Catholics around the world honour 'Pope of firsts'
JOHANNESBURG - A wave of sadness has befallen the Catholic churches around the world as they mourn the death of Pope Francis who died at the age of 88.
Archbishop of Johannesburg Cardinal Stephen Brislin says while his passing has left a devastating scare, they choose to be grateful of the leadership legacy he has left behind.
"We are grateful for the leadership that he gave. From the impactful message of mercy, forgiveness, respect for human dignity and importance of social justice. All these were part of his teachings," he said.
Brislin says he will remember the late Pope as a humble, simple and easy person to talk to.
The Vatican confirmed the death a day after he made an appearance at Saint Peter's Square on Easter Sunday.
The Pope was recently discharged from hospital where he was being treated for double pneumonia.
He was released under strict conditions after at least two months of rest.
Still, he appeared on the balcony of St Peter's Basilica on Sunday, to deliver his final blessing to the world.
His final word emphasised the importance of freedom of thought and tolerance.
Brislin explained that in light of the Popes passing Catholic churches will enter a period of moaning for the next nine days.
To date in the old city of Jerusalem, the Vatican flag has been lowered.
Meanwhile President Cyril Ramaphosa who has since expressed his condolences acknowledged Pope Francis as someone who advanced a world view of inclusion and equality, adding that the Pontiff made a profound commitment to making the Church and the world a better place for all of humanity.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Eyewitness News
2 days ago
- Eyewitness News
Pope Leo condemns 'exclusionary mindset' in Pentecost address
VATICAN CITY - Pope Leo XIV exhorted the faithful on Sunday to reject an "exclusionary mindset" he said had led to nationalism around the world. Leo's homily did not call out current events and conflicts nor identify individual leaders. But his choice of language was significant, encouraging people to "open borders" within their hearts and minds. The address marked a month since the former Robert Prevost from Chicago was elected pope, and came during a Sunday mass to celebrate Pentecost held under sunny skies in St Peter's Square. Before mass, the 69-year-old pontiff made a turn around the sprawling Baroque square in his popemobile to the enthusiastic cheers of the crowd, estimated by the Vatican at around 80,000 people. Leo said the Church "must open the borders between peoples and break down the barriers between class and race". People must move "beyond our fear of those who are different," he said, noting that the Holy Spirit "breaks down barriers and tears down the walls of indifference and hatred..." "Where there is love, there is no room for prejudice, for 'security' zones separating us from our neighbours, for the exclusionary mindset that, tragically, we now see emerging also in political nationalisms." Leo did not speak of physical borders but his focus on barriers and walls evoked the politics of US President Donald Trump, who has vowed to stem illegal immigration into the United States. The pope also said the Holy Spirit was an antidote to toxic relationships marked by "suspicion, prejudice or the desire to manipulate others". "With great pain," Leo cited "cases where relationships are marked by an unhealthy desire for domination, an attitude that often leads to violence, as is shown, tragically, by numerous recent cases of femicide". In Italy, a slew of femicides have become front-page news over the last month, including the killing of a 14-year girl by her boyfriend last week. Leo also cited the dangers of social media, saying it risked making people "ever more alone" within a "vortex of individualism." "Constantly connected, yet incapable of 'networking'. Always immersed in a crowd, yet confused and solitary travellers," he said. Since his election, Leo has offered to mediate between leaders of countries at war and earlier this week, he had his first telephone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Several speeches made by the new pontiff -- including among his first words from St Peter's Basilica when he became pope on May 8 -- have focused on building bridges between individuals and peoples. Pentecost marks the end of the Easter season and commemorates the descent of the Holy Spirit on the apostles and disciples of Jesus Christ.
IOL News
6 days ago
- IOL News
MK Party redeployment or reckoning? Oh Floyd Shivambu, it was always going to end in tears
Floyd Shivambu has been removed as the MK Party secretary general, just a few months after clashing with former president Jacob Zuma's daughter, Duduzile Zuma-Sambudla. Image: Sihle Mlambo/IOL It was only a matter of time until the tide turned violently against Floyd Shivambu in the uMkhonto weSizwe Party. The official stance from the MK Party is that Shivambu violated the MK Party Constitution, ironically, a document he is credited for penning. However, his tumultuous relationship with Duduzile Zuma-Sambudla, the sweetheart daughter of former president Jacob Zuma, cannot be ignored. Of course, Zuma-Sambudla publicly admonished Shivambu with expletives, describing him as the "worst thing that has happened to the MK Party". She later, reluctantly, apologised, only after being publicly lashed by her dad. But, since that day, the daggers have been out for Shivambu. What followed, despite the apology, were attacks aimed at the SG, from MK Party Youth leaders and factions seen as sympathetic to Dudu, as she is affectionately known. Speaking to Newzroom Afrika, Dr MK Zwakala, a political brand analyst, remarked that if indeed Shivambu had contravened the party constitution, why was he being redeployed, instead of being made to apologise and ultimately, facing a disciplinary. Zwakala believes that 'there is much more beyond the Bushiri visit', and it is difficult to disagree with this analysis. Of course, the official stance is that the fired secretary general violated the party's constitution, specifically concerning Section 3(J), which states: 'Undertaking international trips and participating in activities and programmes that are opposed to the agenda of the MK Party or an allied party'. MK Party chairperson Nathi Nhleko said this referred to Shivambu's Bushiri visit in Malawi during the Easter weekend, where Shivambu was seen openly rubbing shoulders with the fugitive pastor Shepherd Bushiri, even describing the fugitive as a Pan Africanist with vision and community impact - despite him being accused of raping young girls in South Africa. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading Really Floyd? For one applauded for his academic stature, clarity and as a known Marxist scholar, why would you wish to associate with such, thuggery? One of the IOL headlines at the time of the Bushiri mess screamed: 'What are you doing Floyd?' What followed was high-profile public lashings from no less than the Justice Minister Mmamoloko Kubayi, giving Shivambu's detractors, internally, fuel to remove him - for visiting his "brother", Bushiri. 'After lengthy discussions and considerable inputs from the National Officials, it was concluded that the actions by the Secretary General were found to be against the spirit and the prescripts of the MK Party Constitution. 'Noting that on the 12 March 2025, The Republic of Malawi's Chief Resident Magistrate delivered a ruling that granted the South African Republic's request for the extradition, it is common knowledge that Bishop Shepherd Bushiri and his wife Mary Bushiri skipped bail, and are to return to South Africa to stand trial on various charges. Thank you my brother, Prophet Bushiri for hosting us and for the kind words. The government scale amount of work you do to economically, educationally, socially and spiritually uplift our people is unparalleled now and in history. I know that the leadership and people of Malawi… — Floyd Shivambu (@FloydShivambu) April 19, 2025 'Based on the deliberations by the National Officials, it was reaffirmed that the trip was not an officially sanctioned programme of the organisation or the President, which therefore goes against the constitution of the party. The MK Party and its leadership, has been approached by members of various sectors of civil society and has taken due consideration of the gravity of this matter. 'Due to the serious nature of this matter and its implications for the party, its image, values and principles, The President and the National Officials were left with no other option but to act swiftly in addressing this matter. Consequently, as a responsible organisation accountable to its electorate and the broader society, the National Officials have come to a decision to redeploy Commander Floyd Shivambu as the Secretary General of the party, and redeploy him to the National Assembly. 'We believe that his redeployment will strengthen the MK Party caucus as the Official Opposition, as Commander Shivambu carries a wealth of experience as a former member of Parliament,' read Nhleko on behalf of the MK Party leadership. Under Zuma's leadership of the MK Party, there has been one consistent theme: instability. The position of secretary general appears to be a poisoned chalice, with those adorned the title of SG barely lasting in the job. Shivambu has been the longest serving SG thus far in that revolving door, but the mistake he made was to fail to read the room. Once he publicly clashes with Dudu, there was only ever going to be one winner, and that was never going to be the former leader of the EFF. When Shivambu left the Economic Freedom Fighters to join the MK Party last year, it shocked all and sundry, including his former ally and Siamese twin, Julius Malema, who had famously declared to all that Uncle Floyd be part of a delegation to see him off should he die. At the time, we warned in a column that the Floyd Shivambu-MKP dalliance could spell the end for the MKP-EFF-led Progressive Caucus - and the events of the past nine months have proved devastating for the so-called progressive left, with little unity between the two main parties, the MKP and the EFF. When Shivambu was appointed national organizer of the MK Party, the honest politician - as Zuma described him upon joining from the EFF - denounced smaller political parties, characterising them as 'fiefdoms of individuals'. At the time, his remarks were aimed at the EFF's Julius Malema, but he was careful to state that it wasn't, instead pointing to the United Democratic Movement of Bantu Holomisa and the Inkatha Freedom Party, formerly of the late Mangosuthu Buthelezi. But Malema, Holomisa and Buthelezi aside, the MKP is also Zuma's little fiefdom, run in the image and disguise of Zuma's wishes, and perhaps those of his daughter, Duduzile. The MKP has shown in character and the manifesting chaos around it, that it is exactly that too. Zuma pleaded for time for the party during an hour long speech, and he asserted yet again, that people would be fired, should they not perform. And Shivambu, and many others, have been fired in the past year, as Zuma still has the ultimate powers to hire and fire as he pleases. With Magasela Mzobe as the Head of the Presidency at the Private Office of President Zuma, Shivambu has an ally in the former ANC Youth League leader who can do some of his bidding for him. But unlike Mzobe, there are hundreds more around the MK Party leadership who are far less sympathetic and who have little appreciation for Shivambu and his Marxist virtues.
Daily Maverick
6 days ago
- Daily Maverick
The philanthropy of Bill Gates must be approached with caution
Bill Gates is soothing his $200-billion headache by giving his fortune away – most of it to Africa – over the next two decades. That means increasing Gates Foundation disbursements to $9-$10-billion annually, compared with $8-billion in 2024. This nearly trebles the foundation's average charitable outlay of about $3.4-billion each year since the Gates family got into philanthropy in 1994. The increase is astounding in absolute dollar terms, but when adjusted for past and future inflation, the purchasing power of the expanded Gates largesse (supplemented by Warren Buffett's substantial billions) just about keeps pace with the real value of their original benefactions. This is still the biggest philanthropic gift in modern history. But why is Mr Gates giving away 99% of his estimated $108-billion wealth? A question of motive Perhaps the philanthropist – once the world's richest man, but now in 13th position – suffers from the same anxiety as lesser persons: securing his legacy and being remembered kindly? Or possibly, the 70-year-old is concerned for his soul as he enters the 'last chapter' of his undoubtedly brilliant career? Gates had a Catholic upbringing, but as befits a fiercely rational scientist, he is agnostic. Nevertheless, his reflection that 'to whom much is given, much is expected' suggests a spiritual base. He is also fond of quoting Andrew Carnegie's Gospel of Wealth: 'The man who dies rich dies disgraced.' The question of motivation is important in our age of suspicion where obvious goodness is not accepted at face value. Gates is the frequent target of outlandish conspiracy theories that say more about his detractors than about him. What Bill Gates does matters to us A more practical question concerns the implications flowing from his intent. Gates is entitled to do what he wants with his private wealth. But this libertarian licence is somewhat conditioned by the thought that the Microsoft co-founder amassed his fortune thanks to people like you and me buying his products and services – 345 million of us contributed $211-billion in revenue in 2023 alone, giving us a legitimate stake in Gates' affairs. His philanthropic endeavours are also our business because of his outsized influence on public policy, particularly when this sways the choices nations make to affect the life chances of 44% of the world population. They are the world's poor (those living on less than $3.65 per day) living in 128 low- and middle-income nations. However, to put this in perspective, the Gates Foundation's projected outlay of $9-billion a year is small change compared with the $294-billion needed annually to close the financing gap for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) among the 48 developing economies covering three-quarters of the global population. Therefore, Gates' influence is not from money alone, but from how his powerful pulpit proselytises his heartfelt causes. This results in unease because of the distortionary consequences for country-level health and development. A narrow approach The causes dear to Mr Gates are: stopping preventable deaths among mothers and children; eliminating headline infectious diseases; and reducing poverty through education and agriculture. These are worthy aims with compelling evidence, garnered not least through the Foundation's own massive research and innovation investment, that they are achievable by scaling up solutions derived from fast-moving scientific and technological advances, including artificial intelligence. Mr Gates' humanitarian credentials are not in doubt. But his approach to tackling a problem 'because it is there' necessitates an all-consuming, laser-like focus on narrowly selected challenges, and lavishing vast sums of money via highly technocratic prescriptions. The venture capital method is problematic for several reasons. It means de-prioritising other equally pressing needs and making highly contentious value judgements on the issues that are more or less worthy. We normally do that through debating the choices we want our governments to make, and holding them accountable, however imperfectly. Private philanthropies are not held responsible in the same way, especially when their well-meaning interventions can shift at will or when they shut shop, as the Gates Foundation will do in 2045. Questioning cost benefits Could its legacy become an unsustainable burden for successor generations? Take, for example, the laudable Gates goal to eradicate wild polio that, after decades of successful global efforts, lurks only in Afghanistan and Pakistan. These fragile states extract high marginal costs for allowing the last wild virus to be chased down. Whether that is achievable is conditioned by prevailing social and political circumstances. So, how much is worth spending on eradication when existing strategies to protect the rest of the world through vaccination, surveillance and outbreak response could be more cost-effective? The counter-argument is that permanent polio eradication would save the world $40-50-billion. But is that sufficiently significant in a multi-trillion-dollar world? Furthermore, would it be better for long-suffering Afghans and Pakistanis to switch their earmarked polio funds into broader health and social services that bring wider progress that eventually catalyses polio eradication at a lesser eventual cost? However, this could take longer than 2045. Understandably, Mr Gates is impatient while we wish him a long life. Vertical focus on selected conditions Comparable concerns are raised by verticalised strategies that capture large Gates resources for diseases such as malaria, measles and tuberculosis. Inevitably, that skews multilateral health co-operation through boosting global funds such as for Aids, TB, malaria, and for vaccines. They also distort our global health institutions such as the World Health Organization, whose $6.8-billion budget for 2024-25 (before recent cuts) included a 10% ring-fenced allocation just for polio. The Gates focus on maternal and child mortality raises further questions because the underlying causes are difficult to shift. Take South Sudan, with the world's most appalling maternal mortality rate of 1,223 per 100,000 births. Against the country's backdrop of conflict, displacement, poverty, misgovernance, disaster, climate change, absent infrastructure and absent trained personnel, the contribution of technical healthcare innovation is useful, but relatively marginal. How much is therefore worth spending on maternal and child health alone while the all-ages crude death rate hovers above 1,190 per 100,000 population? If Mr Gates asks the people of South Sudan how to spend his money, what difficult choices would they make? Bill Gates is highly methodical as befits a smart techbro. His lodestar is metrics, which means getting only what he measures, not more, such as reducing Aids deaths by two-thirds between 2000-2023, or now aiming to halve under-fives' mortality from five million in 2019. A list of other conditions for statistically demonstrable demolition awaits. Technocratic versus holistic paradigms Reducing specific disease burdens helps, but does not equate to health. This is constitutionally defined by WHO as 'physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease'. The metrics for that are not precise and, therefore, less amenable to narrow technical fixes. Take, for example, addictive behaviours and cognitive disorders such as dementia, or making reproductive health choices. Obesity was, until recently, in the same category of complex aetiology. But now we have the GLP-1 agonists revolutionising weight loss, and there are promising new therapies for dementia. Gates may yet be proved right with the invention of pills and jabs for all types of ailments. If enough resources are thrown at selected problems, some are bound to stick, but at huge opportunity costs for other important challenges. Nevertheless, at least Bill Gates is fixated on saving present humanity here, while the world's richest man, Elon Musk, is investing heavily to send sizeable numbers of refugees from a doomed Earth to Mars by the 2040s, so as to keep the human genome alive. Philanthropic influences on democratic policymaking The Gates and Musk outlook brings into focus the technocratic versus holistic approach to life. The impact of the mega-rich on American policy in the Donald Trump era is a possible harbinger of similar influences on the world stage that may lead to comparable tectonic shifts for global health and development structures, approaches, and financing. The consequences should concern us. But there is a counter-reaction. Shifting geopolitics means that top-down solutions are no longer acceptable. That applies even for poor countries suffering from heavy budgetary cuts at the WHO and bilateral donors. They may welcome more Gates support, but want the dignity of charting their own paths without constant hectoring on what is good for them. While that worked with the partially successful Millennium Development Goals, it is resented in the era of assertive nationalism, shrinking aid and failing Sustainable Development Goals. A debatable legacy Against this world mood, the Gates Foundation will face considerable headwinds despite, and perhaps because of, its supersized purse. Does it have strategies for that, or the flexibility to alter course, considering the straitjacket of its religion-like mission? Perhaps the Gates legacy would be more likely to endure if his foundation listened more, preached less, and was open-minded to extend beyond its narrow silos. Otherwise, the risk is of countries left high and dry in two decades, as is happening now with donors walking away from previous commitments. There are greater implications still of how supersized private charities end up directing our societies. Do citizens want that? Large-scale philanthropy – however humanitarian-minded – is yet another ideology in our divided world. It is best imbibed in small doses under strict advice. DM
