92 FUNDACIÓN UNIVERSIDAD A DISTANCIA "HERNANDARIAS"

After Shava’s departure, Kandros Mawisire was appointed by Shoko as the vice-bishop. Kandros Mawisire served as the vice-bishop for a long time, until his death. After his death, Tapson Mawisire, his son, replaced him. This further shows that inheritance is the major leadership succession model used in the ZAFM church. However, Tapson Mawisire felt that he could not be a vice-bishop while there were other elders who were close to his father. Tapson later on decided to surrender the vice-bishop’s position to Jonisaya Muzangwa who was a brother of Andreas Shoko’s first wife Punha (Margret) Muzangwa. Shoko did not dispute this decision hence Jonisaya Muzangwa became the vice-bishop in place of Tapson Mawisire.

The move to appoint Jonisaya Muzangwa as the vice-bishop did not please other priests like Ruka Changa and Matuva Changa. Jonisaya Muzangwa was married to Ruka and Matuva Changa’s sister, so they argued that they could not be led by their mukwasha (son-in-law). This made the two of them to break away from Shoko and each formed ZAFM under their names. Priest Ruka Matongo from Mberengwa supported Ruka Changa. A priest called Erivhanos Rundebvu Makhadho from Zunga supported Matuva. It seems from this narration that Ruka and Matuva had seen some kind of nepotism in the demotion of Tapson and the elevation of Shoko’s brother-in-law Muzangwa. This implies that Matuva and Ruka Changa had suspected that the surrender of vice-bishop’s position to Muzangwa was not out of Tapson’s own volition. Bishop Jamson cited the urge to become a leader as the sole reason why Changa and Matuva left Shoko to form their own church. They just raised the issue of nepotism as a way to justify their move.

111

According to Daneel (1971:309), Ruka Tschanga (the correct spelling is Changa) caused a major schism in 1950 when he broke away and thousands of church members living in Belingwe area (now Mberengwa) followed him. Changa, though he was from Nyajena, managed to influence the congregation from Mberengwa to follow him. The Mberengwa congregation was led by Ruka Matongo who was a prophet.

Unfortunately, Ruka Changa was unable to maintain his position because his followers flocked back to Andreas Shoko, particularly the supporters from Mberengwa (Daneel, 1971). Gwenhamo (not real name), during focus group discussions, said that Changa was not eloquent and persuasive in nature as compared to Shoko, hence his followers started to have discontent with him. Upon realizing that most of his followers had flocked back to Shoko, Changa admitted defeat and re-joined the Zion Apostolic Faith Mission Church of Shoko in 1955. Important to note is the fact that the largest number of Changa’s followers were from Mberengwa and most probably the issue of distance made the Mberengwa followers to go back to Shoko after realizing that Changa hardly visited them because of distance. Daneel, (1971) stated that Shoko was patient, persuasive and humble and these characteristics managed to attract many people to his church.

Bishop Jamson said that the ZAFM of Matuva survived only up to the time of his death. Rundebvu Makhadho, the high priest who had supported Matuva, decided to re-join the ZAFM of Andreas Shoko that is under Bishop Jamson. The reason cited by Rundebvu is that the son of Matuva who succeeded him is immoral. He steals other people’s goats, sheep and cattle; hence, many of his followers are running away from him.

It appears that many of these secessionists had personal agendas against Shoko, but nonetheless Shoko kept the flag of his revolution flying undeterred. It can be said that Bishop Andreas, due to his strong and flexible character, was able to deter schism on an outsized scale. Further, due to his patient and persuasive determination, he succeeded in winning back many of the subordinate officials who had broken away under the main secessionists.

The 1948–1950 disputes gripped Shoko with fear of what would happen after his death. He sensed a more serious leadership dispute that could arise after his death, thus he anointed his son Dorius in 1955 as his successor (see Appendix 3). This was done in the presence of the high priests and the council of priests that included Tapson Mawisire, Paul Mandude, Erivhanos Makhadho and Mabhigiri. The anointment of Dorius in 1955 as the next successor

112

of Shoko had many reasons as well as effects. It seems Shoko did this after seeing that most of the leaders who were involved in leadership disputes had ambitions of becoming bishops themselves. He also wanted to show to the church that succession in his church has to follow his blood. The other reason was to ensure that before his death he has prevented all schismatic motives in his church. Shoko might have done this to have more time to train his successor well before he dies, to make sure that his motives are put forward in the manner that he wanted. Other reasons apart from these can also be raised on why Shoko anointed his son as his successor 30 years before his death.