Britz, R. M.d'Assonville, V. E.Pretorius, Johannes P.2016-12-132016-12-132005-11http://hdl.handle.net/11660/5222English: There is a possibility that in practising (church)history writing, certain perceptions about both the past as whole, as well as specific events in the past may be absorbed without evaluating them in the light of primary sources. Britz shows that conscious and unconscious characterizations play a too significant role in South African (church)historiography to be ignored. These characterizational representations do not rest on what can be inferred from primary historical documents. A perception found in Dutch Reformed Church historiography – especially evident in discussions about the South African church development during the 19th century – concerning the South African Baptists, is that the Baptist Church has had a negative influence on the South African ecclesiastical landscape. This perception can be found in the writings of Hanekom, Kotzé and Van der Watt. This study shows that this perception is not based on the study of primary sources. For the purpose of this study, an examination was made of 19th century Cape Dutch ecclesiastical magazines. These magazines were examined as ecclesiastical documents which both in their nature and their readership, could provide an analysis of the influence which Baptist circles had on the Cape Dutch Church, whether positive or negative. These sources do not only give a good impression of the historical framework within which this research was done, but also of the theological framework with which the Cape Dutch Church identified herself during that time. Two keywords are used in these magazines to report on the (South African) Baptists: "Anabaptists" and "Baptizers." Although the magazines hold that both of these groups had their origin in the 16th century Radical Reformation, and that both these groups reject infant baptism, a clear distinction is made between them. The "Anabaptists" were consistently portrayed negatively while the "Baptizers" were highly esteemed. The South African Baptists were reckoned under the "Baptizers." The official magazine of the Dutch Reformed Church, De Gereformeerde Kerkbode, even petitioned that the South African Baptists ("Baptizers") not be confused with the "Anabaptists." Finally, it will be shown that Hanekom and Kotzé did not take this positive evaluation of the (South African) Baptists into consideration. Furthermore, Van der Watt took their conclusions over almost verbatim. In this manner a perception arose which was, in all likelihood, based on theological considerations, without proper consideration of primary sources.Afrikaans: In die beoefening van (kerk)geskiedskrywing is dit moontlik dat sekere persepsies oor die verlede in die geheel, maar ook oor spesifieke aangeleenthede opgeneem word sonder om dit aan die hand van primêre bronne uit te klaar. Britz toon aan dat bewustelike en onbewustelike inbeeldings 'n te belangrike rol in die Suid-Afrikaanse (kerk)historiografie speel om geïgnoreer te word. "Dit [inbeeldings] berus nie op historiese aannames nie – dikwels is dit met teologiese oorwegings en verbandlegging verbind." 'n Persepsie wat in N.G. Kerk historiografie aangaande die Suid-Afrikaanse Baptiste voorkom, is dat die Baptiste Kerk in meer as een opsig 'n negatiewe invloed op die Suid-Afrikaanse kerklike samelewing gehad het. Die negatiewe invloed vanuit die Suid-Afrikaanse Baptiste kom in besprekings rondom die Suid-Afrikaanse kerklike ontwikkeling gedurende die 19de eeu voor. Die idee word veral by Hanekom, Kotze en Van der Watt aangetref. Hierdie studie toon aan dat dié "inbeelding" nie op historiese aannames berus nie. Om die doel te bereik is kerklike tydskrifte van die 19de eeu bestudeer. Die tydskrifte word na hulle aard – en in terme van leeskring – as ekklesiologiese dokumente bestudeer ten einde 'n analise van 'n invloed vanuit Baptiste kringe op die N.G. Kerk, hetsy positief of negatief, te beskryf. Hierdie bronne gee nie net 'n goeie beeld van die historiese raamwerk waarbinne hierdie navorsing gedoen word nie, maar ook van die teologiese raamwerk waarmee die Kaaps-Hollandse Kerk haarself in hierdie tyd geïdentifiseer het. In die tydskrifte word die terme "Wederdooper"/ "Herdooper" en "Doopsgezinden" aangetref wanneer daar oor die (Suid-Afrikaanse) Baptiste gepraat word. Alhoewel beide die "Wederdoopers" en die "Doopsgezinden" volgens die tydskrifte hulle oorsprong in die 16de eeuse Radikale Reformasie het en beide groepe die kinderdoop afwys, word daar 'n definitiewe onderskeid tussen die twee faksies gemaak. Die "Wederdoopers" word telkens negatief beoordeel terwyl die tydskrifte die "Doopsgezinden" hoog aanslaan. Die Baptiste is onder die "Doopsgezinden" gereken. In die amptelike tydskrif van die N.G. Kerk, De Gereformeerde Kerkbode in Zuid-Afrika, word daar selfs gepleit dat die Suid-Afrikaanse Baptiste ("Doopsgezinden") nie met die "Wederdoopers" verwar moet word nie. Laastens word aangetoon dat Hanekom en Kotze nie hierdie positiewe beoordeling van die Baptiste in die kerklike tydskrifte, uit N.G. Kerk oorsprong, in berekening gebring het nie. Ironies het hulle hulself eerder deur 'n opmerking wat deur Batts, 'n Baptiste historikus, gemaak is, laat lei. Hulle konklusies is bykans woordeliks deur Van der Watt opgeneem. Sodoende het 'n persepsie ontstaan wat waarskynlik op teologiese oorwegings gegrond is, sonder om primêre bronne in ag te neem.afDissertation (M.Th. (Church History and Polity))--University of the Free State, 2005Abraham FaureAnabaptists -- South Africa -- History -- 19th centuryDe Gereformeerde Kerkbode in Zuid-AfrikaDe HonigbyDoopsgezindenGroenewoudHet Nederduitsch Zuid-Afrikaansch TydschriftSpurgeonSouth African baptistsWederdoopersSouth Africa -- Church history -- 19th centuryDissertationUniversity of the Free State