by the Rev. Ernie Ashcroft
In September 1974 I arrived in Cape Town to begin my ordained ministry in the church. My congregation was large and thriving, composed mainly of white, middle-class folks, together with large numbers of students from the University of Cape Town. From day one I was faced with several issues which divided folks
The Anglican Church in South Africa was almost exclusively Anglo Catholic. I was an English, Evangelical Anglican. Also, the Apartheid political regime had legitimized racism across all areas of life, leading to rampant injustices for folks who were not white. Both of these issues challenged me. In the past I had tended to dismiss non-Evangelical clergy as merely “high and dry types” and looked with suspicion on those whose ministry focused on issues of social justice, regarding this as a distraction from the important work of evangelism opting instead for a politically focussed “social gospel”. But ministering in South Africa in the 1970’s I realized I had no choice but to respond to the pressing issues of racism, injustice and oppression; Indeed, for me not to do so would amount to a denial of the Gospel of Jesus.
Issues came my way thick and fast.
As I got to know my clergy colleagues, I recognized that though they might do church differently from me, they were folks of deep prayer and faith, who courageously and prophetically were speaking out against injustice, racism and other abuses perpetrated by the authorities. One priest, David Russel, became my friend although we had little in common. He was single, Anglo Catholic, an Oxford graduate in Politics Philosophy and Economics; I was married, Evangelical and had a Ph.D in Science from a non-Oxbridge university.
David was served with a banning order, a legal device used by the authorities to commit him to five years of solitary, home confinement, unable to function as a priest or have any community involvement. His crime: powerfully calling out examples of governmental oppression and rampant injustice of black and colored citizens. The authorities’ purpose was to silence David and intimidate others. Paradoxically had the opposite effect on me. I determined that I was not going to be intimidated or silenced.
A few months later we visited my in-laws in Washington State.The local T V station did an interview with me concerning the challenges of ministering in Apartheid South Africa. I spoke honestly about the injustices, racism, fears and oppression which were part of everyday life. When we returned early on a Sunday morning to Johannesburg, after a very long flight, I was informed that there was a problem with my visa and so could not be admitted into the country. My wife, I together with our two small children sat in a bare room for 4 or 5 hours having been told that no senior immigration official was available to examine our case because they were all in church! Eventually in the late afternoon I was told that I had been granted a 24 – hour visa, and so could travel down to Cape Town but the following morning must report to our home in Cape Town immigration office.
The next morning, I was left to cool my heels for a couple of hours in the Immigration office and eventually was taken into a room where there were three individuals. It was immediately clear to me that only one was an immigration officer, the others were members of the security police. One of these then told me that they had decided to allow me to remain in the country, however he continued next time you are out of the country be careful what you say about South Africa. I smiled, but made no commitment.
Soon after this, to placate its right-wing supporters, the authorities in Cape Town took action against 30,000 African folks because, they said, they were living illegally in Cape Town. Black Africans were unable to live permanently in the Cape Province. But the economy required large numbers of laborers for the docks, railways and other industries, So Black men, but not their wives and children, were granted visas for six months at a time to reside around Cape Town. They lived in hostels. After six months they had to return to their “homeland”. Then a month later they could return for a further six months of work. Over time these folks brought their families down to Cape Town and built simple tin shacks for them to live in. There were two such communities around Cape Town, Modderdam Road and Crossroads housing 80,000 persons. One July morning in the middle of the Cape winter the authorities bulldozed the shacks on Modderdam road, rendering 30,000 men women and children homeless. Winter in Cape Town meant cold rains and strong winds. Churches got together and provided tents. The authorities then confiscated the tents. We responded by providing simple tarps and again these were confiscated.
Many church leaders, my self included, then opted to open our church buildings for these homeless folks to stay in. My church was in a “whites only” area but now had black folks living there, a step that was not universally popular in my congregation. Some argued politics had no place in the church, others asked how I could disobey the law given the New Testament teaching on obedience to the authorities. I responded that I would preach the next Sunday on the topic of Christian Obedience to the State.
That Sunday we had standing room only. I began the sermon by reading the passage from Romans13, where Paul says” Let every person be subject to the governing authorities”. I argued that proof texting -wrenching a text out of its context is an illegitimate way of handling Scripture; that “a text without its context is merely a pretext”. When Paul wrote Romans 13 the authorities were largely acting for the good of the whole community. I then looked at Revelation chapter 13; here John describes a situation where Christians are in conflict with the Authorities, who are controlled by the Satanic Beast. So, Paul encourages obedience to the Authorities whilst the writer of Revelation calls on Christians to disobey and struggle against the Authorities? There is no real conflict between the two once we grasp their different contexts. In the 50’s, when Paul was writing, the Roman Authorities were on the whole unconcerned with the Christian religion, it was viewed as a “one among many” religions and no threat to the Empire. But by the time Revelation was written the political situation was radically different. I quoted Robert Mounce from his commentary “The attitude toward the state in Revelation differs decidedly from that in Romans 13, 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Peter 2. ..Not because John differed from the other apostles regarding church and state. It is because….the existing truce between church and Empire had given way to conflict in which an aggressive program of emperor worship was being forced upon the populace, supported by active persecution. In the clash of loyalties between God and emperor Christians had no choice but to obey (God)…. Only when the state continues to act within the limitations of its delegated authority can the believer freely submit to its regulations”. I argued that to remain silent and not to act in defiance when the Apartheid regime had been taken over by the Principalities and Powers legitimatizing oppression, injustice and racism, seeing this as even Godly, was not an option for us. We dare not remain silent but must stand up and oppose by word and deed those deeds, laws and acts committed by the authorities when they are in direct conflict with the revealed character, values, example and calling of Jesus. Not one parishioner challenged my decision. Ultimately the government quietly looked the other way as African families returned to the Modderdam Road site and rebuilt.
In the Jeremiah reading today God rebukes the leaders of Israel for their failure to guide, care and protect of the people they were charged to lead. “You have not attended to them”. God promises to replace these unfaithful leaders with one described as a righteous Branch, executing justice and righteousness. For Christians the Branch is Jesus, whose rule or kingdom is characterized by justice, righteousness and acceptance for all peoples. Ephesians speaks of Jesus ministry and death leading to the breaking down the hostility between different groups of peoples and creating one new humanity living together in peace. Instead of division, unity.
Ours is a deeply divided nation and for political reasons some of our leaders are sowing seeds of explicit racism and hatred of those “not like them”, even suggesting that we should drive them out. The clear message is it is not only acceptable but necessary to ethnically cleanse our country of all undesirables. That is utterly evil.
As faithful Christians we may only offer qualified, not unconditional support to those in authority. Those actions taken by the authorities which promote protection, wellbeing and fundamental fairness for all citizens are to be affirmed and supported, but policies and actions justifying prejudice, encouraging violence and hatred and justifying explicit racism must be called out and opposed. In our behaviors, actions and choices we are under a solemn obligation to reflect and act faithfully in response to the character of God.
