Ivo Vegter’s article ‘Let’s decolonise Christianity’ attracted the attention and criticism that was to be expected.
The tenor of most of the criticism was that attacking Christianity was improper, if not blasphemous. This is an understandable view among people of faith, and each critic has every right to challenge Vegter’s article for whatever reason they might have.
This is the essence of debate: allowing opposing views to be aired so that readers can make up their own minds. The IRR believes that rather offence be given and hotly rebutted than that any subject be avoided on the grounds of ‘sanctity’.
This is the ultimate test of freedom of expression, the fundamental tenet at the core of classical liberalism. In the IRR’s view, if you stifle freedom of expression, freedom itself is threatened. Nothing illustrates this better than 46 years of apartheid.
There are some issues raised in the comments, however, with which we fundamentally disagree.
One critic said that he read the Daily Friend for its writers’ opinions on politics and economics, but not religion. Allied to this is the repugnance many expressed about anyone attacking one of the great religions.
The IRR believes that the three monotheistic religions have played a huge role in the development of societies, including in politics and economics, over a long time, as have many of the world’s other great faiths, such as Hinduism and Buddhism. The effects of religion have been profound.
Nowhere was this more evident than in the cynical exploitation of faith in justifying the apartheid system. And, unavoidably, we continue to live with its legacy. Scrutinising religion is justified, even if readers abhor the substance of the scrutiny or the manner in which it is done.
Some wondered rhetorically whether Vegter would have attacked Islam. The point is not pertinent to this particular article, as it was about the spreading of a faith that is followed by nearly 80% of South Africa’s population. That is extraordinarily high. The article, therefore, was about Christianity rather than Islam, Hinduism or Judaism, and how it took hold in South Africa.
The issue of Islam presumably was raised because of the death and destruction wrought all over the world by Islamist extremists in the last 30 years or so. Would those who are anxious to protect Christianity from debate suggest that we should not subject Islamic belief, or its extreme adherents, to scrutiny? If Islam should also be protected from critical inquiry, it would be impossible to examine the role of religious conviction in the bombing of children at a pop concert, or the beheading of a teacher for teaching the concept of free speech.
There have been numerous articles in the Daily Friend about the perpetration of anti-Semitism among adherents of both Christianity and Islam. The tone may have been more measured, but it was criticism nonetheless. Similarly, we have no difficulty in acknowledging the robust criticism of Judaism among those who may see it as providing a biblical justification for territorial claims and the consequent seemingly intractable conflicts that plague the Middle East.
What is easily overlooked is that Vegter’s argument points to ‘decolonisation’ as a key issue for debate – should Christianity be considered a candidate for ‘decolonisation’, as university syllabi are, along with science, and the statuary reflecting a controversial history?
Finally, some scoffed at our disclaimer at the end of Vegter’s article – ‘The views of the writer are not necessarily the views of the Daily Friend or the IRR’. On the contrary, its importance lies, first, in conveying the fact that while some staff members might agree with Vegter, not all do, and, second, making it clear that the absence of unanimity is no reason – and certainly not a good reason – to avoid publishing contrarian views.
Christianity has the most adherents in the world. It has been criticised before and will be again. Christians will argue back, and so they should.
It is too important a debate to be stifled.
If you like what you have just read, support the Daily Friend