Zimbabwean Christian Churches’ Ridiculousness In Need of a Political Sabbath.

By Takura Zhangazha*

Like any other non-state organization, the Zimbabwe Heads of
Christian Denominations (ZHOCD)  is
entitled to its own opinion on the state of affairs in the country. Except that
its opinion is generally expected to be considered.  Its most recent one is borderline ridiculous
and evidence of a misplaced messianic streak of undemocratic political overreach. Or even an
assumption that with the limited levels of a critical national consciousness,
Zimbabweans will probably forget the democratic principle of the separation
of the Church from the State.  Or to
quote Jesus, giving unto Caesar, what belongs to Caesar.  

To quote from the statement, the ZHOCD proposes what it refers
to as a Sabbath that would be  ‘ national
seven year Sabbath period for the purposes of establishing an emergency
recovery mechanism to address the national situation’. 

This ‘national situation’ according to the ZHOCD would
therefore require “the suspension of the constitutional provision of elections”
that would, wait for it, be determined by a referendum. The lack of logic in
the suggestion is laughable.  The ZHOCD wants
the country to vote against voting.

The leaders of the ZHOCD probably prayed about issuing this statement.  Unfortunately the signal that they got from
God or elsewhere is patently undemocratic that even St Augustine would be
raising questions at their political theology. 

If the ZHOCD had ended there, it would have been a little
less ridiculous.  In stating the problem
and an anticipated result of the suspension of elections via a referendum, the
clergypersons propose no actual mechanism as to who or what governs the country
in the seven year electoral ‘Sabbath’. That will be determined by some sort of consultative
process which assumedly, the church itself would lead.  Though it does not say so in the statement.

I am sure one of the main reasons why the ZHOCD has reasoned
this way is because it knows itself to be an organization whose voice will
reach the ears of the most politically and economically powerful in the
land.  And because it has great societal
reach, it also knows that is almost untouchable.  With millions of worshippers flocking to its affiliate
churches every weekend, it can with relative ease influence public opinion in
its favour.

But to influence public opinion in this way, by asking for and
actively willing an unconstitutional suspension of elections, is an abrogation of
the churches responsibility of ensuring peace, progress and stability in modern
day nation states.  It is also probably
as bad as shouting ‘fire’ in a cinema, causing a stampede, and claiming
afterwards, that one was just expressing an opinion. 

There are therefore a number of reasons why progressive Zimbabweans
must be able to talk back to the ZHOCD undemocratic statement.  Not only as a learning curve for that organization
but a re-affirmation of a now long standing democratic value of the principle
of the separation of religion from the state. 
Together with the necessity of a stubborn insistence that democracy
overrides religion. All the while guaranteeing freedom of worship. 

In another instance it would be useful to assist ZHOCD to
recall that various religious doctrines have played important roles in our
liberation struggles, they did not come to define these same said struggles. Indeed
some may have been used to justify the necessity of liberatory armed struggles,
others as a counter- narrative but religion remained firmly on the periphery of
what in the final analysis were secular struggles.  Statements such as the one issued by the ZHOCD
are a rather a vainglorious attempt to place Christianity at the centre of what
should essentially be secular struggles. 
Almost in messianic fashion.

Nowhere in their statement do they mention the political
economic mess that has been wrought on by the ideology of neoliberalism.  Their vague generalisations about ‘healing’ without
reference to structural causes of why we find ourselves where we are is not the
stuff one would expect from the clergy. But then again, who wants to argue
against the massive wealth that these churches preside over, their own internal
dictatorships, their fraternization with the wealthy and powerful to curry
favour and in this age of millennial capitalism, the devastating effect of their
prosperity gospels. 

The ZHOCD  is however
lucky.  The current Zimbabwean president
uses religion as a political backstop. 
Ever since taking over power from Mugabe and retaining it in the 2018 elections,
Mnangagwa makes it a point to pop up at huge gatherings of religious
worshippers.  And he makes many material promises
to the leaders of these churches. 

Opposition political party leaders have also taken on the
dogmatic approach to Christianity and politics. Weighing in on a fervent Pentecostalism,
various politicans have put on both robes of not only being trained
clergypersons but also politicians. 
While it remains their democratic right to do so, the end effect is that
actual church leaders at orgainsations such as the ZHOCD begin to think they
and their religious inclinations are now the raison d’etre for the existence of
the Zimbabwean state.

It is not Zimbabwe that must take nay sabbatical from democratic
electoral processes.  It is the Zimbabwe Heads
of Christian Denominations that needs a long political sabbatical.

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity
(takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)