Browsing by Author "Tonsing, Detlev Ludwig."
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item A critique of the relationship between the Catholic Church and the state in Zimbabwe : towards an empathetic dialogical method.(2010) Phiri, Stephen.; Tonsing, Detlev Ludwig.; Phiri, Isabel Apawo.This study serves to evaluate the effectiveness of the Catholic Church‟s prophetic voice in the post-independence Zimbabwe. It also serves to show that being prophetic is not enough unless this prophesy engages with the other. This study proposes a dialogical prophetic voice, which engages with the one to whom it is challenging. For the prophetic voice to be dialogical it has to be empathetic and being empathetic in this case points to the ability to understand the other party‟s perspective. Understanding in this context does not mean to sympathise or compromise but to be able to see through the eyes of the other party in dialogue in a bid to constructively challenge or criticize the other. This study suggests an Empathetic Dialogical method as central and foundational to an effective dialogical process. It also proposes Bonhoeffer‟s Church-State model as a conducive ground for an Empathetic dialogue. The study ultimately wants to show that the ineffectiveness of the Catholic Church in Zimbabwe to dialogue with the State is due to its predominately non-empathetic dialogical model. It (the study) specifically points to two trajectories: the first trajectory points to the Catholic Church‟s unwillingness to consult the State, while it has a tendency to prescribe for the State. The second trajectory lies in the failure of the Zimbabwean Catholic Church to speak with one voice, which consequently led it to compromise with the State. This study is informed by the suffering Zimbabwean people at the hands of a ruthless regime and a Church whose prophetic voice is ineffective.Item Down & out : parallels and divergences in structure and method between the theological responses of Martin Luther and contextual theologies to their times.(2004) Tonsing, Detlev Ludwig.The thesis compares the structure of the theological responses of Martin Luther and contextual theologies , especially those of Juan Luis Segundo and Albert Nolan. The structure of the theologies are described using concepts derived from the methodologies of research programmes developed by Imre Lakatos. The social and ideological background of the ruling ideology of Luther's time (medieval Catholicism) and that of contextual theologies (neo-colonial capitalism) are presented . Parallels are found in that the ruling ideology utilises a monopoly on legitimating authority to orientate the life energies of people to achieving legitimation in terms of norms set up by the ruling class. These norms result in a an exchange of work for legitimation, and so exploit people. This constitutes an 'in and up' theology: Resources are drawn in in order to climb up to a position of legitimation . Both Luther and contextual theologies respond by reversing this pattern, decoupling legitimation from the norms of the ruling class and the work of people. They constitute 'down and out' theologies: God, the legitimator, is down with people, and because legitimation is given freely to people down where they are, energies flow out to serve the common good. Dissimilarities between Luther and Contextual Theologies are found in the locus of legitimation (individual vs. social), the role of faith, and the negative heuristic (dialectic of the cross vs. transformation of the system). It is argued that the difference in negative heuristic is mainly responsible for the perennial nature and conservatism of Lutheran Theology versus the rapid demise of South African contextual theology. The results of the investigation show that the conceptual structure of Lakatos' epistemology, coupled with an analysis of the flow of legitimation and orientation, is useful in structuring and evaluating theological systems on the questions where does legitimation come from, where to does the theology orientate, and how are orientation and legitimation linked. These questions may be seen as a new way of formulating the lawl gospel distinction of classical Lutheran theology.