2.1...
2.2 Did the Afrikaners invent apartheid?
Van Rooyen points out that although South African racial policy after 1948 became known internationally by the Afrikaans word "apartheid" - a phenomenon which created the impression that the world found this policy so alien that it could only be conveyed in the Afrikaans language the Afrikaners had inherited the policy from the English authorities in South Africa since the 19th century (see Van Rooyen, Die NG Kerk, apartheid en die Christelike Instituut van Suidelike Afrika, p 4). Paul Johnson goes further, saying that "all African states practised racial policies", and adding that group differences "led a growing number of African states in the 1960's and still more in the 1970's to exercise forms of social engineering not unlike apartheid" (Paul Johnson: History of the Modern World, p 526).
The fact that colour played such an important role in South Africa is not solely attributable to the policy of the country's government since 1948. It is manifestly true "that much of the least attractive part of the present South African political economy stems directly from its earlier history as part of the British and, before that, Dutch empires" (Francis Wilson, as quoted by Van Rooyen, op. cit., p 27).
2.3 How can "apartheid" be defined?
2.3.1 There are many possible definitions of apartheid. It has also been said that apartheid cannot be defined, that one has to "feel" it to understand precisely what it is. Prof JA Heyns nevertheless provided a serviceable definition of the concept as it was concretised in South Africa: "Apartheid is a legally regulated political and social pattern of thought and action which, in forcibly separating groups of people, actually envisages the wellbeing of all those involved, but could not, in the process of its implementation, bring about the full realisation of its initial objectives; on the contrary, it not only advantages one population group at the expense of the other, but also wronged individuals" [translation] (JA Heyns: Teologiese Etiek, 2/2, p 50).
2.4 When was apartheid Scripturally justified by the Dutch Reformed Church?
2.4.1 Formulating a Biblical basis for its views on race relations was already becoming important for the Dutch Reformed Church in the early 1940s.
The view heard at synodal assemblies of the time was that the policy of "rasse-apartheid" (racial separateness) was consonant with principles laid down in the holy Scriptures. Apart from references to, for example, Acts 17:16, the history of the Tower of Babel, the events at Pentecost and texts about the "purity" of the people of Israel, the Scriptural basis had not yet been spelt out clearly. Hence the urgent need for a direct Biblical justification of "rasse-apartheid".
2.4.2 The first official attempt by an assembly of the Dutch Reformed Church to put apartheid on a Scriptural basis was in 1943, when the Council of Churches (the council in which the provincial Dutch Reformed Churches were represented before their amalgamation into a General Synod in 1962) made the following statement: "This assembly has taken note of the increasing agitation for colour and racial equality in our country, but wishes to point out that in truth, according to the Bible, God brings nations into being thus (Gen 11: 1 -9, Acts 2:6, 8, 11), each with its own language, history, Bible and church, and that the salvation of the native tribes in our country should also be sought in sanctified self-respect and God-given national pride" [translation] (Handelinge [Proceedings], Council of Churches 1943, p 22).
2.4.3 In 1947 - the year before the watershed House of Assembly election - an important report on this matter came before the Council of Churches. This document, drawn up by Prof EP Groenewald, was the first comprehensive attempt to link pure principles from God's Word with the reality of a practical historical situation in South Africa (see PB van der Watt: Die Ned Geref Kerk 1905-1975, p 88).
Groenewald emphasised that (1) the Scriptures taught the unity of the human race; (2) the dividing up of the human race was a conscious act by God; (3) the Lord wished separate peoples to maintain their separateness ("apartheid"); (4) apartheid extended over every aspect of a people's life - national, social and religious; (5) respect for the principles of apartheid enjoyed God's blessing; (6) in Christ a higher spiritual unity would come about; (7) the stronger had a calling in relation to the weaker (Van Rooyen, op. cit., p 54).
The Council of Churches adopted Groenewald's report without problems, as did the Natal and Free State Synods subsequently, but the Transvaal Synod did not. Dr (later Prof) BJ Marais seriously questioned the Scriptural grounds advanced by the report. It was his view that apartheid could probably be supported for practical reasons, but that the Bible did not present apartheid as a fixed prescription for the regulation of society. After initially not wishing to adopt the report, the Transvaal Synod did, in fact, affirm the Scriptural basis of racial apartheid two days later, after further debate on the matter.
2.4.4 A little later the Cape Synod declared that the Scriptures contained no explicit injunction on separate, differentiated development, but that there was nothing in conflict with it in the letter or spirit of the Scriptures either (Van der Watt, op. cit., p 91).
2.4.5 This did not provide a final answer to the demand for a Biblical justification of the Dutch Reformed Church's standpoint on race relations. By that time, however, apartheid was incontrovertibly church policy, as is evident from a remark in the leading article of Die Kerkbode on 22 September 1948: "As a church we have ... striven constantly for the separation of these two national groups (white and black). In this regard one can correctly refer to apartheid as church policy" [translation].
2.4.6 In 1954 the Council of Churches appointed an ad hoc commission to look into the Scriptural justification of racial apartheid once more. Their report was released at the beginning of 1956. As it turned out, the report did not try to argue that separateness was a Biblical premise or imperative, and it acknowledged the role of practical circumstances in shaping the policy of the church.
"The principle of pluralism in the creation and in the world of nations, and the pluriform ecclesiastical outlook of Calvinism, which allows for the existence of separate national churches, constitutes the ideological basis of the report," [translation] writes Van der Watt (op. cit., p 100).
2.4.7 Several books which appeared at this time, together with continuing debate in the ecclesiastical and public press, kept alive the issue of whether apartheid could be Biblically justified. Prof BB Keet's book Suid-Afrika - waarheen? appeared in 1955, Prof PV Pistorius's Die Trek is verby in 1957 and Prof AB du Preez's Eiesoortige ontwikkeling tot volksdiens in 1959. While the first two authors rejected the policy of separation as unscriptural, Du Preez commended it as the only just policy in South African circumstances. In a lecture at Stellenbosch at the beginning of the academic year in 1958, and also in 1961 as co-author of the book Grense, Prof FJM Potgieter expressed himself strongly in favour of the Scriptural justification of the apartheid policy. He wrote: "On these two pillars, the concept of pluriformity and the right to self-determination of the different nations in the habitations which God gave as their inheritance on earth (Deut 32:8 and Acts 17:26), rests the policy of apartheid" [translation] (Grense, p 30).
2.4.8 It is important to point out that various Dutch Reformed theologians who maintained that apartheid was not a Biblical imperative or presumption were nonetheless prepared to accept it as a practical structural arrangement.
Dr Ben Marais wrote in Die kleur-krisis en die Weste (1952): "We cannot accept any direct basis from the Scriptures for the policy of apartheid ... we can, at best, make inferences and draw parallels in general terms" [translation]. But in the practice of our Christian social principles, says Marais, we must take account of the nature and state of the real world in which we live. The concrete situation, the real world within which the Christian is called to live as a Christian, will largely determine the application of our Christian principles. "Our own position in South Africa, in my view, offers more than sufficient justification for a policy of separate development ... provided that the further requirements of Christian fraternity are 'not denied and that such a policy is inspired by Christian love and not by racial selfishness or a feeling of racial superiority" [translation] (p 291-297).
Ds David Botha wrote in Die opkoms van ons Derde Stand (1960)that "at this stage apartheid is certainly the obvious practical policy for the whites and the black people, because there are overwhelming centrifugal forces in all spheres of interest. But between the whites and the coloured people [an apartheid classification denoting mixed race] it is the centripetal forces which are overwhelmingly powerful ..." [translation] (p 149).
Prof Bennie Keet wrote in Vertraagde Aksie (1960)that apartheid, in the sense of a division of the country, could have been an option a hundred years ago, but it could only take place now with the greatest injustice to one side or the other (p 6).
2.5 Did the Dutch Reformed Church urge the government to adopt or amend apartheid laws?
After 1948the Dutch Reformed Church frequently urged the government to implement the policy of apartheid, and many laws were instituted with the approval of the church. Van der Watt mentions the following laws which appeared in the statute book, or were amended, after representations from the Dutch Reformed Church (op. cit., pp 84-86):
2.5.1 Act no 55 of 1949,which prohibited mixed marriages between individuals of different race groups, was instituted chiefly as a result of sustained pressure from the Dutch Reformed Church (from as early as 1915).Later the church decided that the Bible did not explicitly oppose mixed marriages, but that they were still "extremely undesirable" (1978).
2.5.2 The Group Areas Act of 1950(with subsequent amendments), which provided for separate residential areas for the different population groups, was adopted with the approval of the Dutch Reformed Church. In later years the Dutch Reformed Church criticised the indiscriminate enforcement of this Act and requested that it be applied with discretion.
2.5.3 The Dutch Reformed Church commended legislation that provided for more land for black people and the improvement of "Bantu education".
2.5.4 In terms of section 29(c) of the Native Laws Amendment Act of 1957 - and specifically the so-called "church clause" - non-whites could be prohibited from attending church services in predominantly white areas. Following representations from the Dutch Reformed Church, amongst others, the section concerned was amended to put beyond all doubt that the Bill did not envisage interfering with the individual's freedom to worship, "provided that such freedom is not abused to disrupt good order in society." [translation]
2.6 How, in the view of the Dutch Reformed Church, was the policy of apartheid to be implemented?
2.6.1 In 1963, at the height of the apartheid era, Keet, an outspoken critic of apartheid, declared: "I think the Dutch Reformed Church leaders are very honest in their standpoint" (in an interview with The Rand Daily Mail, quoted by Van Rooyen, op. cit., p 61). Leading figures in the Dutch Reformed church were not only honest in their view that apartheid was the solution to the race question in South Africa, but also firm in their belief that the policy should be implemented fairly.
2.6.2 Prof G Cronje, a Pretoria sociologist known as one of the architects of apartheid, wrote in Die Kerkbode as long ago as 1940: "Social justice must be fostered. Next to love, justice is surely one of the most important principles in the teachings of Christ. It is God's will that justice be done ... The social subjugation and enslavement of human beings is no less unjust and no less contrary to the will of God than would be the subjugation and enslavement of a people" [translation] (letter in Die Kerkbode, 5 June 1940).
2.6.3 A uphill battle continued against accusations of the malicious oppression of people of colour - "but our church never made this a battle against people of colour. On the contrary, it was a battle for them, an attempt to serve their interests best ... White guardianship is not so much a right as a high calling ... because we have not just a policy, but a message: the everlasting gospel" [translation] (TN Hanekom: "Eintlik 'n sendingkongres", Die Kerkbode, 19 April 1950).
2.6.4 At a missionary congress in Bloemfontein in April 1950, the imperative of fairness was emphasised again. In his opening address Prof GBA Gerdener appealed for the correct attitude towards those of colour - an attitude of tolerance, goodwill and fraternalism. Throughout the congress there were calls for the improvement of health services and hospitals for black people, and also for better food supplies, more health education, medical training and the effective combating of disease. At that stage there were about 78 mission hospitals under the control of the Dutch Reformed Church (Van Rooyen, op. cit., p 64).
