Groen van Prinsterer (1801–1876) se Christelik-historiese beskouing is gekenmerk deur ’n
tweeledige waardering vir die Godsopenbaring soos dit neerslag vind in die Skrif aan die een
kant en in die geskiedenis aan die ander kant. Gegewe die feit dat sy openbaringsleer beduidend
begrond is deur die Gereformeerde belydenisskrifte, beoog hierdie artikel om vir die eerste
keer sy beskouing van die rol en aard van algemene openbaring – soos beskryf in artikel 2
van die Nederlandse Geloofsbelydenis – te ondersoek en in verband te bring met sy Christelikhistorisme.
In navolging van veral die Réveil sowel as die Historische Rechtsschule van
Friedrich Carl von Savigny (1779–1861) verwerp hy die idee van ’n normatiewe natuurreg en
beskou hy daarteenoor die goddelike openbaring as te vinde in die besondere openbaring van
die Bybel, sowel as in die geskiedenis as algemene openbaring. Hierdie historiese algemene
openbaring behoort volgens Groen egter beskou te word in die lig van die besondere openbaring,
en met name spesifiek die openbaring van Jesus Christus se verlossingswerk en die
verheerliking van Sy heerskappy as die oorhoofse doel van die wêreldgeskiedenis. Alhoewel
Groen nie die rede of sintuie as middels tot die verkryging van kennis as sodanig verwerp nie,
verwerp hy wel die idee dat die mens by wyse van waarnemings of rasionele konstruksies, los
van die verligting van die goddelike openbaring, kernwaarhede aangaande die werklikheid
kan bekom. In hierdie opsig was sy beskouing van die algemene openbaring beduidend anders
as dié van sy Neo-Calvinistiese opvolgers Abraham Kuyper (1837–1920) en Herman Bavinck
(1854–1921).
Guillaume Groen van Prinsterer (1801–1876) was a Dutch statesman and Christian political
thinker known for his dedication to conservative principles. From a Reformed perspective, he
opposed the liberalisation of Dutch society during the 19th century, which was influenced
by the Enlightenment. Groen believed that the liberal ideas of the French Enlightenment had
a negative impact on Dutch society. He was born during the establishment of the Batavian
Republic, a political development that brought French Revolutionary ideas to the Netherlands.
Groen distanced himself from his liberal upbringing and aligned with the conservative Réveil
movement, which rejected Enlightenment philosophy in favour of a romantic appreciation
for history. His understanding of history played a significant role in his self-identification
as a Christian-historical Calvinist. As leader of the confessional wing of the Réveil, Groen
emphasised the normative character of the Reformed confessions, particularly the Three Forms
of Unity, consisting of the Belgic Confession of Faith, the Heidelberg Catechism, and the
Canons of Dort. Groen articulated his understanding of divine revelation within the framework
of these confessions, rejecting the idea that the Bible is a human creation and that reason should
serve as the measure of truth. He held a high regard for the doctrine of revelation as outlined
in the Belgic Confession of Faith and aligned his Christian-historical perspective with the
Reformed confessions.
Groen sees history as the manifestation of the struggle between the Kingdom of Christ and the
Kingdom of evil. He emphasises the role of ideas as the driving force behind history and views
the Calvinist faith as foundational to the Dutch state. He considers history to be a means of
divine revelation and rejects revolutionary or Enlightenment ideals as at odds with the lessons
and purpose of history. Groen’s historical narratives are Christocentric and he believes that
adherence to God’s revelation is the only true practice. He argues against the secularisation of
historiography and sees the true meaning and value of history in its God-given nature. The
Revolution, for him, represents an anti-Christian rejection of historical rights and relationships
grounded in the divine order. His Christian epistemology is rooted in the divine revelation in
contradistinction to rationalism or empiricism. He argues that true wisdom and truth in religion,
morality, and justice can be found only in the submission of heart and mind to the revelation
of the Gospel. This revelational epistemology is rooted in his embrace of the Christian-historical
perspective, which views history as confirming the truths of the Bible. He believes that the
Bible is the ultimate standard by which all knowledge and theories should be judged. Groen
opposes the epistemological revolution that rejects the sovereignty and authority of God’s
revelation, and he views this as lying at the very heart of political revolutions like the French
Revolution. According to Groen, such revolutions lead to the overthrow of true principles of
law and justice and result in tyranny.
From his Christian-historical perspective, Groen criticises the idea of natural theology commonly
associated with Thomas Aquinas and affirmed by the Council of Trent. He rejects the notion
that individuals can attain religious and moral truths through their own efforts, arguing that
fallen human nature is inherently hostile towards God. Groen also dismisses the idea of deriving
natural law from empirical observations interpreted through the correct use of reason.
He asserts that the wisdom of pre-Christian philosophers was derived from traditional beliefs
and that their highest wisdom consisted of distinguishing revealed truths from popular superstitions.
According to Groen, all religion is necessarily traditional, meaning that all people,
including ancient Greeks and Romans, descend from ancestors to whom the true Protoevangelium
was revealed. He suggests that their knowledge and wisdom are indebted to the
remnants of this revelation transmitted through generations. Groen notes that the unifying
factors in all religions are due to their shared origins, although he attributes the emergence
of non-Christian religions to the distortion of original divine truths by sinful human nature.
Groen extends the impact of the distortion of historical divine revelation beyond religious and
moral life, asserting that it affects every aspect of human existence. He claims that true justice
is grounded in God’s nature and that forsaking God means forsaking justice. For Groen, atheists
recognise only subjective natural impulses, no objective natural law. He argues that a supreme
source of justice, a universal law of justice and love, and a legislator who issues and enforces
it must be postulated to establish the foundations of rights, duties and laws. According to Groen,
conscience and moral sense are feeble echoes of God’s law, and when this law is set aside, the
fulfilment of duty dissolves into pride and self-interest.
In his critique of natural law, Groen purposefully distances himself from the rationalism and
empiricism associated with Thomism and Enlightenment philosophers. He believes that the Bible
is necessary to gain a genuine understanding of natural revelation, asserting that it enlightens,
corrects, improves and adjusts reason. Groen emphasises that reason should yield to Revelation
because all of Scripture is inspired by God while the natural man does not understand the things
of the Spirit of God.
Groen does acknowledge the epistemological role of general or natural revelation, but he does
not identify it with a natural law principle epistemically grounded in rational thought or
empirical observations. He appeals the Historische Rechtsschule of German jurist Friedrich
Carl von Savigny, who argues that the organic development of a particular community is
historically reflected in its unique customs, laws and relationships. Von Savigny asserts that
any legislation should rely primarily on the historical rights and relationships involved and
Groen highlights these ideas about the historical origin of law in particular. Nonetheless, Groen
reinterprets historicism within a Calvinistic framework. He believes historical rights should be
respected not only because they are manifestations of divine providence but also because their
endurance indicates that they align with God’s purpose in history, specifically Christ’s triumph over evil. Groen completely distances himself from the idea that all historical developments
necessarily conform to God’s will. He sees the authority of history as intertwined with the
redemptive plan for the cosmos originating from the cosmological genesis in God’s design of
creation, and culminating in the cosmological telos in the glorification of Christ’s rule.
In this regard, Groen’s historicism is primarily epistemic rather than ethical. He rejected liberal
ideas as anti-historical or revolutionary, arguing that history itself testifies to the impracticality
of such principles.
At the heart of Groen’s Christian-historical philosophy therefore lies the belief that true
wisdom, justice and morality are exclusively rooted in divine revelation, primarily in the Bible
and secondarily in history interpreted in light of this revelation. As a leading figure in the
confessional wing of the Réveil, Groen highly valued the doctrine of revelation as outlined in the Belgic Confession of Faith and uniquely connected general revelation to the historical
aspect of his Christian historicism.
While Groen did not reject reason or the senses as means of acquiring knowledge, he rejected
the idea that humans can obtain core truths about reality through observations or rational
constructions alone, apart from the enlightenment of divine revelation. In his epistemological
framework, truths can be attained only when there remains at least some residue of the original
divine revelation that can serve as a framework for interpreting reality through reason and the
senses. As this framework is transmitted through tradition, he viewed true knowledge of
general principles as fundamentally historical.
In terms of his understanding of general revelation, Groen’s perspective differed significantly
from his Neo-Calvinist successors Kuyper and Bavinck, who considered natural revelation,
in comparison with special revelation, as more universal and apparent. While Kuyper and
Bavinck regarded natural revelation discovered through the theologia naturalis as the
necessary epistemological framework for receiving special revelation, Groen connected
general revelation with the pedagogical nature of history as the long-term human experience
of a God-given reality illuminated by the special revelation in the Bible, rather than with natural
phenomena acquired through empirical or rational means. For Groen, unlike Bavinck and
Kuyper, general revelation cannot serve as the foundation of special revelation. As such,
in terms of their understanding of the role and nature of general revelation, Neo-Calvinism
represented a departure from Groen van Prinsterer’s Christian historicism.
In line with Von Savigny’s idea that natural law, as interpreted through rational abstractions,
has a harmful and uprooting effect on society, Groen regarded history as a superior epistemological
manifestation of general revelation, since developments conflicting with God’s will are
ultimately condemned as unworkable and harmful through the course of history as sovereignly
governed by divine providence. Based on this, he promoted a historical understanding of what
he considered general truths, which emerge only in the context of divine revelation mediated
either through the Bible or tradition derived from earlier divine revelation. For Groen, history
ultimately functions pedagogically and normatively in the sense that theories contradicting
revelation ultimately inevitably fail, while developments aligned with the divine will as
revealed in the Bible yield positive fruits in the long run.
