Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Categories
UFS News Media Release Research
Years
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Months
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Previous Archive
01 March 2018 Photo Eugene Seegers
Theological faculty highlights reconciliation as Biblical imperative
Prof Bram van de Beek (Liturgist; Emeritus Professor, VU Amsterdam); Prof Fanie Snyman (Dean: Faculty of Theology and Religion, UFS); Prof Nelus Niemandt (Guest speaker; Department: Science of Religion and Missiology, University of Pretoria); and Prof Mary-Anne Plaatjies-Van Huffel (Guest speaker; Department of Systematic Theology and Ecclesiology, University of Stellenbosch) at the UFS theological faculty’s official opening in Bloemfontein.
Does the current South African context and reality still allow for discussions around the topic of forgiveness and reconciliation? This was one of the themes discussed at the annual opening and Theological Day of the Faculty of Theology and Religion at the University of the Free State (UFS), which experienced a record attendance figure this year.

After welcoming staff members from the broader university community and from within the faculty, as well as guest speakers and international visitors such as Prof Bram van de Beek from the Free University Amsterdam (the Netherlands) and Dr Stefan Fischer from the University of Vienna (Austria), Prof Fanie Snyman, Dean of the faculty, stated, “We want to welcome pastors, dominees, reverends, fathers, spiritual leaders from a variety of church denominations.” He added, “I would also like to extend a special word of welcome to alumni of this faculty, who have kept their interest in our faculty alive by being present here.”

Reconciliation: Biblical imperative
In his sermon, Prof Bram van de Beek (VU Amsterdam) pointed out that “reconciliation is the Christian way, the way of love; therefore, to serve others should be more important to us than serving ourselves.” He explained further that, as humans, we run the risk of merely thinking about what is best for us, but to be true followers of Christ, we need to let others take priority.

Prof Mary-Anne Plaatjies-Van Huffel from the Department of Systematic Theology and Ecclesiology at the University of Stellenbosch’s Faculty of Theology spoke on Moving from forgiveness to reconciliation—Reconciliation as a fundamental Biblical category. She expanded on the Old Testament understanding of reconciliation as a means of repentance, atonement, and — ultimately — forgiveness.

The Jewish festivals of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, as well as the Biblical events recorded between Jacob and Esau in Genesis Chapter 33 were cited as examples of this understanding. Prof Plaatjies-Van Huffel said, “Having to face a painful past is a prerequisite for reconciliation,” adding that “broken relationships are only restored by the grace of God, who is the Author of reconciliation.” However, the responsibility for carrying out this message to the world belongs to each Christian, who must individually actuate divine reconciliation by the example they set, she concluded.

The reality of the post-Zuma South African landscape
Prof Nelus Niemandt, from the Department of Science of Religion and Missiology at the University of Pretoria, presented a paper entitled Competing narraphors in the post-Zuma landscape. His presentation painted a vivid narrative of the enormously complex time of rapid, radical change with which we as humans are ill-equipped to cope or to which we cannot adapt quickly enough. He highlighted several examples of the paradoxes evident in the world today, such as our mobile worldwide society versus the mass displacement of humans which creates migrants and strangers across the globe, or a growing super-diversity that feeds increased nationalism, racism, or fundamentalism, all of which challenge any preconceptions we may have of reconciliation.

He concluded with this expression: “My hope is that the Faculty of Theology and Religion at the UFS will be such eloquent storytellers that they will shape the imagination with narraphors of Christ’s future Kingdom.”

News Archive

Weideman focuses on misconceptions with regard to survival of Afrikaans
2006-05-19

From the left are Prof Magda Fourie (Vice-Rector: Academic Planning), Prof Gerhardt de Klerk (Dean: Faculty of the Humanities), George Weideman and Prof Bernard  Odendaal (acting head of the UFS  Department of Afrikaans and Dutch, German and French). 
Photo (Stephen Collett):

Weideman focuses on misconceptions with regard to survival of Afrikaans

On the survival of a language a persistent and widespread misconception exists that a “language will survive as long as people speak the language”. This argument ignores the higher functions of a language and leaves no room for the personal and historic meaning of a language, said the writer George Weideman.

He delivered the D.F. Malherbe Memorial Lecture organised by the Department Afrikaans at the University of the Free State (UFS). Dr. Weideman is a retired lecturer and now full-time writer. In his lecture on the writer’s role and responsibility with regard to language, he also focused on the language debate at the University of Stellenbosch (US).

He said the “as-long-as-it-is spoken” misconception ignores the characteristics and growth of literature and other cultural phenomena. Constitutional protection is also not a guarantee. It will not stop a language of being reduced to a colloquial language in which the non-standard form will be elevated to the norm. A language only grows when it standard form is enriched by non-standard forms; not when its standard form withers. The growth or deterioration of a language is seen in the growth or decline in its use in higher functions. The less functions a language has, the smaller its chance to survive.

He said Afrikaans speaking people are credulous and have misplaced trust. It shows in their uncritical attitude with regard to the shifts in university policies, university management and teaching practices. Afrikaners have this credulity perhaps because they were spoilt by white supremacy, or because the political liberation process did not free them from a naïve and slavish trust in government.

If we accept that a university is a kind of barometer for the position of a language, then the institutionalised second placing of Afrikaans at most tertiary institutions is not a good sign for the language, he said.

An additional problem is the multiplying effect with, for instance, education students. If there is no need for Afrikaans in schools, there will also be no  need for Afrikaans at universities, and visa versa.

The tolerance factor of Afrikaans speaking people is for some reasons remarkably high with regard to other languages – and more specifically English. With many Afrikaans speaking people in the post-apartheid era it can be ascribed to their guilt about Afrikaans. With some coloured and mostly black Afrikaans speaking people it can be ascribed to the continued rejection of Afrikaans because of its negative connotation with apartheid – even when Afrikaans is the home language of a large segment of the previously oppressed population.

He said no one disputes the fact that universities play a changing role in a transformed society. The principle of “friendliness” towards other languages does not apply the other way round. It is general knowledge that Afrikaans is, besides isiZulu and isiXhosa, the language most spoken by South Africans.

It is typical of an imperialistic approach that the campaigners for a language will be accused of emotional involvement, of sentimentality, of longing for bygone days, of an unwillingness to focus on the future, he said.

He said whoever ignores the emotional aspect of a language, knows nothing about a language. To ignore the emotional connection with a language, leads to another misconception: That the world will be a better place without conflict if the so-called “small languages” disappear because “nationalism” and “language nationalism” often move closely together. This is one of the main reasons why Afrikaans speaking people are still very passive with regard to the Anglicising process: They are not “immune” to the broad influence that promotes English.

It is left to those who use Afrikaans to fight for the language. This must not take place in isolation. Writers and publishers must find more ways to promote Afrikaans.

Some universities took the road to Anglicision: the US and University of Pretoria need to be referred to, while there is still a future for Afrikaans at the Northwest University and the UFS with its parallel-medium policies. Continued debate is necessary.

It is unpreventable that the protest over what is happening to Afrikaans and the broad Afrikaans speaking community must take on a stronger form, he said.

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept