"Any country that divides itself into groups which fight each other will not last very long." (Matthew 12:25)

The sweet scent of victory may have been in the air, but there was also the acrid smell of hurt, of pain, of violent death, and of new deals by the Government to try and cling to the privilege of power while finding acceptance from the international community.

The tri-cameral system of Parliament had arrived, as had the office of an executive style State President, rather than Prime Minister, with exceptional powers. Speaking about the proposed three House system in October 1981 P W Botha said "The day will come when the world will have to admit that a constitutional masterpiece to be proud of has taken place in this country." It may have been a masterpiece of constitutional arithmetic, but it was anathema to the majority who saw and treated the blacks who opted for the new system as traitors to their own people.

A white referendum agreed to the policy of sharing restricted powers with Coloured and Indian Houses that would create three "Own Affairs" Departments while leaving "General Affairs" of the nation very much in the hands of the white Parliamentary majority and completely exclude any African participation.

Even this was too much for some Nationalist Party members. A rebel group of Members of Parliament would not vote as required, were expelled from the party, and went on to form a new right wing Conservative Party. The Volk were split.

The Coloured and Indian communities were divided in their approval or opposition to the three way system and, in the event, only a small percentage of those eligible to vote actually did so. Feelings ran high and violence raged at political meetings and rallies aimed at drumming up support for this "new deal" in democracy.

Those who were opposed to the tri-cameral system pointed to the fact that it denied any place for the vast majority of the population. It held no place for the African people who were deemed not to be citizens of South Africa but of the various "homelands" and "independent territories." It also further entrenched an ethnic basis to the system of governing the country. The SACC and most Churches, with yet again the exception of the DRC, condemned the new constitutional system as totally unacceptable.

As the governing authorities divided, much of the apartheid opposition came closer together. Many of the internal forces against apartheid rallied together to form the United Democratic Front (UDF), an alignment of community and cultural organisations with a smattering of Church involvement through particular individuals. The launch in August 1983 was a resounding success in both the huge crowd that attended and the spirit of determination and exhilaration throughout. Loud cheers greeted Dr Allan Boesak when he spelt out the mood of the meeting, "We want ALL our rights, we want them HERE and we want them NOW."

At the same time there was also the formation of a National Forum based on the advancement of black consciousness. A smaller organisation than the UDF, it issued a "Manifesto of the Azanian People" calling for non collaboration with the oppressor.

These new affiliations gave added impetus to the struggle. There were demands for the Government sponsored Councillors in black townships to resign, rent boycotts began, Civic Associations were formed to take over control of black urban areas "on behalf of the people", and there often repeated calls to make the country ungovernable.

And there was violence. Violence that was likely to break out in any spot at any time. Violence that emanated from all quarters and cost the nation many lives and much sadness as well as the crippling of communities and individuals. It is a violence that has haunted the country since the formation of the tri-cameral system and has not abated till this day.

There was also suppression of the free flow of information, banning and detention of those who spoke out for justice and a new social order, and police harassment of anti-apartheid groups, including the SACC, at every turn.

But there was a new spirit of determination as the people stood together and faced the enforced rule of the unjust laws in the knowledge that their cause was just and their objective right. Despite court orders for searches of buildings and despite harassment, including detention of staff members, organisations continued in their development, educational, or information dissemination tasks. Despite banning orders, sometimes having to go into hiding, detention and even torture, people continued in their persistent battle against the Government.

The Church did not escape the frenzy of security police activities as raids and searches were carried out on their premises. Khotso House, which now housed the national office of the United Democratic Front, had so many raids that the reception desk was fitted with a button that sounded a siren throughout the building to say "here they are again!" There were continuing calls, given prominence in the Government controlled media, for action to be taken against the Council of Churches for its "furtherance of the aims of communism."

A New Secretary

A new General Secretary was called upon to lead the SACC in these volatile and violent times. The choice fell upon Dr Beyers Naude, who was by now a member of the black DRC in Africa, and who had only recently had his banning order lifted.

"Nobody was more surprised than me," he says "when I was elected. I was unbanned on the 24th September 1984. Mid October I received a call from the Western Province Council of Churches to ask whether it would be in order to put me forward as General Secretary as Desmond (Tutu) had just been elected Bishop of Johannesburg. I said I did not think it wise to select a white person at this time but if this is the wish of the SACC, then I will seriously consider it for the sake of the situation in which we find ourselves."

It was the wish of the SACC and in January 1985 Dr Naude was appointed General Secretary. He speaks of his apprehension in fulfilling the demands of the position. "First of all I realised our country would be entering a period of increased conflict, even bloodshed, and I also felt that any white person, no matter how committed, could never properly fathom and understand what would be happening in the black community.

"Then I was fearful of the effects this could have on the Council. Would it be able to handle this? Would we be able to do what was needed?

"When I accepted I made it clear to the Executive that I accept with gratitude, but also with concern that this post at this time should be filled by a black Christian leader. My service should be no longer than two or three years."

The staff of the SACC was to wait until May 10th, Beyers Naude's 70th birthday, before an official welcome. By then he knew that most of his fears were unfounded. He says that one of the highlights of his time as General Secretary was the "way in which the black Christian community accepted me."

" I was astounded by the warmth and the openness and the trust that I discovered in the black community," he continues. " Many times I said to myself when I had been with them, how much is the white Christian community in South Africa missing in not realising the joy of being trusted and accepted in that way. Please God, will the day come when the eyes of these whites will be opened. It was a tremendous source of encouragement to me and I say this time and time again. I was sorry I could not do much more."

Dr Naude not only received support and encouragement from the black Christian community, but also from the Church leaders who were "so supportive and at all times open. I could phone I could visit at any time. They always gave the time and they came forward with helpful advice."

He also found the former General Secretary, Bishop Tutu, of immense help. He recalls, "Desmond Tutu responded to my need. I could go to him as my predecessor and say to him 'I need your guidance'. He not only gave me advice but also shared in prayer, and expressed his deep concern as a Christian brother. I will never forget it."

It is this rich fellowship enjoyed by Ds Naude that makes one of his stated priorities all the more poignant.

Total Commitment

"Because of my background in the DRC, I wanted to stretch out the hand of friendship to the white DRC and say to them, I am willing to do everything to bring you back into the fold, but only on the basis of your total commitment to the rejection of apartheid.

"There were no signs in the DRC as a Church of any new thinking, but there were signs within individuals. Privately they would say to me, 'you know we agree with you, on the basis of the Gospel, that the SACC is taking the right line but we can not say this in public.' That is what made it so painful, so very sad.

"I challenged them, 'If you do not form some kind of an organisation, call it the Concerned People of the DRC Church, and if you don't stand together you will not be able to help the DRC get out of this terrible imprisonment, theological and social and political imprisonment, in which it finds itself.' But nothing of that kind started.

" I think back and say to myself, if only the leadership of the DRC at that point in time had seen and understood this it would have had an enormous effect."

Dr Naude speaks touchingly of the way in which that wonderful fellowship he enjoyed so much himself was denied many of his DRC brothers through their unwillingness to stand and state publicly that apartheid had to be rejected.

His primary energy was placed into finding ways to help the Council and its member Churches stand by the people in their commitment for liberation "on a peaceful basis." The peaceful was important as the violence raged on and "the policy of apartheid was ruthlessly being implemented by the Government."

More Brutal, Inhuman

"I realised," Beyers Naude says, "that the attitude of the Government would become more brutal, more inhuman, and the pressures upon us, especially as Christians, would increase. Wherever there was any form of suffering, or of marginalisation, or of oppression, we had to let the presence and the voice of the SACC be there."

And "there" it was as the Council continued its activities despite the increasing pressures.

The activities included: extensive work among the many thousands who continued to be removed and relocated; the continuation of its programmes through the different Divisions; service among refugees; a new programme of concern for the many marginalised youth whose hope of formal education had collapsed in the crisis facing schools and universities; condemnation of an SADF raid into Botswana as an "unwarranted act of violence and terrorism" with representatives of the Council attending the funeral of those killed; and a call for Regional Councils to arrange ecumenical memorial services on June 16th to pray "for the end of unjust rule."

The Asingeni Fund provided much help for groups and individuals in emergency need. It also provided a problem. "It was almost impossible to handle it effectively," says Beyers Naude, "and it was unjust to expect any staff member to do it. There was a small group that handled it initially but it eventually came to the point when I had to make the final decisions. I did not have the answer and we must have made a number of mistakes there in trying to help people in desperate need. The situation was so tense and so difficult that sometimes the truth was difficult to find. Many of these individuals, their lives were threatened, their lives were at stake. You had to have an inner sense of whether that person was telling the truth or not. I found that to be a very problematic matter."

The financial support was not a problem. "I never had concerns about the finances of the SACC," continues Dr Naude, "because at that stage the ears and the hearts of the whole Christian community were open to us."

The encouragement and the prayerful solidarity of the world Christian community was a great help both in spirit and in kind. But this all important link with the global partners that now stood so solidly with the Council in its activities had to be kept alive through personal visits and briefings in many parts of the world.

The General Secretary had the constant task of choosing priorities from both the local and international demands upon his time. Beyers Naude remembers that "there were so many invitations from members Churches for gatherings, meetings, courses, conferences, synods, which it was impossible for one person as the General Secretary to attend to. It was the same with so many invitations from overseas Churches and donor agencies. It was just not possible to handle all that.

"And please, it was a very difficult time for my wife. She committed herself fully to what I was doing, she understood it, but at times she was very lonely when I was away from home so much, especially as this followed the banning when I had to be at home every day and night. There was the contrast between this previously banned and now unbanned person, I think. She once jokingly made the remark, 'you know, Bey, at times I think it would be nicer if you were to be banned then you would have to be at home!' I found it very difficult. I thank God that she was willing to allow me to do all that I did."

Perhaps a moment to remember the wives of General Secretaries who were called upon to support their husbands in their onerous, and sometimes dangerous, duties. Sheila Burnett, who was always present at meetings to help with chores, provide refreshments, and act as that extra member of staff for the SACC. Dulcie Rees who had to take more than what would generally be called a fair share in caring for the home and bringing up their two daughters. Violet Thorne who stood by her husband, John, in the pressures of the Presidency and then walked with him through his agonizing about the secretaryship. Leah Tutu, dependable, buoyant, making her own mark in creating a Domestic Worker organisation as well as a constant support and companion for Desmond through all those years. And now, Kagiso Chikane, always there in the background, suffering with her husband in the days of detention, death threats and attempts, and hiding from the police, as well as having to carry the burden of raising the family and caring for the home. They are as much a part of the story of the Council as any others.

Debates

It was during Beyers Naude's Secretaryship that some of the major debates on the manner of facing the apartheid structures emerged. The mid eighties saw the SACC progressing further in the challenge to the Government through the examination of ways and means to bring about the end of the apartheid society. This was to lead eventually in the last two years of the eighties to the "Standing for the Truth Campaign" alongside the Mass Democratic Movement, the Defiance Campaign and Civil Disobedience.

The call for prayers to end unjust rule caused some discussion among the Churches. The differences ranged primarily about the actual wording used. It was heightened through a document produced by the Western Province Council of Churches intending to present a theological rationale to the call. The document suggested that, "We have prayed for the Government to change its policies. Now we pray for a change of Government" and that the prayers call on God to "remove the present rulers in our country."

This move from praying for an end to unjust rule and "the abolition of all apartheid structures," as suggested in 1984, to praying for the actual removal of the unjust rulers, as now suggested through this 1986 document, caused problems for some. Both Bishop Tutu and the Rev Peter Storey, then President of the Methodist Church, were among those who could not go along with the change in emphasis. But, in a joint statement both agreed that on June 16th the people should pray "for an end to oppression and violence in our land and for the establishment of justice and true peace. This is the plea we will offer to God, and this is the goal that must challenge us all."

The second debate was centred around the call for sanctions. Would these be helpful in bringing about peaceful change or harmful in causing loss of jobs for black people? The Council felt constrained to turn to economic sanctions as the only peaceful alternative left for those in opposition to apartheid.

Patterns of Power

The 1985 National Conference laboured long on the subject and produced a lengthy resolution that looked deep at the reasons why sanctions may be necessary. These included that "foreign investments and loans have been used to support prevailing patterns of power and privilege", that evidence suggested "foreign investment does not necessarily create new jobs", and that "the problem of structural unemployment in black communities" had not been a matter of concern to Government or business "until recent months when economic sanctions have become a legislative possibility in the United States."

The Conference confessed that there had been no proper debate on the subject because "we have allowed ourselves to be restrained by the severity of laws designed to prevent open discussion." It then went on to suggest that "disinvestment and similar economic pressures" were needed " as a peaceful and effective means of putting pressure on the South African Government to bring about those fundamental changes the country needs." It asked that the matter be debated in the member Churches, appointed a task force to examine the "whole question of economic justice" and called on member Churches and individual Christians "to withdraw from participation in an economic system that oppresses the poor, by re-investing money and energy in alternative economic systems in existence in our region."

In January 1988 a Symposium on Economic Pressure produced yet another paper which concluded that there was need to demand "comprehensive and mandatory sanctions." It recognised sanctions as only one strategy that must go "hand in hand with internal pressures", still appealed for "flexibility" in its application, and called again on Churches to discuss the issue.

Another issue of these times was related to the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the Government. If apartheid is a heresy then the Government that espouses the system must be illegitimate. It may be legal and exist in accordance with a constitution of its own making, but that does not make it legitimate. The debate was not intense. It seemed to most that it was a natural corollary to the statement that apartheid was a heresy. A Government based on an immoral and heretical system could only be illegitimate.

The issue of violence was one that was constantly debated. The statements over and over again during the whole 25 years of the SACC's existence have pointed to the need for non-violence and peaceful progress in the name of the Prince of Peace. The actions have been strictly non-violent.

The issue was highlighted, however, and controversy raged because of the "Lusaka Statement" of May 1987 when a group of Church representatives of SACC member Churches met with representatives of the WCC, other Churches, and of the African National Congress.

The Lusaka Statement went some steps further than the previous Kairos Document in that it acknowledged the right of the Liberation Movements to the armed struggle against apartheid. It was a decision that has been taken by some to mean that the SACC and its member Churches supported and even encouraged the use of violence to overcome the apartheid regime and thus helped establish a culture of violence that persists in South Africa in these days.

This is far from the truth as even those who opposed the adoption of the Lusaka statement in the Church debates will agree. The debate at the 1987 National Conference at which the Lusaka statement was discussed, and eventually adopted and sent to the member Churches for study, was an emotional matter where most blacks, but not all, and most whites, but not all, stood on different sides of the issue.

This debate highlighted the different experiences which are at the centre of the South African story. They are crucial to the debate and remain at its' centre. To deny that is to deny the reality of apartheid in similar fashion to those who deny the holocaust.

There are many Churches draped with flags and banners, memorials and plaques, that give honour to wars, and those who died in wars, against tyrants, dictators, oppressors and even those who just happened to be enemies of the country in which the Church happens to be placed. One can not but help using the word hypocritical of people from such Churches who condemn the SACC and its member Churches in the same way as our Lord used it of Pharisees who practised one form of behaviour for themselves and demanded another of those who did not belong to their particular group.

The debate will rage for a long time. There will be those vociferous, usually because they have the money and the media, voices that will attack the Churches of South Africa and their Council for the stance taken during these past years.

Perhaps the real clue to all these debates lies in the white General Secretary of the SACC through those years who managed to hear the voices of the black constituency and, more than that, knew them to be coming from within the black experience and had the grace to realise that such experience made a difference. It may be significant that some of the most contentious issues arising from the Churches' opposition to apartheid arose during the time of a white Afrikaner General Secretary.