Violence, whiteness & the Dutch Reformed church1Cobus van Wyngaard 2 Introduction Eighteen months ago, on the morning of one of our first meetings planning this particular conference, I had a knife held against me, and my cell phone and cash stolen3. That was January of 2009. 2008 will be remembered in our congregation as the year of violence. Specifically violent crime. For at least the readers of the Afrikaans newspapers Kameeldrift became synonymous with violence and crime. It was within these contexts that my own critical reflection on violence and theology was birthed. I am an ordained minister of the Dutch Reformed church, a white church, which, as I shall argue in a moment, is important to take note of. The Afrikaner community, as well as the Dutch Reformed church in particular, has often been blamed for its lack of critical self-reflection and self criticism (for example Fourie 2008:282; Van der Westhuizen 2007:6-7). It can also well be argued that white people in general for most of modern history lacked in critical self-reflection concerning race, as can be seen in the blind spot that existed in white-dominated scholarship concerning white identity. The past two decades has seen a large amount of literature, both internationally and in South Africa, in what is generally called “whiteness studies”. Taken seriously, I believe this can assist white people in South Africa in their process of self-reflection, self criticism, and rethinking identity in a postcolonial, postapartheid South Africa. Whiteness studies in South Africa reveal very specific understandings concerning violence and crime in white rhetoric, which is of concern for our topic under discussion. Simultaneously, I present this as part of a broader quest: that of engaging studies on whiteness in reflection on the Dutch Reformed church. The Dutch Reformed Church It is not strange for the Dutch Reformed Church to be talking about being church in a context of violence. Ever since 1994 violence has been on the agenda of every General Synod meeting of the church. In 2002 a declaration on the calling of this church in Southern Africa was presented which has remained influential in General Synod meetings ever since, and for now at least will continue to do so. In 1 Paper read at the conference on “Violence in the democratic South Africa: A challenge to theology and the churches”, held at the University of Pretoria, 10-12 August 2010. 2 Cobus van Wyngaard is an ordained minister of the Dutch Reformed congregation in Kameeldrif, Masters student at the University of Pretoria, and involved with the Centre for Public Theology at the University of Pretoria. 3 I wrote a blog post about this experience. January 27, 2009. the mugging. http://mycontemplations.wordpress.com/2009/01/27/the-mugging/ The synods representing congregations around Pretoria (as well as Limpopo and Mpumalanga) took responsibility in writing a report on violence on behalf of the Dutch Reformed Church (Noordelike Sinode 2008:28).asp?id=728 . specifically Southern Africa. Nobel Prize winner Nadine Gordimer. however. when talking about apartheid. (General Synod 2002:604-605). although this was not explicitly stated as being the biggest priority. or even in thorough academic reflection on the Dutch Reformed church. or congregations actively engaging other role players such as local government and police in dialogue and participation in responding to violence.kerkbode. and. while still identifying with this church. very little had been made of critical whiteness studies from within the Dutch Reformed church. A clear picture of what congregations are doing in engaging violence are still needed. empirically. which need to concern us is the effect of whiteness in the Dutch Reformed church today. theological education. and that I am able to critically reflect on my own whiteness as well as the whiteness of this church partly to what this church has given my through its youth ministry. However. very little need to be said today about the historic connection between the Dutch Reformed Church and white identity in South Africa. and I will therefore argue that in the growing discussion within this church concerning violence.co. The question.za/archive_berigte. representing parts of Pretoria as well as Mpumalanga. at least from my personal experience. It is not strange at all to find reference to the Dutch Reformed church in works on whiteness and Afrikaners in South Africa (see for example various references in Van der Westhuizen 2007 and Jansen 2009:72-73). At the very least we can say that the Dutch Reformed Church has been responding to the challenge posed by violence in the democratic South Africa in various ways over the past years. again called into life a commission on violence. the insights of whiteness studies can provide helpful insights. and examples can go on. It remains a white church. calls it “the ugliest creation of man. and experience in congregational ministry. Indeed.this declaration the synod expressed its wish to make a difference regarding the problems facing Africa. In the Kerkbode. 4 http://www. Recently the Eastern Synod. official newspaper of the Dutch Reformed Church letters and articles has been raging over the years concerning violence. and they baptized the thing in the Dutch Reformed Church” (in Steyn 2001:24). But examples exist. And talk about violence and crime in the Dutch Reformed Church is not limited to synodal meetings. I repeat this because white identity in South Africa has a strong influence on perceptions regarding violence and crime. First. I owe the very fact that I stand here today. the Dutch Reformed Church remains a white church. whether such as the congregation which participated in taking an offer of water to Gethsemane to call on God to save us4. I see myself as wholly part of this church. I’m from the white Dutch Reformed church Maybe this is the point where I need to first confess the difficulty in applying critical theories on whiteness on the Dutch Reformed church. on their list of problems facing Southern Africa was violence. Indeed. Race has not always been what it is today. while still seen as completely part of this group. while men won’t mention being mail. White has not always been what it is today. Steyn 2004:144). But not talking about whiteness denies the reality of distinct white discourses in society. that it exposes the way in which . because the racialness of their own lives is edited out. This makes white identity invisible. but rather to find appropriate means to critically reflect on my own work as pastor and theologian. and also the position of the church I am part of. of intense emotional turmoil when writing this. White people most of the time mainly talk about white people. Beverley Tatum point to this in the way that her psychology class use descriptors for. In their predominantly protestant context Jews will mention their being Jewish. whites have tended to take their identity as the standard by which everyone else is measured. In sum. and which still function as an overwhelmingly predominantly white institution such as the Dutch Reformed church. The importance of whiteness studies is. and this will be true for the church as well. we just couch it in terms of ‘people’ generally (Steyn 2004:144). while protestants won’t mention being protestant. My goal is not to provide excessive feelings of guilt. “even to the extent that many whites do not consciously think about the profound effect being white has on their everyday lives”. It has been pointed out that a dysfunctional guilt complex isn’t going to move white South African forward (Steyn 2001:161). while white students would rarely mention their being white (2003:location541). he states that “(t)hinking of yourself as ‘white’. Simply noticing the blind spot that existed in Western scholarship until recently already illustrate part of the problem of whiteness: As the privileged group. We don’t think of ourselves as white per se (Garner 2007:location814). However. Studies in whiteness point out that the “white race” was an invention of the colonialist era (Steyn 2004:144-145) which created a certain privilege for those who were able to. Whiteness studies Within the broad history of academic reflection whiteness studies is a relatively new player on the block. The same should be said for an institution historically so strongly influenced by whiteness. and allowed to. among other things. insider-outsider nature of researching of one’s “own” group” (2001:xxxv). identify themselves as white. In Garner’s introduction to whiteness. (Steyn 2001:xxvi).I can identify with Melissa Steyn’s description of feelings of guilt and betrayal when writing from an insider’s position (Steyn 2001:xvii). emerging in the early to middle 90’s (Garner 2007:location199. means you are trying to understand how you as an individual are ensnared in the social relationship of oppressed and oppressor” (2007:location229). white people have been able to ignore the manner in which the notion of race has structured people’s life opportunities in society as a whole. my conviction that this self-criticism is needed within my own group has through this study grown stronger than ever. Woman would mention their being female. as the whiteness problematic forces you to do. And in similar fashion students of color would mention their racial or ethnic group. Steyn describe her contradictory emotions as “a clear indication of the intersectional. or at times despite the fact that they experience themselves as the “non-powerful” (Tatum 2003:335) or even the victims of society (Steyn 2004:xxix. Whiteness studies grew out of African-American attempts at an anti-racist recasting the world through a focus on existing power relations (Garner 2007:149). white was the dominant. Garner 2007:location260). is one strand within a general pattern of denial. and about the past. The focus on white people as a race ‘like any other’ brought to the fore that indeed whiteness is ‘unlike any other’. (Steyn 2001:112-113) Internationally white discourse uses a type of colour blindness which denies the effects of racialization (Steyn & Foster 2007:29) which furthers the attempts at maintaining the status quo. of how the legacy of social injustice continues into the future. To take time into consideration I will not refer back to this again. In bringing us closer to the subject being discussed. Within the social space in which I move (and this is not limited to the Dutch Reformed church. at times pointing to white Afrikaners. normalized location. it should already be clear that I agree with those who point out that there is an inherent problem with this normalized white self-understanding.racial order advances whites in spite of their experience that their social space is neutral (Steyn 2004:144). but rather paint a quick overview of some of the things I believe to be important in starting to use these insights when thinking about public theology and the white Dutch Reformed church in South Africa. my “own” group. It is an evasion of the extent to which the past permeates the present. so let me just mention that this can be found in white discourse in various societies. about Apartheid. specifically. Everything else was measured according to distance from selected white norms of society (Garner 2007:location 201). 156-157. racism and talk about race is and should be a thing of the past. but I personally find one of the most important insights from whiteness studies. The appeal to let sleeping dogs lie hides the crucial issue of which dogs are still holding onto the bones. Even with only a few thoughts mentioned thus far. I’d like to focus on a few particularities of white identity and discourse specific to South Africa next. since for a very long time at least (and I would agree with other who state that in many ways this continue today). It is a refusal to acknowledge that sustaining “normal” white life perpetuates the disadvantages of others. The key to critiquing and countering racism and racial polarization is to be found in studying the privilege of the racial elite. white people (Steyn 2001:xxix). and postcolonial studies in general. What was said so far does not provide an overview of whiteness studies. Maybe the emotions involved in explaining to others from my own group why I seem to be opening up racial wounds is the main reason for reacting to this. that it problemetize the idea that white privilege. Of this Steyn writes: …a desire to close the discussion on the past. and does not exclude the academic environment) one often find the sentiment that white people are tired of talking about race. including South African white discourse (Steyn 2001:101-114). . the circumstances in the New South Africa problematize the way whiteness was constructed as the social positionality of domination. Garner state this is an important assumption in our study of whiteness: “(t)he meanings attached to ‘race’ are always time-and place-specific. she points to influential voices such as that of Derrida and Hannah Arendt. Steyn focus on discursive practices by white South Africans used to manage their positionality to their greatest advantage (Steyn & Foster 2007:26). (the) disruption of power in South Africa. Still. Things should remain the way it is (:135). Most groups of whites left the countries they had colonized if they had not attained numerical majority as settlers. motivated by the more “acceptable” discourse concerning fear of crime (Lemanski 2004:109). It’s a battle over definitions and ideas rather than segregated living areas. nor have obvious political power. money. indeed. White privilege is maintained by continuing Apartheid’s sociospatial entrenchment. “A great 5 Obviously affluent blacks can also be found in traditionally rich white areas . Indeed. it is beautifully illustrates how white people use every means at their disposal (legal expertise. is unusual in the history of whiteness.Whiteness in South Africa There is a strong focus in whiteness studies to particularize specific whitenesses (Steyn 2004:145). the suburb of Cape Town. it is not only the extremity of Apartheid. Steyn calls Apartheid “a logical. However. or by even stronger entrenchment into gated communities. if extreme. and could not retain political dominance. they are a larger group than white people in other African countries. as in for example Australia. therefore. among others. This said the global influence on whiteness in South Africa should not be underplayed. (Steyn 2001:164) In South Africa white people are not a majority nor in political power. political savvy etc) to continue protecting white privilege (2002:123-139). Apartheid didn’t develop apart from the racialization of white people across centuries of colonization. But the fact that white people are neither a numerical majority. In a case study on Constantia. do not end our conversation about white privilege. By definition. Indeed. the connection with a global white race is part of what keep white privilege in place. Whiteness is no exception” (Garner 2007:location102). that cause for a unique white self-understanding. where whites are continuing to seek their livelihood in a situation where they have neither numerical nor political power. Much of what shaped our understanding of whiteness in South Africa need not be repeated in detail. interpretation of the trope of modern Western whiteness” (2001:xxxi). nor only the fact that South Africa was one of the last countries in Africa to achieve majority rule. South Africa also has a comparatively larger group of white citizens than any other country in Africa (Steyn 2001:41). In Constantia this means maintaining the status quo.5 Attempts at maintaining white privilege is not limited to socialspatial concerns. who considered Apartheid to be the ultimate form of racism in the world (:23-24). part of each national racial regime. both within the country and abroad” (Steyn & Foster 2007:26). working from the perception that the ANC government doesn’t act because the victims of crime are white (Fourie 2008:264-265). blacks attribute increased crime to unfinished democracy and African Immigrants” (Lemanski 2004:109). sustaining high levels of material. is recast as the victim of the new South Africa. by 2003. that black people hate white people (Fourie 2008:267). Since the middle 90’s “whites see rising crime as representing the new (black) government's inability to rule (i. remain ways in which white privilege is being kept in place. is that black people are criminogenic and violent. in spite of an excessive fortification.e. . These describe the apparent inability of the government as a socalled “hidden agenda” of the ANC to get rid of the Afrikaner. at times specifically Afrikaner white people. Other analysis’ of white talk in the Afrikaans newspapers point out postapartheid white discourses which attempts at keeping the systematic Afrikaner advancement gained through apartheid intact. White talk on violence is of the utmost importance if we are to understand the role of the Dutch Reformed church in a context of violence (Steyn 2004:156). and white people. and we have seen yesterday how this trend which started shortly after 1994 has continued until today. and a growing fear of crime. While in 1998 whites felt safe in residential areas. This is not the same as saying that white self-description is remaining stagnant. In an analysis of 2004 letters to the Beeld editor this same theme is identified among white South Africans. The perception exists. In a 1994 public opinion survey 6% of respondents considered crime to be a major concern. Violence and whiteness in the democratic South Africa There is a perception that crime is becoming a worse problem. psychological and emotional comfort (Steyn 2004:150-151). One of the strongest themes in white discourse is talk about violence. justifying stricter police and criminal justice systems that affect black people disproportionately” (Steyn & Foster 2007:38). and the Afrikaner specifically at times. Furthermore “(T)he slant in White Talk. and those entrenched develop a growing fear. And there seem to be a vicious cycle where fear leads to entrenchment. This was significantly higher than the rise in crime (Lemanski 2004:105). deeper fear” (Lemanski 2004:106). through which white people in South Africa. the meanings created and the understanding of reality being unpacked. negotiating for themselves a reasonably acceptable place in the new South Africa (Fourie 2008:281).deal is at stake in the battle over whose definitions of the current and transforming social. By 1997 this had risen to 58%. Black people are specifically painted as responsible for crime and violence. economic and political arrangements and developments should prevail. protect citizens). the themes occurring. hence. In research looking at letter to the editor in Beeld. The way in which white people participate in the public discourse in South Africa. and is created. it is pointed out how Afrikaners are constantly redefining themselves as need arise. “their fear of the increasingly unknown outside has exploded. Steyn points out how certain white discourses attempting to keep white privilege in place name crime as South Africa’s greatest problem (Steyn & Foster 2007:33-34). as the targeted victims of violence (Steyn 2004:156). however. leading to further fortification and. ” (ASM 2008b)). creating the perception that violence is primarily a white against black issue. numerous examples can be pointed out where the approach chosen by the church in its public discourse reinforce the white talk about government identified earlier.“While crime in South Africa is real enough. incidents on trains. black and white are willfully destroyed by mindless deeds of criminal violence. and that blacks hate whites. and two statements on Xenophobia. the choice to cast this as targeting primarily whites. Most of the perceptions mentioned in the introduction to this document concern perceptions about the inability or lack of political will in the government to combat crime. the figures used is still from 1995. and as if Afrikaners are being singled out for persecution is a deliberate rhetorical option” (Steyn 2004:156). Minnaar & Mistry2004:38)6. Recent figures is needed. quote 1996 figures. although never 6 Minnaar & Mistry is a 2004 publication of the ISS. This can be read as a direct call to challenge the dominant narratives which blame the inability of a black government for the current state of violence. sometimes in the examples used (as part of a list of examples of violence around 2006. and violence continue to be much higher in townships – to name but two obvious points challenging white rhetoric concerning violence. are mentioned (ASM 2006)). Up to 1994 by far the majority of police stations were found in traditional white areas. Violence and whiteness in the Dutch Reformed church Which bring us to the very important question: How does the Dutch Reformed church talk about violence? Are the rhetorical strategies employed by whites in order to keep holding to the privilege gained from an Apartheid system reinforced or challenged in the churches participation in the public discourse concerning violence? The official public statements of the Dutch Reformed church in the past 4 years has a very strong focus on violence. The church is then called to give attention to responsible research concerning the causes of crime (Northern Synod 2008:28-30).both rich and poor. but also violence against woman and children. also from 2004. Although the claim is made of continuation of higher spending in white areas. but also claim that this it still the case. Sometimes explicitly stated (“In our cities and townships the lives of innocent people . Although this is slowly changing “police resources remain disproportionately located in traditionally white areas and the country’s city centres (Lemanski 2004:104. official talk in the Dutch Reformed church about violence as a rule recognize that violence plague people of all races. On the other hand. specifically violent crime. but for the sake of the argument I accept these sources when they claim disproportionately higher police resources in traditional white areas. In a report on violence and crime written for the 2007 General Synod it was specifically stated that popular perceptions may not drive theological reflection. which involves almost exclusively non-whites. . Contrary to themes in white discourse identified above. Lemanski’s work. In a press release by the moderature of the church in 2008.accompanied with the blatant racist rhetoric found in the general white discourse. that theology by its very nature should be public theology. Blatant racism is being challenged constantly. The underlying problems focus on inability of government and police (ASM 2008b). Indeed. To quote Jűrgen Moltmann: “From the perspectiveof its origins and its goal. let me move towards the end by making a few remarks on implications this might have for our reflection on public theology within the Dutch Reformed church. it does point out that at the very least the public discourse of the Dutch Reformed church can be interpreted as support for much of white discourse on violence. then at least ideologically). Whether the problems are real or not are not the issue I want to point out. many would say that all theology should be public theology. Christian theology is public theology. for it is the theology of the kingdom of God” (in Marshall 2005:11). on language rights not being observed. On exactly what we should understand public theology to be. Public Theology and the white church in South Africa Duncan Forrester talked about public theology as “theology which seeks the welfare of the city before protecting the interests of the Church”(2004:6). there continue to exist some confusion (Bezuidenhout 2007:5)7. I believe we are at a point in history where there is general consensus in ecumenical theology that the above two quotes ought in some way to be true. written by the three traditionally Reformed Afrikaans churches. a number of underlying problems which the church believe government should give attention to is listed. But in one way or the other public theology 7 I attempted to explain some of the differences in a Masters dissertation. and on affirmative action (rather than on white dominance and privilege built up over centuries) (ASM 2008a) Although this is not an exhaustive analysis. That the country is slowly falling apart and losing ground (thus implying that what was handed over from the white Apartheid government is being lost) Racism is blamed on who blame things that is going wrong on racism. but not white privilege. This said. and doesn’t yet reflect congregational discourse at all. but merely a few examples. such as: That it would seem as if the current government is not able to address violence. We generally agree that theology should take the wellbeing of all creation as its concern. which also contain further references (Van Wyngaard 2008) . what the task of public theology is. titled as a witness to government. strategies employed to keep white privilege in place can be found in the discourse of the Dutch Reformed church. on the contrary. In another letter. a number of elements which is leading to fear is mentioned. but rather that these are the same problems identified within popular white discourse. although we might differ on what this would mean. These include a number of elements identified in whiteness studies as rhetorical tools which help keep white people in a dominant position (even if not politically. It assumes that what we have is a public sphere where issues of concern for the democracy or the globe can be debated. It remains critical of this sphere as well. in one way or the other. is to consider the welfare of the broader public. reactions to the very real problem of violence in South Africa can become part of a broad rhetoric of keeping white privilege in place. to be published in the January 2011 edition of the International Journal for Public Theology . to challenge our notion that the problem lies with the black other. to public theology within especially white churches. violence. The issue on the table. and specifically the way in which violence can be constructed as targeting specifically whites create an environment in which there is a constant danger that the church’s participation is not in the public sphere. The danger that becomes illustrated by the white church’s reaction to violence in South Africa is that the churches participation in the public discourse on violence becomes a defense of “our people”. Not talking about race by default keeps perceptions of white victimhood in place. but rather in a white discourse (even though at times elite and powerful voices from other racial groups will be made part of the conversation). and I believe postcolonial studies in general. rather a participation in seeking the welfare of society as a whole. but nonetheless. and facilitate further withdrawal of white people from their society. and a general idea on what we as a group should be doing can be reached. is at the same time a very sensitive discussion in which to open up issues of white privilege as well as a reminder that the church itself still participates in white discourse which ultimately keep white privilege in place. we aim to participate in the public discourse concerning the future of this world This said.talks about participation in the public sphere (Storrar 20118). discussed. The ability of white people in general to continue keeping themselves in a privilege position in a post-colonial environment. let me point to a few factors which I believe the Dutch Reformed church should be taking into account in our public rhetoric on violence. Our reactions against violence perpetrated against our own group (although real enough). In our reflections on issues of race we furthermore are in dire need for insights into our own whiteness. 8 Paper delivered at a conference of the Centre for Public Theology at the University of Pretoria in 2008. our formation of members who participate in the public sphere on various levels. and not a narrow public of privileged people. and furthermore that theology and faith can from its own repertoire of language contribute to this discussion. might in effect contribute to the perceptions among white South Africans that violence is somehow a “white problem” and that white people are those worse affected by violence. and the way in which congregations publicly react to violence: The challenged posed by whiteness studies. Conclusion I hope to have pointed out that issues concerning race is not “something we are done with” in the Dutch Reformed church. and that we are still very much in need for self-reflection and self-criticism. If whiteness isn’t problematized. thus a continued segregation. and makes it impossible for white churches to talk about and be involved in the broader problem of violence in South Africa. 2004. Minaar. 52: 2.pdf accessed July 2010. S 2007. The Naming of Parts: Doing Public Theology in a Global Era. and to be published in the January 2011 edition of the International Journal for Public Theology. London: London School of Economics and Political Science. A new apartheid? The spatial implications of fear of crime in Cape Town. A. M & Foster. Afrikaner identity in post-apartheid South Africa: The Self in terms of the Other in Hadland. pp 5-19. R. C 2004. D (2008) 'Repertoires for talking white: Resistant whiteness in postapartheid South Africa'. and challenge the strategies which exist in order to keep white privilege in place.uk/internationalDevelopment/pdf/WP20. August. . E. Tatum. 'Rehabilitating a whiteness disgraced: Afrikaner white talk in post-apartheid South Africa'. and not just its white inhabitants. Pape. Bibliography Bezuidenhout.In contrast to the popular white discourse the church has a task to point out the racialized nature of our public discourse on violence. http://www2. South Africa in Development Working Paper series. B. Port Elizabeth: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University. Forrester.ac. The Struggle against Encroachment. M 2001. Garner. S & Wasserman H (eds) Power. The Scope of Public Theology in Studies in Christian Ethics. Ethnic and Racial Studies. Outsourcing the Provision of Criminal Justice Services. Albany: State University of New York Press. Steyn. Paper read at a 2008 conference of the Centre for Public Theology at the University of Pretoria. Cost Recovery and the Crisis of Service Delivery in South Africa. M. ISS Monograph No 93. J 2002. Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria. Denise Ackermann.lse. HSRCPress. New York: Routledge. M 2004. Furthermore a stronger emphasis on correcting the perceptions about victims of violence is needed in order to truly participate in seeking the welfare of Southern Africa. 31: 1. 2007. 143 — 169 Steyn. Outsourcing and the South African Police Service in Schönteich. DA & Pape. and Etienne de Villiers. Steyn. Constantia and the Defence of White Privilege in the "New" South Africa in MacDonals. 2. A & Mistry. M (et al). Lemanski. 25 — 51. Politics and Identity in South African media. Fourie. D. Louw. Sesanti. Volume 17 No. W 2011. “Whiteness just isn’t what it used to be”: white identity in a changing South Africa. Storrar. W 2008. J. D 2004. B. Re-Imagining Life: A Reflection on “public theology” in the work of Linell Cady. Whiteness: An introduction. Communication Quarterly. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council Publishers. 2008b.org.pdf accessed in August 2010.up.za/documents/Owerheid. ASM. MDiv dissertation.za/documents/Geweld. notule algemene sinode ASM.za/documents/ViolenceInSA. C 2007. http://www.ngkerk. Bosch : The public role of the christian community.org. viewed August 2010 http://upetd.ngkerk. White Power & the Rise and Fall of the National Party. ASM.pdf accessed in August 2010.Van der Westhuizen. GJ 2008.ngkerk. . The public theology of David J. http://www. Van Wyngaard. 2006. Violence in South Africa. 2008a. Agenda van die 2008 Sinodesitteting van die Noordelike sinode van die NG Kerk.pdf accessed in August 2010. ‘n Getuienis aan die owerheid.za/thesis/available/etd-08032010-121845/ Dutch Reformed church documents General Synod. 2002. Persvrystelling Northern Synod. 2008. Algemene Sinode Moderatuur http://www. Cape Town: Zebra Press.ac. University of Pretoria.org.
Report "Violence, Whiteness and the Dutch Reformed Church"