concepts and argues York: Harper and Row, 1969) , 186. that they are only a reflection of the state of moral language after its decline in modernity, especially Values Clarification: A 9. Sidney Simon et al., in the Enlightenment. Handbook of Practical Straategies for Teachers and Students (New York: Hart Publishing, 1972), 15- 22. Adam Philips, On Flirtation: Psycholanalytic 16. Essays on the Uncommitted Life (Cambridge, MA: Harvard U. Press, 1994), 59. 10. See Rheta DeVries, Early Education (New York: Teahers College Press, 1994), 28. 23. Hunter, 183. 11. Ibid., 132. 24. Cf. Elmer Thiessen, Teaching for Commitment: Liberal Education, Indoctrination, and Christian 12. Ibid., 78. Nurture (McGill-Queen’s U. Press, 1993). 13. Hunter, 181. 25. Kilpatrick, Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right From 14. Thomas LicKona, Educating for Character: How Wrong, 1992. Our Schools Can Teach Respect and Responsibility 26. Kilpatrick, 1992. (New York: Banatam, 1992), 11. 27. Ibid. 15. Compare with William Kilpatrick, Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right from Wrong: Moral Illiteracy and 28. Ibid., 81-82. the Case for Character Education (New York: 29. See, for example, Lawrence Kohlberg, Moral Simon & Shuster,1992). Education: Theory and Appliccation, ed. Marvin 16. Jean Piaget, 319. W. Berkowitz and Fritz Oser (London: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoiates, 1985); or Meriel Downey and Lawrence Kohlberg’s Approach 17. Clark F. Power, et al, A. V. Kelley, Moral Education: Theory and Practice to Moral Education (New York: Columbia U (London: Harper and Row, 1978). Press, 1989), 62. 30. Kilpatrick, Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right From The Parent’s 18. See Don Dinkmeyer, Sr., et al, Wrong, 82. Handbook: Systematic Training for Effective Parenting (Circle Pines, Minn.: American 31. Howard Kirschenbaum, Advanced Value
12 Pro Rege—March 2018 Clarification (La Jolla: California University 46. Hunter, 122-123. Associates, 1977), 12-13. 47. Much has been written about the so-called prison 32. Alfie Kohn, The Truth About Self Esteem (Phi Dlta experiment of Philip Zimbardo (it was even Kappa, 1994), 272-283. filmed), and likewise about Stanley Milgram’s 33. Abraham Maslow, The Psychology of Science (New study of human conformity. For details on York: Harper and Row, 1966), 133. Zimbardo, see, for example, the home page of the Stanford experiment
Pro Rege—March 2018 13 The Common Thread in Kuyper, Kuhn and Cognitive Psychology: Interpretive Frameworks
guage, or culture. The idea that subjectivity influences the way we interpret the world is not new; neither is the idea that subjective factors influence the meth- ods, discoveries, and applications of human col- lective efforts. Over the last half-century, the bastion of objective reason has been crumbling at its Enlightenment foundation. Fatal blows have come from insights in psychology and the phi- losophy of science. Although modern positivis- tic science has been mortally wounded, I believe an integrative approach can be taken between a strong relativistic position on truth and an abso- by Daniel Hitchcock lutist one. The Christian faith as a worldview le- gitimizes the assertion that there is a “real world” “We see and understand things not as they as well as the belief that we perceive it through are but as we are.” ~Anthony de Mello— interpretive lenses, which I will be calling “inter- Awareness (1990) pretive frameworks.” These frameworks can yield a plurality of views, including imperfect ones. Christian mystic Anthony de Mello illustrates The goal of this paper is to explore the con- today’s postmodern view of reality. He seems to flict between the relativistic and absolutist posi- say that truth and reality are autonomous, sub- tions on truth, using insights from cognitive psy- jective constructions in the eye of the beholder. chology, philosophy of science, and Christianity. Thus, Truth claims cannot be judged as true in First, I will highlight how subjectivity takes all contexts for all times but are relative to some place at the level of the individual, as described frame of reference like personal perception, lan- by schema theory. Second, I will show that the same cognitive process lies at the heart of human Dr. Daniel F. A. Hitchcock is Associate Professor of social efforts via shared interpretive frameworks Psychology at the College of Arts and Sciences at Regent often called “paradigms.” And third, I will ad- University, Virginia Beach, Virginia. dress the glaring implication of such subjectiv-
14 Pro Rege—March 2018 ity. If individuals and groups interpret the world plain a variety of phenomena—especially in via their own subjective frameworks, the result is memory research and cognitive development. The relativism, which is antithetical to objective ab- result has been a theory explaining that subjective solute truth that stands firm across all times and interpretive frameworks are used to see and under- contexts. I will argue that Christian worldview stand the world. Today we call this theory “sche- philosophy helps resolve the apparent conflict ma theory,” the name originating from Kant.3 based upon the biblical insight that the way we Over the last century, key European psycholo- see and understand real- gists, including Frederick ity stems ultimately from Bartlett and Jean Piaget, the condition of our heart. Although modern positivistic have articulated and ap- Interpretive frameworks science has been mortally plied this idea. Bartlett con- are fundamental to human wounded, I believe an cluded that memory is a re- nature, and embracing integrative approach can construction of interaction their role in human func- with the environment that tioning poses no threat to be taken between a strong involves pre-set schemata a biblical view of truth and relativistic position on truth or frameworks that guide reality. and an absolutist one. both memory storage and recall.4 Piaget took the idea Individual Subjectivity: of interpretive frameworks Cognitive Schema Theory beyond memory processing and articulated an en- At the heart of schema theory is the relative tire theory of cognitive development based upon nature of human sensory perception. The claim their role in organizing all experience.5 that the process of perception is not an exact When the “cognitive revolution” took place match of the original sensation from the external in American psychology in the late 1960s,6 the world originates with Immanuel Kant.1 This idea mantle was taken up by many, including Ulrich was given experimental support in the late 1800s Neisser, who speculated that mental cognitive by the founder of psychology, Wilhelm Wundt, schemata result from actual physical processes in who researched psychophysics in Germany.2 For the nervous system.7 example, I use this demonstration to illustrate Schema theory has even been explanatory in how perception is relative. I place two buckets of the research areas of artificial intelligence, neural water in front of the class, one with ice. I ask a network theory, and neuroscience, by theorists volunteer willing to get his or her hand wet, to including Michael Arbib.8 Arbib believes that rate, on a scale of 1 to 10, the temperature of the schema theory is the best explanation for going bucket without ice. This contains cold tap water, beyond the structure of the brain to an under- and the student usually rates it as a 3 or 4. Next, standing of the function of it.9 I have the student rate the ice water—using the In recent decades, many researchers have con- same hand—which usually receives an emphatic firmed that schemata serve as frameworks that rating of 1! I then instruct the student to quickly guide interpretation. This confirmation has been put his or her hand back into first bucket and rate shown in domains such as story recall,10 text com- the water anew. The student surprisingly says, “It prehension, and speed of recall,11 linguistics,12 feels like a 6 or 7.” This response reveals that per- visual learning,13 cultural differences in cogni- ception is relative and is more dependent upon tion,14 computational cognition,15 and problem the current skin temperature than upon the tem- solving16 and has been applied widely in various perature of the stimulus. The point is that, at an disciplines, including education.17 individual level, we are bound by an interpreta- The work by Wundt, Bartlett, Piaget, Neisser tion process that is relative to individual experi- and Arbib shows how our cognition is an inher- ence. ently subjective process. It is the interplay of an Over the years this idea has been used to ex- individual’s sensation and perception and the re-
Pro Rege—March 2018 15 ality of his or her environment. However, the role predictable and irregular. Rather than a vertical, of interpretive frameworks does not end here at linear process, he suggested more of a horizontal the individual level, but it extends to how mean- one of skips and jumps within a single plane, mo- ing is shared and understood collectively. The tivated not by anything objective but by subjec- same cognitive process lies at the core of human tive, socially-driven factors, such as personality, social efforts. Shared interpretive frameworks prestige, and aesthetics. He even used the reli- function in ways that yield collective subjectivity. gious term of “faith” and the metaphor of “con- version” to describe how an individual scientist Collective Subjectivity jumps allegiance from one view to another. Humans are social creatures, dependent upon Kuhn’s basic concept for describing science the structures of family, society, and culture. centers on the notion of a paradigm. A para- Given this social dependency, it makes sense that digm is a collective conceptual framework that the use of interpretive frameworks would have a includes a complicated mixture of assumptions, social counterpart seen in groups. theories, and hypotheses accepted by the group The idea was anticipated first in the 1930s by that establish a type of unconscious perimeter Lev Vygotsky’s sociocultural view of cognition. within which scientific investigation takes place. Vygotsky claimed inter-dependence between Progress is better seen as growth in depth rather individual cognition and the social context in than growth in breadth. Science is like digging which it takes place.18 This view, that a type of a well straight down within a defined perimeter. collective interpretive framework guides group or Although not always known by those work- social functioning, has been articulated in disci- ing in it, the perimeter of the paradigm is limit- plines beyond the social sciences, most notably in ed. Nature, however, is not so limited; therefore, the history and philosophy of science. some discoveries do not fit within the boundar- Over the last half-century, much investiga- ies of the tight-knit paradigm. Someone digging tion has looked at the social structure of science. near the edge may accidentally dig beyond the The findings have underscored the role of sub- boundary. Kuhn calls such findings “anomalies.” jectivity in scientific activity, in contrast to the They are often ignored and swept under the rug modernist mindset, which sees science as a purely by those who discover them—unless they recur objective endeavor. The overarching consensus of enough to create a crisis within the paradigm: a this work has been that groups of scientists func- state of tension for anomalies that can no longer tion under a type of conceptual structure that be ignored. When the paradigm can no longer orients their work. This structure is subject to provide a comprehensive explanatory framework, non-science-related influences, such as aesthetics, that paradigm must give way to another para- persuasion, and personalities. Although there is digm in order to accommodate the new data. controversy as to who should get credit for the This giving way shifts the discipline to a com- originality of some of his concepts,19 none can pletely different and seemingly incompatible deny that Thomas Kuhn’s book The Structure of paradigm. Kuhn calls this change a “paradigm Scientific Revolutions20 has been one of the most shift,” or a “revolution”—a process of demolition important works published on the topic in the and reconstruction—in contrast to the tradition- last half-century.21 al modernist view of gradual, vertical, linear, and harmonious progress. Human Science Guided by Paradigms Kuhn points to a gestalt switch (like a 3D Kuhn articulated a new way for understand- Necker cube drawing) as an analogy to describe ing scientific progress. He argued that a linear this process, where a single set of data can be progression of discovery upon discovery—ac- perceived in two completely different ways—but cumulating objective knowledge—was insuffi- only one way at a time. Kuhn’s description un- cient for describing how science actually works. derscores the idea that humans are subjective in He proposed a model describing science as un- their collective interpretation of even scientific
16 Pro Rege—March 2018 facts, guided by a collective interpretive frame- world. work. Looking closely, however, we find that nei- ther view negates reality itself. Rather than see- Frameworks Do Not Yield Relativism ing these conflicting paradigms as supporting the So far, we have seen two similar descriptions idea that reality is only in the eye of the beholder, of how humans understand and experience the we should conclude that the interpretation of re- world, both individually and collectively—via ality is what is in the eye of the beholder. This lat- individual and shared interpretive frameworks: ter statement more clearly highlights the role of cognitive structures of belief and expectations our imperfect perception and cognition as they that guide the interpretation of reality. Each de- interact with the real world, rather than claiming scription highlights subjectivity in contrast to the that reality itself is malleable. objectivity of traditional Our view should be modernism. Correctly understood, that a real world exists, The subjective and non- interpretive frameworks, such and that experiences, based cumulative process dis- as schemata and paradigms, firmly in that real world, cussed by Kuhn, and also can nonetheless be inter- by others such as Polanyi22 are each quite compatible with preted and understood dif- in the 1960s, took direct objective, absolute reality. ferently, given the particu- aim at modernism’s objec- lar framework (i.e., schema tive impartiality and began, in part, to usher in or paradigm). John Searle articulates a similar post modernity. The knee-jerk reaction by many view. He presents a satisfying alternative to the in science, as well as in Christianity, has been to old modernist view as well as to the prevailing resist the sea change to postmodernism. Some postmodern constructionist and deconstruction- have critiqued this change as relativism and anti- ist views, which both deny any ultimate real- science.23 Christians have resisted such new ideas ity.24 Searle suggests that two types of facts ex- too because of the danger of runaway relativism. ist: “brute” facts, which are independent of what Such a view seems to undermine the Christian humans think about them (such as that Mount conviction of absolute truth’s flowing from an Everest has snow), and “social” facts, which are almighty sovereign God, who is objectively real. humanly constructed and conceived individually Granted, the views presented allow for rela- or institutionally (such as a piece of paper is a $5 tive interpretation by individuals and groups, bill). This position affirms that which cognitive but I believe that neither should be classified as schema theory and philosophers of science, like endorsing postmodern relativism, which denies Kuhn, contend: that a true reality exists and that the existence of absolute truth. Correctly under- humans develop interpretive frameworks with stood, interpretive frameworks, such as schemata which they interpret that reality. and paradigms, are each quite compatible with objective, absolute reality. Illusory Schema Conflict: When relativity is an illusion Schemata: Basis For Relativity? One important point to highlight is that Taking the ideas from cognitive psychology sometimes what looks like relativism is only an or philosophy of science to an extreme, we find illusion. Regarding the function of schemata as that it does look like postmodern relativism. Yes, they guide individual understanding, I see two human perceptual systems “construct” an under- aspects of the process that can yield what I term standing of the world that does not always match “illusory schema conflict.” The first deals with reality. Yes, humans mentally construct schemata multiple exemplars of a single concept, while the that guide perception. Yes, collective thinking or other draws attention to the possibility of mul- paradigms seem to be exclusively mind-depen- tiple interpretations of a single exemplar. dent and subjective—apart from the objective Let me illustrate the first with the tallest
Pro Rege—March 2018 17 mountain question. If I asked, “What is the tall- whole. est mountain on Earth?” most would say Mount This way of looking at the story highlights Everest in Nepal and China—it stands over a distinction between the two types of schema 29,000 feet above sea level. However, is Mount conflict. The first, illustrated by the mountain Everest really the tallest mountain on Earth? If story, affirms the multiplicity of truth, mediated we invoke different schemata to define the con- by context, while the elephant story shows that a cept of “tallest mountain,” there can be a plural- grand truth may lie behind multiple interpreta- ity of correct answers: tions. This latter example emphasizes how seem- • Tallest from its base below sea level (un- ingly differing views may actually come together der water): Mauna Kea in Hawaii, 33,480 to provide a more complete understanding. The feet. apostle Paul makes a similar point in Romans • Tallest rising from ocean floor: Mount and I Corinthians when he explains that al- Lamlam, Guam, 37,820 feet from the though there are many separate parts of the body, Mariana Trench they function together as a whole.25 This princi- • Tallest from center of the earth: Mount ple applies not only to the physical body and the Chimborazo in Ecuador, over 20 million Church of Jesus Christ but also to human cogni- feet. tive function. The use of different schemata underscores In both cases of illusory schema conflict, the the role of definition and context. Interpersonal conflict seems to reveal incompatible ways of un- misunderstandings are often caused by this type derstanding when, in actuality, the conflicting of schema conflict. Two different interpretive schemata or views can be shown to be simultane- frameworks are correctly used, but they come ously totally true. to disparate conclusions. These differences show This raises the question of whether we, indi- that sometimes differences may be due not to vidually or collectively, are capable of seeing be- whether someone is wrong or right but simply to yond our own interpretive frameworks to perceive the fact that more than one point of view is vi- the whole. No doubt, this perception of the whole able. might be possible, but probably not in all circum- The second type of schema conflict occurs stances because we have been created with lim- when differing schemata are derived honestly its: normative limits imposed simply by the fact from a single exemplar. An illustration of this is that we are created creatures and by the intrusion the ancient parable from India about six blind and distortion of sin.26 Both types of limitations men walking who encounter an obstacle in their probably play a role in obstructing our view of the path. As each reaches out to touch what is in his whole. I speculate that some portions of our lim- way, the six have an awful argument because ited view, specifically those due to the distortion none can agree on what it is. One says it’s a spear, of sin, are potentially fixable, or at least partially, another says it is a hose, while yet another claims via sanctification; but post-consummation, some it is a fan. The fourth declares it is a wall, but of these limits will be entirely gone, and we will another claims it is a pillar, and the last is con- experience knowledge of the true-for-all-time, vinced it is a rope with a brush on its end. What uber-framework. they have encountered? The moral derived is that there are many ways to describe an elephant and An Uber-framework? that individual perception is limited. Some argue An uber-framework is the idea that there ex- that this parable illustrates relativity—that each ists an overarching metanarrative that gives ulti- man experienced his own truth, valid for him mate meaning to varying and sometimes seem- and not the others. However, I suggest a more ingly disparate cultural and/or individual nar- cryptic meaning. Yes, each man’s framework was ratives. Several Christian scholars have argued different from that of the others, but the six views for the existence of such a superior framework.27 actually come together to form a more complete For example, Roy Clouser makes a case for an
18 Pro Rege—March 2018 mountain question. If I asked, “What is the tall- whole. overarching framework that subsumes both pure edge and Truth and that the Bible is a direct filter est mountain on Earth?” most would say Mount This way of looking at the story highlights Aristotelian objectivity and Kantian subjectivity for Truth. Kuyper believed that people can and Everest in Nepal and China—it stands over a distinction between the two types of schema and provides a third alternative: that ultimate should understand Christianity as a holistic and 29,000 feet above sea level. However, is Mount conflict. The first, illustrated by the mountain knowledge lies with God alone. Clouser suggests comprehensive philosophy of life rather than as Everest really the tallest mountain on Earth? If story, affirms the multiplicity of truth, mediated that there exists an overarching uber-framework, just one compartmental aspect of human experi- we invoke different schemata to define the con- by context, while the elephant story shows that a albeit in the mind of God alone, that subsumes ence.31, 32 cept of “tallest mountain,” there can be a plural- grand truth may lie behind multiple interpreta- all others.28 This is where Kuyper highlights world- ity of correct answers: tions. This latter example emphasizes how seem- This idea has been articulated by many in the view as a type of interpretive framework. The • Tallest from its base below sea level (un- ingly differing views may actually come together context of worldview philosophy, particularly by term itself is translated from the German word der water): Mauna Kea in Hawaii, 33,480 to provide a more complete understanding. The Christians who believe that in God lies ultimate Weltanschauung, which means “a particular way feet. apostle Paul makes a similar point in Romans truth, or the true worldview of worldviews—the of looking at the world.” The term originates • Tallest rising from ocean floor: Mount and I Corinthians when he explains that al- uber-framework. In my with Kant, as we saw with Lamlam, Guam, 37,820 feet from the though there are many separate parts of the body, judgment, the concept An uber-framework is the idea the term schema.33 Since his Mariana Trench they function together as a whole.25 This princi- paradigm that we have that there exists an overarching time, it has come to mean • Tallest from center of the earth: Mount ple applies not only to the physical body and the described thus far in the metanarrative that gives a set of underlying assump- Chimborazo in Ecuador, over 20 million Church of Jesus Christ but also to human cogni- context of the philosophy tions that define the spirit feet. tive function. of science is identical in ultimate meaning to varying of the age or the particular The use of different schemata underscores In both cases of illusory schema conflict, the essence and function with and sometimes seemingly way a culture manifests it- the role of definition and context. Interpersonal conflict seems to reveal incompatible ways of un- the concept of worldview disparate cultural and/or self in literature, art, philos- misunderstandings are often caused by this type derstanding when, in actuality, the conflicting that has been articulated individual narratives. ophy, and science. Kuyper of schema conflict. Two different interpretive schemata or views can be shown to be simultane- by many Christian phi- used the term to suggest frameworks are correctly used, but they come ously totally true. losophers. that multiple worldviews to disparate conclusions. These differences show This raises the question of whether we, indi- can co-exist and be in conflict with one another that sometimes differences may be due not to vidually or collectively, are capable of seeing be- Christian Worldview Philosophy while competing for people’s allegiance. whether someone is wrong or right but simply to yond our own interpretive frameworks to perceive In David Naugle’s in-depth look at the con- In his day, Kuyper identified two oppos- the fact that more than one point of view is vi- the whole. No doubt, this perception of the whole cept of worldview, he traces the idea of an over- ing “faiths,” or worldviews, that were in direct able. might be possible, but probably not in all circum- arching worldview that explains all reality—back conflict: modernism versus Christianity. Kuyper The second type of schema conflict occurs stances because we have been created with lim- to the Reformation writings of John Calvin and suggested that the conflict resulted ultimately when differing schemata are derived honestly its: normative limits imposed simply by the fact then, in the late 1800s, to Scottish theologian from Adam and Eve’s fall in to sin. The Fall pro- from a single exemplar. An illustration of this is that we are created creatures and by the intrusion James Orr and Dutch theologian Abraham duced an antithesis, or tension between God and the ancient parable from India about six blind and distortion of sin.26 Both types of limitations Kuyper.29 As the more well-known of these two, idolatry (or evil), that is manifested in all human men walking who encounter an obstacle in their probably play a role in obstructing our view of the Kuyper’s version will be described briefly. endeavors. Relating this antithesis to science, for path. As each reaches out to touch what is in his whole. I speculate that some portions of our lim- example, Naugle states, way, the six have an awful argument because ited view, specifically those due to the distortion Kuyperian Worldview Philosophy Kuyper argues [that]… regenerate people none can agree on what it is. One says it’s a spear, of sin, are potentially fixable, or at least partially, Kuyper is known for applying Calvinism to with a Christian worldview produce a … the- another says it is a hose, while yet another claims via sanctification; but post-consummation, some everyday life, focusing on the sovereignty of the istic interpretation of science, and non-regen- it is a fan. The fourth declares it is a wall, but of these limits will be entirely gone, and we will God of the Bible over all aspects of reality: cos- erate people with a non-Christian worldview another claims it is a pillar, and the last is con- experience knowledge of the true-for-all-time, mos, culture and thought. Calvin believed that produce an idolatrous science …. Scientific vinced it is a rope with a brush on its end. What uber-framework. God revealed Himself to humans via the created reason is not the same for all people. It de- they have encountered? The moral derived is that order, as well as through the Bible, the infallible pends upon whether or not the scientist has there are many ways to describe an elephant and An Uber-framework? and inerrant words written under the influence of or has not been religiously renewed. There that individual perception is limited. Some argue An uber-framework is the idea that there ex- the Holy Spirit. Of these two revelations, Calvin is not a neutral scientific rationality leading that this parable illustrates relativity—that each ists an overarching metanarrative that gives ulti- gave priority to the Bible when he used the meta- to certain objective and shared conclusions. man experienced his own truth, valid for him mate meaning to varying and sometimes seem- phor of the Scriptures being spectacles through Instead, scientific theories are a function of and not the others. However, I suggest a more ingly disparate cultural and/or individual nar- which humans are to interpret and understand the religious backgrounds and philosophical cryptic meaning. Yes, each man’s framework was ratives. Several Christian scholars have argued the rest of God’s creation.30 In other words, orientations of the scientists or theorists.34 different from that of the others, but the six views for the existence of such a superior framework.27 Calvin claimed that God, as sovereign creator It is important to point out that the conflict actually come together to form a more complete For example, Roy Clouser makes a case for an of all things, is the ultimate source of all knowl- is not in the science itself but in the conclusions
18 Pro Rege—March 2018 Pro Rege—March 2018 19 made (i.e., interpretation and application). meaning that knowing with the heart, which is Kuyper is basically arguing that collective the center of human consciousness, involves the interpretive frameworks function in society. totality of our being. This is where our individual His argument is similar to our earlier descrip- cognitive schemata intermingle with our collec- tion of collective cognition as seemingly relative. tive paradigms and worldviews and guide us in But Kuyper’s Christian worldview philosophy is holistic biological, psychological, and social con- clearly based on a belief that there is a real creator, sciousness. God, who is objectively manifest in the material creation as well as in the Bible. Both realms are Conclusion objectively true. But seeming relativity comes The interpretive frameworks we have looked into Kuyper’s thought when he claims that there at (cognitive schemata, paradigms, and world- are different interpretations of that reality: “ab- views) seem to all function in a common way— normal” and “normal,” as he termed them.35 as filters to help us understand the world around Those who are regenerated by the power of God’s us. This way of human perception seems to be by Holy Spirit are given a new outlook, which al- design. God created us to gain individual and so- lows them to understand that the cosmos is in cial knowledge through interpretive frameworks. an abnormal state due to sin and in need of re- These frameworks provide a starting point as well demption through Jesus Christ, but those who as an important heuristic for our exploration and are unregenerate see all as normal and see the progress in fulfilling the cultural mandate.41 need for Christ as folly. The result is a difference One aspect of this design is clear: there are in interpretation of a single reality, not a differ- limitations. We are limited perceivers but will ence between two constructed realities that are someday be freed from at least part of the limita- mutually exclusive. tion. Human nature is restricted in that we are One implication from Christian Worldview creatures created by God and, as such, will never philosophy is that God’s reality is the uber-frame- apprehend fully the true uber-worldview, which work—the true paradigm or schemata, the only is known by God alone. We all are affected by the correct interpretation—and that human access distortion of sin, which implies that some of the to the framework is only possible by regenera- subjectivity of our cognitive perceptions is due to tion of the Holy Spirit. The reverse implication is sin. This distortion explains why errors happen at that without God’s action, flawed frameworks or all levels of our interpretive frameworks. wrong schemata, paradigms, or worldviews exist, The Christian’s hope is that Christ’s redemp- leading to framework errors at all levels. tive work of restoration will yield for us a more Another implication is that because the Holy complete way of knowing at His second coming. Spirit’s regeneration focuses inwardly, we may As the apostle Paul said, “Now I know in part; need to consider that our interpretive frameworks then I shall know fully.” We have confidence that are more than cognitive. Recently, some have be- part of the limitation in our ability to know will gun to critique36 the idea of worldview as a static, be removed. theoretical, and cognitive process and to direct Perhaps without sin’s effect upon our inter- us to see our interpretive frameworks as coming pretive frameworks, we may share a common from the heart—which encompasses our identity perceptual organization, language, culture, para- more holistically.37 For example, Jamie Smith digm, and worldview. Having a shared interpre- suggests that when talking about worldview, we tive framework seems consistent with the bibli- need to move to a more non-cognitive, affective cal theme of restoration. Recall that the origin model, which includes our cares, concerns, mo- of multiple languages and culture groups came tivations, and desires.38 Based upon insight from from God’s judgment of sin at the Tower of Esther Meek,39 Naugle argues that “the heart Babel. Perhaps God will bring “heart” and “cog- needs to be rooted in the physical body…and an- nitive” unity to all the diverse nations who occu- chored in the ebb and flow of the real world,”40 py the new Jerusalem by establishing a common
20 Pro Rege—March 2018 set of interpretive frameworks for all its citizens. 9. Ibid. The biblical narrative of creation, fall, redemp- 10. Jean M. Mandler, Stories, Scripts, and Scenes: tion, and consummation is the human entrance Aspects of Schema Theory (Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum, into God’s true worldview, the uber-framework, 1984); David E. Rumelhart, “Schemata: The where God’s people will know more fully, which Building Blocks of Cognition,” Theoretical Issues may mean to know in the same way from percept in Reading and Comprehension, eds. Rodney to thought to culture. When that day arrives, we J. Shapiro, Bertram C. Bruce, and William F. all, including Anthony de Mello, will no longer Brewer (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1980), 33-58; see and understand things as we were, but will Roger C. Schank and Robert P. Abelson, Scripts, see and understand them as God intended, as Plans, Goals, and Understanding (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1977). they truly are. 11. Edward E. Smith and David A. Swinney, “The Endnotes Role of Schemas in Reading Text: A Real-Time Examination,” Discourse Processes 15 (1992): 303- 1. Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, trans. 316. Paul Guyer and Allan W. Wood (1781; reprint, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998); 12. John D. Bransford and Marcia K. Johnson, D. Brett King, Wayne Viney and W. Douglas “Contextual Prerequisites for Understanding: Woody, A History of Psychology: Ideas and Context, Some Investigations of Comprehension and 3rd ed. (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2008). Recall,” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 11 (1972): 717-26; see also John D. 2. King, Viney & Woody, A History of Psychology. Bransford and Jeffrey J. Franks, The Social 3. David E. Rumelhart and Andrew Ortony, “The Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology Representation of Knowledge in Memory,” of Knowledge (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Schooling and Acquisition of Knowledge, eds. Company, Inc., 1966). Richard C. Anderson, Rodney J. Shapiro, and 13. Richard A. Couch, Edward J. Caropreso, and William E. Montague (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, Helen B. Miller, “Making Meaning from Visuals: 1977), 99-135. Creative Thinking and Interpretation of Visual 4. Frederic C. Bartlett, Remembering: An Information,” Visual Literacy: A Spectrum of Visual Experimental and Social Study (Cambridge: Learning, eds. David M. Moore and Francis Cambridge University Press, 1932). M. Dwyer (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, 1994), 277-94. 5. Jean Piaget, The Language and Thought of the Child (Oxford: Harcourt Brace, 1926); see also 14. Naomi Quinn and Dorothy Holland, Cultural Jean Piaget, The Origins of Intelligence in Children Models of Language and Thought (New York: (New York: International Universities Press, Cambridge University Press, 1987). 1954). 15. Chris R. Stephens and Henri Waelbroeck, 6. George A. Miller, “The Cognitive Revolution: “Schemata Evolution and Building Blocks,” A Historical Perspective,” Trends in Cognitive Evolutionary Computation 7 (1999): 109-24. Science 7 (2003): 141-44. 16. Edward A. Price and Marcy P. Driscoll, “An 7. Ulric Neisser, Cognitive Psychology (New York: Inquiry into the Spontaneous Transfer of Appleton-Century-Crosts, 1967); see also Ulric Problem Solving Skill,” Contemporary Educational Neisser, “Ulric Neisser,” in vol. 9 of History of Psychology 22, (1997): 472-94. Psychology in Autobiography, eds. Gardner Lindzey 17. Richard C. Anderson and P. David Pearson, and William M. Runyan (Washington, DC, US: “A Schema-Theoretic View of Basic Processes American Psychological Association, 2007), 269- in Reading,” Handbook of Reading Research, ed. 301. P. David Pearson (New York: Longman, 1984), 8. Michael A. Arbib, “Schema Theory,” The 255-91; Richard C. Anderson, Rodney J. Shapiro, Handbook of Brain Theory and Neural Networks, and William E. Montague, eds., Schooling and the 2nd ed., ed. Michael A. Arbib (Cambridge, MA: Acquisition of Knowledge (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, MIT Press, 2003), 993-999. 1977).
Pro Rege—March 2018 21 18. Lev S. Vygotsky, Educational Psychology (1926; Sire, Naming the Elephant (Downers Grove, IL: reprint, Delray Beach, FL: St. Lucie Press, 1997). InterVarsity Press, 2004); James H. Olthuis, 19. David K. Naugle, Worldview: The History “On Worldviews,” Christian Scholar’s Review 14 of a Concept (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans (1985): 153-64; Francis Schaffer,The God Who Publishing, 2002); Martin Martin X. Moleski, Is There (1968, reprint, InterVarsity Press, 1998); “Polanyi vs. Kuhn: Worldviews Apart,” Tradition Naugle, Worldview; Albert M. Walters, Creation & Discovery: The Polanyi Society Periodical 33 Regained, (1985; reprint, Grand Rapids, MI: (2006): 8-24. Eerdmans Publishing, 2005); Arthur F. Holmes, Contours of a Worldview (Grand Rapids, MI: 20. Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Eerdmans Publishing, 1983); Brian J. Walsh and Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago J. Richard Middleton, The Transforming Vision: Press, 1962); This edition was followed by a second Shaping a Christian Worldview (Downers Grove, edition in 1970 with a clarifying post script. IL: Intervarsity Press, 1984). 21. Naugle, Worldview. 29. David K. Naugle, “Worldview: History, Theology, 22. Polanyi, Personal Knowledge. Implications,” After Worldview, eds. Matthew Bonzo and Michael Stevens (Sioux Center, IA: 23. Elof A. Carlson, “Paradigms and the History Dordt College Press, 2009); See also Naugle, The Quarterly Review of of Human Genetics,” Worldview. Biology 64, no. 3 (1989): 319-22; Elof A. Carlson, Mendel’s Legacy: The Origin of Classical Genetics 30. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor ed. John T. NcNeill, trans. Ford L. Battles (1659; Laboratory Press, 2004); Paul R. Gross and reprint, Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1998). Norman Levitt, Higher Superstition: The Academic 31. A full description of Kuyper’s philosophy is Left and its Quarrel with Science (Baltimore: John beyond the scope of this paper. For summaries Hopkins University Press, 1994); Paul R. Gross, of his ideas in English, see Kuyper, Lectures on Norman Levitt, and Martin W. Lewis, eds., The Calvinism (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1948); Flight from Science and Reason (Baltimore: John Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology(Grand Hopkins University Press, 1997). Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1980). 24. John R. Searle, The Construction of Social Reality 32. For expansions to Kuyper’s ideas by Dutch (New York: The Free Press, 1995). For more philosopher Herman Dooyeweerd in the next information about the postmodern constructionist, generation, see Herman Dooyeweerd, In the see Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckman, The Social Twilight of Western Thought (Nutley, NJ: Craig Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology Press, 1968); Dooyeweerd, Roots of Western of Knowledge (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Culture: Pagan, Secular, and Christian Options, Company, Inc., 1966). For more information trans. John Kraay (Toronto: Wedge, 1979). about the postmodern deconstructionist, see Jacques Derrida, Of Grammatology, trans. Gayatri 33. Naugle, Worldview; Immanuel Kant, Critique of C. Spivak (1967; reprint, Baltimore: John Hopkins Judgement, trans. Werner S. Pluhar (1790; reprint, University Press, 1997). Indianappolis: Hackett, 1987). 25. See Romans 12:4 and I Corinthians 12:12, 34. Naugle, Worldview, 21-22. English Standard Version. 35. Kuyper, Lectures, 132. 26. For more discussion of this idea see Matthew P. 36. James K. A. Smith, Desiring the Kingdom (Grand Phelps, “Imago Dei and Limited Creature: High Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group, 2009), and Low Views of Human Beings in Christianity Bonzo & Stevens, After Worldview; Esther Meek, and Cognitive Psychology,” Christian Scholar’s Loving To Know: Covenant Epistemology (Eugene, Review 33 (2004): 345-66. OR: Cascade Books, 2011); Sire, Naming the 27. Roy A. Clouser, The Myth of Religious Neutrality, Elephant; Naugle, “Worldview”. Revised Ed. (Notre Dame, IN: University of 37. W. Andrew Hoffecker, “Enlightenments and Notre Dame Press, 2005). Awakenings: The Beginning of Modern Culture 28. James W. Sire, The Universe Next Door (Downers Wars,” Revolutions in Worldview, ed. W. Andrew Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988); James W. Hoffecker (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing,
22 Pro Rege—March 2018 2007), 240-280. 41. See Genesis 1:28. 38. Smith, Desiring the Kingdom, 64. 42. See Phelps, Imago Dei. 39. Meek, Loving To Know. 43. I Corinthians 13:10, 12, English Standard Version 40. Naugle, Worldview, 19. 44. See Genesis 11.
Pro Rege—March 2018 23 WANTED: Vegetarian Kuyperians with Artistic Underwear
A difficulty of passing on such a Reformational-perspective pair of glasses from one older generation to the next younger genera- tion is that its visionary contour is less defined than a philosophical one, and it is also often sub- verted by the primal Way-of-life which always underlies us humans, who consciously have (or do not have) a “Weltanschauung.”1 To “retrieve and renew” a life-guiding (Kuyperian) tradition is not like excavating certain ideas as if they be stones and then rebuilding anew the old ruined house we once lived in, especially if Edward Shils is correct in saying, “A tradition once it has re- by Calvin Seerveld ceded from regular usage cannot be deliberately restored.”2 The usual resulting “Neo-” character Craig Bartholomew’s IVP Academic publica- of such a maneuver tends, in my judgment, to be tion, Contours of the Kuyperian Tradition (2017), artificial, at best a beautiful bouquet of cut flow- is indeed a magisterial systematic introduction ers. to the cloud of witnesses (and many fellow trav- What would it take, God willing, to foster a elers) who have articulated a basically biblical, vital Kuyperian tradition in the consciousness of Jean Calvinian, committed world-and-life vi- the coming generation that is not handicapped by sion on how to live before God’s face until Jesus being “Neo-Kuyperian”? I will offer two sugges- Christ comes again to complete historically the tions for our discussion: (1) A Kuyperian world- Kingdom-Rule of God (Psalm 110, Acts 1:3, and-life vision has a supple, not analytically de- Hebrews 10:19-12:29) in this world, which be- fined but imaginative, literarily composed char- longs to the holy Triune Sovereign Creator God acter; and (2) our program should be to discover revealed in the Scriptures. anew, reformingly embody, and freely share the Kuyperian-spirited constellation of insights with our neighbors, focused on their actual needs. Dr. Calvin Seerveld is husband to Ines Naudin ten Cate; My own practice is to talk about a “commit- their three children are Dordt graduates. He is Senior and-life vision Member emeritus in Philosophical Aesthetics at the ted world- ” instead of the trun- 3 Graduate Institute for Christian Studies in Toronto. cated Weltanschauung, worldview. Talk about
24 Pro Rege—March 2018 “worldview” omits the element of life praxis— sinner” [Luke 18:9-14]). which Kuyper’s original Dutch phrase “levens- Now, if a committed world-and-life visionary en-wereld beschouwing” highlighted! The odd tradition—Nietzschean, American Dream, or term of “life-system,” which Kuyper used in the Christian Kuyperian—“is the structured trans- 1898 Stone lectures, shows the importance of action of passing on wonts from practiced to in- “life” to him; but “system,” I think, overstates experienced human hands,”8 we have a sure guide the kind of cohering form belonging to a synop- to the enormous challenge we face, because “the tic vision.4 I use “vision” partly because of Ezra wonts” of the Kuyperian tradition are as varied as Pound’s wise dictum, “Don’t be viewy,”5 vague, creaturely life. muddled, obscure, “worldviewish.” We will need the daily practice of attent, However, I do believe it connecting Bible read- is proper for a committed How about proposing that ing at family meals; a world-and-life vision tradi- regular healthy diet of tion not to be theoretically artistry should be the underwear, body-building grains and conceptually exact. The at least of the well-dressed greens, without a constant intelligible contour pre- Kuyperian readied for service in gratuitous sugar caress; an sented by S.G. de Graaf’s God’s world. expectant Sunday worship Verbondsgeschiedenis service with a church year (1936)6 has an unmistak- of solid Scriptural preach- able redemptive-historical visionary Gestalt that ing, earnest liturgical confession of sin to be is richly biblical, but strict theological jargon I forgiven, and joyful, communion-building cel- find absent. Thomas Cole’s painterly series of four ebration of the eucharist. We need to be learn- large canvases narrating our human Voyage of ing a trade that fits our gifts and enjoy a week Life (1842)7 convincingly articulates the Horatio of work that somehow serves good to somebody Alger American Dream world-and-life vision of and helps pay our bills; a habit of wide reading greatness that is Neo-Idealistically attractive and in cultural history and current affairs with wise hollow as hell. Bertolt Brecht’s oeuvre depicts mentors nearby; a circle of friends with the cus- and champions a pragmatistic survival ethic that tom to play games together uncontaminated by promises an everlasting bitter-sweet meaning in a a competitive mania, where there rises time for kind of inverted Nietzschean tradition. intimate conversation—it takes an encyclopedic That is, it helps me to understand the bulky range and ensemble of exercised human activi- nature and power of the Kuyperian tradition if ties to show-and-tell, to engender and spread a I realize that the cosmic scope but non-philo- committed world-and-life vision with a special sophical rigor to its perspective has the nature of (Nietzschean, American Dream or) Kuyperian literate precision. Literary precision is not analyti- cachet, beyond telling about it. To chant “square cally tight, but the right word like “woebegone” inch” and “sphere sovereignty” will not keep alive or “bluster” can call up a florescent peacock tail the blessing of a reforming Kuyperian tradition, of nuances that nevertheless can catch precisely a since its concatenated wonts are not reducible to rich reality at hand. When Shakespeare’s Lady a few pregnant ideas.9 Macbeth utters “Out, damned spot! Out, I say!” Would teaching and learning the Refor- (Macbeth, V.1), she is not everyday swearing and mational Christian philosophical systematics— is also not just carefully confessing “I committed of Vollenhoven, Dooyeweerd, Zuidema, Mekkes, intentional first degree murder.” But the theatri- K.J. Popma, H. van Rieseen, H. Evan Runner, cal saying has a bloody, down-to-earth, cry-to- Robert Knudsen, Peter Steen, Sander Griffioen, heaven, spirited specificity that is not scientifically Edward Schuurman and others, which was and is precise but is aesthetically lucid, engaging, over- a like-spirited conceptual deepening of this very whelming (as in Jesus’ parables, with the crooked Kuyperian committed world-and-life vision— tax collector praying, “God, be merciful to me, a help the living propagation of the Kuyperian
Pro Rege—March 2018 25 tradition? In my own judgment and experience, of which are conducive to instilling and practic- when a theoretical physicist (Harry van der ing a vital Kuyperian merciful and just Kingdom Laan)10 or a political science academic (Bernard of God tradition among us. Zylstra)11 has digested the jargon-invested, basic Kuyperian Christian schooling would do intricacies of the Reformational Christian phi- well, it seems to me, to make wearing such un- losophy, which has embedded in its categorical derwear training a priority, since the arts are framework and gut a cross-disciplinary avenue for among the best resilient, subtle, and invigorating communal reflection, then surprising alternative carriers of world-and-life visions.15 scholarship with wisdom can result, like econo- Could we perhaps tweak the “retrieve and re- mist Bob Goudzwaard’s Beyond the Modern Age,12 new” formula to discover and absorb, in order to and oncologist James Rusthoven’s Covenantal give away the Kuyperian tradition as a task for Biomedical Ethics for Contemporary Medicine.13 promoting shalom? That is, a world-and-life vi- Educated thinkers whose special field analysis sion is not so much a deposit you can pick up and and counsel has not been forged with and honed refurbish, as it is an on-going, blood-coursing, by Reformational philosophical hypotheses and world-wide, holding-patterned communal con- who don’t think with a committed Kuyperian sciousness one inhabits or not. world-and-life vision are too handicapped, I As I understand it, a “Christian world-and- think, to be integrally Christian in their profes- life vision is a thetical orientation and not a judg- sional theoretical activity. But superficial knowl- mental condemnation; [it is] a program for doing edge of Reformational Christian philosophy is good for the commonweal and not a plan of at- not an insurance policy one can cash in for being tack on enemies.”16 So it is a joy to give-it-away to able to speak redemptive knowledge as a banker, wandering people who may be at a loss, provided CEO, pastor, governing official or teacher. you do not come on as Proverbs 27:15 puts it, One last comment: since a committed world- “like the dribbling drivel of a leaky roof on a day and-life visionary tradition has, to my thinking, of pounding rain.” an imaginative literary consistency, not to say a If you be a person whose inescapable Way-of- supervening, suggestion-rich, artistic quality, I’d life has not yet sprung a self-conscious world-and- like to raise the ante on Kuyper’s well-known life vision, to be introduced to the all-encompass- phrase that “art is no fringe that is attached to the ing Kuyperian tradition, as Craig Bartholomew’s garment” of human life.14 How about proposing book does it, can be an exhilarating, eye-opening, that artistry should be the underwear, at least of and life-integrating experience. If you are hold- the well-dressed Kuyperian readied for service in ing onto an un-Christian world-and-life vision- God’s world. ary tradition, it may take something more like Every mature Kuyperian child of God should a risky, complete blood transfusion to effect the have underneath his or her visible activity cloth- change in life-orientation. If you meet Kuyperian ing, I suggest, a supportive fabric of images (like progeny while breathing a different Christian Ernst Barlach’s Singing Man, Käthe Kollwitz’s world-and-life vision (Anabaptist Mennonite, or Mother with dead child, Rembrandt’s late self- Roman Catholic), you may notice blind spots in portraits), an invigorating psalm-song under the the Kuyperians yet be willing to supplement your breath (Genevan 51, 89, 141), a poignant favor- resident perspective with certain Reformational ite poetic fragment or novel scene remembered biblical strengths. (Shakespeare’s “Love is not love / Which alters The most difficult encounter happens, I when it alteration finds...”; Gwendolyn Brooks, think, when someone who once had accepted “The Old Marrieds”; the severe act of crossing out the Reformed contours but because of some ac- Pieter’s name from the Bible by his father Jakob cidental affront or mistaken assumption willfully van Vlaanderen, in Alan Paton’s “Too Late the decided to reject its vision or let it atrophy. You Phalarope”); a readiness for gracious, salty speech cannot argue such disenchanted people into em- (see parable-speaking Jesus; Colossians 4:6)—all bracing the Kuyperian tradition again; even try-
26 Pro Rege—March 2018 ing to make them jealous of its healing grace for some and wise Holy Spirit suffuses and gentles distracted people is a tough row to hoe.17 the Kuyperian tradition, what does it really How is the elderly generation to transmit the profit us and our neighbors? However, if we as Kuyperian tradition live to the up-and-coming a community live the Kuyperian world-and-life generation and take pains to avoid the “Neo-” at- vision reformanda, constantly tapping into its avism which deforms a percolating visionary tra- wisdom-gospel biblical roots (although it is not dition into a cliché? I learned from colleague Bill mentioned in Ephesians 6:10-17), the lived, liv- Rowe that the handing on of wonts should take ing Kuyperian Christian consciousness can be a place face-to-face, seasoned person before novice protective hiding place to catch one’s breath in and novice before mentor. The written record of our mortal struggle as God’s people with the evil the Kuperian tradition should best become oral, principalities and cultural powers that would de- spoken, with time for response. And I learned stroy us all. from colleague Peter Steen that a good teacher One last comment: let me emphasize that a necessarily simplifies the matter at hand, but in committed world-and-life vision is not just sim- such an encouraging way that the student can plified lay philosophy, as if the philosophical complicate what is shown-and-told, so as not to meat is just cut up in tiny bite-size bits so that parrot back what is at stake, but own it one’s self. untrained thinkers can swallow it. No! And as You become an aide to a Kuyperian senator to the role that literary studies and critical art in the legislature; you apprentice yourself as an history do and could play in lively carrying on aspiring playwright in the Redeemer Roy Louter the Kuyperian tradition, Dostoevsky’s Crime writing workshop. I learned the Kuyperian fish and Punishment novel is as complicated and business from watching my Father (who had intricate as Bakhtin’s philosophical aesthetics, never read Kuyper) swiftly fillet flounders so but Dostoevsky’s all-encompassing vision and close to the bone you wasted not a pinch of flesh, texture is of a nature different from philosophy. and then tried it hundreds of times over years of Dostoevsky with imaginative story is priming Saturdays and summers. a mentality of compassion rather than exposit- To transmit well the Kuyperian world-and- ing the fascinating intermeshing of life and re- life vision takes time—for feedback, corrections, flection. Although using metaphors can be very revised examples, and the random meaningful dangerous, let me put it this way: philosophers asides by the tradition-giver. I learned a major sense and eat conceptual meat; world-and-life life-giving (Kuyperian) guideline on being “criti- visionaries are thoughtful perceptual vegetar- cal” from Vollenhoven. I was berating Kuyper for ians who formulate imaginative prose essays. being too taken by Idealist Schelling and Neo- So, while Reformational philosophers argue Classical Winckelmann’s thought on the practi- over their hamburger to gain wisdom for bearing cally salvific power of beautiful art.18 “Ja, zeker,” their neighbors’ doubts and burdens, Kuyperians said Vollenhoven, “maar hij had te veel te doen tell stories, doodle sketches, sing songs, formulate (“Yes, sure, but Kuyper had way too much to manifestoes, and start an Institute for Christian do.”), implying that a charismatic leader can’t be Studies, Redeemer College, Citizens for Public right about everything. Justice, Christian Courier, Flagship Gallery...and One should not, I believe, overvalue the remain Kuyperian vegetarians. According to the Kuyperian Christian tradition because, like prophet Isaiah, as I read him, both Covenantal any world-and-life vision, its developed format- Jesus Christ-following diaconal meat-eaters and ting of one’s consciousness that brings to the vegetarians will feast with “well-aged wines” fore structural features of our life world (What together on the new earth (Isaiah 25:6-9). (I is there? How? What’s wrong? Why?) is always could mention, I have never met an over-weight meshed with the matter of directional choice, Seventh-Day Adventist vegetarian....) or where are we headed? What Spirit drives you on in your world-and-life vision?19 Unless a win-
Pro Rege—March 2018 27 Endnotes 118-124). Also, “Unformed persons do immense 1. C. Seerveld, “Philosophy as schooled memory” damage to the Kuyperian tradition, shouting (1982) in In the Fields of the Lord, ed. Craig about sovereignty and grace while failing to Bartholomew (Carlisle: Piquant, 2000), 84-89. manifest grace and humility in their lives” (Ibid., 318). 2. Tradition (London: Faber and Faber, 1981), 329. Cf. C. Seerveld, “Footprints in the snow “ (1991), 10. A christian appreciation of physical science Cultural Education & History Writing, ed. John H. (Hanmilton: The Association for Reformed Kok (Sioux Center: Dordt College Press, 2014), Scientific Studies, 1966). 253. 11. From pluralism to collectivism. The development 3. See “The Damages of a Christian Worldview,” of Harold Laski’s political thought (Assen: Van Cultural Education & History Writing (2004): Gorcum, 1968). 105-109. 12. An Archaeology of Contemporary Culture (Downers 4. Abraham Kuyper, Lectures on Calvinism (Grand Grove: IVP Academic, 2017). Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1961), 11 n.1. 13. An Alternative to Principle-Based Ethics (Eugene: Cf. Seerveld, “Damages,” 108; Bartholomew, Pickwick Publications, 2014). Contours, 102-108. 14. Lectures on Calvinism, 151. 5. “A Retrospect” (1918), Literary Essays of Ezra 15. One might remember that Abraham Kuyper’s Pond, ed. T.S. Eliot (London: Faber and Faber conversion was triggered by Charlotte Yonge’s Ltd., 1954), 6. novel, The Heir of Redclyffe (Bartholomew, 6. Translated by H. Evan Runner as Promise and Contours), 16. Deliverance (St. Catharines: Paideia Press, 1977- 16. “The Damages of a Christian Worldview,” 121. 1981), 4 vols. 17. For biblical thoughts surrounding the problem 7. Voyage of Life: Childhood, Youth, Manhood, Old of reinvigorating a Christian world-and-life Age (Washington D.C., National Gallery of Art), visionary tradition lost, cf. Matthew 13:1-9, 24- each canvas more than 4x6 feet. 30; Hebrews 6:1-12; Romans 10:18-11:12. 8. “Footprints in the snow,” 239. 18. Abraham Kuyper, Het Calvinisme en de 9. Craig Bartholomew touches on the hazard that Kunst, rectoral speech at the Vrije Universiteit “worldviewish thinking” may reduce the full- (Amsterdam: J.A. Wormser, 1888), 70 n.53 and orbed lived character of the Kuyperian tradition 76 n.76. to a mere view-finder pair of glasses Contours( , 19. “The Damages of a Christian Worldview,” 109.
28 Pro Rege—March 2018 Editor’s Note: Dr. Chris Gousmett’s letter is a response to Dr. Sacha Walicord’s review of Gary North’s book, Christian Economics in One Lesson in Pro Rege, vol. 46, no. 1, September 2017.
A Letter to Dr. Sacha Walicord
one that is frequently voiced with approval. It is a vision which inspires and motivates many of us world-wide in our efforts to be faithful in all that we do. It was a surprise, then, to read your review of Gary North’s book, Christian Economics in One Lesson (http://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/ pro_rege/vol46/iss1/6/). While I do not pretend to any expertise in economics, I wish to challenge the approach you have taken in your review because I believe it is taking a mistaken path, one which does not do credit to the Lord whom we serve. While you start with Kuyper’s famous rally- by Chris Gousmett ing cry, in what follows you espouse an under- standing of economics which is radically dif- ferent from that of many of Kuyper’s spiritual Dear Dr. Walicord, followers. You seem to hold that both Kuyper’s I often read Pro Rege with interest, as it con- followers, and Kuyper himself, are inconsistent tains important articles on matters of significance in applying biblical principles to economic life, which are pertinent to our calling to discipleship. given that you state that biblically consistent The vision of Kuyper that the whole of human publications in economics and politics are a “rari- life is to be brought into subjection to Christ is ty in our day and age.” This does not ring true for those of us who are familiar with, for instance, the works of Bob Goudzwaard, Jim Skillen and Chris Gousmett is currently the Corporate Information Alan Storkey. Their vision for economics and for Manager for the Hutt City Council. He studied Hebrew politics is pervasively informed by the Scriptures, and Philosophy at the University of Otago, and completed while being academically thorough in their anal- a Master of Philosophical Foundations degree, focusing on philosophical theology, at the Institute for Christian ysis and proposals for reform. You do not refer to Studies in Toronto. He has a Ph.D. in Patristic theology these authors and their work, while asserting that from the University of Otago, with a thesis on the inter- economics is under-served in the application of relationship of philosophical anthropology and the struc- biblical teaching to that subject. There are oth- ture of eschatological thought in the Patristic writers. His ers who have also worked on developing a bibli- interests are in Reformational philosophy and theology, the cally faithful approach to economics within the history of thought, including history of science, and po- litical and social theory. He has preached in a number of Kuyperian tradition: to name but a few, Tony churches and some of his sermons are available at https:// Cramp, George Monsma and John Tiemstra. hearinganddoing.wordpress.com/ Many of these draw on the work of Christian
Pro Rege—March 2018 29 economists working in the Kuyperian tradition work is still being studied for guidance in how to in earlier generations, such as T. P. van der Kooy. live faithfully before the Lord in every area of life. While these authors (and others also working Many of us who read Goudzwaard, Skillen, in the same Kuyperian spirit) may not be well and Storkey with appreciation also have some ac- known, and are certainly not as numerous or as quaintance with at least the basic approach, if not influential as we may like, it would be doing a dis- the details, of the views of Gary North and oth- service to them and their potential readers (who ers in that line of thought. It is not an approach otherwise may not be spurred to seek them out) which appeals to us, not because we are closet to describe biblical works in economics as a “rar- Marxists or humanistic in our thinking but be- ity.” There have also been a significant number of cause we read the Bible in a different way from authors writing on politics in a biblically faithful North. Those in the Kuyperian tradition have approach, such as Bernie Zylstra, Paul Marshall, clearly demarcated their views from the Marxists Jonathan Chaplin, Sander Griffioen, David and other humanist thinkers. Indeed, Antheunis Koyzis, Romel Bagares, Rockne McCarthy and Janse frequently emphasised that the common Richard Mouw, and again those of earlier gen- error of Marxists, Socialists, Capitalists and oth- erations: Jan Dengerink, Herman Dooyeweerd, ers is that the economic side of life was elevated Antheunis Janse, and others. to a position of dominance over everything else, Would it then be correct to assume that you supplanting the Lord of Glory, who alone rules place these thinkers in the category of the “bibli- over all of life. This criticism would apply to the cally inconsistent” or who only pay “lip service” Austrian school of economics of Hayek and von to God’s Word, or are part of the “sometimes Mises, who, it appears, have influenced Gary biblically inconsistent, ivory-tower transforma- North more than other thinkers. tionalist crowd”? Is that why you do not men- Those who differ from North you describe tion their work even in passing, hurrying on to a number of times as “biblically inconsistent” laud the works of Gary North, whose views are while North is described several times as “bibli- inescapably incompatible with those of the writ- cally consistent” or “consistently biblical.” You do ers mentioned above? not state anywhere what “biblically consistent” You mention that Kuyper’s inconsisten- means, but it seemingly does not apply, in your cies led to the democratic-welfare state in the view, to those who hold views which differ from Netherlands. Whether the modern Dutch welfare those espoused by North. Perhaps you could en- state can be attributed to (or blamed on) Kuyper lighten us as to what you consider “consistency” is probably debatable, but clearly you see a con- with Scripture means and why you seem to privi- nection between the beliefs he espoused and the lege this term over others such as “faithful to eventual emergence of the welfare state. Leaving Scripture.” Surely consistency means more than aside the historical validity of this connection following the principles of a tight logical system, for others to explore, it is true that Kuyper had which appears to originate more from human- significant concern for the welfare of the poorer ist economic and political theories than from folk of his day, as can be seen from his stirring Scripture. One of the criticisms of the approach address at the First Christian Social Congress in taken by North and those who follow him has The Netherlands in 1891 The( Problem of Poverty, been the way in which Scripture is interpreted in translated by Jim Skillen). The politics and eco- a rigid and fundamentalistic manner, which pays nomics of Kuyper cannot easily be slotted into scant attention to context (textual, historical, “socialist” or “capitalist” or other categories, since social, political, etc.) that urges the application he made strenuous efforts (however unsuccess- of OT law immediately to our contemporary fully at times) to be biblical in his approach. He situation. North’s approach is not the only one must be given credit for his achievement in pur- which claims to bring the insights of the whole of suing that goal and for his influence in this re- Scripture to bear on contemporary life in a way gard such that nearly 100 years after his death his which is faithful to the one True King. It would
30 Pro Rege—March 2018 seem to me that North is significantly less suc- task of government, and what principles and pol- cessful in this task than many others, including icies would be best to enable free and prosperous those already mentioned. human life, without the distortions of free-mar- I would be interested to hear from you how ket (neo-liberal) policies that benefit, above oth- different North’s approach is from that of Hazlitt, ers, the wealthy, the multi-national corporations, whose book, which he has re-written, was the and the financiers, who often do their utmost to stimulus for your review. You clearly say that avoid paying any tax at all, let alone the minimal North takes Hazlitt’s libertarian work and puts amount they seem to pay. it into a Christian context. You say that the book What unfortunately is communicated by the has been re-written on a kinds of polemics you of- biblical-moral foundation Following North, it seems, fer against government and instead of a foundation in its “intrusions” and “viola- humanistic pragmatism. you speak negatively of the tions” is support for those Those who follow Kuyper government multiple times, who seek to avoid contrib- and Dooyeweerd would using such terms as “intrusions,” uting to the public coffers question whether a liber- “excessive intrusions,” or to fund the activities of tarian work can be used “violation of property rights.” government, while the ex- as the basis for a Christian tremes of their wealth sits approach without doing se- alongside the economic rious distortion to both. Frankly, the presupposi- hardship and struggles of millions in the same tions and approach taken by libertarian econo- society who have to do without adequate food, mists are hardly compatible with a biblical view clothing, employment, education, shelter and of life. Is this then not just another instance of the health care, to mention but a few of their needs. fallacy of synthesis thinking, in which secular hu- Can you not see that the constant reiteration manistic views are melded with biblical concepts of the theme that anything governments do in into a mixture of iron and clay? Such a synthe- relation to the economy is “intervention” or “in- sis cannot be authentically either humanistic or trusion” contributes to a denigration of govern- Christian. While North and others of that school ment per se and fosters not positive civil virtues are more than happy to critique the foundational in citizens but fear and suspicion? I struggled to principles of socialists and Marxists, they seem find anything positive said about government in strangely reticent to apply the same depth of cri- North’s book. There seems to be a Manichean tique to the foundational principles of capitalism spirit running through his works, which makes (and not just the pragmatistic avoidance of mo- government (in any form, since it seems that all rality). It raises the question as to why North did he can say about government is to attack its every not write a book from scratch instead of adopting action as “intrusion”) something to be feared and and adapting one originating from an unbiblical resisted, while an economy free from regulation perspective. is extolled as good and desirable. For North, it The differences between North and the seems, taxation is always “theft.” Can there be Kuyperian tradition can be seen, for instance, any good thing done by government (apart from in the latter’s approach to the Bible, in which protecting the economy from any interference) the task of government is understood positively. and can any form of taxation be anything but North objects to government “intrusion” into “theft”? It seems not from what you say. the social order. Following North, it seems, you Perhaps you could provide a positive de- speak negatively of the government multiple scription of the task of government, which is times, using such terms as “intrusions,” “exces- “God’s servant for your good” (Romans 13:4). sive intrusions,” or “violation of property rights.” Can there be a legitimate government that does Such polemics are unhelpful when what we need more than the barest possible minimum (what- to know is how we should understand the proper ever that minimum)? Can you explain why the
Pro Rege—March 2018 31 Scriptures throughout speak of God’s relation- compatible with government-forced redistribu- ship to the creation and the people within it in tion, and that this is theft in violation of the com- political terms—God “rules”; he is “King”; he mandment “You shall not steal.” At this point issues laws—if government is so lacking in le- your support for minimal government, minimal gitimacy? Surely disparaging government is to tax (if any), and no redistribution simply un- speak slightingly of the King not only who gives dercuts any claim to be presenting a Christian us government but who also adopts that imagery faithful concern for the whole of society, not just for his own relationship with us (not exclusively, for those who have managed to secure massive of course, but extensively). amounts of wealth. You suggest that compassion The focus for those who take a different line, for the poor and distribution of funds should be more closely aligned with that of Kuyper, is not voluntary. Unfortunately, this is not what we find the extent to which government engages with so- with the massively wealthy—they do not support ciety (as if there were a simple measure of more the poor. In fact their wealth is often garnered or less, with the “correct” level somewhere on through enterprises which pay wages so low it is that scale) but the appropriateness of the engage- almost impossible to live on them, and from ma- ment that should take place. There is no doubt nipulating their finances to minimise whatever that there is an appropriate task for government taxes they cannot completely avoid. The kinds in Christian political theory and practice. In ad- of political and economic views you espouse dition to the clear teaching of Scripture in which here are of one piece with those who advocate government is spoken of as God’s servant, it is rampant neo-liberal free-market economics and also clear that the phenomenon of government is are a poor reflection of the depth and richness grounded in the creation order, as there is nothing of insight into economic and political realities that can exist save that which has been provided which has been presented by the various authors for by God in his order for creation. This is so, mentioned above (along with others I have not despite the fact that government (and every other mentioned). area of life) has been distorted and contaminated The focus on “theft” seems to arise from by human sin—the creational order in which it is North’s contention that the eighth command- founded still remains in place, sustained by God ment, “You shall not steal,” is the principal basis in every way. Were there no basis in the creation for any sound economic perspective. This seems order for the phenomenon of government, then it to place far too great a burden on a few words could not exist. Clearly, then, government is not (four in English, two in Hebrew). There are many merely legitimate but helpful for us. That many more substantive discussions of economic life in governments around the world are tyrannical, the Old Testament, which surely indicate that despotic, or otherwise corrupt does not detract economics goes far beyond simply a proscription from the fact that government is a gift from God of theft and exaltation of property rights. And to for the good of humankind. It is the way it is used extend that proscription to rejection of the right and abused that needs correction, and all too of- of governments to raise funds by taxation is sim- ten we find that it is rampant, free-market capi- ply unsupportable by sound exegesis. This fact talism through neo-liberal ideology which props can be seen even more starkly in North’s claim in up the worst forms of government around the his book that the sin of Adam and Eve in taking world for its own economic benefit. It has been the fruit of the tree was a breach of the prohibi- said of some of the repressive anti-democratic tion against theft—in fact he says that this first dictatorships which imposed free-market ideol- prohibition in the Bible is the prohibition against ogy while engaged in brutality against unions or theft and promotion of property rights. This view others who protested the actions of the govern- is simply astonishing. Surely the sin of Adam and ment, that “people had to be imprisoned so that Eve involves more than theft? That this is not the market could be free.” a misreading of North is confirmed by the fact You say that compassion for the poor is not that he makes the same comment three times in
32 Pro Rege—March 2018 his book, each time expressing the view that the You have commended North’s book to any sin of Adam and Eve was theft. While they did interested Christian who wants to be a respon- steal the fruit, what was involved was not simply sible citizen and an obedient child of God in all a breach of God’s property rights (which is what areas of life. For the reasons given above, I sug- North makes it seem) but a life-encompassing gest that rather than a biblically faithful presenta- breach of covenant, which affected Adam and tion of political and economic life, North’s book Eve in every way. Their sin was a religious change presents a narrow, constricted, and suspect per- of orientation of the heart away from obedience spective that fails to do adequate justice to the to God towards a false authority, a false pretence breadth and depth of life in all its complexity or to autonomy, which established idolatry at their to the drastic consequences of sin in all its horror very core. Seeing it simply as “theft” fails to do and power. It does not present a vision that opens justice to the depth and extent of their disobedi- up Christian discipleship in all of life, but to the ence. contrary, it distorts the teaching of Scripture in It would be of interest to those who follow significant ways and reduces its view of econom- Kuyper’s line to know more about your reasons ics to a very constricted vision. There are many for considering Gary North to be consistent in ap- books by other Christian authors that do a much plying the Scriptures to economics, and whether more effective job in presenting the calling for you consider Goudzwaard, Skillen and Storkey faithfulness to God in all of life and specifically to be inconsistent, ivory-tower thinkers, along for economics. I would encourage you to give with Kuyper. Surely you have not dismissed their them due consideration and reflect on the limi- views in a cavalier manner without considering tations they expose in the approach taken by their work carefully, but since their views are not North. compatible with those of Gary North, I would be Yours in Christ, interested to hear what it is exactly that you find Chris Gousmett unsatisfying in their approach.
Pro Rege—March 2018 33 Reply to Dr. Chris Gousmett’s Open Letter
cerns to help you understand my views. Raised in Europe, I was indoctrinated with statism and “big government socialism” from an early age. This happened in school, through the media, and through many other venues. We were constantly told how great it was to have govern- ment provide everything we needed. It was often added how evil the U.S. social system was and that people there were dying outside of hospitals due to lack of finances and the absence of pub- lic health insurance. Growing up, I believed all of this because it was all I had ever heard. Not once can I remember even hearing a critical view by Sacha Walicord of such a worldview and essentially grew up a Marxist. I promoted and defended this view. Dear Dr. Gousmett, When I was confronted with the saving Gospel Let me begin by thanking you for taking the of Jesus Christ and became a believer in my mid- time to write a review of my review, so to speak. teens, I began to see the world and everything in I have to say that I find it a little difficult to reply it with new eyes. This was, of course, a long pro- to your extensive letter because it is filled with in- cess, but essentially, I came to understand the an- nuendos, platitudes, and very loose references to tithesis, the incompatibility of light with darkness, Scripture without cogent, exegetically-sound ar- of the world with the Kingdom of God. Through guments. It is clear that you do not like the free- this, I learned that I had to rigorously re-think market view and that you prefer the approach everything in biblical terms. I had been made new of forced governmental redistribution when it in the eyes of God through Jesus Christ, and this comes to social issues. To answer all your claims “newness” had to play out in every single area of and assumptions would require an extensive re- my life and thinking—or to say it in Dr. Kuyper’s ply for which, frankly, I neither have time nor great words, in “every square inch” of my exis- enough space in this publication. Therefore, I tence. As I went through university, law school, will try to reply in a more general way. and later graduate school, this antithesis between Please allow me to provide a short excerpt of the world and God’s Kingdom became even my biography before I answer some of your con- clearer to me, and I learned that classrooms are a battlefield for the minds of future generations. I was forced to decide either to push back or to Dr. Sacha Walicord is Associate Professor of Business Administration at Dordt College. abandon my Christian convictions. In line with
34 Pro Rege—March 2018 my conscience, I decided to push back. Later, gether is expressly wrong and a blatant misrepre- as an economics professor, I had to search for a sentation of the truth. Furthermore, you claim biblical view of economics. I quickly understood that we were proponents of humanist libertari- that God’s Word assigned very limited powers anism, which is utterly ludicrous because North to government, but I still needed more clarity states exactly the opposite at length in his book on the matter. To be perfectly honest, I did not (see Preface, Introduction, and Chapter 1!), as find this clarity among colleagues of your per- do I expressly in my book review. North goes to suasion—not at all. I found among them, what great lengths to explain Hazlitt’s weaknesses and seemed to me, little to no commitment to sola the fallacy of humanist libertarianism. I have no scriptura and a strong presuppositional, faith-like problem with discussing opposing views, but I do commitment to both theo- not appreciate misrepresen- logical and political liberal- It seems to me that your entire tations of views and straw- ism. This, of course, is only letter seeks to build a strawman man arguments. Moreover, my very subjective percep- I was quite surprised to read tion, but I did not see them argument, with secular “robber- the following statement in defending the integrity of baron-capitalism” on one your letter: “Frankly, the Scripture against secular side and an infallible “oh-so- presuppositions and ap- onslaughts. On the con- compassionate and selfless” proach taken by libertar- trary, it seemed to me that government on the other. ian economists are hardly for them the enemy was compatible with a biblical not theological liberalism view of life. Is this then not but theologically conservative, Bible-believing another instance of the fallacy of synthesis think- Christians, whom they would often condescend- ing, in which secular humanists views are meld- ingly call “fundamentalists,” “prooftexters,” or ed with biblical concepts into a mixture of iron “biblicists.” It seemed to me that they would de- and clay?” You are absolutely correct, but what fend their views not with sound biblical exegesis is your purpose in telling me this? Both North but with lofty philosophical jargon, which the and I (even in my short review) have in clearest average Christian in the pew would never be able terms distanced ourselves from a humanist lib- to follow. It looked as though they were seek- ertarianism. In fact, that is what North’s book ing to constitute something like a “new priest- is all about, to defend the free market as biblical hood” or a theological “uber-class,” which “ordi- and not from a humanist standpoint (have you nary” Christians and pastors needed in order to really read the book?). And yet, I do have to ask understand the complex teachings of Scripture. you why you do not express a similar warning Reading your letter, and considering the deroga- against statism/socialism in your letter. After all tory emails that were written to my superiors and you seem to find it necessary to point out several colleagues by your like-minded friends, without times that you are not of the socialist persuasion. including me in the discussion, in reaction to my Help me understand how your own statist view, little book review, I have to admit that it certainly for which at no point you provide a coherent bib- feels like the mindset I just described. It appears lical defense, is not—to put it again in your own that a difference of opinion—especially pub- words—“another instance of the fallacy of syn- licly—is not taken well by proponents of your thesis thinking, in which secular humanist views persuasion. are melded with biblical concepts into a mixture In regards to the content of your letter, I have of iron and clay?” to admit that I was taken aback by the incoher- It seems to me that your entire letter seeks to ence of your argument and your almost disingen- build a strawman argument, with secular “rob- uous misrepresentations of Dr. North’s and my ber-baron-capitalism” on one side and an infal- own views. To give you an example, your claim lible “oh-so-compassionate and selfless” govern- that we were against taxes and government alto- ment on the other. Then you attack this made-up,
Pro Rege—March 2018 35 quasi-capitalist position and immediately claim ernments and dictatorships throughout history victory. In agreement, I do not like the straw- has always been, “We know what is good for you.” man-capitalism that you describe, but the utopian You seem to make the opposite case, that the free statism/socialism that you present as a solution market view with a very limited government is cannot exist as it is in stark conflict with human prone to oppression and tyranny. Accordingly, nature. Fallen man will not suddenly become you write, “It has been said of some of the repres- perfect and selfless as soon as he becomes a gov- sive anti-democratic dictatorships which imposed ernment redistributor of other people’s wealth. If free-market ideology while engaged in brutality you give fallen humans unbridled power of the against unions or others who protested the ac- sword, they will abuse it every time. Statism and tions of the government, that people had to be socialism were never about compassion for the imprisoned so that the market could be free.” Do poor but about power for the elite and bureau- you understand the self-defeating nature of your crats, who want to control every area of people’s own argument here? Take note how your state- lives—or to say it in Gideon J. Tucker’s famous ment begins! It begins with the words “repressive words, “No man’s life, liberty, or property is safe anti-democratic dictatorships.” Dictatorships are while the legislature is in session.” governments...the same institution that North Also, your use of isolated passages of Scripture and I say must be limited in its power and which (prooftexting?) is quite troubling to me. In typi- you want empowered to run society for us. cal liberal manner you keep calling for “sound As one reads your letter, you sound increas- exegesis,” but you do not provide any—even re- ingly hostile to wealthy/productive people. At motely sound—biblical exegesis yourself. In fact, some point you write “[Y]ou suggest that com- you seem to quote Kuyper more than Scripture, passion for the poor and distribution of funds and even then, you are more trying to interpret should be voluntary. Unfortunately, this is not his views in your favor than actually quote him. what we find with the massively wealthy— You use Scripture where it fits your argument they do not support the poor.” May I ask how but revert to lofty philosophical jargon and ap- you justify such a blank statement? Is there any peal to emotion where Scripture does not support sound data to back up such a conclusion, or is your views—when you repeatedly and in quite this just another speculation on your behalf? dramatic fashion refer to the plight of the poor, Furthermore, I wonder why the default mode in seeking to make your case for big government by your circles seems to be to call on Caesar to help appealing to the readers’ emotions. Furthermore, the poor and not to call the church to pick up her you use Romans 13:4 to make the case for exten- God-ordained diaconal duty. I think this is quite sive government responsibility as government’s telling. God calls us, as Christians, to care for the being “God’s minister to you for good” while not poor. He does not call us to call on the government allowing the rest of the passage to explain just to care for the poor. As one reads your letter, one what precisely this “good” is—only because it cannot help but observe that you revert more and does not seem to fit your argument. That is not more into a language of class warfare with “the exegesis but eisegesis—you are trying to force (evil) wealthy” on one side and “the (good) poor” your own preferences unto the text of Scripture. on the other. This is, of course, a false dichotomy Thereby you are neglecting a fundamental prin- and seeks to stir up emotions rather than state ciple of Reformed biblical interpretation, namely facts. Such an emotionalized argument builds on to let Scripture interpret Scripture. It is this very a breach of the Tenth Commandment and seeks passage (Romans 13) that explains what this to stir people’s emotions against a group of peo- “good” is, but you fill the term with your own ple based on their income and not based on their preferences. If you want to allow a government to moral quality. This strategy is highly divisive and extend its power to whatever government thinks wrong. is “good,” you have clearly opened the door to all In your letter you continuously mention the sorts of tyranny. The argument of tyrannical gov- names of your favorite scholars and criticize me
36 Pro Rege—March 2018 for not mentioning them. This is a rather strange I am always stunned that as some colleagues criticism since I was reviewing a book by Gary in academia seem to be more than willing to ac- North. Why would I then mention Goudzwaard, cept grants, donations, and salaries from capital- Skillen, Storkey, and others? I like much of Dr. ist donors and parents, while at the same time Goudzwaard’s criticism of Marxism in his 1972 they try to indoctrinate the very same capitalists’ ICS lectures, but these men are not the ones I children with statist and socialist ideas—espe- would go to for sound biblical economic solu- cially those from biblically conservative families. tions. Also, since you are complaining about my That, to me, is the peak of hypocrisy and dis- ignoring them, let me ask you why these and honesty. It has become so en vogue to push so- other like-minded thinkers have never (at least to cialism and other liberal causes in academia that my knowledge) published an objection to Gary not being inclined to do such often means not to North’s extensive publications on the topic of be taken seriously as an academic. Everyone, it biblical economics? North has published a com- seems, who dares to object will be shouted down, prehensive economic commentary on the Bible, intimidated, and slandered. I learned that again which is available free of charge on the internet. with my short book review in Pro Rege, and yet I He has been criticizing these men’s economic ap- will not be intimidated. proach in print for over 50 years. Where is the In closing, I would like to leave you with my response? I am not aware of any, but I might be most important appeal. Critical to our families, wrong. churches, schools, and cherished institutions is Let me unequivocally express that I will con- the fact that our Reformed heritage, which stems tinue to teach my students whatever approach I from an unwavering faithfulness to the Word find in God’s Word. At the end of the day it is of God, must be renewed in every generation. not Kuyper, Dooyeweerd, or North that we will Constantly, we must battle against compromise all be accountable to but to the God of the Bible. in regards to our historic faith, lest liberalism Over the years it has become clear to me with- creep in, which, unabated will always end in out a shadow of a doubt that the Bible teaches apostasy in the next generation. Our very college a very limited role of civil government (Rom. is named after the great Dutch synod of 1618, 13:1-7 etc.) and a strong protection of private when our Christian ancestors valiantly stood property (Ex. 20:15, Matt. 20:15, Acts 5:4 etc.). against the theological errors of their day. Four Furthermore, I do believe in the validity of tax- hundred years later, the battle has remained un- es as long as they are under 10 percent (1 Sam. changed for us. 8:10, 14) and as long as they are used for tasks Thank you again, for interacting with me assigned to the civil government in God’s Word. through Pro Rege. I am afraid that this exchange Therefore, whatever civil government is autho- could easily develop into an endless back-and- rized to take according to God’s Word is not theft forth between us. Therefore, in case you insist and whatever civil government is authorized and on continuing this exchange, I would be open to called to do according to God’s Word is not sin- a friendly formal debate with you on our cam- ful intrusion. My question for you would be this: pus if a sponsor for such a debate can be found. can the government ever steal, or is this by your Whatever disagreements you might have with definition of government impossible because it is, Dr. North, I encourage you to take up with him. well,…the government? In that case we will have Considering that we are talking only about a to change the commandment from “Thou shalt simple book review, we have already invested a not steal” to “Thou shalt not steal—with the ex- lot of time and words. ception of government” or “Thou shalt not steal Every blessing! —except by majority vote.” Rev. Sacha Walicord, Ph.D.
Pro Rege—March 2018 37 BOOK REVIEWS
The Lost World of the Israelite Conquest.John H. Walton and J. Harvey Walton. Downer’s Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press Academic, 2017. 288pp. ISBN: 978-0830851843. Reviewed by Justin Bailey, Assistant Professor of Theology, Dordt College.
John Walton’s first two “Lost World” books destroy” instead of “remove from use.” aimed to illuminate the opening chapters of The authors argue that what is actually the Bible. Convinced that the rich imaginative happening in the Canaanite conquest narratives universe of the biblical writers is often occluded recapitulates the creation account in Genesis: in contemporary debates about human origins, the establishment of cosmos from chaos, the Walton sought to supply the “ancient cognitive institution of order in a non-ordered realm, and environment” that gets lost in translation. Both the clearing of a space in which God can dwell books were popular and provocative, challenging with his people. In other words, the Waltons modern assumptions about the Genesis account do not attempt to construct an apology for the as well as the larger project of Old Testament conquest so much as situate it within its ancient interpretation. Walton’s burden is to remind context. The authors argue that portrayals of the modern readers that the strangeness of Scripture Canaanites fit an ancient trope, borne out by demands our respect. His careful work with other sources, that of the “invincible barbarians” Ancient Near Eastern sources often reveals the who must be expelled. This is a literary device vast distance between the biblical text and our used to demonstrate that the land is not procured modern outlook, even as it seeks to build bridges by the might of the Israelites alone, but by divine for our understanding. assistance. The need to justify the conquest of the For this third book in what has become Israelites, they point out, is not felt by the ancient an unintended “Lost World” series, J. Harvey author: “The Canaanites are being destroyed Walton (son of John Walton) takes aim at the by Yahweh because that is always the destiny Israelite conquest of Canaan, as described in the of invincible barbarians” (147). Thus readings biblical book of Joshua, with the elder Walton of the conquest as commensurate to Canaanite in a consulting and editorial role. The authors’ evil miss the point just as much as readings that basic argument is that modern interpreters have paint the conquest as genocide. Both are poor misunderstood and misapplied these texts in interpretations of what is actually going on in the Joshua. This is the case for cultured despisers of book of Joshua. religion, who condemn the conquest as genocide, Although Israel’s compliance with the kherem as well as for Christian apologists, who legitimize command did involve military violence, the the conquest as divine judgment. The interpretive authors argue that the concept is neither implicitly failure, the authors opine, is multi-dimensional. nor comprehensively destructive. Understood Lacking a proper picture of what the Bible is (an in context, it has to do with the clarifying of ancient document), we adjudicate the text by covenantal identity: its purpose was to “forfeit modern conceptions of progress and goodness. the right to administer the territory and instead Ignoring the literary intent of Canaanite depiction, turn the site over to the deity for the deity’s we judge the Canaanites as “doomed for their sin.” own use” (240). Thus the modern application Lacking historical appreciation of ancient conquest of this has “nothing to do with killing people,” narratives, we miss the literary and theological for in the new covenant, “the element of land is significance of Joshua’s genre. Lacking a nuanced recapitulated by the believers themselves” (239- conceptualization of the key word kherem (Joshua 240). In the final chapter, the authors seek to 2:10, 6:17-18), we mistranslate it as “utterly draw a parallel between the kherem command and
38 Pro Rege—March 2018 the mortification passages in the New Testament assumptions and follows the same basic method. (Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 5:24, Colossians 3:8- Structurally, it organizes its argument around 9). To practice kherem in a new covenant context twenty-one propositions, each of which stands as means to de-center our prior identities and to the title of short chapters that cumulatively make re-center on the covenant community in Christ. the case. This can be a benefit to most readers: Rather than taking over territory or pronouncing the sometimes dense material is mitigated by the judgment on those outside our covenantal efficiency of each chapter’s aim. The argument, community, Christians kherem themselves, “not thus constructed, is relatively easy to follow. as a punishment but to make space for God to At the same time, this third volume is also carry out his purposes through their lives” (252). unlike the earlier volumes: largely penned by the I take the positive contributions of this younger Walton, the prose is less practiced, and volume to be twofold. First, the authors provide a this less-practiced prose sometimes pulls the book plausible alternative for kherem that is worthy of towards overly ambitious pronouncements. That, consideration. Here, kherem signifies the removal together with the elder Walton’s interpretive of Canaanite identities from use in the land so minimalism, results in a reading of the conquest that the land and the people in the land may that is simultaneously spare in its interpretations be co-identified with Yahweh. In the authors’ of particular texts and provocative in its larger assessment, this process includes not just military interpretive project. conquest but also conversion (e.g. Rahab is an Indeed, what makes the volume most example of kherem, not an exception to it). potentially problematic is not the revisionary Second, the authors illuminate the conquest approach to the Israelite conquest but the narratives by placing them alongside other methodological denials that are made along ancient conquest accounts. To call descriptions of the way. The authors take aim at many targets the conquest “hyperbolic” is not exactly accurate, tangential to their task, such as Christopher since these narratives belong to a specific ancient Wright’s missiology (Israel is not “expected to genre that seeks a particular perlocutionary effect. bring the nations into the covenant” [75]), Walt The recognition of these contexts give coherence Kaiser’s principlizing hermeneutics (principles to the conquest accounts so that we are able to are extracted from their context so as to become appreciate the literary and theological significance “essentially arbitrary” [95]), and any number of of what is being narrated in Joshua, rather than attempts to derive ethics from Scripture (God’s starting with questions that are foreign to the text. purpose in giving us Scripture “does not include Nevertheless, many readers may feel that the teaching us to be moral”[98]). authors’ systematic dismantling of the traditional With chapters as short and pithy as they are, interpretation of the conquest is strained. The these dismissals cannot help but resemble straw Waltons argue that depictions of Canaanite men. The authors seem to indicate that most evil are intended to critique Israel rather than attempts to move from the Bible to theology condemn the Canaanites, and they claim that are misguided, even as they advance their own the conquest narratives are concerned with proposal in the book’s final chapter, an attempt driving out the forces of chaos and establishing that in practice is difficult to distinguish from any cosmological order rather than with judging number of hermeneutical approaches on offer sin. Yet, in both cases, it is difficult to see why it (including Kaiser’s!). cannot be all of the above. That the authors are Indeed, the desire to distance their approach accurate in what they affirm does not necessarily from moralism leads to some strange conclusions, rule out what they deny. such as this: “We must not conflate the Bible’s As the work of two authors, The Lost World status and function as Scripture with its status of the Israelite Conquest is both like and unlike and function as literature. Providing us with the earlier two “Lost World” volumes by John moral knowledge is not its purpose as Scripture; Walton. It is built on the same interpretive consequently, any moral knowledge we can derive
Pro Rege—March 2018 39 from it does not carry the authority of Scripture, covenant reveal something about the character of but rather only the authority of human wisdom” the Creator and the grooves of creation? Related (100). I am simply not sure how to understand to this is the authors’ repeated insistence that the statements like this. That divinely-inspired Canaanites cannot be depicted as guilty since moral direction can and should be derived from they are not in covenantal relationship with Scripture is the testimony of the Great Tradition Yahweh. Does not Yahweh’s sovereignty extend to and, more notably, of Scripture itself (2 Timothy the nations? Shall not the judge of all the earth 3:16). In the authors’ effort to ensure that we do what is right by the Canaanites, just as surely mind the gap between the ancient context and as by the inhabitants of Sodom (Genesis 18:25)? our own, I worry that they are in danger of This may not be an immediate concern of the leaving us with Lessing’s “ugly ditch” between world of the text, but isn’t it a concern we must history and faith. address as we live in front of the text? And surely Perhaps the difficulties I found with the larger canonical context has something to the volume may be no more than those of say on God’s relationship with the nations, the a theologian wanting to bring canonical accountability and guilt of all humanity, and the theology to bear on biblical specialists who are general contours of God’s design for flourishing. zealous for close readings of particular texts. These canonical dimensions do not replace the But hard disjunctions seem methodologically meaning of ancient texts in their context, but commonplace throughout this volume. We are they do fill them in sometimes surprising ways. given a picture of striking discontinuity between In the end, this volume advances the the testaments, between holiness and morality, conversation on the conquest narratives in some and between creation and covenant. On the last important ways. As a part of the Waltons’ larger pair, the authors write, “When the Israelites are project in restoring lost worlds of meaning, it is unfaithful to the Torah, they are not breaking a gift to interpreters. The question is whether the God’s universal moral law; they are breaking the methodological underpinnings of their approach covenant” (103). Why not both? Does not the can sustain the weight placed upon them.
The Disruption of Evangelicalism: The Age of Torrey, Mott, McPherson and Hammond.Treloar, Geoffrey R. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2017. 335 pp. ISBN: 978-0830825844. Reviewed by Keith Sewell, Emeritus Professor of History, Dordt College.
Covering the period between 1900 and 1940, following the high points of the nineteenth The Disruption of Evangelicalismis the fourth century and the post-1945 era of the Billy book in InterVarsity Press’ series titled “A History Graham Crusades. This period was marked of Evangelicalism: People, Movements, and Ideas by what Treloar labels as “disruption.” It was a in the English-Speaking World.” Once the series time when the previously unresolved problems ends with the eventual publication of the fifth within evangelicalism were not only not resolved volume, some will see the series as completing the but became more fully apparent. These include development in evangelical history-writing that evangelicalism’s inadequate ecclesiology, its began with George Marsden’s The Evangelical tendency towards cultural superficiality, and its Mind and the New School Presbyterian Experience intellectual deficiencies, all of which were already (1970). This book’s author, Geoffrey Treloar, is manifested in the nineteenth century and, in director of learning and teaching at the Australian the early decades of the twentieth century, came College of Theology, Sydney. He is an authority home to roost. on the historiography of the New Testament While not offering “potted biographies” as scholar Joseph Barber Lightfoot (1828-89). such, Treloar finds exemplars of these divergent In this fourth volume, Treloar’s subject is tendencies in the lives and work of Reuben A. English-speaking evangelicalism in the period Torrey (1856-1928), John R. Mott (1865-1955),
40 Pro Rege—March 2018 Aimee Semple McPherson (1890-1944) and be changed), “activism” (the energetic advocacy T.C. Hammond (1877-1961). The first three of the gospel), “Biblicism” (an emphatic are well known to many American evangelicals commitment to the Bible), and “crucicentrism” and well reflect the North American dominance (a strong emphasis on the sacrifice of Christ of evangelicalism worldwide in the twentieth on the cross). This formula guides Treloar also; century (17). Hammond is the odd one out, an however, recognising the disruptive stresses and Irishman who is among those responsible for strains impacting evangelicalism in this era, he the strongly protestant and Reformed character argues that the biblicist-crucicentric emphasis of the Anglican Diocese of Sydney in Australia became more dominant in the early twentieth (199-200). century (6-7, 192, 201, 226). The three North Americans all share with Of course, the deeper problem was that the Hammond an important quality: they all over-emphasis of the “quadrilateral of priorities” in anticipate leaders and developments that were the life of evangelicalism left it deeply vulnerable to be prominent in the post-1945 era. R. A. on a variety of fronts. Evangelicalism lacked an Torrey looks back to Dwight L. Moody, but in integral basis. As I have argued elsewhere, this his global outreach he anticipates J. Edwin Orr left evangelicalism with serious cultural and and especially Billy Graham and his Evangelistic intellectual deficits. The resulting weaknesses Association, founded in 1950. Similarly, the were painfully exposed in the nineteenth century. fascinating figure of John Mott, the grand The higher critical biblical scholarship emanating strategist of global missions at the time of the from Germany, as well as a wholly naturalistic 1910 World Missionary Conference held in evolutionism, had presented evangelicalism with Edinburgh, can be seen as anticipating the phase challenges that it was ill equipped to surmount. All of the ecumenical movement that commenced too often, in attempting to face these challenges, with the World Council of Churches gathering at evangelicalism only ended up making faces at Amsterdam in 1948. them. Even more prescient is the controversial In this volume, Treloar ably describes an figure of Aimee Semple McPherson. As a evangelicalism past its peak influence (11), ill at celebrity-revivalist Pentecostal, McPherson was ease with political complexities (107-108), and, in many respects a harbinger of the charismatic, after 1919, confronting an “unreceptive culture” revivalist mega-church enterprises of the late in which it had little or no traction (229, 245). twentieth century. Treloar refers to her “creative One of the most important portions of use of modern communication technologies, Treloar’s work is where he breaks new ground in entertainment[,] and spectacle” (216). Acting paying close attention to evangelical responses on the assumption that music and technology to the First World War and its impact (117- are religiously neutral, this strain of revivalist 172). From 1914 and 1917, evangelicals proved evangelicalism has promoted mega-churches to be remarkably susceptible to pro-war state whose apparent success is actually attributable propaganda. Indeed, the level of evangelical to their aping of contemporary pop-culture with cultural naivety could be stunning. Evangelicals its narcissistic mores. For the time being, their actually believed that the end of the Great War attendance figures are generally seen as indications would presage a great worldwide revival—an of success; yet they are not the solution to ever- expectation that was utterly unfounded and increasing secularisation but a mark of it, even as soon dashed. They seemed to have little insight they drain the life out of many a faltering local into the spiritually wasting impact of protracted congregation. battlefield carnage. If they had consulted the A mark of this entire series is its indebtedness autobiographical writings of Richard Baxter to the famous evangelical “quadrilateral of (1615-1691), they would have known better. priorities,” as defined by David Bebbington: The willingness of evangelicals to sign up to a “conversionism,” (the belief that lives need to “war for righteousness” and their all too frequent
Pro Rege—March 2018 41 acceptance of the supposedly “neutral” features of are left asking the following question: How contemporaneous western culture serve to raise different would it be if we were to abandon a confronting questions about the entire sequence. historiography of evangelicalism as here restricted One problem with this series, including by the reductionism implicit in the “Bebbington Treloar’s book, is that it is light on the overall quadrilateral” and re-write the story from the relationship of evangelicalism with its surrounding standpoint that all of life is to be lived Coram Deo, culture. Why? before the face of God? In other words, how would Arguably, the answer lies in the point of the structure of the narrative change if we were departure exhibited across the entire five volume to critically reassess the history of evangelicalism series. These volumes are written from within from a standpoint that acknowledges that Christ’s the perspective of evangelicalism itself. As a call to discipleship—“Follow Me”—knows consequence, the series tacitly assumes the validity no limits, no sacred / secular dichotomies or of the reductionism implicit in Bebbington’s intellectual boundaries, and includes every lawful “quadrilateral.” It views evangelicalism from calling and human activity? within and according to this frame of reference. If we were to take this step, we could acquire a To make the point in another way, this series sharper view of our history as the people of God is valuable in that it provides an insight into in the world, of our calling as we confront our how some evangelicals now view the history of current predicament, and of the challenges that evangelicalism on its own terms. will soon be upon us. That said, after reading this series, we
Calvin’s Political Theology and the Public Engagement of the Church: Christ’s Two Kingdoms.Tuininga, Matthew J. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017. 386 pp. ISBN: 978-1-107- 17143-5. Reviewed by Keith Sewell, Emeritus Professor of History, Dordt College.
Calvin’s Political Theology and the Public Aquinas. Tuininga’s work is that of a disciple of Engagement of the Church: Christ’s Two Kingdoms VanDrunen (viii, 19). is an important work. Matthew Tuininga is This book purports to be presenting Calvin Assistant Professor of Moral Theology at Calvin in his own terms and in his own context, but Theological Seminary. This book is not a “quick in reality it does something else—it presents read.” It requires a sustained effort across more Calvin in terms compatible with Tuininga’s than nine full chapters, and although Tuininga’s and VanDrunen’s commitment to their “two readers will learn much from him, they will need kingdoms” standpoint. In short, while Tuininga to study this work with every critical faculty keenly claims to be holding the Calvin texts and his latter- engaged and be fully alert to the fraught interplay day “two kingdoms” commitment apart (9), in between envisioning Calvin sympathetically in practice his “two kingdoms” commitment exerts his context, and using his work and reputation in a strong gravitational pull over his discussion of order to validate the “two kingdoms” thinking of the Calvin texts. The “two kingdoms” standpoint certain later reformed thinkers. does not necessarily presume to set aside Christ’s The current resurgence of “two kingdoms” kingship over all human culture. Rather, it thinking owes much to David VanDrunen’s A makes the distinction between the church as an Biblical Case for Natural Law (2006) and Natural institution, and the surrounding culture in which Law and the Two Kingdoms (2010). These works it is situated, so sharply that the terminology of confirm the continuing strength of scholasticism “two kingdoms” becomes a matter of course. As a in some circles. VanDrunen is the Robert B. consequence, it may be inferred, or even asserted, Strimple Professor of Systematic Theology at that the followers of Jesus Christ have and share Westminster Theological Seminary, Escondido, much in common with the thinking and conduct CA. VanDrunen’s early work was on Thomas of unbelievers.
42 Pro Rege—March 2018 Accordingly, while Tuininga does not set the advocacy of this “two kingdoms” doctrine out to defend liberal democracy, he is keen until his conclusion (355-78), his commitment to demonstrate how, what he repeatedly calls to this doctrine greatly colors his presentation of “Calvin’s two kingdoms theology,” offers Calvin, to such an extent that he arguably over- Christians a way of understanding how they interprets Calvin in his own favor. This question might participate in contemporary liberal must be asked: if we had never previously democracies that they do not control (3-5, 322). encountered the “two kingdoms” doctrine at all To this end, Tuininga provides his readers with a but had diligently studied the aforementioned full overview of Calvin’s reformation setting (23- passages from Calvin’s commentaries, would we 60), and the attempted reformation in France (61- have found that doctrine to be as ubiquitous in 91), as prelude to a detailed discussion of Calvin’s Calvin as does Tuininga? The point here is not teachings on the kingdom of Christ, its spiritual that the use of this term is always verboten, but character, covenant and law, the responsibilities that it is overemployed by Tuininga in order to of the civil magistrate, and resistance to tyranny support his thesis. (92-354). This is the backbone of the book, and At the same time it should be acknowledged the reader will find here much that is instructive that Calvin’s thought was not free from pro- and worthy of further reflection. blematic Hellenistic tendencies. His anthropology At the same time, he or she will need to exhibited Platonic or Neo-Platonic influences be fully alert. A key difficulty is that Tuininga (151-7). He had his own notion of “natural law” repeatedly insists on finding Calvin’s “two (369-72), a pliable concept that may function kingdoms theology” in passages where Calvin within a scholastic-dualistic natural/supernatural does not use that terminology himself. The result or secular/sacred framework. The presence is misleading, and readers would be well advised of such tendencies, the legacy of centuries of to check passage after passage for themselves. Christian intellectual accommodation that the For example, Tuininga states that “Calvin’s two Reformation did not eradicate in an instant, kingdoms paradigm” pervades his discussion confirms the need to exercise caution when we of Micah 4:3 (178), but when we consult his interpret and appropriate Calvin’s writings. commentary on this—“the nations will beat Of course, Calvin wrote in the Latin and their swords into ploughshares”—passage, we French of his day, and some translators may be find that Calvin says “the scripture speaks of inclined to use “kingdoms” in the plural, where God’s kingdom in two respects,” but nowhere others might simply use the word “twofold.” The in this particular discussion does he use the latter can on occasions be overly stretched to term “two kingdoms.” Similarly, with respect to mean “two kingdoms.” In the Ford Lewis Battles Calvin’s exposition of Joseph’s policy in Egypt as edition of Calvin’s Institutes (1960), at Book presented in Genesis 47:22, Tuininga tells us that III.19.15, the section heading is given as “The “Here Calvin’s two kingdoms distinction guides Two Kingdoms.” However, this expression does his logic”; but again Calvin does not employ any not appear in the original as a heading or in the explicit “two kingdoms” language at this juncture text to which it refers. Calvin’s intention here is (315). Perhaps a further example will suffice. to stress the “twofold” governance to which man With regard to Calvin’s commentary on Romans is subject—“duplex in homine regimen.” In his 14:17—“the kingdom of God is not a matter translation of Book IV.20, Battles guides us well of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, by using the term “twofold” and does not employ peace and joy on the Holy Spirit”—Tuininga the term “two kingdoms.” Interpretation and insists that “Calvin’s two kingdoms distinction” inclination are in play at such points. For example, is evident (157), but again, the explicit use of a Elsie Anne McKee, in her fine translation of the “two kingdoms” wording is not to be found. 1541 French edition of the Institutes, (2009) uses In short, there is a serious problem here. the term “two kingdoms in people” at the start While Tuininga may present himself as leaving of chapter 16, while the original reads “deux
Pro Rege—March 2018 43 regimes en l’homme,” and not specifically “deux Kuyper (373, 375-6). However, while Tuininga royaumes.” is comfortable with the church as an institution That the kingdom has a “twofold” character, coming to visible and corporate expression, in the sense of having come but not yet being beyond the pale of the institutional church it is fully realised, is something to which Calvin often apparently only as “individual Christians” that refers, as Tuininga frequently observes (139, we are called to witness “to the righteousness of 179-81, 280, 358), but in Tuininga’s hands this the kingdom” (376). Presumably there is a place consideration is too readily utilized to support for the seminary. However, the Christian political his “two kingdoms” reading. By contrast, it is not organisation, or the Christian university, and irrelevant that half a century ago the American much more besides, are not in contemplation. scholar H. Harris Harbison, in some of the most There are issues here way beyond the scope of satisfying and stimulating paragraphs written in this review, but many will find this approach English on Calvin’s view of history (Christianity to be hopelessly inadequate in the face of the and History, 1964, 279-287), focused on increasingly strident neo-paganism evident across Calvin’s understanding of the kingdom of God the western world. without ever having recourse to “two kingdoms” In his final book (2003), Heiko A. Oberman terminology. lamented the baleful impact on Calvin studies While Tuininga tries to overcome the dualistic of those who oriented their research projects to tendency in “two kingdoms” thinking (1, 92, their latter-day theological agendas. He was right, 182, 356), it inevitably comes to expression. and it is also right for us to remind ourselves that He rightly draws attention to the distinction of the scriptures only ever speak of one kingdom of the church as an institution, and the church as God. the people of God, as also found in Abraham
44 Pro Rege—March 2018 Submissions We invite letters to the editor and articles, of between 2,500 and 8,000 words, double-spaced, using MLA or Chicago Style Manual documentation. Subjects should be approached from a Reformed Christian perspective and should treat issues, related to education, in the areas of theology, history, literature, the arts, the sciences, the social sciences, technology, and media. Please include a cover letter with your e-mail address and a self-addressed, stamped envelope. Send your submission to the following:
Pro Rege c/o Dr. Mary Dengler, Editor Dordt College 498 4th Ave. NE Sioux Center, Iowa 51250
Dordt College is a Christian liberal arts college in Sioux Center, Iowa, which believes that the Bible is the infallible and inspired Word of God and which bases the education it provides upon the Bible as it is explained in the Reformed creeds. Hence, the college confesses that our world from creation to consummation belongs to God, that Jesus Christ is the only way of salvation, and that true comfort and reliable strength can be had only from his Holy Spirit. Dordt College was established in 1955 and owes its continuing existence to a community of believers that is committed to supporting Christian schools from kindergarten through college. Believing in the Creator demands obedience to his principles in all of life: certainly in education but also in everything from art to zoology. The Dordt College community believes in the Word of God. God’s revelation in word and deed finds its root in Jesus Christ, who is both Savior from our sin and Lord over the heavens and the earth. The Bible reveals the way of salvation in Christ Jesus and requires faithful thanksgiving to him as the Lord of life, especially when exploring, coming to understand, and unfolding the diversity of creation. Dordt College, in its many departments and programs, celebrates that diversity and challenges students not merely to confess Christ with their mouth but to serve him with their lives. Empowered by the strength of his Spirit, Dordt College stands ready to meet the challenge of providing and developing serviceable insight for the people of God. Pro Rege
A quarterly faculty publication of Dordt College, Sioux Center, Iowa