Met die 450e herdenking van die Heidelbergse Kategismus as vertrekpunt, word met die huidige en die vorige artikel gepoog om lig te werp op die plek, die rol en die interpretasie van die opstanding van Jesus Christus in veral Sondag 17 en 22, spesifiek in die konteks van twee besondere eras in die Nederduitse Gereformeerde (NG) Kerk. In die vorige artikel is allereers ’n bespreking gevoer oor die Heidelbergse Kategismus (HK). Daar is gekyk na die resepsie van die betrokke HK-geloofsartikels in die era van Andrew Murray, spesifiek teen die agtergrond van die negentiende-eeuse liberale teologie in Nederland. In die huidige artikel word soortgelyk gekyk na die resepsie van die betrokke HK-geloofsartikels in die NG Kerk na 2000, teen die agtergrond van die herverskyning van die negentiende-eeuse liberale teologie in die vorm van die Jesus Seminaar, die Nuwe Hervorming en ondersteuners daarvan binne die NG Kerk. Sowel die negentiende-eeuse liberale stryd in die NG Kerk asook die stryd oor die opstanding in die NG Kerk van die eerste dekade van die een-en-twintigste eeu, soos verder in hierdie artikel sal blyk, was gekenmerk deur kontekstueelbepaalde uniekhede. Die gemene deler was dat albei deel was van tye van teologiese vrysinnigheid. In die lig van hierdie bespreking word tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die NG Kerk tans, betreffende haar identiteit as gereformeerde kerk waarskynlik in ’n kritieke geloofs- en toekomskrisis verkeer. Dit impliseer kommerwekkende gevolge vir haar Skrifverstaan en getuienis as belydenis en belydende kerk van Jesus Christus en haar toekoms. Alleen duidelike visie, verantwoordelike leierskap en ’n herontdekking van die verlossingskrag van Christus se kruis en opstanding sal herstellende, positiewe en dinamiese oplossings kan bied om sodoende die NG Kerk te red van ’n snelwentelende afwaartse spiraal.With the 450th celebrations of the origin of the Heidelberg Catechism (HC) in mind, the main aim of this and the previous article is to focus on the place, role and interpretation of the doctrine of the resurrection in HC (Sunday 17 and 22), within two very specific and critical eras in the history of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC) in South Africa. The first article focused on the reception of the HC in the time of Andrew Murray during the nineteenth century, and specifically against the background of the then liberal theology in both the Netherlands and South Africa. In this current article I look at the reception of the same HC articles (Sunday 17 and 22) in the DRC after 2000, against the background of the reappearance of the nineteenth century liberal theology in the Netherlands, and specifically with reference to the Jesus Seminar, the New Reformation and those sympathetic to the latter in the DRC. Both these nineteenth- and twenty-first-century developments had their own unique contexts but what they had in common were a specific theological liberal mindset. In view of this discussion it is concluded that the DRC as a reformed church is not only caught up in an identity crisis, but even in a survival crisis of no small proportions. This also has serious implications for its use of Scripture and its confessional character. Only strong vision, able leadership and a rediscovery of the redeeming power of the cross and resurrection of Christ will be able to provide a remedial, positive, and dynamic solution, saving the DRC from an ever downward spiral.
“They Live in Indifference Together”: Marriage Mobility in Zeeland, The Netherlands, 1796–1922
