EVALUATING THE LEGACY OF ARCHBISHOP DESMOND TUTU by Dr. Peter Hammond

To see a livestreamed interview on this topic, Click Here

The announcement of the death of Anglican Bishop Desmond Mpulo Tutu on 26th December 2021, at age 90, has led to much outpouring of praise for this prominent prelate who has been described “the personification of the South African Freedom Struggle”, “An icon of the Freedom struggle”, “Hero of the Nation”, “The Nation’s pastor” and what the BBC called “The staunch and steadfast healer of a nation.”

Frank Chikane, described him in this way: “Tutu was the face of the liberation struggle. The voice of the people. He was a key prophetic voice.”

His biographer, John Allen, wrote that to the old South Africa “Tutu really was public enemy number 1.” ​

​Pumla Gobodo-Madikizela said that Tutu “was carrying the whole country on his shoulders …. He was almost like royalty, representing the journey towards freedom for everybody.”

SACC leader Peter Storey described Tutu as: “The nation’s pastor.”

Cyril Ramaphosa described Tutu as: “An outstanding South African who has bequeathed us a liberated South Africa.”

Pope Francis lamented the death of Tutu and praised him for promoting “racial equality and reconciliation.”

Joe Biden declared that Tutu’s legacy will “echo throughout the ages.”

Barack Obama released a statement calling Tutu a “Universal spirit.”

Buckingham Palace released a message of condolence in the name of Queen Elizabeth, describing Tutu as “a man who tirelessly championed human rights in South Africa and across the world.”

However, there are others who do not share the perspective of these prominent leaders. Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu had a decades long record of supporting abortion, the homosexual agenda, ordination of women to the priesthood, theological liberalism, collectivist economic theories and Marxist class warfare.

The Marie Stopes abortuary in Cape Town had a pull-up banner of Bishop Tutu promoting abortion in their waiting room. Desmond Tutu posed for this picture on behalf of Marie Stopes International, the world’s largest abortion provider.

Although he was meant to be retired from public life in 2010, this 2011 public endorsement of the “invaluable work” of Mary Stopes International praised Marie Stopes South Africa for “empowering people” and “giving people the opportunity to make informed decisions about their future and the choice.” When asked if he had been paid for making this statement and posing for this picture, the Desmond Tutu Foundation would neither confirm nor deny, but simply stated that the Desmond Tutu Foundation does receive donations.

John Ritchie, Director of Tradition Family and Property Student Action asked: “Why should someone who doesn’t even respect the basic right to life be honoured … ?”

Desmond Tutu insisted that there are mistakes in the Bible because people wrote it. “There are certain parts which you have to say No to.” For example that “women should not speak in church … women should not be ordained. There are many things you shouldn’t accept.” (Tutu: Voice of the Voiceless by Shirley Du Boulay, 1988).

‘’Some people thought there was something about Jesus’ birth … maybe Jesus was an illegitimate Son.” (Cape Times, 24.10.1980).

In St. Albans Cathedral, in Pretoria, 23.11.1978, Desmond Tutu declared: “The Holy Spirit is not limited to the Christian Church. For example, Mahatma Gandhi, who is a Hindu … the Holy Spirit shines through him.”

In a report on 20.4.1986, Tutu was quoted as saying: “Every Christian must be a revolutionary. Jesus was a revolutionary.”

Tutu publicly thanked communist dictator, Samora Machel, for all that he and his Frelimo government had done for Mozambique! This seemed an amazing attitude to take towards an atheist who had declared war on the church, destroying, or confiscating and closing over 8,000 churches, imprisoning hundreds of thousands of believers, massacring at least 75,000 people, banning the Bible and expelling all missionaries.

Over the last 20 years Desmond Tutu was very prominent in advocating gay rights. Tutu declared: “I would refuse to go to a homophobic Heaven. No, I would say Sorry, I mean I would much rather go to the other place! I would not worship a God who is homophobic and that is how deeply I feel about this. I am as passionate about this campaign as I ever was about apartheid. For me, it is the same level.”

In 2011 Tutu called on the Anglican church of South Africa to accept and conduct same-sex marriages. In 2005 he criticised Pope Benedict XVI for opposing the distribution of condoms: “To fight HIV-AIDS.”  He also criticised Pope Benedict for opposing the ordination of women as priests.

Desmond Tutu was born 7 October 1931 in Klerksdorp to a Xhosa-speaking family. His father was the principal of a Methodist primary school. His family, who were Methodist, later changed to African Methodist Episcopal (AME) and later to the Church of the Province of South Africa (Anglican).

When Desmond Tutu applied to join the Ordinance Guild, his application was turned down due to his debts. These were then paid off by wealthy industrialist, Harry Oppenheimer. In the 1960’s and 70’s he travelled widely internationally and benefited from grants to obtain his degree and Masters. His Master’s degree was on Islam in West Africa. (Rabble-Rouser for Peace; The Authorised Biography of Desmond Tutu by John Allen, 2006).

In the early 1970’s Desmond Tutu adopted Liberation Theology and Black Theology after attending a 1973 conference on the subject at New York City’s Union Theological Seminary.

In 1975 he was installed as Dean of St. Mary’s Cathedral in Johannesburg. From this point Desmond Tutu used his ecclesiastical positions to speak out on social issues, publicly endorsing international sports and economic boycotts of South Africa. In May 1976 he wrote to Prime Minister B.J. Vorster, warning that if the government did not abandon apartheid, racial violence would erupt. Six weeks later the Soweto Riots broke out.

When Desmond Tutu was nominated to be Bishop of Lesotho, March 1976, the congregation of St. Mary’s were upset and felt that he had used their parish merely as a stepping stone to advance his career.

In September 1977, at the funeral of Pan African Congress revolutionary, Steve Biko, Tutu stated that the Black Consciousness Movement was being used by God.

When Desmond Tutu accepted the leadership of the South African Council of Churches in March 1978, many Anglicans in Lesotho felt angered that he was abandoning them so soon and that they had only been used to advance his career.

The Tutu’s home in Orlando West was bought for them by an “anonymous foreign donor.” Desmond Tutu stated that he was determined that the South African Council of Churches (SACC) would become the “most visible human rights advocacy group” in the country. His time as head of the SACC was dominated by fundraising for the organisation’s projects.

While he was in charge of the SACC it was revealed that one of its divisional directors had been involved in massive embezzlement of funds. At the 1981 Eloff Commission to investigate the misappropriation of SACC funds, Desmond Tutu used the opportunity to attack the South African government as “evil” and “unchristian.” It was suspected that the SACC was channelling funds to ANC and PAC revolutionaries.

At a trial of Umkhonto We Sizwe (ANC terrorist wing) members, Desmond Tutu testified that, although he was committed to non-violence, he could understand why the ANC had turned to violence to overthrow apartheid. Desmond Tutu also publicly signed a petition calling for the release of ANC leader Nelson Mandela, who was imprisoned for acts of terrorism. This led to correspondence between Tutu and Mandela.

In 1979 Desmond Tutu told foreign journalists that he supported an international economic boycott of South Africa. In 1980 the South Africa Council of Churches committed itself to supporting civil disobedience. On international speaking tours Desmond Tutu met UN Secretary General Kurt Waldheim, spoke at Westminster Abbey, met Pope John Paul II at the Vatican and was compared with civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. in America. However, Jerry Falwell and Pat Buchanan described him as a “communist sympathiser.”

In 1983 Tutu became the Patron of the United Democratic Front (UDF) which was widely recognised to be the internal arm of the ANC. Because of the prevalence of the brutal necklace murder (using an automobile tyre filled with fuel) to burn alive Black Town Councillors and others deemed as ‘sell-outs’), the UDF was referred to as Uniroyal Dunlop and Firestone (popular brands of tyres).

Desmond Tutu publicly praised the Mugabe ZANU regime takeover of Zimbabwe in 1980, declaring that the Kingdom of God had arrived in Zimbabwe! (Ecunews 11/1980).

While stone throwing was injuring and killing people on the roads, Desmond Tutu was quoted in the Daily Telegraph of London, November 1984, as stating; “One young man with a stone in his hands can achieve more than I can with a dozen sermons.”

In the Argus, (19.3.84) Desmond Tutu declared: “Thank God I am Black! White people will have a lot to answer for at the last judgement!”

When US President Ronald Reagan refused to impose economic sanctions on South Africa, Desmond Tutu condemned Ronald Reagan as a “crypto-racist” and Reagan’s government as an “unmitigated disaster.”

During the height of the Cold War, while South African troops were locked in deadly battles with the Soviet Union and its Cuban surrogates in Angola, Desmond Tutu declared in St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, in 1984: “If the Russians were to invade South Africa, most blacks would welcome them as saviours!”

He also declared to the Washington Enquirer (29.8.1986): “Communist China will provide a very good model for developing countries.”

On economics, Tutu declared to the Sunday Times (29.12.1985): “I am a socialist. I hate capitalism.” Yet he lived in Houghton and Bishops Court, two of the most exclusive and richest suburbs in the country.

Inside South Africa, April 1988, quoted Desmond Tutu as saying: “I think I would use Marxist insights, ‘from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.’ That, I think, is in line with what our Lord, Himself, would have taught.”

When Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher of Great Britain and President Ronald Reagan of the United States refused to disinvest from South Africa, Desmond Tutu was quoted in the Cape Times (23.7.1986): “The West can go to hell!”

The Star (16.8.1985) quoted Desmond Tutu as stating: “Mandela is my leader and I am not going to be dictated to as to who should be my leader.”

Interestingly, although Desmond Tutu was officially non-violent, Nelson Mandela had been quoted in the Washington Times as declaring: “There is no alternative to take up arms. There is no room for peaceful struggle in South Africa.” Which could be one of the reasons why Desmond Tutu did not have a good relationship with Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi of the Zulus. Prince Buthelezi worked tirelessly, effectively and peacefully for reform within South Africa, yet was condemned by Mandela and Tutu for doing so. Dr. Buthelezi observed that Mandela’s armed struggle delayed the end of apartheid by decades.

The Volkskrant, Holland, 15.11.1984, quoted Tutu as saying: “Imagine what would happen if only 30% of domestic servants in white households would poison their employer’s food?” On WNBC-TV, December 1985, Tutu said: ”Suppose you gave them each a vial of arsenic … they look after the white people’s children …” The Sunday Times, 26.1.1986, quoted Tutu as saying: “Is it not surprising that Black resistance has not blown up a school bus with white children. They are the softest target.”

When a double-decker bus carrying 72 high school students went off the causeway into a small suburban dam in Westdene, March 1985, 42 children drowned that afternoon. The bus driver, who was described as non-white, William Horne, survived. His passengers had all been white Afrikaans school children. Conspiracy theories and allegations came fast and furiously in the next few weeks. Yet, Desmond Tutu continued to publicly speculate on what harm Black people might do to white children.

In 1984, Desmond Tutu was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The Nobel Prize Selection Committee said that they wanted to recognise a Black South African to make a political statement and thought Desmond Tutu would be a less controversial choice than either Mandela or Mangosuthu Buthelezi.

In 1985 Desmond Tutu was enthroned as Bishop of Johannesburg. In his inaugural sermon he declared that he would call on the international community to introduce economic sanctions against South Africa.

Desmond Tutu declared: “We face a catastrophe in this land, and only the action of the international community by applying pressure can save us. Our land is bleeding and burning and so I call the international community to apply punitive sanctions against this government to help us establish a new South Africa.” What Desmond Tutu left out here is that the country was bleeding and burning as a direct result of the actions by the UDF that he was patron of and because the ANC, whose leader he said was his leader and whose objectives were his own.

It was the very Soviets, who Tutu said he would welcome as saviours if they invaded the country, who were providing the landmines, limpet mines, car bombs and other weapons of terror, which were maiming and killing people in the streets of South Africa. Such as with the Church Street bombing of 1983.

Not even the ANC’s call to make South Africa “ungovernable” could make Tutu to distance himself from the ANC as “the government-in-waiting.” In 1985 Desmond Tutu proposed a national strike.

As Philip Russel announced his retirement as Archbishop of Cape Town, Desmond Tutu was in Atlanta, Georgia, receiving the Martin Luther King Jr. peace prize. He was informed that he had been nominated as the next Archbishop of Cape Town. The most senior position in the church of the Province of South Africa.

In the run-up to the enthronement ceremony at the Cathedral of St. George in Cape Town, Gospel Defence League printed 10,000 copies of The Archbishop and The Bible, comparing the public statements of Bishop Tutu with the clear teachings of Scripture. These compact booklets with the insignia of the archbishop on the purple cover, were distributed to delegates and guests as they came to the event.

We were handing out these booklets to clergymen arriving in their gowns at Cape Town International airport, and in Wale street outside St. Georges Cathedral, on the morning of 7 September 1986.

There was a huge mob of Tutu supporters in the street and many international media present. Three of our people dressed in black walked slowly and solemnly towards the side of St. Georges Cathedral. There they solemnly laid a wreath against the stone walls of the church and stood back in an attitude of prayer. When questioned as to what did this mean? Why were they doing this? The media were informed: “This is in memory of the Anglican Church.”

There was an explosion of anger and outrage from the mob. One of the thugs screamed at one of our people, Cindy Leontsinus: “We will necklace you!” More threats and curses followed.

As a mob surrounded me I was challenged: “Why are you distributing these anti-Tutu booklets?”
“They are not anti-Tutu, but pro-Christ; we are calling people back to the Bible.”
“What do you see as wrong with Tutu?”
“He is man-centered, not Christ-centered; his solutions are political, not spiritual.”
“Do you disapprove of Tutu’s enthronement as Archbishop?”
“Yes, certainly. I believe a church leader should be a man of prayer, not a man of politics.”
“But Tutu is a man of the people!”
“Maybe so, but he is not a man of God.”
“a man of God must be a man of the people.”
“Rubbish. A man of God must be a man of the Bible, capable of preaching Repentance to sinful, rebellious mankind. We must not be man pleasers, but people who seek to please God.”
“The people have elected Tutu.”
“Quite right, God has not chosen him, but people. And which people? The press has catapulted Tutu into this office, not God, nor the ordinary church members.”
“Why are you here attacking Tutu?”
“I am here standing for Christ, calling the church to return to Biblical standards, to reject worldly standard and return to God.”
“You do not belong here – why have you come?”
“Why have you come – are you an Anglican?” I countered.
“No.”
“Are you an Anglican?” I asked another.
“No.”
“Are you a Christian – do you love Jesus?”
“I am against apartheid”, they replied.
“The issue is not apartheid, it’s God and your relationship with Him. Are you born again?”
“I am against apartheid”, came the monotonous parrot cry.
“Fine, we know what you’re against, what are you for?”
At this point the man broke into hate-filled swearing at me.
“So, you see”, I pointed out, “this is the kind of supporters Tutu has.”
More of the mob broke out in curses and threats toward me.
“I do not see the love of Christ in your eyes. I do not see Christian love in your faces, only bitterness and hate. Repent of your evil, repent of your hatred. Turn from your sins and turn to Christ.” I challenged them.
There was a shocked silence and then more hate-filled threats, curses and accusations.

While this conversation was going on, I could see that Bishop Tutu had come outside through a side door and was standing at the top of the stairs in front of the closed main double-doors. He was dressed in his full Bishop’s regalia with a large crooked stick in his hands. He was at the point in the programme where he was to bang on the doors with his crooked stick in preparation for the doors to be flung wide and for him to enter in grand procession. But none of the media were on the stairs and he was plainly agitated, trying to call them to record this historic event.

Finally, the journalists realised that they were missing out on Tutu’s grand entrance. They positioned themselves in a semi-circle around Desmond Tutu to record his dramatic entry into the Cathedral. There was a moment of silence, as Tutu had his arm raised with his crooked shepherd staff about to strike the doors. One of our mission workers, John, shouted out for all to hear: “You have chosen Barabbas!” Desmond Tutu looked over his shoulder, as did the journalists, to see who had shouted that. They got the message. As The Sowetan and The Star reported the next day, “a small group of vigorous protestors from Christian Action nearly overshadowed the main event.”

After the ceremony at St. Georges Cathedral, Tutu held an open-air Eucharist for thousands of people in the Cape showgrounds in Goodwood (where the Grand West casino stands today). He invited Allan Boesak and Albertina Sisulu to give political speeches.

We were standing at the entrance, handing out our booklets to people streaming in. “Enjoy the show,” I said. People received The Archbishop and The Bible booklets enthusiastically, probably assuming they were official programmes. Many evangelistic discussions and opportunities for counselling and prayer resulted from these street outreaches.

On Friday 13th February, 1987, Archbishop Tutu declared before a crowd of 4,000 at a graduation ceremony of the University of the Western Cape: “If Jesus Christ came to South Africa today, He would be in trouble with the authorities because of his solidarity with the poor, the oppressed and the hungry. And He would certainly be detained!” (Cape Times, 14.2.1987).

At the time I responded by publishing a leaflet entitled: “If Jesus came to South Africa, would He be detained? Or Necklaced?” In this leaflet I wrote: “Sensational and irresponsible declarations like these are hardly unique in this time of fanatical hysteria and radical propaganda. Nor is it that unusual that a leader of a church hierarchy could espouse emotive and manipulative political nonsense. What is amazing is that 4,000 people could listen to such unsubstantiated fiction without at least some real Christians standing up to challenge this political priest.

“If Jesus came to South Africa today … would He be detained? … Or is it not more likely that He would be burnt to death, necklaced, by the same kind of mobs which screamed: “Crucify Him! Crucify Him!” Luke 23:20

​“The Bible clearly teaches that the Roman governor, Pilate, tried to find a way to set Jesus free – John 19:13; That this political leader declared: ‘I find no reason to condemn Him’ – John 19:65; ‘I cannot find any reason to condemn Him’ – John 19:4; ‘I find no reason to condemn this Man’ – Luke 23:4.”

It was the hypocritical religious leaders and the easily manipulated mobs of people in the street who demanded the death of Jesus and the release of Barabbas. “And there was one named Barabbas, who was chained with his fellow rebels; they had committed murder in the rebellion … but the chief priests stirred up the crowd, so that he should rather release Barabbas to them.” Mark 15:7,11.

“How like the archbishops of our day that the chief priests were more concerned about the release of a prisoner, a rebel and a murderer, than with the Son of God. Pilate, therefore, wishing to release Jesus, again called out to them. But they shouted, saying, Crucify Him, Crucify Him!” Luke 23:20-21

How like the mobs of our day that they allowed themselves to be manipulated by ruthless and evil men to cause the death of the innocent. How like the illogical slogan chanting cliché-shouting fanatics of our day shouting: “Their throat is an open tomb; with their tongues they have practised deceit; the poison of asps are under their lips; whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; destruction and misery are in their ways; and the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes.”  Romans 3:13-18

How tragic that slogans, cliches and paradigms should replace the study of the Scriptures and logical discussion. “So Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they requested. And they released to them the one they requested, who for rebellion and murder had been thrown into prison; but he delivered Jesus to their will.” Luke 23:24-25

How horrifying that political leaders like Pilate “wanted to please the crowd” – Mark 15:15. That a leader should be so led! That leaders could pay more attention to what is popular than to what is right. That a leader could listen more to the hysterical screaming of a mob than to the gentle, still, small voice of his conscience. “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the just, both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord.” Proverbs 17:15

Desmond Tutu condemned the South African government as “evil … immoral … unchristian!” In 1988 Tutu declared that, while he did not support the use of violence, he did support the ANC’s objective of a non-racial, democratic South Africa.

He also criticised the Anglican churches insistence that gay priests remain celibate, describing it as “impractical.”

In 1990, I was invited to be a delegate at the National Council of Churches in Rustenburg. Desmond Tutu was chairing this event. Although their press statement claimed that the NCC included 360 delegates from 200 denominations, the venue was advertised to have a capacity of 160 and I had the official Media List which had less than 160 people listed as attending from 39 different organisations, churches and universities. It was disturbing that the National Council of Churches could not even be honest about how many people were delegates and how many denominations were represented.

The NCC gathered in Rustenburg, under the banner: Towards a United Christian Witness in a Changing South Africa. We were informed that the Declaration that would come out of the NCC would be a synthesis of all the input from the different discussion groups. As I was the appointed scribe in our discussion group, I can testify that none of the recommendations of our group found its way into the final Declaration, which they declared had been “adopted unanimously” at Rustenburg! That was not possible because I was a vocal opponent of it and there was never an opportunity to vote anyway.

However, I must say that Desmond Tutu did actually speak up for me at the conference. My first contribution to a plenary session was reporting back on the recommendations of our discussion group. As I began: “We uphold the right to life of preborn babies …” there was an explosion of anger. Shouts and curses were directed at me, some by people wearing priestly and bishop garb!

There was more anger when I read out: “we oppose the exploitative pornography industry. Families must be protected from pornography and perversion.”  More shouts of hostility and anger was expressed at me.

When I spoke against blasphemy and pornography, one of the delegates, Hugh Wetmore, of the Evangelical Fellowship of South Africa, stood up and actually declared that if we want freedom for the Bible and Christianity, we must allow equal freedom for pornography!

Then I spoke of the need for parental control of education, of the teachers and textbooks. Politicians should not be allowed to interfere in the moulding of the minds of future voters. When I said that education should be Bible based, moral and character building, the same evangelical leader, Hugh Wetmore, declared that “out of love for our neighbour”, we need to allow equal access for Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism in the schools. This seemed quite inconsistent as exposing our children to false religion and deception hardly seems loving. All this was said amongst heckling, interruptions and insults.

The amount of hostility and interruptions directed against me led Bishop Tutu, as chairman, to have to remind the conference that I was a delegate and had a right to be heard.

​The Declaration that was finally issued from the NCC at Rustenburg basically parroted the mainstream media narrative and rubber stamped the ANC agenda. This led to much controversy in the media as I published press statements and letters to the editor countering the disinformation and dishonest statistics put out by the NCC, pointing out that it was by no means “unanimous.” There had never even been an opportunity to vote on the Declaration. I was told that it was “Peter Hammond Contra Mundrum.” The whole world wanted an ANC-led South Africa and I was interfering!

When, on 25 July 1993, APLA terrorists of the Pan African Congress (PAC) attacked the congregation of St. James Church of England, in Kenilworth, one of our mission workers, Charl van Wyk, shot back, wounding the terrorist who was machine-gunning the congregation. As the terrorists fled, Charl pursued the terrorists into the parking lot and fired at their getaway car.

Although Police Commissioner N.H. Acker gave a Commendation to Charl van Wyk for his quick and courageous action which “prevented further loss of life,” Bishop Tutu chose to condemn the congregant who shot back! The Cape Times and Argus quoted Bishop Tutu saying that it is “just not on” for worshippers to come to church armed!

Immediately after the St. James massacre, when the church sanctuary was sealed for investigation as a crime scene, Archbishop Tutu, with a media entourage, gained access to the site of the massacre by claiming to the policeman on duty that he was the head of the denomination! Most people were not aware that the Church of England in South Africa (CESA) is an entirely different denomination from Tutu’s Church of the Province in South Africa (Anglican denomination). As pictures of Desmond Tutu inside the bullet and shrapnel scarred sanctuary were published worldwide, the impression was gained that it was one of his churches that had been attacked. I received calls from people overseas asking how it was that “white supremacists” had butchered poor innocent Black people from Desmond Tutu’s denomination while worshipping in church! The Pan African Congress affiliation of the terrorist assailants was left out of most media reports. Also that most of the victims were whites in this multi-racial congregation. These facts were conveniently left out so as not to interfere with the narrative of Black victims and White villains. It did seem that Tutu exploited this tragedy for his image and narrative overseas.

Desmond Tutu criticised the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, at the 1998 Lambeth Conference of Bishops, for being “too accommodating to conservatives” who wanted to eject US and Canadian Anglicans from the Anglican communion after they had taken an LGBTQ stance on ordaining openly gay priests and bishops and promoting same-sex marriages.

In 2012, Tutu called for US President, George W Bush and British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, to be tried by the International Criminal Court for war crimes in the Iraq war.

In June 1996, Nelson Mandela presented Desmond Tutu South Africa’s highest honour: The Award for Meritorious Service.

From 1996 to 1998 Desmond Tutu was chairman of the Truth & Reconciliation Commission. Many saw this as a propaganda stunt, much like Stalin and Mao’s show trials to discredit the previous authorities. However, many in the ANC were horrified when revelations of ANC torture, attacks on civilians and other human rights abuses were also heard.

The ANC authorities sought to suppress those parts of the TRC report. Tutu was infuriated at this attempt at “government interference” and warned of the ANC’ abuse of power, stating that “yesterday’s oppressed could easily become today’s oppressors. We have seen it happen all over the world and we shouldn’t be surprised to see if it happens here.”

When Thabo Mbeki became president of South Africa in 1999, Desmond Tutu was concerned and publicly charged that the ANC under Mbeki’s leadership was demanding: “sycophantic, obsequious conformity.” Mbeki accused Tutu of “criminalising” the ANC’s military struggle and its Umkhonto We Sizwe (MK Operative).

Desmond Tutu criticised President Jacob Zuma’s “moral failings” of rape and corruption, and the ANC’s policy of “quiet diplomacy” towards Mugabe’s government, which he no longer regarded as “the Kingdom of God having arrived in Zimbabwe”. In fact, Desmond Tutu described Mugabe as “having gone bonkers in a big way.” In 2008, Tutu called for a UN peace-keeping force to be sent to Zimbabwe.

Although he ignored the genocide of Christians in South Sudan and the Nuba Mountains, Desmond Tutu spoke out on behalf of Muslims who were suffering in the Western Province of Dafur in Sudan.

When Desmond Tutu invited the exiled leader of Tibet, the Dalai Lama to attend his 80th birthday, the ANC government prohibited his entry, so as not to offend Red China, who had invaded and occupied Tibet. Desmond Tutu declared that South Africa, under the ANC, was “worse than apartheid.” In 2013, Desmond Tutu declared that he would no longer vote for the ANC.

It is notable that, in later life, Desmond Tutu came to be critical of the ANC. Doubtless he was much disillusioned by how the promised paradise had turned out to be something of a hell hole. The fact that he was snubbed by the ANC when it came to Nelson Mandela’s funeral must also have hurt.

​It is completely understandable that secular humanists, liberation theologians and Marxists, globalists and those who support the New World Order are praising Desmond Tutu as a hero, freedom fighter, saint and global icon. It is understandable that many in the mainstream media support a political priest who supported so much of their agenda, including abortion, euthanasia, the LGBTQ agenda, socialism and globalism.

​However, it is disturbing that so many evangelicals Christians, Bible-believing people are joining the world in parroting many of these extravagant and, in many cases, undeserved praises.

There is no indication that Desmond Tutu ever repented of his rejection of the Virgin birth and rejection of the inerrancy of Scripture.

​Many people were put off and repelled from the church by Desmond Tutu’s radical political pronouncements. A common refrain that I heard repeatedly: “I used to be an Anglican until I put Tu and Tu together!” Man-centered churches and political priests repel many away, or distract many, from our highest priority.

Therefore, it is important to state that Desmond Tutu did not represent the true Church of Jesus Christ. His teachings were not an accurate reflection of the Bible. He did not faithfully proclaim the Gospel of Christ. We need to recognise that people fail. We are not calling anyone to the church or churchianity. You can find any number of failings and shocking scandals in people and political figures. But nobody can possibly point to any failings in our Lord Jesus Christ. It is He, The Way, The Truth and The Life that we must proclaim and focus on. “For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober minded, just, holy, self-controlled, holding fast the faithful Word as he has been taught, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.” Titus 1:7-9

​The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. Our highest priority is the fulfilment of the Great Commission of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. We must love God with all of our heart, soul, mind and strength. We need to seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness. We must make disciples of all nations and teach obedience to all things He has commanded.

Liberation theology is a totally unacceptable distortion of the Scriptures. Their gospel is Marxism, their kingdom is communism. Their freedom ends up in oppression, their evangelism is subversion and their missionaries are, in many cases, rioters and terrorists. This is neither a theology, nor a liberation.

“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him, who called you in the grace of Christ to a different gospel … but even if we, or angel from Heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:6-9

Dr. Peter Hammond
Gospel Defence League
P.O. Box 36129, Glosderry 7720
Cape Town, South Africa
Tel: (021) 689-4480
Email: mission@frontline.org.za
Website: www.GospelDefenceLeague.org
www.ChristianAction.org.za