Mama Amon
JF-Expert Member
- Mar 30, 2018
- 2,021
- 2,478
Arch-Bishop Renatus Nkwande, Mwanza Arch-Diocese
Mourning seasons have historically been used by opinion formers and decision makers as grand opportunities for performing their prophetic roles of criticizing the oppressive historical culture associated with the dead, on one hand, and promoting redemptive eschatological culture, which is an alternative toward which the community is energized to strive because of its promised better future, on the other hand.
Against this expectation, I argue that, senior Catholic Bishops who eulogized Magufuli’s death gave a biased prophecy as they championed his positive legacy without qualifying their statements, something that implied promoting his negative legacy through silence. In the present analysis, the violation of the rights of girl students to gender equality and the breach of human rights associated with sexual minorities are used as examples of Magufuli’s negative legacy dimensions that need to be unrolled.
Introduction
By using a human rights-based thinking ideology, it can be reasonably demonstrated that, usually an alternative eschatological culture ought to awaken people’s consciousness on eight thematic areas of human goods, namely: biological rights to life and healthy living; psychological and somatic rights; intellectual and spiritual rights; political rights; economic rights; social rights; sexual rights; and ecological rights.
In 2001, Father Stanslaus Muyebe and Padre Alex Muyebe collectively authored a book entitled, “The African Bishops on Human Rights: A Resource Book.” The book was published in Nairobi by Pauline Publications Africa. In this book they recorded credible evidence to support the claim that most of the African Bishops have been champions of human rights for the past 50 years.
However, for three weeks of mourning the death of former President of Tanzania, John Magufuli, which officially ended on 6th April 2021, almost all religious homilies exclusively championed the positive legacy of Magufuli portraying him as a hero.
The Bishops overtly posed as Magufuli zealots. For example, addressing the mourners at the National Stadium in Dar es Salaam, on 21 March 2021, Arch-Bishop Jude Tadeus Ruwaichi of the Dar es Salaam Catholic Arch-Diocese, argued that “the late Magufuli was a just man who did justice to God, to his neighbors and to his own self,” without qualifying this statement.
This manner of speaking about Magufuli’s legacy was copied by the President of TEC, Bishop Gervas Nyaisonga, of Sumbawanga Catholic Diocese, who graced the national mourning session which was organized by the government in the capital city of Dodoma, on 22 March 2021.
And Arch-Bishop Renatus Nkwande of the Mwanza Catholic Arch-Diocese, who delivered the homily during the burial mass at Chato, on 26 March 2021, followed the formula. He argued that Magufuli had left “an indelible legacy that deserves to be championed by all” and that he was “neither an atheist nor an evil doer,” without qualifying this statement.
Even Bishop Severine NiweMugizi, of Rulenge-Ngara Catholic Diocese, who attended Magufuli’s burial at Chato, on 26 March 2021, and who had been stripped of his citizenship status by President Magufuli for reasons associated with his decision to criticize the government, expressed his readiness and joy to bury Magufuli’s body, and did not hesitate to praise Maguli as a leader whose legacy has to be championed by all, without qualifying his words.
In short, all the Catholic Bishops I heard mentioned very little or nothing about Magufuli’s negative legacy. I suggest that, the negative legacy includes such themes as: economic success that lacked broad inclusivity; bad governance and lack of accountability; failure to nurture multiparty politics; controversial foreign policy; promoting gender inequality; violating the rights of sexual minorities; and controversial scientific outlook related to the management of the coronavirus pandemic.
But these observations were puzzling. Just 14 days before Magufuli’s death, which happened on 17 March 2021, that is, exactly on 03 March 2021, the TEC Executive Secretary, Father Charles Kitima, while acting in his full capacity as TEC representative, had issued a stormy public statement to awaken the nation on the dangers of coronavirus pandemic.
Many analysts and reporters supported Fr. Kitima’s statement by issuing reasoned arguments in its favor. But, to the surprise of many, the Bishops who were represented by Fr, Kitima through his statement, soon kept total silence over coronavirus pandemic during the whole period of 21 days of mourning.
Instead of priming coronavirus pandemic, some of the senior Catholic Bishops who presided over the funeral session at Chato on 26 March 2021, under the leadership of Arch-Bishop Renatus Nkwande of Mwanza Arch-Diocese, primed sexual rights and duties, with a special focus on the duty to fight against “homosexual ideologies,” the phrase which was not defined.
“Kiongozi” is a newspaper owned by the Catholic Church in Tanzania. On 02 April 2021 it published and circulated a lead story that reported Arch-Bishop Nkwande’s homily by further priming the topic of homosexuality through the lead story whose headline read as: “Ask. Nkwande: Rais Samia kataa itikadi za ushoga, utoaji mimba.” (ISSN 0856-2563, Issue No. 14, 02-08 April 2021).
Kiongozi Newspaper front page
This headline literally meant to say that, Bishop Nkwande directed President Samia Suluhu Hassan to “Champion Magufuli’s legacy by rejecting homosexual ideologies and abortion.”
The present analysis argues that, the call which was made by Arch-Bishop Nkwande, and which was supported by his fellow Bishops who presided over the funeral mass at Chato, was untimely, disproportionate to the expectations of the mourning audience, and an immoral strategy in so far as the vision of a moral nation that we want is concerned.
I shall defend this position, by perusing the key historical context in so far as Magufuli’s legacy on the permanent need to promote human rights, including sexual rights, is concerned.
Bishop Nyaisonga, Current TEC President
Promoting gender inequality in education
On 22 June 2018, President Magufuli issued a declaration banning pregnant girls from attending school. This was followed by crackdowns on individuals and organizations seen as critical of these policies.
Specifically, the government started intimidating civil society organizations (CSOs) that were advocating the rights of pregnant girls to go back to school.
Also, the government obstructed access to sexual and reproductive health services to various groups and intimidated organizations providing information about such services.
Violating the human rights of sexual minorities
Through his campaign against "immoral behaviors" which “could not even be manifested by beasts,” Magufuli stoked anti-gay rhetoric that promoted stigmatization against them since he was elected President in 2015.At one time while addressing a rally at Kibaha, in Pwani Region, Magufuli specifically drew attention to the evil of homosexual pedication, which is illegal in Tanzania.
While this is the case, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, intesexuals and transgenders have both sexual and non-sexual rights, where, the latter are fully protected by the constitution and statutes.
They have seven non-sexual rights, since they are entitled to biological rights to life and healthy living; psychological and somatic rights; intellectual and spiritual rights; political rights; economic rights; social rights; and ecological rights. But, Magufuli’s rhetoric overshadowed their rights in these seven areas.
Thus, the late Magufuli engineered a religiously motivated crackdown on the constitutionally and legally protected rights of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, intesexuals and transgenders. Most of these individuals have, by birth, mismatches between anatomical sex, psychological sex, and hormonal sex. Consequently their sexual identities are ambiguous too.
Bishop Severin NiweMUgizi, Rulenge-Ngara Diocese
Despite these scientifically proven facts, in 2017 Magufuli’s campaign was joined by the country's deputy health minister, Hamisi Kigwangalla, who threatened to publish a list of gay people.
The threat to publish the names of suspected homosexuals in Tanzania has been defended by the deputy health minister on Twitter.
Tweeters accused him of homophobia and infringing on the right to freedom of expression online. But Hamisi Kigwangalla argued that homosexuality did not scientifically exist and was a social construct.
Again, in 2018, Magufuli was joined by his staunch ally, Paul Makonda, the Dar es Salaam Regional Commissioner by then, who announced the creation of a 17-member surveillance squad dedicated to hunting down gay people. The squad was tasked to find and punish gays, lesbians, bisexuals, intesexuals and transgenders.
The government also threatened to prosecute or deport anyone working to protect the rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual, intesexual and transgender people in Tanzania.
In response, in 2018, the European Parliament made a resolution on Tanzania, for the following reasons among other things: to denounce all incitement to stigma, hatred and violence against some persons on grounds of their sexual orientation; and to encourage the country to reduce violence and discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals, intesexuals and transgenders by decriminalizing predication just as fatal boxing has been decriminalized.
And finally, during the 2020 general elections the anti-gay rhetoric as previously stoked by President Magufuli and practically supported by his close allies, gained momentum in political campaigns.
The anti-gay rhetoric was used as a propaganda weapon against the opposition camp Presidential candidate through Chadema, Tundu Lissu.
Lissu was labeled by Magufuli fans as an advocate of homosexual ideology. In retaliation, Lissu fans decided to use the social media to label Samia Suluhu Hassan, the then running mate of Magufuli, the CCM Presidential Candidate, as a practising lesbian.
Before the memories of this indecent campaign language use have subsided, the Catholic Church superiors and her media networks have now embarked on a national campaign against what they overtly call homosexual ideology.
Specifically, on 26 March 2021, while presiding over Magufuli’s funeral mass, Arch-Bishop Nkwande used it as an opportunity to prime the social problems of abortion, homosexuality, and sex reassignment surgery, which he panickingly and derogatorily described as “nonsensical matters,” hence further championing the anti-gay rhetoric which was previously stoked by the late Magufuli in 2015.
Arch-Bishop Nkwande added: “The abominations often embraced by some liberal nations include evils such abortion, homosexual practices, and sex change. We call upon our political leaders to make sure that our nation does not start a walk down a slippery slope toward those ideologies.”
In light of the above discussion, it is logical to conclude that, when Arch-Bishop Nkwande rebuked “liberal nations” he was mainly referring to the European Union.
Discussion and critique of the above narrative
Since 25 July 1968, when Pope Paul VII issued an encyclical on Human Life, officially known as “Humanae Vitae,” the phrase “homosexual ideology” has often been used by some Catholic propagandists to signify “contraceptive ideology” which was condemned by the said encyclical on moral grounds.
Arch-Bishop Jude Thadeus Ruwaichi, Dar es Salaam Arch-Diocese
In order to make this propaganda strategy a success, the Catholic propagandists decided to label all the contents of national policies and laws which appear contrary to the official position expressed in Humanae Vitae, as promoting the “culture of D.E.A.T.H.”
They then defined the phrase “culture of D.E.A.T.H” as a slogan that meant “the culture of Divorce, Euthanasia, Abortion, Total Reproductive Health including Contraception, and Homosexuality.”
Here, they appear to have framed what I shall call the “Contraception and Sodomitical, Oral, Masturbatory, and Armpit Sex Argument,” or the “Contraception and S.O.M.A sex argument,” for short.
It appears o me that, the “Contraception and S.O.M.A sex argument” has the following logical structure: (1) If heterosexual contracepted sex is morally permissible, then heterosexual S.O.M.A sex and homosexual S.O.M.A sex are morally permissible as well; (2) But under no circumstances can homosexual S.O.M.A sex be morally permissible; (3) Therefore, heterosexual contracepted sex should not be morally permissible.
However, this propaganda strategy amounts to coercive evangelization strategy as it amounts to disinformation. This is the case for a number of reasons. First of all, the first premise lumps together incompatible ontological categories, and hence commits the category mistake.
That is, while contraception takes place between heterophilic couples as one sexual category, homosexual relations takes place between homophilic couples as a different sexual category. As such, there is no room for heterophilic contraceptive behavior to bring about homosexual behaviors.
We can see this point by expanding the “Contraception and S.O.M.A sex argument” in order to clearly show how the difference between heterosexual SOMA sex and homosexual SOMA sex makes it unsound. The expanded structure is as follows:
(1) Contracepted sex is a heterosexual conduct which is not procreative in type; (2) Contracepted sex is similar to heterosexual S.O.M.A sex, in that, they both are not procreative in type; (3) Thus, if contracepted sex is permitted, then heterosexual S.O.M.A sex will be permitted as well; (4) Heterosexual S.O.M.A sex is similar to homosexual S.O.M.A sex, in that, they both are not procreative in type; (5) Thus, if heterosexual SOMA sex is permitted then homosexual S.O.M.A sex will be permitted as well; (6) But under no circumstances should homosexual SOMA sex be permitted; (7) Therefore, heterosexual contracepted sex should not be permitted.
In this argument, all the premises are true, except statement number (5) which does not follow from the previous statements since, it is excluded by the ontological difference between heterosexual S.O.M.A sex and homosexual S.O.M.A sex.
The truth of the matter is that, homosexual SOMA sex cannot take place between persons who possess heterophilic libido and lack homophilic libido.
That is, while heterosexual S.O.M.A sex takes place between heterophilic persons, homosexual S.O.M.A sex takes place between homophilic persons. This ontological difference makes the similarity between heterosexual S.O.M.A sex and homosexual S.O.M.A sex irrelevant to acceptability of statement number (5) above.
Thus, the propaganda strategy premised on the “Contraception and S.O.M.A sex argument” commits a category mistake. It is a form of disinformation which is unfortunately perpetuated by the Church for 53 years now.
Another reason that makes the “culture of D.E.A.T.H” slogan a disinformation strategy, and thus an immoral plan, is the fact that, “contraception” prevents life that has not yet come to be while “abortion” destroys the life of an actual person by causing his or her “death”.
Thus, contraception simply causes the “death” of a sperm and ovum but not the “death” of a human person. The death of a gamete is not the same thing as the death of an actual person. So, the word “death” is used equivocally in this slogan, and equivocation is a type of disinformation.
Again, the propaganda strategy premised on the “Contraception and S.O.M.A sex argument” commits a category mistake. It is a form of unwarranted disinformation too.
Moreover, in Tanzania the use of contraceptive technologies and sexual prophylactics are not illegal. Nor are intersexed persons legally prevented to procure sex reassignment surgery. The Muhimbili National Hospital performs many surgeries of this form.
Conclusions and recommendations
Based on the balanced views presented above, it is obvious that, the death of Tanzania's President John Magufuli came at time when the country was feeling a pinch of human rights violations in so far as gender equality and sexual rights of minorities are concerned.
Bishop Paul Ruzoka
President John Magufuli was always confident even when he was wrong, and he was wrong a many times, especially when it came to matters concerning the science and philosophy of human sexuality and the related human rights.
His negative legacy in this regard has many lessons for the sixth phase government under President Samia Suluhu Hassan.
As far as sexual rights are concerned, it is desirable and necessary that President Samia should not hesitate to roll back some of the policies of her predecessor’s reign as she struggles to forge a new vision for the sixth phase government.
For sure, apart from their seminary training which has taught them to always look at the world through the faulty lens of “Contraception and S.O.M.A sex argument,” the Catholic Bishops did not have good reasons to downplay coronavirus and prime homosexuality.
Thus, the President and her government should not be retained by the Catholic Church’s questionable propaganda strategy of disinformation that uses an incoherent “culture of D.E.A.T.H” slogan to stoke a morally irresponsible national anti-homosexuality rhetoric.
This rhetoric is even more appalling if, for the sake of an argument, we stipulate that, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, intesexuals and transgenders constitute less than 600 out of the 60,000,000 people in the nation. This is just 0.001% of the total population.
This is a segment of the population that would not warrant a national attention to the alleged social problem of homosexuality in Tanzania, as some Catholic Bishops and priests seem to insinuate.
Empirical evidence on the prevalence of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, intesexuals and transgenders in Tanzania is needed to improve this analysis. Currently, official government documents, such as national sensus reports, are silent on this matter.
But, let us not forget that, sexual rights, both for heterosexual and homosexual persons, constitute one category of human rights, while the remaining seven categories of human rights still need our proportionate attention in theory and practice.
They are biological rights to life and healthy living; psychological and somatic rights; intellectual and spiritual rights; political rights; economic rights; social rights; and ecological rights.
And this means that, everyone, who loves valid and sound arguments, should be aware of the unsoundness of the “Contraception and S.O.M.A sex argument,” and reject it outright. The Catholic Bishops and priests, who are trained and qualified philosophers-cum-theologians, should show an example in this regard.
Authored by:
Mama Amon,
‘Simbawanga’ P/School,
P.O.Box P/Bag,
‘Simbawanga’.
Version 1.0: 13 April 2021—Original Version.
