Attached please see Lenten Regulations for 2017, as given by Archbishop Stephen Brislin, Archbishop of Cape Town.

[gview file=”http://adct.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Regulations-2017.pdf”]

We live in difficult times: shaky economy, corrupt politics, social disorder, the widening gap between rich and poor, rampant violence in many forms, the list can go on. There is a temptation to think in ‘end of the world’ terms. One sees a strong strand of fundamentalism re-emerging in religion and populism in politics, both using a language of the enemy outside (the threat) and fundamentalist formulas proclaiming certainties to combat them (the solution).

Whether of the Left or Right, fundamentalism and populism create an ‘Us/Good vs. Them/Evil’ dualism to explain and solve the world’s problems. If only X happens or Y disappears everything will be all right is the rhetoric. If only everyone adhered firmly to the Bible or Quran, free market capitalism or socialism, if only there were land redistribution, disarmament/rearmament, more taxes or an end to taxes; if only one or other country is crushed, one or other religion vanished (or in the case of new atheists all religions), abortion and gay rights banned, evolutionists silenced, heretics burnt, then everything will we okay.

We’ve heard this rhetoric. Unfortunately it’s nonsense.

Neither fundamentalism nor populism work. Nor do they offer hope because both are at bottom an angry expression of despair.

Populism as politics expresses rage at the ills of world and gives people an enemy to hate, offer charismatic leaders who claim to understand the people and quick-fix solutions. Religious fundamentalisms offer much the same, but pretend God is their ultimate leader and source of justification for their actions.

The underlying failure of both systems is that life and the world is more complex. Life is a complex system. Everything is connected: politics, religion, science, economy, culture. They interact, change and are changed by each other – or they die out. Every decision one takes has an effect on this complex system, both intended and unintended consequences.

Simplistic political solutions – often couched in terms of a ‘Final Solution’ used with lethal effect by a populist in the 1930s named Hitler – don’t solve problems in the long term, but usually end with ‘the People’ enslaved to a political tyrant. For a while there may seem to be improvement – at very least political certainty and ‘safety’ – but ultimately the ‘cure’ is more disastrous than the ‘disease’ populism attacks. Populism ultimately undermines the society it seeks to create.

Fundamentalist religion, in its many forms, likewise undermines the possibility of faith with its promise of certainty. As a ‘solution’ it may offer simple answers, an alternative to pessimism about the world and God’s presence/absence in it, but does so by avoiding the real questions life throws at us. In the end the answers no longer relate to the questions, and religion becomes a false escape from life.  Like populism, fundamentalism ultimately undermines itself, often destroying belief in God in the process.

Populism and fundamentalism are false hopes. In politics and religion, we need instead a pragmatic mixture and reason and realism to steer us through these difficult times.

By Anthony Egan SJ

Hospitality and welcome are part of our African heritage. As we celebrate the feast of the Epiphany, we celebrate the visit of the Magi. They come from the East seeking something they do not really understand. They come looking for the fulfilment of a prophecy. They come seeking hope. They are looking for something more. Their coming provides the impetus for the Holy Family to become refugees – to go into exile in Egypt – fleeing to protect their baby’s life.

These themes of travel and movement are not unique to our ‘global village era’. As the scripture text tells us, people 2000 years ago were on the move too. Then, as now, people flee from brutalisation, war or for economic reasons. They travel to new places in search of new ideas and new discoveries. They travel to survive.

The question for us – as it was for people migrating in biblical times – is:  How do we live with people who are different from us? How do we engage with those who don’t speak the same language, who don’t wear the same clothes, have the same culture, or look like we do?

Scripture consistently tells us that we have a duty to welcome the stranger in our midst, to draw them into our communities and to make them feel at home. Our current legislation in South Africa reflects our Ubuntu value of welcome and hospitality. This may change as new more restrictive legislation could be put in place. This, motivated by politicians’ awareness of growing xenophobia in the electorate, is already in the pipe line.

Last year the Brexit vote and the election of Trump (whose campaign at times hinted at xenophobia) has shown that there is a growing intolerance towards strangers across the globe. Watching the international news one might mistakenly think that the majority of the world’s migrants were arriving on European or American shores. In reality it is the developing world who still have the greatest number of refugees – Southern Africa and the Middle East particularly.

In South Africa we have people who have fled for their lives from many different places. They have arrived here to attempt to make a new life for themselves. We are offered a choice. We can turn our faces away from those who are different. We can object to them, or fear that they may threaten our way of life. Or, like Mary and Joseph in the scriptures, we can welcome the stranger in our midst. We can be open to accepting the gifts they bring us. We can ourselves be vulnerable to them.

Fundamentally we are offered a spiritual choice. Do I look at ‘the other’ with openness and expect to see Jesus looking at me? Or do I surround myself with walls (physical, emotional and intellectual) that keep all those ‘others’ out? This Epiphany, let us pray for the grace to open our hearts and minds to the strangers in our midst.

By Frances Correia

On behalf of the Catholic community of the Archdiocese of Cape Town, and the Catholic Church of Southern Africa, I wish to express our outrage and sadness at the defacement of the Simon’s Town Mosque. Such acts of intolerance, as well as hate speech which seems to be increasing in our country, further damage the fabric of our already polarized society. They contribute nothing to peace, stability or mutual understanding. This is a time in our country when we should be seeking and striving for the things that make for peace, unity and healing.

South Africa has a long history of religious tolerance. It is regrettable that a few irresponsible, intolerant people wish to destroy that. It is of utmost importance that they not be allowed to do so. I commend the leaders of the Muslim community in calling for calm and I trust that the Police Services will quickly bring the perpetrators to book.

Archbishop Stephen Brislin

(Catholic) Archbishop of Cape Town
President: Southern African Catholic Bishops’ Conference

[gview file=”http://adct.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/21557d_Springfield-DL-Flyer-copy-landscape.pdf”]

We are in the midst of the international awareness campaign: 16 days of activism for no violence against women and children. The statistics for domestic violence, rape, and child abuse in our country remain horrific. Current figures suggest that over 40% of South African women are raped in their life-time. Some sources suggest that as many as 41% of those raped are under the age of 12.

While exact figures may vary, depending on the source, it is clear that violence, and sexual violence, in particular, is a huge issue. While it is still largely an issue for women, there are men who are victims of sexual violence. For men there is perhaps even a greater stigma attached.

How do we change the culture of violence that is so prevalent in our society? Changing the way we police and prosecute is only one piece of the puzzle. To address the root of the problem, we have to start with boys and girls. Children who grow up with a strong and healthy sense of their own dignity and self-worth are less likely to act out in ways that dominate or control. They are also less likely to remain in abusive situations. The self-esteem of adults is largely shaped by the dignity and respect with which they are treated as children.

Issues of gender and sexual violence need to be addressed in schools where many young people are raped or molested by teachers or fellow-learners. From primary school, children need to be taught how to deal appropriately with feelings of anger or frustration, how to treat other people and respect them as separate from me and how to respect the privacy and dignity of their own and other’s bodies – in age appropriate ways. They need to know who they can talk to if they experience abuse of any kind and that they will be taken seriously.

How do we inculcate important values like respect for the dignity of the other, compassion, equality, and a deep sense of the value of life? Children re-enact what they themselves witness and experience. Often violence has its roots in the perpetrator’s own experience as a victim of violence. It is not words alone which have value, but seeing values being expressed and lived out concretely. It is tragic that this is often lacking, even, and perhaps especially, at the highest levels of leadership in our country. At the launch of this year’s 16 days campaign, Zuma’s words about the seriousness of violent crimes against women and the need to report them, rang rather hollow in the light of the shadows that remain over his own attitudes towards women.

It is our responsibility to model a different way of interacting with each other that reflects our Christian values.

In Advent, the readings give us the perspective of the fulfilment of hope that is promised. Advent also offers us an invitation to engage with issues which are obstacles to that reign of God’s peace and love in the world. Gender-based violence needs our urgent and sustained attention.

By Annemarie Paulin-Campbell

Follow the Jesuit Institute on twitter @JesuitInstitute

By Anthony Egan SJ

Despite almost every poll predicting a relatively easy victory for Hillary Clinton in the United States Presidential Elections, closer reflection suggests that it was never that clear in the first place.

To start, the often nasty campaign between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Party nomination may have alienated some Democrat voters, particularly youth who saw Sanders as an alternative to mainstream politics. Clinton’s use of her considerable political and economic clout to win may have further alienated them, at a time in U.S. politics where many are angry about cosy relations between parties and big business. In contrast, though from business himself, Donald Trump (who has never held political office) is an outsider, a maverick and a populist who claims to want change.

Many US citizens, particularly the working class and lower middle class, are deeply unhappy. Whatever the accuracy of their analysis (and I think it’s faulty), they feel that Democrat policies have taken away jobs. They also fear that immigration, particularly illegal immigration from Mexico, is a threat to their economic well-being. Sadly, among some it is expressed in overt xenophobia and racism.

Trump played up on these fears brilliantly. He won in Democrat areas like Michigan and other states like Wisconsin which have been hard hit economically in recent years. He also won in Florida, possibly the result of sections of the Cuban American community’s anger at Obama opening diplomatic relations with Cuba.

This is borne out by what we can see in voting patterns on November 8th. Generally the more wealthy middle class voted for Clinton, while the poorer citizens voted for Trump, even though Clinton was promising higher taxes, as opposed to Trump promising lower taxes. Historically right wing populist leaders frequently get elected by taking an (apparently) anti-tax line.

The campaign of both candidates was marked by viciousness, personality and exposing each other’s ‘dirty washing’. Although there was much to expose, this perhaps had the unexpected effect of evoking popular sympathy for Trump, seen as being on the receiving end of major media outlets attempts to ‘dig out dirt’ on him.

Moreover, two weeks before the election Trump seems to have listened to his campaign advisors and moved out of the limelight, but Clinton was suddenly the subject again of FBI investigations. Both candidates had entered the election process under clouds, but at the last moment the cloud over Clinton deepened, and slightly dissipated over Trump.

If this analysis is correct, this most viciously-fought election in living US memory is a worrying sign of political polarisation in the world’s strongest democracy. It suggests a hardening of hearts to the Other, an unhealthy isolationism and an appeal to simplistic, as opposed to sophisticated thinking by politicians and citizens alike. The kind of political values I would associate with Catholic Social Thought – genuine dialogue, subtle social analysis, concern for the poor, openness to diversity, a global vision – were singularly absent. It bodes ill for the next four years.

One can only hope that the duties and dignity of the office will influence President-elect Trump to a more moderate exercise of his new role.