contemplation and action he tends to depict them in stark contrast to each other.^106
Similarly, following Barth he delineates prayer as predominantly petition^107 and
creates another unnecessary distinction that prayer “is not being transported into
glory” but “an exchange of ideas for the purpose of doing God‘s will.”^108 While more
could be said regarding Bloesch’s antipathy to contemplation and healthy biblical
mysticism Bruce Demarest, another Reformed theologian, has clearly assessed the
primary weakness of this book. “[m]ystical spirituality in the soft (i.e. biblical) or
relational sense is not a dangerous distortion of Christian life and mission, but is the
very essence thereof.”^109
Retrieval of Contemplative-Mystical Piety within the Reformed Tradition:
Herman Bavinck^
While Barth articulates a strong resistance to contemplative-mystical piety he
is not representative of all Reformed theologians. Another Reformed voice that has
become increasingly more prominent in recent years is the Dutch neo-calvinist
Herman Bavinck (1854-1921). This is directly related to the English translation of his
Reformed Dogmatics.^110 Bavinck was older than Barth and there is no indication that
he was familiar with the Church Dogmatics. However, Barth did include a number of
references to Bavinck’s theology and for the most part it was appreciative.^111
Nonetheless, while Bavinck shares some of Barth’s concerns regarding mysticism he
is far more receptive to a healthy and biblically balanced experience of
contemplation.
(^106) Bloesch, Spirituality Old & New (^) , 42, 58, 133.
(^107) Bloesch, Spirituality Old & New, 94, 133.
(^108) Bloesch, Spirituality Old & New, 81, 82, cf. 41.
(^109) Demarest, review of Spirituality Old & New, 113.
(^110111) This translation began in 2003 and was completed in 2008.
Vissers, “Karl Barth’s Appreciative Use of Bavinck.”