Abraham Kuyper

At the end of Reinhold Niebuhr’s travels across Western Europe in 1947, he spent a week at the Ecumenical Institute, a facility near Geneva. He was hopeful of how this project would bless the church life of the world, and he offered observations about discussions there about communism, church-state relations, Christian political parties, and more.

After visiting Scotland, Reinhold Niebuhr traveled to the Netherlands and offered another correspondence that the journal published in April 1947.

“Letter from Holland,” by L.H. RuitenbergAugust 5, 1946 While North Americans, on being informed of the church situation in Holland,…

While I am in large agreement with Shadi Hamid’s essay, I find myself a bit underwhelmed for a few reasons.

Hopefully, with the latest edition of “Political Visions and Illusions,” David Koyzis’ work will no longer be hidden underneath a bushel, but instead, its brilliance will reach a wider audience.

Van Drunen’s Politics after Christendom doesn’t convincingly defend liberalism from a biblical perspective. Readers wanting a compelling Reformed defense of ordered liberty will have to keep waiting.

Abraham Kuyper unquestionably had his failures and his blind spots. But he also labored to find balanced and faithful Christian realist positions on international affairs. We would do well to imitate those principles today.

We have an introductory, if provisional, picture of anti-Revolutionary foreign policy and Abraham Kuyper’s platform coming into the highest political office in the Netherlands in the early twentieth century. How did this platform fair? What “necessary adjustments” (as Kuyper called them) did he need to make between his Calvinistic international theory and the actual work of foreign policy?

While much has been made of Abraham Kuyper’s Calvinistic contributions to domestic political theory, very little (in English) has been said of his foreign policy.