[ICJ 2.2 (2002) 229-242] ISSN 1472-2089 Towards a Congregationalist Theology of the Land * Steve de Gruchy ABSTRACT This article concerns the United Congregational Church of Southern Africa, its land ownership, and the challenges it faces in post-apartheid South Africa where land has emerged as a vital issue of justice and restitution. The article explores some of the ways in which the UCCSA has come to own land, and argues that in the light of contemporary social concerns the church needs to develop a theology of the land. The essay then notes the lack of a Congregationalist theology of the land, and suggests some key elements that might contribute towards such a theology. Church, Land and Restitution in South Africa When the missionaries came to South Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said, Let us pray. When we opened our eyes, we had the Bible and they had the land. The challenge we now face is to get the land back, without losing the Bible (Archbishop Desmond Tutu, 1980). In 1994 South Africa emerged from centuries of colonial and racial oppression, a central characteristic of which was the denial of land ownership to the indigenous people. Even before the formal advent of the policy of apartheid, the land patterns of mission settlement, military conquest and colonial administration had ensured that the best land was owned by white settlers, and that black people were removed to reserves. The 1913 and 1936 Land Acts had ensured that 85 per cent of South Africa was owned by only 13 per cent of the population, and the * Much of the research for this paper was done in conjunction with the Church Land Programme, an NGO working in Pietermaritzburg, South Africa. This research led to the presentation of a report for the United Congregational Church on its land holdings. See S. de Gruchy, G. Philpott and D. Ntseng, The United Congregational Church of Southern Africa: An Inventory of its Landholdings (Pietermaritzburg: Church Land Programme, 2001). The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2002, The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX and 370 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA.
230 International Congregational Journal Group Areas Act and various Homelands Acts of the apartheid regime ensured that access (or lack of access) to property and land were central pillars of injustice and oppression in the country. Addressing the land issue is therefore a key task of the post-apartheid democratic government. Land reform is constitutionally mandated and incorporates tenure security, redress for past racial discrimination and restitution claims processes. The constitution allows for expropriation of land for the public interest which is defined within the constitution to include the nation s commitment to land reform and to reforms to bring about equitable access to all South Africa s natural resources. 1 With particular reference to the churches ownership of land, the Department of Land Affairs has developed a policy to guide the Department s flexible engagement with the church as a substantial landowner. 2 In response to the constitution and the initiatives of the Department of Land Affairs, different denominations have undertaken certain activities, including drawing up inventories of church owned land, conducting audits of the properties so as to explore options for the appropriate use of the land, and developing a policy for the ownership and use of the denomination s land. In addition to such initiatives within each denomination, there have also been attempts to act and meet ecumenically around the land issue. In July 2000, there was a consultation between national church leadership and the national Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs in order to consider possible areas of co-operation between the churches and the state. At this consultation, Archbishop Napier of the Catholic Church represented the ecumenical churches position regarding the land owned by the churches and their intentions in the following statement: The Church s vision and commitment is to work for the effective use of Church Land in order to restore dignity to the affected people, to heal the Communities wounded by the loss of their land, and to assist effectively in the eradication of poverty. In this vision the focus is not solely on the transfer of land, by donation or other processes, but especially on the sustainable and proper use of the land. 3 The South African Synod of the United Congregational Church of Southern Africa (which also includes the Synods of Botswana, Zimbabwe, 1. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996 (Republic of South Africa, 1996), Clause 25(4). 2. Land Reform Policy 68/1999. Department of Land Affairs, Government of South Africa, 2000. 3. G. Philpott, Church and Community: Potential Partners? (unpublished report, Department of Land Affairs and Church Land Programme, 2000), p. 4.
De Gruchy Towards a Congregationalist Theology 231 Mozambique and Namibia) has been a part of this process, and has itself recently commissioned a report on its land-holdings and its obligations in the light of changing political concerns. 4 This report indicates that the UCCSA is not itself a major land-holder in the country, having only 145 properties with a total area of 2,479 hectares registered in its name, or the name of its missionary parent bodies. The UCCSA has the fifth highest number of Church properties in the country (yet only 3.5 per cent of the total of 4948), and the seventh largest in terms of total size (only 1.5 per cent of the total 163,064 hectares). 5 Given the decentralized nature of the Church, however, it is certain that there are a large number of other properties owned by local Congregational Churches and registered under a range of other local church names. In terms of its own land ownership, and its participation in the wider ecumenical church of South Africa, therefore, the task of reflecting theologically upon this ownership of property is thus a challenge to Congregationalists in South Africa today. Congregationalism in Southern Africa In order to have a firmer view of land ownership in the UCCSA, it is important to locate the issue within the history of the Congregationalist tradition in South Africa. This can be described in three distinct movements. The first was through the missionary work of the London Missionary Society (LMS), an ecumenical agency established in 1795. As other denominational mission societies were established, the LMS became, by default, the mission society of Congregationalists although the commitment to ecumenism remained a key element. The LMS opened two frontiers in southern Africa. The first was in the Eastern Cape, pioneered by Johannes Theodorus van der Kemp as early as 1803. The second was in the Northern Cape. Here Robert Moffat established the mission station at Kuruman (1824), and from here the LMS spread out into what is today 4. See de Gruchy et. al., The United Congregational Church: An Inventory. 5. Latest statistics held by the Church Land Programme indicate that the Roman Catholic Church has the highest number of properties, 1829 or 36% of the total, followed by the Anglican Church (1033 or 20.5%) and the Methodist Church (999 or 20%). In terms of the area of the properties, however, the Lutherans have 57,146 hectares or 35%, the Moravians 55,103 or 34%, and the Roman Catholics 20,400 or 12.5%. The different histories of acquisition and mission strategies account for the fact that whilst the Lutherans and Moravians together only have 5% of the total properties, they have 69% of the total area owned by the church. As to be expected there are also large regional differences owing to the geographic focus of most mission societies.
232 International Congregational Journal Botswana and Zimbabwe. As the Eastern Cape became more settled and less of a frontier, the LMS handed church ownership and authority to the converts, and turned its resources to the work in the north. The second movement of Congregationalism to southern Africa came from the United States, through the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM), which arrived in South Africa at the invitation of the LMS in 1836. They focused their attention on Natal and Mocambique. The ABCFM was committed to local church autonomy and sought ways over the decades to stop being a mission, and become a church. This was not an easy task and was bedevilled by issues relating to leadership, authority, finance, culture, property and power. Finally, by 1964, the Bantu Congregational Church (BCC) was formally constituted and the transition from American-led mission to Zulu-led church completed. The third way in which congregationalism emerged in southern Africa was not a missionary movement, but rather a settler movement. English settlers traders, miners, soldiers, teachers arrived in both the Cape and Natal colonies. As to be expected, this group included some who happened to be Congregationalists. These people sought to establish their own Congregational Churches in the new colony. Over time these churches sought a wider network of fellowship, and the Congregational Union of South Africa (CUSA) formally came into existence in 1877. From the start CUSA was not a white church, but included those churches that had been started by the LMS in the Cape, and which were now autonomous. CUSA worked in both the Cape and Natal, and became particularly strong in the Gordonia area around Upington on the Orange River. From here, some Congregationalists moved into Namibia in search of work, and established churches there. By the 1960s, then, there were three distinct forms of Congregationalism in five countries in southern Africa. However, members of these distinct bodies began to converge upon the Johannesburg region to participate in the mining economy and greater possibilities afforded by urban life, and after a short while it was deemed prudent and necessary to unite the pastoral support for them. Thus, in 1967, the United Congregational Church was born. As can be imagined, at its very core this new church was very diverse as it included five countries, eleven languages, numerous cultures, and at least three dominant church traditions. Alongside the very diverse roots of the UCCSA, it should not be forgotten that the very structure of Congregationalism militates against central authority and control, so this diversity has continued to grow and flourish in the 35 years the UCCSA has existed as an independent and united entity.
De Gruchy Towards a Congregationalist Theology 233 Congregationalists and Land Acquisition in Southern Africa Given this diversity, it is almost impossible to characterize land acquisition and use throughout the UCCSA in general. Nevertheless, there are four broad trends that need to be noted. These ideal types could be called: (1) the rural commune ideal; (2) the civilizing buffer zone; (3) the security zone; and (4) the sign of independence. The Rural Commune Ideal The first ideal is illustrated by the establishment of the LMS mission at Kuruman in 1824. The LMS first began work among the Batswana tribe of the Batlaping at Maruping, a village of 10,000 people on the Kuruman river in 1816. The first missionaries, Read and Hamilton, erected a mud and wattle house and church on the edge of the village, and sought to evangelize those in the village. The much younger Robert Moffat arrived four years later, and by 1824 he had moved the entire base of operations 10 km away from the village to a formal mission station on its own land. His reasons for this help us to understand this strategy for rural mission and its implications for land acquisition. An Example and Witness. The missionaries were proclaiming a new way of life. Moffat was not only concerned about prayer and worship, but about industriousness, character and sobriety. He considered that it was not just good enough to preach about this, but that the lived example was the best witness. The communal life on the mission station where God ruled as a clear witness against the life in the village, where Satan ruled was one reason he sought, and was granted by Chief Mothibi, his own land at a distance from the village. Power and Control. Moffat was very jealous of his work and, after 1829, of his converts. The early literature abounds with conflicts between Moffat on the one side and the chief, elders and rain-maker on the other. Having his own land under his control was the easiest way to exercise power against such rivals, but also to exercise control over his converts so that they would not easily go back to their previous sinful lives. The authoritarian nature of this desire, and the possibilities for an abuse of power should not be overlooked. Ownership of Resources. Moffat wanted to build houses, a school room, a church building, and later to run a printing press. He was aware that these were key resources in the wider work of the mission, but that their
234 International Congregational Journal ownership may well be disputed. In the village, such resources would be claimed by the chief or elders, whereas the resources of a mission station were clearly owned by the mission. A separate title deed, however it was understood by the Batswana, was understood by the LMS to guarantee private control of what was on the land. Survival. It is vital to consider the economic circumstances in which missionaries lived (and died). They were thousands of miles away from their mission headquarters in England or the United States. They were hundreds of miles away from the nearest colonial towns or markets. They were often working in a hostile climate where arable land and regular water were hard to come by. This was certainly Moffat s experience. The mission station with its lands and irrigation system provided Moffat and his converts with the food security that was vital for a long-term ministry. While it could not be established that these four reasons were the precise motivation for each such mission station established, they provide a broad understanding of what led to one specific form of land acquisition throughout southern Africa, namely, the rural commune ideal. It needs to be said that this was not a model unique to the LMS, but was one undertaken by many other missions. Here one can think of the Paris Evangelical Mission at Morija in Lesotho, the Moravian station at Wuppertal, and the Methodist mission at Liliefontein. For the reasons outlined above, it was a dominant mode of land acquisition and use by nineteenth-century missions in Southern Africa. The Civilizing Buffer Zone Whereas the first vision for land acquisition was driven by the internal needs of the missions, this second type of land acquisition involved the wider plans of colonial policy. To put it bluntly, missionaries and their mission stations were seen as key buffers of civilization in the midst of vast tracts of rural land where sedition and uprising against the colonial authorities might be planned. It is important to note that the missionaries did not need to accept this vision, and could use their mission stations for their own purposes, (often against colonial authority) even while their presence played into a wider colonial framework. The mission stations of the ABCFM illustrate this point nicely. The mission work among the Zulu had begun in 1838, before Natal became a British Colony in 1843. The Boers who remained behind in Natal, after their kin left to establish their own republic in the Transvaal, demanded land from the Colony, and each was allowed to purchase between 2000 and 8000 hectares. The Colony recognized that by granting land to the
De Gruchy Towards a Congregationalist Theology 235 missionaries they could both counter the Boer influence on the land, and ensure that the Zulu were civilized without having to spend money themselves. In 1856, Law No. 5 was passed, an ordinance which gave twelve grants of land, glebes, to the ABCFM. The land comprised 500 acres of church land, surrounded by between 5,500 and 12,900 acres of reserve land. It was the responsibility of the mission to administer grants of land, build schools, provide amenities, and settle arguments. As can be imagined, this led to many conflicts between the missions and the Zulu, the missions and the colonial authorities, and among the missionaries themselves. Three examples will illustrate the conflicts over authority that came with land ownership. In 1888, when the Natal government imposed a hut tax on every Zulu home to force people to work for wages, the missionaries had the unsavoury task of being the tax collectors. 6 Then again, in 1892, the missionaries enforced rental on the glebe lands so that they could be better maintained, but this caused a mass exodus into the surrounding reserves. Also, the missionaries could not decide whether to let Muslim traders run stores on the glebes. These sorts of issues were behind the 1902 Lands Commission report which gave an impression of failure and desertion on glebe sites (other than Adams and Inanda). 7 The Security Zone A third motivation for Congregationalists acquiring land could be characterized as a desire to set up a security zone against hostile forces which could be hunger, drought or discrimination. This model is clearly present in the former two given that the missionaries had to provide their own food or perish. What characterizes this third reason for land acquisition is that it was a desire on the part of indigenous converts rather than missionaries to acquire land. To understand this fully, we need to remind ourselves of a basic principle of Congregationalism, namely, local ownership of property. Whereas the mission societies (LMS and ABCFM) purchased or received land in the name of the parent body, for the reasons outlined above, local Congregationalists who were not part of a mission predominantly those in CUSA, purchased land in the name of their own local church. As there is no diocesan, synodical or Episcopal structure, there is no larger 6. See Dick Sales, From ABM to BCC: Twentieth-Century Changes to the American Board Mission in Zululand, in de Gruchy (ed.), Changing Frontiers: The Mission Story of UCCSA (Gaborone: Pula Press, 1999), pp. 107-14 (113). 7. Ian Booth, Natal and Zululand: The Work of the ABM, in de Gruchy, Changing Frontiers, pp. 80-92 (83).
236 International Congregational Journal strategy or authority in whose name land is purchased. The diversity, noted above, finds expression in the huge range of landowners who nevertheless all belong to the one church. Two key examples illustrate this type of land acquisition. In the Eastern Cape, 8,694 morgen (approx. 17,000 acres) of the old LMS mission station started by van der Kemp at Bethelsdorp in 1803, was formally handed over to the LMS in 1865. This was de facto recognition of the role of the LMS in the area since the freeing of the slaves through Ordinance 50 in 1828. The ordinance did not give the Khoi ownership of the land, and the missionary was the one who decided who should receive grazing, gardening and rights as tenants. But in 1873 the Cape Government accepted the London Missionary Society Institutions Act which completely changed the character of the mission station. Owners received land-rights letters, and the authority of the missionary was substituted by a citizens management council. The work of the LMS had spread towards the Gamtoos Valley, and more land was acquired for 3,000 pounds during the reign of Queen Victoria for the settling of the overflow of the Bethelsdorp settlement. Although some of the title deeds were lost during the 1840s when money was borrowed in England for the Milton Tunnel, many of the farming plots were handed down from one generation to the next. In 1974, the apartheid government called in the title deeds of families farming and residing in Hankey, Weston and Milton, because the agricultural land had been declared white. The church played a leading role in refusing to give up her rights to the land. Unfortunately, some ministers, who had held positions on the town council, had already ceded property to some white farmers. Thankfully, the church was able to retain several hectares of land, which it leased on tender to its members, to be cultivated to their own personal gain. 8 A second illustration of this form of land acquisition happened in the Gordonia region near Upington. During the first half of the twentieth century, Congregationalists belonging to CUSA had moved from the Eastern Cape to farm around the Orange River at towns such as Upington, Kenhard, Keimoes and Kakamas. The Group Areas Act put severe strain on these people, and they banded together under the leadership of the church personified by the legendary Revd Saul Damon. He oversaw the purchasing of four farms alongside the Orange River in the name of the church on which church members could reside. In a time of great political 8. Margaret Constable, The Eastern Cape: A Highway for God, in de Gruchy, Changing Frontiers, pp. 23-31 (26).
De Gruchy Towards a Congregationalist Theology 237 and economic uncertainty this land, owned by the collective church, provided a security zone for many people. 9 The Sign of Independence There is a fourth major reason for land acquisition among churches that comprise the UCCSA, namely, as a sign of independence. This does not account for any sizeable single tracts of land, but would account for the vast majority of land purchase transactions undertaken by Congregationalists. By this we mean, as the membership of a local Congregational Church grows, the church establishes outstations, and usually seeks land upon which to build a hall or meeting place. Needless to say that there are always conflicts between outstations and the mother church, and one of the key issues has to do with property ownership. The people in the outstations feel they are contributing financially to the mother church who owns all the property including the building in which they, the outstation, are gathering. Over time, that outstation becomes an independent church, and one of the key reasons for seeking independence is to own the property. Each local church, then, is the proud and independent owner of its own small piece of property. Given the fact that these properties were not owned by the church (a white institution), but by the members themselves, it is no wonder that the apartheid legislation that had the worst effect upon the UCCSA itself was the Group Areas Act. Joseph Wing, General Secretary of the UCCSA from 1967 to 1990, noted in an overview of the first 20 years of the UCCSA that almost every church building belonging to a predominantly black or so called coloured congregation in an urban area of South Africa, and in many rural areas too, has been affected by Group areas legislation. 10 Congregationalism, and a Theology of the Land Out of this history and heritage the UCCSA finds itself to be a landowner in a situation in which land reform is a key issue in the socioeconomic and political life of the country. Given the volatility of the land issue in southern Africa, it is crucial that the church begins to think theologically about its responsibility to the land it owns, and its contribution to the wider debate about land, justice and economic security. 9. D.R. Briggs and J. Wing, The Harvest and the Hope (Johannesburg: UCCSA, 1970), p. 224. 10. J. Wing, The UCCSA: An Overview of the First Twenty Years, in de Gruchy, Changing Frontiers, p. 170.
238 International Congregational Journal The Church Land Programme comments that: Church land and what to do with it has become an issue for a number of churches and has been debated at senior levels. This reflects a growing awareness within the church of the compromised history of land acquisition and of the importance of land as a resource and as an element of people s identity There is now widespread recognition that the churches have an obligation that cannot simply be abandoned. 11 The UCCSA is therefore challenged to develop a theology of the land so as to guide its reflection and action. As a member of the ecumenical church, it will make use of the general resources of the church universal in this task. However, it also needs to draw upon its own history and traditions in fashioning this theology. Here we need to note some of the burden of this history, as well as what some of the major strands of this theology would include. An Urban and European Bias Perhaps the first thing that has to be said when it comes to a theology of land is that Congregationalism, in its classic theological formulation, carried an urban bias. Congregationalism began in England in the seventeenth century among newly urbanized people as a theological and political protest against the alliance between the Church of England and the feudal system. The feudal system was a land-based system, and as the emerging class of traders, craftsmen and workers left the land for the cities they sought a theology and politics that was not based upon the land and its systems of ownership and feudal-labour, but rather upon education, hard work and individual human and political rights. Congregationalism, in its covenant theology, embodies this in such key elements as the right for adults to come together, form a church, own property and call and employ a minister without reference to a Lord, Bishop, or indeed the Monarch. This rather simple (and perhaps simplistic) overview of the original impulses that led to the Congregationalist movement in England in the seventeenth century does at least provide the clue to two important elements in a theology of land in Congregationalism. Firstly, allied to the emergence of the urban classes and the liberal tradition in Britain came an affirmation of the right to own property. This was seen as a significant way in which people could break free from the power of the landed gentry and establish themselves as independent citizens. The impact of Congregationalism in the United States through the Pilgrim Fathers had a similar effect upon the importance of property ownership 11. See de Gruchy et al., The United Congregational Church: An Inventory, p. 12.
De Gruchy Towards a Congregationalist Theology 239 rights in that country. Secondly, unlike the Church of England, the new Congregational Churches simply did not own land, other than an urban plot for their church building, and so did not have much cause to reflect and theologize about it. Congregationalism was therefore theologically ill-prepared for its arrival in rural southern Africa, where it suddenly acquired access to large tracts of land for its mission stations. Like all European and North American missions arriving in Africa, it operated within a world-view in which the private ownership of land was natural and unquestioned. African notions of communal ownership of land were not understood, and in any event the authority of the chief over the tribal lands would have reminded the missionaries of the feudal situations they left behind in Britain. It would have been the most natural thing in the world to seek land and to purchase it for the use of the mission society. In the subsequent 200 years of Congregationalism in southern Africa, there has not been much advance upon this rather weak theology of land, and so we need to begin to draw together the theological resources that will help us deal with the contemporary situation. Theological Resources for a Congregational Theology of Land If we have not inherited a theology of land, and yet are cognizant of the fact that the current situation demands one, we need to draw on our wider theological resources to begin to map the contours of what this may look like. The development of a Congregational theology of the land will also benefit from a dialogue among people from the congregational tradition throughout the globe, and the following themes are offered towards this dialogue. It may also be that the intensity of the issue in southern Africa will mean that a theology that emerges here will be of benefit to others in the wider church. In drawing this essay to a close, we reflect on seven of these key themes. A Biblical Church. As a church born of the Calvinist reformation, Congregationalism takes the Bible extremely seriously as the supreme guide for the life of faith and the church. Church tradition, cultural practice and political ideology obviously have an impact upon the church on a day-today basis, but these should be subjected to the critical appraisal of the Scriptures. It is clear that the biblical perspective on the land differs quite markedly from that of western capitalist civilization. The Bible understands the land to belong to God, to be lent to human beings for their benefit, but not to become a tool of oppression. The lesson of Naboth s Vineyard rings clear throughout the Old Testament, and the Levitical Code includes the Jubilee injunction to give back the land to those who
240 International Congregational Journal had lost it. The fact that Jesus himself noted that The Son of Man has nowhere to lay is head (Mt. 8.20 and Lk. 9.58) should also remind us that while our Lord and Saviour was not a property owner, the same cannot be said of the Church that seeks to serve him! An African Church. We have made clear above that Congregationalism developed in a particular way because of the political and social situation of England. Through the work of missionaries this church tradition was planted in Africa, in a different set of social and political conditions. The result was that the Congregational Church looked different in rural Africa to what it did in urban England. For one thing, the white missionary played a role remarkably similar to that of the Bishop in the Church of England, the very system that was anathema to Congregationalists! In other ways the church took on a different flavour in Africa as it began to be inculturated, a process that Congregational missionaries contributed to through their labours on Bible translation and was continued by the early generations of indigenous clergy. The UCCSA affirms that it wants to be a truly African church. But the struggle to be a church in Africa is deeper than just tinkering with the system, for it involves learning from the wisdom of African culture, and, in our case, taking seriously African perspectives on the land. Key issues such as communal ownership, and the relationship to the land as a way of relating to one s ancestors should be important resources in our theology of land. A well-known proverb in Africa is that the land does not belong to us; we belong to the land. Using Land Appropriately. The missionaries of the LMS and ABM did acquire tracts of land, but it was never intended to be used for personal gain. Land was used to build churches, schools and hospitals. It was used for food for the missionaries and their converts, and the LMS participated in innovative irrigation schemes such as the Milton Tunnel and the irrigation furrows at Kuruman that helped provide farming land for the wider community. Against this, however, there were times when the land was not used appropriately, such as when the Natal glebe lands were leased out by the ABM to white sugar cane farmers for profit, causing much bitterness among the Zulu church members. 12 In the light of this historical tradition, it is clear that the church should hold land only when it is held in trust and for the benefit of the community. Taking Justice Seriously. The land issue needs to be seen against the backdrop of a wider ethical calling, namely the calling to practise justice. 12. See Sales, From ABM to BCC, p. 113.
De Gruchy Towards a Congregationalist Theology 241 This calling has been very important for the UCCSA and its parent bodies over the past 200 years. As the submission of the UCCSA to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa made clear, the UCCSA was unequivocal in its opposition to apartheid, the eroding of the rule of law, and the militarization of society. Against this the UCCSA supported the WCC s Programme to Combat Racism, the Sanctions and Disinvestment campaigns, and was the only church to give full support to the Kairos Document. Underlying this opposition to apartheid and support for the struggle for a free and democratic South Africa was a clear vision of justice, particularly for the poor and marginalized. This commitment and calling provides a key element in any theology of land, for it reminds us that issues around land restitution, redistribution and reform need to be guided by a framework that takes justice for the poor as its central thrust. Land as Security against Poverty. An interesting development in Congregationalism in South Africa was the way in which local churches began to purchase land to provide security for their members. Given the wider legal framework for land tenure in South Africa, this was almost exclusively among the coloured constituency in the church. Here we are thinking of the farms in the eastern Cape around Hankey and Humansdorp, and those in the northern Cape around Upington and Keimoes. Here the purchase of land was allied very closely to the need to provide security to those whose livelihoods were under threat from the state. This is an important principle to draw into a theology of the land, namely, a recognition that land does provide security to the poor and threatened. Rather than using land as a way to only create rental income for the church, we should be exploring a responsible use of the land as a resource in the fight against poverty. Our attention should be drawn to the way in which the LMS handed over its land to the local people in the eastern Cape. Recognition of Responsible Ownership. At the heart of Congregationalism is the recognition as noted above that adults have the right to covenant together to form a church, and to own property in their own name. Unlike an Episcopal system where the land is held in the name of the Diocese, and which can lead to power struggles, Congregationalists recognize that the local church even a black or coloured local church has the right to own property and to use it responsibly. That is a key recognition because it does away with notions of baaskap (being the boss) and control through ownership. This recognition did, of course, have unintended consequences in the face of the Group Areas Act,
242 International Congregational Journal because there was no white authority who owned the churches in the newly declared white areas. As noted above, many of the UCCSA churches were forced to move into the newly proclaimed black and coloured townships. But the principle remains adults of all races have the right to covenant together to own property and to use it responsibly in the pursuit of the goals they decide together. A People who Live in and through God s Grace. The covenant means the inclusive embracing of people by God, and their embrace of one another in the community called church. God s embracing of us is an outflowing of the embrace that is at the very heart of the Trinitarian community of God. It is the way God expresses God s love and mercy towards us, even when we were and are far away from God and our neighbour. The covenant is a covenant of Grace, and we are drawn into it through forgiveness and the gift of new life. While, at first glance, this may seem to have very little to do with a theology of land, it is nevertheless the foundation of any social or political ethics, because it places our failure and repentance, and God s grace and forgiveness at the centre. We cannot proceed to deal with the land issue in South Africa in the light of our history and involvement in the purchase and use of land in the subcontinent, unless we approach it with humility, and awareness of our failings and an openness to change.
Copyright of International Congregational Journal is the property of International Congregational Journal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.