How to be non-committal: archbishop’s pastoral letter on the succession debate.

I picked up a leaflet in the cathedral. It was the outgoing archbishop Njongonkulu writing about the process leading to the election of a new ANC leader.

It is a well wishing letter stating among other things that South Africa already has achieved a lot, that only the best is good enough and that St Paul actually already has told us what a leader should look like. The generalities abound and so there is no connection between what should be and what is.

So what has been achieved according to the archbishop? A number of people gave their lives for our freedom, we have a wonderful constitution and the country is enjoying a strong economy. All these are acceptable descriptions of the recent past and the present, but the word on the economy is somehow lacking a comment on the poor of South Africa who do not benefit from this economic strength. So much more striking as Njongonkulu has made it his special task in various ways to fend for the poor of this world.

He quotes St Paul saying that a leader “must be serious,… not greedy for money, …must hold fast to the mystery of faith…”. What Paul has in mind is more a leader of the church like a bishop and it sounds a little astounding that a political leader should hold fast to the mystery of faith in the first place.

It is a well meaning letter and by being well meaning it misses the point completely. What he is after is good and well. We need excellence and blameless leaders. What we have at hand however is something different and it would have been better and far more effective had it been spelt out that we at the moment seem to be lacking precisely that which the archbishop is asking for.

He knew pretty well that it was about two leaders, none of whom was very trustworthy any longer. Both had proved lack of openness in terms of funding matters, not least in relation to the arms deal: Mbeki has refused to allow an investigation into a number of irregularities in a deal that is the most expensive ever. Zuma is personally implicated one way or another in irregularities relating to the arms deal and has still to endure a pending court case against him. If these factors are common knowledge, why not say so?

What is most disconcerting is perhaps the fact that there is no reference to the new kind of power politics that is so obvious in the ANC. If anything, the church should address this phenomenon. It is not that South Africa is so different, on the contrary. Now we are like most others, and it is so sad to take in, but if that is the case, why not say so? To secure power at least seems to be more important than upholding the franchise of the people and the common vision of democracy. In being confronted with two leaders as the only present alternatives, it is easy to see that there are others who would be far better suited to fill the role of the leader of the ANC and the country.

Archbishop Njongonkulu remains on the level of wishful thinking which is a great pity. Some concrete direct words of his into the present leadership struggle would have had some effect as he is seen, rightly so, as a man of integrity. It is even more sad that he leaves all this to another archbishop who is emeritus: Desmond Tutu. There is more to this country in terms of church leaders who have courage to take up the prophetic role than Tutu. What we were entitled to expect from this outgoing arch is a strong word on the plight of the poor. He has claimed the poor to be his commitment so why not say something very concrete to leaders in a struggle where these have clean forgotten any issues of that kind in favour of how to cling to or obtain power?

Hans S A Engdahl