The Need to Organize

This was another week of low productivity, but it included positive steps upon which to build for the remainder of my research in Rwanda. It is hard to believe at this point, but this week will conclude my fourth week in the country, with only five more to go to complete my research. I have decided that my research essentially falls into two phases, the building stage and the implementing stage. I feel this week essentially concludes the building phase of my research. I have been conducting interviews, making appointments, doing limited archival research, and networking over the past four weeks, but this feels like it was mostly laying the ground work for the second phase of the research. Through my initial research and interviews I have been able to gather resources and narrow my methodology to the point where I think that while the quantity of research I will be conducting will be limited, the quality will be better. I am moving away from solely doing individual interviews with religious actors, to focusing more on larger groups of people who are working together on reconciliation projects. This includes religious organizations like the Interfaith Commission of Rwanda, the African Evangelist Enterprise, and the Council of Protestant Churches, but this is also including local groups operating out of churches or small, local organizations. While the individual interviews were positive, and will continue, they failed to fully illuminate the breadth and depth of the work I wished to see. By doing some group meetings, with groups who are prepared to talk about their work which was a problem I incurred earlier in this process, I can witness the work they are conducting in the environment in which they are operating. I think this will add richness to the research that was lacking before. After a very productive meeting with a representative of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), I have also decided to pursue interviews with larger international religious organizations operating in Rwanda, such as World Vision and Catholic Relief Services. I was originally anticipating avoiding such large, international, organizations, but I now feel they will provide an interesting outsider’s perspective on what is happening locally.

There are few new revelations this week, due in part to the dearth of research I was able to conduct. One interesting point that was strengthened in my mind this week was the need for a better strategic vision and implementation strategy for reconciliation projects, especially within the smaller churches which lack resources. Within the Lutheran Church of Rwanda, where I am operating, I have met several people doing good and interesting work on reconciliation. It appeared to me that largely these different efforts were being done independent of each other with little interaction, oversight, and resource sharing. There has been a routine deferral to actors on the local level, which I agree with, and some saying that they do not feel it is a good policy to have people in the capital dictating to people in the rural areas what best practices are, which also has merit, but I feel there needs to be a much greater sense of organization, planning, visioning, and sharing. I agree that reconciliation needs to happen on the local level, and therefore should be driven by local actors, but I feel that if everything happens in isolation there will be a disjointed process toward reconciliation. Even if Kigali should not represent a behemoth dictating plans to rural areas, it should represent a place where all people from around the country can come to share knowledge, receive assistance, and plan new strategies and programs.

One of the things I hear routinely from churches and organizations alike is the need for resources and donors to complete their work. Some organizations, like the Kigali Parish of the Lutheran Church of Rwanda, as talked about receiving assistance to create an infrastructure that will allow for them to be self-sustained, which I find very admirable. However, I think that for these organizations and churches to receive the assistance they are requesting, a better administrative framework needs to be in place to show donors their plans, activities, dreams, ambitions, resources, and so forth. Referring to last week’s post, the organization known as REACH (Reconciliation, Evangelism and Christian Healing) has an office, a vision, a mission statement, a coherent website, and if you visit their location you can see their dream becoming a reality. Obviously they have received international assistance along the way, but what truly stands out about this organization is the administrative framework in place and the level of organization in REACH. Honestly, I think it is the organizational skills of the leadership that makes REACH as successful as it has been. This sort of leadership does not require money or resources; it just needs the dedication of those involved in the project and a commitment to operate within the system they find themselves.

Unfortunately this is one of the problems I am learning about in church-based reconciliation: the church has other priorities beyond reconciliation. Certainly, one of the central themes of all the churches I have encountered is reconciliation, but their priorities are also shared with operating a parish, preparing pastors to minister, attending to the spiritual demands of their congregants, and all the other requirements that come within church administration. This is one reason why the churches I feel require organization that attends to reconciliation programs and makes it easier for all parishes and congregations to contribute to the reconciliation process. If it is left to individual actors or congregations it can be overlooked in the demands of being a church leader, and if a pastor devotes himself entirely to this process he may not be attending to all the spiritual needs of his flock. While this first effort does not take much money, it requires a great deal of dedication.

Leaving Kigali

Do not let the title of this pot confuse you, I am still in Kigali, but this week was the first chance that I had to leave the capital and see a few projects operating in a town called Kayonza, in the Eastern Province of Rwanda. We visited the parish pastor for the region and also saw the church building and met the youth from the Lutheran congregation in Kayonza. Although Kigali is a good city, with a lot to explore for this project, it was refreshing to get outside Kigali, both for the change of scenery, and to see the work of reconciliation in the field. Because Kigali is both the political and economic epicenter of the country, the work of reconciliation can sometimes be overshadowed by the booming development being seen in the city today. I was here one year ago, and while the city was clean, developed, and safe by all accounts, in a little over one year the city has gotten even larger, more developed, and more cosmopolitan. It is not uncommon to sit down in a café of bar and see Europeans, Americans, Africans, and Asians all sitting together.

This week has been a challenge for the research, but has provided some good offerings. We failed to reach the critical mass of interviews required for this week to be considered successful, but I am beginning to think that does not matter. I think a change in the focus and process of this research will be required, but I think it will be for the better. At the moment I am pondering writing on the three approaches to reconciliation I see happening within the Protestant church community: an individual denomination approach, an interfaith approach, and an independent religious actor approach. In stead of fully embracing myself in one of these approaches, specifically the individual denomination approach, I think it will be good to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of all these approaches, and evaluate their overall effectiveness. This is influenced largely from the fact that I will not meet the required number of interviews, but I also feel there is much to learn from studying these approaches, even if I can only offer a cursory overview. If nothing else hopefully it will contribute to the conversation about religious peacebuilding, at least in the Rwandan context. In other news, I have not yet confirmed the assertion in last week’s post about the Catholic Church being absent from interfaith. My feeling is that is not correct, but I hope to confirm that this week.

Although this week lacked for quantity of research, the quality was vey high. One interesting insight this week came from several discussions concerning the role that projects with tangible results play in the reconciliation process. This may go without saying, but the purpose of the projects – such as building houses, building community center, making baskets, etc. – is not simply the tangible result, but rather the sense of community that arises from these interactions. For example, one organization doing some extraordinary work in Rwanda is called REACH, Reconciliation, Evangelism, and Christian Healing. REACH works with the government to reintegrate prisoners convicted through the gacaca courts back into their communities. The government forces these people to contribute a certain number of hours of community service as part of the reintegration process. What REACH does, with government approval, is to take some of these prisoners into the communities where they committed crimes, and help them build homes for the victims of their crimes.

Now, before going forward with this point I should say that it is my understanding that in order to be released from prison on this sort of work-release program, you must admit your crimes, ask for forgiveness, and sincerely feel remorse for their crimes. Many, though by no means all, of these people, the perpetrators, after reflecting on their actions, feel a great since of guilt and remorse, and desire to seek forgiveness. REACH helps the victims and the perpetrators down this journey of reconciliation and forgiveness by not only providing training and counseling to both groups, but by putting them in a position to build relationships. They do this through a work program where the perpetrators rebuild homes for victims whose properties were destroyed in 1994. The perpetrators are responsible for the manual labor, but the victims are also asked to help by providing water for drinking and bathing and preparing some meals. This interaction allows the victim some tangible reparation for their loss, and allows the perpetrator the opportunity to give back to those whom they harmed.

Now this is not a perfect system, by any means, but REACH has determined that this program is successful in building relationships between victims and perpetrators, and allows the process of healing, reconciling, and forgiving. The primary goal of REACH, in this instance, is not so much the construction of the house, but this process of building relationships.

The other part of my research that was inspiring to me, and which I think I have written on in previous posts, is the detailed understanding of process used by both the Lutheran Church of Rwanda, but especially by REACH. (This post is not meant to be an advertisement for REACH, but I am impressed with their methodology.) It is now some 15 years since the genocide occurred, and some people might think that sufficient time has passed and that Rwanda is now stable, growing, and no longer a concern. But for those working in the field of reconciliation, they know this to be a much longer process. As it was explained to mean, the process of reconciliation is two fold, first personal, then interpersonal and intergroup. By this I mean that for individuals to be open to reconciliation, they must first take the time to process their own actions, traumas, and experiences. This happens for both the victim and the perpetrators. Reconciliation is a two way street, and it requires both parties to approach each other. Depending on the individual and the crime either committed or endured, this personal process can take years to a lifetime. Most of the organizations and people I am meeting here understand and respect this, and develop their programs accordingly. This is impressive in an age of high-speed, tangible results, that these grassroots organizations remain focused on such a well understand process of long-term, sustainable reconciliation.

Next week should offer more opportunities to explore both the role of the Lutheran Church, and independent religious actors such as REACH. I am hoping to continue venturing out from Kigali and exploring the work being down in the provinces. Soon, we will receive government permission to move beyond the boundaries of the church, and we will begin to start our comparative work, evaluating the political and community leaders responses to these religious efforts at reconciliation.

Research Begins

Research Update – This week represented my first efforts at actual research. Thus far I have conducted five interviews, and I have a group session and another interview planned for Saturday, February 14. All together my second week in the field should yield six interviews and one group session. The reason that I am using a group session in stead of individual interviews is because I will be speaking with a group of young adults in the church who works closely together on reconciliation projects, and in made more sense to me to interview them collectively in stead of individually. Next week will be my first voyages outside of the confines of Kigali. I will remain in Kigali, but will have at least one day of interviews in a neighboring province not far from the city. I will also be meeting with the leaders of an interfaith group that works both in Kigali and in the provinces as well. I will speak to this more later. Lastly, the process of receiving government approval is moving along. We have finally submitted all my paperwork to the appropriate offices, and now we are just waiting for them to process the paperwork. Hopefully we will be cleared for everything by the end of next week. For now, the resources within the Lutheran Church of Rwanda will keep me occupied for the next several weeks.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I have discovered to a great extent that the church led process of reconciliation is largely an interfaith endeavor. My first formal interviews this week continue to confirm that approach. I believe that the changing face of Christianity in Rwanda necessitates such and approach, and I am encouraged from what I have heard thus far. From what I have been told, and what I will confirm later, is that the Roman Catholic Church, once tallying membership around 80-90% of the Rwandese population, was down to 49% in the 2005 census. While the Catholic Church remains by far the largest religious body in Rwanda, the Protestant community appears to represent almost equal numbers. However, while the Catholic is one organized and hierarchical body, as well all know the Protestant community is not. From what I am hearing thus far, the Protestant community has acknowledged this shortcoming and is trying to overcome that obstacle through collaborative approaches to reconciliation. What I find fascinating thus far, and what I will hopefully confirm in the next few weeks, is that while the Muslim community in Rwanda is an active participant in the work of interfaith reconciliation, the Catholic Church is absent form such organizations. Theories given to me thus have been that the Catholic Church is large enough to work on its own and already has the structure in place to work on its projects. I will hopefully be speaking with someone from the Catholic Church in the next few weeks to investigate this more closely and to see if it is true that they are not engaging the interfaith organizations in Rwanda. If possible I would like to conduct a comparative study of similar such grassroots, interfaith collaboration in post-conflict peacebuilding, but unfortunately I will not be able to make that a part of this study. Perhaps that is a study better suited to Jason Klocek.

Two themes that struck me in interview thus far are development and process. So far, not one single interview has talked about reconciliation in Rwanda without talking about development. This is true of both clergy and lay leaders alike. In fact, as a part of the church led efforts at reconciliation, economic development and poverty reduction has been at the forefront of their thinking. I was not planning to consider economic development as a part of my work here, but it appears I may have no choice. The Lutheran Church of Rwanda, and its interfaith partners, admits that they cannot see reconciliation without development. They are intertwined projects that must be done simultaneously. Without development, and with relative deprivation, reconciliation is potentially doomed to fail because it will appear that different people are benefiting at different levels from the process. As far as process is concerned, there are several different theories on what the process should look like, but universally there is a sense that reconciliation is a journey, and not simply a goal to be attained. This was inspiring to see, because writers like Lederach and de Gruchy both describe the role of second and third tier actors being focused on reconciliation from the intermediate to long-term, meaning viewing it as a process that from years to decades. Even without a formal framework to guide their work, the interfaith community in Rwanda is adopting a timeline that represents the work of modern scholars on reconciliation.

I know that this post might seem a bit repetitive compared to last week’s, but note that last week represented more musings that resources, and this week’s work is beginning to confirm what I was hearing in causal conversations last week. In the weeks to come I should be able to delve more deeply into the interfaith working being conducted in Rwanda and be able to provide more concrete examples. I am also deeply hoping that I will be able to meet with represents of the Muslim and Catholic communities to study their role in this process.

Arrival in Kigali

I arrived in Kigali on Monday afternoon after a furious 48 hours of flying and one night in Addis Ababa. My arrival in Kigali was pleasant and I was greeted by the son of the Bishop of the Lutheran Church of Rwanda. After spending Monday and Tuesday trying to acclimate to the time change and get adjusted to my new environment I am beginning the process for which I came. On Wednesday and Thursday I spent all my time with my mentor trying to receive government permission to conduct my research. I knew this going into the process, but what we all learned was that we need to receive permission from each government office that oversees the different arenas in which we want to conduct research. For example, I want to interview religious leaders about reconciliation, which means I need to receive permission from the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission. I will also be looking for permission for research from TIG, which oversees reintegration programs for those convicted in the gacaca process and will be considering seeking permission from the leaders of gacaca to view a proceeding and to interview pastors on the gacaca court panels. For those of you who do not know, the Gacaca courts are a modern interpretation of an old tradition in Rwandan justice. Theoretically, Rwandans traditionally meted out justice by assembling the aggrieved and accused parties and discussing the matter with the elders of the community. This process has been formalized today, where each community elects its own gacaca panels based on their standing in the community and their perceived integrity.

As they say, all the best battle plans go out the window as soon as the first shots are fired. This has been the case for my research here as well. While I thought the Lutheran Church of Rwanda was currently engaged in reconciliation programs outside their religious teachings and preaching in the pulpit, I found this was not the case. What was indicated on their website was in fact their aspirations and not their reality. For research purposes this will force me to change my methods and the focus of my research slightly, but for my consultancy, this will provide me with an interesting opportunity to work with the church leadership to formally plan and structure what a reconciliation and peacebuilding would look like within the higher administration of the LCR.

As I am awaiting government approval to begin the bulk of my research, I have been involved in many interesting preliminary conversations with my mentor and the Bishop of the church. One of the most interesting developments I have discovered is the changing face of Christianity in Rwanda. Before the genocide in 1994, the country was overwhelmingly Catholic, roughly 90%. After the genocide, there was a backlash against the Catholic Church specifically and Christianity generally. In the 15 years since the genocide Rwanda is again amongst the most religious, and specifically Christian, nations in Africa. However, the Christian face of Rwanda has changed in that time. The Catholic Church still dominates the religious landscape, but Pentecostal and traditional Protestant churches are increasing their numbers regularly. Pentecostal churches were the first to gain prominence in Rwanda after 1994 and continue to be the second most visible church body in the country. Members of Pentecostal churches are largely young people who have been disenchanted with the Catholic Church, or who are drawn to the sense of community found in Pentecostal churches. The worship style offered by these churches is attractive to young people, akin to the growing numbers of young people in America attending community churches that offer entertaining worship styles, contemporary songs, and dancing. From the conversations I am having with my mentor at the Lutheran Church of Rwanda, after young people in the Pentecostal church begin to want to settle down, get married, and raise a family, they begin to gravitate toward more traditional Protestant churches, including the Lutheran church. Membership in the Lutheran church is growing throughout the country, in part due to this phenomenon. It is an interesting cycle where church memberships keep changing throughout the country.

I am interested to explore the implications of these changing demographics on social reconciliation. It is clear that Catholic, Pentecostal, and traditional Protestant churches are all competing with each other for members, but they are engaging in reconciliation projects that cross denominational and religious boundaries. The feeling, I gather, is that when it comes to membership, each church wants to promote its own interests, but when it comes to reconciliation, individual interests in each church fade away and the overarching national interest of reconciliation predominates. Different denominations tend to approach reconciliation through different means, but they try to work together or compliment each other when they can. I will be pursuing this issue in more depth going forward.