Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
18 February 2022 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Leonie Bolleurs
Faculty of Theology and Religion opening
Present at the Faculty of Theology and Religion’s Theology Day were from the left: Dr Eugene Fortein, Dr Siphiwe Dube, Prof Rantoa Letšosa, and Prof Charlene van der Walt.

This year, the Faculty of Theology and Religion at the University of the Free State (UFS) resumed its annual tradition of celebrating the new academic year, after being halted by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

The focus was on a theology of vulnerability for our times, with the theme supported by the text verse from 2 Corinthians 4:7: “We have this treasure in clay jars.” 

God embodies vulnerability

Dean of the faculty, Prof Rantoa Letšosa, left delegates with the inspiring message that one of the treasures in these clay jars is the power of God; power that enables us to stand strong and move forward in trying circumstances, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. He wished all attendees, both in person and online, to experience this extraordinary strength and power of God in the new year. 

Prof Rian Venter from the Department of Historical and Constructive Theology, who led the worship service, talked about humanity that has achieved so much – in the areas of health, space, communication, transport, etc. “Despite all these achievements, we are more insecure, with an intensified sense of vulnerability,” he said. 

“However, the One in whom we believe as our Saviour and Lord is a vulnerable God; he embodied vulnerability. We cannot talk about God as if he is not affected by our vulnerability. He is love. He is affected by us,” he said. 

Depriving people of humanity 

But to be vulnerable can also be seen as to be weak, defenceless, open to harm, in need of care, and deprived of one’s humanity. 

Dr Siphiwe Dube from the University of the Witwatersrand integrated the topic of vulnerability into the paper he delivered, speaking from a decolonialism point of view on the research topic: Towards a Decolonial Political Theology of Vulnerability: Reflections from the Margins. In one of his statements, he said that black people are living in the reality constructed for them and have not discovered what blackness is. He urged the young attendees to make use of spaces created for discussion of this matter. 

Bringing to the table another perspective on this topic, was Prof Charlene van der Walt from the School of Religion, Philosophy and Classics at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. Her paper was on the othering, stigmatisation, and exclusion experienced by the LGBTIQA+ people in the African context in general and the African faith communities in particular. She connected the shame experienced by queer people in a family setting to the story of Joseph in the book of Genesis in the Bible. In her paper: Reflecting on Joseph in the context of Izitabane vulnerability, violence, identity erasure and the imperative of recognition and accompaniment, she stated that Joseph’s otherness informed the vulnerability, exclusion, violence, and identity erasure that happens within the confines of family. 

According to Prof Van der Walt, she wished to not argue for LGBTIQA+/ Izitabane people to be seen or that they somehow ‘pass’ and slip below the radar, but that the recognition called for implied a different kind of seeing: it implied a compassionate witnessing and a humanising recognition. “It implies process, interrogation of power, empathy and imagination, weeping and a commitment to community,” she said. 

Another interesting perspective on the theology of vulnerability was that of Dr Eugene Fortein from the Department of Historical and Constructive Theology at the UFS. In his paper on Vulnerability by Design: On a Theology of Prophetic Solidarity, he asked why the vulnerable is vulnerable? What led to them being vulnerable?
 
“The presence of the vulnerable in South Africa is not an accident. It is not because of fate, but because of a design that is 370 years in the making; deliberately to keep people poor for generations to come.” 

He said it started with Jan van Riebeeck. Legislation such as the Natives Land Act of 1913, the Group Areas Act of 1950, and the Bantu Education Act of 1953 also played a key role. “These were designed to oppress one group and enabling the other to thrive.”

“The scars of this legislation are still haunting us today,” he said. 

The One in whom we believe as our Saviour and Lord is a vulnerable God; he embodied vulnerability. We cannot talk about God as if he is not affected by our vulnerability. He is love. He is affected by us. – Prof Rian Venter

“The vulnerable have names and faces. They are experiencing the effects of being vulnerable on their bodies and that is not to be taken lightly.”

“Do not only pray for the poor and the vulnerable, but work actively to bring restitution,” he said. The church now has the opportunity to be a true servant of Christ,” Dr Fortein added. 

News Archive

Teachers should deal with diversity in education - Prof. Francis
2010-10-08

At the occasion were, from the left: Prof. Jonathan Jansen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State (UFS); Prof. Francis; and Prof. Driekie Hay, Vice-Rector: Teaching and Learning at the UFS.
Photo: Jaco van der Merwe

Prof. Dennis Francis, the Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of the Free State (UFS), recently delivered his inaugural lecture on Troubling Diversity in South African Education on the Main Campus in Bloemfontein.

He urged teachers to be open to what “diversity” might mean in a particular context and how diversity relates to either inclusion or exclusion.

“An approach that promotes the inclusion of all must be based on an understanding of how exclusion operates in ways that may have typical patterns of oppression, but differ in the specific ways that exclusion is expressed and becomes normalised in that context,” he said.

“The good teacher thus seeks to understand how these forms of exclusion may develop in the school’s context and respond through taking thoughtful action to challenge them. It may require creating a climate that enables the silent to speak and recognising that not all groups communicate in exactly the same ways.”

He said teachers also had to affirm the experiential base of learners and students. He said there was an assumption that students would be more effective practitioners if their own experience were validated and explored.

“It is crucial that the students’ own history is treated as valuable and is a critical part of the data that are reflected,” he said. “Equally important is that such stories and similar activities are intentionally processed to enable students to make the connections between personal experience and relevant theory.”

He also urged them to challenge the ways in which knowledge had been framed through oppression.

“Schools are often characterised by messages that draw on one or another form of oppression. Thus, expectations are subtly or in some cases unsubtly communicated, e.g. that girls are not good at physics, or that, while white learners are strong in abstract thought, African learners have untapped creativity, and so on,” he continued.

“For someone to integrate into their role as educators a commitment against oppression means confronting obstacles that one may previously have shied away from, such as challenging authority, naming privilege, emphasising the power relations that exist between social groups, listening to people one has previously ignored, and risking being seen as deviant, troublesome or unpopular.”

Furthermore, Prof. Francis said dealing with diversity in education was always affectively loaded for both students and teachers. He said in South Africa one injunction from educators was to be “sensitive” and thus avoid risking engagement with the contentious issues around imbalances of power.

“If both students and teachers are to confront issues of oppression and power in any meaningful way, we need to design more purposely for the difficulties they will encounter, for example, creating a classroom environment that promotes safety and trust so that all students are able to confront and deal with prejudice and discrimination. Classroom environments will need to balance the affective and cognitive in addressing issues of diversity and social justice,” he added.

He also said that teachers should recognise the need to complement changing attitudes with attempts to change the structural aspects of oppressions.

“To prevent superficial commitments to change, it is important for students to explore barriers that prevent them from confronting oppressive attitudes and behaviours. In this way students are able to learn and see the structural aspects of oppression,” he said.

“Equally important, however, is to get students to examine the benefits associated with challenging oppression. A fair amount of time must therefore be spent on developing strategies with students which they will be able to use practically in challenging oppression.”

He also advised educators to affirm the capacity of staff and learners to act and learn in ways that do not replicate patterns of oppression.

“Many South African schools have survived both the harsh repression of apartheid and the continuing legacy of oppression of various kinds. Despite that, we are often as educators made aware of the ways in which young people in particular affirm themselves and each other in creative and confident ways,” he concluded.

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Director: Strategic Communication (acg)
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl@ufs.ac.za  
7 October 2010
 

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