THE EARLY YEARS (1985-1994)
3.3. The Anglican Church’s Response to HIV and AIDS
3.3.4. Moral Rhetoric Undermines HIV Prevention
168
epidemic was ravaging the nation drew close parallels with prophetic responses to the influenza epidemic in Southern Rhodesia. Ranger observed that claims to heal disease were quite central to the new prophetic movements whereby ―in their prophetic teaching healing came directly to the purified faithful through the descent of the Holy Spirit.‖696 The fact that Bishop Masuko officially licensed Nerwande to function as a priest and appointed him vicar-general of the diocese meant that the episcopacy was in full support of Nerwande‘s spiritual healing exploits.
169
before and during the HIV and AIDS era.700 The lack of regular programmes on marriage and family life, including sexuality and AIDS at diocesan level exposed Anglicans to the risks of contracting HIV.
The Mothers‘ Union guild, an important wing of the Anglican Church in Manicaland, did not create safe spaces for young women who faced the threat of contracting HIV from their spouses. The situation was further exacerbated by the belief that using condoms to protect oneself from possible chances of contracting sexually transmitted HIV was unchristian. There was a belief that in using condoms the church‘s married women, mainly members of the Mothers‘ Union guild, portrayed them as being unfaithful and literally showed mistrust of their husbands.701 For churchwomen, marriage in the time of HIV and AIDS became a death trap, not only due to the undeniable influence of culture, but also due to teachings received from within church circles. In support of this assertion, Mungwini made an important observation that within Shona culture, married women were relatively disadvantaged due to limited chances of negotiating safe sex.702 This situation exposed young women to high risk of contracting HIV sexually and yet the church‘s leadership Manicaland did little to address it. Generally, society appeared to be tolerant of men‘s use of condoms with concurrent partners and the practice was accepted as being normal.703 Takyi pointed out that in Ghana, while many Christian women gained important AIDS information from church and other faith-based interactions, they often encountered restrictions at the individual level. As Takyi stated: ―Rather than facilitate the diffusion of new ideas, it was possible, however, that the influence of religious organisations could constrain individual actions such as use of condoms because they go against church tenets.‖704
While the subject of HIV and AIDS became a talking point in sermons, teachings and addresses,705 the lack of well structured attempts to organise proper presentations at diocesan level could have denied parishioners of opportunities to gain crucial
700 M. Nyamwena, interview conducted by M. Mbona, St. Joseph‘s Samanga, Honde Valley, 14 September 2010.
701 M. Nyamwena, same interview.
702 Mungwini, ―Shona womanhood,‖ 209.
703 K. Nyazika, same interview. See also M. Nyamwena, same interview.
704 Takyi, ―Religion and women‘s health in Ghana,‖ 1222.
705 K. Nyazika, same interview. See also J. Chimwaza, same interview.
170
knowledge and information. The diocesan leadership appeared to assume that the church‘s members were aware of HIV and AIDS from the media or other sources.
HIV awareness campaigns organised by the diocesan leadership for the benefit of church followers were non-existent or very minimal.706 Between 1985 and 1994 very few Anglicans realised that the pandemic had deeper roots than had been imagined.
The denial of HIV and AIDS-related stigma could have prevented the church‘s leadership from using the church‘s healthcare institutions to initiate responses to HIV and AIDS and enlighten church members on the epidemic. The lack of collaboration between the diocesan leadership and the church‘s healthcare institutions weakened the general response to HIV and AIDS interventions. One possible factor is that the church‘s leadership perceived the epidemic largely in moral terms and not as a biomedical reality.707
The lack of openness about the AIDS limited the amount and nature of support that could be provided to PLHIV by both the clergy and the laity. Nyazika and Murakwani mentioned that Anglican parishioners rarely confided information regarding a person‘s HIV status to the priest.708 The fact that at times priests were left to guess the causes of death among deceased church members was indicative of the extent to which Anglican Christians were secretive. The perception of AIDS in moralistic terms and the stigma that followed affected the credibility of Anglican clergy in confessional matters that involved PLHIV. For example, Jesmine Mavhima mentioned that some members of the clergy were stumbling blocks to HIV prevention because ―a number of Anglican priests were of questionable moral standing.‖709 This is not to suggest that Anglican clergy in Manicaland were immoral but to note that sexual immorality and HIV have links and the clergy were not an exception. The HIV epidemic mainly thrived on flaws in human sexuality and increased in cases where immorality was rampant. According to a South African study conducted by Marshall and Taylor, ―It is not only in its lack of response to the crisis that the church is struggling. At the same time, it is failing to lead by example on matters of sex, gender
706 Information supplied by P. Z. Dhlomo to M. Mbona, Rusape, 28 September 2010. See also M.
Nyamwena, same interview.
707 M. Chikukwa, same interview.
708 K. Nyazika, same interview.
709 J. Mavhima, interview conducted by M. Mbona, Lesape Drive, Rusape, 17 August 2010.
171
relations and HIV and AIDS in its own behaviour.‖710 It appears that HIV prevention in the Anglican Church in Manicaland was undermined by a perceived lack of moral leadership that generally turned into moral rhetoric.