Posted by: Titus Presler | December 14, 2009

New Manicaland bishop wrestles with conflict, threats and depleted finances

Open conflict, death threats and financial straits are among the challenges reported by the Rt. Rev. Julius Makoni, the new Bishop of the Anglican Diocese of Manicaland, who was consecrated at an ordination festival in the see city of Mutare on Nov. 22.

“Our problems in Manicaland are numerous, but I am hopeful that we will overcome them all,” Bp. Makoni wrote on Nov. 10.  “I visited St Anne’s School, Wedza, and confirmed 60 candidates. The Mass was well attended and 500 took communion.  After I had left, Elson Jakazi turned up and harassed the staff and students.  He impounded the mission vehicle and locked up the church. I have so far received, via the diocesan office, 7 death threats!”

Both the vitality of continuing Anglican church life and the crippling disabilities of the ongoing factional strife are evident in this vignette.  Goto, in the Wedza district where St. Anne’s School is located, is at the western end of the Diocese of Manicaland, close to the ecclesiastical border with the Diocese of Harare.  It is one of the major rural church districts, which often continue to be called “missions” in the Zimbabwean church.  From the bishop’s account, it would appear that the bulk of confirmands were from St. Anne’s Secondary School, though there may have been some local residents confirmed as well.

Elson Jakazi is the breakaway bishop who sought in 2007 to take the diocese out of the Church of the Province of Central Africa (CPCA), at the same time that Nolbert Kunonga tried the same move with the Diocese of Harare, both on the pretext that CPCA was not tough enough in opposing homosexuality in the church.  Both bishops were soon de-certified by CPCA, and in February 2009 the Anglican Primates definitively confirmed that they were no longer recognized, but both are seeking to retain control of diocesan property and financial resources.

It is encouraging that a major confirmation liturgy could be held by the legitimate bishop at a major church center, and it indicates significant local support in that area.  It has been reported that 26 Manicaland clergy attended Bp. Makoni’s consecration, a number that probably constitutes over half the clergy of the diocese, a sign of the degree of support the new bishop has.  Yet it is discouraging that the breakaway bishop was able to follow so close on Makoni’s heels and then to harass local loyalists, lock up the church and impound a vehicle.

The bishop also reported that Jakazi was “interfering” at St. David’s, Bonda, a major church district in the mountains north of Mutare.

In his Nov. 10 communication Bp. Makoni reported that he was in the U.K. trying to raise money for diocesan operations and indicated that just US$100 was left in the diocesan bank account.  The financial crisis is due to Jakazi’s continued hold on major resources, which include St. John’s Cathedral, diocesan trust funds, rents from commercial properties attached to the diocesan headquarters, and assessments from parishes and church districts still loyal to Jakazi.

The major fundraising accomplished by the United Society for the Propagation of the Gospel earlier this year was designed primarily to support clergy stipends in the Diocese of Harare, and this observer’s understanding is that the fact that it exceeded its goal meant that for a time it was able to support Manicaland clergy stipends as well.  That time may be coming to an end, which makes the financial crisis in Manicaland especially pressing.

It is helpful for people outside the country to be aware that the United States dollar is now not only legal tender but virtually the official currency of Zimbabwe, which is ironic in view of the nation’s strained relations with the USA.   The Zimbabwe dollar no longer exists, having been abolished early this year as a result of the highest inflation in world monetary history.  The British pound and South African rand are also legal tender but are in only marginal use.  The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe has predicted that it may not be until 2018 or 2019 that the country once again institutes a Zimbabwean currency.  In August, the established salary for Manicaland Anglican clergy was US$100/month.  At the time, a loaf of bread cost $US1.  Thus, the economic stability brought by shifting to the US dollar is stability at a very low standard of living, especially since savings and investments denominated in Zimbabwe dollars were wiped out by the abolition of that currency.  In another measure, bus trips from high-density suburbs of Harare, what formerly were called “townships,” cost 50 cents (US) each way, so workers were typically paying US$20 per month just for transport to and from work out of salaries in the $100-200 range.  Thus clergy share in the impoverishment and economic pressure experienced by the population as a whole, making the need for support especially urgent at this time.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Taneta naVaJakazi. Do not wonder at the language of confrontation. The Zimbabwean army which he was a part of taught him well. Why not go to the Baptist Church that he would attend without fail on Plantation Avenue in Mutare? This is a person who has never been fully committed to the Anglican Church but only when it was expedient.

    • I thank Tarisai for the response. Once again I am greatly concerned and surprised that the responses focus on petty personality issues and any request for substance is dodged. Bishop Jakazi is not confrontational. I have asked for examples and real quotations, but people continue to go round in circles. Where does this theory come from – that all soldiers and ex-soldiers are confrontational? Bishop Jakazi has been subjected to confrontation and violence by the Church of the Province of Central Africa. There are facts to prove this. The very same people turn round to accuse Bishop Jakazi of confrontation. We all know it is propaganda.

      It is absolutely wrong to claim that Bishop Jakazi was not committed to the Anglican Church. This is not a fact but a misguided opinion. He is free to fellowship where he pleases and with whomsoever. He fellowships with various other groups and ministries that Tarisai is not aware of. What do the Anglican rules say about this fellowship outside of the Anglican Church? Is that part of the reason why the Anglicans worldwide are failing to observe their own structures and laws and trying to drive out a properly elected and consecrated bishop?

      There is now a lot of nit-picking on Bishop Jakazi. Last time it was that he had been “ex-communicated”. Noone could explain this. Then there were accusations that he attended Bp Kunonga’s daughter’s wedding. Now there is another one – that he fellowshiped with the Baptists. If that was supposed to disqualify him from being bishop of the Anglican Church we were all given 28 days after his election to point out any reason why he should not be bishop. Four years down the line such accusations will not help anybody. What we see here are opportunities to send hate messages, but I stand for facts and the truth. What use will it be for us to dwell on petty issues when the Church of the Province of Central Africa, with the sympathy of the Anglican Communion, has failed to properly administer their own canons and is fighting a losing battle? The people who are writing to try to discredit Bishop Jakazi should try and understand their world better, the Anglican issues and the Bible. I thank Titus for giving opportunity for these varied opinions and viewpoints, and I also would like us all to face the truth.

      Regards, Divine

  2. Again I would like to thank Titus for publishing my latest submission on issues relating to the Anglican Church. I would like , however to comment on T. Brighton’s comments. I am of the opinion that his comments are based on some emotion, not facts. This is the very same error that was made by the Church of the Province of Central Africa (CPCA) and which error is being corrected by the circular Courts, much to the shame and disgrace of the Church of God, the Bride of Christ.

    First, the so called excommunication of Bp Jakazi and Bp Kunonga is a fallacy in terms of the way the Anglican Church is governed. My last comments clearly show the roles that are played by the hierarchies of the Anglican Church worldwide. Can Brighton please go a bit further and explain the process of excommunication? Who does it and in terms of what authority? What are the circumstances that lead to this act? Let us engage in factual debate and not emotional outbreaks.

    Brighton talks of Bp Jakazi having presided over the marriage of Bp Kunonga’s daughter. I want to remind him that Zimbabwe is a place of free association and in terms of our constitution and laws, an old friend can attend a friend’s wedding, and this is allowed. It is unfortunate that the Church has been trying to isolate Bp Jakazi and make sure, through publishing hate messages on internet and otherwise, that he has no friends or anyone to talk to. The Church is obviously going too far in its campaign and one wonders if that is part of the Kingdom of God. From what I gather from Bp Jakazi, he knew Bp Kunonga’s daughter from a long time ago, and she asked him to preside over her wedding. These are petty domestic and private issues which do not involve the Church of God as such, or even any individual for that matter. May I, perhaps, understand why the wedding of Bp Kunonga’s daughter is a matter for the Church or anyone? The Bishops in the CPCA have formed a club to isolate Bp Jakazi. They still follow him around to see who he is associating with and make an issue of it. However, Brighton should also be kind enough to suggest who Bp Jakazi should associate with, maybe his approved list of “friends”. Bp Jakazi will not form his own church. He is waiting for justice in the courts and will not succumb to unjustified bullying.

    Bp Jakazi has stated that the Harare and Manicaland Dioceses issues are different, and should not be lumped together. This is true. This is why I tried to explain the circumstances relating to Bp Jakazi and the Anglican Diocese of Manicaland in my last submission.

    There is proven violence against Bp Jakazi. In addition to failing to adhere to its Canons and making attempts to isolate Bp Jakazi, the CPCA has resorted to using extreme violence against Bp Jakazi. In my last comment I quoted St Agnes Chikanga. There are several more which are not on internet, but we have police RRB numbers which we can publish on internet if needed. I will stand for the truth and facts. I am also happy to get the different points of view to enrich the debate as these things will, inevitably, form part of our church history and the inheritance of future generations.

    That Bp Jakazi and Bp Kunonga must repent is noted. Brighton needs to explain what they should repent of. This will help. And what makes Brighton claim that Bp Jakazi is being used by the devil? I would remind him of the words of Jesus Christ when the same allegation was made about Him – that a Kingdom that is divided against itself will not stand. The devil will never preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and bring people to be born again and receive Jesus Christ, which Bp Jakazi is doing. The devil is actually trying to get people away from salvation through hate, divisiveness and deception. I attend to Bp Jakazi’s sermons quite often. He does not intimidate anyone using “Army language,” whatever that is. Exactly what does he say to you or those who claim to be intimidated? For all we know, he uses illustrations from all walks of life, including the army, with which he is familiar. For example, he says that we Christians are soldiers of Christ, fighting against the devil. We should therefore be on the alert like the ordinary soldier. Or that we should always be in proper form to fight, with proper uniform and weapons, as in Ephesians Chapter 6. Is that intimidation? Or it is a warning over the devil.

    I do not write on issues relating to Harare Diocese because for the most part, I do not have enough information. However, there was a press statement to the effect that Bp Kunonga is the bona fide bishop of Harare, having been granted all property in the diocese by the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe. This, Brighton, was determined in terms of the Canons of the Church of the Province of Central Africa, which governs the running of the Church. While people get emotional for personal reasons, that should not be allowed to get in the way of decision-making at high levels.

    I would request Brighton to understand the Anglican Church and the way it is structured and also what the Bible and Jesus Christ say about the way Christians should conduct themselves. Repentance starts with me, then I can preach it to other people more through our deeds and accompanied by our words.

    Kind Regards
    Divine Melusi

  3. Let’s be honest and truthful when giving people information. Elson Madoda Jakazi was excommunicated together with his Father in God Dr Kunonga. The two are no longer members of the Anglican Communion. Melusi, it does not matter that Jakazi has a strong Evangelism Team and [and is reported to be] casting out demons. The devil can use people as well. The truth of the matter is that Jakazi and Kunonga are being used by the evil one. Why does he like using army language to intimidate people of God? He is always saying that he has nothing to do with Kunonga, yet they are working together. Early this year he presided over the marriage of Kunonga’s daughter in Harare, accompanied by Murakwani and Mungazi. Recently, Kunonga was invited to his synod, to which he decided to sent his son-in-law Mtongomanya to convey a message of solidarity. If Jakazi is truly called and mightly used by God he must openly tell people that he has started his own church.

    It is my prayer that the two apologise to the Church of God and ask for God’s forgiveness before they are taken home. Yes, one can win everything on earth by hook and crook but cannot win on judgment day before God Almighty.

    Repent, for our God is gracious. He will forgive you before you join those who have gone before us. This the chance you are being given, Kunonga and Jakazi.

    Brighton T

  4. I would like to thank you, Titus, very much for allowing diverse views on your website and publishing the same to encourage different points of view. There is always more than one side to any story.

    My comments this time focus on the central questions that Titus said were not addressed. It was not the intention of the writer to address those at the time because the focus was on the accuracy of facts in the publication. I would like to start by looking at the way the Anglican Church is governed worldwide. This is the very reason why I continuously refer to the Canons of the Church of the Province Of Central Africa (CPCA) because they are well structured in accordance with the Anglican way of governance.

    I will quote from the book CELEBRATING THE ANGLICAN WAY, which was co-authored by George Carey, former Archbishop of Canterbury, John Habgood, former Archbishop of York, and several other bishops, clergy and biblical scholars. This book clarifies the way the Anglican Church is run on a world wide context. “Unlike the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Communion is not a single worldwide authority structure (like a pyramid with the pope at the top). It is really a worldwide federation of dioceses. Each diocesan bishop is, in a very real way, autonomous in his or her own diocese. Each diocese, therefore, has its own administrative structures, balances its own budget, employs its own staff, ordains its own clergy. . . . Dioceses have grouped themselves into provinces, and one of the bishops has been appointed or elected as archbishop of the province, with a role of leadership and ministry among the college of bishops.”

    Commenting on the foregoing, the scope of operation and limits of the archbishop are then spelt out in the Canons of the province, like ours, it is the CPCA. Issues relating to misconduct of clergy or bishops and how these issues are dealt with are spelt out in the Canons. There is certainly no way that the Church puts rules and regulations into place then ignores them when dealing with church issues. Its like that for any other issue even outside the church. We are governed by certain rules, and we cannot operate on emotions.

    I continue to quote: “The worldwide Anglican Church is known as the Anglican Communion, a name which reflects its essentially federal nature. Traditionally, the Archbishop of Canterbury presides over the Anglican Communion, but the role is one of influence, not of power, for the communion has no legislative powers over the Provinces. There is no worldwide Anglican Synod, and no bishop of bishops. Even the Lambeth Conference, which meets every ten years, is only a consultative body, at whose sessions the bishops of the various Provinces take counsel together. It has no legislative powers. Nor does the Anglican Consultative Council, which is the continuing committee of the worldwide Anglican Communion. These are bodies dedicated to the search for a common mind and common policies, but always respecting the right and responsibility of each diocese, under the leadership of its bishop to take responsibility for its own mission and ministry in its own context.”

    I want to point out that if a bishop acts in a way that he should not, the Canons are the guideline of procedures that should be taken. The aforementioned offices – Primates meeting, Archbishop of Canterbury, the Anglican Consultative Council, the Lambeth Conference – all do not have jurisdiction over the Anglican Diocese of Manicaland. It is not enough for them to “take a position” which is not backed by authority. There is also language of “concur”, “taken positions”, “taken similar positions”, “similar stance” – but based on what authority? Is it an international kangaroo court? I would like to expose and challenge this false authority that these august offices are trying to wield. It is nothing less than bullying tactics.

    I have seen a letter dated 13 November 2008 that was written by the Revd Canon Kenneth Kearon, Secretary General of the Anglican Communion, which was addressed TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN. This circular letter “confirmed” that Bp Peter Hatendi was the Anglican Bishop of Manicaland. This was grossly incompetent and was not in terms of the Canons of the CPCA or any other constitution governing the Anglican Church. What we know is that issues concerning bishops are properly addressed to the relevant recipients and are communicated by the Provincial Secretary. What role was Revd Kearon playing? Not only that. Had he availed himself of the rules governing the CPCA to ensure that he circulated facts, albeit without authority? Ever since we have had bishops here in Zimbabwe, we have never received circulars concerning individual bishops from the Anglican Communion or Lambeth or from 16 Tavistock Crescent in London [the address of the Anglican Communion Office]. We are guided by the Canons of the CPCA, not by bullying tactics of ill-informed high offices who should know better the way the church is structured and governed. What makes this one unique? What are the interests?

    Moving on to the issue of Bp Jakazi withdrawing from the Province, please understand that the decision was made by the Standing Committee of the Diocese, and the Bishop wrote on behalf of the Standing Committee. The only correction is that this should have been done at Synod level, but still the Bishop was going to do the writing of the withdrawal letter. It is false that Bp Jakazi acted individually. However, I still ask the question, what offence is this in terms of the CPCA Canons? If it really is an offence, why has the CPCA failed to deal with it in terms of the Canons and chose instead to superimposed a parallel structure, something unheard of in the Anglican Church? It is not enough for the CPCA to “conclude” that a bishop, acting on behalf of a diocese is himself withdrawing as an individual. What does the constitution say? Canon 24 is clear that the bishop must be charged if in misconduct and the provisions of Section 2 (b) should be complied with. This has not happened. The CPCA also alleges that Bp Jakazi is “assumed” to have “resigned”. Bp Jakazi never resigned, neither did he express any intention to resign from his office. He was not even dismissed in terms of the Canons of the CPCA. Any resignation would have been in terms of Canon 13. A resignation by its nature has to be voluntary. All we have here is an adverse unilateral and prejudicial decision based on misrepresentations.

    The Church has completely failed to abide by its own constitution. How can then the same church challenge the State when it errs or is perceived to have lost the rule of law. The situation in Zimbabwe is that the State is overwhelmed by the confusion in the Anglican Church – in Courts and at Police Stations. The internet is full of messages of hate, exaggerations, lies, acts of violence, etc. So much for proclamation of the Good News in the Anglican Communion.

    That takes me to the last point where Titus queries the violence being perpetrated by the parallel diocese. On your internet search page, please search “St Agnes, Chikanga” and you will read of an early morning attack on the priest loyal to Bp Jakazi who was severely assaulted. This one happens to be on internet but it is one among so many. The Courts are awash with such cases. There are acts of divisiveness, deception and destruction which are being sponsored by the Church. Will the Church then be able to win souls for Christ or does anyone care?

    This brings me to the last point, my prayer, that there be divine intervention.

    Kind Regards
    Divine Melusi

  5. I am happy to allow comments that provide diverse views of the situation in Manicaland, as this one does vigorously, though my position is clear from my postings. The succession of postings about events in Manicaland and this contrary account highlight the tragedy of conflict continuing to unfold in that diocese. There is probably no part of the Anglican Communion that is currently seeing more severe internal conflict than the dioceses of Manicaland and Harare.

    Accusations of violence on the part of the duly constituted authority of the Diocese of Manicaland, as are made in this comment, are unverified, and I have seen no evidence to support them. The number of clergy present for Bp. Makoni’s consecration was received on good authority.

    Central questions the commentator does not address include these:

    – When a bishop states that he is withdrawing his diocese from the province of the Anglican Communion in which the diocese concerned is situated, an act that a bishop is not empowered to undertake, is it not legitimate for the province to conclude that he is himself withdrawing from the church and therefore to declare the see vacant, as the Church of the Province of Central Africa did?

    – When the Primates Meeting and the Archbishop of Canterbury, two of the four Anglican Instruments of Communion, concur with the Church of the Province of Central Africa that the bishop concerned no longer holds jurisdiction, in virtue of the fact that he relinquished it, how can the bishop concerned continue to claim Anglican jurisdiction? The other two instruments, the Anglican Consultative Council and the Lambeth Conference, have taken similar positions, both implicitly and explicitly.

    The offenses envisioned by the canons, to which the writer refers, are offenses a bishop may commit in the course of holding office, for which an ecclesiastical trial would be appropriate. At issue in the Manicaland and Harare controversies, however, are not offenses committed in the course of holding office. As I understand it, the position of the province is that the bishops concerned gave up their episcopal office when they declared that they were withdrawing their dioceses from the province. Those declarations were tantamount to resignations. As I understand it, it is on that ground that the province declared the dioceses vacant and considered that an ecclesiastical trial was not appropriate to the circumstances.

    A similar stance was taken later by the Episcopal Church USA in the case of bishops who declared that they intended to take their dioceses out of the Episcopal Church. Ecclesiastical trials were not held. The bishops were deposed and their sees declared vacant. Caretaker bishops have been appointed, and in due course new bishops are being elected. Significantly, the deposed bishops have not pursued their removals as legal grievances in either civil courts or ecclesiastical courts, in contrast to other instances where ecclesiastical trials have been held for offenses alleged in the course of holding office. The depositions continue to be criticized by some, whether on pastoral, theological or polity grounds, but they have not been legally contested. Control of property is certainly being contested in civil courts, but not the status of the bishops, and generally the courts are ruling in favor of the Episcopal Church USA and not in favor of the breakaway bishops and dioceses.

    Thus the stance taken by CPCA is not unique but is found elsewhere in the Anglican Communion. A bishop may resign and start a new church if he/she desires. A bishop may commit various offenses while in office and be tried for those offenses. When, however, a bishop undertakes to do what cannot be done, to withdraw his/her diocese from the local Anglican province, the bishop has resigned his/her see. The diocese continues to be part of the local province, but the bishop has withdrawn from it, and the local province is free to declare the see vacant and go about filling it.

    Continuing the discussion,
    Titus

  6. I would like to challenge the accuracy of information contained in this posting. To give readers a true picture of what is happening on the ground, I will reproduce a letter that was written to Dr Makoni by lawyers representing Bp Jakazi:

    “DISTURBANCES AT ST AUGUSTINE’S MISSION AND ST ANNE’S GOTO MISSION – We write with deep concern of the conduct of your members who have chosen to willfully breach the Order by Consent issued by Justice Bhunu on 14 October 2009. We hereby attach a copy of the order for your perusal, although we are quite aware that you are conversant with its contents. The High Court ordered in (b) that the various properties and institutions remain as they are without change whatsoever, until the same Honourable Court would have intervened by issuance of an appropriate Court Order, and that if either party interferes with the Status Quo, that it be regarded as contempt of Court, then swift enforcement can be done by way of a chamber application. This order was issued after the Board of Trustees for the Diocese of Manicaland and Bishop Elson Madoda Jakazi had approached the Court after disturbances of various properties and institutions by the Church of the Province of Central Africa through its agents Bishop R Hatendi and others. . . . It has been brought to our attention that some of your priests have been going to St Augustine’s to hold some services there without the consent of the Board of Trustees for the Diocese of Manicaland (case 4804/09) and Bishop Elson Jakazi, who has effective control of these institutions. To mention them, Rev Waziweyi and Magurupira have been to St Augustine’s Mission and they disturbed the Status Quo. We have also gathered that this coming Sunday, Reverend Chawarika is also going to St Augustine’s with various people being bused in. We have since gathered that Rev Chawarika and Mavhezha have been to St Anne’s Mission Goto to disturb the Status Quo. The priest-in-charge of St Anne’s is Rev Mudhumo and that of St Augustine’s Mission is Rev Maunze, and the Chaplain being Rev Magaya. We have also gathered that your group has been disturbing Rev Ndlovu’s station in Dora, and Manunure, Honde Valley where Reverend Pfupajena is in charge. . . . We request the protection of the police where these various institutions are situated and for them to act swiftly whenever there any contemptous acts.”

    The extracts of the letter reproduced above tells that there is a High Court Consent Order in terms of which Dr Makoni has no legal access to almost all mission stations, which include St Augustine’s; St David’s Bonda – schools, hospital, orphanage and the Convent; St Matthias Tsonzo; St Peter’s Mandeya; St Mary Magdalene’s; St Faith’s Rusape and St Anne’s Goto.

    When Dr Makoni visited St Anne’s Goto and did confirmations, he was in contempt of Court and the law could easily have been invoked. This was, however, not done. The astonishing lies that were reported are that “Elson Jakazi turned up and harrassed the staff and students. He impounded the mission vehicle and locked up the church. . . .”

    These are blatant lies because Bp Jakazi last visited St Anne’s Goto in July/August 2008. Those of us who know St Anne’s Goto are aware that the mission vehicle has not been running for a while now and to impound it, one needs to tow!!! In any case, the person who has custody of this vehicle is Rev Mudhumo, who is loyal to Bp Jakazi. Well, to give you more rope, please give details of this vehicle – the make, model, registration number, and where it was parked. Impounding a vehicle is a criminal offence in Zimbabwe. Was a police report made, Dr Makoni? The school vehicle would even be impossible if anyone knew that various stakeholders who would take action against such a criminal act – there is the School Headmaster and teachers, the Board of Governors, the School Development Committee, the Ministry of Education and the Police. The allegation is from someone who is clearly writing for people who are more interested in the writer’s intentions than the truth.

    Dr Makoni’s visit to St Anne’s Goto was on Friday, 27 November 2009, 5 days after his “ordination” at the Mutare Agricultural Showgrounds. I will not comment on the preparation of these candidates more so as the priest there is loyal to Bp Jakazi and he prepares candidates to be confirmed by his bishop. On the Friday in question, no one was using the church, and the church is kept locked when not in use. Bp Jakazi does not have to travel 200 kilometers to secure property. Dr Makoni arrived when the priest was away, found the church locked and proceeded to the school dining hall to conduct a service. He was accompanied by Bp Trevor Mwamba of Botswana and retired Archbishop Makhulu, among other people. This is when the instant confirmation took place. Yet Dr Makoni was in contempt of Court, and he knew he was. Bp Jakazi would not need to harass anybody when he had the law on his side and when he controls about 80% of the Diocese.

    One commentator said that Dr Makoni will need “very vibrant and intelligent lawyers who know the Canons of the Province and the Acts of the Diocese.” That is partially true. It’s actually the Church of the Province of Central Africa (CPCA) that must read and understand their Canons. The lawyer cannot change them or twist them in Court. The CPCA publicly violated its own Canons overwhelmingly in an attempt to get rid of Bp Jakazi. It does not matter how many Bishops, who are equally ignorant of the Canons and are fuelled by hate of someone they do not even know, support this unconstitutional act and how much they shout it on internet, Canon 28.1 must be complied with, and this says “No Bishop shall be tried for any offence except in the Provincial Court as constituted by these Canons.” If the Church can’t use its Canons, can it at least be guided by biblical principles, please? It seems okay to the world that in the history of the Anglican Church a Bishop is dismissed on internet by the Bishops of the rest of the world and a parallel system is superimposed!! We still go back to Canon 28.1, my brothers and sisters. The Canons are not made to protect just a selected club of people, no, they also protect Bp Elson, much as they would protect Bp Chama [Bishop of Northern Zambia and Dean of CPCA]. At least there are circular courts to deal with the church.

    Because of the High Court consent order, Dr Makoni has no legal access to the Cathedral and this is why the CPCA publicly violated its Canon 8 which says that a Bishop SHALL be enthroned in a Cathedral. The one took place at the Manicaland Agricultural Showgrounds. I note with interest that Titus refers to 26 priests who attended the Showgrounds event. These are exaggerations. Dr Makoni works with these priests – Reverends Waziweyi, Nyazika, Magurupira, Mukome, Chawarika, Gwashero, Chipudhla, Doma, Chemhere, Mudowaya, Mwoyowaonda, Nyamangodo, Mbona, Mavhezha, Dhliwayo and Mushipe. It’s 16, not 26, if they all attended.

    Bp Jakazi works with Reverends – Njaya, Katanga, Sango, Chibvuri, Dzore, Ndlovu, Maupa, Muzokura, Matikiti, Mudehwe, Mwando, Maunze, Magaya, Chibinya, Mhaka, Makape, Chiwanza, Chindomu, Mhosva, Nechironga, Kadzunge, Mukurechaza, Chiinze, Pfupajena, Mutingeringe, Simbabure, Zhuwao, Nyakurimwa, Nyagato, Murakwani, Mungazi, Makoni (ironically), Muza, Basira, Mudhumo, Nyamutaira, and Maungwe. That’s 37.

    To explain further, during the weekend of 20-22 Nov 2009, Bp Jakazi, his priests and congregations were gathered at Mufudzi Wakanaka Church in Dangamvura, Mutare, to celebrate 28 years of the Diocese. The celebrations ended on 22 Nov after an all-night prayer. There is therefore no way that any of the latter priests could have gone to the Showgrounds.

    There is a comment that Bp Jakazi is kept in office by the Evangelism Team. This somewhst misses the point. Bp Jakazi himself is evangelical and he implements the Great Commission to the full in this Diocese. He preaches and teaches salvation in Jesus Christ, he preaches and teaches deliverance. There is healing of the sick, there is casting out of demons. People are coming forward to receive Jesus Christ and people are being born again. As a result, people are seeing their faith in a new light. True, there are several strong ministries and one of them, well emphasised, is the evangelism team.

    I was happy to read that Dr Makoni is being advised to copy Bp Jakazi. It would be great if he did and it will be a relief. We will know that the disturbances and interruptions to Sunday services by Dr Makoni’s supporters are over. The hired thugs who are bused in to interrupt services and assault worshippers and demand a hand-over of the church to Dr Makoni, previously to Bp Hatendi, will then stop. The Holy Spirit would then take control. Happy will also be the Police because they will not need to be called so often to protect people who are being harassed, and sometimes having to make arrests. The Police would now rest on Sunday and those who go to church would resume going and not spend all their time at Anglican Churches.

    I will be looking forward to responses and also to more publications at Titus on Mission. I expect more honest accounts from the men of God.

    Kind Regards,
    Divine Melusi

  7. In order for Bishop Makoni to regain the diocesan offices he and the priests must take a vibrant approach and complement it with strong evangelism so as to counter Bishop Jakazi, who has a very strong evangelism team which has kept him afloat.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: