The FT at the UP celebrates its centenary in 2017. This coincides with a renewed urgency for free, decolonised education, fuelled by student protests on campuses across the national landscape but also by theoretical discourse. Considering the transformation of curricula in SA today, in all disciplines but also in theology, cannot be done in isolation from the changing socio-historical and political-economic context of SA.

The main title of our chapter is ‘transforming curricula into the next century’. This chapter aims to contribute in a small way towards imagining what curricula might look like as we enter into the next 100 years of theological education at a public university in the South African context. It can however not do so without also (very briefly) acknowledging the story of theological education at this institution in the first 100 years. ‘Transforming curricula’ is used in a way similar to Bosch’s (1991) concept of ‘transforming mission’. Not only does it speak about the transformation of curricula in terms of politics, preferences and praxis, to use the language of Steve de Gruchy (2003:451–466), as well as pedagogical approach, but it also speaks of theological curricula itself having a transformational impact on people, communities and the construction of theology itself.

A common thread in the commitments of both these centres is their actions with and on behalf of communities facing immense poverty and exclusion, aiming to facilitate healthy and sustainable communities. These are loaded and contested terms, but in the course of this chapter, we shall explicate our meaning in the use of these terms

We consider the transformation of curricula as doing theology collaboratively with local communities in line with the Faculty Research Theme entitled ‘Ecodomy: Life in fullness’ (Faculty of Theology 2013). We do, however, consider this research theme critically in the light of Letty Russell’s work (1987:25–28) Household of freedom, hoping to contribute to freeing the theme from the risk of institutional smothering. At the same time, we allow for the theme itself to help liberate and transform curricula in order to enable a new vision and consciousness for building and multiplying ‘households of freedom’ as prophetic alternatives in our ‘global household of bondage’. Local communities and households or families should be places that embody households of freedom and life, overcoming oppressive forces of bondage, exclusion and annihilation