Geskiedenis, natuur en algemene openbaring in die Christelik-historiese denke van Groen van Prinsterer

Abstract

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.