The role of the church in the quest for ethnic of reconciliation

I write that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the ground and pillar of truth. (1 Tim 3v15)

Since the Great Renaissance, the role of the church in the modern world has been under fierce contestation. Many in the Western world today consider it an anachronistic institution that is out of touch with modern realities. This is ironic considering how eminently indebted Western civilisation is to the church. This flawed narrative wouldn’t be so tragic if the message had not been so deeply internalised by the church1 itself. 

This idea has been so pervasive that the ascent of modernity has consistently coincided with the withdrawal of the church from the marketplace of ideas, often with devastating consequences. Along with this withdrawal has been a tragic departure of the light of moral clarity and truth, which the church is uniquely positioned to proclaim and model. This has left a dark shadow over a contemporary culture that cannot but disintegrate under the weight of moral relativism. 

The reality is that the church is as essential to the destiny of the nations as it has ever been. Perhaps, given the ubiquitous moral malaise and consequent drift of the nations, it might be argued that its role is more crucial in these times than ever before. 

Despite its marginalisation, self-inflicted or otherwise, the church can draw encouragement that its role is ultimately not defined by vacillating whims of the ages but rather its divinely instituted status as the “ground and pillar of truth”. 

It is the church alone that carries the divine mandate to “disciple” and to teach the nations. While the marriage of the institutional church and political governance has been shown to be historically problematic, the church’s responsibility as a prophetic voice, moral conscience and developer of leaders should never be disputed or ceded. 

The source of the church’s authority is divine and its mandate includes faithfully and fearlessly proclaiming the word of God to the nations - a simple act of incalculable power. The divine authority of the bible is evidenced by its unrivalled ability to diagnose the human condition as well as its unparalleled remedy for its ills. Any reading of scripture will confirm its uncanny ability to pierce the heart as far as “the division of soul and spirit,” “judging the thoughts and intentions of the heart”, always with incisive precision. 

The human heart might perhaps be considered as what most profoundly defines our humanity. Technological and scientific advancement of modern man can never be disputed, but these gains have failed to relieve the human heart of the dilemmas that have afflicted it from time immemorial. It is in the human heart that love, peace and self-control reside, as do such vices as hatred, greed, selfishness and pride. 

These vices are directly attributable for much of the tragedies in the catalogue of human history, including the prejudice, pride, hatred and bitterness that have proven such obstinate obstacles in the quest for genuine reconciliation in post-apartheid South Africa. 

The South African constitution has received countless reviews over the years. While this might be so, its glaring failure to precipitate desperately needed moral renewal has ironically starkly exposed the limitations of political institutions and laws. Countless examples can be cited, but for our purposes, I will only highlight its failure to effectively advance the quest for true national reconciliation despite the loftiness of its ideals. 

The reason is simple, institutions and laws, as critical as they are in the effective functioning of nations, are ill equipped to deal what lies at the centre of most of national problems – the ineradicable corruption of the human heart. The gospel message is the perfect and unique cure for this intrinsic problem as it promises a new heart for the believer, and with it a fundamental transformation of values and motivations. 

The church alone has been given stewardship of the gospel message, which therefore secures its indispensability in the quest for morally sound and therefore sustainable civilisations. Thus even with the vexing issue of ethnic reconciliation, our nation continues to battle in vain because at its core are problematic heart attitudes, for which laws, even good laws, are a powerless antidote. The church therefore has an unrivalled role to play even in this critical issue. 

Humanism and its proponents might purport undying commitment to the idea of equality2. The problem with this claim is that it leaves the fundamental question jarringly unanswered: “says who?” 

If a man bestows equality, this same man, to have such authority, must necessarily be “more equal than others”, which is, of course, a fundament contradiction. Indeed, it’s not inconceivable that the same man might one day change his mind. Also, lest we forget, the universal acceptance, in theory at least, of the principle of equality of people is a fairly recent phenomenon in human history. 

The message entrusted to the church on the other hand advocates the inherent equality of all people, based on the premise that all mankind is created in the image of God. Thus man carries a dignity that is not based on any of the observable measures commonly used to judge the worth of people such as, colour, ethnicity, education, personality, gender, intelligence, athletic prowess and physical beauty. Human dignity is therefore fundamental and independent of prevailing sociological ideas - because no man bestows it, no man can take it away.

It is clear of course that the moral authority of the church and its effectual influence in society will depend on its ability to authenticate its claims by embodying the message it propagates. The word must become flesh. It is imperative that the world not merely hears the church’s message; it must see it being demonstrated. 

It should be highlighted that authenticity is not synonymous with perfection. The reality is that the message is still carried in “jars of clay”, vessels that are marred by the humbling imprints of imperfection. Nevertheless, history provides indisputable evidence that when the church does not distinguish between, “Greek and Jew, circumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman”, society soon takes notice and the world is “turned upside-down.” 

1 The use of the word church is in its broader meaning, which includes both the institutional church that consists of its governing structure and ministries as well as the essential church, which encapsulates all redeemed people of God.

2 I refer exclusively to the principle of equality in inherent worth or the principle of ontological equality, which makes room for differentiated functions and expressions as outlined in scripture.

Stewards of a sacred promise

Time has the uncanny knack of making cynics of us. What was once revered so easily degenerates into worthlessness amid the grind of time and bitter circumstance. It is imperative therefore that we cast our weary memories back to that noble promise that gave birth to our nation. It is a promise that won our allegiance against the impassioned threats of our fears and anger.

We have much to contribute to the community of nations, none of which compares to the promise that lit our hearts once upon a time. This is the audacious promise that a diverse people can overcome their differences and build a thriving multicultural society.

Though the promise was simple, intervening years have taught us that it is far from easy. It was for this reason that the world applauded, as it did, at the improbable genesis of our democratic order. It marvelled that we even dared to envision a path that had eluded and continues to elude so many, in light of what seems an inherent human proclivity towards exclusion and sectarianism.

A combination of necessity and idealism had impelled us to chart a different path from the familiar human story of ethnic division and strife. Faced with centuries of bitter animosity, we chose to scorn our inherited frame of references and to yield instead to the hope that we, a people of diverse cultures, can learn to forge a shared sense of nationhood.

Time has made us wise to the reality that the Rainbow Nation was a promise rather than a reality. Amid the exhilaration of civil war averted and the elation of a nation reborn, we had succumbed to the spurious hope that the journey would be easier than what reality demanded it should be. We would yet be painfully denuded of our naivety.

The march of time has shown us that our chosen path was one that demanded of us to reach for virtues uncommon among men. We had not been afforded the luxury of a middle ground. We were either destined for summits of greatness or the abyss of oblivion. United we would stand but divided, our ruin would be certain.

This solemn choice still confronts us today, precisely because a nation divided cannot but collapse under its own weight. The combination of inequality and bitterness in a country with a history drenched in violence from its inception, as we have come to experience, does not make for the kind of harmonious society any of us wish for our sons and daughters to inherit.

The intervening years since our improbable beginning would introduce further complications that would feed our loss of innocence and growth of cynicism, not least a political establishment of endemic corruption and incompetence. Increasingly, we came to see flagrant displays of conflicting interests of those in power to those of broader society. In some senses they have fed some of our deep-seated fears about each other, which have cajoled us at times to seek refuge in our cultural laagers where beliefs that militate against our better judgement continue to thrive.

This crisis of leadership presents us with the task of reclaiming our power as South Africans from elements bent on furthering their own interests at enormous cost to ours. This crisis poses perhaps the greatest threat to the long-term survival of our nation and thus demands our most pressing attention. Nevertheless accomplishing that goal does not take away our arduous historic task of forging a united and cohesive society founded on tangible justice for all.

We must contend with the spectre of cynicism that confronts us and reclaim our deflated idealism, lest our unfulfilled longings congeal into a deathly despair that incarnates its fears. Perhaps we underestimated the extent of our woundedness and the complexity of the task before us. We miscalculated the extent that spatial, social, developmental and economic imprints of our inherited historical injustice, along with deeply entrenched mind-sets that afflict us all, would be perennial competitors with our idealism.

Despite our many stumbles and the multiplicity of difficulties that continue to confront us, our collective self-interest and the enduring debt to future South Africans compel us to choose principle over expediency, hope over despair and idealism over cynicism. Though the full manifestation of the Rainbow Nation remains yet a promise unfulfilled, let us reclaim our idealism, taking heed the counsel of history that instructs that great nations are not made in a day. Not a few, like us, were forged in the fiery furnace of bitter adversity.

Let us remember once more the grandeur of our destiny in the grand drama of history. That of demonstrating a venerable ideal, for the witness of all posterity. The sacred promise that a diverse people can indeed unite!