The Bible and the justification of apartheid in Reformed circles in the 1940's in South Africa: Some historical, hermeneutical and theological remarks

Robert R Vosloo

doi:10.17570/stj.2015.v1n2.a09

Abstract

This article focuses on the way the Bible was used in the 1940s in some Reformed theological circles in South Africa as part of the discourse to justify apartheid. Attention is also given to some voices critical of this endeavour. The article therefore offers a close reading of influential texts by prominent theologians who provided a biblical justification of apartheid, such as JD du Toit (Totius) and EP Groenewald. In addition, the article attends to some of the writings of theologians such as BJ Marais and BB Keet, who strongly opposed any attempt to justify apartheid in this manner. The article is especially interested in identifying the constructions of identity and otherness that seem to be operative in the discourse connected to the biblical justification of apartheid during this period.

Highlights

Reformed theology in South Africa has an ambivalent history and legacy, with regard to the way in which the Bible was read and interpreted
This article focuses on the way the Bible was used in the 1940s in some Reformed theological circles in South Africa as part of the discourse to justify apartheid
The article offers a close reading of influential texts by prominent theologians who provided a biblical justification of apartheid, such as JD du Toit (Totius) and EP Groenewald

Summary

Introduction

Reformed theology in South Africa has an ambivalent history and legacy, with regard to the way in which the Bible was read and interpreted. It is interesting to note that Strydom argues for objectivity and justice in dealing with the race question: “On the political level one should deal with the race question in a purely objective manner, in order to let justice prevail.” for him it is the policy of apartheid that provides the only honest, just and practical policy (“die enigste eerlike, regverdige en praktiese beleid”) for whites and blacks to live together in one country Strydom challenges those who – in his view – falsely, and on Biblical grounds, argue against social apartheid, and proffered his belief that one can argue on the basis of God’s Word that God willed separate nations, albeit that all those who are saved are one in Christ. We see some clear evidence of “constructions of an enemy” in the congress decisions, with its critique of liberalism, communism, Roman Catholicism and “foreign” mission societies, because the influence of these forces will lead to the eradication of natural boundaries and that this, in turn, will create social chaos.

Just racial apartheid?

Critical voices against the biblical justification of apartheid

Conclusion