In Presbyterian polity it is usually the understanding that when a leader (moderator or clerk) of a governing body makes a statement they speak for themselves unless that governing body has taken an on the record position and then the leader can officially convey the position of the body.
At the present time in the Blantyre Synod of the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian there is a complicated situation that not only raises the question of a leader speaking for a body when the body is not on the record, but also possibility taking action in consultation with the civil government. Hold onto your hats as I unwind this, and hopefully I have a good enough handle on this to get it right and do it justice.
Just as background, the last time I looked at church and state in the CCAP it was with one of the other three Malawi synods, the Livingstonia Synod in the northern part of the country. This new controversy is with the synod in the southern part of the country.
This current controversy began at the very end of October when all eight of the Roman Catholic bishops and bishop elect from the Karonga diocese signed an open pastoral letter directed to Malawi’s President Bingu wa Mutharika and his government. There are eight specific issues dealing with the workings of the government and the President’s party and they caution the President that he is heading towards becoming a dictator. The article also notes that another pastoral letter from the bishops played an important role in moving the country from one-party rule to a multi-party system in 1992.
From a polity stand point it is helpful to note that this letter is coming from a unanimous group of bishops in an episcopal system to a political leader who an adherent with their church. It is also worthwhile to know that this is the twentieth such pastoral letter the bishops have issued over a period of several years.
A bit over a week later, on November 11, the Moderator of the Blantyre Synod, the Rev. Reynold Mangisa, and the deputy general secretary of the Synod, the Rev. Austin Chimenya held a press conference where they criticized the bishops’ actions because “it did not follow protocol.”
Now, while I refer to the two leaders at the press conference, based on the reporting on the conference by The Nation, it would appear that Mr. Mangisa did most, if not all, the talking. In one quote he does begin by saying “As officials of Blantyre Synod, we believe…” But this article is very good from the perspective that it attributes the position to these officials only and, as I will discuss in a moment, it has a number of contrary quotes from other Presbyterian leaders, both in the Synod and around the country. On the other hand, an article in Malawi Voice not only begins with the headline that says in part “CCAP attacks Catholic Bishops” but continues the point in the lede to the article where they say:
The Blantyre Synod of the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian (CCAP)
has attacked the Episcopal Conference of Malawi (ECM) of the Catholic
Church over its last month’s pastoral letter to President Bingu wa
Mutharika.
In this article the remarks are clearly reported as coming from the church, and not just the synod but the whole church, if you only read the headline. And if you want another variation, an article from ENInews says in the headline that the criticism came from the leader, but the lede says it comes from the Synod.
As I said, the article in The Nation is good because, with out explicitly saying so, they make it very clear the opinions expressed come from those leaders, even if the leaders though they were representing the church. Among the contrary voices in that article is that of the General Secretary of the Synod, the Rev. McDonald Kadawati, who is also the acting chair of the ecumenical Public Affairs Committee (PAC). In fact, the PAC came out in support of the bishops’ letter. When asked for comment he indicates that he is not aware of the new synod statement and is quoted as saying “I don’t think what you are
saying is true about my officers. They can’t say that.”
Well, “They can’t say that” pretty much sums up where it went from there. The next step was a emergency special meeting of Synod. In the Malawi Voice article about calling the meeting General Secretary Katawadi chooses his words carefully. The article indicates he said that he was not around when Mr. Mangisa made his comments so he does not know if the rest of the Synod was behind them as well. He is quoted as saying “It is not tension per say, [sic] but we are meeting this evening to hear from
our moderator first before we come out with a stand as Synod.”
The meeting was held on Monday and Tuesday of last week, November 15 and 16. The first thing to come out of the meeting was an official apology to the Roman Catholic Bishops for the Moderator’s comments. According to The Nation, the official statement from the meeting reads in part:
We withdraw the statement made on our behalf by the synod moderator, the
Reverend Reynold Mangisa. We apologise for the divisions and hatred
that may have been caused to both our Catholic brothers and sisters as
well as within our synod, other CCAP sister synods, the public at large
and development partners.
And it is reported that the statement includes support for the Bishops’ statement, that it was overwhelmingly approved and that Mr. Mangisa’s signature is found with the others on the document. He is not responding to media questions other than to confirm that they see his signature on the statement. However, in an article about the apology from Afrique en ligne, former General Secretary and designated spokesperson, the Very Rev. Silas Mcozana, says of the meeting and Mr. Mangisa “at first, there were differences but later Rev. Mangisa saw the point.” In addition, the article informs us that a five-member team was appointed to handle the apology and the statement and that the team, or some of its members, had met with the Roman Catholic Archbishop to personally apologize for the comments.
The second item to come from the meeting is an investigation into this whole incident. A story from The Nation indicates that all four top officials of the Synod – Kadawati, Chimenya, Mangisa, and Vice-Moderator Rev. Mercy Chilapula – will be subject to this investigation. But the twist in this matter came from a series of articles by the Nyasa Times that allege the involvement by the Presidential Adviser on Religious Affairs Rev. Billy Gama in the original statement. The first article talks about how Gama and two other government officials tried to talk the bishops into recalling the letter and not reading it in the congregations. A second article alleges that Gama had Mangisa call the press conference and Gama funded it. A third article talks about how Gama is not a subject of the investigation by the Synod but a following article says other sources in the Synod claim that he is. The most recent article from yesterday says that the paper has a source that says the Office of the President and Cabinet was directly involved and the Rev. Gama was the intermediary. The problem, of course, is that there is as yet no corroboration or named sources so verification of the allegations is difficult. We will see what, if any, of this is part of the Synod report next week.
But getting back to Presbyterian polity and Biblical instructions, an article from the Nyasa Times today is particularly interesting. This article says that the Rev. Mangisa had substantial support in the Synod meeting. His supporters are reported as saying that he was right to criticize the bishops for their openly criticizing one of their own rather than first rebuking the President privately. Also, his supporters say that he does have the authority to speak, without prior instructions, for the Synod. The article says “Those backing the Spiritual Father said as a sitting moderator, Rev
Mangisa is the official mouth piece of the Blantyre Synod and does not
need permission to speak.” The article also claims that Rev. Mangisa agreed to the apology under pressure.
As I said, the next installment of this drama is scheduled to play out in a week when the six unnamed members of the investigating committee report. That is, unless the Nyasa Times or someone else doesn’t come out with new claims or evidence before than.
But as I highlight throughout this post, aside from the charges of government influence, this episode raises questions of what a Presbyterian official can do apart from the governing body they have leadership in. The General Secretary seems to think that speaking for the Synod requires the explicit backing of the Synod. Some of the members of the Synod are reported to fell that having been selected by the body to be the moderator then endows him with the authority to speak for the church. We will see how this develops within that branch.