Review of Theology and History in the Methodology of Herman Bavinck

Cameron D. Clausing. 2024. Theology and History in the Methodology of Herman Bavinck: Revelation, Confession, and Christian Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. xiv + 250 pages.

In the wake of James Eglinton’s work expositing Herman Bavinck’s organic motif (Eglinton 2012), a number of scholarly inquiries have sought to explain the ways in which the Dutch theologian exemplifies an “orthodox yet modern” (Brock 2020) spirit. In a recent monograph, Theology and History in the Methodology of Herman Bavinck, Cameron Clausing demonstrates how these instincts shape Bavinck’s approach to his construction of a theological system. In particular, the author investigates how the nineteenth century’s turn to history is incorporated into Bavinck’s methodology, showing that “while not embracing all of the relativizing implications of that movement, the role of history as a force which both shapes the present and allows for development into the future” influences his practice of theology (8). By examining the three principia of Bavinck’s methodology in light of his trinitarian theology, Theology and History in the Methodology of Herman Bavinck gives an incisive exposition of Bavinck as a constructive yet confessional theologian which serves as a welcome contribution to ongoing explorations into his orthodox and modern sensibilities.

After laying groundwork in chapters 1 and 2 on the nineteenth century’s historicist context and its effects on Bavinck’s approach to theology, Clausing examines each of the three principia of his methodology. The first, revelation, is addressed in chapter 3 which argues that Bavinck conceived of scripture as foundational for trinitarian theology even as revelation itself is trinitarian in its contours. Clausing shows this through highlighting how the Trinity and Christology mutually support each other as central dogmas in Bavinck’s system, how Bavinck opposes the severance of God’s revelatory words and acts in history, and how he views the missions of the Son and Spirt as communicative and thus revelatory.

The second of Bavinck’s three principia, confession, is surveyed in chapter 4. Clausing argues that for Bavinck, the self-authenticating scriptures possess a magisterial authority while the Spirit-led church possesses a ministerial authority. The chapter explores how Bavinck sought to apply his conviction that the two exist in an organic relationship, first in the context of his own Dutch Reformed heritage and second in his resourcing of the broader catholic tradition for his doctrine of the Trinity. He explains Bavinck’s conviction that while the theologian must build on the work of those who came before, it is nevertheless necessary to go “backwards to go forwards” (155).

The third and final principium, Christian consciousness, is exposited in chapter 5. This chapter describes Bavinck’s understanding that theological methodology must account for the individual theologian’s personality as affected by a particular historical situatedness. In Bavinck’s view, Clausing explains, because a particular theology can never be abstracted from finite, temporally and culturally grounded theologians, it is always open to future development.

Theology and History in the Methodology of Herman Bavinck exhibits careful precision in its exposition of historical movements and their effects on a particular dogmatician’s expansive theological system, and effectively brings it all together for the advancement of a cogent thesis. In exploring the nineteenth century’s turn to history and its effects on Bavinck’s construction of his dogmatic system, Clausing’s volume serves to cast his confessional and modern instincts in a clearer light. While he does not quickly gloss over seeming tensions in the Dutch theologian’s thought, he demonstrates that Bavinck nonetheless sought to both defend the church’s orthodox confession while also making use of the resources his historical moment offered. Indeed, Clausing effectively contributes new and important strokes to the portrait of Bavinck as a consciously orthodox Reformed theologian in and for the modern age. Whatever imperfections may have existed in Bavinck’s holding together of scripture and church authority, confessionalism and development, and orthodoxy and modernity, Clausing shows that his attempts to do so are deeply rooted within the core of his system.

To this end, Clausing’s volume is an important addition to scholarly inquiries into Bavinck’s own thought and to the task of theological methodology itself. With regard to the former, the reader is given insight into the pillars of Bavinck’s capacious system and thus a clearer picture of the components that give his project its very shape. Moreover, scholars would do well to take and read Theology and History in the Methodology of Herman Bavinck not simply for a deeper look into Bavinck’s methodology, but to inform their own approach to the task, to draw from the storehouses of his thought while also correcting, building, and developing the discipline for their own time. If Clausing’s analysis is correct, it seems this is a response Bavinck himself would have encouraged.

One question prompted by Clausing’s contribution is whether Bavinck’s approach to development from within a confessional context is itself continuous with his tradition. In other words, is his view of theology as a progressive science an “organic” unfolding of Reformed orthodoxy, or did Bavinck insert a foreign element into it? Though Clausing observes that the idea that semper reformanda might be applied to the church’s doctrine was unheard of prior to this historicist era (187–88), the question remains whether Bavinck’s methodological move is nonetheless a warranted building on the Reformed tradition or if it cuts against the grain of its essence. While a sufficient answer to this question may indeed be beyond the scope of Clausing’s project, further acknowledgment or exploration of this question could have supplemented the work’s presentation of Bavinck’s modern confessionalism.

On the whole, Clausing’s volume is an excellent and welcome resource. Insofar as it contributes to the portrait of Bavinck as a confessional and modern theologian, is informative for contemporary inquiries into theological methodology, and prompts questions for further scholarship, Theology and History in the Methodology of Herman Bavinck is a successful book that is to be commended to scholars and students of theology.