6 November 2006

Notes from the first meeting of the churches sub-committee of Abahlali baseMjondolo

Held at Kennedy Road Community Hall on 6 November 2006.
Present: M’du Hlongwa (Lacey Road), Sihle Sibisi (Joe Slovo), Mnikelo Ndabankulu (Foreman Road), Alson Mkhize (Motala Heights), Bhekuyise Ngcobo (Motala Heights), System Cele (Kennedy Road), Philani Manzi (Foreman Road), Vuyi Mvula (Jadhu Place), Nkosi Dladla (Jadu Place), M’du Ngqulunga (Kennedy Road), Mbongeni Madlala (Juba Place) , David Ntseng (Church Land Programme), Mark Butler (‘Maritzburg).

Background

The question has come up as to how Abahlali baseMjondolo (AbM) should or could relate to the churches. So far, AbM has sometimes approached churches, and more and more, AbM is being approached by church people and church-based organisations. But the churches are complex, and they might have their own, different agendas and possibilities in relation to AbM’s struggle. So, after various discussions within AbM, the sub-committee was established at a general meeting held on Saturday 4 November, and it met for the first time on the 6 November 2006.

Discussion

The discussions responded to the following 2 questions. First, “What are our experiences of the church in our struggle so far?”, and second, “What do we need from churches?”.

So far, in the struggles of the AbM, there has only been a loose connection with churches and it has not been well-defined. It has really only arisen from time-to-time in response to incidences of tragedy. For example, after there was a death from a shack fire, a couple of Bishops attended a memorial service for the victims. Later, a delegation from AbM attended the funeral of the son of one of these Bishops. That Bishop, Rubin Phillip of the Anglican church, had been with us when tragedy struck us, and so it was important that we should be with him when he needed to be supported.

But beyond these tragedies and crises, there has been no time really to celebrate liturgy in our place together with church people, and nor have we had a constructive workshop to talk about these things properly before now. Because of this loose connection, the church doesn’t know about our life in the shacks, it has no experience of it. Because it has not been present, the church does not know about the difficulties that the people go through and it does not know about the crises we face – like the destruction of homes at Motala Heights recently – and so, the church does not feel our pain.

Because of this loose connection too, the church is not here with us to pass on important moral principles that are about how it is to be human beings – the church is not here with us.

This distance is not healthy. The tragedies that happen here in the shacks, and the knocking down of people’s houses, can put people onto the streets. Surely in these cases, the churches could even provide temporary shelter? But more than that, church ministers are people that others are prepared to listen to and so, if they were there with us, then it is possible that their presence could even stop demolitions from going ahead. And if we from AbM and the churches grew closer together, it is possible that we might start learning better about what they believe – for now, we don’t really know.

We have all noticed that, at the beginning of our discussions there was silence in response to the first question. This is really because the church has not been here in the struggles of AbM. But now we have this sub-committee and the connection with the Church Land Programme (CLP), this will grow. But even this weak connection that are discussing, and what we have said already, shows that we need each other and that we need to make our voices stronger together because it is important to build a common struggle. For a long time in our struggles, many people looked down on us because we are from the shacks, they think of us almost as if we are criminals who prey on others. But our recent connection with the Bishop makes us think that some people are thinking hard and seriously about our experiences, and they do not just assume we are a bunch of worthless hooligans. That our struggles are taken seriously by respected people is important.

In addition, these respected people in the churches have connections overseas, and maybe they could help with some of the immediate crises of poverty that affect people in the shacks. We know that there are families in our places who go to bed without food, or whose children have no clothes to wear. It will be important to carry on discussions of these issues in all of the different local areas that are part of AbM as well.

Although we ask the question about ‘what do we need from the churches?’ we must start from the position that we must work together. We must acknowledge that we are together actually because, inside the church, we have women, children, people who are from the jondolos – so why do we disconnect the ‘Sunday church’ from the day-to-day life and struggle AbM? This ‘2-in-1’ division must be discussed and the two aspects must be made to complement each other.

We acknowledge that the government is a very bad listener to the poor. But it listens to the churches. So maybe we can use that to add to the strength of our voice. Perhaps church leaders can use their status to persuade the government on our issues. How would it be if church leaders joined us in our marches – wouldn’t that make the government listen more? The church leaders give their support to many important public awareness campaigns (for example regarding the protection of children’s rights, or the fight against crime) and this is because sometimes people are prepared to listen when church people say things. Looking at the poster on the wall of our meeting room here about the churches supporting the call for an ‘HIV/AIDS free generation’, perhaps there is a challenge to the churches to launch a new awareness campaign for a ‘shack-free generation’. We have seen in our experiences that, sometimes when people were losing their rights – for example to their land – that some priests and churches stepped in to stop it, or at least to provide help.

This discussion makes us think not only about the church out there. It is starting to revive the religious person in us and we are beginning to wonder, ‘what is our religious belief?’ – if we are God’s children, then what does this mean for us living in the shacks? And what does it require us to do?

We know that church is the closest place to the people because a church is not a church without people. And so the people know it as the most recognised place – a place of safety, where there are no thieves and others who prey on us. So we have this feeling about the church that everyone has a ‘willingness’ to support and give dignity. We are nobody without the church. Somehow in this way, the church can be a bridge between AbM and the government because it will be seen that we are not animals. And then nothing is impossible.

In the history of South Africa, before 1994 and at the peak of mobilisation and unrest, we saw some religious figures playing a role. But discrimination, racism and apartheid are not over! Now apartheid is between those who are rich and those who are poor, and we see that this apartheid is getting worse. This should make the church to be uncomfortable and therefore, the need for their intervention is just as important now as it was then – and they cannot do it on their own, they must work with the movements of the poor.

There is a perception that religious people are trustworthy. As we come from the shacks, we are not trusted. Even our churches from the shacks are not trusted.

When we look at charity and relief work like feeding schemes, it is better when these come from churches than from political parties because when it comes from the political parties it is actually like a ‘bait’, something is expected from us in return. And also, if the churches were involved in this kind of work, then they would know about how our life is, which is important.

There are statements in the Bible that are important. For example: ‘You will reap what you sow’. So, if the churches ignore the poor, then that’s what they will reap, but if they work with the poor, then that’s what they will reap. And it is not right to talk about some future kingdom in heaven without looking at what is here and now.

Churches are meant to be agents of justice. They understand that unity is important in some of their own work, and in different areas they are joining together to work better. This approach should also apply in connection with social movements and justice.

At the close of the meeting it was agreed that this has been an important and useful first discussion, and that the work of the new sub-committee will continue and will strengthen the AbM. There seem to be many possibilities that can be developed between the struggles of AbM and the churches. But, we are also not naïve about the churches. We know that some parts of the church pray with the rich and powerful people, that some parts of the church continue to give their blessing to this government. But although the church has these problems, we are sure that God is on the side of the poor. It was hoped that the work of the sub-committee would be useful for the speech that the AbM President will be giving at St Joseph’s Catholic Seminary on Friday.