BOOK REVIEW:  A Life in Letters: Selected Correspondence of Denis Hurley edited by Philippe Denis, Paddy Kearney and Jane Argall

The CIHA Blog’s mission is to bring critical and religious voices to bear on the phenomenon of humanitarianism and related issues of justice. This book review demonstrates the ethical complexities and evolution of an influential Catholic leader in South Africa, and as the author states, taps into ongoing struggles for justice in the country. We would love to hear your thoughts in the comments section! 

BOOK REVIEW:  A Life in Letters: Selected Correspondence of Denis Hurley edited by Philippe Denis, Paddy Kearney and Jane Argall.

By Gyaviira Kisitu, UKZN

Introduction

The production of knowledge, its preservation for the present and future generations is of great importance for human society. As such knowledge preservation mechanisms have been always sought for this service and one of this is through scholarship.  In this book review we focus on “A Life in Letters: Selected correspondence of Denis Hurley,” a volume that attempts to unravel through letters, certain key aspects of the life lived by archbishop Denis Hurley of the archdiocese of Durban.

The book is developed to help a Reader have a solid perception of who Archbishop Denis Hurley was. Key interest is given to highlighting his personality, his emotions, his sport mania, his political views, his theological outlook, and his spirituality. Further, prominence is given to splendid moments of his life, key events in which he participated and the important people he met, as well as his important commentaries on political and ecclesiastical affairs.

The Review

The book is divided into nine parts: Youth and Education (1926-1939), Early Ministry (1940-1961), Vatican II (1962-1965), Post Vatican II (1966-1975), Political Confrontation (1976-1980), President of the SACBC (1981-1987), Overthrowing Apartheid (1987-1992), Retirement (1993-2002), and Sabon House (2002-2004). These parts depict Archbishop Denis Hurley with many faces all of which are mainly marked by a man with charisma in story- telling, persuasion, prudence, and unwavering in the such of knowledge. He is not afraid to confront social injustices whether of ecclesiastical or political nature. Standing for responsibility, social justice as well as providing necessary pastoral advices to those seeking his intervention are shown to be an indelible characteristic of his lifestyle in this volume.  He is shown to have established close ties with politicians, religious leaders, traditional / cultural leaders, academics, and physicians individuals whom he seemed to have identified as key principles that would aid the success of his ministry.

This volume, employs a written form of knowledge production and preservation about whom the editors describe: the most influential South Africa catholic in modern times. It constitutes 251 letters written by Denis Hurley from 1926 when he was just 11 years to 2004 when he was 88 years of age just shortly before his sudden death on the 13th February 2004. The volume is unique in the sense that it succeeds in presenting knowledge about Hurley the teenage; Hurley the Young adult; Hurley the Adult and Hurley the Elder and Statesman. On the other hand, the volume locates Hurley as a teenager undergoing formation to priesthood, as a fully flagged catholic priest, a Bishop, an Archbishop as well as Archbishop Emeritus of the archdiocese of Durban.

It is important to note the volume gives great attention to Denis Hurley’s correspondence with family members and particular family and personal friends. In his style of correspondence Denis Hurley employs a contextualized-descriptive approach. In other words, he was very kin at reporting and sharing his views on the issues happening at hand while providing a detailed description of the case. This can, for instance, be easily seen in Letter 13 where Denis Hurley gives a detailed description of how events unfolded in Dublin on the closing day of the international Eucharistic congress and in many other scenarios such as the elaborate description of the canonization of Bernadette Soubirous in Letter 16 as well as during his accounts on the Vatican II sessions between 1962-1965. Here, Archbishop Hurley attempts to detail the proceedings of the council to his Diocese through the Vicar general (Fr.  Eric Boulle), and Chancellor of the Archdiocese (Geoffrey de Gersigny). The letters demonstrate that even at times when Hurley was out of the country he always remained pastorally attached to his diocese, his family and friends.

Classified ‘A life in letters’ the book offers extraordinarily to the Reader an opportunity to enter into conversation with Archbishop Hurley’s lived experiences. It lays bare his unique personality, emotions, and views on spirituality, politics, theology and the church. The dynamic presentation and perspectives of the letters in the book appropriates correctly the title of this book. The letters are organized in such away to thematically present Hurley’s life story.  The editors argue certain reasons as to why A Life in Letters on Denis Hurley was worth a publication. For instance, “He headed the archdiocese of Durban for nearly five decades, a period which saw the introduction of the legal regime of apartheid, its demise, and within the Catholic Church the celebration of the second Vatican council, and its tumultuous reception”. On reading this book one would easily agree with the editors that the memory of Archbishop Hurley was put to life honorably by documenting his struggles, and achievements which were not only characterized by excitement and struggles but also disappointments.

Denis Hurley Life story according to this volume portrays particular values that characterized his entire life. Some of these were his convictions to the value of correspondence using the available means possible, expressed humorously and with a highly calculated prudence. Salutations, body and concluding remarks of his letters were carefully chosen. On reading any of these letters one cannot easily mistaken the nature of relationship the author had with his recipients as well as the ultimate character of the subject of communication. For instance, while in letters to his Parents, Relatives and Friends he always remained, “the loving son”, loving brother”, or merely “Denis,” on the other hand to his Superiors, fellow bishops, and Political leaders, academics and theologians, he remained “the obedient son in Christ”, the “devoted and fraternal brother in the Lord” , the Archbishop and Archbishop emeritus of Durban”.

The Life in Letters helps the reader to discover Hurley’s  liberal approach to pastoral challenges, his unwavering yearn for knowledge, and a solid articulation of his convictions to his friends, Political authorities, his brother Bishops, and even to the highest authority of the church-the Pope. As a pastor who had the opportunity to participate actively in the life of the Church before and after the second Vatican council, a reforming spirituality of the Second Vatican council left an indelible mark on his approach to pastoral issues.

The letters help a Reader to appreciate that Hurley was a reformist who did not hastate in advising and challenging his Church on its idealistic approach to pastoral challenges in the post Vatican II era. He realized that he himself was once a captive of certain idealistic Church traditions, which after his transformation of thought, he chose to challenge. A good example of this was his view on the Catholic Church traditional teaching on birth control. Prior to Vatican II Archbishop Hurley unambiguously condemned medical proposals to develop artificial birth control mechanisms as tools for family planning. “it is most difficult to oppose a spread of these ideas because of the general lack in our society of convictions about God’s role in creation, the laws He engraved in the things he has created and His providential care for them” (Hurley in Letter 51, 2018:141-142).  However, not long after Vatican II Hurley’s position made a U-turn. He claimed in his letter to Bishop Francis Simons of 9th march 1967 that he had gone through a transition of thought regarding his radical perspective on birth control theology: “At that time I could not see how birth control could ever be justified under natural law. It was only after endless arguments and discussions that in January 1966, the “revelation” came to me of what I call the principle of the overriding right” (Hurley in Letter 85, 2018:208).

A number of other themes can be developed from the book. Among them is that of Liberation and the desire for Christian faith traditions to unite in the fight for democracy, human rights, and self determination, all of which had been suppressed by apartheid policies and political leadership of the time. Not only these attract Hurley’s attention but also some other social justice issues such as strengthening the call for ecumenism and working towards the Common good. It is important to note that pastoral skeptics on African bishops’ abilities to respond positively on concerns of the common good at the time of political transition from colonialism to self-governance were quickly challenged by Hurley. For instance, in his correspondence to Aston Chichester, SJ, the retired Archbishop of Salisbury who wondered whether African bishops can do a good job, Denis Hurley retorts that “the problem comes from the fact that in countries such as Southern Rhodesia-present day Zimbabwe, the Church has a colonial outlook and as a result African bishops are expected to behave like Europeans” (Denis 2018:145).

One could say that given the theology of the time and the authoritative teachings of the church regarding procreation and family, Hurley was controversial; the case is taken in his firm attempt to persuade even the higher authority-the Pope, to retract from his teaching on contraceptives as an alternative birth control mechanism. Though at most of the times Hurley as a catholic Bishop was expected to support the Vatican, he was nevertheless critical of the viability of the traditional magisterium teachings on artificial birth control. Its present position on birth control was unrealistic and irresponsible given the challenges affecting married couples. Reading A Life in Letters helps a reader to understand that it is not only the politicians who usually attempt to seek allies when it comes to winning popular support but also religious leaders within their hierarchies. This is well evidenced in the book when Hurley saw it necessary to not only to write to the Pope but also to share his point of view with fellow bishops such as Christopher Butler, an Australian Oblate John O’regan as well as with a number of priests in his diocese. From this perspective, he therefore presented himself the mouthpiece of the seemingly unsatisfied Christian community as far as the encyclical Humanea Vitae was concerned.

Although the title of the book seems to claim authority of what Hurley’s life was at least in letters, the editors nevertheless claim that the book did not exhaust all the significant letters that would exhaustively present Hurley’s life, as this would be “too big a task”. Although this can be granted and appreciated as such, leaving out certain key correspondences compels a reader to imagine certain lifestyles and thereby imagine if they were true of Denis Hurley. For instance, the first section of the book dedicated to Hurley’s Youth and Education (1926-1939), is limited to Hurley’s close family members to the extent that one wonders if Hurley never corresponded with distant relatives, friends or his peers. The section is very silent on how the young Hurley related with a wide range of friends who happen to be outside his immediate family circle. Did Hurley ever write to his peers or friends in the neighborhoods of his family? It would be of great interest to the reader to understand what role did Denis Hurley’s peers as a Youth play in shaping his thoughts or  could the reader be right to conclude that Denis Hurley as a young man during his formation was only interested in the affairs of his family. Whether it was a deliberate choice of the editors to disregard any correspondence that Hurley may have had with peers outside his close family relatives, the letters to the relatives would still demonstrate Hurley’s relationship with such friends. The fact that the youthful Hurley hardly passed any greetings to friends, at least through his many letters to his family, may suggest that he hardly associated with youngsters of his age in the neighborhood.

While the book details Hurley’s personal correspondence, from his time as a youth, ordained minister and up to his old age at Sabon House, one cannot fail to recognize a significant vacuum of non-Denis Hurley (DH) letters to which Denis Hurley from time to time responded or those that prompted his responses. In some letters such as Nos. 149, 153, and 154 (showing a correspondence between Bishop Desmond Tutu and Archbishop Denis Hurley, and others such as Nos. 87, 97, 100, 101 (showing correspondence between Archbishop Denis Hurley and Pope Paul VI, it is easier for a reader to follow the matter at hand and probably to draw some evidence based conclusions. However the same cannot be spoken of regarding letters such as No. 157, (Denis Hurley to Mongosuthu Buthelezi), or letter No. 42. In the latter for instance, Archbishop Martin Lucas the apostolic delegate writes to Archbishop Denis Hurley on 28th July 1949 and urges him to “refrain from criticizing the apartheid government lest they –the Catholic Church, would lose the support of National party politicians.” Given Archbishop’s stance to social justice and the hierarchy of Archbishop Martin Lucas, one would expect a certain form of response from Denis Hurley in any of the letters that immediately followed. This however, is not the case as this volume lacks a Hurley’s response to this particular letter which would have been central for a reader to ascertain the Archbishop’s thought and reservation on the raised issue. As such, this could support a claim that Archbishop Denis Hurley would at times ignore certain opinions especially those that sought to challenge his point of action.

In order to establish the coherence on some key issues that Hurley writes about, a Reader relies on the brief introductory notes on particular letters and footnotes by the editors. It can be stated that although the introductory notes play a crucial role in helping the reader appropriately assert the self, relying on only these, cripples a Reader’s analysis and a follow up on the subject of correspondence and how the agents of correspondence influenced and appreciated one another’s views on a given matter of concern.

Another key aspect to pay attention to is how Hurley’s failure to grasp well the local language may be associated to his background. As a young star, Denis Hurley is presented in the Volume as one who seems to have been insensitive to racial inclusiveness and could easily correspond with his relatives in a rather a derogative description of the non-white. In the 7th letter of this volume while writing about his first part of the journey to the novitiate in Ireland, Hurley writes to his family and describes his company in the following words: “The only fly in the ointment is that we have Indians and colored’s onboard, no Indian rajahs, and nabobs but common old samony’s and as dirty as they are common”. Although the editors are quick to pick up this as Hurley’s racist attitude during his youth and that he was able to overcome it overtime, this attitude may have influenced him in part for having failed to grasp with fluency local languages such as IsiZulu. It calls to critically analyze why Denis Hurley is thought of to have mastered other languages such as Latin, English, Italian and others with ease. The Life in Letters notes that Hurley regretted not having a good command of the IsiZulu language. But why?  He pins this to the effect of his early appointment to work in an Urban English-speaking community other than the Rural predominantly isiZulu-speaking areas. Even though this would in part explain his pastoral limited command of the isiZulu language, the situation may as well be explained by the effects of the apartheid policies and social circumstances of the time that limited interracial interactions. It is possible that Hurley from his teenage age was not enthusiastic in learning isiZulu. Further, as a fully flagged minister it is possible that he did not feel a pastoral need for the isiZulu language especially in his early ministry, and was less motivated to learn it.

It could also be stated among other key issues to note of this volume that there seems to be a deliberate intention by the editors to disregard any letters that would present Hurley the frail, or Hurley’s unwillingness to communicate moments of his life in which he may have experienced ill-health. This undermines a wholesome presentation of one’s life story which not only seek to present the joyful, successful, and energetic moments but also the sadly , disappointing and frailly  moments of human life.  A part from the letters mentioning his deteriorating strength due to old age such as letters 196, 237 the book overwhelmingly presents an energetic, physically active archbishop. It is only towards his retirement to Sabon House that Editors mention Hurley’s developing impairment: At this time “His hearing had deteriorated, and he found it difficult to follow meetings; his eyesight was also weakening and reading liturgical prayers was a problem” (Denis 2018: 471).

In conclusion, this volume “A Life in Letters: selected correspondence of Denis Hurley, is timely especially in the South African community, which despite the 1994 celebration of democracy continues to ask as to whether, or not and to what extent do the post apartheid era envisage liberation, peace and social justice to all. It cannot be taken for granted that issues of liberation struggles that prompted Archbishop Denis Hurley’s advocacy for democracy, human rights, peace and justice, ecumenism and interreligious dialogue during his life time, still present an eminent challenge to the church, the state and cultural institutions today. It is important therefore to preserve and make present prophetic voices of liberation icons such as Archbishop Denis Hurley to the South African post apartheid generation through scholarship. This would undoubtedly motivate contemporary and future struggles for peaceful and Just co-existences in society.

 

Denis, P., P. Kearney and J. Argall (eds) 2018. A Life in Letters: selected   correspondence of Denis Hurley. (“Christian lives in Africa” series, Vol. 6), Pietermaritzburg: Cluster Publications.

%d bloggers like this: