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

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