COMMENT - More propaganda. They can't complain about a lack of 'rule of law', and then turn around and not get the right police permits for gathering in the large groups they want to use to destabilize the country, so they can invite foreign troops to illegally invade the country, 'for humanitarian reasons'. Or continually call the president of the country 'Mugabe'. Either you believe in the rule of law and make it part of your election platform, or you don't.
Anglican primate urges Mugabe action
04/01/2012 00:00:00
by Staff Reporter I Agencies
THE Anglican Archbishop of Cape Town has called on President Robert Mugabe to put an end to persecution of the Anglican Church after state police broke up the annual prayer retreat of clergy from the Diocese of Harare.
About 80 diocesan priests were meeting at Peterhouse School in Marondera Tuesday when police intervened and halted the gathering, reportedly on the grounds that it had not received official legal clearance.
Cape Town Archbishop Thabo Makgoba, primate of the Anglican Church of Southern Africa, called the police action shocking and deplorable.
“I call on President Mugabe to ensure that the religious freedom of all Zimbabweans, and especially persecuted Anglicans, is respected, and to instruct the police to allow the churches freedom of assembly and worship,” Makgoba said in a Jan. 4 statement.
A statement released by the Harare diocese said: “We deplore this action and call upon higher authorities to intervene. So much for freedom of religion.”
Police spokesman, Oliver Mandipaka said the meeting had to be broken following concerns members of a splinter Anglican group led by Bishop Nolbert Kunonga, could have tried to meet in the same private school.
"Judging from past experiences, these meetings have turned violent. It was on that basis that we advised them to disperse," Oliver Mandipaka told the German news agency dpa.
"People must correctly interpret police actions. We were just being proactive.
"Weddings and churches do not need police clearances. But in the past these groups have clashed after gathering at the same venue. That is what we wanted to avoid."
Zimbabwe’s Anglicans have faced repeated harassment and violence from Mugabe’s police force since Bishop Nolbert Kunonga was excommunicated by the Church of the Province of Central Africa in May 2008.
A Mugabe ally, Kunonga still claims ownership of the diocese’s Anglican churches and backs the persecution of the country’s loyal Anglicans who are routinely intimidated and prevented from worshipping in their own church buildings.
Incumbent Anglican Bishop Chad Gandiya has led the Harare diocese since May 2009.
“We affirm Bishop Chad Gandiya, his clergy and people at this time,” Makgoba said in his statement.
“As they share in the sufferings of Christ, may they gain strength from the experience and never give in to a cynical and sinister government.”
Makgoba also called on “ecumenical friends and our partners in the Anglican Communion to ask their governments to put pressure on Zimbabwe to end this persecution.”
In October, Makgoba was joined by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and the archbishops of Central Africa and Tanzania in meeting with Mugabe, presenting him with a dossier of abuses against the Anglican Church and calling on him to “put an end to all unacceptable and illegal behavior.”
Labels: ANGLICAN CHURCH, MDC
Read more...
Rowan Williams: Between Lambeth and Harare
15/10/2011 00:00:00
by Nathaniel Manheru
"MUGABE and the White African" is in essence a David and Goliath story. Appalled by the state-orchestrated crimes against humanity on a massive scale countrywide, with horrific violence perpetrated against white commercial farmers, their farm workers and the rural population, a farming family takes on President Mugabe's government in a landmark court case heard by the Sadc Tribunal in Windhoek, Namibia. They know the risks, but they believe it is what God requires of them.
Set on Mount Carmel farm in the Chegutu district of Zimbabwe, this deeply moving book is the chronicle of a Christian family's struggle to survive, to protect the land it purchased legally from the government, and to protect the lives and livelihoods of all those working on the farm."
British State in Devotion
The past week has been a significant one for the Anglican Church, itself a schismatic offshoot of the Catholic Church, and the official Church of the State in the United Kingdom.
The last point, including the consequential role of the British Queen as the Head of that Church, is often overlooked in discussions of church, state and unfolding politics in and of Zimbabwe. We need to keep that dimension in mind, in which case we can soundly understand why in spite of the fact that Lambeth is not a State, the way that the Vatican is, its foremost official - the Archbishop - carries the aura of a head of state when on visits abroad, especially in countries with which Britain has had colonial links in the past.
The Anglican Church has evolved as the British State in worship or devotion. A cursory reading of the evolution of the British political and governmental system will clearly show its crucial near-ethereal role as the earthly agent for God's benediction on the British Monarch, the State, its apparatus and its minions.
The past week had seen the head of the Anglican Church, Archbishop Rowan Williams, paying a visit to Southern Africa, including Zimbabwe. The visit, particularly its Zimbabwean leg, was almost engulfed in controversy, something that guaranteed it maximum publicity.
Man who turned 80
A great week for the Anglican Church in another sense. One of its shepherds - now retired - hit 80, to great ululation, joy and fanfare. This was Archbishop Desmond Tutu who, alongside well-wishers, organised a great "bhavhadeyi".
Advertisement
It still remains to be explained to me how the same age zone that invites deep obloquy for Robert Mugabe, triggers jingle bells for Desmond Tutu.
Tibet and South Africa
But much more than jingle bells. The event also generated lots of bile and brickbats, this time against President Zuma's government. The good archbishop had decided, apparently without any reference to his Government, to invite the Dalai Lama, the Tibetan spiritual leader who has been a thorn in the flesh of the Chinese Government, so the spiritual leader could be part of the party. The South African Government would have none of that and they simply played a dilatory game with the protocol of visa granting, creating a situation where the bhavhadeyi passed before the Lama's papers were in place for his travel.
The Archbishop was furious, as was the Western world which has heavily invested in the spiritual leader to keep the sides of the rising dragon needled all the time by uncomfortable questions, uncomfortable situations. The script abroad was the Zuma Government had succumbed to pressure from the Chinese Government which would look dimly at any profile-raising concessions to it's spiritually suffused opponent.
The script went further. South Africa would not risk billions-worth of trade with the giant Chinese economy for the sake of a mere birth-marking ritual involving some old man, albeit spotting a collar on his shirtfront.
This was condemnable in the extreme, went the Western script and its multiple echoes in our subcontinent. Zuma, added these magisterial voices, had yet again fumbled on foreign policy, with Zimbabwe, Libya and many other areas being cited in accusatory illustration.
Expensive Birthday gift
This attack on Zuma, much of it quite gratuitous, should be deposed of with the swiftness it deserves. From flashes of anger which the media recorded from Archbishop Tutu, it is clear the cleric expected an expensive gift from the South African government, all to mark the occasion. He expected the South African government to indulge him, all to the value of billion upon billions of dollars in Chinese trade which South Africa was sure to forego in consequence.
That was going to be the dollar value of the gift Tutu expected from the South African Government. Turn that into jobs, or some other welfare index, and you graphically quantify the sacrifice Tutu hoped from South Africa's poor, never mind that the link between trade with China and benefits to the poor should never be posited as obviously given.
I have not yet mentioned the fact that South Africa and China both belong to Brics, an alliance which we all hope can be nurtured into a meaningful counterpoise to arrogant American and European global dominance.
What was being asked of Zuma was that Tutu's birthday soar above the foreign policy of South Africa, indeed play first fiddle to South Africa's strategic interests in Asia. No one cared to explain how and why a matter between China and the West, a matter between China and her religiously recalcitrant citizen, should excise South Africa. Or why a citizen of South Africa, simply on the strength of worn-out Anglican robes, should found and consecrate friendship outside of, insensitive to, and defiant of the foreign policy concerns of his government and State. Or why he should piously remonstrate with that offended State for not bending low to wipe clean his dirty feet and sandals, so entangled in a worthless of ecumenical friendship.
Bad for the gander
The argument goes deeper. This year alone we saw Western leaders, including American and British leaders beat the road to China, begging bowl beneath the robes of haughty Caucasian pride.
The China they were now visiting was far, far different from the China of servile urchins in the days of the Opium Wars, and the subsequent triple occupation of Shanghai. To this day Shanghai bears its triple disfigurement: a third of it British, another third French and the last third American. They were now paying visits to a new, roaring China with trillions of American dollars in reserves, a mighty China playing donor to virtually all western economies, so buffeted, so much in financial turmoil.
However much their liberal media howled - and howl they did - all the leaders steered clean of any controversies, indeed punctiliously ensured great China was not, would not be, offended by extraneous issues, including human rights and the rights of the Tibetan people as led by their spiritual leader.
Were they leaving this very sensitive matter to South Africa to raise at her own expense in the month of October, towards the end of the year of our Lord two thousand and eleven? They, and only they, have the right to shelve larger matters in deference to their immediate needs and strategic interests. We don't. We do not have that latitude to pass over matters which injure the pursuit of our interests? We are obligated to raise such touchy issues for the sake of Europe, America and the idealisms of western liberalism?
Above all, how come the Queen never invites the Dalai Lama on the occasion of her birthday? Or Robert Mugabe? Or wa Mutharika? Or Ahmadinejad? Or Chavez? Or Castro? Or better still the spiritual leader in Iran?
When will our own people realise the value of harmonising their pursuits with the larger interests of their nation, rather than generating valueless dilemmas and controversies for their Governments, all for personal fame and glory?
Divided Anglicans
I want to go back to the visit to Zimbabwe by Rowan Williams, the head of the Anglican Church. Until on the eve of his departure from Malawi, itself the headquarters of the Anglican Province of Central Africa, the man of God was content to call his trip a pastoral one, with the prime purpose of sharing the worship with his brethren in Zimbabwe.
Appropriately, the Archbishop could not peg enormous cosmic goals to his mission. Unlike the Catholic Church whose spiritual epicentre is the Vatican, whose spiritual head is the Pope, the Anglican church pretends a diffused, non-hierarchical order whose hub is the "province" in a given geographical region which must give direction to parishes under it. As is now well known, the province of Central Africa to which the Zimbabwean Anglican Church is, or was, affiliated, depending of course on where you stand vis-à-vis the current controversy, was torn apart a few years back on account of the gay question. It is a divided church, bitterly divided.
Divided by Caesar's things
And because the Zimbabwean church wields the financial wherewithal, this controversy has become a dispute over church assets and resources. It pays to remember that throughout the colonial days, the Anglican Church in Rhodesia stood by successive colonial governments, which is how it was able to accumulate fabulous wealth by way of real estate, orphanage and educational business.
It was a church of settler and racist conformity, by and large, which is why conscience-led bishops like Knight Bruce soon lost to Bishop Burrough who openly endorsed UDI and consecrated soldiers before their deployment for wanton, genocidal "kills" of natives. The sheer financial muscle of the Zimbabwean Anglican Church explains why its schism has sucked in the whole of Southern Africa.
The rich simmer
Much worse, unable to marshal a common position on the land issue, the Zimbabwean church soon found its bishopric badly divided in a way that mirrored the larger political divide in the country. It is simply dishonest to call Kunonga a "Mugabe" or a "Zanu-PF" bishop without acknowledging the MDC-T politics so explicitly "embedded" in Gandiya, Bakare, etc, etc.
The matter gets even more entangled when you bring in Julius Makoni, that faction's latest catch through a nexus of relationships.
The Anglican pulpit has been heavily politicised and I challenge any of its bishops to swear by the holy book that they have not pledged their allegiance to competing political parties, to the princes of power! That situation has created quite an explosive concoction for the church: gays, land, property and politics.
You add the issue of relations with Britain, and the pot simply gets thicker than poor porridge after a very long simmer. I am not even bringing in the juridical dimension. Such is the church the archbishop came to, and it is not a surprise he needed a large entourage from the whole Province to fortify his own courage.
Gathering interest
Until the Archbishop made a suggestive if not incriminating comment on the eve of his departure for Harare, no one in position of authority in Zimbabwe took much notice of his mission. The interest had remained strictly journalistic: had the Archbishop sought audience with the President; was the President going to meet with the Archbishop, etc, etc. Beyond that, the sun rose from the east, set in the west, both to no cloud cover or rumbling thunder.
In fact the sending church in the UK was more excited about the trip than the host society, never mind the jostling and jockeying that visibly picked pitch within the Zimbabwean Anglican church itself. That was hardly new to this quarrelsome church. But the moment the Archbishop spoke of raising the issue of division and persecution in the Anglican Church with President Mugabe, aggressive interest gathered within the country. The Archbishop's homily inside the country reinforced this eagerness to engage him.
Matters of morality
In a well-calculated pre-emptive denunciation of colonialism, he raised issues of post-independence governance, hoping his fawned anti-colonial tirade had secured him all-time insurance against instant retort founded on the historical culpability of the Anglican Church as a partner in genocidal colonialism.
And of course the well-attended church service in Harare gave him and his Gandiya faction an illusion of carrying the bigger moiety of the deeply divided church. Here and ahead of his arrival, the church had distanced itself from homosexuality, stressing the Church did not condone such a moral monstrosity. The announcement was a calculated pre-emption, meant to leave Kunonga and his group with no cause, no grievance.
Later, the Archbishop would seal the argument through a highly intellectualised argument to the effect that the Church, while scornful of homosexuality, respected homosexuals as human beings entitled to dignity and respect in their deviance. After all, American churches which had sanctified homosexuality belonged to another province which had no lordship over the rest. That way, the matter was deposed. Or so the Archbishop thought.
Dossier for publicity
Sanctions? Well, the Archbishop insisted he had not been favoured with evidence of hurtful sanctions in the country and thus could not react to the matter. As far as he had heard and read, sanctions in Zimbabwe were targeted. And to overwrite this touchy subject, he presented the President with a dossier on the persecution of the Anglican Church in Zimbabwe, urging the President to intervene to end it.
The dossier was soon published on the internet for wider reading. It thus became a public document, never privileged communication between a Church anxious for some resolution and a Head of State whose intervention it implored. And like most Western officials, the Archbishop had also been asked to assess the health and mental acuity of the President. To the disappointment of those interested in that side of the President, the Archbishop gave the man a clean bill of health, at least as confirmed by the faith stethoscope!
Flying British Kite
Now let's deal with the hard balls of this narrative, without fear, without favour. The decision by the Archbishop to visit Harare generated lots of controversies within Britain itself. Would he be well received? Would he not present Mugabe with a propaganda coup? Would he not legitimise Mugabe, thereby redeeming him from splendid isolation?
Such worries, so acutely and fervently put, attested to the fact that in the visit, the British State was in fact breaking with its self-imposed protocol, to initiate contacts with President Mugabe and his Government. It had invested heavily in the visit which played deep stick to bilateral relations. Indeed, the Archbishop received the courtesies of a foreign official, including State security.
Alongside that visit was an opinion filtered through a think-tank linked to the British establishment. This Commonwealth think-tank suggested the impending Chogm be used to make overtures to Zimbabwe.
Expectedly, a British Minister moved in to shoot down the suggestion, seemingly making tougher demands on Zimbabwe. But the purpose had been served: the balloon had been flown, the idea of re-engaging Zimbabwe had been placed in the public domain without binding the British Government, indeed with all the safeguards against a public fallout well in place.
Indeed, opinion leaders in quality British papers proceeded to hail Lambeth for having a better foreign policy than Whitehall, urging the British Government to do better! One perfectly understands the game in town. It would be quite naive, if not foolish, for the divided Anglican church to visualise itself as the subject matter of the week. Simply, it was not. Much worse, it would be downright silly and idealistic for its bishops to imagine their differences can find resolution outside of the abiding question pitting Zimbabwe against Britain, indeed finding play in sanctions.
Questions for Gandiya
Which takes me to my first charge against Bishop Gandiya and all those he leads. Why did he not prepare a dossier against sanctions for presentation to the Archbishop? Does he think this country is not under sanctions? Does he think that his Anglican laity, Elijah-like, enjoy a sanctions-free universe that hovers above all of us, flying well beyond and above sanctions and the travails they spawn?
Or is his denial of sanctions secular, in which case he needs to tell us in what way it differs from that of MDC-T? Could this provide a clue to the politics of his faction in the church, as well as its appeal to the mother church in Britain which is at one with the British Government both historically and in terms of contemporary politics? That the issue of gays is but the icing on the cake to this untoward dalliance?
Clearly the effort in compiling a dossier on alleged persecution is just about what was required in compiling a dossier on sanctions which have affected church schools, hospitals, orphanages, followers, etc, etc. Or is the church unconcerned, the same way it was under Ian Smith except where white interests are concerned? I hope the good bishop noticed that among the worshipers who came to meet the Archbishop were Zanu-PF office holders who cannot be indifferent to sanctions, and whose presence cannot be interpreted as endorsement of his politics with their attendant blind sports.
Ecclesiastical colonialism
My second question to the bishop gets me agitated. At no time did the bishop seek audience with the President. Why? Was he waiting for the Archbishop's intercession? To achieve what? Personal profile? Greater damnation for the President? A strong image of a persecuted Church later to translate to greater gifts to that church? Clearly there are real moral and political issues which are at stake and which will not go away.
While the local church thinks it has ducked the issue of gays and their so-called rights, hardly had the Archbishop's footmarks evaporated on our land than had the British Government announced a policy tying its own overseas aid support to gay rights. The British State is clearly enforcing an eleventh commandment through its alleged financial power over the Third World.
The idea of a local bishop by-passing the State President and the Committee set up to resolve that matter, to reach a British Archbishop reeks of ecclesiastical colonialism of the worst order. Such a disposition does not build a national church; rather, it builds some church in Zimbabwe appended to Lambeth. Needless to say such power relations in an institution so steeped in history and governmental politics implies not just a political outlook, but also a disturbing answer to the current stand-off between Britain and Zimbabwe.
However holy this holy man of Lambeth may be, he cannot be our father who art in Britain, and Bishop Gandiya should know that. He is a mere believer whose efforts heavenwards trigger numerous questions in all of us, whether religious or cultural.
National institutions
Bishop Gandiya did more to entangle his own skein. He went to the courts. Later, he abandoned the same courts, followed by a not so holy scent of a bad loser. He turned to Lambeth, denouncing a national institution of the Bench which he had freely accosted, before which he had placed holy matters he and his brethren should have resolved anyway, well away from secular institutions.
As I write, he is back in the courts, and has just been awarded a favourable judgement. What attitude does he now adopt with regards to the Bench? That it is good and competent only when he wins? It is a very poor showing by a holy man, but also a showing passing as a reminiscent echo from a political party we know from some electoral past.
Could we be looking at the same strategy and tactic? Looking at the same brains behind the same campaign whose objective is ultimately to trash the Bench? I have a problem with politics which seek to overrun national institutions and discourse, while apotheosising the outsider as the answer we are looking for.
Sin in Anglican robes
I opened this piece with a quote. I am sure the gentle reader is wondering whose statement that is, and what relevance it has to this article. Well, the quote is from Archbishop Desmond Tutu. The words are part of his foreword to Ben Freeth's book titled "Mugabe and the White African".
In fact, the book has two Anglican voices, one from Tutu and another from Archbishop Sentamu. Curiously Sentamu is Ugandan-born Anglican cleric now ministering in York, in Britain. More curiously, the endnote to his preface to the same book reads: "We, the people of Britain and the United Nations, need to hear the voices of our own consciences and heed the cries of the suffering people of Zimbabwe."
The cause which Archbishop Tutu biblically dismisses as comparable to that of Goliath is that of our Land. Put differently, the cause which the holy man beatifies as Davidian, is that of Rhodesia's settlers whom he thinks should not have lost the land. Sentamu sees himself as part of Britain; Tutu as an arbiter of the interests of Britain's kith and kin here.
The South African Archbishop mistakenly thinks Freeth and his ilk lost land they had bought from the Zimbabwe Government. Freeth himself does not feel burdened to say so in his narrative, which clearly related to a settler community whose land rights preceded Zimbabwe. Was the archbishop misled? Did he write the foreword? Archbishop Tutu thinks he is defending a Christian "white African".
Freeth does not feel constrained to prove his African parentage, real or vicarious. He clearly visualises himself as a superior white man from Scotland, subsequently adopted by settler Rhodesia, and seeking to exorcise the powerful evil demon afflicting the otherwise "noble African savage". And I am not quoting Joseph Conrad. I am quoting Tutu's Christian Freeth.
As I write, the Sadc Tribunal which Tutu worshipfully regards as that which sets right the sins of this world, has been disbanded by a full Summit of Sadc. Again Tutu has wrong-footed his Governments, all for personal fame. To all that add his demand soon after South Africa's independence, demand that Zimbabwe releases white terrorists who had bombed ANC cadres here, and a worrisome picture emerges, fully dressed in Anglican robes. What has become of the Anglican Church? Can someone tell me? Icho!
Labels: ANGLICAN CHURCH, BEN FREETH, NATHANIEL MANHERU, RACISM, RHODESIA
Read more...
We need religious cleansing - Sata
By Patson Chilemba and Chibaula Silwamba
Wed 12 Oct. 2011, 13:00 CAT
ZAMBIA needs a lot of religious cleansing, says President Michael Sata. And visiting Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams said the Anglican Church was encouraged by President Sata and the PF's commitment to just taxation.
Meanwhile, Dr Kenneth Kaunda says the Anglican Church has been part of the world for a long time, spreading the word of God to the people. Speaking when Archbishop Williams paid a courtesy call on him at State House yesterday, President Sata reaffirmed his commitment to governing the country based on the biblical 10 commandments.
"I am very grateful for your coming to Zambia. We need lots of religious cleansing…I am very grateful and I said this government shall be ruled on the Biblical terms. This government shall be ruled by the 10 Commandments," President Sata said. "It's within those 10 Commandments all the laws of the world, that's where they come from and that's how we are going to rule."
President Sata said he received a lot of support from the British government when he served in several ministerial portfolios, and was sure that he would get enough support now that he was President.
He said most things had not gone right in the last 20 years as the country drifted away from the West to seek new friends.
President Sata said although Zambia was a one party state during Dr Kaunda's reign, the country remained close to the West and achieved much success.
"But when we drifted away to look for new friends, when they brought equipment we had to look for interpreters and interpreters are very costly," he said.
And responding to Archbishop Williams who wanted to know how the issue of refugees was being addressed in Zambia, President Sata said Zambia had always looked after its brothers and sisters who were displaced from their countries, and that there were still several of them residing in the country.
He said some did not want to go back to their countries even though conditions in their homelands had improved because they felt more comfortable living here.
President Sata said the former ruling MMD government found it convenient to use refugees for rigging elections.
"And we have one case now where one refugee was elected member of parliament, it's most unfortunate, in Western Province. Now this is not his fault, it was the fault of the former government because the former government took advantage of refugees, they gave them national registration cards NRCs, they gave them voters cards in their continuous rigging of the elections," President Sata said.
"So this was a clever refugee, to say ‘if I have an NRC and I have a voters card them I qualify to be MP'. And he was popular and the refugees voted for him and he is MP in Western Province. But we are saying that in the Bible they say ‘I was sick, you denied me a visit….I was thirsty you denied me water'."
President Sata said it was not the refugees' fault that they had been displaced from their countries, saying the government would look after them and see how they could integrate before they went back to their countries.
He said he was thankful for the role the Church was playing in the fight against HIV, adding that the pandemic could be addressed by providing people with sources of livelihood.
President Sata appealed to Archbishop Williams to send more priests to the country in order for them to do pastoral work.
And Archbishop Williams said it seemed this was a very exciting time for Zambia and wished President Sata's government well in the many creative projects they were signaling to the world.
He inquired from President Sata in the areas he felt the Anglican Church could help in the development of the country because the Church had a strong belief that the welfare and growth of their communion was everybody's concern.
Archbishop Williams said this had been expressed over the years in various partnerships between the Church in Britain and the one in Zambia.
He said he appreciated the grassroots work the Church was involved in, such as health care, environmental concerns and pastoral work.
"We are encouraged by your own commitment to just taxation practices, to the rebuilding and strengthening of the Zambian economy through a fair approach to international multi-national presences here," Archbishop Williams said. "We would want to support that and regard that as a matter of justice and good practice. We wish you well in your efforts to make that a fruitful future."
During the meeting, British High Commissioner to Zambia Tom Carter presented a congratulatory letter from his country's Prime Minister David Cameron to President Sata over the PF's victory in last month's general elections.
And speaking when he met Archbishop Williams after his State House visit, Dr Kaunda said the Anglican Church had been part of the world for a long time spreading the word of God to the people.
"We live in a world of competing interests. A world that desperately needs spiritual guidance and healing so that we can live in peace as brothers and sisters irrespective of race, colour, tribe or even faith," Dr Kaunda said. "In my humble view, the Anglican Church has played an important role in fulfilling our shared objective to live in peace and harmony in this our one world."
Archbishop Williams praised Dr Kaunda for setting a moral foundation for Zambia.
And on arrival at Kenneth Kaunda International Airport around 09.15 hours, Archbishop Williams said Zambia had a strong Christian heritage from the beginning of its independence.
He said the country's leaders had been formed by Christian principles of justice, harmony, peace and entertaining democratic rights for all, saying this was part of the Christian gospel and teaching, which he hoped would continue.
Labels: ANGLICAN CHURCH, KENNETH KAUNDA, MICHAEL SATA
Read more...
Chief Justice speaks on Anglican row
Saturday, 01 October 2011 00:00
Daniel Nemukuyu Senior Court Reporter
CHIEF Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku has blasted the Bishop Chad Gandiya-led faction of the Anglican Church for seeking political intervention in the long-drawn property ownership wrangle still pending before the courts. This, the Chief Justice said, was tantamount to interference with the independence of the judiciary.
The Gandiya faction is aligned to the Church of the Province of Central Africa (CPCA). Chief Justice Chidyausiku recently threw out an appeal by the Gandiya faction in which they were challenging the High Court's judgment granting the Diocese of Harare to a faction led by Bishop Nolbert Kunonga.
CPCA has filed a Constitutional application challenging the recent decision of the Supreme Court as well as several applications to stop the execution of the judgment.
After the dismissal of the appeal, the Kunonga faction took control of some of the church property on the strength of the High Court order.
Now the Gandiya-faction faction is alleged to have written to the Supreme Court seeking to meet Chief Justice Chidyausiku for the sake of pushing for the hearing of other pending court cases related to the issue.
The Herald is reliably informed that one of the retired bishops of the Gandiya faction got to an extent of writing to Justice and Legal Affairs Minister Patrick Chinamasa after the dismissal of the Supreme Court appeal.
To this, end the Chief Justice felt the conduct amounted to interference with the justice delivery system.
After the last meeting of September 28, the Chief Justice instructed the registrar of the Supreme Court to write to the parties warning them against seeking political intervention in judicial matters.
"In view of the persistent attempts by the litigants in this matter, in particular the applicant (Church of Central Africa), to try and influence the outcome of this matter outside the judicial process, no further applications will be entertained from either party except in open court...
ALSO SEE
* Anglican church properties to remain under Bishop Kunonga
* Govt probes evictions at Anglican Church-run schools
"The issues set out above can only be determined by the Supreme Court. I accordingly take great exception to conduct undermining the independence of the judicial process by seeking political intervention in judicial matters," part of the letter read.
The judge said that all the pending Anglican cases in the Supreme Court should be dealt with at once.
He said the matter would either be consolidated or set down before the same court on the same date or one after the other.
The letter sent to Gill Godlonton and Gerrans who are acting for the CPCA and to Chikumbirike and Associates who are representing the Diocese of Harare.
In a letter purportedly written to Minister Chinamasa by Bishop Peter Hatendi on September 23 this year, he was seeking the Minister's assistance in having the Chief Justice recuse himself from handling Anglican cases.
"The church of the province of Central Africa has made a Constitutional appeal against the judgment of Chief Justice Chidyausiku dated August 4 2011 in chambers and requested him to recuse himself.
"Will you assist in the processing of the appeal. I am writing just in case, I am unable to meet you in your office due to your heavy schedule.
"I am founder chairman of an autonomous think-tank whose task is brainstorming on the crisis facing the Anglican Diocese of Harare. By the grace of God, I was the founder Bishop in 1981 and was responsible for reconstruction of rural and urban churches, schools and clinics that were razed to the ground during the war and the construction of new structures.
"My successor Dr Nolbert Kunonga grabbed both the old and the new structures when he resigned in 2007.
"Where is commutative justice to be found save in our courts of law? I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible, please," the letter read.
Labels: ANGLICAN CHURCH
Read more...
Archbishop Kunonga: I’m no Zanu-PF puppet
Posted by By Our reporter at 30 September, at 02 : 45 AM
ANGLICAN Archbishop Nolbert Kunonga says he is not a Zanu-PF puppet and described the intended visit by the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams as a propaganda mission to extend British interests in Zimbabwe.
He said Dr Williams (pictured right) was a British, “civil servant on a mission”. Speaking to journalists yesterday, Archbishop Kunonga said he supported democracy that involved the passing on of natural resources to people. He said he spoke his mind in his capacity as a church leader and not as a Zanu-PF activist.
“I do not need any favours from anyone. I am fighting for this land, mines, natural resources of this land and economic power, which is in the hands of the whites. That’s my fight with the British.
“I am not a puppet of Zanu-PF and if I am a puppet, then I am a proud and educated puppet,” he said.
Archbishop Kunonga said Dr Williams was a nonentity and was coming to lobby for homosexuality.
“The Anglican Church is a political organisation when it is in England. Rowan William was appointed by the Queen and the Prime Minister and he is a civil servant of Britain.
“In a political and economic environment, the civil servant represents and symbolises with his State.
“He is a diplomat like Charles Ray (US Ambassador). He is coming to represent neo-colonialism. He is coming to lobby for homosexuality and for him it is a timely move as we are making our Constitution,” he said.
Labels: ANGLICAN CHURCH
Read more...
Archbishop of Canterbury to meet Mugabe
08/09/2011 00:00:00
by Staff Reporter
THE head of the Anglican Church Rowan Williams will meet President Robert Mugabe on a visit to Zimbabwe in October, Lamberth Palace confirmed on Wednesday.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, the spiritual head of the 77 million strong worldwide Anglican Communion, will become the first high profile British figure to visit Harare in almost a decade.
High on his agenda will be the alleged persecution of the church’s members by renegade bishop Nolbert Kunonga, who has also seized Anglican properties.
In January, Williams wrote an open letter to President Mugabe urging him to "put an end to these abuses forthwith", adding: "We are convinced that the unmerited, unjust, and unlawful persecution of the members of the Anglican Church in Zimbabwe damages further the good name and reputation of the Republic of Zimbabwe and results in untold and unnecessary additional suffering for many thousands of people."
He will also make stops in Malawi and Zambia as part of "a pastoral visit to show support for the Anglican Church there," said Marie Papworth, media director at Lambeth Palace in London.
The Anglican Church in Zimbabwe has been in turmoil since 2007 after Kunonga, criticising what he said were liberal attitudes toward homosexuality, tried to remove the Diocese of Harare from the Anglican Communion, the worldwide community of Anglican churches.
In 2008, Kunonga was excommunicated from the communion, but as an ally of Mugabe he and his supporters were able to seize churches and other properties.
A recent Supreme Court decision gave custody of Anglican properties to Kunonga, whose henchmen began harassing worshippers and evicting priests from rectories. One priest was severely beaten when he refused to leave his house, the diocese reported.
The diocese has appealed the August 4 ruling by Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku.
The current bishop, recognised by the Anglican Communion, is Chad Gandiya. He said on Wednesday that "there are parishioners being banned from church buildings by Kunonga with help of the police. They are worshipping in open spaces, under trees or booking other church buildings."
Reverend Julius Zimbudzana was detained by police at his home near St Mary’s Anglican Church in northern Harare on Tuesday accused of stealing church property worth US$1,5 million.
Bishop Gandiya said the accusations against Zimbudzana were "unfounded, baseless and very strange". He said the incident was the latest in a campaign of intimidation against Anglicans who have remained loyal to the central church.
Gandiya said no parish in the Zimbabwe diocese owned property worth US$1,5 million.
Labels: ANGLICAN CHURCH, ROBERT MUGABE
Read more...
William Banda will destroy the country, warns clergyman
By Abigail Chaponda in Ndola
Tue 01 June 2010, 04:30 CAT
ANGLICAN Cathedral of Holy Nativity dean Fr Samuel Zulu has warned that Lusaka Province MMD chairman William Banda will destroy the country with his violent messages.
In an interview yesterday, Fr Zulu expressed displeasure that Banda was brewing violence in the country and the government was not doing anything about it.
“Whenever William Banda opens his mouth, he speaks nothing but violence. I wonder what the government is doing about it. If I had a way, I would not be paying the TV licence because William Banda is given a lot of coverage and doesn’t say anything positive,” he said.
“If William Banda was from the opposition, the government would have shut him a long time. Look at what happened in Mufumbwe, who started that violence, it was William Banda. That man should be put in his right place because he is not doing anyone good.”
Fr Zulu said peace was important in the country and that if the government was not careful, Banda would destroy it with his violence.
He said if Banda wanted to fight, he should go somewhere else because he was a danger to the security of the nation.
“Wherever you hear William Banda, you will hear violence. Enough is enough, William Banda is not President Rupiah Banda, his violence should be stopped before he drags the country into war. Why is the government allowing William Banda to do whatever he wants? Why is the government not doing anything about William Banda and why is the government supporting his violence,” he wondered.
Fr Zulu said the government should wake up from its slumber and cage Banda because his violence was getting out of hand.
“William is brewing destruction in this country and if he is not stopped, I can assure you that other political parties are going to think that violence is the way to solve issues and they will join in the violence and what is going to become of this country? William Banda should be stopped, and now!” said Fr Zulu.
Labels: ANGLICAN CHURCH, POLITICAL VIOLENCE, SAMUEL ZULU, WILLIAM BANDA
Read more...
‘Anglican Parishioner’ missed the real point
EDITOR — I hope this time around you will find it expedient to publish this letter in your widely-read paper, as it is, in fact, my reply and comment to the letter entitled "Bishops, priests don’t own Anglican Church" by an anonymous "Anglican Parishioner", which you published on December 25 , 2009.
In my view, the "Anglican Parishioner" is not terribly clear about his use of the phrase "Anglican Church" — whether he means the Harare Anglican Church as a building or the Anglican Church as a faith practised by Anglicans the world over.
Nevertheless, I am inclined to deduce that it is about the "ownership" of the Cathedral Church and its other church buildings in the Anglican Diocese of Harare in our Zimbabwean setting.
In order to clarify and remove any doubts or misunderstandings as to which bishop or which Anglican faction now owns the Anglican Cathedral in Harare and all the other church buildings in the Diocese of Harare, I quote hereunder what the High Court ordered on July 24 2009.
1. "It is ordered: that the following persons be and are hereby declared the Diocesan Trustees of the Diocese of Harare who constitute the Diocesan Board:
a) Bishop Dr Nolbert Kunonga
b) Some seven listed current Trustees (directly under the charge, control, leadership, chairmanship and headed by the legitimately installed and enthroned Dr Bishop Kunonga
(D.D)
1. That the property of the Diocese of Harare whether movable or immovable owned by the Church within the Diocese of Harare vests in the Diocesan Trustees mentioned in paragraph one above.
2. That the respondent (whoever he or she was) is hereby ordered to give vacant possession or occupation and control to the Diocesan Board within 7 (seven) days failing which the Deputy Sheriff with the assistance of ZRP is hereby authorised to take occupation or possession of any assets of the Diocese of Harare and to hand over any assets or possession to the board" (headed by Dr Nolbert Kunonga).
This in my humble submission is definitive and clearly orders the ZRP to help restore order and recover the property from "usurpers" to Bishop Kunonga’s control. There is no human rights violation by Chihuri’s police, we usually hear about. With my greatest respect to the justices and the "Anglican Parishioner", I totally fail to understand or fathom where the question of slots "or sharing of worshipping times with "invaders" or usurpers comes in now which some quarters’ advocate vehemently.
Rather baffling and intriguing indeed to me, to say the least!
This ownership of properties is further made abundantly clear by the "Acts", or Constitution of the Diocese or Harare, which is autonomous, by the way.
The constitution or Acts clearly state: "For the avoidance of doubt, it is declared that all property, whether movable or immovable, owned by the Church within the Diocese, of Harare is vested in the Diocesan Trustees . . ." (currently headed legally by Bishop Kunonga).
How clearer can this be, Mr Diocesan Parishioner?
Concerned Anglican.
Harare.
Labels: ANGLICAN CHURCH
Read more...
