The social context of church members spawns different ecclesial imaginations of the nature of the church. Those different ecclesial imaginations often function within one particular church. It interacts with each other – in isolation, competition or hostility – to ultimately shape the life of that church. This article discusses the result of a historical study in which the authors dissected the primary ecclesial imaginations of members of churches in South Africa. The authors, therefore, discuss three of the ecclesial imaginations that emanated from the research, which can be observed within the sampled congregations. The authors argue that because the congregants of the churches have such ‘ecclesiological imaginations’, the prophetic voice of the church in South Africa has become silent. Therefore, the authors suggest that the members of the churches in South Africa should re-imagine the nature of the church in terms of the missio Dei if it wants to recover the prophetic voice of the church. The authors conclude that the missional church discourse provides specific conceptual tools to assist congregations to recover the prophetic voice of the church in South Africa.Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: This article demonstrates the relationship between societal context and its influence and impact on the emergence of ecclesial imaginations. There is an interaction between the discipline of social science, humanities, theology and missiological discourses in terms of the challenge that the authors address in this article.
The Uniting Reformed Church in Southern Africa (URCSA) has since its inception always celebrated its prophetic and missional heritage from all the avenues of the black church. However, it remains crucial to reflect whether this can be ascribed only to a few individuals and whether the struggle against injustice was nurtured on “grassroots” level. The black churches in their own right have certainly made significant contributions during the apartheid years. However, the impact of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC) on the black wing of the church, in terms of its mission thought and practice, will still be felt by the newly established church (URCSA) for some years to come. Therefore, this contribution focuses specifically on the mission praxis that has been apparent in the DRC in the Cape since 1652, but it will also subsequently discuss various historical developments in terms of mission thought and practice within the DRC family until 1994 and beyond—the 25 years since the existence of URCSA. The article will provide a fragmentary historical account aimed at presenting an idea of the thought and practice of mission before and after the establishment of URCSA. This paper argues—as part of a critical reflection on the said period—that URCSA should position itself in such a way that it does not perpetuate the patterns of mission thought and practice of the past. It would be crucial for the church to avoid the objectification of mission, as well as being too comfortable to focus on forming external partnerships, without tenaciously and intentionally establishing a praxis of African “missional consciousness” in URCSA.
In celebrating a quarter of a century of the Uniting Reformed Church in Southern Africa (URSCA) (1994 2019), quite a few well-organised activities and events took place. These activities reflect a mix of serious academic seminars and liturgical celebrations of which the ones in the Cape, both in Belhar and at the University of the Western Cape (UWC) warrant special mention. In his sermon based on John 17 at the closing liturgical celebration at UWC, Prof Daan Cloete raised several pertinent issues pertaining to unity and justice as a challenge to the leadership of URCSA. Despite all the significant events taking place throughout the year (2019), there has been a major deficit. Attempts at serious historiography are few and far between. This book is an attempt at starting such a study process. However, to put it modestly to contribute to the writing of the history of the URCSA. It has been resolved to start right at the beginning: the founding synod of URCSA with a specific focus on the constituting moderature. The book discusses the issues that were looming large at the founding Synod in 1994 which captures the ‘miracle’ and the euphoria that emerged amidst some delicate matters and issues that would have posed some serious impediments that would have jeopardise the unification before it even started. In calling into service the pastoral or praxis cycle the contributions of the first moderature of URCSA: Rev Nick Apollis (moderator), Rev Leonardo Appies (Scriba Synodii) Rev Dr Sam Buti (Assessor) and Rev JD Buys (Actuaris), of the 1994 General Synod elections are presented in this book. The authors were interested in answering the question: In what way did the moderature members of URCSA assist in the transformation of church and society? The book showcases, how not only systems and structures are essential in transformation processes, but people - who take up the task in obedience and servitude.
During the South African amnesty process perpetrators would get amnesty if they could prove that there was a political motive for committing their actions, their deeds were proportionate, that they happened during and between the years 1960 and 1994, and if they gave full disclosure. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the following: the fact that remorse and repentance were not required in order for perpetrators to get amnesty, left the reconciliation process in a vacuum. The inclusion of remorse and repentance as a requirement for amnesty, would have established a true (not a cheap) forgiveness and a ‘thick’ reconciliation process between perpetrators and victims. Remorse and repentance would have requested an admission and regret of wrongdoing, followed by an act of repentance underwritten by acts of contrition.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.