By Dr Benno
Alexander Zuiddam[1]
Jump of Despair into Spiritualism
Reason’s Dead End and the Theology of DP Faure
This article deals with nineteenth century liberal thought in
South-Africa and the
Our real story begins in Anno Domini 1887. We find
two theologians involved in an important exchange of thought by letter. Both of them had consciously drifted away
from their roots. They had done away
with the traditional approach of Christianity, albeit the one more openly than
the other. Like an ex-fundamentalist friend of his, liberal minister DP Faure had high hopes of Spiritualism.
The change that took place in Faure’s friend
was remarkable. Twenty years ago was a
renowned adversary of liberal theology.
He was a reformed evangelical.
Spiritual revivals in 1860 and 1861 he considered as a preparation for
“the fierce battle against unbelief”. [4] With this he pointed to
the struggle against liberal theologians, which started at the 1862 Synod of
the Dutch Reformed Churches.
His name was P Huet, a minister and a poet. As a writer he built a reputation that would
gain him numerous references in the Standard Dictionary of the Dutch language (Handwoordenboek der Nederlandsche
On the 24th of April 1887 this Peter Huet
wrote a personal letter to David Faure.[7] As this private correspondence became public
knowledge by Faure biography, we may have a closer
look. Huet converted to Spiritualism, though
outwardly still a minister of the Dutch Reformed Church. His correspondence shows that he discarded
the central beliefs of orthodox Christianity and lost about everything that a
Christian might loose: the Trinity, the atonement by Christ and the Bible as
the Word of God. By this time, Peter Huet had moved back to the
One year before this letter, Huet revealed his
feelings in “The Eternal Life”, not a surprising choice since he happened to be
the editor of this periodical. In this
article he tried to explain why he did not really care about revelation through
the Bible any longer and paved the way for his new insights for living. Rev. Huet stated
that the real thing that had always appealed to him was the so called “unio mystica,” the mystical
relation with God. One had to be in a
relationship of life and love with Christ. “But this has nothing to do with
religious systems or dogma’s... God and Religion are the same everywhere,”
according to Huet.[9] The orthodox theologian had become a
spiritualist, and a liberal. Amazingly, but it was not by accident.
His South African friend arrived at the same station of Spiritualism,
though using a slightly different route. It was his liberalism, not as a
consequence of Spiritualism, which left him unfulfilled. David Faure turned to Spiritualism for answers
that his modern theology had not been able to give him.
Why not?
To answer this question, one must have a look at his view of God,
revelation and its implications. We write 1907.
In
As a result of this Faure scratched out the
supernatural from his Bible. The witness
of the Holy Ghost was equalled to the voice of human reason. Scholten added a
check and balance by the sentence “in the morally pure person.” In practice though, the distinction between
source and standard became rather vague.[12] Reasonable conscience became the standard for
truth. This is shown when Faure deals with
anticipated objections against such a stance. “What a dangerous doctrine!, shouts or sighs one of my hearers. Must I believe that corrupted reason is my
source for truth? No, my brother, you
need not believe that. She is not the source of truth, but the instrument by
which man learns to recognise the revelations of God, His outer revelation in
nature and history, His inner revelation right within you. Reason has the same relation to revealed
truth, as the eye to the things it perceives.
Just like the eye cannot see anything, if there is nothing to be seen,
likewise reason is not able to recognize the truth, if it is not revealed to
her by God.”[13]
The obvious next step would have been disconnecting God, as the
foundation for his inclusion lay in a concept of revelation now discarded. In
this way both Scholten and his pupil nearly arrived at
a worldview without God. On a moral
level He was still necessary, but for all practical purposes, He could be left
out in formulating scientific theories.
One sees the influence of the philosopher Wilhelm Kant and his Critic of
the practical Reason.
God was reduced to a set of moral laws and material causality in the
universe. Faure
did not hesitate to call Him “the reign of Law in the Universe”.[14] The two capitals that he used are striking:
“Law” and “Universe”. These are a
summary of his theology. Did it satisfy
his sense for theology and reason? Was this the outcome he had hoped for? At first glance he certainly seemed
happy. Although the evidence of real joy
is not overwhelming in his writings one could say that the liberal minister
defended his position with intense commitment.
With confident sarcasm he ridiculed orthodoxy. David Faure devoted
his money, time and life to modern theology.
But how sure was he really?
At closer look Faure still had not found what
he was looking for. In 1907 he writes that his last religious hopes are not set
on modern theology, but Spiritualism.
“I can see no reason why the adherents of the new school of thought should be
prejudiced against Spiritualism; on the contrary, it would seem that they have
every reason for wishing it to be true, to bestow their blessing upon it, and
wishing it Godspeed. In the first place,
it would supply absolute proof of the immortality of the human soul, which
proof cannot be, or rather has not yet been supplied from another source.”[15]
Behold, the failure of human reason as the operational centre of theology!
Faure was
forced to the conclusion that in the end reason left to itself,
is not enough. The committed rationalist
admits that some things need to be revealed to man in order to know for
sure. He wants revelation to silence the
doubts about immortality. He needs it badly to disprove the philosophy of
materialism and to kill off orthodoxy. Faure expects Spiritualism to provide the weaponry against
these three mortal enemies.
“We may have hope and faith in
Immortality -as I trust we have- but that after death we retain our
individuality, our self-consciousness, survive under new conditions, we cannot
know, unless we know that at least one has actually returned from “that bourne,” whence Shakespeare believed “no traveller
returns.”[16]
At this stage Faure has become a ship passing in the
night, nearly touching the roots of the Church, which puts its trust in the One
who actually did return. But the liberal
mister was no longer able. His heart was
too hardened to arrive at the same conclusion as Peter: “To whom shall we
go? Thou hast the words of eternal
life.”(John 6:68)
Modern theology also failed Faure on the
subject of Materialism. It could as well
be that everything that we think and do, is a temporarily result of matter
only. His rational theology did not
offer anything to a challenge this line of reasoning. Faure sure hoped
that Spiritualism would provide him with the necessary answers. “Spiritualism means death to
Materialism. If the truth of the
Spiritualistic theory is established, Materialism has no locus standi, the theory that matter is but the manifestation of spirit, then becomes an axiom.”[17]
David Faure reveals something else here. Ever
since Faure returned from his cum laude examinations
in 1866, he had been confronted with orthodox Christianity in one way or
another. Although trying very hard, he
had never been able to deal it that final blow which would satisfy his reason. Towards the end of his life he admits that
modern theology alone was not strong and convincing enough to end of orthodox
Christianity and logically force its conclusion. “And, in the third place, the verification of
Spiritualism, is death to orthodoxy. If the dead can return and communicate with
their friends -entirely irrespective of the description they give of the future
life- the orthodox views of heaven and hell, and the scheme of salvation of the
popular theology, become demonstrably untenable.”[18]
Faure had
been challenging these threats to his religious system ever since his return to
About the life and resurrection of Jesus, and other things contained in
the Apostolic Creed, the liberal minister stated: “Never did Jesus make man's
salvation dependent on faith in doctrines like that, a child can understand
this. According to Jesus, religion did not consist of belief in doctrines,
whatever they may be, but of life; religion as he understood it, was a
state of the heart, loving God and people.”[22] The New Testament only provided us with nice
illustrations for dogmatic and philosophical opinions of human reason. In Faure’s case
these were the principle of loving your neighbour and some other virtues. His tutor Scholten
had a comparable approach.[23]
In his address on Easter, the minister still showed a firm belief in the
immortality of the human soul. Faure put contrast between this immortality and the
‘foolish’ belief in a bodily resurrection.
“We attach no value to the bodily resurrection of Jesus; nor do we
believe that our dear ones, who are dead and gone, and that, that which constitutes
our humanity, is immortal, and will live on in all eternity -this we do
believe, this we believe as firmly as we believe in God, in a God not of the
dead, but of the living. Death deprives
us of nothing, save our material body, -the spirit dies not... Eternity is mine!”[24]
Fifty years later, his hopes are set on Spiritualism for proof. It was not as though Faure
did not recognize the fallibility of human reason fifty years ago. He saw this problem, but tried to make
provision for its consequences by the stressing the task of human conscience.
The lecture about Pentecost shows that Faure
already wrestled with Orthodoxy and Materialism in 1868. “The revival must come, will assuredly
come! And it is our task to bring it
about! And if we do
not lay the foundation of that new temple, it cannot, will not be constructed! Materialism will not build it: it will
destroy all temples, old and new.
Orthodoxy will not construct that new one: it is satisfied with the old,
and that is quite good enough.”[25] Faure also states
that to be filled with the Spirit, is to strive for human virtues.
At that stage he still believed in a Supreme Being giving moral guidance
to his creatures. “But God planted a feeling in our inner man for everything
that is true and good, and you must give heed to the voice of conscience, you
cannot do otherwise. You cannot silence
her, and if you listen to that conscience, and follow its prescriptions, then
you are guided by God himself, then you walk on his hand, and He shall not mislead
His child!”[26]
Fifty years later, Faure is in doubt about
this all. He perceived that if moral and
religious standards are founded in man, they will change with culture and
time. Even truth and God as its
guarantee become subject to reasonable conscience. This is why Faure
had to say, even in 1868: “And as long as we have the conviction, as long as
Jesus remains the supreme phenomenon in the religious realm, as long as Jesus
remains the best that we know, for that long we will remain true to him, and
will call ourselves Christians. If the
time comes, when it appears to us that we may find a better religion than his
elsewhere, if a man stands up who appears to be a greater hero in religion than
he was, then we shall go and no longer walk with Jesus...”[27]
These words Faure also spoke in Mutual Hall, a
few weeks after his last formal lecture about modern theology. It is striking
that they had been part of a sermon about John 6:66-69. The very thing that this passage condemns, is recommended by the minister if circumstances
seem to allow for it according to human reason.
It is therefore not strange, that the kind of Jesus left to Faure in 1907, no longer offered any certainty about
eternal life.[28]
If reasonable conscience gets the position of a final authority, many things
become relative.
On the outside the liberal minister of the
How did his new Bible function?
“The two characteristics of the eternal Bible (as Faure
used to call his alternative) are, in the first place, that it must cover and
include all truth which concerns the life and the welfare of man,
and in the second place, it must be for ever being written and never
completed.”[30]
This new Bible became as relative as the authority of human experience that
had to support it. “These are the real
chapters of the eternal Bible which are being written age after age as the
result of human experience -a Bible not yet complete, a Bible in which each new
truth is a sentence, and each new grand discovery a chapter.”[31] The likely feature of wavering surprise did
not matter as Faure called in God for final
support. He was the ultimate
justification for the ever-changing courses of human reason. “Or would the good Father of us all have
given us the human reason, in order to throw us in destruction? Then he would not be God, but the Devil.”[32]
It is quite remarkable that Faure eventually
granted Spiritualism all the supernatural room that he denied to Biblical
Christianity. In an almost desperate
attempt to cling to his last hope for answers, Faure
stated: “But the most determined foes of
Spiritualism are to be found among the thoughtful men and women, who have discarded belief
in the supernatural, and are fully persuaded of the stability of the laws of nature,
which are never broken, and from which
there is no departure. Belief in
miracles they regard as childish, and their very faith in a God ruling the
Universe would be shaken if they were convinced that the immutability and
constancy of the laws of nature were fictions and fables. Now if it was certain that Spiritualistic
phenomena were in reality infringements
of natural law, they would have to be placed in the category of ‘miracles,’ and
believing, as I do, in the reign of Law in the Universe, which leaves no room
for the miraculous, I would, without hesitation, reject the Spiritualistic
theory. But the correct definition of a
miracle is that it is a violation of the laws of nature known or unknown. Hence
Spiritualistic phenomena, however much they may conflict with known laws, may
yet be subject to laws as yet
unknown.”[33] One has only to replace
Spiritualism with Biblical Christianity, to ascertain the shift in Faure’s thinking.
Faure was
however not prepared to grant Orthodoxy the same chance. His mind could not but create space for
revelation from the realms of the unknown, as reason was on a dead track and in
need of revelation. It could not prove
immortality, nor disprove that everything visible and spiritual was just a
product of matter and circumstances.
Reason was no longer able to give satisfactory foundations to Faure’s liberal theology.
In short, it had arrived at a dead end.
If only a spirit would return and give some revelation about a possible
state after death... “then we shall go and no longer
walk with Jesus...”[34]
But Faure left the One who did return long
ago. It was a notorious woman that visited him at a reformed seminary so
called. She took Faure by the hand and quietly walked
away from Jesus. The reformer Martin Luther also knew her. He used to refer to her as ‘that old witch,
Lady Reason’. She guided the South African safely while he kept up the
appearances of confident liberal theology. She guided him safely, to a dead end
for mind and soul.
[1] Dr Zuiddam is a
graduate from
[2] A Morrees: Die Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk in Suid-Afrika
1652-1873, SA Bybelvereniging, Kaapstad 1937, p.976.
[3] J du Plessis: Het Leven van
Andrew Murray, Zuidafrikaanse Bijbelvereniging, Kaapstad 1920, p.241- 242.
[4] P Huet: Eenvoudige Meededelingen over Zuid-Afrika, Utrecht 1868, p.4,5.
[5] P Huet: Eenvoudige Meededelingen over Zuid-Afrika, Utrecht 1868, p.30.
[6] P Huet: Afrikaansche
Gedichten, H Höveker, Amsterdam 1868.
[7] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, p.130.
[8] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, idem.
[9] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, p.131.
[10] AJ Rasker: De Nederlandse
Hervormde Kerk Vanaf 1795, haar
geschiedenis en theologie in de negentiende en twintigste eeuw, JH Kok, Kampen
1974, p.117.
[11] TN Hanekom: Die liberale Rigting
in Suid-Afrika, ‘n kerkhistoriese
studie, deel 1, CSV Maatskappy, Stellenbosch
1951, p.32.
[12] A Murray: Het Moderne Ongeloof, dertien leerredenen, Hofmeyer & Co, Kaapstad 1868, p.8,9.
[13] DP Faure: De Moderne Theologie,
dertien toespraken gehouden in de Mutual Hall
Kaapstad, Juta, Kaapstad 1868, p.37, translated
from Dutch origin.
[14] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, p.128.
[15] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, p.129.
[16] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, p.129.
[17] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, idem.
[18] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, idem.
[19] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, p.36.
[20] DP Faure: De Moderne
Theologie, dertien toespraken gehouden in de Mutual
Hall Kaapstad, Juta, Kaapstad 1868.
[21] DP Faure: Modern Theology, sixteen discourses held in Mutual
Hall Cape Town, Van de Sandt de Villiers, Capetown 1869.
[22] DP Faure: De Moderne
Theologie, dertien toespraken gehouden in de Mutual
Hall Kaapstad, Juta, Kaapstad 1868, p.288, translated from Dutch original.
[23] AJ Rasker: De Nederlandse
Hervormde Kerk Vanaf 1795, haar geschiedenis en theologie in de negentiende
en twintigste eeuw, JH Kok, Kampen
1974, p.119.
[24] DP Faure: Modern Theology, sixteen discourses held in Mutual
Hall Cape Town, Van de Sandt de Villiers, Capetown 1869,
p.209.
[25] DP Faure: Modern Theology, sixteen discourses held in Mutual
Hall Cape Town, Van de Sandt de Villiers, Capetown 1869,
p.230.
[26] DP Faure: De Moderne
Theologie, dertien toespraken gehouden in de Mutual
Hall Kaapstad, Juta, Kaapstad 1868, p.37,38.
[27] DP Faure, De Moderne
Theologie, dertien toespraken gehouden in de Mutual
Hall Kaapstad, Juta, Kaapstad 1868, p.290, translated from Dutch original.
[28] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, p.129.
[29] DP Faure: The Truth about the Bible, discourses delivered in
the
[30] DP Faure: The Truth about the Bible, discourses delivered in
the
[31] DP Faure: The Truth about the Bible, discourses delivered in
the
[32] DP Faure: De Moderne
Theologie, dertien toespraken gehouden in de Mutual
Hall Kaapstad, Juta, Kaapstad 1868, p.38, translation from Dutch original.
[33] DP Faure: My Life and Times, Juta, Capetown 1907, p.128,129.
[34] DP Faure: De Moderne
Theologie, dertien toespraken gehouden
in de Mutual Hall Kaapstad, Juta,
Kaapstad, 1868, p.290, translation from Dutch original.