Abstract
Despite the demise of apartheid, economic inequality remains racially skewed in South Africa. For young people born either shortly before or after 1994, the official demise of apartheid—termed “born frees”—we must ask whether they are indeed “free” of the social and economic constraints of the past. How does ongoing inequality color notions of reconciliation and restitution twenty-five years later? This article focuses on the context of Christian young adults living in Stellenbosch, one of the most unequal towns in South Africa. We explore their lived experiences and theologizing on these issues arising from empirical research in Stellenbosch.
South Africa is currently ranked as the most unequal nation in the world by the World Bank, with high rates of racially skewed poverty and inequality, a legacy of the past. 1 For many young South Africans born either just before or just after the demise of apartheid, termed “born frees,” 2 the ongoing realities of poverty and inequality raise the question of whether they are truly free in this postapartheid era. 3 Their lived experiences of inequality, views on issues such as reconciliation and restitution, as well as their understanding of their role in societal change are important to consider against this backdrop. Furthermore, how do Christian “born frees” understand and interpret these issues in light of Scripture and their lived experiences within community and church? The research findings presented in this article seek to engage the lived theologies of inequality among young South African Christians (between the ages of 18 and 35). 4 The focus of this study is the community of Stellenbosch, a town in the Winelands district in the Western Cape. This community is considered one of the most unequal places in South Africa and remains largely geographically segregated along apartheid-era racial lines. 5 It is a youthful community, with an estimated 64 percent of the population under the age of 35.
The context of the study
South Africa, inequality, and reconciliation
Within the South African social, political, economic, and religious context, reconciliation is a contested issue. The 2015 report of the Institute for Justice and Reconciliation (IJR) found the following: “While most South Africans agree that the creation of a united, reconciled nation remains a worthy objective to pursue, the country remains afflicted by its historical divisions. The majority feels that race relations have either stayed the same or deteriorated since the country’s political transition in 1994 and the bulk of respondents have noted income inequality as a major source of social division. Most believe that it is impossible to achieve a reconciled society as long as those who were disadvantaged under apartheid remain poor within the ‘new South Africa.’” 6 Recent events in South Africa, such as the #Feesmustfall protests 7 against economic inequalities and economic injustice in higher education, 8 the spate of racial slurs and denials of black pain on social media, 9 and the re-racialization of society through identity politics, 10 all seem to support the findings of the IJR.
The lived experiences of inequality among South Africans have a significant influence on their views of “the other” and their willingness or unwillingness to engage in processes that may contribute toward justice and reconciliation. Forgiving a person for wrongs committed, which is an important step toward reconciliation, is a complex and difficult process. In deeply religious societies such as South Africa, theologically laden concepts such as reconciliation and forgiveness play an important role in the lives of persons. They also shape social values and expectations in the broader society.
One problem that has been identified is that these unreconciled persons seldom have contact with each other because of the legacy of the apartheid system, which entrenched inequality by separating persons racially, according to economic class, and geographically. 11 The result is that, as intergroup contact theory suggests, each group’s own social views and religious beliefs (i.e., in-group identity) become entrenched, and the views and beliefs of “the other” (i.e., out-group identity) are rejected or ignored because they are not understood or engaged across separating boundaries. 12
In at least one sense this separation makes processes of reconciliation very difficult. Not only is it difficult for persons to forgive one another, since they have no proximate or authentic social engagement, forgiveness is also theologically contested because of deeply held and entrenched faith convictions about the nature and processes of forgiveness. 13 Moreover, the lack of restitution and enacting of justice on behalf of the beneficiaries of apartheid (white South Africans), along with a lack of seeking the well-being and dignity of those persons harmed under apartheid and beyond (black South Africans), has created deep wounds, a great deal of distrust, and understandable anger. 14 In other words, there is both a hermeneutic and a social barrier to forgiveness that is complicated by the lived reality of inequality. In recent years, the discourse of reconciliation in South Africa has shifted to include restitution, which would address the injustices wrought by the apartheid system socioeconomically, including the redistribution of land. 15
Born free? Youth and inequality
This study focuses on young adults within Christian congregational contexts between the ages of 18 and 35. Jansen notes that one of the most devastating aspects of poverty is that if you were born poor and had to struggle to secure food, there is a good chance you will remain poor and hungry as a young child, adolescent, and young adult. 16 Young people are the biggest cohort of new job seekers and are therefore the most vulnerable group with regard to unemployment, which is central to ongoing inequality in South Africa. 17
Those who turned twenty-six in 2020, along with the majority of South Africa’s population who were born after them, have been labeled the “born free” generation. 18 The term “born free”’ is deeply contested. For many South Africans born after the end of political apartheid in 1994, the daily reality of poverty, racism, violence, and spatial injustice is as devastating as it was for their parents and grandparents. 19 This study seeks to contribute toward the texturing, troubling, and thickening of the understandings of what it will take for this generation to become truly free.
Some social commentators have described today’s youth as depoliticized and apathetic, yet recent #Feesmustfall protests in South African tertiary institutions indicate that youth agency exists. 20 These youths protested for equal access to tertiary education, against institutional racism, and in favor of a decolonized curriculum.
Research methodology
The research project was guided by the following question: “In what ways do the lived realities of the continued and intensified realities of inequality in post-apartheid South Africa impact on the lived theologizing and political agency of the ‘born free’ generation of South Africans (18–35 years) with regards to issues of social justice, inequality, and reconciliation?” To engage this question the project (1) discussed the current socioeconomic milieu of South Africa, in particular in Stellenbosch; (2) explored and contrasted perceptions of race, class, and inequality in the 18–35 age group of church-attending young adults; (3) explored theological and ethical constructs that may shape these perceptions; and (4) investigated the notion of political agency and how it related to issues of social justice, inequality, and reconciliation.
The project followed a qualitative, inductive methodology. 21 A qualitative approach was considered best suited, since it allowed the researchers to investigate issues that require explanation or understanding of specific phenomena. 22 A multiple case-study approach was employed. 23 It allows contemporary phenomena to be investigated in depth and within a real-life context, while considering multiple factors and sources of evidence. 24
Our three case studies were of congregations of the same confessional background within Stellenbosch. These three congregations each represent one of the three main racial groups in Stellenbosch: a church from the so-called Colored community, 25 a church from the Black (isiXhosa) community, and a church from the White community. The use of racial designations within the study was a contested one, however, as race and inequality remain directly aligned in this context; we chose to use these designations. We focused our studies on youth between the ages of 18 and 35 years, conducting up to twelve in-depth interviews within each congregation. A gender balance was prioritized. A list of thirty potential participants was compiled by the church leaders, with the research team doing the final selection of the twelve participants from each congregation, thus ensuring the anonymity of the participants involved in the study.
The core research team was responsible for approaching the churches and arranging access for the researchers. One of the collaborators and two research assistants interviewed the respondents, and interviews were conducted in the participants’ language of choice (English, isiXhosa or Afrikaans). Interviews were then transcribed (and also translated, in the case of isiXhosa interviews). Transcribed interviews were then analyzed thematically, using ATLAS.ti 8. A provisional coding sheet was designed by the research team, which was updated and adapted, based on the content of the data. Each case study was analyzed individually, and then, based on the findings, a synthesis report was compiled. It should be noted that studies of this nature have limitations. They aim to give voice to the lived experience and lived religion of Christian young adults in Stellenbosch as accounted by them. It does not necessarily document their actual engagement with these issues—only their perspectives. It also cannot be generalized to the whole of South Africa. Grounded qualitative research, however, does give us a “thick” description of the kind of perspectives emerging from Christian young adults on these issues. This article presents the following key findings.
Findings
In this section we present our findings under the following four categories.
Inequality is a lived reality for young adults, and it remains aligned to race
All respondents recognized the realities of poverty and inequality in South Africa and, especially, inequality in the town of Stellenbosch. Most White respondents agreed that South Africa has high levels of inequality and that Stellenbosch is a very unequal town—except one younger participant who does not live in the town. The White respondents who had crossed racial or economic borders and had been confronted with “the other” noted that they were less likely to ignore the reality of poverty and inequality. For the Black and Colored respondents, inequality is a very real lived experience, often provoking raw emotions. The feelings noted by Colored and Black respondents included sadness, anger, frustration, and numbness. They also made much of the ways in which the legacy of apartheid and spatial inequalities and social divisions continued to be replicated in Stellenbosch: I think that there’s an established boundary—I would say, like rich is somewhere, and poor is somewhere. Like even within the community of Stellenbosch if you go to certain areas, you can clearly see—okay this is a rich area, or this is a poor area. And people don’t actually associate. I mean there are those exceptional ones that associate with different classes like rich and poor, but most times it’s the rich and the poor. (Colored respondent)
All three groups were asked about their understanding of “white privilege.” They all recognized that privilege remains aligned with race in the post-apartheid context. Some White respondents acknowledged the privileges accrued from the past system; others felt that policies such as affirmative action were unable to minimize these apartheid gains. Some White respondents even viewed it as reverse oppression.
All respondents noted that the churches in Stellenbosch still reflect the inequalities and racial divisions in the broader society and that there is little “border crossing.” This study did not investigate whether this observation is true at the leadership/pastoral level. However, the perception of young adults from this study was that there is little engagement across racial lines.
Forgiveness, reconciliation, and restitution remain disputed issues
Forgiveness, reconciliation, and restitution were clearly “hot button” issues, eliciting conflicting, yet nuanced responses. Some White respondents felt that reconciliation would be possible only with forgiveness; other White respondents, while recognizing that they have benefited in some ways from the aftermath of apartheid, felt that, since they did not personally participate in apartheid (it had been enacted by a previous generation), they were not required to ask for forgiveness. I don’t feel like I have to apologize to someone or ask for forgiveness. For me, it is that many of these things [are the result of] decisions take by many people on my behalf and many years [before I was born]. (White respondent)
This statement links with the next respondent’s statement. It is clear that reconciliation has generational dimensions: And with the young people, like we didn’t really see what went on, but our parents felt pain. So now the parent carries the pain that they felt onto you, now you also just feel angry, because your parents suffered under it or something. (Colored respondent)
Colored respondents appeared to be conflicted as to whether reconciliation and restitution were synonymous, although all felt that actions to correct the injustices of apartheid and its ongoing legacy were crucial. Yet, some felt that restitution might amount to revenge seeking. For these participants it is a necessary evil, but not necessarily the answer to relational brokenness. Black respondents, in contrast, were clear that there would be no reconciliation and forgiveness without justice: Reconciliation is a process. You can’t have reconciliation without justice. . . . You know the whole issue of forgiveness, you can’t forgive [people] or reconcile with people without really having the process of forgiveness. Reconciliation is kind of the end result. There will always be tension between races, especially between Black and White people, if there is no justice, and we really need to work towards that justice in order to reconcile and even to consider forgiveness. (Black respondent)
A fascinating perspective from Black respondents is that they felt that the expectation for forgiveness is placed on them rather than it being something that White persons should take responsibility for and work toward. The issue of restitution related to wealth sharing, economic transformation, and land redistribution (with consent and compensation, or without compensation) was raised many times by participants. For this group, restitution and correcting the injustices of the past, which continue to be features of inequality today, included issues related to the economic sphere, education, transportation, safety, employment, job security, and other areas.
White respondents were also conflicted on issues of restitution and what it entailed. Most agreed that land reform and affirmative action were understandable in light of the past, and most recognized the symbolic value of land. Yet, some also felt land redistribution did not make economic sense, especially if it was not managed properly or was tainted by corruption. Respondents were also fearful of land reform simply becoming land grabs, 26 which Stellenbosch was experiencing at that time.
Lived theologizing is focused largely on the Great Commandment
With regard to how the Bible helped respondents to think about poverty and inequality, a strong narrative emerged from all three groups calling for love for one’s neighbor, in the light of God being a God of love. The key manner in which respondents reflected was therefore with reference to the “Great Commandment,” which admonishes one to love God and love one’s neighbor as oneself (Mark 12:30-31). This factor should motivate one to act in compassion with regard to poverty and inequality and to cross borders. All of the respondents felt that this ethic challenged them to treat others with respect, love, tolerance, and understanding.
Because everyone is created in his image, everyone is equal in his eyes and so if you are now the richest man or the poorest person on the street, we are all actually equal. (Colored respondent)
This view was also tied to an understanding that Jesus is “for the marginalized, was for the people that were basically, were seen as nothing, were dehumanized.” The Black respondents interpreted love in light of the concept of Ubuntu, 27 which they believed should be a guiding value. This indigenous framing also problematized the notion of love, saying that it was not evident in the ways in which inequality in the town existed. They were concerned that while the majority of South Africans reside in faith communities, there was still inequality and therefore still a lack of love. Therefore, Christian values should guide the church in engaging these issues.
White respondents also problematized certain parts of the Bible. While they felt their faith called them to treat everyone with dignity and to associate with the marginalized, some also felt unsure how to understand Jesus saying that “the poor will always be with us” (Mark 14:7) and noticed that he never condemned slavery.
There is a lack of clarity regarding how the church can act for change
Black and Colored respondents did not appear to be clear on the ways in which their churches were currently responding to poverty, although there were some direct initiatives of which they were unaware. All groups, however, had ideas with regards to engagement. Colored respondents largely focused on the need for spiritual formation, believing that churches should equip young people to better engage with societal issues and to be empowered to be self-reliant. They also noted that the church could become a place where job opportunities are shared or resources mobilized, and where people are educated for civic participation.
Black respondents largely suggested cognitive strategies as starting points to address the problem: sponsoring workshops, inviting speakers, hosting discussions, and so forth. However, they did not seem to view the church as a space in which concrete and practical action could be taken. Perhaps this is because they felt that the church as a whole was not proactive enough in encouraging societal transformation, and they appeared to indicate that political parties and political action might be more effective. The church was therefore seen as not being able to take concrete action, such as mobilizing for advocacy or for development. Black members, however, noted that one of the ways that inequality could be bridged was by sharing resources, and that churches should lead the way in doing so. They felt there was too much inequality between churches in Stellenbosch, yet the Christian faith obligates persons to act in love toward their neighbor. They were also clear that this should not come in the form of paternalistic handouts from White churches.
In contrast, the White group all appeared to be aware of their own church’s involvement in surrounding areas through a faith-based organization. They were positive about this involvement and understood it as allowing opportunities to cross racial and class boundaries, although two respondents did reflect on whether this was an outflow of White guilt. Some noted that perhaps the church could do more to encourage engagement.
Conclusion
This study uncovered points that need to be considered by congregations in this context. Sadly, what emerges from this study is deeply challenging to the churches. Congregations in Stellenbosch still echo the socioeconomic and racial divisions of the town and its apartheid history. While young adults saw the importance of church to engagement, they struggled to point to what churches should do, other than dialogical engagement across racial lines and focusing on children and younger youth. These are certainly good places to start engaging issues of racial and socioeconomic division and to empower communities. Churches, however, were not generally regarded as places from which economic activities could be developed. Nor were they viewed as sites of advocacy for community change and mobilization.
The lived theologizing of young people was largely focused on the Great Commandment and the love of neighbor, but they seldom mentioned the prophetic and social justice texts within the Pentateuch or the Prophets as theological resources. The latter is neither right nor wrong, but it is interesting in the light of South Africa’s prophetic theological tradition, which is rooted in these texts rather than the Great Commandment. 28 Prophetic texts deal more directly with issues of socioeconomic justice. The latter implies that there might be a need for hermeneutical engagement around issues of justice and inequality. We noted that indigenous values (such as Ubuntu) reinforce or align with values in Scripture, and they also assist in critiquing praxis. Ultimately, respondents across racial lines were hopeful, and this hope was rooted in their faith.
Churches in towns such as Stellenbosch therefore have a great deal of work to do in fostering the welfare of their communities. Young adults could be at the forefront of this work if equipped with theologies that allowed them to develop their prophetic imagination, and if spaces are created for them to engage across lines of race and class while transforming economic and social injustices.
Footnotes
Funding
The research project received a grant from the Nagel Institute for the Study of World Christianity, Calvin University, Grand Rapids, MI, USA, which was funded for the African Theological Advance initiative by the Templeton Religion Trust, Nassau, Bahamas.
Notes
Author biographies
Left to right: Nadine Bowers Du Toit, Dion Forster, Elisabet le Roux, and Shantelle Weber.