El significado de la relación de ayuda.

Manipulation of prophecy in order to justify one’s claims to leadership or support for a preferred leader is the other cause of succession disputes. Prophets are the eyes of the church and advisors to the incumbent bishop. In the event that the bishop has died, a prophet might connive with one of the sons of the bishop and argue that the Holy Spirit has revealed to him who the successor should be. Since the words of a prophet cannot be disputed in the ZAFM church, chances of the prophets manipulating such a system are very high. The prophet can also raise a spiritual argument that God does not want such and such to be a leader because he is not serious with his religious life. Indeed, after the death of the bishop, each group comes up with its own justification to support their candidate for the office of the bishop. Such claims are made within the church worldview using devices that resonate with the people. Prophecy, revelations, dreams and visions are some of the devices used by claimants to support their choice. In the case of Jeremiah Shava, a prophet connived with him and blamed Shoko as a way of paving the room for Shava to become a bishop and officiate over Holy Communion, a duty that was reserved to the bishop himself. Such a move was a way of disputing the authenticity of Andreas Shoko’s leadership. Bishop Jamson said that corruption in prophecy was also at play after the death of Samuel Mutendi, where a well-respected prophet of Samuel Mutendi went to Rueben and asked him to give his sister in marriage and then the prophet would support him as the next leader. When Rueben refused, he went to Nehemiah who agreed, and the prophet then raised the argument that Samuel disclosed to him that Nehemiah, who was not the eldest son, should succeed Samuel. Pastor 2, during focus group discussions, cited the influence of well-respected priests as the other cause of succession disputes, as was the case between Ezra and Jamson Pedzisai Shoko. This implies that respected and influential people

173

who had been close to the deceased leader may take advantage of their positions to stir succession disputes in an effort to follow their own ambitions or hidden agendas.

Zonal Priest 2 said that, muporofita anokwanisa zvakare kufurira vana vesangano kuti vakonzerese makakatamwa. Anongovaudza kuti munofanira kubvuma kutungamirirwa nanhingi chete. Vana vesangano vanobva varamba kutevera mumwe mutungamiririri nokuti vanenge vaudzwa kuti haasi kunamata zvakanaka nekudaro haangavi mutungamiriri. (A prophet might influence the members of the laity to stir succession disputes by telling them to rally behind a certain leader because of personal opinions. Members of the laity may dispute that a certain potential successor was not a member of the church during the lifetime of the deceased leader, hence they cannot be led by such a person). The members of the laity can then choose a person of their choice. This was the case with Dorius. Some members of the laity and other leaders thought he was not in a good relationship with his father and had backslidden and became a drunkard and prostitute hence he could not be the successor of Andreas Shoko. These people had little knowledge that Shoko had already anointed Dorius as the next successor in 1955. The support of Zachariah by the members of the laity caused succession disputes after the death of Andreas Shoko.

Masondo (2004), looking at the church of Isaiah Shembe, said that in order to support their claim to the position of a bishop, claimants often appeal to dreams, words of a prophet, or divine anointing. For him, after the death of Isaiah Shembe, his son Johannes Galilee claimed to have had a dream while he was in the same room with his parents having a meal, and Isaiah Shembe was said to have entered Johannes Galilee Shembe’s chest and disappeared. This was done to make people believe that from that time on, Johannes Galilee Shembe was acting according to the dictates of Isaiah since they were now one. It was a move meant to silence his critics because he knew no one would want to oppose Isaiah Shembe. In the case of ZAFM church, both Jamson and Ezra were making claims that were meant to validate their succession rights. Ezra claimed to have been anointed by the late Bishop Dorius and a will was written supporting him. Moreso, the prophets and the council of high priests supported him. Jamson claimed to have been secretly anointed by the late bishop as well, and a prophet proclaimed at Gunikuni that he should be the successor. Further, the 1949 covenant supported his claim to the throne.

The importance given to prophets and the words or actions of the incumbent leader is strikingly similar to the importance the Shona people in the traditional life gave to n’angas (traditional

174

healers) and the kings and chiefs. Traditionally, in African societies, the words and decisions of the king or chief were unquestioned. In the same way, n’angas were also playing vital roles in succession issues and they acted mostly as advisors to the installed chief or king. Due to the importance n’angas were given, they were liable to connive with one of the players in the succession disputes and then help him to rise to power. The n’angas or prophets’ ability to see beyond the supernatural make people to believe their words without raising any doubt. This was the case with Jeremiah Shava and Bishop Ezra. Shava got the support of the prophet and Ezra garnered the support of ten (10) top priests who were close to Dorius Pedzisai Shoko to rise to power. This means that for the sake of integrity in the church, some leaders may take advantage of their positions to stir succession disputes between potential successors as a way of trying to achieve their own desires.

Commenting on the striking similarities between traditional societies and the church, Mugambi (1989) says that Christian understanding and traditional African thought have been harmonized in such matters as views of God, spirits and angels, ancestors and saints, rites of passage and eternal life. Such a mixture of Christianity and traditional African values has often triggered pertinent questions like, ‘Where is the boundary between the gospel and the culture? How much can the church adapt itself to the prevailing worldview and remain recognizably Christian?’ This implies that church and culture have to move alongside each other. The church has to adopt much from the traditional society if it is to make an impact, as the ZAFM did. The adaptation of the traditional values by the church makes it to move alongside with reality of human lives.