Latest News Archive

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

CR Swart Memorial Lecture: Mr Cecil le Fleur
2006-08-08

Khoe and San call for government to speed up policy dialogue with indigenous communities  

 Mr Cecil le Fleur, leader of the National Khoe-San Consultative Conference and member of the executive management of the National Khoe-San Council, has called for a national policy on indigenous peoples to protect the human rights and special needs of indigenous people in South Africa.

 Mr Le Fleur delivered the 38th CR Swart Memorial Lecture on the Khoe and San at the University of the Free State (UFS).  He commended the UFS for its serious approach to the Khoe and San and for initiating initiatives such as a research project on the Griqua in which various aspects linked to language, -culture, -history, - leadership, their role in the South African community (past and present) and the conservation of their historical cultural heritages will be covered.   

 “The policy dialogue with indigenous communities initiated by government in 1999 and supported by the International Labour Organisation (ILO), has been exceedingly slow, owing to political and bureaucratic problems,” said Mr Le Fleur.

 According to Mr Le Fleur the slow pace is also impacting negatively on the United Nations’ efforts to expand the international standards and mechanisms for human rights so as to include the special needs of indigenous peoples.

 “The successful adoption of a South African policy would probably have a major impact on the human rights culture of Africa and, more specifically, on the UN system,” he said.

 “South Africa has a powerful moral authority internationally and is willing to use this authority in multilateral forums. At this stage, however, South Africa’s Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) may not take an official position on UN instruments and declarations pertaining to indigenous issues, until the Cabinet has resolved its own domestic policy position,” he said. 

 According to Mr le Fleur it therefore came as a great surprise when the DFA brought out a positive vote in the UN for the adoption of the "Draft Declaration on the Rights of indigenous Peoples" in June this year, even before the completion of the policy process. 

 Policy consolidation in South Africa is the primary key to creating a new policy climate in Africa in order to protect the rights of indigenous peoples.  “The existing constitution of the Republic of South Africa is one of the most liberal on the continent, and embraces the concept of redress of past discrimination.  It already includes a clause (Section 6) making provision for the protection of language rights for Khoe and San peoples - the fist peoples of southern Africa,” he said. 

 “If South Africa can effectively integrate this ‘third generation’ of collective rights within an existing democratic constitution, this will send a clear message to Africa and the world that indigenous rights are a necessary component of human and civil rights in modern democracies,” he said.

 Mr Le Fleur proposed an institutional framework based on set principles that would satisfy the needs and aspirations of the Griqua and other first indigenous peoples in South Africa.  “The proposed framework was based on the notion of vulnerability as a result of colonialism and apartheid, which stripped us of our indigenous identity, cultural identity and pride as people.  This injustice can hardly be addressed within the existing mechanisms provided by the current text of the Constitution,” he said.

 Mr Le Fleur also proposed that the principles of unique first-nation status, as recognised in international law, should be applied in the construction of the framework of the constitutional accommodation for the Khoe and San. 

 Mr Le Fleur further proposed that the Khoe and San’s indigenous status in constitutional terms must be separate from the constitutional acknowledgement of their status as a cultural community, as envisaged in sections 185 and 186 of the Constitution of 1996.

 According to Mr Le Fleur, the suggested mechanism should make provision for structures such as:

  •  A statutory representative council for First Indigenous Peoples of South Africa at a national level;
  • a separate Joint Standing Committee on Indigenous and Traditional Affairs, in both the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces on which the Khoe and San can be represented;
  • a representative structure for the Khoe and San in the legislature of each relevant province; and
  • ex officio membership in the relevant structures of local government.

Media release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Media Representative
Tel:   (051) 401-2584
Cell:  083 645 2454
E-mail:  loaderl.stg@mail.uovs.ac.za 
24 August 2006


- Full lecture
- Photo gallery
 

 

 

 

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