LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
The Way of Michael Scott
But,—Mr. Alport is understandably anxious to justify his Govern- ment's imposition of Federation in face of the opposition to it both in Africa and Britain. But is he justified in claiming the sanction of Christianity for the doctrine that the State has the right to exact obedience from its subjects and that the individual has the duty to obey ? Would he apply his interpretation of the saying " Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's " to the populations of Poland and Eastern Berlin ?
Such an interpretation is slender ground for his assumption that Christ taught a form of Statism for his own people and age and that be bound all subsequent generations by a doctrine that government with or without the consent of the governed, with or without a form of representation based upon racial discrimination, carries equally the sacred obligation of obedience. Surely Christ's religion cannot be so tamed. Nothing less than its full power and glory will suffice both for the dispossessed and those who are themselves possessed by this world.
We can see what a hideous crop of tares is growing up, what perversions of Christ's way of life are being propagated, what bogus revolutionary programmes are being offered to the poor and ignorant and the oppressed peoples of the world. This peril to man and his civilisation has been brought about partly through a persistent human tendency in history to try to reduce Christ's religion to a respectable conformity. But if we prefer our religion- in a morning coat let us not pretend to the Africans that we have put on the whole armour of God.
Something more is needed not only by the ignorant and oppressed but by the wise and powerful in our time. Take away just enough of the Christian gospel to make it conform to the requirements of governments and we are .in danger of depriving the world of any hope of deliverance. Humanity has been turning away in despair from empty claims to salvation, because what is needed is a civilised method of struggle against injustice and unreason and of overcoming evil and the terror of evil.
Christ's passive resistance to Caesar was incidental to his great struggle to overcome evil with good. But Christ's resistance and that of his followers in subsequent history proved infinitely stronger than Caesar's Empire, despite its attempts to suppress Him and them by violence.
With organised Christianity weakened by subsequent compromises and its own internal divisions Christians of our time are faced with the challenge of evil in more highly organised forms and a wider historical context. In Africa the corruption of Christianity has gone very far. In South Africa alone, according to Dr. Sundkler, there are more than eight hundred different Christian sects. In Nyasaland, since the attempts to impose .Federation with Rhodesia and the acquiescence in this by certain Christian leaders and some missionaries (with notable exceptions), African leaders have begun to say " Why not an African Church ? There is an Anglican Church and a Scottish Church and a Dutch Church and German, Swiss and American churches."
Some Africans, considering the Christian statesmanship of those to whom the protection of their country was entrusted, the successors today of Dr. Livingstone and Dr. Laws, are beginning to think of the possibilities of Islam with its seemingly attractive emphasis on the oneness of God, on_ fidelity and brotherhood as contrasted with apartheid and some of our other Christian infidelities.
Africans today are confronted with many choices. One of these is the necessity of choosing the methods and means whereby they will resist injustice and the imposition on them of systems of law and society which violate what we ourselves have taught them of the dignity and worth of the human person. It may be said that this conception is held by only the educated few. These Mr. Alport and his colleagues believe can be safely discounted in Nyasaland. But can they be discounted ? They represent the fruits of many genera-
tions of missionary, educational and their own efforts. Any scheme which reckons on discounting them will result in another serious miscalculation in Africa, the losses of which may not be so easily written off as other miscalculations have been.
If the choice for the African people lies between the methods of violent and non-violent resistance to systems enforCed upon them without their consent, is Mr. Alport so sure that the methods of civil disobedience or passive resistance are incompatible with the methods and the Spirit of Christ ? It is true that Christ did not recommend any particular programme for righting political wrongs. But nor did he ever enjoin that slaves should at any time or by any means be freed. He is not recorded as saying that it would be wrong for his followers belonging to one race to claim superiority over others belonging to another and devise separate systems for them. Our contemporary attitudes and actions are only now being formed from what we believe about Christ Himself and can be derived (wrongly, says Dr. Malan) from his teaching. The mission of Chriitianity in Africa, today is to the educated and civilised as well as to the poor and ignorant and oppressed. The responsibilities of African .Christian leadership in this are great. The " native problem " for Christians is becoming a " white problem." African leaders whether Christian or not have the choice of using civilised or uncivilised methods of resistance. Those who use the methods of non-violence and non-co-operation say they prefer to accept the penalties of unjust laws rather than acquiesce in their injustice. This method is not incompatible with respect and even forgiveness for one's opponents. Clearly it would be more convenient for the Government if there were no resistance to their policies. But this conflict was started by those whom the Africans had Welcomed peace- fully to Nyasaland as .their protectors. May I appeal to Mr. Alport and others wild have influence with the Government not to add to a wrong a greater wrong of representing any opposition to them as inspired by violent and evil motives and to respect the non-violent character of Africans' resistance to their policy. The too ready resort to tear-gas, bullets and truncheons against African Christians using civilised methods of resistance will only weaken and undermine Britain's position in Africa and that of white populations living there.
Perhaps history will record that one of the qualities which made Britain great, in any true sense of the word, was her flexibility in the art of governing and her ability to learn from history. Thereby the frontiers of human freedom have been enlarged and millions in Asia and Africa have achieved the right, and, in the course of the struggle for it perhaps, the capacity to control themselves and their future. Perhaps, after all, the bowler hat, as opposed to the jack-boot, has made Britain the bewildered, and at times even unwilling, instrument of a divine creative purpose. Let the conflict which lies ahead in Africa be a civilised conflict in which both sides keep those qualities and their respect for one another, recalling the past and having faith in the outcome.
Those of us who have opposed Federation and still oppose it because of the inequity and extreme form of racial discrimination in its political structure ought not logically to be accused of supporting " black domination." We shall continue to work for the abolition of bogus partnerships and political representation based upon racial discrimination. We shall go on working for a constitution which will emphasise, not racial differences, but all the things both great and small which people of different race have in common in the building up of a civilised order in Central Africa.—Yours faithfully, MICHAEL SCOTT.
Previous page
