This thesis brings together two fields of theological ideas. On the one hand, at the heart of Christian theology and faith are the person and work of Jesus Christ, centred on God's initiative of Atonement through the cross. Here God addresses the whole condition of creation and humanity, usually expressed in terms of dealing with sin. On the other hand, the growing field of Christian disability theology is seeking a positive theological account of disability, viewing it as an integral part of the variety of humanity, and resisting normate assumptions that cast what is regarded as disability in a wholly negative light. Drawing these fields together, does the way we think about the Atonement, and what God addresses and achieves through the Atonement, need to be disrupted and re-formed in light of the insights of disability theology? Conversely, if disability theology is to be distinctively Christian, should the Atonement play a far more foundational role within it than it has to date? If so, given the often negative juxtaposition of disability and sin within theology and in biblical texts, how is all this to come about? The approach taken is first to examine both of these fields and the extent of their current interaction. In particular, their use of ideas and metaphor are explored, to determine whether these provide the means for making that interaction more fruitful. However, the interaction is found to be partial at best, and the ideas and metaphors shared are not found to provide the means for the task at hand. Based on that work, however, a proposal is developed for reconsidering what sort of event the Atonement is, and the nature of God's presence within it. Building on insights from Frances Young, Jurgen Moltmann, Eberhard Jungel and Paul Fiddes, it is proposed that the Atonement should be understood as God's deepest, once for all participation in the risk (both moral and contingent) of creation, through which all that alienates us from God and each other is addressed. This opens up a theological space to talk of disability, sin and the cross together, one that does not require all aspects of what we identify as disability to fit into a binary sin/not sin analysis. This Atonement-as-participation also provides an account of the Atonement that is inherently inclusive of humanity in all its variety, where disability is not a special case. This enables God's initiative of the Atonement to function as a foundation for the various themes within disability theology as these continue to develop.

Submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Public Administration – Peace Studies, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa, 2017. / Zimbabwe is in dire need of wholesale reform. Gross human rights violations which date back to the pre-colonial period could have been abated in 1980 when the magnanimous policy of national reconciliation promised a new start. The watershed opportunity was, however, lost mainly because no deliberate efforts were made to account for the wrongs of the past in order to start afresh. The result was that Zimbabwe won the independence, but peace remained elusive. This is evidenced in the continued instability, insecurity and uncertainty. The non-retributive pledge had inherent weaknesses; it lacked inclusive participation, hence, no broad ownership. Simply drawing a line between the wounded past and the present, meant burying the past without the prerequisite rituals bent on ensuring non-recurrence. The futility of this blanket amnesty is evident in the sustained legacy of gross human rights abuses and impunity. Political violence has been institutionalised through politicisation of all aspects of life. This research is guided by Lederach’s reconciliation theory which uses Psalms 85:10 to emphasise the importance of commitment in converging the seemingly divergent aspects of truth, peace, justice and mercy into a ‘meeting place’ called reconciliation. Using a mixed methods approach, this research established that the invariably top-bottom approaches massage the symptoms rather than address the root causes of conflicts. The victims’ agitations for revenge and retribution prompted me to design action research processes aimed at engaging the research participants in interactive activities. The action research component aimed at sensitising participants to the merits of letting go of the burdens of the past, and to use scars as reminders of hope and not victimhood. The issues of forgiveness without apology, compensation or even remorse were contentious. However, through give-and-take concessions, the dialogue intervention yielded invaluable by-products such as maximisation of indigenous knowledge systems. Building on the participants’ input, sustainable healing and reconciliation can be achieved through deliberate truth-recovery, the right to justice, reparation, forgiveness and non-recurrence assurances. The research outcomes show that Zimbabwe urgently needs a ‘hybrid’ transitional justice framework based on inclusive participation. Inclusivity is critical because politicians are not necessarily experts in peacebuilding. The yet to be implemented National Peace and Reconciliation Commission can be used as a tool to seek public opinion on how to overcome the entrenched ‘fearology and militarism’ (Oberg 2016) ahead of the watershed 2018 general elections. Uncensored national debates can be used to gather information on the way forward. The multiple merits of Information Communication and Technology should be fully maximised in peacebuilding. / D