More on the tragedy of Zimbabwe

This man, Nolbert Kunonga, pictured here wearing the collar and cloth of an Anglican bishop as befits his former position as Bishop of Harare, was once a professor of liberation theology in the US. Today, as we report in TimesOnline, he was unequivocally condemned by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, who professed himself 'appalled'. What happened?

A few years ago, Kunonga was charged with inciting militants to kill ten of his critics. The charges, in a church court, were dropped on the orders of the Primate of Central Africa, Bernard Malango, now retired.

Kunonga is a fierce supporter of Robert Mugabe. His loyalty to him and his ruling Zanu-PF party, expressed through the ordination of government ministers to replace clergy he expelled, was rewarded with the gift of a farm from which he evicted all 41 black families living there. Finally deposed by the province last month, on Saturday he announced the creation of a new Anglican Church of Zimbabwe and declared himself Archbishop.

Then yesterday, there was chaos in Harare as police in riot gear descended on various churches and priests and parishioners loyal to the Anglican Church's replacement, Sebastian Karare, were arrested. This is what the report from Zimbabwejournalist says:

Reports in Harare yesterday revealed armed police were disrupting church services in Harare, arresting at least three priests and a number of parishioners opposed to Kunonga who fell for the police bait and openly challenged the decision to allow the disgraced Bishop to take over against the will of the people.

Priests who were conducting services without Kunonga or police authorisation were dragged out of church and assaulted.

Harare diocese has been torn apart since Kunonga pulled the church out of the Church Province of Central Africa ostensibly because he opposed the province's stance on homosexuality.

As a result Kunonga was replaced with Bishop Sebastian Bakare and said Kunonga was no longer a member of the Anglican Church. But Kunonga and his followers have refused to recognise the new bishop's appointment, going on to form their own church.

Police this week sent a circular to all parishes ordering that only priests loyal to Kunonga were allowed to conduct services, resulting in the heavy deployment of security agents at a very high cost to the public purse.

In Glen View Kunonga has won the battle with the help of state security resulting in the hundreds of believers and their priest who is aligned to the new Bishop Bakare having to hire the nearby Methodist church to conduct their service.

Kunonga’s priest was forced to conduct a service with less that 10 people after having successfully dislodged the whole congregation.

Police paramilitaries in riot gear and carrying batons disrupted a service at St Elizabeth church in Harare's middle-income suburb of Belvedere, said church spokesperson Christopher Tapera.

"They disrupted the service and asked everyone to leave. One woman who was taking a video was arrested," he said.

In nearby Glen Norah, CIO operatives were heavily present together with the police resulting in the whole congregation of about 500 people opting to have their normal Sunday service outside.

“The whole congregation, like all the others here in Harare has said it is not going with Kunonga so when a Priest, Musopero, who is aligned to Kunonga came to lead us in the service with his wife and sister, the police and the CIO, the people decided it was better to leave them to it,” said one parish member who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The parish’s priest was involved in a road accident last week soon after refusing to align himself with Kunonga after the congregation had told him to choose which way he was going.

In the end two services were held at the St Francis Anglican Church in Glen Norah with the 500 attending their service which was led by a lay leader in threatening weather outside as Musopero ministered to three people inside the vast church and gave his sister and wife holy communion.

After the church the CIO operatives convened a meeting with the church leaders after witnessing the embarrassing situation affecting the group they came to protect.

Kunonga is just one of the crosses Zimbabwe's beleagured populace has to bear.

The Jesuit Missions last month released a video to bring to the world's attention the plight of Aids victims in Zimbabwe, and the country's desperate economic circumstances.

Musicians, Chris Birkett and Lee Ward, flew out to Zimbabwe to work with the Makumbi Children’s Choir with the purpose of recording the song for launch on World AIDS day.  One in five people are infected with HIV/Aids in Zimbabwe. At Makumbi Children’s Home many of the orphans have been abandoned by family members no longer able to shoulder the burden of caring for these young orphans who have lost their parents to Aids. ITN carried a report.

It all sometimes seems beyond hope, beyond the help of mortal man. No wonder John Sentamu has removed and cut up his clerical collar.

If that's not enough to make you weep, here's Zimbabwe's Silent Night:

 

Comments

[Geoffrey Smith]

For a Christian, Tom, no form of aggression is permissible, if by that you mean an unprovoked attack on you personally. If, however, you are acting entirely in SELF-defence, then violence is morally justified to ward off the evil. In the case of a kidnapped victim, it would be the duty of the local police to free the victim, using force if necessary. Again, action in self-defence to overpower hijackers is morally permissible for a Christian, even though such action would be violent and would end in the death of several passengers and/or crew.
If someone confronts you on the street with a gun, you can, in the words of the police, 'have a go', if you feel lucky. If you do get lucky, and kill your assailant, it is no crime or sin. Otherwise, you can adopt a pacifist attitude and allow the gunman to steal your property, but even then there is no guarantee that you will escape with your life!
When our Government decides to declare war on another country, it must have an air-tight case that a great evil has been committed which threatens the security and freedom of our country. I submit that no such threat would or could exist in the case of Zimbabwe. It did not exist in the case of Iraq, nor, I suggest, could it exist at any point in the future, assuming that we were not so foolish as to rid ourselves of our military might.
As the ancient Romans said: if you want peace, prepare for war.
In all these circumstances, Tom, we must never forget the Christian moral principle: evil must never be committed in order to achieve what we imagine would be a justifiable result, or that aggression can be
inflicted on an opponent. Self-defence, and only self-defence, is, for a Christian, morally justified.

[Tom Jackson]

"No, Tom, for Christians this is not the answer."

I am interested to know, Geoffrey, as a Christian, at what point would you consider some form of aggression as acceptable? Is it in self-defence? If you had irrefutable information that Madeleine McCann was being held captive in some North African village, would you consider aggressive action by the authorities to release her as acceptable?

If you were a passenger on a hijacked plane heading for New York, would you consider any action to overcome the terrorists "grossly immoral"?

It is a question of degree and perspective. If someone confronts me in the street with a gun, what do I do? In the same way, if those who have been elected to govern the nation in which I reside believe that a foreign country such as Iraq provides a serious danger to the UK or UK interests in the future, what do we do?

In a civilised manner, we try to resolve the matter peacefully. I reason with the gunman; our government explores all possibilities through the international organisations to remove the danger to our country.

But, when that fails, what then?

As a Christian, I take these matters to God. But when all humanly means have been exhausted, there is a judgement to be made as to whether we believe God wishes us to sit on our hands and let these situations develop or do I attack the gunman; does the UK government support action in Iraq?

Zimbabwe is just one area of concern amongst many. But, there is a justification for the UK to become involved, politically and for humanitarian reasons. The Church has a responsibility to get involved. It is not enough to meander through life on an intellectual, theological cloud of remoteness, an approach which confuses many Christians and fails to stimulate and attract those people who need faith but readily reject Christianity as represented by the Church.

[Geoffrey Smith]

Both President Bush and Prime Minister Blair were warned by Pope John Paul that a pre-emptive strike against Iraq - for whatever reason - was grossly immoral and an evil in itself. The principle is that evil may never be committed in order to achieve a good result. For this reason, a strike against Zimbabwe would also be grossly immoral, whether carried out by a Brish-led task force or a UN operation. Quite apart from the impossible logistics involved, interference of this nature would set a very dangerous precedent, if indeed it has not already been set by the invasion of Iraq. There are several countries around the world with governments which do not meet our standards of democratic behaviour. At what point do we decide that aggression is called for and such regimes will have to be changed? Do we make an exception in the case of China? No, Tom, for Christians this is not the answer. The consequences of trying to make this the answer would be horrific - as they are in Iraq to this day.

[Timothy B. Erskine]

POINT:

The premise peace is good, war is bad clearly represents an ideal with which ALL men of good will can agree. The horror of war and the brutality of terrorism convinces such men other means should be found to settle disputes or quell despotic regimes. Fairly the question, how can this be achieved (peace), is posed.

Hands-off, implies in the Zimbawean context, the continued abuse of power and corruption within the current regime. This was at least, in some measure, the rationale (ie, corruption and the abuse of power) behind the invasion of Iraq. WMD, proveable or not was simply a convenient excuse. We won't bring up oil this time. Google YouTube sometime and view the kind and compassionate way in which Saddam Hussein caressed those who disagreed with him or others as a means of instilling fear in the general populace. Is terrorism too strong a word to use in describing such governmental(?) behavior? Some have pointed out S Hussein was a nominal Muslim but even if he were devout and supported Shariah law literally, the brutality of day-to-day life for the common man was/is simply unacceptable and abhorent to western civilization; but more than to western civilization alone to ALL men of good will. Clearly this recurring theme is not isolated to the middle-east.

Now, which is the greater atrocity, terroristic subjugation of a people OR the release of the captive and oppressed by force of arms. Which is the greater evil. Isnt this a matter of perspective and isn't it interesting how where you sit changes your point of view. And if a people oppressed by the heaviness of constant fear, uncertainly and just plain hopelessness of never living life in peace, tranquility, and decent opportunity for something other than grinding poverty, what a relief to have someone covering your back.

[Tom Jackson]

"If Mugabe had been a foreign invader, that would have been a different matter, but the man is a Zimbabwean himself."

I agree that from a certain perspective, this makes a difference but when considering the scale of persecution that Mugabe is subjecting his people to and when the extent of the destruction of Zimbabwe is taken into account, is there really a difference if the injustice suffered is "from one of their own"?

And then, Geoffrey, you raise the example of Iraq to illustrate the "sheer stupidity" in attempting to intervene in a foreign country.

The failure where Iraq is concerned is to be found in the planning and execution of any post-conflict policy rather than the actual intervention and removal of Saddam Hussein and his cronies itself. The same planning considerations would apply where Zimbabwe is concerned. Removing the governing power - no matter how justified - without a carefully considered, realistic and effective plan to stabilise and control the country through the initial period of unrest, is irresponsible.

You either believe that Hussein's regime was a threat to the international community - now or in the future - or you don't. But even as an example to the rest of those despots who would allow their land to be used as safe havens and training camps for international terrorists, an example to those governments who openly seek to gain access to WMD as a bargaining or threatening tool against the international community, the forceful removal of Hussein and his subsequent execution was justified.

And, although the UK can be shown to have a special responsibility where Zimbabwe is concerned, what is required for intervention is an international coalition with the authority and power to act quickly, decisively and with real authority.

To establish such a coalition - as Iraq demonstrated - is not easy. But it can be done and it should be driven from the UK simply because of our history in that region, the responsibility we intermittently had as a colonial power since 1880. And the Church should be up-front and active in promoting any action.

As a Christian, I pray to God about many things and I believe some prayers have been answered in one way or another. I leave many problems in God's hands trusting in Him to listen and act if appropriate.

But even from a Christian perspective, prayer has to be accompanied by action. Otherwise, we are like the Thessalonians, abandoning normal life and concerns, waiting on God to deal with everything. Prayer gives strength, it provides guidance and, through God's Grace, it will open a path and a direction to remove this "evil regime" and free God's people.

[Mike Homfray]

This is simply about power and someone who thinks he knows which side his bread is buttered.

[Geoffrey Smith]

After all your rhetoric, Tom, you have not answered my question: exactly HOW are we supposed to intervene? Yes, we are our brothers' keepers, but not to the extent that we must contemplate bloodshed and mayhem in defence of a people who suffer injustice from one of their own. If Mugabe had been a foreign invader, that would have been a different matter, but the man is a Zimbabwean himself.
It was sheer stupidity to invade Iraq; it would be equally stupid to try to force change in a sovereign nation, however much good you may think that would achieve.
I agree with you that isolationism is not the answer to that country's problems, but at least it doesn't exacerbate a very dangerous situation. From our Christian perspective, this is a case where fervent prayer is the only thing which will have any influence on this evil regime.

[Tom Jackson]

"Don't you think that, after the debacle of Iraq, we would be well-advised to mind our own business and keep our noses out of other people's affairs?"

Isolationism; that's your response, Geoffrey, and you would have a good number of people who support such an attitude. And in world where it was possible to isolate yourself from what happens thousands of miles away, it was a realistic approach.

But, not now. Not in a world where a car backfiring in some God-forsaken place halfway around the world can be an item of interest in a paper you read next morning if someone takes an interest. Tell Bob Geldoff that it's "none of our goddam business" what happens in countries such as Zimbabwe, that it is 'Tough' that people suffer and die in such places when it is avoidable.

This is not about "spreading the gospel of democracy". It is about man's inhumanity to man. It is about the distortion and discarding of values and standards of behaviour that give a structure and meaning to life.

It is as much a threat to what we believe in and what sustains us as a nation as when Chamberlain finally warned German that following the invasion of Czechoslovakia in March 1939, the UK was prepared to intervene to prevent further attacks (and that was despite the fact that many people wanted to "keep our noses out of" what many people considered "other people's affairs".

Isolationism is no longer an option. In a world where the example of brutal dictatorship provides opportunity and breeding grounds for those who would destabilise international relations, it is no longer acceptable (or even logical) to sit on your hands and pretend such situations don't really exist or will not affect you in your cosy little world.

Mugabe represents everything that, as human beings, we attempt to resist and overcome as intelligent, respectful and caring individuals.

[Rick Beekman]

This Situation is a Typical Scenario Of So-Called "Men of The Cloth" Using A Marxist Theology Under The Name of Jesus.

The RCC Has Priests all over Third World Countries Using this Abomniable Doctrine. Most Especially in Central and South America and The Philippines.

The Idea is To convince The People the Government is Their Enemy and it needs to be Overthrown as in a Coup D Etat Etc.

[Geoffrey Smith]

"Now is the time to intervene [in Zimbabwe]."
- Tom Jackson, 15 JAN 2008, 10:24:37

Exactly how are we supposed to intervene, Tom? Militarily? An economic embargo? A UN resolution?
An EU initiative? Don't you think that, after the debacle of Iraq, we would be well-advised to mind our own business and keep our noses out of other people's affairs? In 1980, the Zimbabweans were ringing their bells when Britain withdrew from one more of her stolen territories; today they are wringing their hands because they have a fascist dictator around their necks. Tough.
It's none of our goddam business, Tom. Do you really want more families in the UK to suffer the loss of loved ones for the sake of spreading the gospel of democracy?

[Fr Craig Sweeney]

wish the AB would find himself appalled at the Dio. of San Joaquin...

[John]

Just what is it about African leaders that virtually any state or institution becomes the victim of megalomaniacs and kleptocrats - in Zim it is the Church as well as the State?

[J Pearce]

"Nolbert Kunonga is the Thomas Cranmer of the 21st century."

Err...not really, Geoff. At least, lets hope not. Cranmers actions have echoed down the centuries, freeing us from the manacles of Roman Catholic dogmatism. I would like to think that this odious no-mark will become little more than a dusty footnote in the history of Africa.

This is one schism the Anglican Church would heartily endorse, I suspect.

[Recusant]

It would just figure that he was/is a liberation theologist. It is more about politics than religion and in the end uses the methods that all 'progressive' and 'liberational' political movements have ended up using: violence.

God bless Zimbabwe and God bless those like Pius Ncube who are placing themselves on the side of Right.

[Tom Jackson]

Let's get one thing straight. The situation in Zimbabwe related to Mugabe and the people who support him such as Kunonga has nothing to do with Anglicanism or even Christianity except in as much as they cloak their activities in a deceitful and evil facade of representing the Church.

If ever evil walks this Earth, it is through men such as Mugabe.

If ever there was a situation where the World community should be involved and preventing evil men from persecuting their own people and plundering their country, it is Zimbabwe.

Apart from making it abundantly clear that Kunonga is no longer representative or a member of the Anglican Communion, Dr Rowan Williams is powerless.

Now it is up to those who represent those nations in the World who abhor such dictators such as Mugabe to do something about him and the country he has destroyed.

Now is the time to intervene and, as part of that process, restore an Anglican presence in Zimbabwe which truly reflects the Love and Spirit of Jesus Christ.

[Geoffrey Smith]

Nolbert Kunonga is the Thomas Cranmer of the 21st century. The more a thing changes, the more it stays the same.