Tuesday, 19 March 2013

The African chief converted to Christianity by Dr Livingstone

The African chief converted to Christianity by Dr Livingstone


It is 200 years since the birth of David Livingstone, perhaps the most famous of the missionaries to visit Africa in the 19th Century. But as author and Church historian Stephen Tomkins explains, the story of an African chief he converted is every bit as incredible as Livingstone's.
According to the title of one biography, David Livingstone was "Africa's Greatest Missionary".
This is an interesting claim about the Lanarkshire-born man, considering that estimates of the number of people he converted in the course of his 30-year career vary between one and none.
The variation is because Livingstone himself wrote off his one convert as a backslider within months of his baptism.
The irony is that this one backslider has a much better claim than Livingstone to be Africa's greatest missionary.
This man on whom Livingstone gave up became a preacher, a leader and a pioneer of adapting Christianity to African life - to the great annoyance of European missionaries.
His name was Sechele, and he was the kgosi or chief of the Bakwena tribe, part of the Tswana people, in what is now Botswana.
Born in 1812, he was 10 when his father, the previous kgosi, was killed. Two of his uncles divided the tribe between them. Sechele escaped with a few followers into the desert for nine years, and returned to oust one of his uncles.
This was how things stood when Sechele first met Livingstone - he ruled a half-tribe. Livingstone persuaded him to make peace with his other uncle by sending him a gift of gunpowder for his rifle.
The uncle was suspicious that the gunpowder was bewitched, tried to neutralise it with fire, and in the resulting explosion was killed. Sechele thus ruled over a reunited Bakwena.
Like many kgosi, Sechele was keen to have a missionary living in his town. Missionaries came with guns (and powder), making them an invaluable defence, and with medicine.
Sechele amused Livingstone by asking for medicine to make him a better hunter. But the thing Sechele wanted above all from Livingstone was literacy.
He learned the alphabet, upper and lower case, in two days, compiled his own spelling books, and set about reading the one book in the Tswana language, the Bible. He ate breakfast before sunrise in order to start school as quickly as possible, and then taught his wives to read.
As Sechele grew increasingly interested in Christianity, he found two huge barriers in his way. One was rain.
Tswana tribes had rainmakers, whose job was to use magic to make the rain come. Livingstone, like all missionaries, vehemently opposed rainmaking, on both religious and scientific grounds.
Sechele happened to be his tribe's rainmaker as well as kgosi, and Livingstone's stay coincided with the worst drought ever known, so Sechele's decision to stop making rain was predictably unpopular.
The greater problem was polygamy. Sechele had five wives, and Livingstone insisted that to become a Christian he needed get rid of the "superfluous" ones. This was a political as well a personal nightmare, threatening the political structure of the tribe and relations with other tribes.
But in 1848 Sechele divorced four of the women and was baptised. The following year, however, one of his exes became pregnant, and it turned out that Sechele had fallen. He repented, and told Livingstone: "Do not give me up because of this. I shall never give up Jesus. You and I will stand before him together."
Livingstone did give up on him, going north to embark upon his celebrated adventures.

leveson

This is the official site of the Leveson Inquiry. It aims to provide the latest information on the Inquiry, including details of hearings and evidence, to the public and interested parties.
Background
The Prime Minister announced a two-part inquiry investigating the role of the press and police in the phone-hacking scandal, on 13 July 2011. Lord Justice Leveson was appointed as Chairman of the Inquiry.
Part 1 of the Inquiry examined the culture, practices and ethics of the press and, in particular, the relationship of the press with the public, police and politicians. Lord Justice Leveson was assisted by a panel of six independent assessors with expertise in the key issues that were considered.
Lord Justice Leveson opened the hearings on 14 November 2011, saying: “The press provides an essential check on all aspects of public life. That is why any failure within the media affects all of us. At the heart of this Inquiry, therefore, may be one simple question: who guards the guardians?”  A wide range of witnesses, including newspaper reporters, management, proprietors, police officers and politicians of all parties, all gave evidence to the Inquiry under oath and in public.
Lord Justice Leveson published his Report on Part 1 of the Inquiry on 29 November 2012.
Part 2 of the Inquiry cannot commence until the current police investigations and any subsequent criminal proceedings have been completed.

Censorship

      CENSORSHIP: the suppression, alteration or deletion of material which may be considered objectionable, harmful or sensitive.
      DEFAMATION: anything that damages a person’s reputation in the eyes of society.
      LIBEL: publishing a false statement that damages a person’s reputation (written defamation)
      SLANDER: making a false verbal statement that damages a person’s reputation (verbal defamation)

GOVERNMENT CENSORSHIP: (formal) Used by Governments to withhold information from citizens. Often used during wartime to protect soldiers/public.
      Used by the Department for Information during WW2. At one point the British Government considered taking over the BBC directly to control output
     
Do you think Government’s should be requesting to have information removed or allow the internet to have complete freedom of speech?
I think they should be allowed to request for information to be removed because certain issues may disregard people’s human rights.
Informal censorship is used, operating through independent regulatory bodies such as the PCC (Press Complaints Commission), Ofcom (Office of Communications) and the BBFC (British Board of Film Classification).

Do you think there should be informal censorship of TV? Should there be certain things that should/should not be said at certain times of the day?
      I think that they should stick to how the current censorship works because if there was no censorship then at certain hours of the day, children may watch inappropriate things which can lead to negative values of life.

AUTHORITARIAN CENSORSHIP: positions of power are used to limit access to information. Media owners and editors can exercise this type of censorship.
      SELF CENSORSHIP: individuals decide for they the information they will receive e.g. you turn the telly over because you don’t want to watch something you find offensive.
     
Arguments for:
1.  To protect the security of the state
2.  To prevent children from being exposed to violence
3.  To protect people from being corrupted by overt sexuality
4.  To protect individual privacy
     
Arguments against:
1.  People need accurate information in order to make choices
2.  Freedom of speech is a fundamental right
3.  It has not been proved that media material may corrupt or deprave
4.  Access to the internet has made censorship ineffective

WHAT PROBLEMS CAN YOU THINK OF WHEN IT COMES TO BLOGGING? DISCUSS!
Blogging allows freedom of speech on the internet however; this can criticise or target certain groups in society regarding social issues such as bullying and racism. Therefore there should be a limitation on blogging so that there is no risk of offence on the public audience.