The Message to the people of South Africa after 40 years
Steve Hayes
In September it will be 40 years since the "Message to the people of South
Africa" was published.
It was a comprehensive rejection of the apartheid policy of the South African
government of the time on theological grounds.
While Christian groups had criticised apartheid previously, most of the
earlier criticisms had not explicitly rejected the principles of apartheid,
but merely criticised the way it was applied.
The "Message to the people of South Africa" was a new departure, saying that
apartheid was not merely bad in practice, but was wrong in principle. It was
not merely heretical, but it was a false gospel.
It was intended to be a turning point in Christian responses to apartheid.
Unfortunately, from the point of view of publicity, it was upstaged by the
government's banning of the MCC cricket tour because the England side included
Basil d'Oliveira, a South African-born coloured.
For this and other reasons, the response to the Message was disappointing.
One result was the formation of "Obedience to God" groups, and in some
quarters there was a hope, and even an expectation, that this might lead to
the formation of a Confessing Church in South Africa.
In the event, the "Confessing Church" never happened.
One of the abiding questions is, why not?
One answer may be that many people were simply too chicken.
Many of those responsible for drafting and publicising the Message were
clergy, and they perhaps feared for their position, their stipends and
their pensions if they went out on a limb.
One of those most committed to "Obedience to God" was Bill Burnett, then
General Secretary of the South African Council of Churches.
I believe that the failure of the "Obedience to God" movement led to Bill
Burnett's disillusionment with the ecumenical scene. Soon after that he was
elected as Anglican bishop of Grahamstown, and he began to plug the
charismatic renewal movement within the Anglican Church in South Africa.
He said afterwards that "The one who does God's work is God", and I got
the impression that he attributed the failure of movements like "Obedience to
God" to the impossibility of human beings obeying God without the power of the
Holy Spirit.
The challenge of a "Confessing Church", of course, is that one has to "think
sect" (in the sociological sense of the term "sect"). It means abandoning the
pretence at respectability and being marginalised, It meant that the church
would have to go underground, as many opposition political movements had done
earlier.
To my knowledge Bill Burnett made one more attempt, when the was Archbishop of
Cape Town, and presided at the Anglican provincial synod in 1979. There was a
motion to the effect that the church should stop applying for permits for
things like multiracial functions. Bill Burnett said that as Archbishop he saw
his role as guardian of the institutional church, and it was a role he
disliked. He asked if synod was asking him to drop that role, because one
consequence of not applying for permits might be that the institutional church
would crumble, and he asked if synod was asking him to do this. There was an
embarrassed silence, and synod said nothing.
Obedience to God was too difficult, and "thinking sect" was something that the
clergy, black as well as white, were not prepared to do. People could talk of
a "confessing church", but were not prepared to take the
consequences.
There's a fuller version of this on my blog at:
http://tinyurl.com/4ecz5r
with links to resources.
Comments, anyone?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
- .. -- Tim .-.
"Steve Hayes" <haye...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9clv141dh8p95g8h0...@4ax.com...
All too often, churches have followed where they should have led. We see
this today in some parts of the world (including parts of the African
continent), in some countries gross human rights abuses not only go
unchallenged by their churches, but in some cases are condoned or even
encouraged. More leaders like the Most Reverend Dr Desmond Tutu are needed.
Tim.
++
Perhaps we should all collectively pray for bravery instead of cowardice
by our clergy. That is usually the source of problems.
Jenicek
"++" <fri...@spambot.com> wrote in message
news:nsOdnRdrQ-Z75L3V...@rcn.net...
Didn't you shout that church should not interfere with the government?
And I bet you will start shouting again, if the church start condemning
reverse race discrimination
at present in full speed in SA!
RichMacDonald
>
> Comments, anyone?
>
Thank you Steve. Truth is I have no comment to add, because I am not at all
familiar with the issue or the people. So just mentioning that I read it
:-)
Growing up in Durban, I attended Bishop Stephen Bradley's church in
Pinetown. Your post led me to the following:
http://www.frontline.org.za/news/tribute_bishop_bradley.htm
Peter H.M. Brooks
>
> And I bet you will start shouting again, if the church start condemning
> reverse race discrimination at present in full speed in SA!
>
and the Ethnic Cleansing of the Workplace 'reverse' race
discrimination - they are direct racial discriminiation. Denying
somebody a job that he is qualified for simply because of the colour
of his skin is, and always has been, racial discrimination and it is
wrong.
I must say that I haven't noticed much from any leading god-botherers
about this, but I have never really expected much from them. As
Steve's article points out, the churches are primarily organisations
that are keen to protect their existence, and genuine attacks on evil
don't help much with that. The Roman Catholic Church feared that the
Fascists would take the Vatican away from them, so that was enough to
keep them quiet on the holocaust. I doubt you'd find churches taking
many risks to protect people from racism at work. After all, they'd
argue, white people can simply leave to get a good job elsewhere.
They're right about white people leaving because of racism. I was sad
to teach somebody the other day who had been deliberately passed over
for promotion many times (but was expected to train his juniors to
take over his job). He, and his family (his children are completing
their degrees, ready to enter the workforce) are leaving, not because
he can't take it, but because he doesn't want his children to suffer.
He certainly had no desire to leave and, knowing him, it is clear that
his loss is going to cost the country economically.
It was also strange to meet coloured nurses in New Zealand, senior
nurses, actually, who had also left because of racial discrimination.
It isn't quite so easy for coloured people, since they are also
'previously disadvantaged' [as the phrase has it], but not
sufficiently 'previously disadvantaged' to benefit from the racism.
Steve Hayes
>Thank you Steve. Truth is I have no comment to add, because I am not at all
>familiar with the issue or the people. So just mentioning that I read it
>:-)
>
>Growing up in Durban, I attended Bishop Stephen Bradley's church in
>Pinetown. Your post led me to the following:
>http://www.frontline.org.za/news/tribute_bishop_bradley.htm
If I recall correctly, Bishop Bradley's Church, the Church of england in South
Africa, was in those days very much a part of the "religious right", and did
not even sign the "Message", much less plan any action on it. In fact it was
an enthusiastic participant in the Volkskongres teen Komunisme, a far-right
attempt to prop up apartheid by associating opposition to apartheid with
communism.
I'm glad to say that CESA seems to have changed since those days, as can be
seen in the following blog:
http://stephenmurray.wordpress.com/
Steve Hayes
<Peter.H....@gmail.com> wrote:
>On May 6, 9:50 pm, "Jenicek" <Jeni...@cz.com> wrote:
>>
>> And I bet you will start shouting again, if the church start condemning
>> reverse race discrimination at present in full speed in SA!
>>
>I don't think that it is accurate to call Black Executive Enrichment
>and the Ethnic Cleansing of the Workplace 'reverse' race
>discrimination - they are direct racial discriminiation. Denying
>somebody a job that he is qualified for simply because of the colour
>of his skin is, and always has been, racial discrimination and it is
>wrong.
You need to get your terms straight. It's Black Elite Enrichment.
>It was also strange to meet coloured nurses in New Zealand, senior
>nurses, actually, who had also left because of racial discrimination.
>It isn't quite so easy for coloured people, since they are also
>'previously disadvantaged' [as the phrase has it], but not
>sufficiently 'previously disadvantaged' to benefit from the racism.
The advantage of using weasel words like "previously disadvantaged" is that
they can be used to cover the presently advantaged and make them sound hard
done by, while ignoring the plight of the currently disadvantaged, black and
white.
Peter H.M. Brooks
> On Tue, 6 May 2008 21:51:40 -0700 (PDT), "Peter H.M. Brooks"
>
> >On May 6, 9:50 pm, "Jenicek" <Jeni...@cz.com> wrote:
>
> >> And I bet you will start shouting again, if the church start condemning
> >> reverse race discrimination at present in full speed in SA!
>
> >I don't think that it is accurate to call Black Executive Enrichment
> >and the Ethnic Cleansing of the Workplace 'reverse' race
> >discrimination - they are direct racial discriminiation. Denying
> >somebody a job that he is qualified for simply because of the colour
> >of his skin is, and always has been, racial discrimination and it is
> >wrong.
>
> You need to get your terms straight. It's Black Elite Enrichment.
>
think that is part of it. You're right, though, it is not the poor it
is aimed at, whether it is executives or the 'elite'. Is it, though,
really aimed at a genuine 'Elite' - isn't a group of rich but
underserving people an oligarchy, not an elite? An elite is a good
thing, remember, something to admire and to aspire to.
>
> >It was also strange to meet coloured nurses in New Zealand, senior
> >nurses, actually, who had also left because of racial discrimination.
> >It isn't quite so easy for coloured people, since they are also
> >'previously disadvantaged' [as the phrase has it], but not
> >sufficiently 'previously disadvantaged' to benefit from the racism.
>
> The advantage of using weasel words like "previously disadvantaged" is that
> they can be used to cover the presently advantaged and make them sound hard
> done by, while ignoring the plight of the currently disadvantaged, black and
> white.
>
disadvantaged by Apartheid are considered members of the club.
Steve Hayes
>Thank you Steve. Truth is I have no comment to add, because I am not at all
>familiar with the issue or the people. So just mentioning that I read it
>:-)
>
>Growing up in Durban, I attended Bishop Stephen Bradley's church in
>Pinetown. Your post led me to the following:
>http://www.frontline.org.za/news/tribute_bishop_bradley.htm
If I recall correctly, Bishop Bradley's Church, the Church of england in South
Africa, was in those days very much a part of the "religious right", and did
not even sign the "Message", much less plan any action on it. In fact it was
an enthusiastic participant in the Volkskongres teen Komunisme, a far-right
attempt to prop up apartheid by associating opposition to apartheid with
communism.
By the way, I'm reposting this because it did not appear on my reader, and i
wondered why, then saw that you had set follow-ups to soc.culture.south-africa
only.
That means that I will not see any reply you or anyone else makes -- I have
not been able to read anything in soc.culture.south-africa for over a year
now, unless it is cross-posted to other groups that I CAN read.
It seems that I can still post there, but I can only read things that are
crossposted to other groups.
I'm glad to say that CESA seems to have changed since those days, as can be
seen in the following blog:
http://stephenmurray.wordpress.com/
Zvakanaka
'reverse' race discrimination..... does this mean, by implication, that
whites are racists and blacks are reverse racists? I thought a racist
was a racist, no matter the colour. It seems not.
OrthodoxNews
"Zvakanaka" <lala...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:g06bc8$1enb$1...@newsreader02.ops.uunet.co.za...
***You are right. Racism knows no color boundaries.
Steve Hayes
>Peter H.M. Brooks wrote:
>> On May 6, 9:50 pm, "Jenicek" <Jeni...@cz.com> wrote:
>>> And I bet you will start shouting again, if the church start condemning
>>> reverse race discrimination at present in full speed in SA!
>>>
>> I don't think that it is accurate to call Black Executive Enrichment
>> and the Ethnic Cleansing of the Workplace 'reverse' race
>> discrimination - they are direct racial discriminiation. Denying
>> somebody a job that he is qualified for simply because of the colour
>> of his skin is, and always has been, racial discrimination and it is
>> wrong.
>'reverse' race discrimination..... does this mean, by implication, that
>whites are racists and blacks are reverse racists? I thought a racist
>was a racist, no matter the colour. It seems not.
Reverse racial discriminators are homophobes -- they can't stand people of the
same race as themselves.
charley
> On Tue, 6 May 2008 21:51:40 -0700 (PDT), "Peter H.M. Brooks"
>
i wish there was a way to take all white south africans and bring them
to America if they want to come....they deserve better than what they
have under communist black rule...should have never given up there
country....after all it was the boer who settled South Africa and not
the black tribes.
++
charley crawled out from something immutable butslimey and emoted:
>i wish there was a way to take all white south africans and bring them
>to America if they want to come....they deserve better than what they
>have under communist black rule...should have never given up there
>country....after all it was the boer who settled South Africa and not
>the black tribes.
>
>
cough sputter gack
I wish there was a way to end racism forever
Steve Hayes
>i wish there was a way to take all white south africans and bring them
>to America if they want to come....they deserve better than what they
>have under communist black rule...should have never given up there
>country....after all it was the boer who settled South Africa and not
>the black tribes.
Before you do anything rash, read this:
http://methodius.blogspot.com/2008/05/ten-reasons-why-i-want-to-raise-my.html
(Ten reasons why I want to raise my child in South Africa).
charley
> On Tue, 13 May 2008 18:49:45 -0700 (PDT), charley <varric...@aol.com> wrote:
> >i wish there was a way to take all white south africans and bring them
> >to America if they want to come....they deserve better than what they
> >have under communist black rule...should have never given up there
> >country....after all it was the boer who settled South Africa and not
> >the black tribes.
>
> Before you do anything rash, read this:
>
>
> (Ten reasons why I want to raise my child in South Africa).
>
> --
> Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
> Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
> Blog:http://methodius.blogspot.com
> E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
another reason is her chances of being killed and raped are
dramatically increased living in south africa. yea, i could see
wanting to be in south africa. hey enjoy, those blacks are peace
loving folks.
http://www.southafricathetruth.net/index.php?PHPSESSID=304e660ea32229c1ae282e3f308f9f49&cat=17
charley
Steve Hayes
Eh?
is just about right.
Steve Hayes
>On May 14, 1:00 am, Steve Hayes <hayesm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 May 2008 18:49:45 -0700 (PDT), charley <varric...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >i wish there was a way to take all white south africans and bring them
>> >to America if they want to come....they deserve better than what they
>> >have under communist black rule...should have never given up there
>> >country....after all it was the boer who settled South Africa and not
>> >the black tribes.
>>
>> Before you do anything rash, read this:
>>
>> http://methodius.blogspot.com/2008/05/ten-reasons-why-i-want-to-raise...
>>
>> (Ten reasons why I want to raise my child in South Africa).
>another reason is her chances of being killed and raped are
>dramatically increased living in south africa. yea, i could see
>wanting to be in south africa. hey enjoy, those blacks are peace
>loving folks.
About as peaceloving as those white folks in America who can't refrain from
dropping bombs on people.
charley
enjoy liberal nitwit...your daughter has something to look forward
to....and for us dropping bombs had the whites down that in SA maybe
you'd still have a country....asshole
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_2322996,00.html