One of the continuing news items that I have followed on this blog is a dispute between two Synods of the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian (CCAP). I first mentioned this issue almost exactly two years ago and then did a follow-up in December of last year. From recent reports it appears that this situation is no better, and has possibly worsened.
Some background: The Church of Central Africa Presbyterian has five Synods: Zambia and Harare (Zimbabwe) are pretty much national Synods in those countries. In Malawi there are three Synods – Livingstonia in the north, Nkhoma in the center, and Blantyre in the south. From reading up on this it is important to note that these Synods have more autonomy than many American Presbyterians would expect, a legacy that derives from their missionary heritage. As I read about the CCAP it seems that it might be better described as a “confederation” than a “denomination.” It is also interesting to note that its confessional standard is not Westminster but the Belgic/Heidelberg/Dort standards.
Quick recap: While Livingstonia and Nkhoma are supposed to be geographic Synods with specific boundaries, over the last several decades as workers migrated the Synods have followed and churches have been established among their respective language groups, Chewa for Nkhoma and Tumbuka for Livingstonia, even across Synod boundaries.
This week a new, detailed article in Nation Online titled Synod Fight Turns Nasty reports that the dispute continues and appears to be worsening. The lede:
It started as a border dispute 50 years ago but
it is now much bigger. The battle lines have been drawn between
Livingstonia and Nkhoma synods of the CCAP. The former has since
declared a ‘Holy War’ while the latter wants its adversary to quit the
General Assembly.
and later in the article:
The [Nkhoma] synod also said it is not prepared to go to
war with its sister synod; it will continue pushing for discussions as
men of God but said if Livingstonia insists on its new stand then it
has to move out of the General Synod and stop using the name of CCAP.
Continuing to read through the article the point the writer of the article wants to make is that this is all about… Money. The article says:
“All those areas such as Kasungu are just
scapegoats, the main target is Lilongwe. Money is central to the whole
issue,” said University of Malawi historian Professor Kings Phiri.He explained that Lilongwe, being the capital and having a lot of
members from the North, gives Livingstonia Synod the feeling that if
they have a congregation in the Capital City there will be prospects of
beefing up the synod’s revenues.Phiri, who once chaired a task force appointed by the General Synod
to look into the problem, also said the other factors to the issue are
tribalism and politics.He said after the task force came with its
recommendations Nkhoma Synod accepted while Livingstonia rejected the
proposals and clearly showed that their minds had already been made to
plant churches in Lilongwe.
This situation is clearly getting heated and the article quotes Livingstonia officials as saying that they will continue development in Lilongwe to show Nkhoma “how it pains.” In addition, a Deputy Minister of Education said that as a Northerner he would rather go to a Livingstonia church in the capital to keep his money in that Synod. There are also warnings that a continuing church dispute could break down into a political dispute with the potential for violence.
The article concludes with a discussion about the General Synod getting involved, getting respected members of the church engaged as part of discussions to resolve the dispute, and making sure all the parties are at the table. There is an acknowledgment by one theologian that it can not be a one-sided resolution on territory, implying that both Synods will need to stop their encroachment. And there is also the necessity for a discussion about the status of the General Synod — Does it become a strong central unifying body, or do the individual Synods go back to their previous, fully autonomous status.
There is also a recent editorial in The Daily Times — Why Should Synods Forgo Boundaries? The editorial argues that the CCAP is one church and members originally from a different synod should not have a problem worshiping in a different synod when that is where they live. The editorial then says:
But probably we are working on the surface when
looking at the wrangle between the two warring synods. Probably, there
are other motivations for the synods to encroach into each other’s
territory beyond serving God’s flock. It appears the two synods know
why they want to operate in each other’s territory but cannot bring
these reasons to the public domain. And if this is the case, then they
are failing as God’s messengers because their first call should have
been to serve God and His people.
The editorial concludes with this:
fighting politicians when the clergy themselves do not reconcile and
resolve their conflicts?
The only way to solve the boundary issue is to establish why the
church’s forefathers created synods and assess whether by eliminating
these administrative boundaries, the church would become stronger or
weaker. Obviously, those who came up with the idea of synod, with each
operating in a specific designated area, had good reasons for it and
that is probably why some churches like the Catholics, Anglicans,
Seventh Day Adventists and others have their equivalents. All these
other churches can obviously not be in the wrong.
In doing the research on this the past few days I have found one other voice, a CCAP blogger who occasionally ventures into the topic of his church’s politics. Mr. Victor Kaonga works for the Christian broadcaster Trans World Radio in central Africa and writes the blog Ndagha. Back in February 2007 he had a post on this border situation where he presents his view as a member in that church. In particular he writes:
Nkhoma and Livingstonia is a very healthy situation for the Church in
Malawi. I somehow agree for several reasons:
It is helping us
ask questions we have never asked before. The questions about when this
issue started coming up. We hear it is an old story for about 50 years.
Was there a time when they disputed like it is now? How did they solve
it then? Why is it a big issue now? Is this a product of missionary
failure in handing over to Malawians? Is it another after-effect of the
postcolonial period in Africa?
He goes on to echo many of the themes from the other two articles: Christian unity, power politics, historical context, economics. And while he is part of the broadcast media himself, he writes with the tone of an informed member of the CCAP. His outlook is ultimately optimistic for the situation, at least at that time 18 months ago, as opposed to the more cautious tone of the other two current print articles. His final conclusion is that while the situation is complex and there are many issues in play here, in the end the two arguing synods are concerned for, and committed to, spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
This is still a developing situation — The talks organized by the General Synod are to continue at least until December so we will see if any resolution and reconciliation is demonstrated in the near future. Stay tuned.
The issue of Livingstoni/Nkhoma wrangle in Malawi is not what people write. I come from the disputed boarder areas and i know where the problem is. In this T/A Mabulabo’s area in the southern Mzimba district in Malawi, there is fertile soil for agriculture and many chewa speaking people came to farm. normally they are from nkhoma synod. Now these people when they settled in our areas, for a long time, they refused to join presbyterians churches in the area which are Livingstonia hence they ended up constructing their own Nkhoma-chewa churches. Now again this area is many miles away from Livingstonia headquarter and for a long time, Livingstonia church leaders never paid any attention and could not address such issues then until now that there are more than 88 Nkhoma synod churches in the area and now its too late to revearse this whole thing. We who come from this area we know what went wrong and possiblly we are the right people who can help to solve this whole madness in the church.
now livingstonia has gone into Lilongwe coz they are punishing Nkhoma for not stopping their boys from contructing churches in their areas and to my knowledge livingstonia has come to lilongwe to stay and they will not move back.
Qeko,
Thank you very much for your comments.
As you suggest, there are many different sides to this controversy and not all the viewpoints and the history gets communicated in the media, especially for those of us who only see the on-line media coverage.
You are correct that sometimes churches have problems crossing boundaries of language, be it a linguistic language or a cultural language. Our churches need to be sensitive to those differences, both in reaching out as well as when they cross the various boundaries in their reaching out.
Again, thanks for taking the time to write this and I will highlight this in an upcoming blog post because your viewpoint is significant.
Blessings
Have you made any research on Harare Synod or do you have any info?
I am aware of the Harare Synod and looked at some limited information a while back. Thanks for the reminder and I’ll see if any more information has become available.