A group has never evolved anything descent

There are those advancing the complaint that Chamisa is a dictator. The common grievance is that he does not consult others in his leadership. The assumption that such complainants are driven by desiring the advantage, accessible in Chamisa’s popularity may not be far from wrong.

An idea comes from one person but is supported when resonating with people’s needs. Before unpacking the phenomenon of Chamisa’s popularity, let us first dwell on what has sustained human civilisations. Galileo pitched up with his telescope to introduce what eventually led to current scientific provisions.

Riding on Galileo’s breakthroughs, individual mathematicians further sharpened the phenomenal Information Technology, currently being overtaken by AI, driving modern civilization. The model, prescribing the effectiveness of oneness, rather than groupings came through Jesus Christ.

The only reason that caused Jesus’ murder was His deviation from subscribing to a group mentality. Like Chamisa, Jesus was hated for one thing: Being loved by the people, yet having not agreed with the bunch of psychopaths in the Jewish religion. Great ideas come from unitary sources, where God is the author.

If the pluralistic philosophy was that important, Jesus would have consulted the leadership in Jerusalem, before establishing Christianity. Truth comes from the source. Anything that embroiders what comes from the source is susceptible to misleading and deserves discarding.

The source of any progressive information is God, whose form can wrongly be considered individualistic and undemocratic. The Bible shows nothing else but the monotheistic formula, whenever God initiated transformative changes in humanity. For democracy to be workable, it has to be based on choosing one leader to champion what resonates with the majority.

God worked with Noah, rather than a group. He later worked with Abraham, rather than those in agreement with Abram’s credentials of righteousness. Throughout the history of the Israelites, their revival was always initiated by one man. There is no record of God having ever democratically worked with groupings. Those currently accusing Chamisa of sidelining them are opportunists, desiring to ride on Chamisa’s popularity.

Forget about the assumption of value in structures based on communistic principles, designed to make leaders more important than other fellow humans. Jesus never formulated structures, such as those peddled by discredited scholars like Jonathan Moyo. God’s Church is structure-less, sustained by the brotherhood coherence.

Jesus invalidated democratic principles, as the reason for manipulations by wicked characters, disguised as champions of democracy (Matthew 7:13-20). The workable principle of leadership is monotheistic. The fact that the monotheistic principle is comparable to dictatorship does not make it unworkable. The difference is that dictators do not consult the feelings of those who are led.

This does not necessarily suggest that people should not form their own political parties. They should actually, be encouraged to form as many. This gives people the ability to choose what identifies with their needs. The wrong thing is opposing those with ideas that resonate with ordinary people.

The monotheistic principle is altruistic. That principle provides for a single leader, but whose power is vested in people. In other words, such a leader is attached to common people’s welfare, which invalidates leadership structures. There is nothing wrong with operating without structures, according to Jesus’ recommendation to His disciples:

“But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Matthew 23:8-12 NIV).

The disciples were instructed to appreciate an apparent leaderless structure, where the ultimate leader is God. The semblance of a leader at the human level is for communication purposes. Otherwise, when operating on a spiritual level, each member carries peculiar abilities. Everything is promoted by the spirit of cooperation and love.

Each member bears some responsibility without grumbling or envying what does not identify with their talents. There would be no jostling for power, and jealousy would be absent. A spiritual organism is different from a physical organism. The physical organism uses force, while the spiritual organism, whose principle was perfectly articulated by Paul, uses persuasion.

There are different kinds of working, but in all of them and everyone it is the same God at work. Now to each one, the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge using the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gift of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous power, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines (1 Corinthians 12:6-11 NIV).

Paul illustrated what Jesus pronounced, but applicable when appreciating humanity’s spiritual condition. Good leadership implies accepting and considering divergent views but with the right to accept or discard such suggestions. When disciplined, those giving suggestions cannot demand that the leader should always bend to their whims.

An organizational leader stands in God’s position. The worst thing is to oppose a leader of the same organization. That kind of behaviour constitutes rebellion against God. As common as this appears to be, such opposition is against God, who dislikes rebellion (Numbers 16).

That behaviour is inspired by despising the leader. In this life, there are those interested in power but rejecting the responsibility thereof. The malcontents, against Moses, projected what resonates with some of those of our time.

Behind the rebellious characters would always be supporters. To them, democracy means everything going their way, instead of the way of the despised. Those people might look innocent but are driven by a deadly ego. As much as anyone may conclude how evil Sengezo Tshabangu was, he represented various others, behind the scenes.

Democracy appears as the best form of corporate governance. But it depends on how one interprets democracy. In 2005 Morgan Tsvangirai was ejected from power after his colleagues voted in favour of Mugabe’s senatorial provision. Tsvangirai disagreed but resonated with the grassroots supporters.

As representing people’s welfare, Tsvangirai was supported by citizens, constituting the majority. The MDC party became split, causing Tsvangirai to technically lose leadership in court. Tsvangirai stood by people’s wishes on the ground. It, therefore, is incorrect to assume that Tsvangirai was undemocratic.

The same undemocratic Tsvangirai went on to win the 2008 elections. Most people continue to fail to appreciate that the “democratic” ones, per the 2005 split, were, actually, the ones who were undemocratic. Rebellion can never attract the majority, from which the term “democracy” is derived.

People’s wishes are God’s wishes, as opposed to the wishes of the power-hungry. The developments, leading to Tsvangirai’s MDC T winning elections in 2008, ought to have been adopted as a learning curve. That is if those peddlers of dubious constitutionalism were honest in their assertions.

Christianity is not immune to pluralistic principles in leadership. Catholicism is recorded as the first Christian organization established, after the Dark Ages. The question of whether Catholicism had Christ’s blessing, in the first place, can only be answered by God.

But history has it that there existed some Gnostic groups, considered heretical which got suppressed out of existence. Christianity is riddled with thousands of denominations, each claiming legitimacy ahead of others. The monotheistic principle established by Jesus does not appeal to ordinary humans. Each grouping seeks to invalidate those not subscribing to their doctrinal positions.

The principle of monotheism is the only one that carries authenticity. God is one, as opposed to divisive party structures. Common people need unity more than factionalism, designed for personal benefits. Satan is the root of factionalism, as he attempted rebellion against God and is, therefore, the sponsor of factionalism.

The Nicaean Council that established the Trinitarian doctrine was not based on monotheistic principles. The Trinitarian doctrine was formulated on pluralism, where oneness is considered nothing, and pluralism is considered authentic. The first of the Ten Commandments given to Israel emphasizes monotheism.

 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and your gates” (Deuteronomy 6:4-9 NIV).

Although specifically commanded to the Israelites, the exhortation applies to Christians, whose counsel is Jesus, advising praying to a monotheistic God. Jesus never insinuated that God was divided into factions. Prayer was to be addressed to a monotheistic God, whom Jesus instructed them to address as their Father.

“This, then, is how you should pray: ‘Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, you will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And lead us not into temptation but deliver us from the evil one.’ For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you” (Matthew 6:9-14 NIV)

 Two things need consideration in the above passage: 1) the disciples were not instructed to pray to God, but to their Father, whose name was to be hallowed. Throughout His ministry, Jesus never uttered God’s name. The traditional God’s name is given in consonants YHWH, being mysterious. Some vowels were later added to make it pronounceable as Yahweh. But Jesus showed the need to protect that name from profanity.

This brings us to the second point: 2) God’s forgiveness requires forgiving others. Here we see that forgiving is rooted in monotheism. Recognizing diversities is possible, only to those willing to forgive. The unwillingness to forgive is rooted in the philosophy of pluralism.

The inability to forgive stems from a pluralistic philosophy. The pluralistic philosophy insists: “Their problem is not our problem”. The monotheistic philosophy suggests: “Their problem is our problem”. The monotheistic philosophy is inclusive, while the pluralistic philosophy is exclusive.

In the History of Christianity, the pluralistic philosophy sought to invalidate the Gnostics, labelling them as heretics. But, more so, it is the pluralistic philosophy that delineated the existence of thousands of denominations, attesting to belief in the same Jesus. Paul attempted to address this amateurish conduct, but possibly without success.

“I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought. My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, ‘I follow Paul’; another, ‘I follow Apollos’; another, ‘I follow Cephas’; still another, ‘I follow Christ.’ Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you?

“Were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power” (1 Corinthians 1:10-17 NIV).

Whatever caused those Corinthians to prefer specific leaders was driven by pluralism, suggesting introversion, affecting the inward-looking, rather than the outward-looking. The monotheistic philosophy considers the problems of outsiders, more than the insiders. Hence, Jesus instructed His disciples to pray for their enemies.

Chamisa insinuated forming a broad-based political movement, without traditional structures. As to whether he still maintains that viewpoint, remains to be seen. But I, for one, am supportive of that idea. Pluralism appeals, but is very undemocratic. Pluralism is supported by those benefiting when others lose.

This country needs one leader, rather than the multitudes of power-hungry crooks. Collectively, people can exchange leaders, through democratic processes, if not meeting their needs. The party spirit is egotistical, preferred by egocentric characters, contributing to our country’s demise. I wish Christians across the globe could also copy this monotheistic model.

Andrew Masuku is the author of Dimensions of a New Civilization, laying down standards for uplifting Zimbabwe from the current state of economic depression into a model for other nations worldwide. A decaying tree provides an opportunity for a blossoming sprout. Written from a Christian perspective, the book is a product of inspiration, bringing relief to those having witnessed the strings of unworkable solutions––leading to the current economic and social decay. Most Zimbabweans should find the book as a long-awaited providential oasis of hope, in a simple conversational tone.

The Print copy is now available at Amazon.com for $13.99

Also available as an e-copy at Lulu.com  for $6.99