The history of Zimbabwe is characterised by a series of challenges, which, at different turning points, manifested themselves through violent conflicts, since its independence in 1980. Faced with the challenges associated with violence, socio-political, economic and religious conflicts, civil unrest and polarisation of the Zimbabwean society from 2008 to 2017, this article discusses the relevance and applicability of Jesus’ ethics with special focus on the Matthean Jesus and forgiveness in a bid to bring national healing, peace and reconciliation. The article stresses that the application of Matthean Jesus’ ethics is vital for the Zimbabwean society because it paves way for peace, healing and reconciliation. Among other factors, the Matthean Jesus’ ethics call for victims of political violence to unconditionally extend forgiveness to their offenders as demonstrated by the Matthean Jesus who forgave mankind’s sins through his sacrificial death on the cross. Over and above that, there should be an honest implementation of justice and truth telling by the Zimbabwean government through willingness and commitment to institute the rule of law and cab all forms of lawlessness. Moreover, it is imperative that there should be a formation of an independent truth, justice and reconciliation commission to deal with truth telling, acknowledgement of past wrongs, and restorative and transitional justice issues in Zimbabwe.
The history of Zimbabwe is characterised by a series of challenges, which, at different turning points, manifested themselves through violent conflicts since its independence in 1980. The issue of achieving sustainable peace and development has remained a challenge because of the lack of comprehensive approaches to human rights violations (Machakanja
Sim (
Jesus’ stance on forgiveness in Matthew can be deduced from the following passages in Matthew: ‘And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors’ (Mt 6:12).
The petition for the forgiveness of debts, our sins, is an appeal that God, as the Father of the disciples, will graciously forgive them their sins and so enable them to forgive one another (Stock
Basis: ‘For if you forgive others their trespasses, your father in the heavens will also forgive you. If you do not forgive others, neither will your father forgive your trespasses’ (Mt 6:14–15, 18:35) (Talbert
Lord, how often will my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times? (Mt 18:21–35)
Acceptance of suffering and service by the disciples in analogy to Jesus stands behind the instructions that Jesus gives to his disciples throughout the section on community life (Stock
According to Schreiner (
But the deepest secret of this love which characterizes realized discipleship is that they have learnt how to forgive. They extend to others the divine forgiveness which they have experienced, a forgiveness which passes all understanding. (Schreiner
Anything that causes people to stumble or fall away must be removed from their lives. Jesus uses hyperbolic language of cutting off a foot or hand or gouging out an eye (Mt 5:29–30, 18:8–9) to portray the radical steps that must be taken to avoid apostasy. Both anger (Mt 5:21–26) and lust (Mt 5:27–28) must be conquered by believers, and they cannot be allowed to take root in the hearts of Jesus’ disciples (Schreiner
Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven’. (Mt 18:22)
In Jesus’ answer (which is a historical present), after the question that sets a limit, a number is cited that expresses an utterly unlimited readiness for forgiveness. This unexpected answer has the sound of a proverb, but by its form and succinctness, it carries conviction (possibly Jesus reverses Lamech’s vindication song of Gn 4:24).
The community, versed in the Old Testament, knew the song that Lamech, one of Cain’s descendants, sang before his wives:
If Cain is avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy-sevenfold. (Gn 4:23)
Cain had rejoiced in Yahweh’s protection, no one dare to kill him (Gn 4:15); but if it happened, Cain would be revenged sevenfold. In his pride, Lamech could outdo Cain; he will receive a revenge out of all proportion, unlimited (Stock
Against the example of unlimited revenge, Jesus sets unlimited reconciliation; as it is so rife in the world, it can only be balked where an equally great amount of good is set against it. To the ‘natural insistence or right’, Matthew’s community must make its own the ‘totally opposed’ command (‘I tell you’) and form its community life according to it. Natural sensibilities have no place there, where mercy becomes the highest norm of fraternal behaviour (cf. the fifth beatitude Mt 5:7) (Stock
Two meanings above all are brought home to the community: (1)
Once again, Matthew did not only present an earlier tradition but also re-interpreted it to meet the needs of his community. He transformed an earlier saying into a more dramatic dialogue about unlimited forgiveness (Mt 18:21–22). He introduced the story of the unforgiving servant (Mt 18:23–24) to illustrate the Father’s attitude toward a disciple who fails to forgive a personal offense (Mt 18:35). ‘This evidence reveals Matthew’s interpretation and provides an insight into the concrete situation which influenced his arrangement and composition’. The members of his community needed a forceful reminder that they should always forgive a personal offense (Stock
Sande (
The parable of the unmerciful servant vividly illustrates this principle (Mt 18:21–25). In that story, a servant owed the king an enormous debt. When the king threatened to have the servant and his family sold as slaves to pay off the debt, the servant begged for mercy. The king ‘took pity on him, cancelled the debt and let him go’ (Mt 18:27). Moments later, the servant saw a man who owed him a much smaller debt. When he demanded payment, the man asked for time to repay it (Sande
You wicked servant … I cancelled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you? (Mt 18:32–33)
Then, ‘in anger, his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured until he should pay back all he owed’ (Mt 18:34).
According to Reiser (
Jesus concludes this parable with these words: ‘This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart’ (Mt 18:35). The parable illustrates an attitude that is all too common among Christians. We take God’s forgiveness for granted, while we stubbornly withhold our forgiveness from others. In effect, we have behaved as though others’ sins against us are more serious than our sins against God: Jesus teaches that this is a terribly sinful thing to do, it is an affront to God and his holiness, and it demeans the forgiveness that Jesus purchased for us at Calvary (Sande
Hauerwas (
It is true, of course, that in a sense to be a ‘forgiven people’ makes us lose control. To be forgiven means that one must face the fact that his or her life actually depends on the hands of others. When we exist as a forgiven people, we are able to be at peace with our histories, so that now God’s life determines our whole way of being – our character. We no longer need to deny our past, or tell ourselves false stories, as now we can accept what we have been without the knowledge of our sin destroying us (Hauerwas
Here we see the essential links between learning to live as a forgiven people, accepting our historicity, and being at peace with ourselves and with one another, for we are able to have a past only to the extent that we are able to accept forgiveness for what we have done and have not done but which we must claim as our own if we are to have a worthy history. Our sins as human beings are inexorably part of us, but we now no longer need to deny it. As we learn to locate our lives within the kingdom of forgiveness found in Jesus’ life, death and resurrection, we should always acquire those virtues of humility and courage that are necessary to make our lives our own. Forgiving should be our lifestyle if we would need to imitate Jesus Christ. As human beings we should know that no one is perfect; we sin today and need forgiveness from others, and tomorrow someone sins against us and need forgiveness from us.
We can also draw lessons from the parable of the Unforgiving Servant (Mt 18:23–35). The parable is written in superb koine Greek, free of Semitisms, and it was apparently composed by Matthew himself. The parable is subdivided into three scenes or ‘acts’, such as we often find them in Jesus’ parables and similitudes. In the first scene, a ‘servant’ (
The second scene forms a sharp contrast to the first. The same man who had just been forgiven a debt of ‘ten thousand talents’ has scarcely left the king’s presence when he encounters a fellow servant who owes him the sum of 100 denarii, ridiculous in comparison. He seizes him by the throat and demands: ‘Pay what you owe!’ We find this formula in Latin in Petronius’ satyr icon, where one person boasts: ‘no one has ever said to me in a forum: “Give back what you owe!”
The Matthean Jesus in this parable is teaching the importance of the golden rule that ‘we should do unto others what we wish them to do to us’. The master practised justice. Furthermore, this story teaches that the victims of injustice should be treated fairly, and perpetrators of violence must also face justice. Another lesson drawn from this parable is that Jesus was a man of nonviolence, hence the reason why he taught about that parable of an unforgiving servant.
It is important to note that for purposes of clarity, we will give a brief background of the socio-political environment that was prevalent in Zimbabwe from 2008 to 2017 for us to appreciate the efficacy of the application of the Matthean Jesus’ ethics in the Zimbabwean context. The first decade of the 21st century marked the beginning of a new epoch in the socio-political history of Zimbabwe. This was insinuated by the formation of a formidable opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), in 1999, which challenged the ruling party, the Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) that had enjoyed power since independence in 1980. The period from 2000 to 2008 was associated with unprecedented tumult that engulfed the country characterised by a plethora of socio-political challenges, which include the worst hyper-inflation, severe poverty and unprecedented political woes that include abduction, torture, intimidation, victimisation, selective application of the rule of law and murder of alleged members of the opposition MDC.
These socio-political and economic challenges were significantly reduced for a period of 5 years (2008–2013) during the tenure of the Government of National Unity (GNU). During this era, there was the formation of the Organ for National Healing, Reconciliation and Integrations (ONHRI). This organ was meant to promote national healing, peace and reconciliation in Zimbabwe. Be as it may, there were arguments as to whether the national healing and reconciliation project should be led by politicians given the politics of partisanship that characterised the political landscape of Zimbabwe since independence. Indeed, this organ did not yield the desired results. Moreover, the post-GNU era saw the resurgence of the socio-political and economic challenges that were rampant during the pre-GNU era. By the end of 2014, it was evident that the Zimbabwe economy was in deep trouble again, after the marginal recovery under the GNU, but with little sign that the government would address the problems. The solution was evident to virtually all except ZANU-PF (Research and Advocacy Unit
It is important to note that in the Zimbabwean situation, the strict application of the Matthean Jesus’ ethics of non-resentment is problematic because some of the people perceived to be perpetrators of human rights violations continue to hold power or are in strategic positions that obstruct the advancement of the envisioned reconciliation and national healing process. Tom (pers. comm. 18 November 2014) argues that those who are prosecuted are those alleged offenders from the opposition, while perpetrators from the ruling party often get away scot-free. Prosecution is not fairly practised, because even the judiciary system seems to be biased towards the ruling party, giving the impression that it is not an independent body. The president, probably with the ruling government, decides on who should be judges and this hamstrung the effectiveness of the judiciary. No wonder there is an outcry for the independence of the judiciary by opposition parties and the international community.
Chirandu (pers. comm. 09 June 2014) argues that some rich perpetrators of political violence simply pay bribes and they get off scot-free. According to Steven (pers. comm. 13 July 2015), the persecuted in most cases in Zimbabwe would end up nursing their wounds whilst behind bars because when they report cases of political violence, they end up being arrested instead of the perpetrators of the violence. The aggrieved would, therefore, fear going to report the violence, which makes it very difficult for the victims to get medication because the doctors would first ask for a police report before attending to the victim. The perpetrators of violence aligned to the ruling party are sacred cows, because they are often not prosecuted. According to Barson (pers. comm. 12 December 2017), Zimbabwe has a dark history of impunity, perpetrators of violence have not been prosecuted because most of the political violence has been state-sponsored and is highly institutionalised. The law enforcing agents, like Zimbabwe Republic of Police (ZRP), have cited shortage of duty officers and lack of transport as reasons for not bringing to book those engaged in violence. Many perpetrators are skilled at manipulating the system effectively to further their aims to punish the victims; hence, they walk scot-free. Kongola (pers. comm. 19 December 2017) asserts that it depends on which political party the perpetrators are affiliated to. If they are from the ruling party, it is unlikely that they would be prosecuted. This is the area where the noble process of national healing, peace and reconciliation fails. For Musimwa (pers. comm. 15 October 2017), perpetrators are not prosecuted as most of them bear high ranks in political parties. The statements above suggest that for Zimbabweans to apply Jesus’ non-violence, repentance, forgiveness and justice will take time because the perpetrators of violence are walking scot-free.
The gospel of Matthew retells the drama of scapegoating but reveals its demand for violence as a fraud. Acknowledging that all history is dominated by violence, the Matthean Jesus says:
Therefore I sent you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify; and some you scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town, that upon you may come all the righteous bloodshed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the alter. Truly, I say to you, all this will come upon this generation. (Mt 23:34–36; Chamburuka & Chamburuka
These views are also found in the early Christianity as they remembered Jesus condemning violence and urged Christians to make peace and to suffer violence without retaliation. In Matthew 22:15–22, when Jesus encouraged the Pharisees to pay taxes to Caesar, it was a way of preventing violence for Jesus knew that the Pharisees perceived him as a political leader. By so doing, Jesus was able to promote peace and prevent political violence.
With the above insights, reconciliation is a tough and slow moving process in Zimbabwe. It requires a decisive beginning, creative enough to bring former enemies to a point where they are willing to explore a shared solution to the conflict, which often has the capacity to consume a society in violence but not to bring peace. It requires a commitment to an inclusive regime of human rights, as an incentive to deepening peace.
Its goal is a society within which enemies begin to engage one another as fellow citizens and even friends (Horsley
[
The notion of non-resentment and forgiveness is applicable to the Zimbabwean situation of national healing, peace and reconciliation in Zimbabwe. As we appreciate the Matthean Jesus’ ethics, we need to consider a close parallel that is enunciated by Mahatma Gandhi’s theory
National healing demands justice but what is happening in Zimbabwe is that the perpetrators of violence are let off scot-free and the law of Zimbabwe is silent about that (Gadzikwa pers. comm. 28 December 2017):
In Bikita one of our close relative lost their live stocks, and the one who destroyed them is free and not prosecuted and this is more painful I tell you. (Gadzp. ikwa pers. comm. 28 December 2017:7)
The other challenge is that the victims are being victimised by their relatives. For national healing to take place in Zimbabwe, the government should not take part in the calling for healing. Neutral organisations should be active on this issue such as churches. An example is the issue of
One of the tenets of Matthean Jesus is non-violence. However, Gadzikwa (pers. comm. 28 December 2017) argues that there is no peace in Zimbabwe. We are talking of a new government that is not a new government at all.
We can safely say we have a new government with the same old people. This current government led by Mnangagwa was not voted by the people of Zimbabwe because it came into power by force using the military. I might not be in for people. Most of them have a tainted history. Maybe we should just give them the benefit of the doubt and see what will happen after elections in 2018 (Gadzikwa pers. comm. 28 December 2017). This is because the people we are dealing with are just the other faction of the same party which is ruling ZANU-PF. They do not represent the people but only their party. The system might not change necessarily because people are the same. The Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Front has failed to bring peace and reconciliation because this new government, instead of bringing together the two factions of the same party G40 (former president Mugabe ZANU-PF supporters) and Lacoste (current president Mnangagwa ZANU-PF supporters), are busy chasing them away from the party and prosecute only people from G40. They are not even mentioning the opposition parties. The confusion is still in their party, which is the ruling party. So how can a party that is failing to bring peace and reconciliation upon itself manage to bring peace and reconciliation to the whole nation? Therefore, as Zimbabweans we still have a lot of work to do in order to effectively implement the Matthean Jesus’ ethics.
Mnangagwa was heard on television (30/12/17) saying
Ruzivo (pers. comm.16 December 2017) argues that the political terrain in Zimbabwe is quite unstable at the moment.
There are still fights happening in some parts of Zimbabwe. Therefore, talking of national healing is quite difficult until the political terrain stabilises. Maybe after the 2018 elections will we realise a temporary national healing, peace and reconciliation. This is because as Zimbabwe has gained independence in 1980, people have been uniting for some short periods before getting divided again.
According to Ruzivo (pers. comm. December 2017), unity is an ideal that one should strive for: it can never be realised ultimately. It is like the life of being a Christian; you always thrive for it. ‘Being a Christian is utopia because you keep striving for it without totally achieving it until you die’ – this can be applied to the national healing of Zimbabwe (Ruzivo pers. comm. 16 December 2017). Reconciliation is not a panacea for the rest of life but it rather registers the desire that we want to have peace and live peacefully. It does not mean that if people has reconciled, they have forgotten. Reconciliation sometimes only comes because people would just want to benefit from the system. Ruzivo (pers. comm. 16 December 2017) argues that ‘I am influenced by Karl Max theory which states that there is a thesis which is followed by anti-thesis and then synthesis’. For him, the Zimbabwe thesis was in 1980, when we got our independence, which was then followed by an anti-thesis in 1987 where we re-united by the means of Unity Accord and then Unity Government in 2009 came later. We will continue in this cycle as a nation. Peace will come for a short period of time, then we fight again and unite and peace comes again.
Ruzivo (pers. comm. 16 December 2017) asserts that Jesus’ ethics can be applied only in a certain period. When we strive to make order, our order will never be permanent. Following the above thought-provoking input from Ruzivo (pers. comm. 16 December 2017), we cannot rule out that the Matthean Jesus’ ethics are still applicable in Zimbabwe. What is needed is political will on the part of the ruling party as well as developing robust ways of deconstructing the culture of political violence upon the citizenry. The church and civic organisation should lose sleep in preaching and teaching Matthean Jesus’ ethics by drawing lessons from countries like South Africa where peace, healing and reconciliation were achieved to a greater extent in the post-Apartheid era.
Tutu (
Forgiving means abandoning your right to pay back the perpetrator in his own coin, but it is a loss that liberates the victim. In the commission, people were heard speaking of a sense of relief after forgiving. Tom (pers. comm. 18 November 2014) asserts that one can bring national healing, peace and reconciliation by making perpetrators of political violence to apologise and ask for forgiveness to those whom they wronged and to the public through print media and/or through television or radio. Chirandu (pers. comm. 09 June 2014) is of the opinion that healing can come through preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ, preaching about unity and by bringing harmony among the political parties, churches and societies or communities. Cay2 (pers. comm. 23 February 2015) advocates for tolerance regardless of differences in political parties and ethnic orientation. Zodwa (pers. comm. 12 December 2017) argues that national healing can be brought through clinical counselling of the victims as well. If the process is carefully executed, it will lead to confessions by both the perpetrators and victims of political violence and bring the most needed national healing, peace and reconciliation in Zimbabwe.
Mavedzenge (pers. comm. 20 October 2017) contends that engaging in dialogue and asking for forgiveness by perpetrators of political violence are crucial in Zimbabwe. However, political leaders should be sincere enough to practice what they say on political platforms upon which they condemn violence. According to Kongola (pers. comm. 22 December 2017), church organs should facilitate and initiate meaningful programmes in national healing, peace and reconciliation in Zimbabwe. This can be achieved through organising workshops of training for trainers in matters of national healing. These workshops will induct participants with the necessary skills on how aspects like counselling sessions are conducted with special focus on cases of political violence. The trained trainers will be mandated to go to their respective districts and provinces where they will also train others who will also do the same, and the chain goes on until one have many skilled counsellors, peace builders and peace ambassadors in each community. It is important to note that the Matthean Jesus’ ethics will be emphasised in these trainings; however, the trainers should also apply a multi-faith approach so that participants who are not Christians may not resist the programme or end up castigating it as a Christian proselytisation agenda.
We are instructed to love our enemies, including those who have wronged us and are unrepentant (Wolterstoff
Reconciliation, forgiveness and negotiations will become our Christian duty in South Africa only when the apartheid regime shows signs of genuine repentance (Wolterstoff
Be that as it may, the cross breaks the cycle of violence. Hanging on the cross, Jesus provided the ultimate example of his command to replace the principle of retaliation (‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’) with the principle of non-resistance (‘if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also’; Mt 5:38–42). By suffering violence as an innocent victim, he took upon himself the aggression of the persecutors. He broke the vicious cycle of violence by absorbing it, taking it upon himself (Chamburuka & Chamburuka
Jesus’ kind of option for non-violence had nothing to do with the self-abnegation in which I completely place myself at the disposal of others to do with me as they please; It had much to do with the kind of self–assertion in which I refuse to be ensnared in the dump redoubling of enemies’ violent gestures, and be reshaped into their mirror image. (p. 211)
However, the crucified Messiah is not a concealed legitimation of the system of terror, but its radical critique. Far from enthroning violence, the socialisation of him as victim subverts violence. Secondly, the cross lays bare the mechanism of scapegoating. All the accounts of Jesus’ death agree that he suffered unjust violence. His persecutors believed in the excellence of their cause, but in reality they hated without a cause and to say that he was an innocent victim is not to say that he was an arbitrarily chosen victim. In a world of deception and oppression, his innocence, his truthfulness and his justice were reasons enough for hatred. Jesus was a threat, and precisely because of his threatening innocence, he was made a scapegoat. Instead of taking the perspective of the persecutors, the gospels take the perspective of the victim; they constantly reveal what the texts of historical persecutors, and especially mythological persecutors, hide from people: the knowledge that their victim is a scapegoat (Volf
Jesus did not wait until those who were nailing him to the cross had asked for forgiveness. He was ready, as they drove in the nails, to pray to his father to forgive them, and he even provided an excuse for what they were doing. If the victim could forgive only when the culprit confessed, then the victim would be locked into the culprit’s whim, locked into victimhood, whatever her own attitude or intention (Tutu
Jesus could have avoided suffering, but in obedience to his mission of communicating God’s love, he chose the path that inevitably made him one of the victims. As such, he suffered in the same way as many others.
Stripped of all human dignity, exhausted by continuous pain, helpless before his executioners and the jeering onlookers, deserted by friends and by his God, Jesus was reduced to sheer victim. Yet, his suffering did not, as suffering often does, turn him in on himself and deprive him of the spiritual strength to be concerned for others (Bauckham
Imagine you are sitting in a dank, stuffy, dark room. This is because the curtains are drawn and the windows have been shut. Outside the light is shining and a fresh breeze is blowing. If you want the light to stream into that room and the fresh air to flow in, you will have to open the window and draw the curtains apart; then that light which has always been available will come in and air will enter the room to freshen it up. So it is with forgiveness. (p. 272)
The victim may be ready to forgive and make the gift of his or her forgiveness available, but it is up to the wrongdoer to appropriate the gift to open the window and draw the curtains aside. He or she does this by acknowledging the wrong he or she has done, so letting the light and fresh air of forgiveness enter his or her being (Tutu
Tutu’s conception of forgiveness above is shared by Taringa (pers. comm. 14 October 2012), who maintains that for the issue of peace and reconciliation in Zimbabwe to be applicable to Jesus’ ethics, reconciliation is only sustained by the victim forgiving the perpetrator. He argues that the power of forgiveness comes from the victim. Taringa (pers. comm. 14 October 2012) also stresses that Jesus on the cross was the one who uttered the words of forgiveness and not the perpetrators. Therefore, for him reconciliation can only be achieved if and only if it is advocated by the victim, not churches and any other organisations and ministries. It requires a fair measure of humility and unconditional love to achieve this mammoth task of forgiving one who offended you. The victim, we hope, would be moved to respond to an apology by forgiving the culprit. In essence when the victim initiates forgiveness, that move will disarm the perpetrator. The approach appears to be unrealistic to many people but it is effective and it paves way for healing by confronting the source of trauma.
Tutu (
We concur with Chitando (pers. comm. 05 May 2012) who argues that in the Zimbabwean context, the perpetrators need to come out and be heard asking for forgiveness and then compensate whatever loss has been incurred in the victim. Chitando (pers. comm. 05 May 2012) asserts that the perpetrators have to compensate; especially the victims who lost their body parts and those who lost their beloved ones must be assisted, maybe with school fees for the children of the bereaved or with artificial legs or hands or eyes. This process will greatly show the depth of regret for evil deeds.
The call for justice in relation to the Zimbabwean scenario is also shared by Trevor Saruwaka (pers. comm. 20 October 2012), the Member of Parliament (MP) of Mutasa Central Region. He argues that for being a victim, the issue of turning the other cheek applied in the past, but now the victims need justice. He reiterates that as long as the perpetrators are walking scot-free, victims will not sit down and watch. Saruwaka (pers. comm. 20 October 2012) argues that there is a need for those people to be judged, sentenced and be jailed, so that peace and reconciliation prevails. If justice is not done, people will wait for an opportunity to rule because to forget about it, is impossible. This conception shows the need to have a robust application of the national healing, peace and reconciliation in Zimbabwe. Saruwaka (pers. comm. 20 October 2012) asserts that during the GNU, it was impossible to implement peace, healing and reconciliation programmes because the Organ on National Healing Reconciliation and Integration (ONHRI) was not working. Although it was created, it lacked necessary resources for it to function as expected by the people of Zimbabwe. Furthermore, Saruwaka (pers. comm. 20 October 2012) argues that ONHRI must not be superintended by politicians, but it must instead be led by independent officers, such as churches, civic organisations or better still, an independent commission.
However, the challenge now is that some of the churches in Zimbabwe have been infiltrated by the ZANU-PF. Be that as it may, it is important for the churches as a community to unite and be free from partisan affiliation and instead be actively engaged in the process of national healing.
Magaya (pers. comm. 06 September 2012) opines that Jesus is very unique. He was certainly non-violent but it does not mean that he applied docility and passivity to perpetrators. This is because Jesus as a man stood for justice.
By saying ‘turn another cheek’, it means to reduce one’s dignity to the perpetrator. Magaya (pers. comm. 06 September 2012) stresses that non-violence will leave the perpetrators naked, because you will be saying ‘yes destroy our homes, beat us and torture us so that your shamelessness will be visible’ (Magaya pers. comm. 06 September 2012).
Moreover, Magaya (pers. comm. 06 September 2012) argues that by ‘turning another cheek we end up having no cheeks if we do not apply justice’. He further says that ‘an eye for an eye we end up having every one blind’. For him, an eye for an eye is not good, whereas a pacifist approach is also not accepted (Magaya pers. comm. 06 September 2012). He argues that as Christians in Zimbabwe, there is a need to have to come out in the open, and march with our bible, and talk about peace, truth and justice for Zimbabwe to be healed from the past ills of political violence.
Magaya (pers. comm. 06 September 2012) agrees with Saruwaka (pers. comm. 2012) that the problem in Zimbabwe is that some of the church leaders are now affiliates of political parties. Magaya (pers. comm. 06 September 2012) gives an analogy that: ‘If a dog has been given a bone, it will not bark hence making robbers do whatever they want’. Therefore, it is imperative for church leaders to be true ambassadors of Jesus Christ in order to be prophetic and become the voice of the voiceless in Zimbabwe. In essence, if the church is compromised politically, this will jeopardise the application of Matthean Jesus’ ethics among the grass roots in villages and high density areas that were most hard hit by political violence.
It is important for the people of Zimbabwe to learn from their mistakes. It is evident that many people in Zimbabwe have been affected in one way or the other by political violence, especially the violence that happened between 2008 and 2009. For instance, Matingo (pers. comm. 27 December 2017) from Manicaland Province argues that many people suffered several problems, which include, but are not limited to, psychological disorders/trauma-like dementia, severe stress, post-traumatic disorders and other bipolar disorders, unrest, loss of life; some were orphaned leading to early marriages; and child-headed families causing school drop-outs. Ncube (pers. comm. 28 December 2017) from Masvingo Province asserts that MDC-T supporters were the most affected by political violence from June 2008 up to the inception of the GNU. He argues that most of these people are now living in fear; they lack freedom of speech; some are still homeless and disabled; and even more tragically some are now widows or orphans.
According to Mutimhodyo (pers. comm. 23 November 2017), political violence in Zimbabwe has caused the disintegration of the families; it impeded development and some of our Zimbabwean citizens are now asylum seekers in neighbouring countries (such as South Africa, Namibia, Lesotho, Botswana, Zambia and Mozambique), and some have gone overseas. Chitombo (pers. comm. 19 December 2017) alludes that loss of property and lives and hatred in families are some of the effects of political violence. Tendai (pers. comm. 19 April 2016) argues that political violence causes economic decline and social conflicts resulting in high rate of crime.
Machakanja (
Barson (pers. comm. 12 December 2017) asserts that justice ought to be applied in the process of national healing, peace and reconciliation in Zimbabwe through creating a mechanism that monitors human rights abuses and political violence. The commission must be all inclusive, and there should be public ratification and commitment by senior government leaders to commit to peace, as well as the signing and ratification of United Nations charters on peace and reconciliation and national healing. It is worrisome to note that to date Zimbabwe has not committed itself to stop torture among hundreds of nations that have committed themselves against torture of any kind.
For Mavedzenge (pers. comm. 20 October 2017), a neutral body of non-partisan people should lead the reconciliation process or have representation from all affected parties, including victims. Those who killed and committed atrocities should face the wrath of the law regardless of their political affiliation.
From the discussion above, it has emerged that the application of Matthean Jesus’ ethics is vital for the Zimbabwean society because it paves the way for peace, healing and reconciliation. Among other factors, the Matthean Jesus’ ethics call for victims of political violence to unconditionally extend forgiveness to their offenders as demonstrated by the Matthean Jesus who forgave mankind’s sins through his sacrificial death on the cross. Over and above that, there should be an honest implementation of justice and truth-telling by the Zimbabwean government through willingness, and commitment to institute the rule of law, and cab all forms of lawlessness. Moreover, it is imperative that there should be a formation of an independent truth, justice and reconciliation commission to deal with truth-telling, acknowledgement of past wrongs and restorative and transitional justice issues in Zimbabwe.
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
All authors contributed equally to this work.
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the authors.
This article represents a reworked version of aspects from the PhD-thesis of Sheila Chamburuka, titled ‘Matthean Jesus and national healing, peace and reconciliation in Zimbabwe: 2008–2017,’ in the Department of New Testament and Related Literature, Faculty of Theology and Religion, University of Pretoria, with Prof Dr. Ernest van Eck as supervisor.
Mahatma Gandhi has come to be known as the Father of India and a beacon of light in the last decades of British colonial rule, promoting non-violence, justice and harmony between people of all faiths (see