“Living Our Faith:” The Lenten Pastoral Letter

of the Bishops of Malawi and the Shift

MAURA MITCHELL

From 1964 to 1993, Dr. Hastings Kamuzu Banda ruled the nation of Malawi by a singular mixture of terror and
ritualized paternalism, relying on religious institutions to bolster his own moral authority. In the changing global
and regional political context of the early 1990s, however, it was the Roman Catholic bishops of Malawi who
challenged the prevailing culture of silence. In the lenten pastoral letter entitled “Living Our Faith,” the seven
bishops reproached the Banda regime for its authoritarianism. Relying on New Testament images of Christians
as inherently free, the bishops ultimately contributed to the development of representative democracy. Acting not
as biased proponents of specific political groups but rather as the champions of government accountability and
human dignity, Malawan Catholic clerics and the external rituals and symbols of their faith have attained (at least
in the short term) a greater prestige and popular appeal in a religiously heterodox nation.

In March 1961, the Catholic bishops of Nyasaland issued a joint pastoral letter entitled
“Building a Happy Nation.” Delivered to a laity on the threshold of independence from British
colonial rule, the letter sought to instruct Catholics in the region regarding their rights and re-
sponsibilities within the nascent political order. In a passage directed at “rulers and chiefs,” the
bishops reminded all secular leaders that their authority came ultimately from God, and that it
was from their role as God’s representatives that they derived the right to be obeyed:

If [rulers] act against the Law of God, they are no longer acting as God’s representatives. Then they lose the right
to be obeyed. In those exceptional cases it is a right and a duty to criticize and resist. (Episcopal Conference of
Malawi 1961:38)

In the aftermath of this bold instruction, the Church refrained from making any such assertions
from 1964 to 1992, as Malawi languished under the rule of Dr. Hastings Kamuzu Banda. While
tourist literature promoted Malawi as “The Warm Heart of Africa,” a land of well-behaved,
conservative, shy people free from the violent excesses and painful scarcity of their African
neighbors, Dr. Banda ruled the nation by a singular mixture of terror and ritualized paternalism.
His Excellency The Life President imprisoned anyone who dared to express sentiments such as
those found in the 1961 pastoral letter, and in fact used Malawian religious institutions to bolster
his own moral authority (Ross 1996a:38).
From 1989, both the changing global political context and the increasing activism and orga-
nization of forces rallying against Banda combined to create a more favorable climate for overt
denunciations of the Ngwazi (Father-Leader), as Banda preferred to be called.
With the end of the Cold War, African dictators who had been viewed as anticommu-
nist bulwarks by Britain and the United States lost the unquestioning support of their Western
allies (Africana 1992:8). Malawians watched with great interest as the paramount ruler of Zambia,
Kenneth Kaunda, responded to calls for multiparty democracy by stepping down from power in
acquiescence to the popular will. It was also duly noted that Catholic clerics had been among the
first to demand greater governmental accountability to the Zambian people.1

Maura Mitchell can be found at Florida Atlantic University, Davie Campus, 1208 Avacado Isle, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33315.

Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 41:1 (2002) 5–18

Ordinary Malawians’ access to unfiltered international radio news (particularly BBC World
Service) had improved and the democratization of other African dictatorships lent encouragement
to small but determined anti-Banda forces.2 By late 1991, criticism of Banda and his cabinet,
particularly Minister of State John Tembo, was widespread (Chipeta 1992:3). Yet much of the
organized resistance to Banda’s regime and his monolithic Malawi Congress Party was forced to
operate outside Malawi with limited resources (African News Bulletin 1992:III).3 In early 1992,
these groups still lacked the cohesion to combat both popular apathy and Banda’s highly effective
methods of repression—imprisonment, assassination, and the paramilitary support of thousands
of young men attached to the Malawi Congress Party Youth League and the notoriously violent
Malawi Young Pioneers (MYP).
Yet voices of dissent were raised tentatively from the 1980s, and both male and female
Catholic religious were among those who discussed the viability of a backlash against the growing
corruption and violence of the Banda regime. By the landmark visit of Pope John Paul II in 1989,
Malawian clerics were eager to discern whether or not the pontiff would support their desire
to assume a more outspoken pro-democratic position. Although the Pope would not denounce
the regime personally, in private meetings he most strongly and unequivocally urged the bishops
and apostolic administrators of Malawi to guide the nation toward an open dialogue on justice
and freedom. With what amounted to a papal “green light,” the bishops prepared to mount a
challenge to Banda’s stranglehold on the institutions of his country. The successful efforts of the
Zambian Episcopal Conference in 1990 to awaken the political consciousness of the people of
that long-repressed nation provided further inspiration (Roche interview 1999).
The Roman Catholic bishops of Malawi placed the government’s proven disregard for human
rights front and center in the public discourse during the lenten season of 1992. In a pastoral letter
entitled “Living Our Faith,” the bishops issued a polite but direct appeal for greater governmental
accountability to the Malawian people. Parish priests read the statement from the pulpits of
Catholic churches throughout Malawi, and 16,000 copies were circulated for further examination
and discussion. The timing of the letter and the prelates’ straightforward, powerful argument
transformed a respectful letter of admonition into a precipitant of popular outcry against the Life
President, culminating in a national referendum for multiparty democracy in June 1993 and the
subsequent fall of Dr. Banda. The atmosphere of fearful, silent acquiescence that had limited
Malawian political discourse for over a generation had been challenged—not from abroad or by
a small circle of activists, but from the pulpits of parish churches in every district of the nation.
Following the issuance of the pastoral message, Malawian clerics (not only Catholic but also
Protestant and Moslem) rapidly became outspoken and often unbiased defenders of the democratic
process.4 To see the events of 1992 and 1993 in their proper context, an examination must be
made of the language used by the bishops to discredit the authoritarianism that had characterized
Malawian politics since 1964. Employing letters and memoranda from Church and governmental
archives as well as contemporary newspaper and journal articles, interviews, and press releases,
this study will scrutinize the prelates’ admonitions, the rapid response of the state, and the Church’s
defense against these counterattacks. The resultant increase in the prestige and influence of the
Catholic clergy in a religiously heterodox nation will also be considered. Whether this increase
will prove to be short-lived remains to be seen, but at present, the bishops of Malawi are firmly
ensconced as moral, spiritual, and (despite their protestations to the contrary) political guides to
their flock, not as proponents of specific political parties, but rather as the champions of democratic
principles. Their tactics and language illustrate the successful infiltration of spiritual authority into
temporal affairs by blurring the line between the two. By claiming the struggle for civil liberty as a
holy imperative and the province of all men of God, the bishops both followed and refined methods
employed by the Catholic prelates of other African nations, including Zimbabwe, Zambia, The
Sudan, and Kenya. In the case of Malawi, the Church’s attack on authoritarianism had sweeping
and immediate consequences. The seven men who signed their names to “Living Our Faith”
precipitated a chain of events culminating in the establishment of multiparty democracy in Malawi.
BISHOPS AND DEMOCRACY IN MALAWI 7

THE PASTORAL LETTER OF MARCH 1992

The language of the pastoral letter was rooted in a longstanding Catholic tradition of citing
both canonical precedent and examples from the teachings of Christ and his disciples to justify
Church involvement in temporal affairs. True to this tradition, 20th-century liberation theology
legitimizes itself through the New Testament, with Christ the revolutionary as a central pillar of
support. None of the bishops of Malawi in 1992 could be categorized as radical, but in order
to justify their attack on the Banda regime, it was necessary to rely on the central concepts of
Christ as liberator and freedom as the birthright of the children of God. By drawing very carefully
from the New Testament, the bishops presented themselves as impartial witnesses to the current
political situation. This was the first crucial decision taken by the seven prelates in enhancing their
popular appeal: to stringently avoid any appearance of sectarian grandstanding or personal bias
when reproaching the Life President and his cabinet. They held Banda accountable not to their
own potentially self-interested expectations, but rather to the standards of the reign of God. This,
as Ken Ross has written, was the cornerstone of the shift from acquiescence to activism among the
people of Malawi: the introduction of accountability into the political life of the nation (1996a:39).
To stimulate political activism among the Catholic population of Malawi, the bishops relied
on traditional perceptions of the cleric as shepherd. The fundamental moral force of their message
would lie in the fact that they spoke on behalf of the inviolable dignity of the people they protected.
They established their role as advocates for human rights in the first passage of the letter:

The unity and dignity of the human race have been definitively sealed in Christ the Son of God who died for all,
to unite everyone in one body. Rejoicing in this truth we proclaim the dignity of every person, the right of each
one to freedom and respect. This oneness of the human race also implies equality and the same basic rights for
all. These must be solemnly respected and inculcated in every culture, every constitution and every social system.
(Episcopal Conference of Malawi [henceforth ECM] 1992:1)

The Episcopal Conference laid the groundwork for a discussion of temporal matters in the
ensuing discourse. The words “dignity,” “rights,” “freedom,” and “equality” are measured out in
the text and indeed form a framework for the entire letter. From their perspective, the bishops
were not stating their opinion or analyzing the current regime’s performance; they were simply
reminding their audience of an essential New Testament concept—human beings as children
of God, equals before God, each worthy of his grace. The bishops first justified their impending
involvement in secular affairs by establishing that a government’s treatment of its subjects directly
affects their minds and spirits, and so can never be entirely divorced from the moral or religious
sphere of human existence.
The intent to address temporal issues was expressed in the opening paragraph of the second
section:

Because the Church exists in this world it must communicate its understanding of the meaning of human life and
of society. As Pope Paul VI says: “The Church is certainly not willing to restrict her action only to the religious
field and disassociate herself from man’s temporal problems.” (ECM 1992:2)

The quote from Pope Paul VI’s 1975 encyclical on world evangelization entitled Evangelii
Nuntiandi provided another vital element of the prelates’ criticism of the state: papal authorization.
Pope Paul VI affirmed that the Church must fulfill its role as safeguard of the human spirit
by embracing the global struggle for liberation. The Church’s role in this struggle, which was
profoundly rooted in God’s plan for the salvation and freedom of all people, was not to embrace
specific political systems, but rather to call men and women to become active seekers of justice
(Apostolic Exhortation of His Holiness, Pope Paul VI 1975:38).5
After citing Evangelii Nuntiandi, the bishops politely acknowledged some of the benefits of
Banda’s rule in Malawi, particularly the climate of general stability enjoyed under his leadership.
8 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

Such cordial language prefaces several sections of the letter but appears as an insubstantial for-
mality when followed by indictments of the government’s shortcomings and abuses. After empha-
sizing the tragic failures of the state educational system and medical establishment, the bishops
focused attention on the restricted access of the vast majority of Malawians to free and full par-
ticipation in the public life of the nation. In this section of the pastoral letter, the exaltation of
democratic principles was buttressed by examples from the New Testament. The bishops stressed
that “the Holy Spirit grants the members of the Christian community gifts of all sorts for the bene-
fit of the community,” citing Ephesians 4:7 (“On each one of us God’s favor has been bestowed in
whatever way Christ has allotted it”) and 1 Peter 4:10–11 (“Each one should use whatever gift he
has received to serve others, faithfully administering God’s grace in its various forms. If anyone
speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God.”). Not only does each individual
have a God-given right to speak and to be recognized, but it is only a very shortsighted government
that would want to reject the ideas and possible contributions of any of its subjects (ECM 1992:10).
The bishops then applied traditional African wisdom by quoting, in direct succession, three
Chewa folk sayings, beginning with:

Motu umodzi susenza denga.

This was an appeal not only for social unity, but an admonition aimed at a regime in which
only a very few were empowered to make decisions and to shape policy. The talents, opinions,
and full participation of all were required to realize the optimal development of a community.
The second proverb continues this theme:

Mtsinje wopanda miyala susunga madzi.

Without hearing the voices of every member of society, a government is only an empty
channel. When it enacts policy that does not reflect the true needs of the people, the administration
has no solid foundation for lasting, beneficial development. Such a system will benefit only the
few who impose their will upon the majority, and for how long? As the bishops explained, “No
individual—or group of individuals—can pretend to have all the resources needed to guarantee
the progress of a nation” (ECM 1992:10).
Finally, democracy must include the voices of even the simple and uneducated, for they may
possess insights or gifts that could prove useful to all:

Wopusa ansomba ng’oma wochenjera navina.

Having broken the taboo against even subtle public criticism of the Banda regime, the bishops
laid out the full scope of their indictment: the state must acknowledge the aspirations and frustra-
tions of all its people by according a legal forum wherein citizens could express their views and
the state, in return, would be accountable to public opinion. The bishops proceeded to plead for
freedom of the press, free speech and assembly, freedom of political affiliation (an indictment of
the stranglehold maintained by Banda’s Malawi Congress Party on the political life of the nation),
an impartial judicial system, and academic liberty. Such civil rights, if granted, would foster an
atmosphere of open discussion and debate whereby true progress might be made and a greater
proportion of Malawians might share in the fruits of development:

The first step in the restoration of the climate of confidence may be taken by recognizing the true state of the nation.
“The truth will set you free” (John 8:32). These words of Christ do not have an exclusively religious meaning. They
BISHOPS AND DEMOCRACY IN MALAWI 9

also express a deep human reality. . . . It is the Church’s mission to preach the Gospel which affects the redemption
of the human race and its liberation from every oppressive situation, be it hunger, ignorance, blindness, despair,
paralyzing fear, etc. Like Jesus, the advocate of the poor and the oppressed, the believing community is invited,
at times obliged in justice, to show in action a preferential love for the economically disadvantaged, the voiceless
who live in situations of hopelessness. (ECM 1992:13, 15).

As a Christian institution, the Church was duty-bound to speak openly in defense of any
people (of any creed) deprived of physical and psychological freedom. Through the structure
and text of their lenten pastoral letter, the seven prelates held the immediate advantage of having
defined the terms of the ensuing discourse in a positive, populist, even heroic manner. As the
government resorted to mudslinging, threats, and other negative responses, the Church attracted
national and international support through its self-anointed position as an untainted, impartial
champion of human rights.

THE REACTION OF THE BANDA GOVERNMENT

“Living Our Faith” was read in Malawian churches on Sunday, March 8, 1992, the first
Sunday of Lent. Throughout the entire nation, there were only three pastors who refused to
pronounce the lenten message.6 Only two days earlier, the state-controlled Blantyre Daily Times
had printed a commentary praising the strong bond between the Banda regime and the Roman
Catholic Church. A Catholic delegation including the Archbishop of Blantyre, James Chiona, and
the Auxiliary Bishop of Dedza, Tarcisius Ziyaye (later Bishop of Lilongwe), called on the Life
President that week to discuss matters of mutual interest. The bishops were polite and reserved,
preparing for the release of what they knew would be unwelcome criticism of the state in “Living
Our Faith,” but careful to appear respectful before Dr. Banda. The Daily Times reported with
satisfaction that the bishops pledged to work with the state to improve living standards through
education and community service. Archbishop Chiona served notice that the Church had every
intention and right to concern itself with the progress of both the “body and soul” of the people,
a foreshadowing of the reproaches found in the pastoral letter. Banda, however, received this as a
pledge of solidarity with the government in working toward the material progress of Malawians.
The Daily Times commentary praised Dr. Banda for leaving the doors of his residence open to all
who would share their views with him: “we join the Catholic Bishops . . . in echoing a word of
gratitude for the peace and stability, tranquillity, freedom of worship, and high sense of dialogue
. . . that have characterized independent Malawi” (March 6, 1992:8). In fact, the nonexistent “high
sense of dialogue” highlighted in the commentary would be forced upon the Life President with
the reading of the lenten letter.
Following the dissemination of “Living Our Faith,” Banda was immediately placed on the
defensive, and the regime’s backlash against the Episcopate would only emphasize the sort
of arbitrary rule criticized in the pastoral message. By Tuesday, March 10, the bishops were
called before the Chief of Police in Blantyre to explain the letter. The authorities questioned
the prelates for eight hours and demanded that the bishops remain at Archbishop Chiona’s res-
idence until further notice (they would return to their respective residences on March 13, after
foreign diplomats sent word to Dr. Banda that any “accidents” involving the bishops would
result in the halting of aid to Malawi). Meanwhile, Banda’s advisers launched a campaign to
discredit the Episcopate and thereby deflect any groundswell of public sympathy for the seven.
On the state-controlled Malawi Broadcasting Company’s evening news, Banda’s Speaker of the
House Lungu accused the bishops of confusing the public and telling them lies (Turnbull 1992:
1–2).
The government declared the pastoral letter seditious on March 11. The Office of the In-
spector General of the Police issued a press release stating that any persons in possession of
a copy of the letter should surrender it immediately to the nearest police station. Henceforth,
10 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

possession or circulation of any copy of “Living Our Faith” would result in criminal prosecution
(Daily Times March 12, 1992:1). At this time, an extraordinary meeting of the Malawi Congress
Party was convened at party headquarters in Lilongwe. A recording of the proceedings was later
transcribed and printed in the Malawi Democrat, the opposition paper of trade union leader
(and future presidential candidate) Chakufwa Chihana’s Alliance for Democracy (September 24–
October 8, 1992:1, 3). The violent language employed to denounce the prelates, including a boldly
stated directive to kill them, was captured on audiotape in the distinctive voices of Banda’s top
aides. Publication of the transcripts further eroded support for the Life President and his inner
circle.7
When assessing the transcripts, it is important to recognize that making death threats and
engaging in violent discourse are considered assaultive actions in Chewa culture, where words
and their potential for harm carry as much weight as a physical blow. To even wish a man dead
is tantamount to an attack on his body and spirit.8 Thus the words attributed to Malawi Congress
Party luminaries resonated deeply in the public consciousness:

Wadson Deleza, Administrative Secretary to the Party: . . . If only the President could allow us to go to these
Bishops’ houses and tear them apart so that there would be no Malawian Bishops, we would do so. These Bishops
are finished.
B. Phiri, Party Chairman, Kasungu: . . . I am asking to have these Bishops brought into here and have them finished
with. We would like to make them go to heaven before us. President Kamuzu Banda was chosen by God to rule
the Malawians, so anybody who secretly goes against him is caught and brought out into the public.
Hilda Manjankhosi, Lilongwe Party Chairlady: . . . bring the Bishops here and let us women deal with them.
[Bishop of Lilongwe] Chimole’s face is like a sculpture and he does not look like a human being. . . . These
Bishops are all stupid and they are thieves. They steal money from their churches. We do not want this Catholic
Church anymore, and these Bishops should be killed right away.
Charles Kamphulusa, Blantyre Party Chairman: . . . If we were given guns, we could have killed them ourselves.
These Bishops are great sinners. They are drunkards, womanisers, thieves.
Katola Phiri, Minister of Local Government: . . . Our hearts will not rest until we hear that all the seven Bishops
do not exist anymore. The President does not choose all his ministers on merit [education] but rather knows that
when things like this happen we can easily solve the problem, for example, if I could meet one of the Bishops
anytime, whether day or night, with my car, he would disappear. We already agree that whoever speaks ill of the
President should be killed. Even in the Bible it is said anyone who speaks ill of the leader of a country should be
killed. Romans 12, verse 13 says that anyone who is against the elders should be killed. (Recording Transcript of
the Extraordinary Convention of the Malawi Congress Party, March 11, 1992)9

Katola Phiri used the New Testament to sanctify obedience to the state, interpreting not
Romans 12, but rather the admonitions found in Romans 13:

The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is
rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgement on themselves. For rulers
hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one
in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you
do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring
punishment on the wrongdoer. (Romans 13:1–4)

Ironically, Phiri drew from the same epistle used by the bishops in “Living Our Faith”—
St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans—as an example of God’s directive to obey temporal authorities.
Spiritual exhortations to obey the state were not, however, particularly effective when the regime
had no record of acting in the interests of a majority of Malawians. For the government to
regain lost ground, the bishops’ increasingly glowing reputation had to be compromised. In a
speech given at the Catholic mission in Kasungu, Katola Phiri would later label all seven prelates
hypocrites who were concerned primarily with enriching themselves at the expense of the people
of Malawi (Daily Times March 26, 1992:1). Such accusations would be launched regularly against
the Episcopate by Banda supporters, in speeches, in the M.C.P.- dominated media, and through
anonymous letters.
BISHOPS AND DEMOCRACY IN MALAWI 11

On March 13, the Malawi News reported that Malawi Congress Party leaders denounced the
pastoral letter as “subversive” and condemned the bishops for using the pulpit “to sow seeds of
confusion in Malawi.” The News reported that many Catholic parishioners were “shocked and
dismayed” by the contents of the letter and in some cases had to be restrained from “taking
direct action against the Bishops.” The Catholic Episcopate was accused of fostering political and
religious factionalism, in an attempt to divide and enhance their own temporal powers in Malawi
(Malawi News March 7–13, 1992:1, 3).
The following issue of the Malawi News continued to attack the bishops, now attempting to
disparage them individually. The News suggested that unspecified “mafia-style” forces controlled
the prelates. Archbishop James Chiona of Blantyre was cited as a “known illiterate” who must have
been acting as a rubber stamp for these dangerous criminals behind the pastoral letter. Monsignor
John Roche, acting Apostolic Administrator of Mzuzu Diocese and an Irish national, was credited
with spearheading this international conspiracy against the “peaceful, beneficent rule” of Kamuzu
Banda. The Malawi News presented the following scenario:

. . . We are aware how churches are used by intelligence agencies in the world to cause confusion and agitate
social and political unrest for the benefit of their paymasters. That we cannot allow here.
We are not prepared to condone any bishop whose aim is to import IRA terrorism into this country to spread
here the chaotic situation now exiting [sp] in Northern Ireland by non-conformist and satanic Catholics. . . .
. . . Any traitor on the payroll of foreign governments to disturb the existing peace and calm in this country
must face the clenched fist on the laws of this country without mercy.

After associating the bishops’ statement with chaos, sectarian violence, and international
terrorism, the Malawi News cast aspersions on the past political record of the Malawian Catholic
Church. The Church had formed a Christian Democratic Party (CDP) in opposition to the early
Malawi Congress Party, and the article asserted that the goals of the CDP were the continuation of
colonialism and imperialism in Malawi. Catholic leaders in Malawi, it was stated, were fomenting
neocolonialism by allowing foreign-bred dissent and rebellion to contaminate the political life of
the nation (Malawi News March 14–20, 1992:6).
The Blantyre Daily Times leveled similar charges at the bishops, particularly Monsignor
Roche and the other non-Malawian prelate, Alessandro Assolari of Mangochi Diocese. The Times
named Roche and Assolari as the sources of the pastoral letter and the assault on the current
regime, but reproached the Malawian bishops as well for allowing themselves to be influenced by
men who were “now bent on practising IRA drama and atrocities on innocent church-goers and
unsuspecting civilians” (March 13, 1992:8).
The Malawian Parliament became yet another forum for denunciations of the Episcopate.
There were daily verbal attacks on the seditious clergy, including calls for the bishops to be
punished or sent “to the mental hospital” (Malawi Parliament Hansard March 26, 1992). On
March 18, Mr. Liyati Phiri, M. P. for Dowa North, expressed profound gratitude for the blessings
of Banda’s rule and then proclaimed that “the House unreservedly condemns the Catholic Bishops
in Malawi for maliciously attempting to destroy the good relationship of the country” (Malawi
Parliament Hansard March 18, 1992). The following day, 20 members of the Malawian Young
Pioneers (MYP) set fire to the Montfort Missionaries Press at Balaka, where “Living Our Faith”
and other Catholic circulars had been printed. Members of the parish staff at Balaka reported that
the MYP attempted to lock them in the building before burning it down; fortunately, they were
able to escape (Turnbull 1992:4).
The Malawi Congress Party attempted to stage pro-government rallies to counter the increas-
ing climate of protest. On March 24, such gatherings were staged throughout the country but
attracted few attendees. Even in Lilongwe, Banda’s stronghold, the White Fathers reported in
their diary that approximately 500 marched in support of the regime, a pitiful showing even if this
number represents a low estimate. Rallies in Lilongwe had long been noted for their large turnout
and exuberant displays of adherence to the rule of the Ngwazi (Turnbull 1992:6).
12 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

Accusations were issued through anonymous letters distributed to secular and religious au-
thorities and to the press. One such letter was forwarded to the Bishop of Lilongwe’s residence
in the spring of 1992, and the terms of the charges leveled at the prelate are typical in the context
of this struggle for public sympathy. The letter stated that priests and bishops carried condoms
in their pockets for use with young girls, and that the clergy was infected with gonorrhea and
syphilis. They had illegitimate children scattered throughout the country (“especially the Bishop
of Zomba”), while Malawians who took wives without a Catholic ceremony were banned from
the sacraments. Nuns, the letter announced, were aborting fetuses conceived with priests. Finally,
Malawian clerics overstepped themselves by campaigning openly for opposition parties against
Banda’s MCP. Malawian Christians were fallen (akugwa), retreating from the sacraments and
from God because of the poor example set by the clergy.10
The final charges against the clergy—that they failed to understand their proper place in
society and actively drove people away from faith in God—were more serious than any allegations
of a sexual nature. In lay-clerical conflicts throughout the world, the accusation that priests inspire
contempt for religion is the paramount insult. There is no greater transgression that a man serving
as the intercessor between God and his people can commit.
Were such accusations effective in strengthening Dr. Banda’s authority and discrediting
the bishops’ message on the need for national reform? Judging by continued support for the
prelates and the pro-multiparty results of the 1993 referendum (which was viewed as a popular
referendum on Banda’s government and the MCP), the answer is no. Throughout the 1992–
1993 transitional period, the bishops carefully monitored their language to appear moderate and
unselfish and stringently avoided harsh attacks on their enemies. At the same time, Banda’s forces
were consistently embarrassed by the continuing circulation of the March 11 MCP meeting
transcripts, which included the voice of Dedza Chairlady Cecilia Kankodo urging party leaders to
bring the bishops to Lilongwe so that women loyal to the Ngwazi could torture them (Recording
Transcript of the Extraordinary Convention of the Malawi Congress Party March 11, 1992).
Banda’s shock troops, particularly the Young Pioneers and the MCP Youth League, began a
campaign of harassment against the bishops and their supporters that would escalate throughout
the remainder of 1992 and through the referendum of June 1993. This violence and intimidation
often served to encourage increasing numbers of Malawians to stand against the Life President,
either in the streets, in the committee rooms, or through the ballot box.
The White Fathers and the Catholic Secretariat in Lilongwe noted greatly increased at-
tendance at Sunday services throughout Malawi in the spring and summer of 1992 (Turnbull
1992:3).11 It is also worth noting that the total number of baptisms in Lilongwe Diocese reached
87,644 persons in 1992; in comparison, 42,116 had been baptized in 1991, and 23,077 would
receive the sacrament in 1993 (Sacramental Statistics 1991–1993, Diocesan Archives, Lilongwe).
This statistical “bulge” in the number of people welcomed into the faith suggests a drive by some
families to complete catechism already underway and a decision by others to end procrastination
and delay. Malawians are baptized not only as infants but as children, young adults, and even
as elders. At a time when the Church seemed to wield genuine political and social influence,
Malawian Catholics were eager to demonstrate their support and to claim a connection with this
newly enhanced authority by increasing observance of external acts of faith such as attendance at
Sunday mass and baptism.12

THE CHURCH’S DEFENSE

Following the reading of the pastoral letter, those who had been mobilized by the bishops’
message were unafraid to voice their approval of the seven prelates even in the face of violent
retribution. As the Catholic hierarchy in Malawi confronted Banda’s initiative against “Living Our
Faith,” praise for the Malawian Church’s position both from within the country and throughout
the world helped to solidify the bishops’ claim to hold the high moral ground. At the same time,
BISHOPS AND DEMOCRACY IN MALAWI 13

the Church leadership carefully defined its own position in the center of the controversy with
characteristically respectful yet firm language. If support from the Vatican was often lukewarm,
other influential bodies, including the Church of Scotland, the Church of England, the U.S.
Catholic Conference, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, Amnesty International, the
United Nations, and the U.S. Agency for International Development, expressed their whole-
hearted approval of the actions of the Malawian Catholic leadership.13
In a serious blow to the government’s popular legitimacy, the first major religious institution
to praise the bishops and to demand that they remain free and unharmed was the Church of
Scotland, which Dr. Banda had always claimed as his close ally. Banda had received Presbyterian
theological training and was ordained during his exile in Great Britain. Following his rapid rise
to power in Malawi, Banda often cited his position as an Elder of the Church of Scotland as one
of the pillars of his spiritual authority. Kamuzu Banda’s rule included a rigid behavioral code
that stemmed from his self-professed conservative Christian faith. Malawians, often referred to as
charmingly shy, were under state duress to be obedient, hard-working, and modest (as examples of
the code, women in Malawi could not wear trousers in public and men were required to keep their
hair short). Banda capitalized on his eldership by speaking to the nation as a stern, admonishing
preacher when it suited him. This quaint overlay provided convenient cover for his less paternal
treatment of dissidents and other “undesirables,” and in his battle with the Catholic Episcopate,
his own Christian education was expected to provide an important source of credibility.
It was thus a serious reversal for the regime when the Church of Scotland’s Department of
World Missions and Unity issued a scathing refutation of Dr. Banda’s status within the Church
hierarchy:

We further wish to make it a matter of public record that Dr. Banda is not an elder of the Church of Scotland in any
meaningful sense. While technically, ordination to eldership is for life, a person with that status is not properly
regarded as an elder unless they are a member of a kirk session [local council]. Dr. Banda has not been such a
member for nearly fifty years. (Statement issued March 16, 1992)

On the same date, March 16, the President of the U.S. Catholic Conference, Archbishop
Daniel Pilarczyk, denounced the treatment of the bishops in a letter to the Malawian Ambassador
to the United States. Archbishop Pilarczyk also endorsed the content of the lenten pastoral letter
in the name of the American Episcopate, as would the prelates of Southern Africa (March 17),
England and Wales (March 17), and Canada (March 18). A Canadian ecumenical association,
the Inter-Church Coalition on Africa, expressed its solidarity with the seven Malawian bishops
(March 17), and Dr. George Carey, the Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote directly to Kamuzu
Banda to seek guarantees of the bishops’ safety (as reprinted in Catholic International May
1–14, 1992:412–14). Amnesty International began an investigation of the persecution of Church
leaders and of lay people accused of possessing the pastoral letter, and reported the death threats
leveled at the prelates (Turnbull 1992:4). More instrumental in restraining the Life President was
the decision reached at the World Bank Consultative Group Meeting in Paris on May 11–13 to
suspend long-term development aid to Malawi until the Banda regime modified its human rights
practices. Only emergency relief such as drought aid would be provided in the interim (Chipeta
1992:7; Turnbull 1992:13)
While international support for the bishops and their message increased, the earliest and
most consistent activism on behalf of the Episcopate within Malawi was staged by students. On
March 15, the first Sunday following the reading of “Living Our Faith,” University of Malawi
students marched into Zomba Cathedral for mass, paraded through the town, and gathered on
campus along with nurses from the University Hospital. The students not only proclaimed their
support for the bishops, but also chanted slogans for multiparty democracy. They were dispersed
by police who used tear gas and fired bullets into the air. The following day, March 16, the students
boycotted their exams and were again dispersed by the police. The university was promptly closed;
although its break had been scheduled for Friday, March 20, the government declared that the
14 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

students would be sent home early to ease tensions. In Blantyre, Malawi’s business and commercial
center, students at the Polytechnic staged demonstrations in favor of the bishops and of a multiparty
state on March 17 and 18. There were reports of minor injuries and the detention of as many as
75 demonstrators. The student unrest continued until Blantyre Polytechnic, too, was closed by
the state. Yet even after the closing of the university and Polytechnic, students remained active
in the pro-democracy movement. Banda’s government countered in April by demanding that all
students sign a declaration swearing that they would not participate in any political activities. The
declarations were also to be signed by their parents. By this time, the police were in the process
of rounding up student leaders, but the movement would not be suppressed. Students in Blantyre
and Zomba continued to battle with local police and to demand multiparty elections in Malawi
(Turnbull 1992:3, 10, 12).
Many of the students active in the pro-democracy movement were members of campus
Catholic, Protestant, and Moslem organizations. Their aspirations long suppressed, they were
overjoyed by the bishops’ display of courage and used the reading of “Living Our Faith” as a
signal to unleash their own expressions of democratic ideology within a religious context. On
March 13, the University of Malawi Catholic Students Association issued a hand-written letter to
the seven bishops praising their initiative and, most emphatically, their social conscience.
“The pastoral letter,” the students explained, “has been a mouthpiece for the voiceless and
powerless and is a clear indication of care for the poor and the oppressed. . . . The people of Malawi
needed more than just political freedom at independence, they also needed a social and economic
emancipation” (University of Malawi Catholic Students Association, letter of March 13, 1992).14
Perhaps the most eloquent defense of the bishops’ precipitation of events in March 1992 was a
memorandum issued to the Life President on April 3 by Archbishop James Chiona of Blantyre on
behalf of all seven prelates. The memorandum asserted that “Living Our Faith” was in no way to
be misinterpreted as a call to rebellion, but rather as an honest assessment of the current political,
economic, and social climate of Malawi. In expressing its opinions within these secular domains
of national life, the Church was simply fulfilling its duties to enlighten the faithful according to
the guidelines established in “the Gospel, the social teachings of the Catholic Church, and indeed
the teaching of the Holy Father expressed specifically in his Encyclical Centesimus Annus in order
to promote the dignity of the human person who has been created in the image and likeness of
God.”15 Pope John Paul II’s 1991 Centesimus Annus (so called because it was issued on the 100th
anniversary of Pope Leo XIII’s landmark Rerum Novarum, in which the Pope confronted the
materialism of the late 19th century and laid the foundations for modern Catholic social doctrine)
referred to passages wherein the Holy Father espoused fully representative democracy as the most
favorable political environment:

The Church values the democratic system inasmuch as it ensures the participation of citizens in making political
choices, guarantees to the governed the possibility both of electing and holding accountable those who govern
them, and of replacing them through peaceful means when appropriate. Thus she cannot encourage the formation
of narrow ruling groups which usurp the power of the State for individual interests or for ideological ends. (Pope
John Paul II 1991:section 46).

Archbishop Chiona emphasized that the Church in Malawi was not seeking to promote its
own earthly ambitions but rather “to give witness to the truth” in the spirit of the work of Christ
himself (Chiona 1992:1).
All seven bishops insisted that “Living Our Faith” was not a political manifesto, but rather
called for material and spiritual improvement in all aspects of Malawian life. Any national
condition that limited human potential, whether political, economic, social, psychological, or
physical, needed to be diagnosed and discussed openly in order for any substantive improvements
to take place. “Authentic freedom,” wrote Bishop Chimole of Lilongwe Diocese, “is to be found
in the truth” (Chimole 1992:2). When assessing the effects of the lenten pastoral letter, Chimole
BISHOPS AND DEMOCRACY IN MALAWI 15

quoted the ChiChewa phrase spoken by many of the bishops’ supporters: “Mwatitsegulira ku
kosi” (“You have opened our throats”) (Roche interview 1999).
The appropriation of the role of unbiased, unselfish heralds imbued the upper clergy of
Malawi (and, later, the leaders of other denominations who joined wholeheartedly in the call
for governmental accountability) with a moral authority that no representative of the discredited
Banda regime could hope to possess. The bishops, in the eyes of their supporters, were fulfilling
their role as good shepherds by proclaiming the true condition of Malawi in order to alleviate the
sufferings of their flock.

ON THE THRESHOLD OF POLITICAL CHANGE: THE CHURCH AND THE REFERENDUM OF 1993

As the events set into motion by “Living Our Faith” began to unfold, the bishops continued
to define their role in the political transformation of Malawi as that of spiritual and social witness.
When leaders of major Malawian religious groups (including the Church of Central Africa Pres-
byterian (CCAP) and the Anglican Church) took up the challenges issued in “Living Our Faith”
and initiated an organized call for a national referendum on multiparty democracy, the Catholic
bishops pledged their support, but then tended to step back from the limelight (Ross 1996a:41).16
The Political Action Committee (PAC) was established in the summer of 1992 to promote a na-
tional referendum; the Catholic Church was represented, but did not presume to claim a leading
role. The PAC consisted of influential members of various religious organizations, lay groups,
and pro-multiparty pressure groups (the latter would evolve into the principal political parties).17
Banda grudgingly accepted the advisory authority of the PAC by October 1992, and once the
referendum was set for June 1993, the PAC provided civic education for the electorate and mon-
itored the campaigning and voting procedures. Following the example of the Catholic prelates,
the majority of Church leaders carried on as moral guides rather than forming political pressure
groups, although their message on the importance of free speech and their call for the greater
accountability of elected officials clearly benefited the multiparty position (Wigginton, Johnson,
and Francis 1993:2). Influential Malawian clerics generally respected this distinction between
political and theological imperatives; dedication to all of God’s people must not be compromised
by service to narrow party interests.
To a great extent, the bishops of Malawi honored their assurances that they would act as
illuminators rather than as biased participants in the rapidly changing political environment of
1992–1993. Yet if they scrupulously shunned support for individuals or parties, their letters and
sermons at the time of the referendum demonstrated that the Church’s teachings on politics and
society could not be reconciled with the toleration of a repressive dictatorship. The 1993 pastoral
letter of the Bishop of Lilongwe entitled “Our Responsibility Today: The Referendum” included
an assessment of both single-party and multiparty systems, with scant praise for the former and
extensive remarks on the benefits of the latter.18 The greatest strength of a single-party state
is its “unanimity in decision-making,” thus eliminating dissent and bringing harmony, but the
multiparty system with its climate of open dialogue and freedom of expression “respects the
dignity of the human person and encourages new initiatives in politics.” A country controlled by
a single party easily shades off into tyranny:

Fear grips everyone, including the leaders who fear to be ousted. When fear permeates society, suffering becomes
commonplace. As Pope John Paul II says, “When a government reaches this stage, the Church can hardly accept
it,” and it is then the Church’s duty to speak out openly and without fear in order to protect all those who are
suffering the consequences. (Diocese of Lilongwe 1993:11–12)

Few of the readers would have failed to recognize the indictment of the Banda regime and
the justification of the initial criticisms launched in “Living Our Faith.” Similar sentiments were
expressed in another joint pastoral letter issued by the bishops in 1993 entitled “Choosing Our
16 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

Future:” “A party which is unopposed tends to take power for granted. It easily begins to abuse
its power. It can end by causing suffering to the very people it is meant to serve” (as reprinted
in Ross 1996b:229–30). While carefully citing canon law prohibiting the clergy from taking an
active role in politics and civil administration, the bishops nonetheless felt compelled to describe
a “sound political system.” This system must include active participation of all citizens, respect
for human rights, the acceptance of pluralism and open debate, honest elected representatives
who serve the people and not their masters, and protection against violence for everyone (Ross
1996b:232).
Whereas clerics once emphasized salvation in the afterlife over liberation in this life, and
indeed asserted that the poor and oppressed were by the nature of their lowly status already closer
to God, late 20th-century liberation theology asserts that a man in chains cannot lift his head to
see the face of God. The Church defines a free and fulfilling existence in this world (as well as
the next) as part of God’s plan for his people, and the Catholic hierarchy, as the self-professed
institutional embodiment of his love on earth, must struggle openly and unceasingly to realize this
freedom. In the booklet entitled Instruction of Christian Freedom and Liberation (published by
the Vatican in 1986), Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger expressed the Church’s position by connecting
democratization with the Exodus of the Children of Israel from Egypt:

When God rescues his people from . . . slavery, he does so in order to make them, through the Covenant on Sinai, “a
kingdom of priests and a holy nation” [Exodus 19:6]. God wishes to be adored by people who are free. (Ratzinger
1986:25)

The bishops were true to this theological principle and at the same time demonstrated that
they too must be held accountable—accountable to contemporary standards of social justice. No
longer would the Church in Malawi stand by while a self-serving dictator maintained his subjects
in a condition of terrified submission. Church leaders presented themselves and were accepted
as completely unbiased, courageous advocates for the voiceless masses, and the threats and
accusations leveled at them by Banda and his henchmen only added to their prestige by investing
them with an aura of martyrdom. Banda had unwittingly enhanced the bishops’ influence by his
own frequent references to the divine nature of his rule and to the unique position of his nation as a
God-fearing haven of peace on a tumultuous continent. For 30 years, the Ngwazi had constructed
a moralistic, theological framework for the exercise of power in postcolonial Malawi.
In order to raise popular expectations to the level of demanding political empowerment for
ordinary Malawians, the bishops relied on both Christian and traditional African worldviews and
wisdom, and scrupulously avoided any appearance of partisanship or political aspirations. The
events of 1992–1993 provide an important paradigm for the methods used by the Church in Africa
to accommodate the culture of materialism and individual worth of the late 20th century without
compromising its traditional promise of eternal salvation.

NOTES

1. In a pastoral letter issued by the bishops of Zambia on July 23, 1990, the Church leaders asked, “To what extent is
our participatory democracy a reality in deed and not just in words? . . . Is the government in practice free to represent
the people or does it represent [Kaunda’s monolithic] Party?” (Pastoral Statement of the Catholic Bishops of Zambia
1990:6).
2. Monsignor John Roche, Apostolic Administrator of Mzuzu Diocese from 1987–1992 and 1993–1995, emphasized that
the BBC broadcasts were critical in breaking the climate of fear and silence. The Malawian people were “delighted”
to hear hard questions being raised in a public forum regarding the Banda regime (Roche interview 1999).
3. This resistance included the Congress for the Second Republic, based in Dar-es-Salaam, and the United Front for
Multiparty Democracy, based in Lusaka.
4. Monsignor Roche discussed the immediate and surprising level of ecumenism that developed in the aftermath of
the lenten pastoral letter. Roche called 1992 “the most important moment in the ecumenical spirit of Malawi—[the
BISHOPS AND DEMOCRACY IN MALAWI 17

dialogue on the need for a democratic process] opened channels of communication and made us look at common
ground” (Roche interview 1999).
5. Pope Paul VI declared that “the Church is becoming ever more conscious of the proper manner and strictly evangelical
means that she possesses in order to collaborate in the liberation of many. And what is she doing? She is trying more
and more to encourage large numbers of Christians to devote themselves to the liberation of men. She is providing
these Christian “liberators” with the inspiration of faith, the motivation of fraternal love, a social teaching which the
true Christian cannot ignore and which he must make the foundation of his wisdom and of his experience in order to
translate it concretely into forms of action, participation and commitment. All this must characterize the spirit of a
committed Christian, without confusion with tactical attitudes or with the service of a political system. The Church
strives always to insert the Christian struggle for liberation into the universal plan of salvation which she herself
proclaims” (Apostolic Exhortation of His Holiness, Pope Paul VI 1975:38).
6. The three refusals occurred in parishes lying within the cities of Zomba (seat of the University of Malawi), Lilongwe
(the capital), and Blantyre (the largest city in Malawi).
7. A European Community representative met with Monsignor John Roche on the evening of March 13, following the
prelates’ release from house arrest. The representative had been informed of the extraordinary meeting of the Malawi
Congress Party and the call to kill the bishops, and warned Roche that he must proceed with extreme caution. Roche
was told that an unnamed participant in the extraordinary meeting was sympathetic to the bishops and had informed
European diplomats of the party leadership’s violent agenda (Roche interview 1999).
8. In conversations with Father Claude Boucher, Director of the KuNgoni Center and Museum at Mua, Malawi, con-
ducted on June 5, 1998, the power of the spoken word in Chewa society was discussed at length. The contribution of
his anthropological perspective is gratefully acknowledged.
9. The Alliance for Democracy issued an international press release containing passages from the transcript of the meeting
through their offices in London on September 25, 1992.
10. The anonymous letter is in the Diocesan Archives at the Bishop’s House, Lilongwe.
11. In Father Turnbull’s report, Zomba and Lilongwe Cathedrals are cited for their “packed” Sunday masses, and in
Lilongwe he notes that the proceeds from the Sunday collection had doubled.
12. A statistical study on sacramental participation is necessary to assess the long-term effects of the Church’s role in the
shift to multiparty democracy on formal Catholic practice. An examination of the crude birth rate in Malawi makes
it improbable that the dramatic increase in baptisms in 1992 was due to a surge in the birth rate. The crude birth rate
(live births per 1,000 people) ranged from 53 in 1985 to 49 for 1995 for the country at large (Center for Interna-
tional Health Information [CIHI] Executive Summary for Malawi: Health Statistics Report January 1996 [examines
1985–1995]).
13. While the Pope had strongly protested the April 17 expulsion of one of the two foreign prelates, Monsignor John Roche
(Apostolic Administrator of Mzuzu Diocese), the Vatican hesitated to express full and public support for the actions of
the bishops of Malawi (Justice and Peace 1992:7). When a Vatican Envoy was sent to Lilongwe, he conducted private
meetings with the Life President and Minister of State Tembo, and the bishops were not invited to participate in the
discussions. This permitted Banda and his ministers to separate the Malawian bishops from the Vatican and present
the former as “mavericks” acting without papal support. Feeling confident after meeting with the Envoy, Banda went
so far as to announce on April 8 that the bishops had apologized to him, which was refuted by the prelates (Turnbull
1992:8–10). Upon his return to Great Britain, Monsignor John Roche expressed disappointment in the “silence” from
Rome: “The message from Malawi is where is the Vatican? The silence is giving a message and for me it is not
the right message. The time for private support is over and it should be said in public” (Roche interview May 12,
1992).
14. Monsignor Roche stressed the fact that university students were highly (albeit still secretly) politicized throughout
the early 1990s. A group of Catholic students rebuked the bishops early in 1992, asking why the prelates remained
silent in the face of growing corruption and repression. According to Roche, their call for an open examination of
government practices and policies resonated deeply with the Malawian Episcopacy, and formed another element in
the decision to distribute the pastoral letter in March 1992 (Roche interview 1999).
15. Frans J. Verstraelen has written that Catholic clerics must act not as ideologues but rather as enlightening “agents
of change,” which he defines as “a group or a person who tries to make certain aims known and understand-
able, who develops a strategy and tactics that are helpful for people to solve their own problems” (Verstaelen
1975:17).
16. The major Malawian churches were not undivided in their criticism of the Banda regime. The Nkhoma Synod of the
CCAP (from Banda’s home region in the center of the nation) retained its longstanding loyalty to the Life President,
earning a suspension from the Christian Council of Malawi. As Ken Ross writes, “Pastors often admonished the people
to vote against any sort of political change and pronounced the Banda regime to be ordained by God” (1996:47). This
was, however, very much against the Christian mainstream by 1993.
17. One such group was the United Democratic Front, the party of Bakili Muluzi, who would defeat Banda in the 1994
election to become President of Malawi.
18. The pastoral letter was published in booklet form by the Montfort Missionaries Press in Balaka, the same press the
MYP had attempted to destroy following the reading of “Living Our Faith” in March 1992.
18 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION

REFERENCES

African News Bulletin. 1992. The warm heart of Africa—Now slightly chilled. April 1:I–V.
Africana. 1992. The situation in Malawi. 163:8–10.
Alliance for Democracy. 1992. Press Release of September 25.
Boucher, C. 1998. Interview conducted on June 5.
Catholic International. May 1–14, 1992:406–14.
Center for International Health Information [CIHI] Executive Summary for Malawi: Health Statistics Report. 1996
(examines 1985–1995).
Chimole, M. 1992. Pastoral letter for Advent, November 23. Lilongwe: Diocesan Archives.
Chiona, J. 1992. Memorandum to His Excellency the Life President, April 3. Lilongwe: White Fathers’ Archives.
Chipeta, M. 1992. Malawi: Turning point or political paralysis? SAPEM May: 3–7.
Daily Times (Blantyre). March 12, 1992:1.
Diocese of Lilongwe Pastoral Letter. 1993. Our responsibility today: The referendum. Balaka: Montfort Missionaries
Press.
Extraordinary Meeting of the Malawi Congress Party. 1992. Recording transcript, March 11.
Hansard of the Malawi Parliament. March 18, 1992.
Hansard of the Malawi Parliament. March 26, 1992.
John Paul II. 1991. Encyclical Centesimus Annus. Section 46.
Justice and Peace. 1992. Malawi flashpoint. April–June: 7.
Malawi Democrat. September 24–October 8, 1992:1, 3.
Malawi News (Blantyre). March 7–13, 1992:1, 3.
Malawi News (Blantyre). March 14–20, 1992:1.
Paul VI. 1975. Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi [On Evangelization in the Modern World], Passage 38.
Ratzinger, J. 1986. Instruction on Christian freedom and liberation. Vatican City: Vatican Polyglot Press.
Roche, J. 1995. Interview conducted on May 12, 1992 by the Catholic Communications Service, London.
––––––. 1999. Interview conducted on June 8, 1999 by author. Lusaka, Zambia.
Ross, K. 1996a. The transformation of power in Malawi 1992–1995. Ecumenical Review January:38–52.
––––––. 1996b. Christianity in Malawi, A source book. Gweru, Zimbabwe: Mambo Press.
Turnbull, B. 1992. How things appear to have developed in Malawi. Report. Lilongwe: White Fathers’ Archives.
University of Malawi Catholic Students Association. 1992. Letter of March 13. Lilongwe: Diocesan Archives.
Verstraelen, F. J. 1975. An Africa church in transition: From missionary dependence to mutuality in mission, a case study
of the Roman Catholic Church in Zambia, Vol. 1. Leiden: Development Research Institute.
Wigginton, M., L. Johnson, and J. R. Francis. 1993. Malawi National Referendum, Pre-Referendum Report of 14 June.