E-Book, Englisch, 240 Seiten
Bavinck / Sutanto / Eglinton Christianity and Science
1. Auflage 2023
ISBN: 978-1-4335-7923-3
Verlag: Crossway
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 0 - No protection
E-Book, Englisch, 240 Seiten
ISBN: 978-1-4335-7923-3
Verlag: Crossway
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 0 - No protection
Herman Bavinck (1854 - 1921) was a leading theologian in the modern Dutch Reformed tradition. He is the author of the magisterial four-volume Reformed Dogmatics.
Autoren/Hrsg.
Weitere Infos & Material
1
In recent years, an earnest and powerful striving to build science on the foundation of the Christian faith has been stirring. One can differ in appreciation of this fact, but its existence has risen far above all contradiction. The circle of those who are dissatisfied with the direction of leading contemporary science, in practice as in theory, is gradually increasing in size. There are many who desire something different, a different principle and a different method, for the practice of science.
There can also be no difference of opinion over the origin and character of this endeavor. For anyone who desires to see, it is clearly based on and directed by religious motivations. In the name of religion, for the sake of Christian truth, in order to bridge the chasm between the academy and [everyday] life, in the interest of the confession of the church, the scientific investigation of our time is judged in its principle, method, and purpose. Those who praise contemporary science cannot simply close their eyes to the religious character of this movement. Recently, Prof. Groenewegen of Leiden1 gave witness to this in a notable way:
The religious response has moved forward quietly, the public ecclesiastical-political response has followed. And now, finally, the scientific [community] must crown that effort, and, if possible, guard and confirm it. No one should underappreciate the original religious motivation of this powerful reactionary movement, which at times lends it a character worthy of praise.2
And so it is indeed. Christians, having gradually sunk into a deep sleep in the eighteenth century, suddenly experienced an awakening at the beginning of the [nineteenth] century, through which the Christian confessional and ecclesial consciousness was shaken out of its slumber. Looking around themselves, and discerning how much was neglected and taken for granted among them, the believers once again arose and set to work. In the circles of the Réveil,3 men devoted themselves mostly to evangelistic and philanthropic activities. The Secession4 took up the reformation of the church and restored it to the foundation of the confession. On political terrain, the battle was mostly focused on the [fight for] Christian primary and secondary schools [Christelijke volksschool]. And slowly, the impression that the banner of the gospel must also be displayed over the world of science began to spread. Under all manner of misunderstandings and scorn, Van Oosterzee5 took upon himself the defense of a science of faith. Chantepie de la Saussaye6 bravely and definitively set his ethical method against empiricism. From then on, the battle against unbelieving science has continued to occupy an ever-more-principled standpoint. The Reformed Churches [Gereformeerde Kerken]7 tasked the Theological School in Kampen8 with the duty of forming future ministers of the word through the scientific study of theology and the practical preparation for sacred ministry. The Free University of Amsterdam set as its goal the practice of science and the [provision of] education for all manner of callings in life, in accordance with Reformed principles. We are already so far advanced in our homeland that a bill for the recognition of special professorial chairs9 and the degrees [awarded by] private universities10 was submitted to the House of Representatives, and was accepted with 56 votes for and 41 votes against. However weak it may be, a revival of Christian science can be seen, and that fills the heart with hope for the future.
This phenomenon in our homeland is all the more remarkable and is gaining significance because it is not an isolated occurrence. Elsewhere, too, signs of such a scientific movement can be perceived. Namely, among Roman Christians, especially after the encyclical by Pope Leo XIII on August 4, 1879, recommended the study of Thomas, a zeal to practice science in accordance with his principles was awakened, the depth of which should put believing Protestants to shame. There are hardly any scientific subjects that do not include his skilled exponents and representatives. In foundational scholarly works and narrow, detailed research, the Roman foundation is applied to the entire terrain of science. Logic and psychology, metaphysics and theology, history and literature, jurisprudence and sociology are practiced in such a way by them that the opponent must reckon with their work. And although the antithesis [between Protestant and Roman Catholic], which is so clearly again manifested in the work of Denifle on Luther,11 should in no way be ignored or weakened, their [Catholics’] scientific studies can be consulted nevertheless with great profit by all who still stand on the foundation of the universal, indubitable Christian faith.
We may even go a step further and bring this resurgence of a Christian practice of science in connection with a succession of phenomena, all of which show that positivism’s days are numbered. The slogan “back to Kant” has lost its charm for many. The philosophy of Hume and Comte increasingly gives way to that of Leibniz and Hegel. Everywhere, there is a perceptible return from empiricism to idealism. Following the supreme rule of understanding, feeling has retaken its rights, theory makes way for life, and rationalism stands aside for the romantic. The mystical makes its entry into art. In natural science we behold a turnaround that had seemed impossible for decades. At that time [during the zenith of the enlightenment], materialism was held to be the highest wisdom, and the mechanistic explanation of the world was deemed the only scientific one. Now, we witness how many of the most exceptional naturalists are returning from mechanism to dynamism, from materialism to the energetic [explanation of the world], from causality to teleology, from atheism to theism. After the thirst for facts is initially quenched, hunger for the knowledge of the origin and goal, for the cause and essence of the things above, resurfaces.12
Naturally, this remarkable reversal in science also benefits religion. The time is not far behind us when natural science, history, and philosophy all alike questioned their reason for existence. For a few years, Haeckel13 believed that he had put [this questioning] to death in his The Riddle of the Universe,14 and that he had cleared up the dogmas of God, the soul, and immortality for good. But the reception of this work, which came from the scientific circles, shows that thought here had already turned in another direction. The metaphysical need lies too deep in human nature to be silenced in the long run. Not only is this recoupment—which people seek as religion in all manner of paths, in spiritism and theosophy, in humanitarianism and the idolization of culture, in Buddhism and Islam—a clear proof of the metaphysical’s indispensability, but there is in broad circles a desire to detect a more or less positive Christian faith. Humanity is tired of doubt and uncertainty. Even among modern theologians, men who insist on a confession and dogmatics, on ecclesial organization and liturgical unity, arise.15 Faith in such a highly self-conscious modern culture has been shaken. Exact science has not delivered what men like Renan had expected from it in their youthful hubris. And so, one returns to the formerly scorned religion, by no means always in true repentance but nevertheless in despondent doubt.
An era that manifests such signs is not unfavorable for the practice of science in a Christian spirit. It is thus important, for oneself and others, for friend and foe, to give a clearer account of what should be meant by such a practice of science. It cannot be done with the clichés of reactionary dogmatism. Whoever has a sense of the power of religious convictions, whoever knows the driving power of principles that take root in life and, with this, knows to point out the signs of times, cannot be guilty of underestimating such an earnest and powerful movement, much less of taking an indifferent attitude toward it. Believing and unbelieving, Christian and positivistic views of science stand diametrically opposed to each other. Compromise is not possible here; rather [there is] a duty to make a definite choice. However, to that end, a clearer understanding of the unique features of both views is an indispensable requirement.
1. Here Bavinck refers to Herman IJsbrand Groenewegen (1862–1930), professor of the philosophy of religion at the Remonstrant Seminary in Leiden.—Eds.
2. Herman Groenewegen, “Wetenschap of dogmatisme,” Theologisch tijdschrift 37 (1903): 393. [Unless otherwise indicated, translations are our own.—Eds.]
3. The Réveil was a nineteenth-century Protestant revival movement that began in Switzerland and spread into France, Germany, and the Netherlands.—Eds.
