Solid biography. Kuyper was and is a controversial figure - yet his contributions to Christian thought are inescapable. Bratt handles both the fruitful and discouraging sides of Kuyper’s career, personality, writings and political influence well.
The notes section after the bibliography- ridiculously helpful!! Wow.
208 - “Worldview was also inherently democratic: that is, it assumed a pluralistic situation, was designed for popular reception, and sought to inspire action. As to pluralism, it was to normalize perennial dis-agreements among schools that Dilthey entitled his definitive essay on the matter "Der Streit der Weltanschauungen," the conflict of the worldviews. Some of Kuyper's latter-day progeny have aptly noted that, whereas "philosophy" at the time made claims to universal truth, "worldview" connoted the particular vision of one group or an-other. Also, philosophy restricted its domain to elite competency, while worldviews aimed to perform philosophy's functions — to provide answers to life's fundamental questions - for a wide range of people. Finally, worldview sought to furnish a feedback loop between convictions and experience, each clarifying the other so as to propel action. We can add that "the wide range of people" in question were often newly literate and newly urban under conditions of industrial-ism, thus living amid an unfamiliar welter of opinion and circum-stance. Worldview was first conceptualized this way by Friedrich Engels; it perfectly fit Kuyper's project.” …
278 - “When, after two world wars and a long sojourn in a Fundamentalist counterculture, some conservative Protestants sought to engage the American scene constructively again, the Kuyperian tradition supplied crucial resources for doing so. Among American evangelicals, then, his vision would finally have some of the impact he had yearned for decades before. That his heritage divided left, right, and center shows that the volatility of his vision could cross the Atlantic, too”
381 - “Yet the final test of a thinker might be whether her critical method can be used to expose and correct her substantive mistakes - whether, in Kuyper's language, his principles can work through unhappy iterations to reach a better application. In this regard it is intriguing to recall that one of the leading religious voices against apartheid, Allan Boesak, invoked Kuyper's most famous words to condemn apartheid as a heresy. "Not a square inch of human existence," Boesak testified, not even the system of racial hierarchy and exclusion that South African authorities had set beyond religious critique, stands apart from the sovereign claims of Christ.
More positively, Kuyper's theory of sphere sovereignty has been recommended for adaptation by South Korea's burgeoning evangelical Protestant population as a way to promote civil-society institutions there against a heritage of overweening state power and the rising threat posed by multinational business and financial corporations responsible to no one but themselves. The Justice and Development Party of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan demonstrates that a political party with strong Muslim roots and appreciative of the rights and public role of religion can operate successfully under the separation of mosque and state. The success there has entailed overturning rule by a self-perpetuating, secularistic caste (the military), winning fair and free elections, and opening new ventures in economic and diplomatic arenas that redound to the nation's well-being, just as Kuyper proposed for Calvinism in the Netherlands. Beyond pol-itics, the current search by African Christian theologians to explain the phenomenal spread of Christianity on that continent has postulated a complementarity between the new faith and the people's native culture and "primal religion." Such a proposition can find ballast in Kuyper's theology of common grace and especially in his robust endorsement of the created, and creative, value of every culture under the sun. If this is so in Africa, then it might be so anywhere. There is much we can all learn from a person who asked the right questions and gave enduring methods for seeking, and finding, their answers.”