University of Groningen
A Second Reformation? Krijger, Tom-Eric Marinus
IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below.
Document Version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Publication date: 2017
Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database
Citation for published version (APA):
Krijger, T-E. M. (2017). A Second Reformation? Liberal Protestantism in Dutch Religious, Social and Political Life, 1870-1940. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
Copyright
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).
Take-down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.
© T.E.M. Krijger, 2017
ISBN 978-90-367-9613-2 (paper version)
ISBN 978-90-367-9612-5 (electronic version)
NUR 686
Printing and cover: Ridderprint BV, Ridderkerk
Photographoncover:stained-glasswindowsinthebuildingoftheVarsseveldbranchofthe Nederlandsche
Protestantenbond/Vrijzinnige Geloofsgemeenschap NPB/VrijzinnigenNederland,madeontheoccasion
ofthe125thanniversaryofthisbranchin1998.Thewindowssymboliseharmony(left),liberty(centre) andlove(right).ThethenlogooftheNPB,stillusedbyVrijzinnigenNederlandin2017,depictsachalice
with a flame, and is engraved in the centre window.
Stained-glass windows designed and made by Marie-Huberte Meijer-Paumen. Photograph taken by Rinus Luijmes.
Photograph obtained through the kind offices of Tonnie Kraan, chairman of Vrijzinnigen Nederland in
Varsseveld.
It is not allowed to copy this photograph without the permission of Mrs Meijer-Paumen, Mr Luijmes and Mr Kraan.
A Second Reformation?
Liberal Protestantism in Dutch Religious, Social and Political Life,
1870-1940
Proefschrift
ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
op gezag van de
rector magnificus prof. dr. E. Sterken
en volgens besluit van het College voor Promoties. De openbare verdediging zal plaatsvinden op
donderdag 16 maart 2017 om 16.15 uur
door
Tom-Eric Marinus Krijger
geboren op 13 augustus 1987Promotores
Prof. dr. M.P.A. de Baar Prof. dr. H.M. Kirn
Beoordelingscommissie Prof. dr. H.S. Benjamins Prof. dr. E.G.E. van der Wall Prof. dr. D.J. Wolffram
to my parents
and to the memory of my grandparents
⁂
A minha pátria é a minha língua.
Fernando Pessoa
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS XI
ABBREVIATIONS AND NOTES TO READER XV
1. Abbreviations of Names of Organisations XV
2. Bibliographical Abbreviations XVI
3. Notes to Reader XVII
INTRODUCTION 1
1. Modernising Christianity and Christianising Modern Society 1
2. Terminology and Periodisation 6
3. Status Quaestionis: The Dutch Modernist Movement in Historiography 11
4. Methodology 22
5. A New Perspective 24
6. Defining ‘Bourgeois’ 29
7. ConceptualandSynopticOutline–PartI: The Dutch Modernism Movement 33
8. ConceptualandSynopticOutline–PartII: Modernising Christianity 35
9. ConceptualandSynopticOutline–PartIII: Liberal Protestant Discourse 36
10. ConceptualandSynopticOutline–PartIV: Christianising Modern Society 39
11. ConceptualandSynopticOutline–PartV: The International Context 40
– THE DUTCH MODERNIST MOVEMENT
PART I
411. THE GENESIS OF THE MODERNIST MOVEMENT 43
1. ‘The First Characterisation of Modernism’ 43
2. A Characterisation of Modernism 45
3. The Roots and Dual Character of Modernism 55
4. Modernism before the Founding of De Hervorming 61
2. THE MODERNIST ‘TRIBUNE’ 71
1. A Liberal Protestant ‘Gentleman’ 71
2. Nieuw Kerkelijk Weekblad 73
3. De Hervorming (I): Its Position within the Dutch Periodical Press 78
4. De Hervorming (II): From 1875 to 1934 87
5. The Agency of De Hervorming within the Modernist Movement 104
– MODERNISING CHRISTIANITY
PART II
1113. MODERNISM, ORTHODOXY AND SELF-IDENTIFICATION 113
1. ‘Chinese in Europe’ 113
2. The ‘True Heirs to the Reformation’ 116
3. Criticising the Modernist Identity 126
4. Revising the Modernist Identity 137
5. Laying Down the Modernist Identity 146
6. Identifying Modernism: An Evaluation 153
4. ENVISIONING THE FAITH COMMUNITY OF TOMORROW 157
1. “The Ape of God’s Kingdom” 157
2. The NPB and the Free Congregation as Alternatives to the Existing Churches 159
3. Disappointment and Renewed Appreciation for the Institution of the Church 170
4. Ecclesial Competition and Introversion 179
5. The Modernist Movement and Church Reforms: An Evaluation 192
5. LITTLERELIGIONS,‘LIBERAL’TENDENCIESANDATHEISM 199
1. Liberal Protestantism Broadened to ‘Free Religiosity’? 199
2. Modernism and the Rise of ‘a Hundred and One Prophets’ 200
3. Modernists and Adherents of Little Religions: Attraction or Repulsion? 209
4. Potential Fellow Reform Movements 216
5. Atheism and Nondenominationalism 224
6. The Modernist Movement and Other Alternatives to Orthodoxy: An Evaluation 233
– LIBERAL PROTESTANT DISCOURSE
PART III
2376. A SPIRITUAL ARISTOCRACY OF TUTORS 239
1. Stained-Glass Windows Exemplifying Liberal Protestant Discourse 239
2. Defining ‘Spiritual’, ‘Aristocrats’ and ‘Tutoring’ 241
3. LiberalProtestantDiscourseintheContextoftheChurch: TheCaseofLayPreaching 254
4. LiberalProtestantDiscourseintheContextofSociety: TheCaseofDistrictNursing 263
5. LiberalProtestantDiscourse: An Evaluation 270
– CHRISTIANISING MODERN SOCIETY
PART IV
2737. CONQUERING THE LOWER CLASSES 275
1. What Now? 275
2. The Social Question and the NPB 277
3. Views on Modernism in the Socialist Labour Movement 281
4. Views on Socialism in the Modernist Movement 292
5. The Modernist Movement and Socialism: An Evaluation 311
8. CAPTIVATING THE INTELLECTUAL CLASS 315
1. A Bourgeois Movement 315
2. Modernism in Intellectual Life 318
3. Modernist Responses to Intellectuals 328
4. The Modernist Movement and Contemporary Literature: An Evaluation 336
9. BECOMING A PILLARET 337
1. The Uncontrollable Need to Organise 337
2. Politically Liberal ‘by Nature’ 340
3. Non-Socialist Modernist Criticism on Political Liberalism 348
4. Modernist Group Formation within Political Liberalism 351
5. Dissatisfaction with ‘Neutrality’ (I): Public Education 360
6. Dissatisfaction with ‘Neutrality’ (II): Associations on a General Basis 368
8. Case II: Liberal Protestant Student and Youth Leagues 373
9. Case III: The Liberal Protestant Radio Broadcasting Corporation VPRO 378
10. The Modernist Movement and the Process of Pillarisation: An Evaluation 381
– THE INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT
PART V
38510. FIELDS RIPE FOR HARVEST? 387
1. “A Difficult Combination” 387
2. Foreign Mission as a ‘Problem’ 387
3. Discussing Foreign Mission 390
4. Liberal Protestant Discourse in a Missionary Context 400
5. The NPB in the Dutch East Indies 403
6. The Modernist Movement and Foreign Mission: An Evaluation 405
11. THE INTERNATIONAL LIBERAL PROTESTANT ‘FAMILY’ 409
1. “A Grand Global Movement” 409
2. Germany 413 3. France 421 4. Switzerland 425 5. Alsace-Lorraine 428 6. Hungary 431 7. Sweden 434 8. Estonia 437
9. Unitarians in the United Kingdom and the United States 438
10. Liberal Protestants Elsewhere 451
11. Means of Contact 458
12. Dutch Modernists and Like-Minded Groups Abroad: An Evaluation 467
CONCLUDING REMARKS 469
1. Recapitulating the History of the Modernist Movement 469
2. Interpreting Modernist History: The Significance of the NPB and De Hervorming 470
3. Evaluating the History of the Modernist Movement 472
4. The Modernist Paradox 481
5. Suggestions for Further Research 487
EPILOGUE 495
The Modernist Movement and Modern Theology: Two Different Stories? 495
APPENDICES 499
A. Fact Sheet of the Nieuw Kerkelijk Weekblad and De Hervorming 499
B. Numerical Development and List of Branches of the NPB 501
C. The Foreign Branches of the NPB 511
BIBLIOGRAPHY 517
1. Manuscripts 517
2. Databases 517
3. Full Titles of Consulted Periodically Published Sources 517
5. Other Literature 571
NEDERLANDSE SAMENVATTING (SUMMARY IN DUTCH) 633
Inleiding 633
Deel I: De moderne richting 635
Deel II: Het kerkelijk-godsdienstig leven 636
Deel III: Het vrijzinnig-protestantse discours 638
Deel IV: Het cultureel-maatschappelijk en staatkundig leven 639
Deel V: De internationale context 641
Slotbeschouwing 642
LIST OF NAMES 645
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Adissertationislike a jealous girlfriend: she constantly demands your full attention and wants youtoonlythinkabouther.1Shecannotstanditwhenyoucannotdevoteallyourtimetoherand makes you feel guilty when you want to do something that does not include her. I have been together with such a ‘girlfriend’ for several years now, but by writing these words, our ‘relationship’comestoanend.Notwithstandingherdemandingnature,Iwouldnotwanttohave missedourrelationship.Inthepastyears,breakingup with her has never been a thought worth considering.True,shehasbeenasourceofconcern,frustrationandsometimesevendespair,but ontheotherhand,shehasgivenmecountlessjoyfulmomentsandhasaccompaniedmefrommy firststepsingraduatelifeonwards.Whatismore,shehasbeenmyreasontobeingraduatelife inthefirstplace.Wehavebeenthroughalottogether:wehaveexperiencedupsanddowns,we havebeenfacedwithandhavemanagedtoovercomeseveralchallenges,andwehavetravelled to various libraries, archives, universities, meetings and conferences in the Netherlands and abroad. Having the opportunity to be in a relationship with her has been a privilege – after all, how many men can say that spending time with their ‘girlfriend’ has been their full time job while actually being paid for it for four years? The thousands of hours we spent together have helpedmetogrowasaresearcherandasaperson;duringthosehours,Ihavelearnedalotabout academiclifeandlifeingeneral.The language we usedinourrelationshiphasnotbeenDutch, a languagethatisverydeartome, butEnglish.As aresult, ourrelationshiphashelpedmeto improve my command of what has become the academic lingua franca in recent decades. Moreover, it has brought me into contact with people whom I might not have otherwise met. Togetherwith myfamilyandfriends,thoseindividualshave, allintheirownway,helpedme through graduate life. I feel extremely grateful for that and would like to thank them all for everything they have done for me.
Prof Mirjam de Baar (University of Groningen/Leiden University), who evinces that doing researchisnotjustaprofession, butavocation, hastrulybeena mentor.Ihavegreatly benefitedfromherexpertise,suggestionsandcomments.Herincredibleworkethic,theprecision withwhichshehasreadmychapters,herenthusiasmandmoralsupporthavenotonlyhelpedme tocompletemydissertation,buthavealsocompelledmyadmiration.ProfDeBaarhasgivenme allthefreedomtofollowmyownpathasaPhDstudent,towritearticlesnexttomydissertation, to teach some classes, to give lectures, and to be involved with administrative matters as PhD representative.Atthesametime,shehasalwaysbeentheretodiscussmywritings,togiveadvice andencouragement,andtoinquireabouthowIwasdoing.Thetrustshehasputinmefromthe very beginning has meant so much to me. I am grateful that Prof De Baar is my Doktormutter andIhopetocontinueourpleasantcooperationinthefuture.ProfHans-MartinKirn(Protestant Theological University, location Groningen) has read the chapters of my dissertation with the proverbialGründlichkeitandPünktlichkeitthatmakeGermanDoktorväterrenownedthroughout the world. I have learned a lot from the stimulating talks that I have had with him and Prof De Baar.IampleasedthatProfKirnhasbeenwillingtobetheco-supervisorofmydissertation.In
1 I would like to reassure those who might think that I am gender biased: the decisive reason to use the metaphor
of a girlfriend is that the gender of the noun ‘dissertation’ is feminine. By no means do I imply that jealousy is an intrinsically ‘feminine’ trait.
addition, I am pleased that Prof Ernestine van der Wall (Leiden University), Prof Dirk Jan Wolffram (University of Groningen) and Prof Rick Benjamins (University of Groningen/ ProtestantTheologicalUniversity,locationAmsterdam)havebeenwillingtobeinthereading committeeofmydissertation,criticallyevaluatingmyanalysisofliberalProtestanthistoryinthe Netherlands. Hartelijk dank voor alle inspanningen die u allen voor mij heeft willen leveren.
TheNederlandscheProtestantenbond,nowadayscalled‘VrijzinnigenNederland’,plays acentralroleinmydissertation.Thisassociationhasbeenwillingtograntme free access to its archives,givingmeallthefreedomtoconductmyresearch in my own way. The interest in my PhDresearchthatIhaveexperiencedinthecircleofVrijzinnigenNederlandhasbeengratifying. I would like to thank Wies Houweling and Elsbeth Goettsch in particular for their cooperative attitude and their hospitality at the national headquarters of Vrijzinnigen Nederland in Zwolle and Amersfoort, as well as for regularly inquiring about the progress of my research. Voor de
medewerking en blijken van interesse die ik vanuit haar midden heb mogen ontvangen, ben ik de vereniging ‘Vrijzinnigen Nederland’ zeer erkentelijk.
In early 2015, I had the privilege to spend several months at Harvard Divinity School inCambridge,Massachusetts,tomakein-depthstudyofUnitarianism.ProfDanielP.McKanan hasgivenmetheopportunitytotakesomeofhisclasses,andhasbeensokindtodiscussvarious bookswithmeinaprivatetutorialandtoreadtheintroductorychapter of my dissertation. Prof GaryL.Dorrienhasallowedmetofollowseveralofhisclassesaswell.BarbaraBoleshasbeen extremelyhelpfulinhelping me withallkindsofadministrativeaffairs.StuartLipskyhasbeen afriendlyandhospitablelandlord.Thankyouallforyoursupportandforgivingmeagreatand inspiring time in the USA, a period at which I look back nostalgically.
Duetoagenerousgrant,theStichting‘DeHonderdGuldenReis’,chairedbyProfJande BruijnandProfGeorgeHarinck(FreeUniversityAmsterdam),hasenabledmetomakethegreat leap across the Atlantic to Harvard University. In addition, the Scaliger Institute, located at Leiden University, awarded me a two-month fellowship in 2016 to consult several archives of liberaltheologiansatthespecialcollectionsdepartmentoftheuniversitylibraryinLeiden.Dank aan alle betrokkenen voor het vertrouwen dat u in mij als onderzoeker, door middel van uw toekenningvangeldelijkeondersteuningaanspecifiekeonderdelenvanmijnpromotieonderzoek, heeft uitgesproken.
ThefacultyofTheologyandReligiousStudiesattheUniversityofGroningenhasgiven me the opportunity to work on a fully-funded research project for four years. Particularly Prof Jacques van Ruiten, the director of the faculty Graduate School, has been a great help, being alwayswillingtolistenandthinkalong,regularlyinquiringabouttheprogressofmy research and my well-being, and making me feel appreciated as a PhD student. At the faculty, I have cooperated most closely with my colleagues in the department ‘Christianity and the History of Ideas’, some of whom I would like to thank specifically. Dr Erin Wilson has helped me by uttering reassuring words when I most needed them. Dr Mathilde van Dijk has been so kind to invitemeforadrinkanddinnerseveraltimes,andhasgivenmetheopportunitytoteachseveral classes.ProfHenkvandenBelthasalsoenabledmetogainteachingexperience,andhasbeen willingtoreadthefirstdraftofoneofmychapters.IntheformativephaseofmyPhDproject, ProfArieL.Molendijkencouragedmenottodoaprojectonneo-Calvinism,whichhadbeenthe focus of my two master theses, but instead on liberal Protestantism, which had so far received
considerably less historiographical attention. In consultation with him, I have chosen De
Hervorming as my main primary source. Furthermore, during the earliest stage of my PhD
project,hehasreadthreechaptersofthisdissertationinfirstdraft.Voordesteuneninteressedie ik in de faculteit en specifiek in de vakgroep heb mogen ervaren, zou ik allen willen bedanken.
Onenteringgraduatelife,liberal Protestants replaced neo-Calvinists as the focus of my research. Yet,I havenot lost sight of thelatter –on thecontrary even. By welcoming me in their midst, the editors of the Historisch Tijdschrift GKN, currently consisting of Dick Kaajan,
Frans Rozemond, Daan Schut and Dr Theo van Staalduine, have enabled me to continue to make study of neo-Calvinist history during the past years, in addition to my PhD research. I am pleased with the interest that they have shown in the progress of my dissertation. Bedankt,
‘mannenbroeders’, dat ik in jullie midden de ‘benjamin’ mag zijn.
Prof (Emer.) Henk Tieleman (Utrecht University), who has not been directly involved withmyproject,deservesawordofthanksforstimulatingmetostudymyresearchinterestsin depth,andforencouragingmetobecomeaPhDstudent.Prof(Emer.)EricCossee(Universityof Groningen), whom I admire for his erudition and pastoral character, has shown a great interest inmyresearch,andhasbeensokindtodiscussaspectsofthehistoryofliberalProtestantismwith memorethanonce.ThesamegoesforProfChristopherBegg(CatholicUniversityofAmerica), who is working on a biography of Dutch liberal Protestant theologian Abraham Kuenen. Dr Jan Wim Buisman (Leiden University) invited me to present part of my research during an undergraduatecoursein2016,givingmeawarmwelcomeinLeiden.ProfYmeKuiper(University ofGroningen)hasbeensokindtogivefeedbackonmysuggestiontocontinuemyresearchon the history of liberal Protestantism from an international perspective. Finally, I am grateful to Prof António Camões Gouveia (Nova University of Lisbon) for showing interest in another research proposal (not related to my dissertation in any way), for being willing to discuss this proposal with me in Lisbon, and as such for encouraging me to pursue a further career in academia. Dank u zeer, thank you very much, muito obrigado.
In the final stage of my PhD project, Joshua Dixon thoroughly proofread my entire dissertation, notwithstanding a short amount of time to do so. Thank youvery much for this.
Graduate life would not have been the same without the companionship and encouragementofmyfriendsandcolleagues,someofwhomIwouldliketomentioninparticular. EsthervanSteenbergen,EvertvandenBergandPieterHakvoort,withallofwhomIstudiedin UtrechtbeforemovingtoGroningen,regularlyinquiredabouthowIwasdoing.DrMichaëlGreen andDrAnne-SylvieBoisliveauhelpedmetofindmywayatthefacultyduringmyfirstyearasa PhD student. Dr Karin Neutel, whose astonishing command of English makes even the Queen jealous,hasnotonlybeenanepitomeofbrilliance,butalsoagreatfriendwithabigheart.Henk vanPutten,whoarguablyisthe‘mainstay’ofthefaculty,hasinitiatedmeintoGroningenlunch rituals and has always been willing to discuss both trivial and more serious matters with me. Finally, thanks to several warm-blooded Southern Europeans, the sun was always shining in theDutch‘Arctic’North,evenduringthemanycloudyandrainydays.LiaNunes,whowalked straightoutofaPortuguesetelenovela,unexpectedlydroppedbymorethananyoneelse.Luisa Lesage Gárriga fortunately moved just in time from Málaga to Groningen to jump on my
bagagedrager,andhaskindlyofferedtoreadtheintroductorychapterofmydissertation.Anna Cabanel is the answer to the question of why I am Francophile, and has joined me for a ‘tour
gastronomique de Groningue’ that was absolument génial and formidable. Dr Joana Serrado,
who walked into my life as a colleague, but quickly became so much more, never ceased to showhowmuchshecaresaboutmeandhowbigherheartofgoldis.Shehashelpedmewithher intelligence, kind-heartednessandgenerosityinmanyways–celebratinggoodtimeswithme, comfortingmeduringbadtimes,stimulatingmetopursuemydreams,convincingmethateven someone with a Calvinist work ethic is allowed to take an evening off once in a while, and turning Portugal into my second home. Bedankt, spasibo, muchas gracias, merci beaucoup,
muito obrigado!
I owe it to the people who have known me since my birth to mention them last. My sister Kim, accompanied by her husband Hans during the last stage ofmyPhDresearch,has always been shown to care about her little brother, often inquiring about how I was doing and texting me kind words. Though living in the south of the Netherlands,shewastherefore‘near’ meinthe‘highNorth’nonetheless.Myparentshavealwayssupportedmeineverything I have done, and have encouraged me to pursue my interests. I cannot thank them enough for the upbringing,loveandopportunitiestheyhavegivenme,forthevaluesandprinciplesoflifethey have instilled in me, and for always being there for me. My father René has not only given me thesurnameKrijger,butalsothementalityfitforakrijger,meaning‘warrior’inarchaicDutch: he has taught me to never give up, to keep struggling against the waves, to fight for what is valuableinlife,nottotolerateinjustice,andtothinkinsolutionsinsteadofproblems.Fromhis abilitytoputthingsinperspective,generosityanddecisiveness,Ihavegreatlybenefitedduring my time as a PhD student, and still benefit every day. My mother Antoinette has intensely empathised with me, always reassuring me, being my ‘sounding board’, sending me kind messagesandcards,takingthetroubletovisitmeinGroningenmorethananyoneelse,andmaking surethatIlackedfornothing.Herkeensenseoflanguage,willingnesstohelp,strongworkethic, generosity,kind-heartednessandconsideratenesshavebeenvitalincompletingmydissertation, andarecrucialinlivingmylife.Mygratitudetowardsmyparentscannotbeexpressedinwords. I therefore dedicate this book to them. Veel dank dat jullie zijn wie jullie zijn.
Groningen, Reformation Day 2016
ABBREVIATIONS AND NOTES TO READER
1. Abbreviations of Names of Organisations¢ Original spelling
£ Spelling in effect since the orthographic reforms of the Dutch language in 1946/1947 ¥ No difference between original and post-1946/1947 spelling
Full Name in Original Language Full Name in English
AEPMV ¥ Allgemeine
¥ evangelisch-protestantische Missionsverein General Protestant Missionary Society ANRO ¢ Algemeene Nederlandsche Radio-Omroep
£ Algemene Nederlandse Radio-omroep General Dutch Radio Broadcasting Corporation ARP ¥ Anti-Revolutionaire Partij Anti-Revolutionary Party
AUA American Unitarian Association
AVRO ¢ Algemeene Vereeniging Radio-Omroep
£ Algemene Vereniging Radio-omroep General Radio Broadcasting Corporation BCS ¥ Bond van Christen-Socialisten League of Christian Socialists
BFUA British and Foreign Unitarian Association BVL ¥ Bond van Vrije Liberalen League of Free Liberals
CC ¥ CentraleCommissiev/hVrijzinnigProtestantisme Central Commission for Liberal Protestantism CHU ¥ Christelijk-Historische Unie Christian Historical Union
CPN ¥ Communistische Partij van Nederland Communist Party of the Netherlands GKN ¥ Gereformeerde Kerken in Nederland Reformed Churches in the Netherlands HDO ¢ Hilversumsche Draadlooze Omroep
£ Hilversumse Draadloze Omroep Hilversum Wireless Broadcasting Corporation IARF ¥ Internationaal Verbond voor
¥ Vrijzinnig Christendom en Geloofsvrijheid
InternationalAssociation for
Liberal Christianity and Religious Freedom KRO ¥ Katholieke Radio-Omroep Catholic Radio Broadcasting Corporation NCRV ¢ Nederlandsche Christelijke Radio-Vereeniging
£ Nederlandse Christelijke Radiovereniging Dutch Christian Radio Broadcasting Association NCSV ¢ Nederlandsche Christen-Studenten Vereeniging
£ Nederlandse Christen-studentenvereniging Dutch Christian Student Association NHK ¢ Nederlandsche Hervormde Kerk
£ Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk Dutch Reformed Church NOV ¢ Nederlandsche Omroep-Vereeniging
£ Nederlandse Omroepvereniging Dutch Broadcasting Association NPB ¢ Nederlandsche Protestantenbond
£ Nederlandse Protestantenbond Dutch League of Protestants NSB ¥ Nationaal-Socialistische Beweging National Socialist Movement NSF ¢ Nederlandsche Seintoestellenfabriek
£ Nederlandse Seintoestellenfabriek Dutch Transmitter Factory NVB ¢ Nederlandsche Volks-Beweging
NZG ¢ Nederlandsch Zendeling-Genootschap
£ Nederlands Zendelinggenootschap Dutch Missionary Society PKNI ¢ Protestantsche Kerk in Nederlandsch-Indië
£ Protestantse Kerk in Nederlands-Indië Protestant Church in the Dutch East Indies PvdA ¥ Partij van de Arbeid Labour Party
RSV ¥ Religieus-Socialistisch Verbond Religious Socialist League SDAP ¥ Sociaal-Democratische Arbeiderspartij Social Democratic Workers’ Party SDB ¥ Sociaal-Democratische Bond Social Democratic League SGP ¥ Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij Political Reformed Party SSR ¥ Societas Studiosorum Reformatorum Reformed Student Society
USA United States of America
VARA ¢ Vereeniging van Arbeiders Radio-Amateurs
£ Vereniging van Arbeiders Radioamateurs Association of Workers’ Radio Amateurs VCJB ¥ Vrijzinnig-Christelijke Jongerenbond Liberal Christian Youth League
VCJC ¥ Vrijzinnig-Christelijke Jeugdcentrale Liberal Christian Youth Centre
VCJGB ¥ Vrijzinnig-ChristelijkeJeugdgemeenschappenbond Liberal Christian League of Youth Communities VCL ¥ Vrijzinnig-Christelijk Lyceum Liberal Christian Grammar School
VCSB ¥ Vrijzinnig-Christelijke Studentenbond Liberal Christian League of Students VDB ¥ Vrijzinnig-Democratische Bond Liberal Democratic League
VPRO1 ¢ Vrijzinnig-Protestantsche Radio-Omroep
£ Vrijzinnig-Protestantse Radio-omroep LiberalProtestantRadioBroadcastingCorporation VVD ¥ Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy VVH ¢ Vereeniging van Vrijzinnige Hervormden
£ Vereniging van Vrijzinnige Hervormden Association of Reformed Liberals
2. Bibliographical Abbreviations2
BLGNP Biografisch Lexicon voor de Geschiedenis van het Nederlandse Protestantisme
BMGN Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden
BNPP Bibliografie van Nederlandse Protestantse Periodieken
BPL Bibliothecae Publicae Latini
IISG Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis
NL-AsdSAA Stadsarchief Amsterdam NL-HaNA Nationaal Archief
1 Inhistoriography,adistinctionissometimesmadebetweentheV.P.R.O.andtheVPRO.Thefirstabbreviation(with
dots)isthenusedinreferencetotheperiodbetween1926and1968,whentheLiberalProtestantRadioBroadcasting CorporationwasbroadcastingprogrammesexplicitlyintendedtopropagateliberalProtestantideasandprinciples. The second abbreviation (without dots) is then used in reference to the period after 1968, when this broadcasting corporationwas‘takenover’byagenerationofpoliticallyprogressive,non-religiousprogrammemakers,andlost itsliberalProtestantbasisentirely.Asaresult,theabbreviationliterallybecamemeaningless,andbecamea‘brand’ in itself. For two reasons, however, only the abbreviation without dots is used in this study. First, both in present-dayEnglishandDutch,dotsarenolongerusedinabbreviationsofnamesoforganisations.Fromastylisticpointof view,itwouldthereforebeincongruoustomakeoneexception.Second,becausethisstudydealswiththeV.P.R.O./ VPROonlypriortotheSecondWorldWar,itisobviousthatwhenmentionismadeofthisbroadcastingcorporation, the ‘V’ and ‘P’ still actually stood for ‘Liberal Protestant’.
2 Abbreviations starting with ‘NL-’ are used in the so-called ‘International Standard Identifier for Libraries and
NL-HtBHIC Brabants Historisch Informatiecentrum NL-UtHUA Het Utrechts Archief
PThU-U Protestantse Theologische Universiteit, Utrecht
RUG Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
RUL Rijksuniversiteit Leiden
UBL Universiteitsbibliotheek Leiden
VU Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
3. Notes to Reader
Regardingthenamesofauthorsinsourcesmentionedinthefootnotes,thefollowingrulesapply:
Name The author of the article is known
(because he has signed the article with his full name or initials)
[Name] The article in question is published anonymously, but its author can be inferred from the context with absolute certainty
(mainly editorials in opinion magazines)
[Name in:] The person in question is paraphrased, quoted or referred to in an article written by someone else (mainly in reports of NPB and other meetings, and communiqués)
N.N.3 The author of the article is unknown or at least not known to me (mainly newspaper articles)
Articlespublishedinjournalspriorto1945andarticlespublishedindailynewspapers, both before and after 1945, are referred to in the footnotes in full both the first time they are mentionedandeverytimethereafter.Thisisdone,becausesomearticleswouldotherwisehave theexactsameshortenedform.Readerswhowanttocheckareferencementionedinafootnote, would then not know to which article reference is made in that particular footnote. Moreover, given the amount of articles in journals and newspapers referred to in the footnotes, it would probably be asked too much of a reader to remember where exactly in this study an article is mentioned for the first time. Thus, for the sake of clarity and consistency, and as a ‘service’ to thereadership,shortenedformsarenotusedinreferencetothearticlesmentionedinthefourth section of the bibliography.
Non-EnglishnamesofperiodicalsandassociationsaretranslatedintoEnglishbetween brackets only the first time they are mentioned.
Dutch terms for which no satisfactory English equivalents exist are not translated. For example, I consistently use the term ‘Dutch Reformed Church’ to refer to the Nederlandse
Hervormde Kerk, but the terms ‘evangelisch’ and ‘ethisch’ to refer to specific
theological-ecclesiological currents existing within the Dutch Reformed Church. Terms such as the latter are specified in English the first time they are used.
Words and phrases in languages other than English are written in italics. All quotes in languages other than English are translated by me into English in the main text and given in their original form in the footnotes.
The term ‘denomination’ is a translation of the Dutch noun ‘kerkverband’.
3 The abbreviation ‘N.N.’ is not used in the footnotes. If an author of an article cannot be identified, only the title
Forthesakeofconsistency, theword‘church’is onlycapitalisedinnamesofspecific denominations (e.g.: the Dutch Reformed Church) and congregations (e.g.: the Austin Friars ChurchinLondon),notinreferencetothechurchasinstitutioningeneralortheentirebodyof Christians (e.g.: the institution of the church, the separation of church and state, the church of Christ).
The terms ‘modernist’ and ‘liberal Protestant’ as translations of the Dutch adjectives ‘modern(-godsdienstig)’ and ‘vrijzinnig-protestants’ are used interchangeably throughout the text, although the latter is used more often in reference to the period after 1900.
Theterm‘neo-Calvinist’isusedasanadjectiveofeverythingrelatedtotheReformed ChurchesintheNetherlands(GereformeerdeKerkeninNederland).Theterm‘gereformeerd’is not used, in order to avoid confusion with other denominations also carrying this term in their name.
Toavoidconfusionbetween‘hervormd’and‘gereformeerd’,Ispecificallyusetheterm ‘DutchReformed’whenmeaning‘hervormd’.Thereisonlyoneexception:inallinstances,the term‘liberalReformed’isshortfor‘liberalDutchReformed’,hencefor‘modern-’or
‘vrijzinnig-hervormd’.
The term ‘Mennonite’ is a translation of the Dutch word ‘doopsgezind’.4
In the text, the original spelling of Dutch terms (indicated with a ¢ above) is used,
hence Nederlandsche Christelijke Radio-Vereeniging instead of Nederlandse Christelijke
Radiovereniging.
When used in a general sense, which the context makes clear, masculine personal pronouns include their feminine counterparts. In those instances, ‘he’ should thus be read as ‘s/he’, etc.
4 Vissersuggestsusingtheterm‘Mennonites’onlyinreferenceto“thosegroupsthatsoughttoremainloyaltothe
heritageofMennoSimons.”IntheNetherlands,Simons(±1496-1561)wasoneoftheearlyleadersofamovement originallyreferredtoas‘Anabaptists’,amovementinwhichinfantbaptismwasrejected.Visserdoesnottranslate theterm‘Doopsgezinden’(followingEnglishspellingconventionsregardingnamesofreligiousgroups,heusesa capitalD)whenreferringtothosegroupswithintheAnabaptistbranchofProtestantismthatwereopentoreforms ofMennoSimons’sintellectualheritage.Ifhissuggestionweretobefollowed,theterm‘Mennonite’shouldnotbe usedinreferencetomodernist-mindednineteenth-andtwentieth-centurydoopsgezinden.Nevertheless,itis(still) standardpracticeinEnglish-languagehistoriographyonthelattertousetheterm‘Mennonites’.Moreover,because allDutchnamesofdenominationsaretranslatedintoEnglishinthisstudy(e.g.‘DutchReformed’for
‘Nederlands-hervormd’),thesameisdoneinthecaseofdoopsgezinden.Besides,asVisserhimselfremarks,theterm
‘doops-gezind’is“theofficialnameoftheDutchbranchoftheglobalAnabaptist/Mennonitemovement.”Usingtheterm
‘Mennonite’to refer to this Dutch branch of the international Mennonite movement in an English-language study thus seems to be perfectly legitimate. See: P. Visser, ‘Mennonites and Doopsgezinden in the Netherlands, 1535-1700’,in:J.D.RothandJ.M.Stayer(eds.),ACompaniontoAnabaptismandSpiritualism,1521-1700(Leiden2007), 299-345, there 299-300.
Dutch Reformed minister Johannes van Loenen Martinet (central) was editor-in-chief of the Nieuw Kerkelijk
Weekblad, a liberal Protestant opinion weekly, between 1869 and 1871, and of its successor De Hervorming
between1885and1913.Inaddition,asdepictedhere,hewaseditor-in-chiefofthepoliticallyliberalopinion weekly De Nieuwe Amsterdammer in 1895 and 1896.
INTRODUCTION
1. Modernising Christianity and Christianising Modern Society
“The press has been for a long time, and is becoming even more, one of the great forces that control
the course of politics and society.”1
It might seem a provocation to start a study on the liberal or ‘modernist’ current within late nineteenth-andearlytwentieth-centuryDutchProtestantismwithaquotefromAbrahamKuyper (1837-1920).Afterall,Kuyper,thepatriarchofneo-Calvinistorthodoxy,sethimselfupasone ofthefiercestantagonistsofliberalProtestantism.Thecontentofthisparticularquotemighteven intensifythefeelingthatintroducingthisstudybyreferringtoKuyperisaprovocation,whenone considersthatKuyperusedthepresstovehementlycriticiseliberalProtestantsandtomobilise felloworthodoxcountrymenagainstthem.Yet,grantingKuyperthefirstwordsisnotmeantto beprovocative.Hisawarenessthatthepresshadthepotentialtogreatlyinfluencepoliticaland socialdevelopmentsperfectlytypifiesthespiritofthelatenineteenthandearlytwentiethcentury, the period with which this study deals and in which media scholar J.M.H.J. Hemels places the ‘goldenage’oftheDutchpress.2Asoftheabolitionofaspecialnewspapertaxin1869,thepress took over the role of reading clubs, debating societies and gentlemen’s associations as the primaryarenainwhichthebattleofideaswasfoughtintheNetherlands.3Itwouldcontinuetobe
so until the proliferation of the radio in the late 1920s.4 Due to newspapers and magazines, differencesofopinionwithinandbetweengroupsofProtestantscouldcrystalliseandsimultaneously be brought to the attention of an immense amount of people all across the country, thereby largelycontributingtotheemergenceofseverallooselyormorestronglyorganisedmovements. In the Dutch context, Neo-Calvinists formed one of these movements, modernists another.
Whenitcametotheopportunitiesthepressoffered,liberalProtestantsfullyagreedwith Kuyper. They also recognised that the press was a powerful instrument with which thousands of people could be reached and united in a common cause. Ever since the first vague contours of a liberal Protestant community became apparent in the late 1850s, the want of a modernist periodicalthereforemanifesteditself.In1858,C.P.Tiele(1830-1902),whowouldbecomeone of the leading modernist theologians of his generation, took the initiative to found a weekly, entitled Teekenen des Tijds (Signs of the Times). Although he stated that his magazine did not side against orthodoxy, he could not hide his liberal Protestant sympathies.5 Tiele surrounded himself with contributors who were all firmly committed to studying the Bible as any other historical document. Furthermore, he devoted a favourable review to fellow minister Conrad BuskenHuet’s(1826-1886)controversialBrievenoverdenBijbel(LettersontheBible),inwhich thesacredcharacterofScripturewasstraightforwardlydenied.6Tieledidnothavemuchsuccess:
1 “Deperswassindslang,enwordtsteedsmeer,eendergrootemachten,diedengangvanhetpolitiekeensociale
beheerschen.” Quoted from: J.M.H.J. Hemels, ‘De pers als “een der groote machten” ofwel het late gelijk van dr.
Abraham Kuyper’, De Negentiende Eeuw XV.2 (1991), 53-69, there 53.
2 Ibid.
3 As demonstrated in: J.M.H.J. Hemels, De Nederlandse pers voor en na de afschaffing van het dagbladzegel in
1869 (Assen [1969]).
4 R.L. Schuursma, Jaren van opgang. Nederland 1900-1930 ([Amsterdam 2000]), 208.
5 [C.P. Tiele], ‘De redactie aan den lezer’, De Teekenen des Tijds I.1 (1 October 1858), 1-2, there 1.
6 C.P.Tiele,‘BrievenoverdenBijbel’,Ibid.I.30(22April1859),1-2;I.31(29April1859),1-2;I.32(6May1859),
alackofreadershipforcedhimtodiscontinuehismagazineasearlyas1859.TeekenendesTijds
apparentlycameabittooearly:subscriptionstomagazineswereexpensive,whileliberalideas hadnotyetpenetratedchurchlifefirmlyenoughforagenuinemodernist movement tocomeinto existence.Tenyearslater,however,whensuchamovementhadbeguntoemerge,someministers in the region north of Amsterdam made a new attempt to publish a magazine disseminating modernist opinions. Thanks to the abolition of the newspaper tax, their Nieuw Kerkelijk
Weekblad(NewEcclesialWeekly)didmanagetoattractasufficientnumberofsubscribers.As themagazine’stitleindicated,itwaspredominantlydedicatedtochurch-relatedaffairs–thatisto say,tothejustificationofmodernists’righttobeinthechurchagainstorthodoxy’sdenialthereof. Afteracoupleofyears, thetitle‘NieuwKerkelijkWeekblad’wasnolongersatisfactory. FromJanuary1873onwards,themagazinewouldbecalled‘DeHervorming’(‘TheReformation’).
In the first issue carrying the new name, then editors-in-chief B.C.J. Mosselmans (1830-1911) and J. van Gilse (1836-1917) gave an explanation. In the last decade, they noticed, modernists hadbeenabletogivetheirreligiousconceptionsanecclesialembedmentandthushadnoreason any longer to preoccupy themselves with justifying their presence in church life. Orthodox Protestantswhostillchallengedmodernists’righttobeinthechurchwerefightingarearguard action;thefurtherdisseminationofliberalconceptionsofGod, JesusandScripturewassimply unstoppable.Andyet,liberalProtestantshadnoreasontofeelfulfilled.“Wewanttogofurther andwewantmore,”MosselmansandVanGilseexclaimed.Whattheywantedwastotakeupthe sixteenth-centurychurchReformers’initialaspirationtobringabout“theKingdomofGod,[…] anewearthfilledwithjustice.”TheReformershaddroppedthisaspirationfortworeasons.First, tolegitimisetheircause,theReformershadchallengedtheauthorityoftheRomanCatholicChurch by substituting it for the authority of Scripture. The biblical words had consequently become the sole sources of divine knowledge. Second, the endeavour to realise a new earth had been besmirched by excesses, particularly early Anabaptists’ orgies of violence. As Mosselmans and Van Gilse believed, now the time had come to pick up the pursuit that the Reformers had failed to bring to completion.7
Why was the time ripe to do so? Because, as Mosselmans and Van Gilse argued, (the Christian) religion was at the root of all present-day issues. Of course, without them saying this out loud, the emergence of modern theology was in large part responsible for that. Since religion was at the root of all contemporary issues, the key to solving these issues lay in a purification of religion. To purify Christianity, the church and everything that went with it had to be reformed on the basis of modern-theological insights. Moreover, an end had to be made to the “ancient distinction and friction” between religion and human reason. Only then could truepiety–thatis,areligiousfaithbasedonJesus’sethicalprinciplesandnotonanidolisationof Jesusasdivinely-humanlymiraclemaker–flourishandcoulditsfruits–anawarenessofethical responsibility and charity – saturate society, “[so] that it might be well with the world.”8 A structuralreformationoffaith,churchandsocietywasneeded,andbyrenamingtheirmagazine, MosselmansandVanGilsedemonstratedthatitwastheirgoaltocontributetothisreformation.
7 “Wijwillenverderenmeer.”;“…het‘Godsrijk’,d.i.[…]denieuweaardewaargerechtigheidwoont.”Quotedfrom:
[B.C.J.MosselmansandJ.vanGilse],‘Nieuwjaarsgroet’,DeHervorming1873-01(2January1873),1-2,there1.
8 “…aloudescheidingentweespalttusschengodsdienstenkennis…”;“…opdathetdewereldwelga.”Quotedfrom:
The content of the Christian faith thus had to be brought up-to-date in compliance with thestateofcontemporaryscientificandscholarlyknowledge,whiletheoutwardmanifestations of Christianity – church structures and rituals – should be purged of all elements that were rooted in the supernatural world view to which modern-theological inquiry had given the deathblow. Simultaneously, society and culture should be permeated with the sense of duty and charity that were the consequences of ‘true’ piety. True piety could only be rooted in the message of Jesus, stripped of its miraculous aura by modern theology, instead of in veneration foramythologicalGod-man.Inotherwords,MosselmansandVanGilsewantedthemodernist movement to modernise Christianity and to permeate society with this modernised, non-supernatural Christianity, or, in short, to truly Christianise society.9
MosselmansandVanGilsewerenottheonlyoneswhodefinedthecauseofthemodernist movementassuch.Whereasmodernistshaddelineatedtheirmovementasonewithinchurchlife before the 1870s – which is reflected in the large amount of brochures they wrote to defend their historical and ethical right to be church members while renouncing creedalism –, they cametobroadenthescopeoftheirmovementtosocietyatlargeafterwards.Thefoundingofthe
NederlandscheProtestantenbond(DutchLeagueofProtestantsorNPB)in1870largelycontributed
to that.
Thisvoluntaryassociation,createdinreactiontotheformationofanorganisationalfront inorthodoxcircles,aimedatunitingallliberalProtestantswithinitsranks.Someevenimagined thattheNPBwouldbeaprefigurationofthefaithcommunityoftomorrow,ultimatelyreplacing
thechurch.IdentifyingtheNPBwiththemodernistmovementasawhole,championsoftheNPB
expressed themselves in similar terms as Mosselmans and Van Gilse. According to the first regulations of the NPB, the association wanted “to preserve and further the free expression of
individual Christian religious life in the churches” and “to stimulate the development of Christianlifeinindividualsandfamilies.”10Inan1871brochure,DutchReformedministerJ.F. Corstius (1819-1888) explained how this could be realised. Church regulations should be as limitedaspossible,containingonlysomeelementarycodeoforder,butcertainlynoreferences to creeds or prescriptions on the composition of religious services.11 As orthodox fanaticism irrevocablyresultedin“thedecayofsociety,”religiouslifeshouldbeabletofloatwithoutbeing doctrinally straitjacketed. The NPB aspired to “make society more truly free in the spirit of
Christ,” in order for Christians to fully live up to Christ’s incitement to be “the salt of the earth” and thus to promote social welfare and popular development.12
9 ComparethefirsteditorialarticleofDeHervormingwiththatofthemodernist-mindedmagazineDeProtestant,
issuedbetween1883and1887.JustasMosselmansandVanGilse,theeditorsofDeProtestant,I.Hooykaas,A.P.G. Jorissen (1830-1905), H.C. Lohr and J.H. Maronier, had the “firm conviction that a good deal of what requires reformationinchurchandstate,insociety,schoolsandhouseholdswillget[thereformationitrequires]whenthose principles[modernistprinciples,TK]exerttheirinfluencemoregenerally.”(“…vasteovertuiging,datveelvan‘tgeen
nuinKerkenStaat,inmaatschappij,schoolenhuisgezinhervormingbehoeft,diezalvinden,wanneerdiebeginselen
meeralgemeenhuninvloeddoengelden.”)Quotedfrom:‘Watwijwillen’,DeProtestantI.1(6January1883),1-2,
there1.Seealso:A.L.Molendijk,‘DevervluchtigingvanhetvrijzinnigprotestantismeinNederland’,Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift L (1996), 122-134, there 124, note 11.
10 “…de vrije uiting van het persoonlijk christelijk geloofsleven in de kerkelijke genootschappen te handhaven en
aan te moedigen.”; “…de ontwikkeling van het christelijk leven bij personen en in huisgezinnen bevorderen.”
Quoted from: J.F. Corstius, Het Witte Kruis of de Protestantenbond in Nederland (Dokkum 1871), 17.
11 Ibid., 16.
12 “…de verrotting der maatschappij…”; “…de maatschappij meer waarlijk vrij te maken door den geest van
Threeyearslater,recentlyabdicatedDutchReformedministerW.Zaalberg(1835-1906) encouraged liberal-minded Protestants in the Overijssel town of Deventer to join the NPB by
defining the association’s objective as follows:
Being an association for public advancement in the sphere of religion and the church, [the NPB]
wants to let many share in the blessed triumphs of science, applied to ethical-religious life. That way, it wants to contribute to the ennobling of our nation’s existence in households and society as well as to the formation of a church community built upon the principles of free Protestantism – a church community that can again be the salt of society.13
Church–thatis,theorganisationoftheChristiancommunityoffaith–andsocietybothcontained many obstacles that hindered people from believing on the basis of modern-theological insights, while only such a liberal belief could be beneficial to the common good. Church and societyshouldthereforebereformedinsuchawaythattheseobstacleswouldnolongerexist.
Enhancing the “free development of religious life,” as the slightly less church-oriented 1872 regulations of the NPB stated, meant what Zaalberg implied.14 Religious life would only
beabletodevelopinfreedomifitwasnotkeptinconfinementbycreeds,out-datedconceptions and rituals that had become hackneyed and that lacked any significance in the modern world view. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, for example, only had meaning in supernatural metaphysics, but modernists believed that modern theology had falsified a supernatural interpretation of Christianity once and for all. If the ontological basis and content of faith – that is, conceptions of God, Jesus and Scripture – were revised, then new forms ought to be created in which this faith could find concrete expression.
Not only the way in which the church and religious services were organised made it impossible for religious life to develop freely; so did society. There were many impediments that hindered the true Gospel message of deliverance from evil – individual imperfections and socialwrongs–,detachedfromthebeliefinamiracle-makingJesus,fromfindingactualisationin society. Many people lacked education or were kept in a state of intellectual poverty by priests and orthodox ministers, who polluted their minds with dogmatic rigidity and a sense of helplessness when it came to improving their own lives – they were said to be sinners who were incapable of doing any good without being redeemed by Christ, after all. This restrained them from embracing liberal Protestantism, which could raise the standard of their spiritual, ethical and even material life. Modern society was not a place wherein justice was ubiquitous. All kinds of social evils, ranging from alcohol abuse to a lack of domesticity and from sanctimoniousness to pauperisation, kept people from engaging themselves in spiritual and ethical matters and thus prevented religious life from developing freely.
Why was the modernist movement so convinced that church and social life had to be reformed?Becauseitwasatrueoffspringofthenineteenthcenturyinthesensethatitwasdriven
13 “Opgodsdienstigenkerkelijkgebiedeenemaatschappijtotnutvanhetalgemeenwilhijdegezegende
veroverin-gen van de wetenschap, toegepast op het zedelijk-godsdienstig leven, het deel doen worden van velen. Alzoo wil
hijmedewerkenaandeveredelingvanonsvolksbestaaninhuisenmaatschappijenaandevormingeener
kerkge-meenschap,gebouwdopdebeginselenvanhetvrijeprotestantisme,eenekerkgemeenschap,dieweêrhetzoutder
maatschappij kan zijn.” Quoted from: W. Zaalberg, De Nederlandsche Protestantenbond (Deventer 1874), 15.
14 “…devrijeontwikkelingvanhetgodsdienstigleven…”Quotedfrom:J.Steur,‘Archiefvanhethoofdbestuurvan
denNederlandschenProtestantenbond,1870-1925’,in:InventarissenvanRijks-enanderearchieven,vanRijkswege uitgegeven, voor zoover ze niet afzonderlijk zijn afgedrukt IV (The Hague 1933), 140-158, there 142.
byaneschatological,evolutionaryandoptimisticbeliefinprogress.Technologicaladvancements encroached deeply on society, while scientific discoveries and a scholarly accumulation of knowledgedecisivelystampedintellectuallife.Historybecameanacademicdiscipline,tellingthe narrative of a world that had gradually become better and that was moving towards ultimate perfection.ForChristianitytostillbesignificantintheagetocome,itshouldnotbeoutofstep withsocial,culturalandscholarlydevelopmentsandshouldaccordinglybe‘improved’.Modernists regarded this to be crucial, because of the strong link they saw between religion and ethics. If Christianity would no longer be persuasive and acceptable for man living in the modern age, moderniststhought,thiswouldhavedevastatingconsequencesforpublicmorals,forChristianity was the cement of a civilised society. Liberal Protestants had disagreements over the exact relationship between religion and morality, but none of them doubted that the two were in one way or another intertwined.
Modernists were certainly not the only ones in the late nineteenth century who felt that if Christianity and society would not be reformed (and in such awaythatacontinuous cross-fertilisation between the two could take place), then the gapbetween them would eventually becomeunbridgeable,whichwouldbeadisasterforboth.InthecontextofDutchProtestantism, for example, Kuyper and his orthodox Calvinist supporters, who called themselves ‘gereformeerden’andaregenerallyreferredtoinEnglishas‘neo-Calvinists’or‘Kuyperians’,had similaraimstobringReformedorthodoxy‘inrapport’withthepresentdayandto‘re-Christianise’ society.15Theyevenmadethesameclaimasmoderniststocompletetheworkofthe sixteenth-centuryReformers,albeitwithadifferentjustification,andwithadifferentobjectiveinmind.16 AstheeditorsofDeHervormingandtheNPBwerebothdevotedtolettingthemodernist
movement fulfil its vocation to modernise Christianity and Christianise modern society, it was nosurprisethattheNPBdecidedtopurchaseDeHervormingin1875.Themagazinecontinuedto
15 See, e.g.: J. Hendriks, De emancipatie van de gereformeerden. Sociologische bijdrage tot de verkenning van
enigekenmerkenvanhethuidigegereformeerdevolksdeel(AlphenaandenRijn1971),94-156,212;A.A.vander
Schans,KuyperenKersten.IJveraarsvoorherkersteningvanonzesamenleving(TheHagueandLeiden1992),129; J.Veenhof,‘Geschiedenisvantheologieenspiritualiteitindegereformeerdekerken’,in:M.E.Brinkman(ed.),100
jaartheologie.AspectenvaneeneeuwtheologieindeGereformeerdeKerkeninNederland(1892-1992)(Kampen
1992),14-95;J.P.Stoop,“Omhetvolvoerenvaneenchristelijkestaatkunde”.DeAnti-RevolutionairePartijinhet
interbellum(Hilversum2001);D.Th.Kuiper(J.deBruijn,J.G.M.deBruijnandG.J.Schutteeds.),Tussenobservatie
enparticipatie.Tweeeeuwengereformeerdeenantirevolutionairewereldinontwikkelingsperspectief(Hilversum
2002),112-115.Seealso:C.M.vanDriel,‘Modernisme’,in:G.Harinck,H.J.PaulandB.T.Wallet(eds.),Het
gereformeerdegeheugen.ProtestantseherinneringscultureninNederland(Amsterdam2009),223-232,there223;
T.E.M.Krijger,‘WasAbrahamKuypereenfundamentalist?Hetneocalvinismelangsdefundamentalistischemeetlat’,
Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift LXIX.3 (2015), 190-210, there 203-206.
16 Briefly put, Neo-Calvinists believed that all teachings denying or nuancing the Trinity, the total depravity of
mankind,andGod’sabsolutepowertopredestinesometogotoheavenandotherstobelostforalleternity–hence all modernist teachings – and all church practices that were rooted in such teachings, undermined the vitality of Christianity. Reformed church life should accordingly be purged of all of these teachings and practices by reconstructingitonastrictlydoctrinalCalvinistbasis.However,Calvinhadlivedinanagethatwasverydifferent frommoderntimes.KuyperiansthereforeacknowledgedthatCalvinistthinkingcouldnotdowithoutcontextualisation. Atthesametime,theydisappointinglysawsocietymovinginsuchadirectionthattheabsolutesovereigntyofChrist theKingoverallspheresoflifewouldnotbehonoured.Neo-Calviniststhereforeaspiredaftera‘Christianisation’of society,orrathera‘Calvinisation’–theywantedtopermeatesocietywitharevitalisedCalvinism“untilthisnation will onceagainbowtoGod”(“tot weerdatvolkvoorGodzichbuigt”). Quotedin:Kuyper-Gedenkboek 1907.
Bevattendeeenoverzichtvandefeestvieringop29October1907tergelegenheidvandenzeventigstenverjaardag
vanprof.dr.A.Kuyper,oud-ministervanBinnenlandscheZaken,te’s-Gravenhage,benevenseenverzamelingvan
existuntil1934.Withinthese59years,especiallybeforetheoutbreakoftheFirstWorldWarin 1914,thewordsofMosselmansandVanGilse,CorstiusandZaalbergwereconstantlyreiterated. The bulk of speeches given at NPB meetings and opinion articles published in De Hervorming
were about the deficiencies of church life, the shortcomings of social life, or both. In fact, while also referring to liberal Protestants’ claim to be the true heirs to the sixteenth-century Reformation, the title ‘De Hervorming’ should be read as a concise programme of what the modernist movement tried to establish. There was a consensus in the NPB that church life and
social life had to be reformed. Yet, in what way and to what extent this reformation should be pursued was no open-and-shut case. Should liberal Protestants try to change existing practices withinthechurches,orshouldtheyleavetheinstitutionofthechurchbehindaltogetherandcreate an entirely new community of faith? Should liberal Protestantism influence society directly or indirectly; that is, should liberal Protestants proactively set their hands to a reconfiguration of society in organised form, or should they merely make people aware of social wrongs without organisingsocialworkthemselves?Moreover,shouldprioritybegiventothereorganisationof churchlifeortotheimprovementofsociallife?Therewerevividdiscussionsonthesequestions, to which different answers were given by different persons at different times.
This study deals with the development of the modernist movement in the Netherlands between,broadlyspeaking,1870and1940,byanalysingthediscussionsheldinmodernistcircles onthequestionofhowChristianityshouldbemodernisedandhowsocietycouldbepermeated withthismodernisedChristianity.Asthelastparagraphhasindicated,thereformationofchurch andsociallifewasthegoaltowhichthemodernistmovement,asrepresentedbytheDutchLeague ofProtestants,aspired.Themodernistmovementliterallytookshapewhiletryingtorealisethis aim.Theaforementioneddiscussionsarethereforetheidealfocalpointofastudythatwantsto comprehendthedevelopmentofthismovement.Forreasonsexplainedbelow,aclosereadingof
DeHervorming isattheheartofthisstudy,althoughtheanalysisiscertainlynotlimitedtothis magazine alone.
2. Terminology and Periodisation
Itishardtogiveastraightforwarddefinitionof‘Protestantmodernism’or‘liberalProtestantism’, asthosewhoidentifiedthemselvesas‘modernists’rejectedcreedswhereintheconceptualcontent offaithwaspreciselyformulated.TherewasnoChristology,noecclesiologyandnosoteriology that can be labelled as the modernist ‘building blocks’. ‘Modernism’ is an umbrella-term for a widevarietyofviewpointsthat,inessence,haveonecharacteristicincommon:theyalldeviate in one way or another from viewpoints that are designated as ‘orthodox’. ‘Modernism’ and ‘orthodoxy’areproblematicterms.Ajuxtapositionofbothtermssuggeststhat‘orthodoxy’was essentially anti-modern and that ‘modernism’ was receptive to contemporary developments in cultureandsocietybydefinition.Asthisstudyshows,thisdichotomyisinmanywaysmisleading. The Dutch context has some terminological peculiarities. Protestants outside the NetherlandswithwhomDutchmodernistssympathisedusuallycalledthemselves‘liberal’inthe English-, French- and German-speaking world. It was, contrariwise, not common for Dutch moderniststodepictthemselvesas‘liberaal’.Inachurchcontext,thisadjectivewasmostlyused torefertotheearlynineteenth-centuryadherentsofamoderatelyrationalistic,hardlydogmatic,
supernaturalistinterpretationoftheBible.17Inamoregeneralsense,theusageoftheterm‘liberaal’ wasrestrictedtothepoliticalarena,denotingthestillinfluentialpoliticalphilosophythatbelieves in keeping state intervention in individual, social and economic life as minimal as possible.18
Asecondterminologicalpeculiarityisthattheterm‘modernist’graduallylostitsappeal infavouroftheuntranslatablelabel‘vrijzinnig’from1900onwards,althoughtheterm‘vrijzinnig’ hadalsobeenusedbeforehandandtheterm‘modern’continuedtobeuseduntilwell into the twentiethcentury.Inthisstudy,‘modern’and‘vrijzinnig’arebothtranslatedas‘modernist’and ‘liberalProtestant’,andusedinterchangeably.Thereasonforthisistwofold.First,‘modernist’ and‘liberal’canbeseenasexactsynonyms,astermsthatbothrefertotheschoolofthoughtthat emergedinProtestantisminthenineteenthcenturyandthatwasepistemologicallybasedona historical-critical reading of the Bible. Before the emergence of this school of thought, there was no ‘liberal Protestantism’. Second, ‘modernism’ can be seen as the nineteenth-century manifestationofabroader‘liberal’(‘vrijzinnige’)current–‘liberal’referringtoacriticalattitude towardsacceptedconceptionsofGod,JesusandScripture–,thatisasoldasProtestantismitself, or even as old as Christianity as a whole. This is the vision J. Lindeboom (1882-1958) puts forwardinhisthree-volumeGeschiedenisvanhetvrijzinnigprotestantisme(HistoryofLiberal Protestantism), published between 1929 and 1935.19 Either way, ‘liberal’ and ‘modernist’ can safely be used as interchangeable terms in the period with which this study deals, the years between 1870 and 1940.
It is important to make a distinction between ‘modern theology’ and the ‘modernist movement’.20 The first emerged in the second quarter of the nineteenth century and consisted of academia-based divines who studied the Bible by making use of natural scientific theories and philological and historical methods. As a result, these theologians came to reject
17 E.g.: J. Vree, ‘The Dominating Theology within the Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk after 1815 in its Relation to
theSecessionof1834’,in:G.HarinckandJ.L.Krabbendam(eds.),BreachesandBridges.ReformedSubculturesin the Netherlands, Germany and the United States (Amsterdam 2000), 33-47, there 37; N.H. Bijleveld, Voor God,
VolkenVaderland.DeplaatsvandehervormdepredikantbinnendenationaleeenwordingsprocesseninNederland
in de eerste helft van de negentiende eeuw (Delft 2007), 85.
18 Note that in the United States, the word ‘liberal’ denotes a progressive political position. Liberals in the United
States tend to be more in favour of state intervention than non-liberals.
19 R. Klooster, Het vrijzinnig protestantisme in Nederland (Kampen 2006), 10; A.L. Molendijk, ‘Vrijzinnigheid
ruim opgevat. Johannes Lindebooms “Geschiedenis van het vrijzinnig protestantisme”’, in: M.P.A. de Baar and M. van Dijk (eds.), Herinnering en identiteit in het vrijzinnig protestantisme. Opstellen aangeboden aan prof.dr.
E.H.Cosseebijzijnafscheidalshoogleraar(Hilversum2009),15-26,there16.Chapter1dealswithLindeboom’s
vision in more detail.
20 This distinction was made in modernist circles. See, e.g.: ‘Wat wij willen’, De Protestant I.1 (6 January 1883),
1-2,there1;‘DerichtingenindeprotestantschekerkenXVI’,Ibid.V.6(5February1887),2-3,there2;A.Kuenen,
Gedachtenisrede in de vergadering van moderne theologen, 7 April 1891: 1866-1891 (Leiden 1891), 8-9; A.M.
Brouwer, De moderne richting. Eene historisch-dogmatische studie (Nijmegen [1912]), 41; K.H. Roessingh, Het
modernismeinNederland(Haarlem1922),110;[H.C.Lohr],‘Mededeelingenenberichten’,DeHervorming
1875-49(9December1875),3-4,there3;‘NederlandschProtestantenbond–Brielle’,Ibid.1878-12(23March1878),2; P.H. Hugenholtz, Jr., ‘Onze leestafel – “Een bonte bundel”’, Ibid. 1882-48 (2 December 1882), 3; L. Knappert, ‘Nog eens de moderne theologie’, Ibid. 1889-29 (20 July 1889), 113-114, there 114; [J. van Loenen Martinet], ‘Berichten, enz. – “Fata morgana”?’, Ibid. 1900-51 (22 December 1900), 395-396; J. Herderscheê, ‘Ingezonden stukken–“Demodern-godsdienstigerichting”’,Ibid.1906-48(1December1906),381;[J.vanLoenenMartinet], ‘Berichten,enz.–Devergaderingvanmodernetheologen’,Ibid.1908-18(2May1908),140-141,there140;M.A.P., ‘Ingezonden stukken – “Moderne richting”, “moderne theologie”’, Ibid. 1908-42 (17 October 1908), 335; F.E. vanSanten,‘Hoofdartikelen–Tijdeneeuwigheid’,Ibid.1917-05(3March1917),34;M.C.vanMourikBroekman, ‘Godsdienst en wereldbeschouwing – Geestelijke stromingen in den bond’, Ibid. 1919-46 (15 November 1919), 207-208, there 207.
supernaturalism – the belief that Jesus performed miracles and that God can intervene in the world while surpassing the laws of nature – and brought forth new views on the authorship and dating of Biblical texts. The modernist movement manifested itself outside academia and propagated a non-supernaturalist Christian world view in an attempt to preserve Christianity as a powerful cultural force in the age to come. A reformation of church and social life was therefore deemed necessary. The modernist movement came into being in the third quarter of the nineteenth century and consisted of ministers, laymen, and most practitioners of modern theology, who participated in it by giving lectures outside academia and by writing in non-scholarly journals.21 ‘Modernism’ encompasses both modern theology and the modernist movement. This study concerns itself only with the latter.
ItisnotanachronistictohangthedevelopmentoftheDutchmodernistmovementbetween 1870and1940ontheendeavourtoreformchurchandsociallife,asexpressedbyMosselmans, VanGilseandotherearlymodernists.Asstatedbefore,thisendeavourwasgenerallyseenasthe
raisond’êtreofthemodernistmovementnotonlyinthe1870s,butalsoduringtheentireperiod priortotheFirstWorldWar.Afterwards,theambitionsofthemodernistmovementdecreased; voices proclaiming the ‘Christianisation’ of society fell silent. The blow that the First World Wardeliveredtotheculturaloptimismofmanymodernistswasresponsibleforthis,aswellas processes within the modernist movement itself and within society at large. Nonetheless, the hope to influence church life and social life in such a way that liberal Protestant ideas could find actualisation continued to be vivid in the interwar period. A good example thereof is the (failed)transformation of De Hervorming into a magazine that targeted leading non-modernist intellectuals and decision makers in 1918.
The reason to begin this study in 1870 is twofold. First, it was in this year that the Dutch League of Protestants was founded. The NPB, a national organisation with local
branches, could justifiably claim to have a central position in the Dutch modernist movement. It grew from 1,400 members and 26 branches in 1871 to nearly 20,000 members and 175 branchesin1900.Thesenumberswouldmoreorlessstabiliseinthedecadesfollowing1900.22 The NPB wanted to be significant both within and outside of church life. It targeted people
who were already confirmed liberal Protestants as well as people who did not (or not yet) have modernist sympathies. The denominational composition of its membership was varied, asmodernistscouldbefoundintheNederlandscheHervormdeKerk(DutchReformedChurch), including the Francophone Walloon Reformed congregations that were part of this church denomination,the Remonstrantsche Broederschap (RemonstrantBrotherhood),the Algemeene Doopsgezinde Sociëteit (General Mennonite Society) and the Evangelisch-Luthersche Kerk
(Evangelical Lutheran Church), while some did not belong to any of these churches. Although itisimpossibletodetermineexactnumbers–theReformed,LutheranandMennonitechurches did not only have modernist-minded members, whereas membership figures of these churches do not say anything about individuals’ level of orthodoxy –, it is safe to state that in the period
21 OneprominentexceptionwasJ.H.Scholten,who,contrarytotheother‘patriarch’of moderntheologyinthe
Netherlands,C.W.Opzoomer,didnotactivelyparticipateinthemodernistmovement.WhileOpzoomerwasoneof thefoundingfathersoftheNPB,ScholtenneverlecturedatNPBmeetingsandwroteanarticleinDeHervormingonly once.See:J.H.Scholten,‘Ingezondenstukken–Uitdegeschiedenisderproponentsformule’,Ibid.1884-06(9February 1884), 25-26.
