Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Annual Tutu-Jonker Lecture focuses on dignity as foundation of justice

11 October 2019 | Story Eugene Seegers | Photo Eugene Seegers

Tutu-Jonker Prestige lecture — Ingrid Mostert and Nathlene van Wyk, both from the Office of the Dean of the Faculty of Theology and Religion, with guest speaker, Prof Nico Koopman (SU), and the Dean of Theology and Religion, Prof Rantoa Letšosa.

The “rich Christian logic of Luther tells us this: ‘Forgiveness is the first word.’ It invites, facilitates, anticipates, and comes to fruition in contrition.” With these words, Prof Nico Koopman, Vice-Rector: Social Impact, Transformation, and Personnel at Stellenbosch University (SU) sought to reach the hearts of those who attended the UFS Faculty of Theology and Religion’s annual Tutu-Jonker Prestige Lecture on 19 September 2019.

Prof Koopman’s chosen theme was No Future without Justice: The Forgiveness-Logic of Desmond Tutu and Willie Jonker, which focused on these ‘prophets of forgiveness’ as well as the praise and critique they received as a result of their actions.

On Forgiveness

Delving into the history of the relationship between these two prominent theologians, Prof Koopman first revisited the emotional scene when, in 1990, Prof Willie Jonker pleaded for forgiveness on behalf of the Dutch Reformed Church and the Afrikaner nation at an ecumenical conference in Rustenburg, describing it as personal, yet representative. This confession spoke of justice versus injustice, saying that injustice is a stumbling block to reconciliation. Later, Prof Jonker would be criticised for making this confession ‘on behalf of’ the church and white Afrikaans-speaking South Africans, yet even some of his former critics and others defended his actions. Jonker also maintained that a confession of guilt, of sin or wrongdoing, was necessary to enable reconciliation and forgiveness; action was needed to overcome these stumbling blocks. According to Prof Koopman, Prof Jonker’s logic of reconciliation follows that of the apostle Paul, in which justice is essential to the at-one-ment or atonement, reconciliation.

Next, Prof Koopman reviewed Archbishop Tutu’s unequivocal, representative, and vicarious forgiveness, for which he, too, was criticised. Prof Koopman equated this forgiveness with Lutherian tradition, as mentioned at the outset. This belief is grounded in the scriptural principle found in the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew 6:12: To forgive others, just as we have been forgiven. Prof Koopman said this amounted to passing on and sharing our forgiveness as received from God to those who have sinned against us in some way.

Drawing from the Christian parable of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15:11-32, Prof Koopman said the road is paved for real restitution, forgiveness is available. In the parable, the father of the prodigal son ran to him and greeted him even before he could make his confession: “In the space of the hospitality of forgiveness, justice flourishes,” said Prof Koopman. “Tutu granted forgiveness with justice in mind.”

On Justice

Justice is known as Summum Bonum, or ‘Highest Good’. Archbishop Emeritus Tutu’s message is still: ‘Seek justice’. According to Romans 14:17 and Isaiah 65:17-25, future blessings in God’s kingdom, such as peace and joy, flow from justice.

Referring to the South African Constitution, Prof Koopman said dignity is a foundational value. Recalling the 2015 #FeesMustFall protests, he said this highlighted how essential it is for dignity to be linked with justice in practice.

Concretely seeking justice

Prof Koopman mentioned several areas in which one could ‘seek justice’ now, everywhere, and concretely ‘next door’, saying: “Human rights need right humans.”

“Firstly, break rape culture as a quest for justice NOW!” Prof Koopman described rape as oppression, cruelty, barbarism, ‘thingification,’ and dehumanisation; a violation of the most precious, cherished gift — a fellow human being.

Second, he said, is to oppose racism and racial determinism, especially in the field of research. Third, seeking socioeconomic liberation and fulfilling socioeconomic rights, such as access to healthcare, housing, and education.

Lastly, seeking wise hospitality and association with other races, nationalities, and cultures. Following the Tutu-Jonker Logic involves advancing justice as embracing, not alienating.

Porcupine Journey (‘Ystervarkpad’)

In conclusion, Prof Koopman related how porcupines need to huddle close together to conserve their body heat during cold winter nights. However, every time they get close to another porcupine, their quills prick each other, causing them to pull away. Yet, their survival depends on their overcoming those small injuries in order to benefit from each other’s body heat.

He compared this to the situation in South Africa: There are old and new sores that require continuous confessing and offering of forgiveness. He concluded: “Embracing justice means drawing closer together to survive and thrive. Don’t seek to be right all the time; what is most important is to be forgiven. This makes our joint quests for justice sustainable.”

News Archive

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during Reconciliation Lecture

2014-03-05

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during the Third Annual Reconciliation Lecture entitled Forgiveness, Law and Justice.
Photo: Johan Roux

No one could have anticipated the atmosphere in which Prof Martha Minow would visit the Bloemfontein Campus. And no one could have predicted how apt the timing of her message would be. As this formidable Dean of Harvard University’s Law School stepped behind the podium, a latent tension edged through the crowded audience.

“The issue of getting along after conflict is urgent.”

With these few words, Prof Minow exposed the essence of not only her lecture, but also the central concern of the entire university community.

As an expert on issues surrounding racial justice, Prof Minow has worked across the globe in post-conflict societies. How can we prevent atrocities from happening? she asked. Her answer was an honest, “I don’t know.” What she is certain of, on the other hand, is that the usual practice of either silence or retribution does not work. “I think that silence produces rage – understandably – and retribution produces the cycle of violence. Rather than ignoring what happens, rather than retribution, it would be good to reach for something more.” This is where reconciliation comes in.

Prof Minow put forward the idea that forgiveness should accompany reconciliation efforts. She defined forgiveness as a conscious, deliberate decision to forego rightful grounds of resentment towards those who have committed a wrong. “To forgive then, in this definition, is not an obligation. It’s a choice. And it’s held by the one who was harmed,” she explained.

Letting go of resentment cannot be forced – not even by the law. What the law can do, though, is either to encourage or discourage forgiveness. Prof Minow showed how the law can construct adversarial processes that render forgiveness less likely, when indeed its intention was the opposite. “Or, law can give people chances to meet together in spaces where they may apologise and they may forgive,” she continued. This point introduced some surprising revelations about our Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

Indeed, studies do report ambivalence, disappointment and mixed views about the TRC. Whatever our views are on its success, Prof Minow reported that people across the world wonder how South African did it. “It may not work entirely inside the country; outside the country it’s had a huge effect. It’s a touchstone for transitional justice.”

The TRC “seems to have coincided with, and maybe contributed to, the relatively peaceful political transition to democracy that is, frankly, an absolute miracle.” What came as a surprise to many is this: the fact that the TRC has affected transitional justice efforts in forty jurisdictions, including Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia and Liberia. It has even inspired the creation of a TRC in Greensborough, North Carolina, in the United States.

There are no blueprints for solving conflict, though. “But the possibility of something other than criminal trials, something other than war, something other than silence – that’s why the TRC, I think, has been such an exemplar to the world,” she commended.

Court decision cannot rebuild a society, though. Only individuals can forgive. Only individuals can start with purposeful, daily decisions to forgive and forge a common future. Forgiveness is rather like kindness, she suggested. It’s a resource without limits. It’s not scarce like water or money. It’s within our reach. But if it’s forced, it’s not forgiveness.

“It is good,” Prof Minow warned, “to be cautious about the use of law to deliberately shape or manipulate the feelings of any individual. But it is no less important to admit that law does affect human beings, not just in its results, but in its process.” And then we must take responsibility for how we use that law.

“A government can judge, but only people can forgive.” As Prof Minow’s words lingered, the air suddenly seemed a bit more buoyant.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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