by Herman Bavinck
translated by Gregory Parker Jr.
This essay was originally published in 1892 by Herman Bavinck in the yearbook of the Dutch Youth Association (Nederlandsch Jongelings-Verbond) as “Hoofd en Hart” (“Head and Heart”).(1) Formed in Amsterdam in 1853 as a result of the Réviel,(2) this association of young males between eighteen and thirty-five later merged with the Young Men’s Christian Association (Y.M.C.A). Since the original readers of this essay most likely struggled with the intersection of theology and life, Bavinck’s intention was to clarify for them the relationship between the head and the heart. The piece also demonstrates Bavinck’s ongoing work in biblical psychology.(3) (The numbers found in brackets are the page numbers in the Dutch edition.)(4)
[71] Everyone knows that Holy Scriptures grants the heart a central place in the spiritual life of man, and on the other hand it seldom makes mention of the head. According to [Scripture], the heart, not the head is the principle, the root, the fire—and midpoint of all of life, and of all the activities of the soul. It is not only, as for us, an organ of all feeling and emotion, so that love and hate, friendship and enmity, sadness and joy, courage and fear, compassion and revenge, and all sorts of other feelings are added to it. See, for example, to name just a few places of many: Isa. 65:14; Hos. 11:8; Ps. 84:3; John 16:6; Acts 2:46; 7:54. But it is also the origin and driving force of the will, which cannot be turned to and fro, but is bound to and moved by the nature of the heart. See, among others: Exod. 35:21, 29; Eccl.1:13; Dan. 1:8; Acts 11:23; 2 Cor. 9:7. Nonetheless, the most remarkable thing is that all of the works that we summarize under the name of the faculty of knowing [kenvermogen] are attributed in Scripture to the heart. Thinking, contemplating, deliberating, remembering, imagining, knowing, etc., are according to Scripture functions of the heart; from there they derive their origin and therein they have their seat and organ. Deut. 8:5; 29:4; Neh. 5:7; Isa. 32:4; 65:17; Luke 2:19; Acts 16:14; 1 Cor. 2:9, and many other places, clearly teach this. That is why there is always talk of poems, imaginations, counsels, objections, consultations, and thoughts of the heart (Gen. 6:5; Ps. 73:7; Matt. 15:19; 1 Cor. 4:5; Heb. 4:12). Even words come from the heart: “The fool says in his heart, there is no God” (Ps. 14:1). And thinking is speaking in the heart (Gen. 8:21; 17:17; Ps. 27:8; Prov. 23:33; Matt. 24:48).
This psychology of Holy Scripture therefore deserves our attention all the more, since it diverges so completely from ours. Not only does scientific psychology teach us that the head, and not the heart, must be regarded as the seat and organ of thinking, but the same applies to the testimony of daily experience. Everyone knows from experience that thinking takes place with the head and that the conscious life is bound to the brain. It even startles [72] us and seems strange to us that the Israelites could have attributed those activities of the soul to the heart, which we believe to be so clearly taking place in the head. For us, the heart is only the seat and organ of the affections and moods [stemmingen] of the soul. But consciousness with all its expressions and activities has its center in the head. It is as if our thinking has increasingly sought to escape from the influences of the heart and has now taken on an autonomous and independent position.
And that Eastern character is also found in Israel. Israel is not a nation of thinkers; it lacks the sharp dialectic of reason, the philosophical disposition that characterizes the Indo-Germanic peoples. It is rather a people of gemoed and of heart [gemoed en van hart](5); not a people of tepid western beaches and on and on. [The] Eastern [character] is lively, cheerful, passionate, susceptible to all kinds of impressions; it is never indifferent or neutral, but loving or hating with their entire soul, blessing or cursing, cheering or lamenting. In all of this, their character was formed by the Lord himself. Israel was not to produce, but to receive and preserve what God had given it; it was not to reason philosophically about God, but rather to listen to him and sing of his deeds. That is why, even in Scripture, reasoning and argumentation are seldom seen; it was not born of reflection but of inspiration.
But Western people are nourished completely differently. They are characterized by a strong feeling of freedom [gevoel van vrijheid], through a strong pursuit of independence [onafhankelijkeheid]. They excel through clarity of [73] thought, severity of argument, and sharpness of reasoning. From the outset, the head has a different, greater significance than the heart. There has always been an effort among the Indo-Germanic people to emancipate the head from the heart and to make reason rule over the changing moods [stemmingen] and disorders of the soul. The dark side of this excellent construction is indubitable; intellectualism was at all times and even now is more than an imminent danger. Intellectualism is the tendency [richting] that sees in thinking not a lofty activity but the essence of the human soul. It sees intellectual knowledge as the highest good and determines the value of man according to the extent of his knowledge. All education then serves the purpose of developing the mind and expanding knowledge. Schools save people from prison. As long as the head is full, the heart will automatically reach the right place. Knowledge is a source of virtue and cure for all the ailments of suffering humanity.
Against this one-sided intellectual tendency, Scripture offers an excellent corrective to us. However, much one appreciates the aptitude and the peculiar calling of Western peoples; the head is not the only thing, and the intellect is not the essence of man. We too often experience that thinking and willing are controlled by our heart, and thus the heart is the origin of our whole spiritual life. Outside of our knowledge and against our will, sundry thoughts and deliberations often arise in our consciousness. There is therefore no so-called unbiased research and independent science. Even in the most impartial and fairest investigations, every person brings with him his own heart, and he cannot get rid of himself. Consciously or unconsciously, his heart gives the direction in which his thinking and willing will move. A famous philosopher has therefore rightly said: “The kind of philosophy one chooses therefore depends on the kind of person one is.”(6) The system of our head is often nothing but the history of our heart. That is why the demand and also the impossible practice to impose silence on our hearts as a man of science only give the floor to the so-called neutral intellect. This cannot and must not be the requirement of science: to cut a man in half and to shorten the deepest and noblest in him; but our calling ought rather to be this, that we always and everywhere, including the scientific domain, are whole and true people [74], equipped for every good work. That is a demand of our nature and a need of our spirit, which thirsts for unity and strives for harmony.
Conversely, we all know that the most astute line of reasoning and the strongest arguments are often pointless at convincing us of the wrong and persuading us to a different view. The heart has its own logic and it yields no syllogism to the understanding. Whoever does not realize and acknowledge this must explain the tenacity of their opponents’ stubbornness and their unwillingness to seek shelter. Intellectualism leads to intolerance and looks down on the foolish and reluctant crowd with contempt. But even without unwillingness or misunderstanding, it often happens that a man cannot surrender himself under an argument, because he cannot convince himself and his heart; because he is his heart, he keeps opposing, even though his intellect is at the end of all contradiction. And in such a case, he would prefer to comfort himself with his intellect than displease the gemoed. Peace with one’s own heart is elevated by the peace of the head. The logical power of truth has always proved impotent by itself to convert the heart without any other help. Even philosophy has occasionally acknowledged this; Kant and Schopenhauer both hold “a sort of rebirth” as necessary for the true renewal of man.(7) To think and to will as one ought, one must first be what one is supposed to be. Intellect and will are not suspended in the air, nor can they move to their heart’s content; they are bound to and rooted in the inner nature, in the heart of man. Therefore, first of all, plant the tree well; then the good fruits will follow. For this reason, intellectual development and progress are themselves insufficient to renew mankind spiritually and morally. Underneath all this [intellectual development], the heart and character can remain unchanged. And intellectual knowledge, beautiful and in itself an invaluable good, becomes even in the service of the unregenerate man a dangerous tool for the satisfaction of evil passions and sinful inclinations.
Nevertheless, the conscious retains the highest and most honorable place in our spiritual life. It corresponds to the assertion that our head belongs in the human organism. Thinking is and remains one of the most important activities of the human mind [geest]. Consciousness is the passage, the gateway, [75] the royal road to the human personality. There is no other path cleared for us, or at least permissible, than that which leads through the head of mankind. There man, as it were, grants an audience and hears us and speaks to us. The head is the waiting room of man. Attempts to penetrate the human personality through another path—through a back door, as it were, as is done nowadays—generally deserves our disapproval; they lead to the deprivation of man’s right to his personality, to himself, and bring him into the possession of another; that is, make him “possessed” by another. God himself walks that royal road, as he lets the Word work on our souls and brings faith to hearing.
Although, not the head but the heart is the center of man. There he dwells himself; this is his inner chamber; in the heart, man is first honest with himself. The head is the entrance and the waiting room; the heart is the temple, the sanctuary of man. Only he who has won the heart has the man. Wherefore the Lord demands first our heart, and then also intellect and all strength. Armed with the key of knowledge alone, we cannot penetrate into the inner sanctuary of the human personality. We may be able to silence someone, but in this case staying silent is not permitted. Anyone who wants to win the heart of a man must bring with him something other than reasoning and argument. He needs love in order to ignite another heart in love. Mighty at all times were those people who in one way or another satisfied the needs of the heart, knew how to stir the faculty of people’s gemoed, and were able to become masters of the deepest passions of the soul. Only love, taken in the broadest sense, is the key that unlocks the inner sanctuary of man’s personality. According to the Reformed confession, the Holy Spirit’s operation of grace is irresistible, but it is so because it is both gentle and sweet. It does not compel but inclines.(8) It does not make slaves but volunteers. And God is the Master of the human heart, because he is almighty love.
Greg Parker Jr. is a PhD candidate in systematic theology at the University of Edinburgh. He is the co-editor and co-translator with Cameron Clausing of Herman Bavinck’s The Sacrifice of Praise (Hendrickson, 2019) and Guidebook for Instruction in the Christian Religion (Hendrickson, 2022).
2. The Réviel was an international revival of Reformed thinking in the nineteenth century. Within the Netherlands, it was cultivated and promoted by Willem Bilderdijk. In 1906, Bavinck wrote a positive biography on Bilderdijk (see Bavinck, Bilderdijk als Denker en Dichter [Kampen: J. H. Kok, 1906]).
3. Bavinck, “Foundations of Psychology,” The Bavinck Review 9 (2018): 1–252. In this book, Bavinck also compares Eastern and Western psychology (see pp. 216–18).
4. I would like to express gratitude to Jacolien van Eekeren for her feedback on this translation.
5. Gemoed is a synonym for heart but goes deeper. Gemoed indicates the fountain spring from which emotions—especially the higher, noble emotions—arise. The heart is the seat; the gemoed is the source of emotions. Therefore, we speak about a soft, warm, deep, pious, friendly, or noble gemoed. Gemoed confers a quiet, friendly, pleasant, gentle warmth on all impressions and deeds it touches. It is something genuinely human. Bavinck, “Foundations of Psychology,” 217.
6. Johann G. Fichte, “[First] Introduction to the Wissenschaftlehre,” Fichte, Introductions to the Wissenschaftslehre and Other Writings, ed. and trans. Daniel Breazeale (Cambridge: Hackett, 1994), 20. Bavinck draws on Fichte’s statement to argue in favor of the heart and the head working together in science (see also Bavinck, “Foundations of Psychology,” 124).
7. Immanuel Kant, Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft (Leipzig: Voss, 1838), 41, 50; Arthur Schopenhauer, Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1887), 1:448. Bavinck makes reference to this elsewhere in his corpus. See, for example: Bavinck, Christian Worldview, trans. and ed. Nathaniel Gray Sutanto, James Eglinton, and Cory Brock (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2019), 112; Bavinck, trans. and ed. Cory Brock and Nathaniel Gray Sutanto, Philosophy of Revelation: A New Annotated Edition (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2018), 187.
8. Canons of Dort, III–IV, 3, 6, 11, 16. The Spirit “spiritually quickens, heals, corrects, and at the same time sweetly and powerfully bends it.”
