Special Hearings — Conscription Hearings — 1997-07-23

REV DU PLOOY: To really understand the role of the Military Chaplain and the national servicemen Chaplains in the SADF one needs to keep in mind that, especially as far as the mainstream Afrikaans churches are concerned, that the Church fully cooperated with the SADF on national Synod level as far as military service and national service are concerned.  The Church accepted that the advice of the leadership of the Nationalist Party government and Defence Council as far as defence matters were concerned.
 This total involvement, and this is the heartsore, was strengthened by the infamous concept of the total onslaught.  Through the idea of the total onslaught the Church immediately became an ally in the war.  The total onslaught concept assumed that only 20% of the onslaught was of military nature, the 80% was directed against the economical and spiritual welfare of the people, therefore the Chaplaincy and by name the Church had to be involved in winning the hearts and the minds of the people. 
 The Church's main task was to strengthen the spiritual defensibility of its members.  The Church was now totally convinced that the fact that we were fighting the war, we were fighting a just war.  Almost every Synod of the DRC during this time supported the military effort in their prayers and by way of resolutions of thanks acknowledging the fact that the SADF did help to constitute a safer living environment of the peoples of South Africa and serving Church members in the SADF.
 Even when national servicemen were required to do service in the townships, and some of the graduates especially doing national service at that time, were specially opposed to that, the Church as such never uttered a word of opposition.  A few voices that did raise some doubts were set off as disloyal to the Church and country and playing into the hands of the enemy.  Objections usually were countered immediately by saying, we are worried about the spiritual welfare of the enemy as well and we pray for them.  Exactly what the prayers involved no one knows.  Some even held the idea that people objecting against the system are non-believers.  I was once, personally, during a morning parade reprimanded by an assistant Chaplain General in the presence of all that attended, about what I said during the scripture and the prayer on this matter.  
 The cross-border operations and reprisal attacks were seldom questioned, yet in spite of all lots of young men could not cope with the pressure during the training and operational duty and took to all sorts of ways to get out of the army.  Most common was to develop problems at home.  A young man once during an intake filled out his form stating that he was married and the father of two children.  After a few days, the first few days of basic training he came heartbroken into my office, someone just phoned from home with the news that my baby died.  Eventually it was discovered that he never was married and the address he gave during intake did not even exist.  This was his ploy which he invented before coming to do national service.
 Attempted suicide, it was well known at one stage fast became a problem and special measures had to be laid down with the Chief of the Defence Force and Chaplain General to respond to this problem.  Early in 1979 a young recruit came into my office during basic training, clearly disillusioned and at the end of his reserves, Padre he said, I can't take it anymore, I am going to take my own life.  The reason, "since I was gay".  He was gay.  I held a simplistic view at that stage.  That should cause no problem because you are among men all day long and you are busy with many things.  His reply to me was this, Padre imagine the army sending you to do your basic training at the Women's College at George.  You are placed in a group with ten other girls, girl rookies, and you must dress and undress in front of them, taken communal showers with them, even use the communal toilet, how would you feel?  Well he said, that is what I feel like since basic training started.  This young gay changed my whole life and attitude as far as this situation is concerned.
 I just want to say this unholy marriage between the Church and the State, in this case the Military, had a calming effect on parents whose sons became liable to do national service. Chaplains, citizen force, commando and permanent force Chaplains had a special task to keep civilian congregations informed on matters.  They delivered sermons and addresses to these congregations to console parents as to the special care of their sons during national service.  Special effort was made to call on the girlfriends of national servicemen to be positive about the war because it is for their safety and future that the boyfriend is doing military service.  Chaplains even gave guidelines to girlfriends on how they should write their letters to the men on the border or in the townships.  For example, never write or talk about problems at home.
 The truth is, on the other hand, Chaplains did have the freedom to come and go in the military situation as they preferred and they were allowed to see the members at any time.  Chaplains did have the freedom to preach the gospel according to their conviction.  And it was surely good for the soldiers and the loved ones to know that the Chaplain was always at hand.  
 Chaplains also played a vital role as the contact between the SADF and the families at home especially in conveying death messages to servicemen as well as parents.  The SADF stipulated that a Chaplain must accompany an officer when parents were informed of a child that died in action.  In most cases full particulars were withheld about the circumstances under which a soldier died because of the covert character of the operations.
 I know of a family very personally who frankly accepted the death of their son on the border, the father never, however, never had the freeness to talk about his son's death.  It's only now after more than 12 or 15 years that the father for the first time can speak freely of his child's death.  That he did about two weeks ago although he is still in the dark about the circumstances under which it occurred.  
 Standing at the door of the parent home together with an officer in uniform the most common words I was greeted with was this, Padre, when did my son die and how?  Parents usually accepted the worst but at the same time were comforted by the presence of the Chaplain.  Chaplains could more than once tell the parents of their child who came to believe in Christ when confronted by death on the border.  In that sense some even said the war did serve some good in the lives of young men for it sometimes led to reconciliation with God.
 The Church being present in the war in this manner gave the war under those circumstances, from my personal feeling, a holy and justified character.  Very few Chaplains were really prepared to speak of the fact that God as such does not want people to kill people.  I know of no publication by the former DRC structure saying anything about the fact of waging war, no, it was war and we the Church had to be there to serve our members and no questions were to be asked apart from that.  Accept that the Church must be present under all circumstances for the sake of its members, but in the Church's guidance of its members the Church also needed to be prophetically earnest about the fact of war. Attributing by its presence to giving the war a holy character the Church eventually left the injured during battle or the friend of someone who has fallen in battle disillusioned.  
 It raises the questions such as, how can God allow me to be injured or my friend to be killed in battle if we are busy fighting for a just cause?  I preferred the task of the Chaplain to be the other way round.  Knowingly, we are busy with war, a fact, but the fact God can never approve of under any circumstances because he does not want people to die, but also knowingly that there is forgiveness for our wrongdoings.  Injured and death at war do not ask for acceptance but for forgiveness.  
 It is true the Chaplains, the Churches, the Chaplaincy, the cookie-tannies did a lot to make life easier for the troops.  Coffee rooms were established in all camps and the Church and other organisations supplied spiritual reading matter. All solders were issued with a special edition of the New Testament and the Psalms, but this Bible had a bound in message from Mr P W Botha, first as Minister of Defence and later as State President.  The message said, and I just quote one sentence,
"This Bible is the most important part of your military equipment".
 It was generally accepted, a soldier that believed in Christ is a better soldier.  The Chaplaincy also accepted the Inocsigna sign as the logo.  "In this sign, the sign of the cross we shall conquer".  It's adapted from Alexander the Great.
 I just want to conclude, so-called political security was assured by the National Government and that is how it was said, they gave us every possible opportunity in life, the least we can do is to help defend that heritage.  The Church was involved and satisfied that the war was for a just cause.  The Church was also prepared to render service to its members under most difficult circumstances but the State had to foot the bill.  How could the Church then not be involved?  It is our obligation to defend this freedom, the least it can do is to help assure the spiritual freedom.
 I think the Dutch Reformed Church as such, of which I am a member, that the Church as a whole I think should give itself account of its unconditional acceptance and identification with the war effort.  It is now in retrospect that regular churchgoers ask, but how is it possible that everything felt so right during those years?  The Church gave us that assurance, and yet now the Church is only prepared to say it's sorry, we were wrong to support and justify apartheid.  More will have to be done.  
 We will have to explain how we thought about the war that was a result of that.  How can we not admit it was wrong in unconditionally supporting the war effort?  Did we not rely too much on the guidance and leaders of the Church?  Should we not have relied more on the God of the Church, we may then have ended up with much less disillusionment.  The Church will have to speak up to ensure continued reliance by its members. 
 In the end I want to borrow a verse from Walt Whitman - if you will just permit me one personal remark, one of my very best friends in my years in the Defence Force, Mervyn van der Spuy is also present this morning of the Anglican Church and he just told me this morning that everything has changed since I was retrenched in 1990.  In the end let us borrow a phrase from Walt Whitman from Leaves of Grass,
"After the seas are all crossed as they seem already crossed,
 After the great captains and the engineers have accomplished their work,
 After the noble eventers, after the scientists, the chemists, the geologist, ethnologist, 
 finally shall come the poet worthy of that name,
 The true Son of God shall come singing his songs".
And that is my prayer for the work of the Commission and my prayer for the Church, that eventually we will, the poet will come afore and the Son of God will sing His songs,  we are reconciled and a New South Africa.