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

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

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