Cover Image

Original Research

Die owerheid se ingesteldheid ten opsigte van godsdiens: Die geskiktheid van die aktief-plurale opsie vir die toepassing van artikel 36 van die Nederlandse Geloofsbelydenis

D. Francois Muller
In die Skriflig/In Luce Verbi | Vol 46, No 1 | a37 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/ids.v46i1.37 | © 2012 D. Francois Muller | This work is licensed under CC Attribution 4.0
Submitted: 09 July 2012 | Published: 02 November 2012

About the author(s)

D. Francois Muller, Unit for Reformed Theology, North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, South Africa

Abstract

‘Wat behoort ’n owerheid se ingesteldheid ten opsigte van godsdiens te wees?’ is ’n vraagstuk waarvoor owerhede millennia lank reeds staan en wat tans al meer akuut word. J.M. Vorster het vyf opsies geïdentifiseer wat owerhede se ingesteldheid vergestalt en verkies die sogenaamde ‘aktief-plurale’ opsie. Hiervolgens behoort owerhede alle godsdienste en/of tradisies toe te laat en geeneen in besonder te bevoordeel nie. Artikel 36 van die Nederlandse Geloofsbelydenis (1561) verteenwoordig ’n vername verwoording van waartoe die Reformatoriese tradisie glo owerhede geroep word. Hierdie studie het dus die geskiktheid van die aktief-plurale opsie vir die toepassing van artikel 36 ondersoek. Die fokus van die ondersoek was op die agtergrond waarbinne en die doel waarmee die belydenis geformuleer is; die belangrikste tekstuele veranderinge (1905, 1982); asook die korrekte betekenis van artikel 36. Daar is vir lank gemeen dat owerhede onder meer die taak het om alle afgodery en valse godsdiens uit te roei. Sedert 1982 word bely dat owerhede (slegs) die verkondiging van die Evangelie moet beskerm om hierdie doelwitte sodoende te bereik. Alle owerhede ontvang hulle gesag van God en moet sy getroue dienaars wees – sonder om ’n dienaar van enige kerk en/of tradisie te word.

Government’s attitude towards religion: the suitability of the active-plural option for the implementation of article 36 of the Belgic Confession. ‘What attitude should a government have towards religion?’ was not only a question that governments had struggled with for ages, but one currently growing in significance. J.M. Vorster identified five options that different governments had chosen and he selected the so-called ‘active-plural option’ as his preference. This option allowed governments to make provision for all religions or traditions, without the promotion of any specific one. Article 36 of the Belgic Confession (1561) represents a foremost statement of what the Reformed tradition believed governments were being called to. This study therefore investigated the suitability of the ‘active-neutral option’ for the implementation of article 36. This was done while exploring the specific circumstances within and goal with which the confession was formulated; the most important changes to the text of article 36 (1905, 1982) as well as its corrected meaning. Whereas there was a time when governments were seemed to have the task to, amongst others, destroy all idolatry and false worship, it was stated in 1982 that governments (only) had to protect the proclamation of the Gospel and in so doing achieved this destruction. All governments received their authority from God and were to be his faithful servants – without becoming servants of any church and/or tradition.

Keywords

Belgic Confession; Article 36; Active-plural option; Theocracy; Religious freedom; Government/authorities

Metrics

Total abstract views: 4679
Total article views: 7937


Crossref Citations

No related citations found.