belhar confession yesterday, today and tomorrow: prof st kgatla

More documents

Recommendations

Info

their own <strong>confession</strong> known: ‘Jesus is Lord’ (Rom 10-9-10). The ChristianChurch, called <strong>and</strong> held together by Jesus Christ Himself, lives only through thecontinual renewal of this fundamental <strong>confession</strong> of faith. A <strong>confession</strong> of faithmay thus be defined more precisely as a public declaration before God <strong>and</strong> theworld of what a church believes. It is an officially adopted statementWhen Christians make a <strong>confession</strong>, they say: ‘This is what we most of what acommunity of Christians believes <strong>and</strong> wishes the world to know what they believe.A <strong>confession</strong>, a church affirmation of faith always has three reference points: God,The church itself, <strong>and</strong> The World. A <strong>confession</strong> of faith is firstly a solemn <strong>and</strong>thankful response to God’s self-revelation, expressed with a sense of responsibilityto be faithful <strong>and</strong> obedient to God. Secondly, in a <strong>confession</strong> of faith members of aChristian community seek to make clear to themselves who they are, what theybelieve, <strong>and</strong> what they resolve to do. Thirdly, Christians confess their commonfaith not only to praise <strong>and</strong> serve God, <strong>and</strong> not only to establish their self-identity,but also to speak to the world with a unified word that declares who they are <strong>and</strong>what they st<strong>and</strong> for <strong>and</strong> against.The Time in which The Belhar Confession came into beingThroughout the history of the Christian era, churches have written <strong>confession</strong>s offaith because they were compelled to do so, not just because they thought it wouldbe a good idea, or acceptable to the world. But they did so fully aware that theworld would most probably hate <strong>and</strong> persecute them precisely because of the st<strong>and</strong>they were taking. In some instances, <strong>confession</strong>s of faith resulted from a sense ofurgent need to correct some distortion of the truth <strong>and</strong> certain claims on the Gospelthat threatened the integrity of the Church’s faith <strong>and</strong> life within it (the church).The <strong>confession</strong> might result from some political or cultural movement outside theChurch that openly attacks or subtly seeks to compromise the Church commitmentto the Gospel. Sometimes the urgency to confess came from the Church’sconviction that it has a great insight into the promises <strong>and</strong> dem<strong>and</strong>s of the Gospelthat is desperately needed by both the Church <strong>and</strong> the World.In the case of the Belhar Confession all three scenarios played a crucial role in itsgenesis. There was a sense of urgent need to correct some distortion of the truth<strong>and</strong> the claim of the Gospel that threatened the integrity of the Church’s faith <strong>and</strong>life on one h<strong>and</strong>. Apartheid ideology was eroding the fundamental truth of theGospel. On the other it had been defended <strong>and</strong> justified by the Church that broughtthe Gospel to South Africa. South Africans, particularly Blacks were on the vergeof forsaking <strong>and</strong> rejecting the Gospel because of what was being done to them. Thewhite churches were involved in practising heresy because of their theologicaljustification of the system. There was urgent need not only to correct the wrongteaching but also to provide Christian authentic witness to the world. We are,however, thankful to God because the DRC has publicly denounced apartheid <strong>and</strong>apologized to the South Africans.2
The Belhar Confession was called for by the political <strong>and</strong> cultural movement,operating inside <strong>and</strong> outside the church, of the denial of human rights to the blackcitizens of the country. The church had to come up with a <strong>confession</strong> thatresponded to the challenges of the apartheid. The Church had a conviction that thepromises <strong>and</strong> dem<strong>and</strong>s of the Gospel were needed by both those who propagatedinjustices against black fellow citizens <strong>and</strong> the victims as well.The Belhar Confession was an appropriate response by <strong>and</strong> a voice of the blackChristians within the DRC Family in South Africa. It was a credible response to<strong>and</strong> critique of the ideologization of Christianity in the core beliefs of the whitedominant culture of the time. It responded to the destructive experience of beingdominated <strong>and</strong> the incriminating experience of being the one who dominated <strong>and</strong>benefited from the domination of the other. It brought necessary clarification tohard <strong>and</strong> pressing theological questions of the time. The Black Youth wasdem<strong>and</strong>ing answers from their Christian parents why they were belonging to aChurch of the oppressed. Black (reformed) parents were being criticized by theirkids <strong>and</strong> other Churches for being so naïve <strong>and</strong> belonging to the white DutchReformed Church that supported an ideology of apartheid <strong>and</strong> in that waylegitimized their own oppression. How on earth could these black Christiansbelong to a Church whose members understood them as God’s chosen people withthe divine right to dominate, cultivate <strong>and</strong> tame black ‘savages?’ They were openlybeing challenged by incidents such as the 1976 Soweto Students Uprising againstthe imposition of Afrikaans on them. Black <strong>and</strong> Reformed Christians were thusseverely criticized <strong>and</strong> challenged by their children to justify their stay in theReformed faith.During the late seventies <strong>and</strong> early eighties prominent black theologians emergedwho clearly questioned the authenticity of the Bible as a true word of God. Theyproblematized the matter by coming up with Marxist axioms that suggested thatthe Bible needed to be liberated first before it could be considered a liberatingword of God. They employed materialistic tools of interpreting the Bible <strong>and</strong>accused those who were faithful to the Bible as Biblicists <strong>and</strong> naïve. Still otherscame with a notion that the Bible was a lulling tool in the h<strong>and</strong>s of the oppressor todomesticate the Blacks. They invented a popular notion that: When the white mancame to South Africa, he had a Bible in his h<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Blacks had the l<strong>and</strong>. Heinvited Blacks to a prayer <strong>and</strong> when he said Amen, he had the l<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Blacks hadthe Bible. The logic of statements such as this is that in order for Blacks toemancipate themselves from white domination they should renounce the ChristianFaith. Indeed many black Christians turned away from the Bible. The apartheidideology <strong>and</strong> the role the white church played called for an urgent public witness.Something had to be done to correct the perceptions <strong>and</strong> refute the liars. It was inthis milieu when there was a huge confusion that God intervened <strong>and</strong> blessed HisChurch with a gift of <strong>confession</strong> that will remain a guiding light forever.3
Page 1: BELHAR CONFESSION YESTERDAY, TODAY
Page 5 and 6: The Belhar Confession offered the C
Page 7: En-route to re-unification of the D

belhar confession yesterday, today and tomorrow: prof st kgatla

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?