Biblical truths for shaping a Christian perspective of South Africa's Government of National Unity

For a political party that wins a general election in South Africa to form a government on its own in the National Assembly, the number of votes it receives during the election must allow it to occupy more than half of the National Assembly’s 400 seats (read here for an explanation of how votes are translated into National Assembly seats).  

For the first time in South Africa’s post-1994 history, the African National Congress (ANC) failed to meet this criterion, leaving the party with no choice but to establish a coalition government that ultimately took the form of a Government of National Unity (GNU). Readers can follow this link for an explanation of the context surrounding the formation of South Africa’s current coalition government, specifically in the form of a GNU.

Gateway News recently published a call for online consultation to inform prayer among Christians in South Africa, for the GNU. Leading the call was Pastor Olusegun Olanipekun, a Nigerian national who happens to be studying Constitutional Law at the University of Pretoria .

Although the content of the call itself deserves some critical theological reflection, such a task extends beyond the scope of this article, which is specifically about outlining and reflecting on some of the biblical truths that should shape how Christians in South Africa approach the GNU, both in thought and deed.

Good governance depends on more than prayer

At the start of the recent protests in Nairobi, Kenya, one protestor was photographed holding a placard that read, “Kenya is…proof that prayers cannot fix bad governance.” This statement captures some of the scriptural truth about the relationship between Church and State, or between Christians and civil government, but not all of it.

The Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way” (1 Timothy 2:1-2, ESV). In the New International Version, these verses appear under the heading, “Instructions on Worship.”  

Christians are instructed to pray as part of our worship to the Lord. We are instructed to pray for all in authority. This includes the government as an institution and its respective officials. Note from the two verses in Timothy, how prayer for those in authority is a precondition for living peaceful and quiet lives.

Is it possible for a majority of citizens in any society to live peaceful and quiet lives outside good governance? Since 1 Timothy 2:1-2 suggests prayer is a precondition for good governance, I would venture to say that prayer is also essential to fixing bad governance.

The significance of prayer underscores the importance of the call Pastor Olanipekun made for consultation about prayer for the GNU, and it challenges the notion that prayer cannot fix bad governance.

For the state of the nation to improve and for the GNU to show itself effective in governing, will require more than just prayer, however.

From James 2:14-26 (ESV), we learn that faith without works is dead. Prayer, which amounts to an act (or work) of faith, is fundamental to the Christian life, and community or societal transformation. Yet, to the degree that Christians fail to engage in works beyond praying for good governance, the potential for experiencing good governance becomes that much less. I have heard someone say, “Pray as though it depends on God, and work as though it depends on you.”

The need to work alongside or as a consequence of faith is why Pastor Olanipekun’s call refers to an “action plan for churches and Christian groups to implement”. Prayer alone stops short of what’s required to establish good governance or transform governance from ‘bad’ to ‘good’.

Consider the film that Africa Enterprise released in 2022 – “The Threatened Miracle of South Africa's Democracy”. It documents the role that faith-filled Christians played in helping South Africa transition from apartheid to an aspiring democracy.  

In his commentary on Nehemiah, entitled, “Nehemiah Prays First!”, leadership expert John C. Maxwell writes, “When Nehemiah heard that the walls of Jerusalem lay in ruins, that its charred gates sat rotting, and that the Jewish survivors live in distress and reproach, he did what every great [Christian] leader must do: He fasted and prayed.”

Note, Nehemiah prayed, but after praying he approached King Artaxerxes to ask the king’s permission to travel to Jerusalem and rebuild its walls (Nehemiah 2:1-10, ESV). Nehemiah’s plea before King Artaxerxes was the beginning of the work without which Nehemiah’s faith, in this instance, would have been dead. More specifically, when Nehemiah approached King Artaxerxes, he was engaging in a political work founded on faith (see the definition of politics I have given further down).

Politics and governance are inseparable from power

The GNU was birthed in a power struggle. Patriotic Alliance (PA) leader, Gayton McKenzie was spot-on when he said, the reason for the delay in the announcement of a new Cabinet was that parties were in “‘a fight about positions’”. McKenzie asked about himself, “’Do you think I am there seeking autographs? I’m there for power. Policy comes second.’”

South Africans, including Christians, shouldn’t be surprised or offended by statements like these. The GNU is a political arrangement. This reality is what also makes the GNU a power arrangement.

Politics is the competition for and/or exercise of power necessary for managing resources and creating order, without which human beings cannot survive or thrive. Therefore, politics and power are inseparable.

South Africa’s new Minister of Sports, Arts and Culture, whatever his faults may be, understands that the ability to draft and implement policy – something that democratic politicians with a desire for human-centric governance will do with human freedoms and the interests of all South Africans in mind – depends first on having the power to do so.     

Because of humankind’s inherent fallibility, the competition for and use of power can be and often is a messy business. Consider author Ross du Preez ’s recent article on the misuse and abuse of power in the Church.

Politics often is a messy business, not because it involves competition for and exercise of power, but more directly because of the motives underlying and the methods characterising the competition for and exercise of power. This is why the negotiations preceding the formation of South Africa’s new coalition government were intense, and why some viewed the negotiations and their possible outcomes through a racialised lens.

Righteousness exalts a nation

A radio presenter recently asked me during an interview (listen here, here, and here), whether the GNU takes South Africa any closer to having a righteous government. This question is an important one because we learn from Scripture about the benefits accompanying righteousness, including when righteous people occupy positions of authority.  

In Proverbs 13:34 (ESV) we read, “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people,” and in Proverbs 29:2 (ESV), “When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan.”

The GNU Cabinet that President Ramaphosa announced on 30 June, that was sworn in on 03 July, and that constitutes South Africa’s new government, is worth celebrating, if only because it involves a shift away from successive one-party governments responsible for eroding the nation building and democratic gains made during the Mandela and Mbeki years. South Africa’s new National Executive includes members from 9 political parties, one of which has a comparatively good governance record, especially in the Western Cape.

At the same time, however, one of the criticisms levelled against the GNU relates to the quality of its membership, namely, the individuals who have occupied ministerial positions across the respective government departments.

Before 30 June, OUTA - Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse called for “fresh leadership in cabinet appointments”, stating specifically that “three ministers from the 6th administration should not be reappointed” because of their poor governance record. Despite the call that OUTA made, each of the three ministers in question occupies a post in the GNU Cabinet.

Journalists Victoria O’Regan and Lisakanya Venna , for Daily Maverick , have asked whether the GNU Cabinet has the skills, ideas and energy to get the job done. Professor William M. Gumede of the Wits School of Governance has argued that the “Recycling of failed ministers proves the ANC is deaf to the electorate”.

I have reflected elsewhere on whether the GNU Cabinet meets the good governance criteria that President Ramaphosa himself cited during his Cabinet announcement, including, effectiveness, experience, skills, responsibility, commitment, diligence, and, importantly, integrity. I asked this question because, as I’ve already written, “News reports link at least 30 GNU Cabinet Ministers to alleged or confirmed cases of corruption and/or mismanagement.”   

There isn’t a straightforward or clear-cut answer to the question of whether the GNU takes South Africa closer to having a righteous government, or whether the GNU is more righteous than the previous dispensation. The answer depends on how one defines ‘righteousness’ and what one believes concerning the standard for, or measure of, righteousness. Even then, once this conceptual work is complete, one would have to assess each cabinet member on a case-by-case basis, since party affiliation won’t necessarily be a reliable indicator of a cabinet member’s righteousness across different definitions.   

One can define righteousness in at least three ways – each definition’s underlying standard for righteousness being different from the next and each definition involving benefits for a nation, including in this instance, South Africa. These standards of righteousness, also applicable to the GNU, we can call, ‘conforming with state law’, ‘being in right standing with God,’ and ‘pursuing and applying biblical principles and values’.

Before expanding on these standards, let’s consider the meaning of ‘righteousness’, understood separately from any underlying standard. In his essay, “The Righteousness of God,” Professor of Systematic Theology Fred Zaspel , writes as follows:

“The primary words which the biblical writers use (tsedek and dikaiosune) denote, in a physical sense, ‘being straight,’ or in a moral sense, ‘being right,’ and hence, ‘conformity to an ethical or moral standard,’ being and doing what is right. One who is righteous ‘lives up’ to expected obligations; he acts in accordance with what should be done. A righteous man is one who is right and who does what is suitable, one who maintains a ‘right relation with’ what is expected.”

Righteousness that results from conforming with state law

From a good governance perspective, South Africa (like any country) could always do with more citizens, beginning with the most powerful (including government ministers), who act according to the Constitution and state law more broadly. Based on the definition of righteousness given above, and from a good governance perspective, South Africans in right relation with the Constitution might be called righteous citizens.

Righteousness that results from being in right standing with God

From the Christian perspective, the Constitution, like any other human-made standard of righteousness, falls eternally short of God’s standard, defined in Scripture.

The Bible tells us we obtain righteousness (we come into right standing with God’s standard or arrive at God’s standard of righteousness) through no effort of our own except that effort required to confess our sins (1 John 1:9) when we accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour (Romans 10:9). In other words, it is through Christ, not through our works, that we are made righteous (Philippians 1:11, 2 Corinthians 5:21).   

People who confess their sins and accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour (what we call Christians) become righteous before God. Why, from a biblical perspective, would an increase in the righteous (Christians), including among ruling authorities, be good for a nation?

Because God’s life-giving and sustaining Word contains the blueprint for managing human affairs, including in the sphere of civil governance, and because Christians who voluntarily come under biblically based discipleship (because they have a revelation of God’s sacrificial love and a desire to respond affirmatively to that love through obedience), develop an understanding of Scripture alongside a desire to see it applied in all spheres of life.

To the degree that Christians apply God’s Word, including in the civil governance sphere, benefits will accrue to all involved – Christians and non-Christians alike. Consider examples of scriptures that speak to the blessings that accrue from obeying and living according to God’s Word:  Deuteronomy 6:24, Leviticus 26:3-10, Proverbs 3,  Proverbs 6:23; Psalm 119:105, and Luke 11:28.

Importantly, the fact that the Bible’s authority transcends the authority of South Africa’s Constitution, doesn’t mean Christians should ignore state law. In fact, in Romans 13:1, Christians are instructed to subject themselves to (obey) the governing authorities. What would this obedience mean if not obeying the statutes that governing authorities pass? Christians in South Africa who are in right standing with God should also be conforming with state law, except in those cases where it is legitimate for Christians to defy the state.

Therefore, the more those in right standing with God increase and the more they exercise influence, including through civil governance, the more prosperous a nation ought to be. Jesus refers to His followers in Matthew 5:13-16 as the salt and light of the world. As I have explained elsewhere, salt enhances flavour and prevents food from rotting while light enhances perspective and gives direction.  

The argument that more Christian influence in government would involve greater benefits for a nation than a government with less Christian influence is not the same as advocating for a Christian government (a government made up entirely of Christians) or Christian nationalism.

In Proverbs 29:2, we learn of a positive consequence resulting from righteous persons ruling. If, in this instance, “righteous” is understood as being in right standing with God, the scriptural correlation between righteous persons governing and the people of a nation rejoicing must not be interpreted as a command from God that Christians must govern or fully occupy government.

If, in South Africa or any other country, such a scenario was to materialise (an unlikely outcome) it would have to happen peacefully and with the consent of the governed, following which such a government would have to give due regard to freedom of religion or belief (FoRB). Christians must recognise that “God has not established human government to Christianize the world.”

Righteousness that results from aligning with biblical principles and values

American scholar Daniel Dreisbach writes about Proverbs 13:34, “This proverb challenges conventional understandings of power politics, indicating that a nation’s greatness and power are determined by its moral character and not by its political, military, or economic strength.”

Dreisbach’s commentary is pertinent to the current conversation because moral character doesn’t equate with right standing before God, although, being in right standing with God, should necessarily develop moral character in a person or society.

A nation (or its government officials) can possess moral character shaped or informed by biblical principles and values without that nation (or its government officials) necessarily recognising or believing in the divine source of the principles and values. Just like one doesn’t need to know the authors of South Africa’s Constitution to recognise the Constitution’s value and conform with its precepts, one doesn’t need to know God to recognise the value and conform with the principles and values evident in a text inspired by His Holy Spirit.

According to this definition, the GNU Cabinet will be righteous to the degree that its members, pursue biblical principles and values in their governance – irrespective of their religious identity, whether they identify with a religion at all, or whether they recognise the principles and values they apply in their governance as originating from the Bible or not.

Suppose the GNU has taken South Africa closer to having a righteous government. In that case, it will be because, compared to the previous administration, it includes more law-abiding citizens, or because it includes more Christians, or because it includes more leaders who are willing to govern according to biblical principles and values, or any combination of these reasons.

Scripture suggests a limited role for government

What the Bible says about the role and, therefore, the limitations on government, is relevant because another criticism against the GNU Cabinet has less to do with its leadership quality and more with its leadership quantity or the size of its membership. The GNU Cabinet is the biggest in South Africa’s post-1994 history – a reality I have given more elaborate commentary on in an article accessible at this link.

In the opening passage to his article, “Biblical Foundations of Limited Government,” Doug Bandow of the Cato Institute , acknowledges that the proper role of government is a contested issue. Nevertheless, the explicit guidance that the Bible provides on civil governance remains limited because, as Bandow writes, “the dominant message of the Gospel, as well as the Hebrew writings, is man’s relationship to God and his neighbors…the Bible gives much more guidance on how we should treat people than when we should coerce them, which is the defining characteristic of government.”

The fact that the Bible says more about relations between people and between people and God, than about civil governance, while not denying civil government’s key role, suggests that the responsibility of developing and shaping a nation for success is weighted more in favour of civil society (including the Church) than in favour of government.

According to Romans 13:3-4 (ESV), [R]ulers 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 you will be commended. For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

Based on this scripture, which is the most explicit in the Bible about government’s role on Earth, a government’s fundamental role is a limited one – to commend those who do right and punish those who do wrong. Beyond what we read in Romans 13, “The Bible suggests that an expansive government is bad not only because it might demand to be treated like God, but also because it will reflect the sinfulness of its participants and mistreat its citizens.”

South Africa’s recently appointed National Executive is inflated in terms of the number of portfolios for which Ministers and Deputy Ministers are responsible and Cabinet membership, both of which will have implications for government spending, and by implication, taxpayer contributions.  

Of the 32 ministries that President Ramaphosa created, 11 have 2 deputy ministers. While a large number of portfolios (something South Africa’s Free Market Foundation has argued can be reduced to as few as 10) and the bloated cabinet are not new or unique to the South African context (read here, here, and here), the GNU Cabinet is the largest in South Africa’s post-1994 political history.

The size of the GNU Cabinet is an inevitable outcome of President Ramaphosa and his party’s decision to push for the kind of inclusive coalition with opposition political parties that extended well beyond the minimum requirement for forming a government.  If this inclusivity amounts to more than political window dressing and extends beyond only characterising an arrangement between South Africa’s political elite, it will be good for the nation.  

God appoints the authorities

I have highlighted two criticisms levelled against the GNU Cabinet – one concerning the quality and the other concerning the quantity of its leadership. To help temper or place these and any other criticisms against the GNU in the right perspective, so that they don’t dissuade the Church in South Africa from approaching the GNU with proper thinking and action, Christians must remember three biblical truths, the first of which I have already cited above: We must pray for government and its officials.  

Secondly, every member of the GNU and the wider National Assembly is created in God’s image (Genesis 1:27). For this reason alone, every government official is worthy of respect, irrespective of his or her political affiliation, ideology, governance track record, how they govern in the current dispensation. Importantly, showing respect does not deny the need for accountability.

Thirdly, we read in Romans 13:1 that “there is no authority except that which God has established” and that we must therefore, “submit to the authorities” that God has established. Christians in South Africa and elsewhere may have wanted and hoped for a different electoral outcome and may disagree with decisions President Ramaphosa made concerning a coalition government and his Cabinet appointments, but ultimately, we must recognise God’s sovereignty, the realm in which decisions about governing authorities are ultimately granted, and the subsequent need to obey the governing authorities. 

Faithfully believing that God institutes governing authorities because Scripture says so, is one thing. Understanding God’s institution of governing authorities in contexts where people clearly influence who occupies government office, including but especially in contemporary democracies, is another.

There appears to be a contradiction, for example, between Romans 13:1 (cited above) and Hosea 8:4. In the latter scripture, we read how God says, “They set up kings without my consent; they choose princes without my approval” (NIV), and in other translations, “The people have appointed kings without my consent, and princes without my approval” (NLT), “They made kings, but not through me. They set up princes, but I knew it not” (ESV), and “They crown kings, but without asking me. They set up princes but don't let me in on it” (MSG).

How can it be that there is no authority except from God and that God institutes the authorities that exist, while at the same time, God himself acknowledges in Hosea 8:4 that Israel appointed authorities without his approval or consent?

One explanation for the tension between Romans 13:1 and Hosea 8:4 is that “Paul is not telling us [in Romans 13:1] that God appoints the specific ruler [or rulers] in any one government, but that he supports, generally, the right of a government to govern and to protect people from harm.”

In other words, God gives people, however big or small their grouping may be, or whether they do so democratically or not, the freedom to elect or help to power the political leaders they want. This freedom that God gives people does not necessarily mean God approves of how any government ascends to power, or that He approves of the government that comes to power, or how it governs. Hosea 8:4 makes it clear that God allowed Israel to choose its kings, but they did so without consulting Him, and without His approval.

Consider as a temporal analogy for God’s spiritual role concerning the appointment of those in authority, how South Africa’s Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, according to the Constitution, called for and presided over the first sitting of South Africa’s recently established National Assembly – an event that included the Chief Justice witnessing “the swearing in of elected members of the Assembly, the election of the Speaker, Deputy Speaker and the President of the Republic.” The Chief Justice fulfilled these tasks without him necessarily having been consulted and without him necessarily having approved of those being sworn in and elected.   

God remains our ultimate hope and primary source of provision

As political parties naturally vied for citizen attention and loyalty during the campaigning that preceded the recent elections, several slogans circulated in public and private spaces. Among them, one read, “Rescue SA. Vote DA”. Another, cleverly read, “ONLY ACTION WILL FIX SA”. A third, fourth, and fifth, respectively, read, “BUILD ONE SA”, “BUILDING BETTER COMMUNITIES TOGETHER”, and “#HOPEFORSA.

Like the political slogans listed above, the GNU, even if only because of how it is named, may encourage among the more idealistic South Africans, misplaced levels of hope and faith in government, irrespective of how competent or integrous its members may be.

Ideally, before the elections, South Africans would have interpreted political campaign slogans, and today, after the elections, view the GNU, with the understanding that although politicians and governments are crucial determinants of national peace and prosperity, what any politician or government is practically capable of, and in fact does, often falls short of what they envision for their role in society.

Furthermore, the role that politicians and governments play is specific to the civil governance realm and exists separately from (although connected to) the vitally important role that civil society and its diverse members (including the Church) can and must play for a nation to prosper. Co-founder and CEO of Futurelect , Lindiwe Mazibuko ’s words ring true, inspiring action by those located outside of government: “There’s nobody who is waiting in the wings to come and save us from ourselves; there’s just us.” But even Ms. Mazibuko’s words are true only to the point where they no longer apply to South Africa's temporal governance space.

Every South African, including those occupying political office, that possesses the necessary awareness, must do all that he or she can to make our country a better place. Christians specifically, will (or ought) to understand, however, that no matter how promising politicians or a government may be, or how active civil society and its members are, God remains a nation’s ultimate hope and source of provision. We must rely on Him, and therefore take to heart what David wrote in Psalm 20:7: “Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God.”  

Craig Bailie holds a Master’s degree in International Studies from Rhodes University and certificates in Thought Leadership for Africa’s Renewal and Transformative Governance from the Thabo Mbeki African Leadership Institute (TMALI) and the University of the Free State (UFS), respectively. He is the founding director of Bailie Leadership Consultancy. He writes in his personal capacity and reserves the right to improve his views whenever possible.