Christian Resistance to Apartheid in South
Africa
A brief history, by Kim Thoday
(Throughout the history of the Church, those who have truly mirrored
the life and prophetic call of Jesus have been few. Yet the few have
been significant in the shaping of this world and the heralding of the
dawn of God's kingdom. Our post-age is no different in this respect.
Popular and establishment 'Christianity' struggles as the seduced bedfellow
of the dominant cultural milieu. However, in every era God raises those
who critique the principalities and powers with the Gospel of Jesus
Christ. During the period of Apartheid in South Africa, whilst the role
of the Dutch Reformed Church in shaping Afrikaner nationalism is well-known,
there was a countervailing Christian tradition that questioned South
African government policies, stretching back to the nineteenth century.
It is this tradition that I wish to bring to light, for it was a movement
of God in a desperate hour. It is an abiding example of the exodus tradition
and one that can strengthen our contemporary determination to follow
Jesus' example of solidarity with the poor and oppressed against the
tide of a globalised corporatist ascendancy).
My article will attempt to show that resistance to white hegemony emerged
from both liberal and radical strands within the mainline bodies of
the Church in South Africa. While dissidence always remained the prerogative
of a minority of churchmen, as Afrikaner dominance and racism solidified
from the time of union, it would be the radical strand that became the
effective heart and soul of Christian resistance. Radical Christian
leaders were those whom allowed themselves to be converted by the blacks
with whom they were engaged in mission. For them a new biblical imperative
emerged. By identifying themselves with the oppressed they ultimately
fought more passionately and deliberately against the systemic evil
of white hegemony.
Implicit Christian resistance to racism began most clearly in the Cape
colony, in the nineteenth century. This was a result of the comparatively
liberal stance of many of the Protestant missions. That is, while many
Protestant leaders remained unconsciously ethnocentric and hence, white
supremacy was taken for granted, nevertheless, it was felt that not
only the souls of black heathens could be saved from eternal damnation,
but that they could be educated on white terms to be good citizens of
Empire. This liberal attitude was also a reflection of the mid-Victorian
liberal mind set that had been imported from Britain and the quite extensive
contact that had existed between blacks and whites since the first of
the Frontier Wars and which had been maintained to facilitate an agricultural
and trade base for the colony. The everyday contact (though limited
and racist by postmodern standards) of whites with blacks should not
be underestimated as a pre-requisite for later resistance to white oppression.
This will be an important recurring motif.
It would be the graduates of the Christian missions (notably Lovedale)
whom would largely form the black elite of the Eastern Cape. It was
they and the coloureds in a few urban centres in the Western Cape who
were able to take advantage of the Cape colony's non-racial qualified
franchise. Thus, in the Cape, Africans were allowed to vote (until 1936)
provided they met quite stringent and discriminatory education and ownership
criteria. Many black students went on to take up employment as journalists,
clerks, interpreters, teachers, preachers and so on. In other words,
since the latter half of the 19th century, a significant minority of
blacks in the Cape entered the middle levels of society; a phenomenon
which was anomalous to the rest of South Africa.1 It is arguable then,
that those Christian missions which were located in the Eastern Cape
were responsible for sowing the seeds of a new (still essentially masculine)
African, who had access, albeit limited, to white institutions; who
knew the horizon of his rights under the Westminster parliamentary and
legal system and who had been given a sense (at least in principle)
of his worth and value as a Christian. Many educated Africans believed
that Christianity had given them progressive values and a new sense
of their place in the world.2 Andre Odendaal argues that it was the
blacks who had been educated by these Christian missions '... who formed
the nucleus of the new emergent political organisations,' in the late
nineteenth century.3 Ultimately, it was the emphasis of the Christian
missions combined with the liberal politics of the Cape, that prepared
the political ground for the formation of the South African Native National
Congress (SANNC) in 1912; later reformed as the African National Congress
(ANC).
In the 1950s Trevor Huddleston commented '... that the overwhelming
majority of South Africans of the "white group" have no conception
whatever of human relationships, except that based on racial domination.'4
From the earliest days of Afrikaner invasion of southern Africa, whites
had psychologically immunised themselves against viewing the indigenous
peoples as fellow human beings. At best they were there to serve white
economic and political interests. At worst, they were abstractly perceived
as the 'native problem.' 'The native,' said Huddleston, 'is a problem;
he is never a person.'5 This immunisation came to be most notoriously
evident in the missiological doctrines6 of the Afrikaner Dutch Reformed
Church (DRC). The DRC became the co-conspirator of apartheid and some
critics have argued, its progenitor.7 While not nearly as debilitating,
the immunity was also a problem even for more liberal Christians. The
dilemma for white liberal Christianity was that while it tried to improve
the status of Africans, it did not challenge the oppressive structures
to which it was umbilically tied and partly as a consequence, it was
not in touch with the black experience of living under a white regime.
It organised and theologised at a distance, with all the assumptions
of cultural superiority and Christian paternalism. White ignorance of
black experience would only intensify after the union of South Africa
as the social and political divide between black and white widened with
the increasing adoption of segregationist legislation such as the 1913
Land Act and the Pass Laws.
Concrete resistance to the white regime came through a radical Christianity
as distinct from conservative or liberal Christianity. This radical
strain can be traced back to last century, particularly within the Anglican
communion and also within the fewer Roman Catholic missions.8 The figure
of Anglican Bishop Colenso of Natal (1853-63), is noteworthy. Long before
the missiological concept of enculturation had entered the English vocabulary,
Colenso was practising it with the Zulus of Natal. He quickly came to
believe that the missionary endeavour was only legitimate if it protected
and preserved tribal customs which were compatible with Christianity.
Edgar Brooks and Colin Webb, in their History of Natal, described Colenso
as '... a great tribune of African freedom' who '... set a tradition
which has never died out.'9 A critical element in the Colenso tradition
was his empathy and identification with Zulus. In contrast to his liberal
colleagues Colenso lived with those whom he engaged in mission; he began
to take their side in issues, to see life from their point of view.
He became so radical in this that eventually he ' ... did not wish his
Zulu converts to pray to Christ as God.'10 It was this radical theological
stance and strategy that led him to be formally tried and found guilty
of heresy. Nevertheless the tradition of a minority of white missionaries
attempting to live alongside blacks and enculturate the Gospel, that
is, to facilitate the expression of Christianity through indigenous
symbol and custom, continued on. This attitude posed a direct threat
to white superiority, which viewed African custom and religion as inferior
and pagan.
Brookes and Webb, suggest that later Anglican priests such as Bishop
Reeves and Father Trevor Huddleston stood in direct line and lineage
to the Colenso legacy.11Huddleston spent twelve years living and working
with the urbanised African mainly in Sophiatown in the 1950s. His order
included black priests and was committed to the work of advocate on
behalf of the black community. Identification, led the order to see
first hand the daily brutality and injustice of the white racist regime.
It seems that the more one physically took sides with the African poor,
the more one was open to a conversion to their experience. And consequently,
the more overtly oppressive the government became, the more one's protest
became politicised. Huddleston speaks of his explicit politicisation
occurring in the early 1950s when he was due to speak at a rally that
had been organised against the Government's scheme to forcibly remove
the Africans from Sophiatown. The police arrived with rifles and a tommy
gun to arrest only one man. It was at this moment that he realised just
how far the South African Government had moved towards a totalitarian
regime.12 It was from a radical immersion within the political and social
problems of the African experience of oppression on this occasion and
many subsequently, that Huddleston and other radicalised clerics realised
that the present Government needed to be broken and that it needed to
happen soon. Such religious figures spoke this message publicly at protest
meetings alongside the ANC and from the pulpit, many times alienating
their white constituents. They risked their lives, their vocation and
many were detained, harassed and later banned.
Resistance to white supremacy also came from within the heart of Afrikanerdom,
although the lead was given mainly by one man, namely, Beyers Naude.
In many ways he became the symbol of resistance par excellence. It was
one thing to radically resist from without, it was entirely something
else to do it from within. Naude was a member of the Afrikaner Broederbond
and for a time became Moderator of the Dutch Reformed Nederduitse Gereformeerde
Kerk (NGK). Many in prominent Afrikaner circles perceived his leadership
and intellectual potential and predicted that one day he would be prime
minister.13 It was his solid Afrikaner heritage and these impeccable
Afrikaner qualifications that make him the archetypal symbol of the
process of politicisation and theological radicalisation. Like Huddleston
and others, it was exposure to the plight of blacks that began the process
of change in heart and mind.14 It ought to be admitted however, that
it is never just circumstance or experience that modifies or revolutionises
a person's thinking and living. A change of heart is also dependent
upon certain attitudes that have already been formed, through which
experience is filtered and interpreted. This was certainly the case
with Naude. Even during his academic years, he was already showing signs
of independent thought, religious scepticism, a healthy distrust of
theoretical detachment and the signs of political and theological dissent.15
Naude's resistance burst on to the South African stage in the wake of
the Sharpville massacre in March, 1960. Soon after, World Council of
Churches (WCC) representatives met with their South African member churches
in Cottesloe and produced the Consultation Statement which moderately
questioned the biblical and theological basis of apartheid.16Under pressure
from Prime Minister Verwoerd the NGK withdrew from the WCC. Naude was
left standing alone. He said later '... I was convinced that those resolutions
were in accordance with the truth of the Gospel.' 17
After Sharpville, the Verwoerd Government moved swiftly to completely
suppress black resistance so as to focus on implementing its grand system
for total separation of blacks from whites, known as apartheid18. From
this point on, Naude would prove to be a tenacious and influential adversary
of the apartheid system. Naude later described Sharpville as the moment
when his conscience 'came out of hiding.'19 Naude became convinced that
an independent ecumenical movement of individual Christians opposed
to apartheid needed to be formed urgently. By August 1963 he had founded
the Christian Institute (CI) which functioned as a grass roots network
for study, discussion, publishing and ecumenical protests.20 A month
after its establishment, Naude was forced to resign as NGK Moderator
and was then denied clergy status within the NGK. It is difficult to
appreciate the personal and emotional cost of Naude's decision to take
such a public stand against his own race and religion in this period
when race and religion were the primary determinants of Afrikaner nationhood.
His resolve was especially courageous because at this time he did not
know whether he would be accepted by the black community as a campaigner
in solidarity, because after all he was an Afrikaner.
In short, Naude was prepared to risk everything for the fight against
apartheid. This eventually endeared him to all in the resistance movement,
both black and white. In the years that followed Naude and the CI were
smeared by both the DRC and the Government . The CI was frequently branded
communist, its staff detained and overseas funding stopped. Naude became
the target of the Security Police, right-wing terrorism, and libel suits.
In 1972, Naude and the CI staff refused to testify before a Government
enquiry on the basis that it was not judicial.21The result was that
Naude had to stand trial - a trial which would drag on for three years.
In October 1977, following the CI's vehement attack on the Government
over the June 1976 Soweto uprising, it was declared an illegal organisation.
Naude and eighteen other leaders were to face the punishment of the
apartheid state; they were banned. Naude's banning was suddenly lifted
eight years later in September 1984.22In a interview in 1988 Naude graphically
described what banning entailed: "A banned person cannot be quoted
by the press. A banned person cannot write anything with a view to publication.
A banned person can never meet socially with more than one person at
a time. A banned person is restricted to a specific area of a city or
a town. A banned person is not allowed to enter any educational institution
or any place where any material is being prepared with a view to publishing.
A banned person is not allowed to give any educational instructions
to anybody except his or her own children. So, for all practical purposes,
a banned person becomes a non-person. A banned person is simply removed
from the public eye, and the public voice."23
The CI and its leaders had been silenced after an amazingly successful
16 years of ever deepening and committed struggle against apartheid.
In the years following the Nationalist victory in 1948 and the construction
of the apartheid state, the CI had been the one real torch light for
black resistance once the ANC and the Pan-Africanist Congress (PAC)
had been banned. Naude and the other leaders had increasingly been influenced
by the black consciousness movement and Latin American liberation theology.
These became important tools of biblical exegesis. Increasingly, Naude
and others became aware that the God of the Bible was the God of the
poor and the oppressed. Black consciousness and liberation theology
swept aside the Westernised doctrinal interpretations of Scripture.
The radical nature of the Gospel of Jesus the poor man from Nazareth,
was being rediscovered. The situation called for a development of a
black theology, that is, an African theology which took ' ... seriously
the plight of the poor, the underprivileged, the outcasts and the oppressed.'24.
This is precisely what happened. From the beginning of the 1970s the
CI became a place where black theology would be articulated and developed.
With the CI and its leadership suppressed, the torch light of a Christianity
that had been purified and reminded of its essence was handed on to
a new generation of black radical Christian leaders from the late seventies
and throughout the eighties. Naude's mantle was effectively transferred
to Desmund Tutu. The radical Christian movement against apartheid had
now found its appropriate black voice. The fusion of black consciousness
and an authentic Christianity had now found its nemesis in a leadership
of Africans for Africans. There were many other distinguished black
Christian leaders during this time such as Dr Manas Buthelezi, Alan
Boesak and Frank Chikane. These leaders mounted a formidable resistance
movement against the Government at a time when most other resistance
forces had been savagely and mercilessly crushed. It was these radical
Christians who lead and kept black resistance alive and vigorous, by
creating a climate of self-esteem and hope amongst their oppressed brothers
and sisters.25
In having played a major role in keeping black resistance alive at it
most desperate hour, the Christian resistance movement was extremely
successful, although it had been the product of immeasurable human cost
and suffering by a minority within the Church whom had handed the daunting
task on from at least the time of Bishop Colenso. Without the long suffering
commitment of dissident Christians, both black and white, the fall of
apartheid and the relatively peaceful moves towards a truly representative
democracy in South Africa may not yet have eventuated.
1With the exception of an Indian elite in Natal. 2The
Foundation of the ANC. 3 Andre Odendaal, 'The Roots of the ANC' in Ian
Liebenberg, Fiona Lortan Bobby Nel & Gert van der Westhuizen (eds),
The Long March: The Story of the Struggle for Liberation in South Africa,
Pretoria, Proes, 1994.p.3. 4Trevor Huddleston, Naught for Your Comfort,
Doubleday & Co., Garden City, New York, 1956. p.19. 5ibid, p.82.
6 Allister Sparks, The Mind of South Africa: The Story of the Rise and
Fall of Apartheid, Heinemann, London, 1990, p.160. A missions policy
of developing racially segregated churches was officially adopted by
the DRC in 1935, which was 12 years before the Nationalist ideology
of apartheid was fully developed. 7ibid p.153. The DRC theologian Kuyper's
doctrine of 'sovereignty in one's own sphere' was selectively used by
the builders of Volk Nationalism which systematised the idea of the
Afrikaner nation as being a separate and sovereign 'social sphere.'
Jim Wallis, 'Into the Crucible of Fire: The Church Steps Forward in
South Africa,' in Sojourners, August-September, 1988, p.14. Most significantly,
membership in the highest circles of Afrikaner power and the DRC were
practically synonymous. 8Huddleston, op.cit., p.75. 9Edgar H Brookes
and Colin de B Webb, A History of Natal, University of Natal Press,
Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, 1965. p.105. 10ibid, p.108. 11ibid,
p.105. 12Huddleston, op.cit, p.72. 13Jim Wallis, ' "To Love When
Others Hate": An interview with Beyers Naude.' in Jim Wallis (ed)
Sojourners, February 1988, p.15. 14Charles Villa-Vicencio, 'A life of
resistance and hope,' in Charles Villa-Vicancio & John W De Gruchy
(eds) Resistance and Hope: South African Essays in Honour of Beyers
Naude, pp.7-8. 15ibid.p.7. 16ibid., p.9. 17ibid. 18Beyers Naude, 'The
Christian Institute of South Africa: A Short History of a quest for
Christian Liberation,' in Ian Liebenberg, op.cit., p.166. 19Jim Wallis
op.cit., p.15. 20John W De Gruchy, 'A Short History of the Christian
Institute,' in Ian Liebenberg, op.cit., p.16. 21op.cit., p.24. 22Charles
Villa-Vicencio, op.cit., p.11. 23Jim Wallis, op.cit., p.19. 24Bobby
Nel, 'The Story of a Black Theology of Liberation in South Africa,'
in Liebenberg, op.cit., p.144. 25Johan Kinghorn, 'The Churches Against
Apartheid,' in Liebenberg, op.cit., p.151.
© John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced
in any medium, without applying for permission
(provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
information)