Berkouwer systematics?

[arapahoepark]

I have heard his later stuff is touched with neo orthodoxy in his systematics and I am wondering which ones? I would have assumed his Divine Election yet, I can't find it relating to that. All I have heard is that is is rather weak on election, not necessarily neo Orthodox.
Gordon Clark said this about this book:

[it] is largely motivated by the pastoral concern to protect the congregation from the uncertainties and fear of a harsh presentation of election, predestination, and related themes.... [It] evidences a wealth of knowledge; its doctrine is unmistakably Calvinistic; and yet some of its hesitations and fears seem to be unfounded. Most of the dangers that he mentions have no doubt actually occurred, as in the writings of a certain Snethlage whom he mentions; these dangers could possibly be more common in Holland than in the United States; but so far as the present writer's experience goes, it would seem that the greater and far more common dangers are those of an opposite tendency.

 

[Shawn Mathis]

One of my seminary professors had Berkouwer as his adviser when he was in graduate school. My professor told me that Berkouwer denied election, as I recall. Berkouwer also told my professor that Ridderbos was doing to biblical theology what he did to systematic theology. Here's an old thread on him.

 

[MW]

Berkouwer is dogmatics in dialogue, which defeats the purpose of "dogmatics." There is some benefit in seeing the points of difference and resemblance between the reformed faith and other systems, and in knowing how to address divergent beliefs with the testimony of Scripture. But a person can read Berkouwer's works with impartiality and be left in a state of hesitation over what he taught. This should be a clear indication there is something amiss.