Special Hearings — Faith Community Hearings — 1997-11-17

BISHOP MICHAEL NUTALL: Thank you. I think on that first matter of the decision   in 1970 in regard to the World Council of Churches grants to liberation movements,   the whole issue has gone by default. I am not aware that there has been any   revisiting of that officially, within the life of our church. The reason for   that resolution, if I recall, it was the first time I attended a Provincial   Synod. I was quite young and immature at the time. But the reason for it was   that we didn't want to leave the impression that we were lending our support,   or that the church should be lending its support to movements that had decided   to engage in violence, as part of their strategy and we didn't hear the argument,   even if there was legitimacy for that point of view, we didn't hear the argument   that the grants were intended for humanitarian purposes within those liberation   movements and not for the purchase of arms. We didn't see any distinction between   those two. Looking back now, I would wish to say here that I think we erred   in that resolution in 1970, because it included a decision to withhold our subscription   from the WCC. Subsequently, we were prevented by government anyway from sending   any subscriptions to the WCC so we were nicely covered by the government itself,   but initially we took that decision and we have to take responsibility for it.   And I think it is right that we should acknowledge that that was a mistaken   decision looking back now, with the benefit of hindsight. On the issue of Father   Michael Lapsly and his license, I think if I may, I would prefer not to comment.   That may sound very much like chickening out, but I'm not sufficiently well   informed on the circumstances that surrounded that, something that I think happened   within the diocese of Lesotho at the time and it has been written about in the   biography of Michael Lapsly, that has now been published, maybe it is something   that needs to be visited. What I would like to say is that Michael Lapsly as   a result of (at least partly) what happened to him in the bombing, whereby he   lost both his hands and one eye, has become what I would consider to be a living   icon of redemptive suffering in the life of our church and our nation at this   time and somebody to be truly honoured and respected for that fact.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Virginia?

UNKNOWN: Thank you, Chairperson. Bishop Michael, I'm going to ask you   a question which has bothered me, and I don't think it only refers to the church,   but it also refers to the situation in general. You said in y our submission   that the church has embarked in black empowerment and we hear about this black   empowerment everywhere, even in industry. But my concern about that is that   black empowerment doesn't usually go with training, and I would like to know   what the church is doing in terms of trying to really empower people by giving   them skills so that they are able to take up the challenge of that empowerment?

BISHOP ZAMABUHLE: That is done individually by respective diocese through its   parishes. The skill training is a priority of every diocese in our church. Each   bishop has been given a mandate to see to it that he builds up leadership in   his diocese. Taking whatever effort and whatever resources that may be available,   so it's a thing that is opened in such a way that every bishop is taking it   seriously and therefore we think in the future we will be seeing a good result.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

UNKNOWN: Can I just follow that up please? My next question would then   be What happens in a situation where the bishop in the diocese does not encourage   or does not see to it? Is there any other higher body that would make sure that   this happens?

BISHOP ZAMABUHLE: Maybe - I do think there is a body, the Black Forum, because   it spearheaded this, so it's still alive.

BISHOP MICHAEL NUTALL: You have touched on a delicate point being the way in   which we organise our life, because of the diocesan autonomy and I hear within   your question an assumption that maybe the bishops have too much power or something   like thatobviously we need to be gracious enough to recognise our profound   need to be in partnership with other people across the board and we're slowly   learning the need for that.
DR.

KHOZA MGOJO: Just a very short question, which is easy. I have been very much   impressed by your submission about the transformation process in your church,   which we hope is going to lead to what we call the African church and I commend   you for that. Now the question I have in my mind what is the criterion or criteria   of appointing your priests in the parishes at the present moment as a way forward?   Do you appoint priests according to colour? If you have got an opening at Umlazi,   they need a parish priest, do you look around the black priests to be appointed   at Umlazi or do you just look for the priest all over and say that we think   that this one must go to Umlazi?

BISHOP MICHAEL NUTALL: You call that an easy question? Yes, yes, umChairperson,   Dr Mgojo knows the situation in Umlazi because he ministers there himself, so   he knows our situation there. Yes. We are better than we have been in the past,   I think, in making our appointments freely across the board. We are even better   at it at the moment perhaps within what I would call parishes (in the situation   that I come from) where the language is English and I don't mean only so-called   white parishes, but parishes where the language spoken is English. More and   more we are inviting clergy whose mother tongue is Zulu to take appointments   either as rectors or assistants in those parishes. For instance at the beginning   of next year we have a black African priest becoming rector of our parish at   Overport, which is traditionally an Indian area and one of the things that we   are discovering as indeed we are discovering the presence of women clergy in   our church now is that people, as a result of the actual experience of clergy   coming from different backgrounds, are experiencing a new inner liberation which   they didn't realise would happen and so it's an exceedingly pleasing process   to see. We are not doing it to the same extent the other way around - appointing   white priests into black parishes, if I may use that terminology. That is partly   for historical reasons because we used to have those parishes or those missions   as they were called in the past serviced by white clergy, mainly from overseas   and there has been a certain reaction to that. Within the black community itself,   with black priests wanting to take responsibility within their own cultural   and linguistic ...[indistinct] and idiom for that work. So I think we are going   to be moving in the not too distant future, back into a more healthy mixture,   but that is the historical reason that mixture doesn't exist to the same extent   there. We have moved away from something that was there before in order to facilitate   the advancement of black leadership at the request of black leadership in those   particular congregations. Of course, the challenge to English speaking clergy   whether they're white, coloured or Indian is that they need to learn the language,   and something of the culture. And that is something that we are continuing to   wrestle with in this time and I hope that as time goes by in this transformation   process, we will begin to make further progress in this field.

BISHOP DLAMINI: My diocese has got white Christians as well, but not a single   white priest and the black priests minister to everybody, so there is no problem   at all. The work of God is going speedily ahead.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you father. Joyce?