JOLTED by cleric Evan Mawarire’s #ThisFlag movement’s growing popularity following its spirited campaign against bad governance, President Robert Mugabe has characteristically torn into ministers of the gospel, accusing them of “meddling” in politics instead of sticking to the Bible.
NEWSDAY COMMENT: One, however, is persuaded to believe that if the Church had played its role in politics effectively, then Zimbabwe would perhaps have been in a better political and economic situation than it is today.
The Church is the light of the world and the salt of the earth and is morally bound to raise alarm if the government of the day digresses.
If Mugabe can be honest — even with himself — then he must admit that there were several Catholic priests, as well as other church leaders in Rhodesia, who played a crucial role in their own way to usher in the country’s independence from Rhodesian tyranny.
History recalls a young black American preacher called Martin Luther King Jr, who appreciated that the gospels spoke against the abuse of man by man as well as violation of other people’s rights and he played such a crucial role in American politics and redefined the future of race relations in that country.
 |
| Church is not there to please Mugabe |
Old Testament, prophets were used by God to ensure checks and balances in the handling of power after the establishment of the institution of kingship.
It is unfortunate that Mugabe would rather pamper preachers who turn a blind eye to his shortcomings as the Head of State while tearing into, and threatening, those who choose to speak out against the socio-economic ills borne by the majority of Zimbabweans.
Mugabe’s description of preachers who wade into politics as “enemies” that will be dealt with merely demonstrates the intolerant streak that characterises his leadership style.
A leader who does not take criticism and correct his weaknesses is a failure, no matter how many people continue to pamper him as good.
If church leaders in Rhodesia could speak against the then fearsome Ian Smith regime and throw in their lot with the liberation fighters, why should it be wrong for church leaders in independent Zimbabwe, a so-called democracy, to speak against similar leadership failures?
If it is wrong to speak out when one is hungry, then what purpose does the independence serve? Where then is the difference with Rhodesia?
It is unfortunate that Mugabe would rather pamper preachers who turn a blind eye to his shortcomings as the Head of State while tearing into, and threatening, those who choose to speak out against the socio-economic ills borne by the majority of Zimbabweans.
Mugabe’s description of preachers who wade into politics as “enemies” that will be dealt with merely demonstrates the intolerant streak that characterises his leadership style.
A leader who does not take criticism and correct his weaknesses is a failure, no matter how many people continue to pamper him as good.
If church leaders in Rhodesia could speak against the then fearsome Ian Smith regime and throw in their lot with the liberation fighters, why should it be wrong for church leaders in independent Zimbabwe, a so-called democracy, to speak against similar leadership failures?
If it is wrong to speak out when one is hungry, then what purpose does the independence serve? Where then is the difference with Rhodesia?
