ARTICLES

 

Reimagining forgiveness: A transformative engagement with a social imagination of forgiveness through intercultural biblical reading in South Africa

 

 

D.A. Forster^I; C. Hermans^II

^ISchool of Religion and Theology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Faculty of Theology, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa. E-mail: d.a.forster@vu.nl, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7292-6203
^IIFaculty of Theology and Religion, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa; Faculty of Philosophy, Theology and Religious Studies, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. E-mail: chris.hermans@ru.nl, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9416-3924

 

 

---

ABSTRACT

How can one work towards the transformation of the social imagination of forgiveness among racially divided South African Christians, with the focus on the White participants, through a process of intercultural Bible reading of Matthew 18:15-35? The study highlights the role of local congregations as both sites of constraint and transformation. The research involves two Methodist churches that are institutionally united (sharing the same doctrine, polity, and denominational identity) but socially separated by their lived realities. The findings suggest that ecclesial institutions are not neutral containers of belief but active participants in shaping theological imagination. When these spaces facilitate shared practices across lines of division, they may offer a "road to reconciliation" by challenging fixed ideas of community, justice, and grace. In doing so, they contribute to reimagining forgiveness as a socially embedded and transformative process in postapartheid South Africa.

Keywords: Forgiveness, Social imagination, South Africa, Intercultural Bible reading

---

Trefwoorde: Vergifnis, Sosiale verbeelding, Suid-Afrika, Interkulturele Bybel lees

---

 

 

1. INTRODUCTION

Although the vast majority of South Africans identify as Christian, the Christian concept of forgiveness is hotly debated in a country that remains deeply divided along racial and social lines. Research shows that Black and White¹ South African Christians have markedly different interpretations of, and approaches to forgiveness (Forster 2018:1-13; 2019a:214-219). Vosloo (2015:363) highlights that the unresolved nature of forgiveness in South Africa underscores the fact that

forgiveness and related concepts regarding engagement with the past continue to be influential, albeit also highly contested, in public discourse.

One of the key challenges highlighted by this study, and supported by its empirical findings, is the ongoing lack of meaningful interaction between Black and White South Africans, and this is also the case among Black and White Christians. This reflects the enduring legacy of apartheid, which entrenched divisions along racial, socio-economic, and geographic lines (Hofmeyr & Govender 2015:1). Consequently, as intergroup contact theory explains, members within each distinct group reinforce their own religious convictions and social narratives (in-group), while simultaneously discounting or overlooking the perspectives of other groups (out-group). This reality is further deepened by a lack of meaningful interaction or mutual comprehension across these divisions (Brewer & Kramer 1985:219223; Duncan 2003:137-140; Bornman 2011:729-732).

This situation makes forgiveness practically unattainable, since individuals cannot engage in genuine acts of justice and forgiveness without authentic relational encounters. Moreover, forgiveness becomes theologically untenable, due to deeply entrenched religious understandings about forgiveness that inform how persons believe that it can and should be achieved. Thus, forgiveness faces both interpretative (hermeneutical) and social obstacles among South African Christians. Paul Ricoeur proposes that overcoming these barriers necessitates acts of translation capable of bridging linguistic and existential differences between the self and the supposed other (Ricoeur & Brennan 1995:7). Kearney similarly emphasises the crucial role of translation in the context of forgiveness and reconciliation, stating that

... it is only when we translate our own wounds in the language of strangers and retranslate the wounds of strangers into our own language that healing and reconciliation can take place (Kearney, in Ricoeur 2007:xx).

This study examines how the social imagination of forgiveness is shaped, sustained, and transformed within the institutional life of a Christian community in South Africa (Forster 2019a:70). Forgiveness is an inherently complex and contested concept, particularly in societies emerging from histories of systemic injustice and racial division. Within the contemporary South African context, forgiveness remains both a theological and sociopolitical concern, shaped by divergent imaginaries across racial and cultural lines. Andrews (1999:119) observes that, although forgiveness is often framed as an individual act, it is deeply embedded in social structures, institutions, and collective memory.

Forgiveness is a socially mediated concept. De Gruchy (2002:28) aptly observes that forgiveness (and indeed reconciliation itself)

is a work in progress, a dynamic set of processes into which we are drawn and in which we participate.

Thus, the notion of active participation in forgiveness through relational encounter is significant, highlighting the mutual dependency between the self and the other, in order to uncover the factors that facilitate forgiveness. De Gruchy further argues that, when understood relationally, forgiveness surpasses being merely an event or static objective. It represents a nuanced and continually evolving social imagination emerging from communal engagement. Within such interactive processes, translation and the emergence of new meanings become possible, potentially reshaping participants' previous understanding of forgiveness and opening imaginative pathways towards a collectively envisioned future.

The two Methodist congregations studied in this project are united by doctrine and polity, but they operate as separate church communities. The institutionalisation of the church within racially divided communities influences how forgiveness and reconciliation are perceived and enacted in each community. This study explores how, because of their institutional structure, these unreconciled ecclesial spaces may serve as both barriers to, and instruments for reimagining forgiveness. By focusing on the reimagining of forgiveness within the White community (which is the focus of this paper), the study demonstrates how ecclesial institutions can act as "roads to reconciliation" by reshaping the perception of forgiveness through deliberate engagement across racial boundaries. It demonstrates that intercultural Bible reading groups provide valuable opportunities for participants to engage in dialogue that reveals commonalities and differences in language and lived experience relating to the politics of forgiveness in South Africa.²

 

2. THE SOCIAL IMAGINATION OF FORGIVENESS

Taking the above into account, this study explores the ethical and social feasibility (or lack thereof) of conceptualising forgiveness within a communal framework, particularly among Black and White South Africans (see Solomons 2021:396). The linking of politics and forgiveness is intentional. Drawing on Graham Ward's (2018:180-206) analysis, the research identifies various levels of imaginative engagement, both individual and collective, that underscore the complexities involved in understanding forgiveness across different social and racial divides.

• The cultural imagination may be understood as a generative reservoir of symbolic and conceptual possibilities.

• Through sustained engagement with this imagination, particular cultural values and ethical orientations are given shape and expression.

• The ways in which these imaginative pursuits become structured and embedded within social systems are referred to as the social imagination (Ward 2018:207-233).

Ward contends that every level is intertwined with the dynamics and activities of the other levels. Every level is driven by the process of sense-making, assembling models of reality from the readily available symbolic resources at hand, and forming associations (Ward 2018:185). Thus, the social imagination is intricately linked to the operation of the cultural imagination as well as the values produced by it. Hence, there is both a social and an ethical barrier to the possibility of forgiveness.

2.1 The social (im)possibility of forgiveness

Although a significant majority of South Africans self-identify as Christian (General Household Survey 2013-2014; Schoeman 2017), the country continues to grapple with profound divisions. Marked differences persist in how Black and White Christians interpret key aspects of faith. Existing literature indicates that these communities, often unreconciled, rarely engage in meaningful or constructive contact. This persistent separation is largely a consequence of apartheid-era policies, which enforced rigid divisions along racial lines, socio-economic status, and geographical location (Hofmeyr & Govender 2015:1). According to the intergroup contact theory, such structural separation tends to reinforce each group's own social perspectives and theological convictions, while simultaneously leading to the dismissal or marginalisation of those held by members of the opposing group. This dynamic is sustained by limited exposure to, or meaningful engagement with those outside one's own social category (Brewer & Kramer 1985:219-223; Duncan 2003:2, 5; Bornman 2011:411414). Contemporary developments in South Africa illustrate the persistence of these patterns, evident in movements such as #FeesMustFall, which protested against entrenched economic inequality and systemic injustice in higher education (Baloyi & Isaacs 2015). Further examples include the proliferation of racially offensive commentary on social media platforms (for example, the Penny Sparrow incident) (Makhulu 2016:260; Nhemachena 2016:411-416; Surmon et al. 2016:1-2), as well as the resurgence of race-based identity discourses within the public domain (Mbembe 2015).

2.2 The ethical (im)possibility of forgiveness

How might one begin to assign a value to redress the violence inflicted by apartheid? What form of reparation could ever adequately reflect the depth of dehumanisation wrought by such a systemic and political order? Yet, to acknowledge this inadequacy is not to suggest that efforts toward redress should be abandoned. Quite the opposite - genuine forgiveness necessitates political, economic, and social transformation. However, such reform alone is insufficient. Forgiveness also entails a dimension that transcends transactional justice, opening a space in which the seemingly impossible might be rendered possible. As Ricoeur notes, forgiveness,

in its full sense, certainly far exceeds political categories. It belongs to an order - the order of charity - which goes even beyond the order of morality. Forgiveness falls within the scope of an economy of the gift whose logic of superabundance exceeds the logic of reciprocity (Ricoeur & Brennan 1995:10).

The use of the term "(im)possible" is deliberate. It is intended to draw attention to the tension between what is deemed impossible and what might be made possible. It points to a suspension in meaning, where the conditions that enable the (im)possible to become possible are provisionally held in view. The very notion that true forgiveness cannot be achieved solely through economic or political means reveals the need for something beyond transactional justice. This is what necessitates a form of grace that exceeds human calculation, often described as "impossible grace", as illustrated in the parables found in Matthew 18:15-35.

2.3 Mapping a social imagination of forgiveness

The social imagination is defined as the imaginative way in which we give meaning to our institutionalised social systems (see Hermans 2025). How do agents within an institutionalised social system of a church congregation know how to act in accordance with their role in the social system with regard to forgiveness and the cultural value of forgiveness upon which they are supposed to act?

Wilber's AQAL Integral Theory (All Quadrants, All Levels, see Wilber 2011:12) provides the conceptual tool for mapping the social imagination of forgiveness. According to this theory, any aspect of reality should be examined from four key perspectives (see Forster 2019a; Hermans 2025):

• Subjective thoughts, beliefs, emotions, and hopes with regard to forgiveness (for example, "Jesus freed me from my sins through His death on the cross", "I love Jesus but Jesus loved me first", "I see no mercy between two persons").

• Intersubjective (shared) thoughts, beliefs, emotions, and hopes of a community (for example, "we exist in a shared state of forgiveness", "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us").

• Individual-objective refers to objective states of individual characteristics, actions or observations of the world (for example, "I forgive you", "I show repentance for my wrongdoing").

• Interobjective states of shared characteristics, actions or observations of forgiveness in the world contributing to a just and fair society. Forgiveness is more than simply personal action (for example, "we engage in acts of restoration as part of a broader social process with another group") (Forster 2019a:21-56; see 2017:1-10).

 

3. TRANSFORMING SOCIAL IMAGINATION OF FORGIVENESS

How can a new understanding of forgiveness be created in a socially and racially divided country such as South Africa? The social imagination of forgiveness is deeply informed by intergroup relations. Based on this, we can take participants on a shared journey of discovery to foster a new understanding of forgiveness. Intercultural Bible reading is a shared journey that can lead to new notions of a possible future based on a new understanding of forgiveness. A second presumption is that intercultural Bible reading under conditions of anxiety is not very effective. Thus, positive intergroup relations are necessary to facilitate this process of intercultural Bible reading on forgiveness.

What do we mean by "intercultural Bible reading" (Forster 2017:142145)? According to De Wit (2012:21), intercultural Bible reading rests on two principles, namely interactive diversity and eccentricity. The principle of interactive diversity affirms the significance of engaging multiple interpretations of the biblical text. In addition, the concept of eccentricity highlights that individuals cannot be fully defined by their own self-understanding or singular interpretive frameworks. As De Wit (2012:22) puts it, "people are never completely reducible to themselves". Individuals are shaped by their own readings of Scripture, yet they are also capable of encountering and making sense of the perspectives of others. Drawing on Koopman's insights, it becomes clear that interactive diversity involves a reciprocal dynamic. On the one hand, biblical texts shape identity through the articulation of certain "ideals" and, on the other, a person's identity and context influence how those texts are interpreted and received.

In South Africa, where the race factor has also determined how people understand the Bible, it is of utmost importance that people listen jointed to the Word to discover God's will for us today. This joint listening to the Word wills us to develop a common story which belongs to all of us. This common heritage corrects our racial ideologies, but also liberates, encourages and energizes us to work for a new society which reflects something of the biblical ideals (Koopman 1998:165).

Intergroup contact theory serves as a valuable framework for identifying the mechanisms and conditions that support constructive engagement between groups, and it provides important insight for understanding the dynamics within intercultural Bible reading. One of the core insights of this theory is the role that prejudice plays in shaping perceptions of those outside one's own group. Rather than recognising out-group members as distinct individuals, people often perceive them as a uniform collective characterised by fixed and easily identifiable traits (Duncan 2003:139-141; see also Bornman 2011:729-730; Ypma 2014:12). These generalisations typically arise from bias and limited exposure, rather than from genuine interaction or informed understanding.

Intercultural Bible reading in a socially divided context should facilitate conditions of prejudice reduction in order to create a willingness to open for other perspectives on forgiveness than the perspectives of their ingroup. When levels of anxiety are reduced and conditions are created in which open, vulnerable, and secure interaction can occur between in- and out-group participants, the potential for empathetic engagement is significantly enhanced (Batson et al. 2002:1656-1666; Turner et al. 2007:369; Swart et al. 2011:187-189). In certain conditions, participants will exhibit empathy as "perspective taking", i.e. where they can perceive a certain situation from the perspective of the other. In some instances, empathy may take the form of affective resonance, whereby individuals are able to sense or imaginatively enter into the emotional experience of another person (Swart et al. 2011:187).

 

4. RESEARCH DESIGN

This section describes the research question and hypothesis (4.1), the sampling (4.2), intervention (4.3), and data collection and data analysis (4.4).

4.1 Research question and hypothesis

The following research question shapes this study: To what extent has the social imagination of forgiveness of White members in an unreconciled congregation transformed into a more integrative and more inclusive manner following an intercultural Bible reading of Matthew 18:15-35?

Members of an unreconciled congregation, specifically White members, are the focus of this study. The social imagination of forgiveness is defined from four key perspectives (see above):

• Individual interior refers to thoughts, beliefs, emotions, and hopes with regard to forgiveness (II).

• Collective interior refers to thoughts, beliefs, emotions, and hopes of a community (for example, "we exist in a shared state of forgiveness", "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us") (CI).

• Individual exterior refers to objective states of individual characteristics, actions or observations of the world (IE).

• Collective exterior refers to characteristics, actions or observations of forgiveness in the world contributing to a just and fair society (CE).

The research design is deliberately constructed to enable empirical intercultural Bible reading within the context of positive intergroup contact.

Before the intercultural Bible study, it is hypothesised that the White respondents show a spiritual understanding of forgiveness.

• Individual interior: Forgiveness is reported in personal salvation narratives; responsibility for forgiveness is primarily situated within the individual's personal relationship with God.

• Individual exterior: Action and intention are directed vertically, toward God rather than horizontally, toward community members.

• Collective interior: Congregations are viewed as passive spaces, reinforcing pre-existing perspectives on forgiveness as unconditional and spiritual.

• Collective exterior: Acts of communal engagement with injustice are not reported in relation to forgiveness.

It is hypothesised that, after the intercultural Bible reading, the respondents supported by positive intergroup contact will show a shift in their understanding of forgiveness. We formulated the following hypotheses:

• Individual interior: Forgiveness is spiritual but also comes with social, economic, and political change.

• Individual exterior: Acts of forgiving are connected to acts of change (social, economic, and political).

• Collective interior: Congregations as active spaces of social, economic and political transformation are conditions for forgiving.

• Collective exterior: Acts of communal engagement with injustice related to forgiveness.

The following hypothesis was formulated with regard to a more integrative social imagination of forgiveness before the intervention (pretest).

• Collective interior: Forgiveness is spiritualised and individualised, reflecting White in-group identity.

• Collective exterior: No acts of engagement with acts of injustice are reported in relation to forgiveness.

• On the post-test, we predict to make the following observations:

• Collective interior: Growing awareness of community and communal aspects, built on shared faith.

• Collective exterior: Acts of communal engagement with injustice in relation to forgiveness more characteristic of the Coloured and Black participants.

4.2 Sampling

Participants for this study were selected based on several key criteria. All participants were independent volunteers who gave informed consent to take part. Crucially, they also had to be members of one of the two primary stakeholder churches: Church Street Methodist Church or Coronation Avenue Methodist Church. These are two Methodist churches in the same town. One of the participating communities consisted primarily of Black South Africans affiliated with the Church Street Methodist Church. These individuals had experienced the direct impact of the oppressive racial policies of apartheid. The second community largely comprised White South African Christians from the Coronation Avenue Methodist Church. This group represents a historically privileged demographic that continues to benefit from the socio-economic advantages associated with whiteness in democratic South Africa.

Both groups were engaged as "knowing subjects" in this study, in line with an epistemological stance that values diverse perspectives and acknowledges the significance of differing viewpoints in the discovery process. Objectivity and neutrality were, therefore, replaced with reflective subjectivity, recognising the epistemic contributions of participants' lived experiences and socio-historical positions (Bergold & Thomas 2012:10).

Participants were also required to be formally sanctioned by their respective church leadership structures (Pettigrew 1998:65-85). To meet this requirement, the researcher consulted with the ministers of both churches, outlining the study's aims, structure, and objectives. Each minister then undertook the task of nominating several potential participants, whom they personally approached and invited to participate in the intercultural Bible reading process as official representatives.

4.3 Intervention: Group meetings

The intervention consists of a series of intergroup activities involving intercultural Bible readings focused on Matthew 18:15-35, which are aimed at fostering positive intergroup relations between the two groups (see Forster 2017:159-163).

The initial group sessions were conducted with each community independently. During these meetings, participants were introduced to the communal Bible reading method that would shape subsequent encounters, specifically the practice, known as "Dwelling in the Word", focused on Matthew 18:15-35 (Ellison & Keifert, 2011; Nel, 2013).

The second and third group sessions were designed as intercultural Bible reading encounters, bringing together members from both congregations. These meetings took place in a neutral setting, where participants gathered around a large, circular table. Each individual was free to choose his/her seat and was encouraged to pair with a "friendly stranger" from the other church community. Within these pairs, participants listened attentively to one another's reflections on the theme of forgiveness, as drawn from the biblical text. Following this exchange, each person was invited to share what s/he had heard from his/her conversation partner with the wider group.

During the final session, the researcher once again met with each community separately. Three key activities were undertaken. First, participants engaged in a reading of Matthew 18:15-35, using the same method employed in earlier sessions, namely "Dwelling in the Word" (Ellison & Keifert 2011; Nel 2013). Following this, individuals were asked to offer personal responses to a set of reflective questions aimed at tracing the development of their understanding of forgiveness in relation to the biblical passage, as well as assessing the perceived impact of the structured intergroup contact sessions. The meeting concluded with a group discussion in which participants shared their experiences of how their perspectives on forgiveness had evolved, and how both the intercultural Bible reading and intergroup encounters had contributed to that transformation.

4.4 Data collection and data analysis

The transcribed data was anonymised to protect participant confidentiality while retaining coded identifiers to maintain connections with social identity and demographic data. Following transcription, the participants from each group were invited to review the transcripts to ensure accuracy in capturing the discussions and interactions during the focus groups. Upon their confirmation of the transcripts' fidelity, the records were finalised and securely stored for subsequent analysis. To verify the reliability of the transcripts as accurate records of the sessions, a sample validation was conducted with six participants, consisting of three persons from each of the two communities for the pre- and post-intercultural meetings, and six persons (equally representing both communities) for the intercultural Bible reading session.

Once the transcripts were verified, ATLAS.ti was used for analysis. Coding was conducted iteratively (with up to seven cycles for some documents), to progressively refine and deepen the categorisation of theological themes. The AQAL theory informed the theological constructs and vocabulary used to analyse participants' interpretations of forgiveness as drawn from Matthew 18:15-35. This coding process was conducted iteratively to validate initial insights and progressively refine the analysis, thereby uncovering nuanced relationships between ideas, experiences, and mechanisms.

Throughout the study, the researcher remained mindful of personal biases and the expectations of various stakeholders. To navigate the inherent tension between subjectivity and objectivity, particularly in a context marked by ethical and emotional sensitivity, the principle of bracketing was employed. This methodological approach helped limit preconceived notions and foster a more open and reflective engagement with the data (Rolls & Relf 2006:286). By attending closely to possible sources of bias and applying the method of bracketing in a deliberate and systematic manner during the analysis, the researcher aimed to remain open and impartial towards the participants, the research process, and the unfolding data and interpretations.

 

5. FINDINGS

First, the pre-test findings (5.1) and then the post-test findings (5.2). The next section (conclusion) presents the answer to the research question.³

5.1 Pre-test findings

Four of the six individuals expressed an understanding of forgiveness that was predominantly spiritual and personal in nature (II). They tended to focus on forgiving spiritual sins rather than on engaging with broader social, economic or political issues (Forster 2019a:186-188). The following quotations illustrate this outlook.

Extract:

D2:15 ... be careful that we don't judge others... because it is not for us to judge. God is the judge, so we shouldn't be judging others because they will probably judge us back ...

Analysis

This statement, when viewed alongside the participant's interpretation of Matthew 18:31, reflects a theological perspective in which sin and its judgement are understood as matters that concern only the relationship between the individual and God (II), rather than involving any communal or social accountability. According to the participant, judgement belongs entirely to God, "it is not for us to judge", suggesting a spiritual interpretation of forgiveness that is not connected to communal or social accountability (II, and not CI or CE). The implication is that moral judgement is a divine prerogative rather than a matter for social deliberation (CI) or societal action (IE, CE).

Extract

D2:47 P2: ... I think for me, thinking about the country, a lot of what happened in the country, I lived in Somerset West all my life. I: Yes. P2: ... Which nothing happened in Somerset West way back then you can imagine, it didn't affect my life ... I: Yes. P2:... so how could I forgive something that I personally didn't do?

Analysis

This response starkly illustrates a distinction between personal faith (II) and societal reality (CI and CE). The participant maintains that, because apartheid did not directly impact his/her personal experience, s/he feels no obligation to engage in a process of forgiveness: "so how could I forgive something that I personally didn't do". This perspective exemplifies an individualistic approach to culpability, in which wrongdoing and forgiveness are confined to one's personal relationship with God (II) rather than engaging with the broader consequences of historical injustices (CI, CE). Despite the observable societal ramifications of apartheid (CE), the participant does not perceive him-/herself as morally implicated (II) and, consequently, does not recognise the necessity for forgiveness in communal or structural terms (CI, CE). This discussion took place in reference to Matthew 18:21-22 and 35.

The findings of this section of the research reveal considerable disparities in the ways in which Black and White South Africans conceptualise forgiveness. White participants largely interpret forgiveness as a personal and spiritual matter detached from sociopolitical concerns. These differing perspectives highlight the complexities of reconciliation and the challenges of fostering a shared understanding of forgiveness in a post-apartheid society.

The White participants in this study generally conceptualised forgiveness as an individual and spiritual concern (II) (Forster 2019a:184-189). For most of the members of this group, forgiveness was primarily understood as the restoration of one's personal relationship with God (II), with limited initial emphasis on reconciliation with the offended party or broader community structures (IE and CE) (see quotations D2:14, 15, 20, 33, 36, 43). Forgiveness was framed largely as a theological matter centred on sin and divine absolution (see quotations D2:16, 22, 23), wherein God was regarded as the principal party wronged. From this perspective, forgiveness was considered as accomplished when God absolved the individual of guilt and spiritual transgression (II), without necessarily involving interpersonal repair (CI) or systemic redress (CE). As a result, this understanding did not require efforts toward restoring communal relationships (CI) or addressing historical injustices through restorative justice (CE). This outlook was often summarised in statements such as "Apartheid was wrong, but it is over. I confessed my part in [sin] and I believe God has forgiven me. Now we need to move on and stop living in the past. We must stop talking about apartheid."

5.2 Post-test findings

One of the indicators in the data suggesting a shift in the White participants' understanding of forgiveness following the intervention is the presence of explicit acknowledgements by some individuals that they had developed new, shared expressions of intersubjective meaning (CI). In what follows, the analysis explores the character of these emerging perspectives on forgiveness, many of which reflect social and political dimensions (CE) that were more commonly expressed by the Coloured and Black participants.

Extract

D5:19 If I was Coloured or Black now and I experienced the apartheid regime, would I have been as humble or as forgiving as what these people are so, cos often we sit here in this church, and we think those guys are thinking so bad of us low of us, or whatever, but it was a revelation to me that it's not actually like that. That they actually very humble and, and you know, how would I be?

Analysis

This participant's self-identity was challenged through the process of intercultural Bible reading. The participant begins with a statement of affective empathy "If I was Coloured or Black now ...". Within this interpretive frame, the participant poses the question, "would I have been as humble or forgiving"? This moment of reflection indicates a shift in personal identity (II), which has begun to open toward a broader sense of shared identity (CI). This expanded perspective enables the participant to critically reassess previously held beliefs and assumptions, as captured in the admission, "it was a revelation to me that it's not actually like that". Furthermore, the participant's question reveals an emerging awareness of the theological imperative for social transformation as a necessary dimension of forgiveness, particularly in light of the discussion about the parable of the unforgiving servant (vv. 23-34).

Extract

D5:27 P11: So, I think, the strongest thing for me was change and transformation, forgiveness isn't just, isn't just a process of forgiving, it's forgiving and changing to, to stop it happening again.

Analysis

In this excerpt, another participant conveys a comparable insight. The individual acknowledges the necessity of undergoing "change and transformation" at a personal level (CI) as a prerequisite for initiating or realising forgiveness. This part of the discussion emerged specifically in relation to the reading of verses 30-31.

The findings from this group meeting indicate a shared recognition among participants that the intercultural Bible reading process had contributed to an expanded understanding of forgiveness, particularly through engaging with the experiences and perspectives of Coloured and Black participants (see D5:1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 12, 19, 21, 27). This widening of shared belief and identity prompted some individuals to reconsider previously held or deeply rooted views (see D5:7, 27). In certain instances, the combination of affective and cognitive empathy led to the emergence of new insights regarding both the meaning of forgiveness and the conditions necessary for its realisation (see D5:4, 19). Initially, the White participants had found it difficult to relate their faith to the social, political, and economic dimensions of forgiveness within the South African context (see D2:16, 22, 23). However, the data reveal a growing awareness of the inseparability of faith and life in these matters (see D5:7, 27). It can, therefore, be concluded that this element of the hypothesis is supported - namely, that White participants expanded their social identity and interpretive horizons (CI) to incorporate understandings of forgiveness more commonly associated with the Coloured and Black participants.

5.3 Developing a deeper understanding of the political, economic, and social aspects of forgiveness

At the outset, White participants largely viewed forgiveness in individualised and spiritual terms, framing it as a transaction between the sinner and God (see D2:14, 15, 20, 33, 36, 43) (II). There was hardly any evidence of a developed awareness of the broader social, political, or economic implications of forgiveness (see D2:47). This inclination to internalise and spiritualise the concept of forgiveness limited their capacity to acknowledge or engage with the lived realities of those who suffered under and continue to be affected by the injustices of apartheid. Such a perspective constituted a significant barrier to the possibility of meaningful forgiveness.

However, an analysis of post-test findings shows that White participants had broadened their understandings of forgiveness (which were predominantly II) to include aspects of the social, economic, and political (CE), as a result of the intercultural Bible reading process. Two compelling examples illustrating this shift were presented in the preceding section, specifically in the discussion of quotations D5:4 and D5:7. In these instances, participants engaged with complex social themes, including the notion of whiteness and its economic and political implications within the South African context. They also reflected on the necessity of both personal transformation in relation to racial and social attitudes (see D5:16) and broader structural change (see D5:27). What follows is an analysis of selected instances in which participants' understandings of forgiveness evolved to encompass social, economic, and political dimensions, particularly in response to their engagement with Matthew 18:15-35 through the intercultural Bible reading process.

Extract

D5:15 And then, the, the next point, is when we receive forgiveness there should be a transformation I: mmm P8: And for me that was also a revelation, because often, you know like, people use the word love cheaply, you know forgiveness is also used just as cheaply, now, if you forgive somebody, um, then then, there should be transformation in your life and their life, it shouldn't be that forgiveness is a curb, but there's not change now ...

Analysis

This participant proceeds to elaborate on the nature of his/her realisation, making it evident that forgiveness entails more than repentance directed

toward God (II); it also involves "transformation" that is not "cheap", but that brings about change in "your life and their life" (CE) (see Matt. 18:24-25). The focus on the cost of transformation is noteworthy, as it suggests that the participant has engaged with the practical demands and implications of forgiveness, particularly when extended toward a wounded or "angered" other (see D5:17, 19). From this perspective, genuine forgiveness must encompass social, economic, and political dimensions (CE). The participant further insists that forgiveness cannot be meaningful if it lacks concrete change, stating, "but there's not change now" (in reference to vv. 30-31). This insight also points to ongoing patterns of economic, geographic, and social exclusion between White and Black South Africans (see D5:19; D5:6).

Extract

D5:11 P11: Um, but then, on the other side, If I am constantly sinning, sinning against someone and somebody is constantly forgiving me, then I need to catch a wake up and I need to make the change to stop, stop doing the same thing to them. I: Mmm. P11: So, I think, the strongest thing for me was change and transformation, forgiveness isn't just, isn't just a process of forgiving, it's forgiving and changing to, to stop it happening again.

Analysis

In the initial part of this quotation, the participant articulates a recognition that genuine forgiveness involves a significant social dimension (CI), which must be accompanied by tangible action (CE), as reflected in the statement, "I need to make the change to stop, stop doing the same thing to them" (this comment was made in relation to the behaviour of the unforgiving servant in v. 30). In addition to this, the participant shows insight that forgiveness has a political element that is oriented towards a better future, "forgiveness isn't just, isn't just a process of forgiving, it's forgiving and changing to, to stop it happening again" (see vv. 30-31, 35).

Extract

D6:4 I: What, give me a little ... can you express what might've changed, what was it that made that change, what helped the change happen? P7: Because you found others also thinking in the same way that you thought that you were thinking and others also seeing that that we ... we mustn't be apart, we must be one. We call ourselves the Methodist people.

Analysis

The participant explained the shift in his/her understanding of forgiveness by referring to two key factors. First, s/he described experiencing a form of cognitive empathy, reflected in the observation that "you found others also thinking the same way" (II). In addition, the participant attributed this change to a deepened sense of shared faith identity (CI), as expressed in the statements "we must be one" and "We call ourselves the Methodist people" (CI). These reflections were offered in the context of a discussion on the call for communal unity found in Matthew 18:15-19, 35.

 

6. CONCLUSION

As a reminder, the research question of this study is: To what extent has the social imagination of forgiveness of White members in an unreconciled congregation transformed in a more integrative and more inclusive manner following an intercultural Bible reading of Matthew 18:15-35?

On the basis of the data analysis presented above, the answer to this research question is to be formulated. Congregations, as institutional spaces, play a crucial role in shaping and sustaining social imaginations of forgiveness and restorative justice. A comparative analysis of the data shows a shift in social imaginations of forgiveness before the intercultural reading of Matthew 18:15-35 supported by intergroup contact. This section focuses on a shift towards a more integrative social imagination, and to a more inclusive shift.

The data on the pre-test indicates that the (im)possibility of forgiveness was intricately linked to the (im)possibility of conceiving forgiveness in a broader social and political context of a racially divided South Africa (see Table 1). The results for each dimension of social imagination of forgiveness are summarised. In the dimension of individual ideas on forgiveness (II), there is a shift from forgiveness interpreted within personal salvation narratives (pretest) to a broadening of forgiveness with implications for social, economic, and political change (see Table 1). This result confirms the hypothesis formulated before the intervention (section 4.1). It starts with a predominantly spiritual narrative of a personal relation to God and Jesus Christ and broadens to an understanding of forgiveness connected to social, economic, and political change after the intervention of intercultural Bible reading. Both hypotheses (1) and (5) are confirmed (see 4.1).

 

 

The shift in the dimension of individual acts (IE) is coherent with the shift of individual ideas, emotions, and hope (II). There is a shift from action and intention of forgiveness predominantly directed vertically toward God, to a connection of forgiving with change in a social, economic, and political sphere after the intervention of intercultural Bible reading (see Table 1). Both hypotheses (2) and (6) are confirmed (see 4.1).

In the dimension of collective ideas, emotions, and hope (CI), there is a focus, in the pre-test, on congregations as passive spaces, reinforcing existing perspectives of forgiveness as unconditional and spiritual (hypothesis 3). In the post-test, there is a shift towards congregations as active spaces of social, economic, and political transformation. For example, when they identify with the pain and struggle of others (CI, D2:47). Related to the pain and struggle is an emphasis on the cost of transformation (of self and others). The social, economic, and political transformation is viewed as a condition for forgiving (see hypothesis 7).

Finally, there is a shift with regard to collective acts (CE) in line with the formulated hypothesis. In the pre-test, there is no awareness of acts of communal engagement with regard to historical injustice (hypothesis 4). The respondents feel no obligation to engage in forgiveness, because apartheid did not directly impact their personal experience. After the intervention, there is a focus on concrete acts of communal engagement with restorative justice (hypothesis 8).

The second aspect addressed in the research question concerns a shift towards a more inclusive orientation within the social imagination of forgiveness. This development is closely linked to the nature of the intervention itself, namely the use of intercultural Bible reading situated within the framework of positive intergroup contact. The primary aim of this intergroup process was to reduce anxiety and foster greater empathy among the participants. For instance, during the group meetings, the participants were encouraged to choose a seat where they felt at ease and to form pairs with a "friendly stranger" from the other church community, with whom they shared reflections on forgiveness as drawn from the biblical text (see section 4.3). It is important to note that the Coloured and Black participants expressed understandings of forgiveness that differed significantly from those articulated by members of the White community.

Table 2 contains an overview of the pre- and post-test findings of the research. In the pre-test, there is an in-group understanding of forgiveness and a blind spot for race in community (hypothesis 9). This is in line with the analysis of Koopman that the race factor in South Africa influences the understanding of the Bible. In the post-test, there is an awareness of unity of the Methodist community (we) based on a shared faith identity. Shared faith identity becomes a source of social imagination (hypothesis 11). This refers to a shift beyond in-group (White) versus outgroup (Coloured and Black) dichotomy to a "we-in-shared-faith" of unity.

 

 

The collective exterior dimension (CE) refers to the observable characteristics, actions, or practices of forgiveness as they manifest in the wider world. Prior to the intervention, there was hardly any evidence of any meaningful connection between the participants' expressions of faith and the socio-political and economic realities of forgiveness within the South African context. This disconnection of faith and life with regard to forgiveness rests on the idea that apartheid is beyond their personal experience as something for which they do not need to account (hypothesis 8). After the intercultural Bible reading supported by positive intergroup contact, the participants showed a broadened hybrid model of forgiveness and justice more characteristic of the Coloured and Black participants. Prior to the intervention, the group of White participants found it considerably difficult to link their faith with the social, political, and economic dimensions of forgiveness within the South African context (see D2:16, 22, 23). However, through exposure to the experiences and testimonies of the Coloured and Black participants, they developed affective and cognitive empathy, which, in turn, contributed to new insights into both the meaning and conditions of forgiveness (see D5:4, 19). This observed shift in the post-test findings corresponds with the expectations outlined in hypothesis 10.

 

7. DISCUSSION

This study demonstrates that theological understandings of forgiveness among White South African Christians, which were initially framed in highly individualistic and spiritual terms, were substantially challenged and, in several instances, reconfigured through structured intercultural Bible reading with Black Christian counterparts. By engaging Ward's concept of social imagination and employing AQAL theory, the research illustrates that congregational settings, when shaped by deliberate intercultural engagement, can operate simultaneously as spaces of limitation and as contexts for transformation. The observed shift among White participants towards a more comprehensive understanding of forgiveness, one that includes restorative justice, relational healing, and collective accountability, indicates the potential for theological renewal within ecclesial institutions. Significantly, these changes were not only intellectual. They also involved affective and relational dimensions that emerged through embodied encounters across social and racial boundaries. Forgiveness came to be viewed less as a private transaction between the individual and God, and more as a socially situated and systemic process that requires truth-telling, transformation, and acts of restitution.

The fact that these congregations are institutionally united in doctrine and polity, yet institutionally divided in lived ecclesial practice, reveals the deep entanglement of theology with social identity. However, it also highlights the potential of institutional ecclesial spaces to act as "roads to reconciliation" when their liturgies, practices, and relationships are oriented toward encounter and transformation. This study affirms that forgiveness is not merely a theological ideal. Rather, it is a socially enacted, institutionally mediated, and politically significant process. The local church, then, is not only a setting for reflection on forgiveness, but also a vital arena for its reimagining and embodiment.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andrews, M. 1999. The politics of forgiveness: Truth-telling, justice, and forgiveness: A study of East Germany's truth commission. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society 13(1):107-124. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022959624594        [ Links ]

Baloyi, B & Isaacs, G. 2015. #FeesMustFall: What are the student protests about? [Online.] Retrieved from: http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/27/africa/fees-must-fall-student-protest-south-africa-explainer/index.html [20 November 2015].         [ Links ]

Batson, C.D., Chang, J., Grr, R. & Rowland, J. 2002. Empathy, attitudes, and action: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group motivate one to help the group? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28(12):1656-1666. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616702237647        [ Links ]

Bergold, J. & Thomas, S. 2012. Participatory research methods: A methodological approach in motion. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 13(1). [Online.] Retrieved from: http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1801 [3 December 2013].         [ Links ]

Bornman, Ε. 2011. Patterns of intergroup attitudes in South Africa after 1994. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35(6):729-748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.06.006        [ Links ]

Brewer, M.B. & Kramer, R.M. 1985. The psychology of intergroup attitudes and behavior. Annual Review of Psychology 36(1):219-243. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.36.020185.001251        [ Links ]

De Gruchy, J.W. 2002. Reconciliation: Restoring justice. London: Fortress Press.         [ Links ]

De Wit, J.H. 2012. Empirical hermeneutics, interculturality, and Holy Scripture. Elkhart, IN: Institute of Mennonite Studies.         [ Links ]

Dungan, N. 2003. "Race" talk: Discourses on "race" and racial difference. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 27(2):135-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(02)00095-0        [ Links ]

Ellison, P.T. & Keifert, P. 2011. Dwelling in the word: A pocket handbook. Minneapolis, MN: Church Innovations.         [ Links ]

Forster, D.A. 2017. A public theological approach to the (im)possibility of forgiveness in Matthew 18:15-35: Reading the text through the lens of integral theory. In die Skriflig/In Luce Verbi 51(3). https://doi.org/10.4102/ids.v51i3.2108        [ Links ]

Forster, D.A. 2018. Translation and the politics of forgiveness in South Africa? What Black Christians believe and White Christians don't understand. In: Society for Ricoeur Studies Conference, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, pp. 1-13. https://doi.org/10.17570/stj.2018.v4n2.a04        [ Links ]

Forster, D.A. 2019a. The (im)possibility of forgiveness? An empirical intercultural Bible reading of Matthew 18.15-35. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock.         [ Links ]

Forster, D.A. 2019b. A social imagination of forgiveness. Journal of Empirical Theology 32(1):70-88. https://doi.org/10.1163/15709256-12341387        [ Links ]

Hermans, G. (forthcoming) 2025. The social imagination of the church in a racially divided society. Acta Theologica Supplementum 39.         [ Links ]

Hofmeyr, J.H. & Govender, R. 2015. SA Reconciliation Barometer 2015: National reconciliation, race relations, and social inclusion. Cape Town: Institute for Justice and Reconciliation. [Online.] Retrieved from: http://www.ijr.org.za/uploads/IJR_SARB_2015_WEB_002.pdf [20 October 2025].         [ Links ]

Koopman, Ν. 1998. Racism in post-apartheid South Africa. In: L. Kretzschmar & L.D. Hulley (eds), Questions about life and morality: Christian ethics in South Africa today (Pretoria: J.L. van Schaik), pp. 153168. [Online.] Retrieved from: http://philpapers.org/rec/KOORIT [21 January 2015].         [ Links ]

Makhulu, A.M. 2016. Reckoning with apartheid: The conundrum of working through the past, an introduction. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 36(2):252-262. https://doi.org/10.1215/1089201X-3603319. [Online.] Retrieved from: http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/handle/10161/12663 [20 October 2025].         [ Links ]

Mbembe, A. 2015. Decolonizing knowledge and the question of the archive. [Online.] Retrieved from: http://wiser.wits.ac.za/system/files/Achille%20Mbembe%20-%20Decolonizing%20Knowledge%20and%20the%20Question%20of%20the%20Archive.pdf [18 August 2025].         [ Links ]

Nel, M.J. 2013. The influence of dwelling in the word within the Southern African partnership of missional churches. Verbum et Ecclesia 34(1):1-8. https://doi.org/10.4102/ve.v34i1.778        [ Links ]

Nhemachena, A. 2016. Rhodes must fall: Nibbling at resilient colonialism in South Africa. Journal of Pan African Studies 9(4):411-416.         [ Links ]

Pettigrew, T.F. 1998. Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology 49(1):65-85. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.65        [ Links ]

Ricoeur, P. 2007. Introduction: Ricoeur's philosophy of translation. In: E. Brennan (transl.), On translation (New York, NY: Routledge), pp, vii-xx.         [ Links ]

Ricoeur, P. & Brennan, E. 1995. Reflections on a new ethos for Europe. Philosophy & Social Criticism 21(5-6):3-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0191453795021005-602        [ Links ]

Rolls, L. & Relf, M. 2006. Bracketing interviews: Addressing methodological challenges in qualitative interviewing in bereavement and palliative care. Mortality 11(3):286-305. https://doi.org/10.1080/13576270600774893        [ Links ]

Schoeman, W.J. 2017. South African religious demography: The 2013 General Household Survey. HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 73(2):1-7. https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v73i2.3837        [ Links ]

Solomons, D. 2021. The absurdity of reconciliation: What we (should) learn from Rustenburg and the implications for South Africa. Stellenbosch Theological Journal 6(2). https://doi.org/10.17570/stj.2020.v6n4.a18        [ Links ]

Surmon, K., Juan, A. & Reddy, V. 2016. Class over race: New barriers to social inclusion. HSRC Review (9258). [Online.] Retrieved from: http://www.hsrc.ac.za/en/review/hsrc-review-april-to-june-2016/class-over-race [5 December 2016].         [ Links ]

Swart, H., Turner, R., Hewstone, M. & Voci, A. 2011. Achieving forgiveness and trust in post-conflict societies: The importance of self-disclosure and empathy. In: L.R. Tropp & R.K. Mallet (eds), Moving beyond prejudice reduction: Pathways to positive intergroup relations (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association), pp. 181-200. [Online.] Retrieved from: http://psycnet.apa.org/books/12319/009 [19 July 2016]. https://doi.org/10.1037/12319-009        [ Links ]

Turner, R.N., Hewstone, M. & Voci, A. 2007. Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93(3):369 - 388. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.3.369        [ Links ]

Vosloo, R. 2015. Difficult forgiveness? Engaging Paul Ricoeur on public forgiveness within the context of social change in South Africa. International Journal of Public Theology 9(3):360-378. https://doi.org/10.1163/15697320-12341406        [ Links ]

Ward, G. 2018. Unimaginable: What we imagine and what we can't. London: I.B. Tauris.         [ Links ]

Wilber, K. 2011. The eye of spirit: An integral vision for a world gone slightly mad. Third edition. Boston, MA: Shambhala Publications.         [ Links ]

Ypma, M. 2014. Diversiteit in de hulpverlening: Een praktijkonderzoek naar de rol van vooroordelen en onbewuste attituden in de relatie tussen cliënten en hulpverleners van een Utrechts buurtteam. Unpublished Master's thesis. Nijmegen: Radbound University.         [ Links ]

 

 

Date received: 20 July 2025
Date accepted: 15 October 2025
Date published: 20 November 2025

 

 

1 Race is not treated as an essentialist or fixed category in this study. Participants self-identified their racial and ethnic identities, largely in line with the legal classifications used in South Africa for Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment. In this instance, the categories of Black, Coloured, and White are employed in accordance with the participants' own descriptions and with reference to their relevance in South African social and political contexts. These identities are understood as fluid, relational, and shaped by context rather than innate characteristics.
2 This article is based on the research which was originally presented in Forster (2017) and later published in Forster 2019a. In 2019, Forster presented his findings using the concept of social imagination (Forster 2019b). This article is a theoretical elaboration and deepening of this work, focusing on the reimagination of the politics of forgiveness among White respondents.
3 The findings were first reported in Forster (2017), later published in Forster 2019a and 2019b. Since the focus of this article is on the social imagination of White participants, only their data are used in this article.