the church and zimbabwean refugees
May 14, 2008
Last night I visited Arthur and some of the Pangani people. They have been starting to feel a call to get involved with the Zimbabwean situation. Since Friday I’ve bee feeling the same calling, although with no idea how to actually get involved, so I do what I do: I blog, I tell the stories as I hear them, and I hope to get as many people as possible to think and talk and hopefully get actively involved with Zimbabwe.
But we talked, Andrew was there, who wrote the article I referred to on Saturday, and Jody the Canadian, who is currently working with Zimbabwean refugees, and Arthur, and Mariah, who has spent some time in the past working with refugees (in Canada I think). We talked about the big picture, but also about the small. And this is where our attention got fixed. The small problem (or rather, one of the symptoms) is the millions of refugees currently in South Africa, and on this level it seems possible to get involved.
Obviously, no one will be housing millions of refugees, but it is possible to help a few. These people face enormous problems in Zimbabwe, except for the lack of food and basic medicine, many of them now fear for violence and their lives. In South Africa they now experience some of the worst forms of xenophobia in the squatter camps where they found safety up to now, and this also result in a fear of bodily harm or death.
South Africa don’t do refugee camps, but at places people are trying to help refugees. Central Methodist in Johannesburg is the one example we talked about. There is differing of opinion on what is happening there, but you can read some of it (Ekklesia Article, News report on refugee camp linked with crime), but in spite of the troubles, I hear very positive things about this move. A few other examples were also mentioned, people housing Zimbabweans in their homes, other smaller shelters. The conversation turned so that the other members, who are working together, are now talking about doing something similar, Arthur have a short post on this. My one recommendation is that when this is done, care should be taken that we are not taking away jobs from South Africans when trying to help Zimbabweans. However, if this article is right, there seem to be some space for skilled workers.
Anyone out there also doing this? Anyone know of anyone that is involved in helping Zimbabwe? Helping refugees? Anyone that would want to get involved but don’t know what to do?
I found a copy of Where We Have Hope last night on my shelf. Bought it at a second hand book stall last years somewhere. It was written by a journalist who worked in Zimbabwe, Andre Meldrum (google this name and you’ll find a lot of info). The end of the first chapter really caught me. It gave words for what I’m more and more realizing my own feelings towards South Africa and Africa is…
“I am seated in the middle aisle and cannot see Harare’s twinkling lights dwindle as we fly up and away. But I do not need to. Zimbabwe is indelibly etched in my memory. I am steeped in this country, it is in my pores. More than just the physical look and feel and smell of the land, I have a deep sense of what the country stands for: liberation, majority rule, democracy and human rights. This is what Zimbabwe meant when it won independence in 1980 and it is what so many are valiantly fighting to regain. This conviction of what Zimbabwe stands for cannot be erased simply by forcing me out of the country.”
Update: I’ve been thinking since Saturday, but forgetting to say this: This might be a good time to again watch Schindler’s list, or using it in church.
I preached on Genesis 11:28-12:9 on Sunday. I started preparing real early, reading Brueggemann’s Genesis commentary on Monday, and Von Rad’s shortly after, but never quite got around to making the sermon. I knew what I wanted to say though. God call Abram, promise to bless him, but in the same breath call Abram to also be a blessing to those around him (see some thoughts in Afrikaans here). God call Abram, but he doesn’t call him out of this world, but to be wholly part of this world (see some more thoughts in Afrikaans here). In Genesis, it is the creator God who now become further part of the creation-gone-bad by calling Abram, and by becoming involved with human history.
But last week we again had two armed robberies on houses in our congregation. In one the people were wounded, in the other a man was killed, leaving behind a wife and kids. Shot in the head when he wanted to press the alarm button. This happened on Friday evening, on Saturday I finally got around to finalizing the sermon. Furthermore, the reports on Zimbabwe started coming in, I blogged on that here while I was preparing the sermon.
How do we preach in this context? What do we say? As I said to the congregation at one stage: In church many would say we are not supposed to talk politics. But in this context, and reading the story of Abraham, I cannot do other but talk politics. But politics isn’t about who is right and who wrong, I never spoke about Mugabe for example. Maybe what we call politics in the church, is actually just ethics. Public Theology.
I believe the message, even for this hurt congregation, and believe me, our congregation, and community, is hurt. The violence have been going on for weeks now, every week the reports come in, for this congregation also, the message is that we should bring hope. There is a message that God bring hope to the world, but the other side of the coin is that God bring hope through us as well.
We need to preach on South Africa. We need to preach on Zimbabwe. Telling the stories of the people there, telling the story of the Bible, realizing that the story of the Bible is forcing us to, in some way I don’t understand yet, take part in the story of suffering ongoing around us. Our congregation is starting to talk about our role, a missional role, in the context of violence around Kameeldrif. It’s not a new conversation, but we took it upon ourselves in all earnesty. I’ll be getting together with Arthur tomorrow to have some talks on Zimbabwe. What is the role of the church in a time like this? What can we as a church do?
churches unite for human rights in Zimbabwe
May 10, 2008
It’s been years now since we started talking about Zimbabwe. I remember hearing the stories of farmers being forced from their farms, even of farmers being killed. I still think it was a crime, and I still think it was quite stupid and didn’t help the country at all. But life went on, the farmers lost their farms, they got new farms in Australië, or new jobs somewhere. Somehow, throughout all this, I still thought that much worse problems was going on in the world. But I think that might have changed:
The evening after first hearing about the ship full of weapons on it’s way to Zimbabwe, I told my flatmate that: “now, for the first time, I am really worried about Zimbabwe”. At that point I started thinking about Rwanda, Uganda, and the other worst case stories of Africa. Could it be? Is this really where Zimbabwe is heading?
Yesterday I’ve been hearing some of the stories about the current situation in Zimbabwe. The personal accounts stand out more than the news. One pastor told about people he know very well who actually are still farming in Zimbabwe. ZANU-PF (Robert Mugabe’s party) are doing “voters education” on the farms. So they had to leave and go stay in town, so that ZANU-PF could “educate” the workers. This education involved the chopping of of fingers, of hands, the cutting of of lips…
Arthur sent me a mail yesterday with an article written by a friend of his who was there, the photo’s ain’t nice…
The things which happened over the past years in Zimbabwe was bad. It was really bad. But when we all thought that Zimbabwe has hit rock-bottom. When we thought that now the people would throw out Mugabe and start something new, it got worse! We assumed that Morgan Tsvangirai will win the election. A friend who is onto economy and things like that said a few weeks ago that within 5 years a lot could again be back on track in Zimbabwe… that idea has changed.
What do we do? What should the church do?
Our denomination has started a project to help feed Zimbabwe. We made an arrangement with Makro to pack crates of food which is then sent to Zimbabwe and can be picked up be church leaders there to help the people of Zimbabwe. Currently a crate cost R15000 (approximately $2000). This certainly is needed, and even if political problems stop today, would still be needed for quite some time. Anyone interested in contributing to this could mail Dr Gustav Claasen.
I think the church have a mayor role to play in forming people thoughts on this. We need to talk politics in church! We can no longer turn our heads away. How about using Hotel Rwanda, Last King of Scotland or The Interpreter and discussing the Zimbabwean situation along with them. After first seeing The Interpreter I remember thinking that this is telling the story of Zimbabwe (that was some years ago). Today I fear that Last King of Scotland, or worse still, even Hotel Rwanda might be telling the story of what is approaching in Zimbabwe! For more information on Zimbabwe you could also visit this site posting updates on the Zimbabwe Situation, or this blog from a Civic Action Group keeping you up to date on the situation in Zimbabwe.
But what next? Is it maybe time for the church to start saying out loud that the world powers should play a much stronger role in Zimbabwe? Could it be time that the United Nations step in in Zimbabwe? Should the large church organization, the World Council of Churches and the Roman Catholic Church not say very loud that “enough is enough!“? What about other faith or philosophical traditions, almost all of these would agree that what is going in is deeply unethical. I’m not a politician, and surely don’t understand everything. But I do know a little bit about ethics, and I know that the right to self-government should be respected, and that Zimbabweans should have the opportunity to govern themselves, and do things in their way, which might differ from developed countries. But I also know that the right to life had priority over the right to self-government. And when this right is taken from the people of Zimbabwe, how long can the world take part in active non-participation?
If your not taking part in this months bloggers unite yet, I urge you to join in. On Wednesday bloggers all over the world would be joining hands to blog about human rights. And when blogging about human rights, remember Zimbabwe.
Let us be a voice for the voiceless…
I think it was after reading some of the work of John de Gruchy that my dad told me about the cross as symbol or metaphor for a horisontal and a vertical conversion. We need to have a vertical conversion, a conversion to God, and a horizontal conversion, a conversion to our fellow human being.
I found the metaphor strange, and I have to admit, I still do. Not because I think it is wrong, but I guess it’s because I was trained to be as historical as possible, thus, the first thing I think when I hear something like this is: “the way the cross was built has nothing to do with what it meant, that is simply a construction”. And actually, I forgot about the image, until the last 24 hours.
As part of my reading for my dissertation I’m currently busy with Mission in Bold Humility: David Bosch’s Work Considered, so far it’s an excelent book. I think I’ll blog about it some more later on. One of the authors wrote about Bosch using this image, and then, in a public debate on rasicm today, professor Piet Meiring (if I remember correctly) also mentioned this image. So I’m reconsidering the image.
In spite of my historical thinking, I realize more and more that this image do bring together a very deep meaning of the cross. But first this. Protestants had a way of holding very strongly onto the cross and forgetting the other aspects of the life of Jesus (incarnation, life, death, resurrection etc). The Gospel according to Mark also kind of did this, so I guess there is something to say for the primacy of the cross, but I’d rather say that the cross is symbol for Christ, in all aspects of his life, death, resurrection etc.
Historically the cross has had a lot of interpretations which dealt with how it restore a relationship between God and man. I’m not going into the atonement argument which is so popular today now. I don’t understand this quite well, but it’s so central to theology over 2000 years, I can’t possibly deny this. Jesus is the door to the Father (Gospel of John). This is the vertical side, we convert to God, we restore a relationship between God and man. And sometimes this is the easy part.
The hard part, more so than not it would seem to me, is converting to our fellow human beings. This meaning of the cross is being considered more and more, for example when we start noticing the political reasons behind the crusifixion. Jesus was crucified because he himself was “converted” to his fellow human beings. The cross remain a symbol calling us to a different way of life, where the “other” is more important.
what happens on a Sunday morning
February 19, 2008
A lot can be said concerning Christians gathering on Sunday mornings (and sometimes evenings) for some form of a primary worship event. In spite of critique concerning what happens, about the so called hypocrisy of those who attend, or the comercialization of the service, fact is that still thousands attend. What is happening in this hour is for most people still their primary understanding of “church”. So on a positive note: think potensial. What is the potensial if this hour could really be done in a way that give people an idea of the kingdom of God.
This was my theme for Sunday’s service. Actually a difficult theme, concidering that I didn’t really consider Sunday mornings to be a missional activity, not in the sense of a “seeker” type of setting. Rather, I considered what happened the rest of the week, wherever members of our community went, to be the missional part of a congregation. Reading Patrick Keifert’s Welcoming the Stranger helped form my thinking on this, attempting to point the way towards something that is both worship and missional.
Sermon came from Luke 24, Jesus’ journey from with two disciples from Jerusalem to Emmaus. Starting out on the journey, Jesus is called a “stranger” because he pretends not to know about the crisifixion that took place in Jerusalem 3 days before. As the story unfolds, it becomes clear that the disciples must be the strangers, since Jesus was the one who actually knew what happened, and they didn’t understand. So Jesus start explaining everything to them. I’ve many a time wondered why Jesus didn’t just pop up and say “hallo! this is me!”, rather, a softer approach is followed, and little by little they are introduced to the ideas that would change the world for ever. And then, with the breaking of the bread, they suddenly realize who is it that was journeying with them…
I think our worship gatherings is a lot like this. It is also a journey, and everyone who join on a given occasion take part in this journey. I don’t think the preacher is neccesarily the Jesus figure, rather that on this journey we become Jesus figures for each other, and in the relationship between us, Jesus appear to journey with us. The challenge of our times of worship is to be able to do what Jesus did. To journey with people, slowly introducing them to what we are doing, in such a way that they can understand this. The dream is that we can see people connect to God, to their community, and to an alternative community in our worship times.
And the end of the story of Emmaus is people connecting with an alternative community, a community which radically changed the world, by radically doing what Jesus would have. Just a thoughtin spite of all the criticism against the institutional church, recently I’ve started thinking: “What would happen if 1000 preachers in 1000 Dutch Reformed congregations of South Africa start to preach the Kingdom of God on Sundays?”. Think potensial!
In a weeks time I’ll be preaching on the public worship, welcoming the strangers into our church services, and the role of public worship in mission, so I might be blogging on this a few times during the week. But to start out, some experiences from yesterdays eucharist.
I wasn’t preaching, only attending church. I came late, which is not a funny thing in our congregation. I don’t understand it, but for some reason this community accept that a lot of people would only be coming in by 9 o’clock, which is the time the service is starting. When time came for the eucharist two things happened.
-
Where I sat, I could hear a dad and a child talking. The child was asking if he could join in the eucharist, but the dad said no. He said that the child could join when he was 16. In our congregation children are allowed to participate in the eucharist, although it’s still up to the parents.
-
Two rows in front of where I was sitting, a couple of children from the children’s home was sitting. They were about 9/10 years old, and when the wine came around, I could see that this was a big thing for them, and could just imagine little boys nudging each other about the fact that they are now going to drink some wine.
I wondered which was worse? The boys taking part in the eucharist, but not really understanding what it was about, or the little boy who wanted to take part, but who was excluded because he wasn’t old enough yet. I’m pretty sure the excluded boy is further from the intention of the eucharist than the boys taking part, but not yet understanding the theological significance and what have you…
But eucharist is always a very intense experience for myself. And this was no exception. As the bread passed over my lips, and the wine went down my throat, I started thinking about the meaning of this. “What did eucharist mean to me today?” And sitting there, what I experienced was the question where I would have stood at the crucifixion. Would I have been part of the crowd shouting “crucify him”, or part of the disciples crying over what was happening? Would I have cried about the one who came to preach an alternative society, a society totally different from what I was used to, radically accepting people, radically inclusive, radically equal, or would I have rather been part of the voice that said that Jesus is making things uncomfortable, so maybe we should dispose of him.
I don’t say this to point fingers. I think all of us at times isn’t comfortable with what Jesus preached. The message was so radical, and is “Jesus is Lord”, the implications for my life is so radical, that at times I’m not sure if I’m comfortable with it, it really makes me uncomfortable. Still there was room even for those who doubted, for those who weren’t yet comfortable with how Jesus were doing things, yes, even people like myself was part of the disciples.
Maybe that is part of the paradox of my existence. I identify myself with a community, with the narrative of Jesus, although I can’t say I’m the best example of how Jesus would have done things. I’m part of the alternative community Jesus preached, I believe, although I still find myself uncomfortable with the radicality of what he said at times. I’m part, even though I’m still being formed, but I’m formed by being part.
Could this be another example of thinking about an “already/not yet” eschatology? This is a subject I’ll maybe touch upon another time, but if you look at the work of David Bosch, you’ll find this way of looking at eschatology. The kingdom of God is already here, it is now, but there is also tension, because it’s not yet fulfilled, it is in process of becoming, and will only arrive in it’s fullness in the future. Myself? Well, I’m already here, I’m already part of the alternative community bringing the kingdom about, but I’m also being formed, in process of becoming the person which would follow Jesus through all the uncomfortable and radical ideas he presented, and if I keep the tension, then I’ll only be following the radical way of Jesus in the future. Always the paradox… always the tension…
needs in Hammanskraal
February 7, 2008
A few weeks ago I met Mrs Rika Kruger, a government spokesperson or something. I’ve never been very good at understanding politics, and don’t really know what exactly it is she is doing. Except that she is working with the government on social development. She invited me to join her in looking at some problematic parts of Gauteng.
So today we went to Hammanskraal, to Kikhanya Gardens, a aquattercamp on the Eastern side of the N1. We visited an old age home, that also feeds 200-300 kids on a Thursday afternoon. The old age home is also basically zink building, with some brick rooms added to it. They have a small kitchen, and a bathroom, with only cold water.
We identified a number of practical things which need to be done.
-
Ceilings for some of the rooms with zink roofs
-
the “donkey” which heat water with fire, need to be finished and repaired, so that they can have hot water
-
The hot water need to be linked to the bathroom
-
A water filtration something is needed (even if it is only a drum with river sand in it)
-
A pipe to let out gasses from the long drop toilet
Maybe there was more, but this is the things I can remember now. Furthermore there is the constant need for people to get involved with the old people (the oldest lady is 93), and food, especially with all those kids coming around. Also the caretakers working there get a salary of next to nothing, because there is no money really.
The visit also again showed me some of the amazing things you’ll find people doing. All this was started not by the DA, as far as I can see, or the government, but by an oldish lady living in Hammanskraal that saw a need, and started addressing it. She also care for a number of “miracle” babies, babies which the hospitals didn’t want because they didn’t think they had a chance of surviving. Some of them are 4 years old by now.
Well, maybe you are looking for a place to get involved with on a short or longterm basis. Then this might be for you. Talking to these people you’ll also hear of a number of other great projects running in and around Hammanskraal which can use some help, or maybe just some people that want to get involved. They said even just some students spending time with the young people there that have lost hope, would be of great help.
Anyone out there thinking about taking on this project?

