Dei)^196 however, a person begins to enjoy these eschatological benefits already on
earth.^197 Significantly, Bavinck believes that Jesus’ invitation to the Lord’s Supper
offers believers the “joy of heaven” and “communion with Christ.”^198
To summarize, Bavinck noticeably demonstrates a greater receptivity than
Barth to a contemplative-mystical piety. G. C. Berkouwer, who later occupied the
same chair of theology at the Free University as Bavinck, offers this valuable
summary:
In spite of his objections to experiential theology, Bavinck did not think that
the purpose of this theology was to make subjective, pious experience the
criterion of religious truth. Kuyper was more critical of experiential theology,
and thought Bavinck’s critique was too mild. He suspected that a pantheistic
streak ran through experiential theology. Bavinck, on the other hand, was
more sensitive to the dangers of dead orthodoxy, of a confession that one believed in place of a living faith that one confessed. Great theologian that he
was, Bavinck certainly was aware that the Christian had to reflect about the
manner in which divine revelation entered convincingly into human
consciousness.^199
Therefore, Bavinck reveals a greater flexibility to both the need for and importance of
experience than Barth. While he expresses some concerns regarding mysticism, they
are significantly less than those of Barth. Clearly Bavinck’s theology and piety are
more reflective of Ambrose’s viewpoint than Barth and Bavinck’s overall theology is
more conducive to creating the opportunity for a person to experience God more
contemplatively.
Previously it was noted that the restrictive trajectory of Barth’s resistance to
contemplative piety has continued to the present affecting some of his disciples, such
(^196) Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics (^) , 4:722.
(^197) Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 4:721-3.
(^198199) Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 4:640, cf. 576.
Berkouwer, Half Century of Theology, 14.