Themes in African Church History. Missionary Motives, Merits and Mistakes

CONTENTS

The Rhenish Missionary Society and the Formation of the Rhenish Church in Namibia (Anthony Brendell)

Protestant Missionaries and Colonialism in Sub-Saharan Africa (Thorsten Prill)

Bibliography

About the Authors

DEDICATION & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We dedicate this book to all ministers, evangelists, church elders and members past and present of the Rhenish Church in Namibia / Rynse Kerk in Namibië.

Maar julle is ‘n uitverkore geslag, ‘n koninklike priesterdom, ‘n heilige volk, ‘n volk as eiendom verkry, om te verkondig die deugde van Hom wat julle uit die duisternis geroep het tot sy wonderbare lig. (1 Pet. 2:9)

We would like to thank all organisations and individuals who have made this pub­lication possible. We are very grateful to Ryan Peter McKernan and Kerstin Prill for their helpful comments and corrections. Special thanks go to Rev Jonathan van Wyk, moderator of the Rhenish Church in Namibia, who provided valuable docu­ments from his private collection. Likewise, special thanks go to the National Archives of Namibia, the Archives of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Republic of Namibia and the Archives of the United Evangelical Mission in Wuppertal, Germany, for access to various letters, agreements, and minutes of missionary conferences and church meetings.

Anthony Brendell & Thorsten Prill

FOREWORD

The Protestant missionary movements of the 19th and early 20th centuries have for some time come under severe criticism both by many Western scholars and an increasing number of their African peers. Protestant missionaries are charged with displacing indigenous African cultures and supporting the political and economic colonisation on the African continent. Writing from a Namibian perspective we attempt to establish a more accurate view in this book. We will demonstrate that the overall picture painted by the critics is often harsh, and at times prejudiced with negative strokes. Contrary to their claims, the majority of missionaries did not come to Africa with an imperialist, racist or sexist agenda. Most missionaries were driven by compassion for people who needed to hear and accept the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Of course, that does not mean that they were faultless. Their zeal for the gospel and the mission of the Church did not prevent missionaries from making serious mistakes.

One of these mistakes was the practice of paternalism, as the example of the Rhenish Missionary Society shows. While most Rhenish missionaries, who worked in Namibia in the forties and fifties of the 20th century, declared that their goal was the transformation of the missionary led Rhenish Mission Church into a unified independent Namibian church, a strong paternalistic attitude among them undermined this endeavour. For the benefit of their African fellow Christians, so they believed, Rhenish missionaries ignored their desire for more autonomy. Being convinced that they knew best what was good for them, the missionaries passed over the wishes of their Namibian church members. The consequences were seri­ous. Missionary paternalism not only prompted the Nama Secession in 1946 and the Herero Secession in 1955 but also contributed to the schism in the Rhenish Baster Congregation in Rehoboth and the subsequent formation of the Rhenish Church in Namibia in 1962.

THE RHENISH MISSIONARY SOCIETY AND THE FORMATION OF THE RHENISH CHURCH IN NAMIBIA

ANTHONY BRENDELL

INTRODUCTION

In February 1996 I started my theological training at the United Lutheran Theo­logical Seminary Paulinum in Windhoek. The seminary was and still is up to this day jointly owned and governed by the two largest Lutheran denominations in Namibia, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Namibia (ELCIN) and the Evangeli­cal Lutheran Church in the Republic of Namibia (ELCRN).¹ Having grown up dur­ing the final years of the Apartheid regime and the beginning of an independent Namibian state, when communities and churches were still divided along ethnic lines, the Paulinum student family was my first experience of a Christian commu­nity composed of men and women who belonged to a variety of ethnic groups. For the first time in my life, I sat next to Oshiwambo and Otjiherero-speaking Christians in a worship service. It was during a conversation outside the classroom one day that one of the students, who belonged to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Republic of Namibia, made the comment that ‘you Rhenish people did not join our church, because you didn’t want to be in the same church as black people.’ This comment of my fellow student came as a shock to me. However, it also moti­vated me to look into the history of both church bodies. During my investigations, I learned more about the events which led to the formation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in South West Africa (now Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Republic of Namibia) in 1957 and ultimately to the establishment of the Rhenish Church in South West Africa (now Rhenish Church in Namibia) in 1962.

This essay discusses the historical events of 1957-1962 which led to the estab­lishment of both church bodies, and which have had a negative impact on their relationship right up to the present day. Though both churches have their roots in the work of the Rhenish Missionary Society (RMS) and work together in the National Council of Churches in Namibia and local church partnerships, their rela­tionship is not without underlying tensions. Efforts by the Rhenish Church in Namibia to initiate an official process of reconciliation at national church leader­ship level have been unsuccessful so far.² It seems that the historical events of the late 1950s and early 1960s and the contradicting interpretations of these events still hinder closer cooperation and church unity today. For example, while the ELCRN sees herself as the successor of the Rhenish Mission Church and argues that the Rhenish Church in Namibia seceded from the ELCRN, the Rhenish Church in Namibia claims that she was never part of the ELCRN in the first place and that she is the ‘true continuation of the original Rhenish Mission Church.’³ In this essay, I want to argue that the Rhenish Missionary Society is partly responsible for this situation. The majority of Rhenish missionaries in Namibia demonstrated an attitude of paternalism which ignored, among other aspects, the unique history of the Rhenish Baster Congregation in Rehoboth.

A SHORT HISTORY OF THE RHENISH MISSIONARY SOCIETY IN NAMIBIA (1842-1957)

The establishment of the white settlement at the Cape did not only pave the way for trade relationships but also opened up possibilities for the evangelization of the indigenous people of Southern Africa.⁴ The first two missionary societies that arrived in Namibia (South West Africa) were the London Missionary Society and the Wesleyan Society.⁵ They were followed by the Rhenish Missionary Society in 1842, which became the most successful mission organization in Namibia.⁶

The London Missionary Society

The London Missionary Society (LMS) was founded in England in 1795 as an evangelical, inter-denominational society, which had a broadly Reformed outlook.⁷ The main aim of the LMS was the spreading of the knowledge of Christ among ‘the heathen and other unenlightened nations’.⁸ The LMS was mainly supported by congregational churches in England.⁹ However, many of their missionaries came from other parts of Europe, such as Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, and the Netherlands.¹⁰ The first four LMS missionaries arrived in South Africa on 31 March 1799.¹¹ Right from the start, these LMS missionaries did not allow the colonial laws of the day to guide them in their thinking and attitudes towards the indigenous African people.¹² They did not treat them as second class citizens.

In January 1805 missionaries Abraham and Christian Albrecht together with Johannes Siedenfaden of the Rotterdam Missionary Society, arrived at the Cape.¹³ In October 1806 these three missionaries established the first permanent Christian mission at Warmbad in southern Namibia.¹⁴ Five years later, the LMS discontinued the work at Warmbad.¹⁵ The cause of this is explained by Nangolo Mbumba and Norbert Noisser:

A conflict soon arose between the chief [Abraham Christian, chief of the Bondelsswarts] and the missionary. It was the same kind of conflict that happened later in other cases too. The chief wanted the missionary to be completely under his authority. But the authority of the chiefs was often questioned and ignored by the missionaries.¹⁶

The development and furthering of mission work in Namibia continued to be a challenge for the early missionaries.¹⁷ However, there were also missionaries who made a significant and positive impact.

According to Tilman Dedering and Shekutaamba Nambala, the most remarkable missionary was Johann Heinrich Schmelen,¹⁸ who became one of the pioneers of mission work in Namibia.¹⁹ On the request of mission inspector Campbell, Schmelen crossed the Orange River in 1814 on a journey into southern Namibia and settled north of the river at a place called Ui-gandes or Klipfontein, which he renamed Bethany.²⁰ From Bethany he explored the country and met various members of the Nama tribe and other indigenous people on his journey.²¹ Schmelen was fluent in three languages: German, English, and Dutch.²² He became the first European to learn the Nama language and translated the four gospels of the New Testament with the help of his Nama wife Zara into the Nama language, which were printed in 1831.²³ Due to a drought and locust plague, Schmelen returned to South Africa in 1828 and began to work among the people of Jasper Cloete at Komagas. In 1838, Schmelen asked the Rhenish Missionary Society to assist with the mission work north of the Orange River.²⁴

The Rhenish Missionary Society in Namibia

The Rhenish Missionary Society (RMS) was officially established in the Rhenish town of Mettmann by a merger of three smaller organisations, i.e. the Elberfeld, Barmen, and Cologne mission societies, on 3 September 1828.²⁵ In June 1829 the King of Prussia ‘officially recognized the RMS as a missionary society and approved its statutes.’²⁶ Its headquarters were at Barmen (now part of Wuppertal).²⁷ The three founding societies stood in the Reformed or Lutheran traditions of the church and had been greatly influenced by the pietism of the Lower Rhine region.²⁸ The main objective of the society was ‘the training and send­ing forth of Christian missionaries to non-Christian nations.’²⁹ At that time the first four missionary candidates of the RMS were approaching the end of their training and the mission board considered South Africa to be a possible mission field for them.³⁰ These four candidates arrived under the leadership of Dr John Phillip of the LMS in South Africa in 1829.³¹ In the first two months after their arrival, two of them, Luckhoff and Zahn, were sent to minister amongst the slaves at Stellenbosch and Tulbagh, while the other two went further north and started to work amongst the Khoi at Wupperthal near Clanwilliam and at Ebenhaeser.³² More stations were established over the years by RMS missionaries in the northern Cape (Namaqualand and Bushmanland) and in the southwestern Cape (Serepta, Saron, Worcester, and De Doorns).

In response to the request made by Heinrich Schmelen in 1838, the decision was taken at a board meeting of the RMS at Barmen on 17 June 1840 to send Franz H. Kleinschmidt to Kommagas to learn the Nama language and to prepare for his ministry at Bethany.³³ In 1841 the missionaries Hugo Hahn and Hans Christian Knudsen were sent to join Kleinschmidt for the work in Great Namaqualand and possibly Damaraland. On 22 May 1842, Kleinschmidt was ordained in Kommagas. He left Kommagas five days later and reached Bethany on the 30 August 1842,³⁴ previously a station led by Schmelen.³⁵ This marked the beginning of a very long and ultimately successful missionary work by the RMS in Namibia. The RMS became ‘the dominant missionary society in Namibia for more than a century’.³⁶

In 1842 the first RMS missionaries arrived at Windhoek, the village of Jonker Afrikaner.³⁷ This was the beginning of the Nama mission to the south and the Herero mission to the north. As Jonker Afrikaner was the most powerful indigenous leader at that time, the missionaries were eager to have him as their patron.³⁸ They were greatly disappointed when Jonker Afrikaner did not allow them to visit the Herero people. A second disappointment awaited them in 1844 when he preferred a Wesleyan missionary over the Rhenish missionaries to stay and work at his village.³⁹ Due to a misunderstanding between the RMS and Wesleyan missionaries, Hahn and Kleinschmidt left Windhoek to establish a mission amongst the Herero in the north and amongst the Nama in the south.⁴⁰

In October 1842 Hans Christian Knudsen, a Norwegian missionary, arrived at Bethany to continue with the missionary work which had been started by Schmelen.⁴¹ He immediately restored the house built by the LMS missionary eighteen years earlier and added a church building. The people of Bethany were happy to have a missionary and the work immediately began to flourish.⁴² On the request of the kaptein, missionary Knudsen drew up the first rules for the community, i.e. the ‘Gemeente orde’.⁴³

Hugo Hahn, who is regarded as the father of the Herero mission, began his mission work amongst the Herero people at Otjikango in 1844.⁴⁴ He later renamed the place Barmen after the German town in which the RMS headquarters were located. Hahn acted as a community leader; he was responsible for the governing of the station: He took responsibility for the buildings and the agriculture projects, as well as for all other missionary activities.⁴⁵

In 1845 Kleinschmidt started missionary work at Rehoboth.⁴⁶ The people of Rehoboth lived around the hot springs and were led by Kaptein Abraham Swartbooi. Missionary activities began with the building of a church, a school, and accommodation for the missionary.⁴⁷ The work made good progress and by 1846 220 people had already joined the congregation.⁴⁸ A remarkable person in the congregation was Anatjie, the kaptein’s wife.⁴⁹ She had been baptised earlier by Schmelen and had served as a deaconess at Bethany under Knudsen. Anatjie Swartbooi became a very reliable helper for Kleinschmidt.⁵⁰ This very promising work in Rehoboth came to an end in 1864 when the kaptein and his people, because of fear of the Afrikaners, decided to leave their homes and moved to the northwestern part of the country.⁵¹ Kleinschmidt and his family went with them. He died at Otjimbingwe on 2 September 1864.⁵²

By that time Namibia together with South Africa had become, as the February 1856 edition of The Missionary Herald noted, ‘the most important mission field of the Rhenish Missionary Society’.⁵³ That said, it was not an easy field for the Rhenish missionaries, as explained by the Missionary Herald:

The northern branch of the mission is passing through an interesting and eventful crisis. The gospel has been preached among the Namaquas, Bushmen, Damaras, and other tribes, for a number of years; but such are the habits of the people, that very little has been accomplished. Their life is nomadic, the country being in the main not well suited to agriculture; schools and churches, therefore, cannot prosper. There are also constant feuds and forays in all this region, which exert a very disheartening influence upon missionaries.⁵⁴

However, these challenges did not stop the RMS from continuing their work in Namibia.⁵⁵ In the following years RMS missionaries managed to establish various mission stations all over the country, including Gibeon (1863), Omaruru (1870), Okombahe (1871), Rehoboth (1870), Waterberg (1873), Rietfontein (1885), Gaub (1885), Karibib (1902), Swakopmund (1905), and Lüderitz (1905).⁵⁶ The RMS worked for more than 150 years in Namibia and founded many congregations, schools, and hospitals.⁵⁷ The growth of the work was remarkable. In 1940 the RMS had 22 congregations with a total membership of 72,000. Seventeen years later, there were 23 congregations with a membership of 95,530.⁵⁸ These congregations were served by 16 pastors and 21 missionaries.⁵⁹

When the RMS started working in Namibia, it also began with mission work amongst the Baster people at the Karreeberge (Amandelboom) in 1845 and at De Tuin in 1863, as well as in Rehoboth in 1870.⁶⁰ Through many hardships and tremendous challenges, the missionaries stayed faithful in building up this Baster church in South Africa and Namibia.

Formation of Separate Mission Congregations

The RMS, as a German Protestant missionary society, was deeply influenced by German Lutheran missiology, which promoted the establishment of autonomous churches or Volkskirchen (literally: people’s churches), in which people of the same ethnic group were gathered.⁶¹ To accomplish this aim, the missionaries had to respect the culture and language of the people they were serving.⁶² The gospel had to be preached without detaching the Africans from their culture. The idea was that the church had to grow within the cultural context. Hans-Werner Gensichen notes:

Thus the church, […], was no longer an imported foreign structure estab­lished among natives removed from their environment and social rela­tions, and exposed to alien techniques of dogma and cult. It was to be truly a folk church, Volkskirche, elevating even all basic social structures into the new creation of the Spirit and thus becoming fully indigenous.⁶³

While this was a laudable approach it, unfortunately, became the root of separatism within the Lutheran churches in southern Africa.⁶⁴ Long before the official establishment of Apartheid by the South African government, the RMS chose to establish distinct congregations based on ethnicity and language in Namibia.⁶⁵ Two kinds of congregations developed from the work of the Rhenish missionaries: congregations for white settlers and mission congregations for the indigenous people groups.⁶⁶ This development was supported by the German community who felt that they were not part of the mission field as they were already Christians.⁶⁷ These events show that the RMS struggled to develop a theology that opposed colonialism, racism and later apartheid.⁶⁸ The ecclesiological and missiological concept of the Volkskirche was the basis for this development.⁶⁹ The emphasis was on spiritual unity over organisational unity. The main reason for the formation of separate congregations was the issue of language.⁷⁰ People could not be part of the same congregation, it was argued, because they spoke different languages. It was further argued that spiritual unity existed between the various ethnic congregations anyway, which was more important than organisational unity.⁷¹

Though it cannot be completely ruled out that the Volkskirche concept also played a role in the formation of two separate RMS congregations after the arrival of the Baster people in Rehoboth, the reasons for the decision to have two ethnic congregations, it seems, were more of a pragmatic nature. Thus, the Damara people who came to the Sunday services did not speak Dutch and the missionary, who led the services, did not have an interpreter available. To accommodate the Damara-speakers, missionary Heidmann decided to have a Sunday evening service which was led by a local teacher who spoke the language.⁷² In 1873 Heidmann explained the situation as follows:

Am Sonntag kommen einige Bergdamara, namentlich Frauen, auch zum Gottesdienst. Mit ihren schrillen, hellen Stimmen singen sie die Gesänge mit, aber ohne Worte, denn Holländisch verstanden sie nicht. […] Leider verstehen sie wohl nicht viel, weil ich keinen habe, der dolmetscht. […] Große Sorge machte mir, daß ich niemand zum Dolmetschen hatte. […] Für die Nama und Bergdamara ist am sonntagabend wieder Gottesdienst, die unser Schulmeister Mattheus Gertse abwechselnd mit mir hält.⁷³

The church historian and missiologist Theo Sundermeier has criticised the RMS for not having made any attempt to unite Basters and Damaras in one congregation: ‘Die Mission hat die Damara von jeher geistlich versorgt, doch sie hat kaum ernsthafte Versuche unternommen, die beiden Volksgruppen zu einer Gemeinde zusammenzuführen.’⁷⁴ Because of the Apartheid system which was imposed on the indigenous people of Namibia, the two congregations continued to exist along ethnic lines even after the establishment of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Republic of Namibia.⁷⁵

Education and Leadership Development

Right from the beginning, education was an integral part of the RMS’s mission strategy. Most of the RMS’s mission stations served as educational centres.⁷⁶ The teaching in the schools was elementary and had its focus on reading and writing, arithmetic, music, and Bible knowledge. In other words, the standard of education in the mission schools was very low.⁷⁷ The RMS’s schools were preparing people to become labourers. Their emphasis was on the teaching of Christian values and practical skills.⁷⁸ As a result, very few Namibians managed to proceed to secondary education during this time.⁷⁹ The RMS missionaries assumed that the indigenous people would not cope with the study of languages and mathematics.⁸⁰ By providing them with elementary education they excluded them from leadership and decision making positions in the church.⁸¹ Rudolf Tjibeba argues that the unwillingness of the missionaries to train and ordain indigenous clergy was based on the biases of the day, i.e. that black people were not capable and ready for responsible positions. Indigenous evangelists employed by the RMS were allowed to preach the gospel to their people and perform certain duties under the supervision of the white missionaries only.⁸² According to the 1934 constitution of the Rhenish Mission Church in South West Africa it was the task of itinerant evangelists (Wanderevangelisten) to preach the gospel to farm communities, teach the basics of the Christian faith to children and prepare people for baptism, while senior evangelists (Hauptevangelisten) served as leaders of smaller daughter congregations (Filialgemeinden).⁸³ However, neither of them were allowed to administer the sacraments.⁸⁴

As a result of the unwillingness of the Rhenish missionaries to ordain black Christians as pastors, the leadership of local mission congregations (and of the Rhenish Mission Church as a whole) remained in the hands of the missionaries. For this reason, a large number of Nama people left the RMS and joined the African Methodist Episcopal Church in July 1946.⁸⁵

The Rhenish Mission Church and the Question of Independence

After the unsuccessful freedom struggle of the Herero and the Nama, which began in 1904 and lasted for three years, many Herero people joined the RMS congregations.⁸⁶ However, even the turbulent war years could not extinguish the desire for political freedom in the hearts of many Herero and Nama.⁸⁷ This later gave rise to the development of separatist movements which in some cases also affected the RMS and the Rhenish Mission Church. Thus, the Rhenish Mission Church experienced several secessions.⁸⁸

The first secession was the Herero Secession of 1923.⁸⁹ It was triggered by events surrounding the funeral of Chief Samuel Maharero in August of the same year.⁹⁰ After Maharero’s funeral, the majority of the Herero people left the Rhenish Mission Church and returned to ancestor worship and the practice of the Holy Fire.⁹¹ According to church historians Buys and Nambala, this secession should not be seen as a church schism, as it was primarily motivated by political and national rather than religious ideas and convictions: ‘The tribal chiefs and indigenous community of the Hereros, who left the Rhenish Mission Church in 1923, were stimulated by the Ethiopian movement’s emphasis on Black nationalism.’⁹²

The second secession which affected the Rhenish Mission Church was the Nama Secession of 1946.⁹³ This was the first time that indigenous Christians raised their voice of protest against the missionary control of the church. The Nama members of the Rhenish Mission congregations in the south of the country were seeking greater independence from the Rhenish missionaries and acknowledge­ment of the authority of the black church leaders. One of the two immediate causes which triggered the secession was the proposed transfer of the Rhenish Mission congregations to the Dutch Reformed Church. This transfer was reported in a Cape newspaper, Die Burger, in October 1945.⁹⁴ The report implied that the transfer was already accomplished. The second cause was the placement of a new missionary at the congregation in Keetmanshoop. Against the will of the congregants, who wanted an indigenous pastor to be ordained as their spiritual leader, the RMS appointed a German missionary.⁹⁵ At a general conference of the Nama Teachers’ and Evangelists’ Association, which took place on 12 January 1946, the teachers and evangelists present felt that they had been betrayed by the Rhenish missionar­ies.⁹⁶ They concluded, ‘indigenous workers had been deceived and sold out like chil­dren by their parents (mission). Their independence as a church had been attacked. Decisions […] had been taken without consultation.’⁹⁷ As a result, the majority of the spiritual leaders of the Nama congregations in the south together with a large number of members left the Rhenish Mission Church and joined the African Methodist Episcopal Church.⁹⁸ Tjibeba notes: ‘The motive for the Nama secession was the search for greater independence, recognition as fellow Christians and equal workers in the mission, and full acknowledgement of the authority and leadership of the indigenous leaders.’⁹⁹

This development in the Nama congregations challenged the RMS to work towards the establishment of an independent, indigenous church.¹⁰⁰ Shortly after the Nama schism, the RMS missionaries ordained the first black Namibian pastors in 1949. This, however, was not a voluntary act on the part of the local RMS missionaries.¹⁰¹ The missionaries had come under pressure from their leaders in Germany who were deeply concerned about the situation in Namibia because of the recent breakaway of the Nama people.¹⁰² The pressure increased when Herero leaders also began to discuss the possibility of forming an independent church un­der Herero leadership. After years of negotiations and talks between the RMS mis­sionaries and the Herero leaders, the Oruuano or Protestant Unity Church was established in August 1955.¹⁰³ A large number of Herero members left the Rhenish Mission congregations and joined this new church.¹⁰⁴ Zedekiah Ngavirue writes:

The main aim behind the establishment of Oruuano or Protestant Unity Church, was like that of the Nama secession, which preceded it, to have a church without European control. The Herero secession movement was headed by Reinhard Ruzo, a man who [had] also been in the service of the R.M.S. like his Nama counterparts. Since the break was not based on schismatic differences, Oruuano retained the practices of the parent church in matters of worship.¹⁰⁵

Some Rhenish missionaries admitted that they had made mistakes and were willing to take responsibility for this development. Missionary Milk, for example, spoke of the guilt and failure of the missionaries. He saw the Herero secession as a judg­ment from God. At the same time he was grateful that by the grace of God the Rhenish missionaries were able to continue their work amongst the Herero people:

Wir glauben, dass in der Abfallbewegung Gottes Gericht und Gnade uns begegnet, Gottes Gericht über mancherlei Versäumnisse bei uns als den verantwortlichen Dienern der Gemeinde, wie auch über die Gemeinde selbst durch die Sichtung, die sich in ihr vollzieht. In der Erkenntnis und Beugung unter die Schuld, die wir überkommen und die wir selbst hin­zugefügt haben, […], danken wir Gott dem Herrn für die grosse Gnade, dass er noch seine Gemeinde unter den Herero sammelt und wir in ihr dienen dürfen.¹⁰⁶

However, the RMS missionaries held that the Herero secession was not the result of a spiritually motivated desire to have an independent church. They believed that the secession had to be seen in a political light as it was driven by a nationalistic, anti-white and anti-Christian agenda:

Wir glauben aber, dass sich in der Abfallbwegung unter den Herero, […], nicht ein echter Wille zur Selbständigkeit der Kirche äussert. Die Frage nach der Kirche wurde zum Anlass genommen, um in Wirklichkeit Fra­gen aufzunehmen, die schon vor 30 Jahren aufgebracht waren und auf dem national-politischen Gebiet liegen. Es ist der Ruf zurück zur Wahrung der völkisch-nationalen Tradition und die Absage an das Christentum und damit auch die Absage an den weissen Mann.¹⁰⁷

Conclusion

It can be argued, that the process of transforming the Rhenish Mission Church into an independent church without missionary involvement already began in 1938 with the formation of the Paulinum Theological Seminary for the training of indigenous pastors.¹⁰⁸ However, this process was interrupted by World War II which lasted from 1939 to 1945. The first indigenous pastors were ordained shortly after the Nama secession in 1949.¹⁰⁹ This was the first and very important step towards the autonomy of the Rhenish Mission Church.¹¹⁰ In 1950, under great pressure from the RMS leadership in Germany, the missionaries began to prepare a draft consti­tution for an independent church in Namibia.¹¹¹ In 1953, the first indigenous lead­ers were invited to join the Church Order Commission, which had the task to develop a new constitution that would replace the 1934 Church Order of the Rhenish Mission Church. After the final draft had been accepted by the two re­gional synods in 1956,¹¹² the new constitution was adopted at the first Territorial Synod in 1957. The new church was constituted as the Evangelical Lutheran Church in South West Africa (Rhenish Mission Church) on 4 October 1957.¹¹³ In 1990, after Namibia had gained independence from South Africa, the name of this church body was changed to Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Republic of Namibia (ELCRN).¹¹⁴

THE RHENISH BASTER CONGREGATION

The Origin of the Rhenish Mission Baster Congregation

The history of the Rhenish Baster Congregation at Rehoboth dates back to the beginning of the work of the RMS in Boesmanland, Northern Cape in 1845.¹¹⁵ In 1843 missionaries Leipold and von Wurmb of the Rhenish mission station at Wup­perthal travelled to the Kareeberg area, where the Xhosa people under the leader­ship of Kaptein Jan Kaffer lived.¹¹⁶ Missionary work in that area (Zakrivier) had been previously (1799-1803) undertaken amongst the San and Khoi by J.J. Kichener of the London Missionary Society.¹¹⁷ In the Kareeberg area, Leipold and von Worm also met a group of Baster pastoralists who led a nomadic lifestyle and who seemed to be more responsive to the gospel.¹¹⁸ They were descendants of Euro­pean men (trekboere) who had intermarried with Khoikhoi women.¹¹⁹ They requested the RMS for the service of a missionary, upon which the missionaries Johann Heinrich Lutz and Friedrich Wilhelm Beinecke arrived in the Kareeberg area in 1845.¹²⁰ They pitched their tents under a huge almond tree close to a foun­tain near the Zakrivier and named the station Amandelboom. The missionaries immediately started mission work amongst the Basters in the area, and soon a school was opened under the direction of Beinecke. Under the guidance of Lutz the church began to grow.¹²¹

The RMS was never exclusively Lutheran or Reformed but was firmly rooted in both Protestant traditions.¹²² For that reason, the mission stations and congrega­tions in Southern Africa used both the Heidelberg Catechism and Luther’s Small Catechism for Christian education purposes. However, the Scriptures were always central in the spiritual guidance of the congregations.¹²³

The successful missionary work among the Baster people came under threat when the northern boundary of the Cape colony was moved up to the Orange River by the British government in 1848.¹²⁴ This resulted in the invitation of white farm­ers, who took the grazing land which had previously been used by the Basters. The missionaries tried hard to obtain ownership rights for the Baster people of the area but did not succeed.¹²⁵ However, the influx of white Afrikaners with their animals made it difficult for the Basters and others to continue to stay on the station as grazing became increasingly difficult for them.¹²⁶ From 1861 onwards, more and more Basters left the mission station and moved northwards in search for new pastures for their animals. By 1862, most of the Basters had left Amandelboom and settled further north at Carnavon, De Tuin and Pella.¹²⁷ After a few visits, RMS mis­sionary Peter Sterrenberg established a permanent mission station at De Tuin in 1863.¹²⁸ By 1864, they had built a spacious parsonage,¹²⁹ and a church and a school building were added in 1865. In the same year, Sterrenberg was transferred to the nearby Schietfontein (Carnavon) station.¹³⁰ On 13 November 1865, the missionary Johann Friedrich Christopher Heidmann arrived in the Cape Colony to take over the work at De Tuin.¹³¹ Heidmann came to De Tuin in February 1866 and was warmly welcomed by the congregation. By the time of his arrival, there were 105 members in the congregation, more than a hundred people in catechism classes and 187 children attending the mission school.¹³² According to Patrick Pearson, between 50 and 70 families resided on the station, with a further 150 living in the area.¹³³ Order in the community was maintained by a Baster Council. The Cape gov­ernment supported the school with 30 pounds per year. The community was almost self-sufficient, as they usually raised about 200 pounds each year for the operations of the station.¹³⁴ Only in times of severe drought did the RMS come to their aid.

In 1865, the Cape government promulgated the Land Beacon Act, according to which, occupants of land should provide proof of their ownership.¹³⁵ The govern­ment also decided that Crown land was to be divided and made available to be leased or sold.¹³⁶ In response, the Baster community, under the guidance of Heidmann, asked the government for a tract of land. This request was turned down in November 1866.¹³⁷ The lease system, however, was not the only threat to the Basters. There was also the invasion of white farmers with their animals from other areas.¹³⁸ Besides these challenges, the existence of the community was also threat­ened by the Korana and San, who were in desperate need of land.¹³⁹ By 1867, the sporadic theft of cattle and sheep from the colonists had become open warfare with the aim to remove them from their land. De Tuin, which was close to Koranaland, soon became a target for Korana raids.¹⁴⁰ Hartmut Lang and Cornelia Limpricht write about these raids:

The raiders […] became increasingly crafty and violent. At first, they would steal individual animals for slaughter, taking the horses with them to prevent the Basters from pursuing them. Shortly after they would reap­pear with the horses to take entire herds, - leaving some families with nothing.¹⁴¹

The Basters asked the Cape Government for protection, but without success. The Baster community of De Tuin lost all hope for security in the border region of the Cape Colony.¹⁴² Their unsuccessful efforts to get land ownership, the selfish actions of white farmers, and the raids of the Korana, finally forced the Basters to decide to look for a place beyond the borders of the colony.¹⁴³ Kristin Kjæret and Kristian Stokke describe how the Basters perceived this situation:

They were thus in conflict with the whites through their laws and with the blacks through their plundering, and were left standing alone without help from their own ancestors: they were the brown children who had to get by without the support from their parents.¹⁴⁴

On the 24th of February 1868, at a community meeting, 90 family heads de­clared that they wanted to move.¹⁴⁵ Of the 58 families who were members of the RMS congregation, 40 were willing to join the trek northward.¹⁴⁶ On the 12th of July 1868, Heidmann and a small group of his congregants gathered in the small church located on the station for their last church service and the celebration of Holy Communion. On the 13th of July 1868, the locks and the bell were removed from the church and put on a wagon.¹⁴⁷ The trek immediately went westwards in the direction of Pella to join Hermanus van Wyk, who had been elected kaptein at Usib.¹⁴⁸ On the 16th of November, they arrived at the Orange River. Almost three weeks later, on the 25th of November, the last wagon crossed the river and began the journey under harsh and difficult conditions to the next waterhole called Kinderzit.¹⁴⁹

The De Tuin Basters in South West Africa

With permission of the Orlam–Nama kaptein, the Basters moved to Warmbad.¹⁵⁰ During the stay at Warmbad a set of laws was drawn up by Hermanus van Wyk with the assistance of missionaries Heidmann and Weber.¹⁵¹ These laws later formed the basis for the Vaderlike Wette, which were written at Rehoboth in 1872. The Basters left Warmbad just before Christmas and moved to Haris, where they stayed a few weeks, after which they reached Keetmanshoop on the 24th of Febru­ary 1869. At Keetmanshoop, Heidmann left the congregation and went to Cape Town to meet his fiancé, Ida Eick from Germany.¹⁵² Upon their arrival, most of the congregational members were stationed at Chamis and the surrounding area.¹⁵³ Heidmann joined the group at Chamis and continued with the school, offering evening classes for the adults.¹⁵⁴ Most of the Basters did not live on the station. They were scattered in the area, partly due to the drought but also because many had turned to hunting.¹⁵⁵ Heidmann deeply disapproved of this and claimed that ‘it makes them savage at heart and blunts their sensibilities and makes them unrecep­tive to all what is superior and ennobling.’¹⁵⁶ For Heidmann, it was clearly of great importance that the Basters would settle together, as this would make it easier for him to continue with his missionary work.¹⁵⁷

Both Heidmann and Kaptein van Wyk were eager to find a suitable place for the Basters to settle but they were cautious not to rush it.¹⁵⁸ Missionary Hugo Hahn invited the Basters to come to Scheppmansdorf, a settlement near Walvis Bay.¹⁵⁹ With this move, Hahn wanted to secure the bay against any attacks.¹⁶⁰ The Basters arrived in the country amid the Herero and the Nama war which had started five years earlier.¹⁶¹ On the 20th of September 1870, the Peace Conference of Okahandja took place and a peace agreement was reached between the Orlam, Herero and Nama tribes. Hermanus van Wyk was also invited to attend the conference.¹⁶² At this conference, he asked Abraham Swartbooi, chief of the Swartbooi tribe, about the possibility for the Basters to settle in Rehoboth. Kaptein Swartbooi granted Hermanus van Wyk and the Basters permission to occupy Rehoboth until the Swartbooi tribe wanted to repossess the land.¹⁶³ They agreed that the Basters would pay Swartbooi a yearly compensation consisting of one horse. Heidmann felt un­easy about this agreement as it was not included in the peace treaty. Heidmann’s reservation was justified, as the position of the Basters at Rehoboth would soon be threatened. Immediately after this agreement van Wyk and some of the Baster families went to Rehoboth. Heidmann and the rest of the congregation arrived at Rehoboth in February 1871.¹⁶⁴ The community immediately began to develop the station:¹⁶⁵ they blasted away the rocks to get better water supply from the foun­tains; gardens and cornfields were planted. At that time the Baster community con­sisted of 333 people.¹⁶⁶ Four years later ‘the community of Rehoboth had grown to about 80 to 90 families or 800 “souls”, which assumes an average family size of nine to ten persons.’¹⁶⁷ Although the Basters had settled at Rehoboth, they were still unsure about their future. As early as 1872 they were confronted with different groups who wanted them to leave the Rehoboth area. White farmers who arrived in the country tried to buy Rehoboth from the Swartboois in 1876.¹⁶⁸ At the request of the Basters, Abraham Swartbooi had already agreed in 1875 to sell Rehoboth to them. This agreement became null and void when Swartbooi and his people attacked Rehoboth on 16 November 1882.¹⁶⁹ The attack was fought off by the Basters. According to Heidmann, Abraham Swaartbooi forfeited the right of own­ership to the Rehoboth ‘Gebiet’, ‘[Die] Basters het dus hul gebruiksregte behou inooreensteming met die reels wat deur die Swartboois self neergele.’¹⁷⁰

[...]

---

¹ M. Nelumbu, ‘Theological Education at Paulinum from 1996 to 2013’, in P.J. Isaak (ed.), The Story of Paulinum Seminary in Namibia (Windhoek: Namibia Publishing House, 2013), 32.

² Cf. letter sent by Rev Eugen Beukes, moderator of the Rhenish Church sent to Bishop Z. Kameeta, Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Republic of Namibia; dated 7th March 2013.

³ C. Limpricht, ‘Churches in Rehoboth’, in C. Limpricht (ed.), Rehoboth, Namibia Past & Present (Hamburg: C. Limpricht, 2012), 251.

⁴ S.V.V. Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia (Milwaukee: Lutheran Quarterly, 1994), 60.

⁵ M. Mbumba & N.H. Noisser, Namibia in History: Junior Secondary History Book (London: Zed Books, 1989), 71-72.

⁶ Mbumba & Noisser, Namibia in History, 73.

⁷ A.F. Walls, The Cross-cultural Process in Christian History (Maryknoll: Obis Books, 2002), 207.

⁸ Journal of the House of Lords, Volume 49 (1812), 624.

⁹ G.L. Buys & S.V.V. Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805 -1990: An Introduction (Windhoek: Gamsberg Macmillan, 2003), 9.

¹⁰ Walls, The Cross-cultural Process in Christian History, 207.

¹¹ Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 62.

¹² R. Elphick, The Equality of Believers: Protestant Missionaries and the Racial Politics of South Africa (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2012), 35.

¹³ T. Dedering, Hate the Old and Follow the New: Khoekhoe and Missionaries in Early Nineteenth-Century Namibi a (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1997), 70.

¹⁴ Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 62.

¹⁵ Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 62.

¹⁶ Mbumba & Noisser, Namibia in History, 71.

¹⁷ Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 62.

¹⁸ Also known as Johann Hinrich Schmelen.

¹⁹ Dedering, Hate the Old and Follow the New, 69; Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 62, 65.

²⁰ B. Lau, Namibia in Jonker Afrikaner’s Time (Windhoek: National Archives of Namibia, 1994), 22.

²¹ Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 65.

²² A. Ejikeme, Culture and Customs of Namibia (Santa Barbara: Greenwood, 2011), 49.

²³ J. Baumann, Van Sending to Kerk: 125 Jaar Rynse Sendingarbeid in Suidwes-Afrika, 1842-1967 (Karibib: E.L.K. Boekdepot, 1967), 16.

²⁴ Ejikeme, Culture and Customs of Namibia, 53.

²⁵ N. O. Oermann, Mission, Church and State Relations in South West Africa under German Rule (1884-1915) (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1999), 29.

²⁶ Oermann, Mission, Church and State Relations…, 29.

²⁷ Oermann, Mission, Church and State Relations …, 29.

²⁸ Cf. G. Scriba, & G. Lislerud, ‘Lutheran Churches and Missions in South Africa’, in R. Elphick & R. Davenport (eds.), Christianity in South Africa: A Social, Political, and Cultural History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 175; G. Melton, ‘Rhenish Mission’, in J.G. Melton & M. Baumann (eds.), Religions of the World: A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of Beliefs and Practices, vol. 1 (Santa Barbara: ABC-Clio, 2010), 2413.

²⁹ C.P. Heese, Sendingonderwys in Suidwes-Afrika 1806-1870: ‘n kritisie beskouing van bepaalde aspekte (Stellenbosch: Universiteit van Stellenbosch, 1980), 75.

³⁰ E. Strassberger, The Rhenish Mission Society in South Africa 1830-1950 (Cape Town: C. Struik, 1969), 15.

³¹ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 17.

³² Nambala , History of the Church in Namibia, 69-70.

³³ Strassberger , The Rhenish Mission Society in South Africa 1830-1950, 69.

³⁴ Heese, Sendingonderwys in Suidwes-Afrika 1806-1870, 76.

³⁵ Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 73.

³⁶ V.L. Tonchi, W. Lindeke & J.J. Grotpeter, Historical Dictionary of Namibia, 2nd ed. (Lanham: The Scarecrow Press, 2012), 367.

³⁷ Heese, Sendingonderwys in Suidwes-Afrika 1806-1870, 64.

³⁸ Heese, Sendingonderwys in Suidwes-Afrika 1806-1870, 64.

³⁹ Heese, Sendingonderwys in Suidwes-Afrika 1806-1870, 64.

⁴⁰ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 19.

⁴¹ Baumann, Van Sending tot Kerk, 17.

⁴² Baumann, Van Sending tot Kerk, 17.

⁴³ Baumann, Van Sending tot Kerk, 17.

⁴⁴ Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 72.

⁴⁵ Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 72.

⁴⁶ G. Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, in P.J. Isaak (ed.), The Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Republic of Namibia in the 21st Century (Windhoek: Gamsberg Macmillan, 2000), 20.

⁴⁷ Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, 20.

⁴⁸ Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, 20.

⁴⁹ Baumann, Van Sending tot Kerk, 45.

⁵⁰ Baumann , Van Sending tot Kerk, 45.

⁵¹ Baumann, Van Sending tot Kerk, 49.

⁵² Baumann, Van Sending tot Kerk, 49.

⁵³ The Missionary Herald, Volume 52 (Boston: The Press of T.R. Marvin, 1856), 54.

⁵⁴ The Missionary Herald, 54.

⁵⁵ Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 72-73.

⁵⁶ Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia, 72-73.

⁵⁷ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 117.

⁵⁸ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 117.

⁵⁹ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 117.

⁶⁰ Strassberger, The Rhenish Mission Society in South Africa…, 79.

⁶¹ H.E. Winkler, The Divided Roots of Lutheranism in South Africa: A Critical Overview of Social History of the German speaking Lutheran Missions and Churches Originated from their Work in South Africa, unpublished masters dissertation (Cape Town: University of Cape Town, 1989), 16.

⁶² Winkler, The Divided Roots of Lutheranism…, 16.

⁶³ H.-W. Gensichen, ‘The Germans’, International Bulletin of Missionary Research 6/2 (1982), 52.

⁶⁴ Winkler, The Divided Roots of Lutheranism in South Africa, 16.

⁶⁵ Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, 19-20.

⁶⁶ Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, 19.

⁶⁷ Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, 20.

⁶⁸ Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, 19-20.

⁶⁹ Winkler, The Divided Roots of Lutheranism…, 18.

⁷⁰ Winkler, The Divided Roots of Lutheranism…, 18.

⁷¹ Winkler , The Divided Roots of Lutheranism…, 18.

⁷² R. Vollmer, Missionar Friedrich Heidmann: Ein Pionier von Rehoboth: Sein Leben und Werk in Namibia (Windhoek: John Meinert, 1996), 48.

⁷³ Quoted in Vollmer, Missionar Friedrich Heidmann, 48, 119.

⁷⁴ T. Sundermeier, Wir aber suchten Gemeinschaft: Kirchwerdung und Kirchentrennung in Südwestafrika (Witten: Luther Verlag & Erlangen; Verlag der Evang.-luth. Mission, 1973), 229.

⁷⁵ Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, 29.

⁷⁶ Cf. H.R. Tjibeba, The History of the Rhenish Mission Society in Namibia with Particular Reference to the African Methodist Episcopal Church Schism (1946-1990), PhD thesis (Durban: University of Durban-Westville), 50, 60.

⁷⁷ Tjibeba, The History of the Rhenish Mission Society in Namibia…, 54, 60.

⁷⁸ A.M. Mbamba, Primary Education for an Independent Namibia: Planning in a Situation of Uncertainty and Instability (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1982), 56.

⁷⁹ Tjibeba, The History of the Rhenish Mission Society in Namibia…, 54, 60.

⁸⁰ Tjibeba, The History of the Rhenish Mission Society in Namibia…, 60.

⁸¹ Tjibeba, The History of the Rhenish Mission Society in Namibia…, 60.

⁸² Tjibeba, The History of the Rhenish Mission Society in Namibia…, 60.

⁸³ Kirchenordnung für die Missionskirche der Rheinischen Missionsgesellschaft in Südwestafrkia, 1934, 7.

⁸⁴ Tjibeba, The History of the Rhenish Mission Society in Namibia…, 61.

⁸⁵ Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, 22.

⁸⁶ G.L. Buys & J.J. Kritzinger, Salig die Vredemakers (Pretoria: Promedia Publikasies, 1989), 129.

⁸⁷ Buys & Kritzinger, Salig die Vredemakers, 129.

⁸⁸ Buys & Kritzinger, Salig die Vredemakers, 129.

⁸⁹ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 177.

⁹⁰ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 177.

⁹¹ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 177.

⁹² Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 177.

⁹³ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 178.

⁹⁴ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 179.

⁹⁵ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 178.

⁹⁶ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 179.

⁹⁷ J.J. Kritzinger, Sending en Kerk in Suidwes-Afrika: ‘n Ondersoek na die Kerk onder die Nie-Blankes van Suidwes-Afrika, Volume II (Pretoria: University of Pretoria, 1972), 432.

⁹⁸ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 179.

⁹⁹ H.R. Tjibeba, ‘The AMEC Schism in Namibia (1946)’, in J.A. Smit & P.P. Kumar (eds), Study of Religion in Southern Africa: Essays in Honour of G.C. Oosthuizen (Leiden, Brill, 2005), 232.

¹⁰⁰ Cf. H. Lessing, ‘The Contribution of the Rhenish Mission Society to Theological Training and Education in Namibia’, in P.J. Isaak (ed.), The Story of the Paulinum Seminary (Windhoek: Namibia Publishing House, 2013), 60.

¹⁰¹ Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, 22.

¹⁰² Gurirab, ‘A Brief Historical Survey of the ELCRN’, 22.

¹⁰³ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 180.

¹⁰⁴ Buys & Nambala, History of the Church in Namibia 1805-1990, 182-183.

¹⁰⁵ Z. Ngavirue, ‘On Wearing the Victor’s Uniforms and Replacing their Churches: South West Africa (Namibia) 1920-50, in G.W. Trompf (ed.), Cargo Cults and Millenarian Movements: Transoceanic Comparisons of New Religious Movements (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1990), 414.

¹⁰⁶ Protokoll der ausserordentlichen Missionarskonferenz in Okahandja vom 5.-7. Dezember 1955, 4-5.

¹⁰⁷ Antwortschreiben der Konferenz der Rheinischen Mission in Südwest-Afrika auf die Fragen der geehrten Deputation an die Feldleitung vom 20.1.1996, 2-3.

¹⁰⁸ Buys & Kritzinger, Salig die Vredemakers, 140.

¹⁰⁹ Buys & Kritzinger, Salig die Vredemakers, 147.

¹¹⁰ Buys & Kritzinger, Salig die Vredemakers, 140.

¹¹¹ Buys & Kritzinger, Salig die Vredemakers, 140.

¹¹² Buys & Kritzinger, Salig die Vredemakers, 140.

¹¹³ Buys & Kritzinger, Salig die Vredemakers, 140.

¹¹⁴ Tjibeba, The History of the Rhenish Mission Society in Namibia…, 57.

¹¹⁵ J. Du Plessis, A History of Christian Mission in South Africa (Cape Town: C. Struik, 1965), 200.

¹¹⁶ Du Plessis, A History of Christian Mission…, 200.

¹¹⁷ E. Van Schalkwyk, Die Amandel Breek Op (Williston: N.G. Amandelboom Gemeente, 1995), 5-6.

¹¹⁸ Strassberger, The Rhenish Mission Society in South Africa…, 79

¹¹⁹ G.L. Buys, Die Holistiese Benadering in die Ekumeniese Diskussie, met besondere Verwysing na Kerk en Sending in Suidwes-Afrika/Namibia, doctoral thesis (Stellenbosch: Universiteit van Stellenbosch, 1980), xxiv.

¹²⁰ Du Plessis, A History of Christian Mission…, 205.

¹²¹ Van Schalkwyk, Die Amandel Breek Op, 8.

¹²² Scriba & Lislerud, Lutheran Churches and Missions in South Africa, 175.

¹²³ -, ‘Evangeliese Lutherse Kerk in die Republiek van Namibië (Rynse Sendingkerk)’, Immanuel 10 February (1966), 6.

¹²⁴ Cf. J. Zandberg, Rehoboth Griqua Atlas (Voorburg: Zandberg 2010).

¹²⁵ Cf. G. Steinmetz, The Devil’s Handwriting: Precoloniality and German Colonial State in Qingdao, Samoa and Southwest Africa (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2007), 113.

¹²⁶ H. Lang & C. Limpricht, ‘The Trek of the Rehoboth Basters’, in C. Limpricht (ed.), Namibia Past & Present (Hamburg: C. Limpricht, 2012), 10.

¹²⁷ P. Pearson, The History and Social Structure of the Rehoboth (Namibia) Baster Community, M.A. dissertation (Johannesburg: University of Witwatersrand, 1986), 52.

¹²⁸ Pearson, The History and Social Structure…, 53-54.

¹²⁹ G.J.J. Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks van die Staatkundige Verhouding tussen Suidwes-Afrika en Suid-Afrika, 1915-1939, PhD dissertation (Potchefstroom: Potchefstroomse Universiteit Vir Christelike Hoër Onderwys, 1993), 6.

¹³⁰ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 6.

¹³¹ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 6.

¹³² R.G. Britz, H. Lang & C. Limpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters tot 1990 (Windhoek/Göttingen: Klaus Hess Publishers, 1999), 7.

¹³³ Pearson, The History and Social Structure …, 53.

¹³⁴ Pearson, The History and Social Structure …, 54.

¹³⁵ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 8.

¹³⁶ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 8.

¹³⁷ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 8.

¹³⁸ Pearson, The History and Social Structure …, 58.

¹³⁹ Pearson, The History and Social Structure…, 58.

¹⁴⁰ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 11-12.

¹⁴¹ Lang & Limpricht, ‘The Trek of the Rehoboth Basters’, 10

¹⁴² Pearson, The History and Social Structure…, 60.

¹⁴³ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 12.

¹⁴⁴ K. Kjæret & K. Stokke, ‘Rehoboth Baster, Namibian or Namibian Baster? An Analysis of National Discourses in Rehoboth, Namibia’, Nations and Nationalism 9/4 (2013), 584.

¹⁴⁵ H. Lang, ‘The Population Development of the Rehoboth Basters’, Anthropos 93 (1998), 381.

¹⁴⁶ Britz, Lang & Limpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters tot 1990, 9.

¹⁴⁷ Britz, Lang & Limpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters tot 1990, 13.

¹⁴⁸ Pearson, The History and Social Structure…, 16.

¹⁴⁹ Pearson, The History and Social Structure…, 16.

¹⁵⁰ Britz, Lang & Limpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters…, 12.

¹⁵¹ Britz, Lang & Limpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters…, 12.

¹⁵² Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 16.

¹⁵³ Pearson, The History and Social Structure…, 65.

¹⁵⁴ Britz, Lang & Limpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters…, 15.

¹⁵⁵ Britz, Lang & Limpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters…, 15.

¹⁵⁶ Quoted in Pearson, The History and Social Structure…, 65.

¹⁵⁷ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 16.

¹⁵⁸ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 16.

¹⁵⁹ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 16.

¹⁶⁰ R.D. Britz, 1970 ons eeufees: 1870-1970 (Windhoek/Rehoboth: -, 1970), 15.

¹⁶¹ Pearson, The History and Social Structure…, 70-71.

¹⁶² Pearson, The History and Social Structure…, 71.

¹⁶³ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 20.

¹⁶⁴ Oosthuizen, Die Rehoboth Basters binne die Konteks…, 21.

¹⁶⁵ Britz, Lang & Limpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters…, 16.

¹⁶⁶ Lang, ‘The Population Development of the Rehoboth Basters’, 382.

¹⁶⁷ Lang, ‘The Population Development of the Rehoboth Basters’, 382.

¹⁶⁸ Britz, Lang & Limpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters…, 15.

¹⁶⁹ Britz, Lang & Limpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters…, 17.

¹⁷⁰ Britz, Lang & Lmpricht, Beknopte Geskiedenis van die Rehoboth Basters…, 16.