Reconciliation in the Heart of Africa

This was a busy week that will hopefully prove to have been a productive one. I had two good meetings early in the week to set up more in-depth meetings this coming week, and a long, but productive trip to southwest Rwanda. I met early this week with Catholic Relief Services, who agreed that we would arrange something for next week with their experts in the field of reconciliation, and those who are working in the field and with the churches. Unfortunately, while we discussed such arrangements on Tuesday, I have not heard back from them yet. I did, however, meet briefly with the Grand Mufti, the leader of the Rwandan Islamic community. He was a very gentle man and intelligent man, who offered me several hours of his time this coming week. I am looking forward to this meeting not only because I enjoyed his company and look forward to getting to know him better, but also because he is the leader of the largest interfaith community in Rwanda, and I believe he has important insights to share about both reconciliation in Rwanda, and the overall religious landscape of the community. Either way, I have never sat down for a long talk with a Muslim religious leader before, and I am simply excited for all the new things I should expect to learn from this man.

My trip to the southwest was truly remarkable. First of all, this was one of the most beautiful parts of the world I have seen. To get to this part of the country – on the southwest corner of Rwanda on Lake Kivu – you have to travel through one of Rwanda’s national parks. While the road through the park was a little frightening, driving along steep cliffs in a crowded and old bus, the scenery was breathtaking. I had the good fortunate to travel through this area both during sunny weather with blue skies, and during cloud cover. Both climates provided for different, but beautiful, backdrops to the scenery. The park was surround on both its entrance and exit by tea plantations, and seeing the tea plants, with mountain peaks and misty clouds, was a beautiful and peaceful sight to behold. The town we were in was also beautiful. On the shores of southern Lake Kivu, overlooking neighboring Congo, it was a lovely, peaceful town. From what I was told, this town was one of the last places to be affected by the war and genocide in 1994, and is working hard to recover from the tragedies that ensued. It would have been nice to delve into this a little deeper, but my time was in short supply, so I was limited to merely learning about the current landscape of reconciliation and the role of the churches in reconciling the community.

Fortunately we had a local contact in the religious community who arranged a series of engaging meetings for us. We first went and spoke with a local community leader who was able to describe the roles of both the government and the religious community in the reconciliation process. Obviously, because this person was a community and not a religious leader, who argued that while the religious community is an integral part of the process, the government is taking the lead in national and community reconciliation. While it may seems obvious that someone with no direct connection to the religious community, but involved in local government would cite the government as the leader of this effort, this merely confirms what I am seeing myself and what I am hearing from local and international NGOs operating in urban and rural parts of Rwanda. As one person put it, churches are not taking initiative in this process. I have definitely seen this throughout my time here, and I think you can attribute this to several things.

First, the government is taking a leading role in the reconciliation process because it has better leadership than the churches. While the Kagame regime has certainly received its share of criticism, and certainly some for good reason, there is no doubt that he offers the steadiest leadership and clearest vision for the country. Even those who do not share his vision, or disagree with how he is implementing that vision, there is no dispute that he is the strongest leader in the country. The Kagame regime sets the agenda with which all other parties must follow, and has the resources to back up his policies. The administration also has the strongest infrastructure to implement its policies, with both a full-time office dedicated to reconciliation – the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission – and the mandate that all local government offices must be focused on creating a sense of national unity. No other organization, including the churches, can rival such an expansive infrastructure.

Secondly, as I think I have mentioned before, the churches, overall, suffer from a lack of leadership. I believe that many of the church leaders, both local and national, have great spiritual wisdom and can probably lead their respective flocks in spiritual matters, but few have the education or experience in peacebuilding to fully implement reconciliation processes, most – besides the Catholic Church, and perhaps the Anglicans – do not have the infrastructure to implement such widespread programs as the government, and lastly, no one leader has national prominence to take a lead in organizing and engaging the religious community. I also perceive a deference to the government in terms of peacebuilding and reconciliation activities within church leaders. Whether this is from the timidity of the leaders, or an understanding of their limitations compared to the government, churches and church leaders seem to have taken a complimentary role to the government, not a leading role with the government. At this point I am not sure what the churches’ plans or ambitions are in regard to their reconciliation ministries. Some have argued that while the government can create the structures of national unity – community service projects, reintegration programs, community and economic development, justice – it is up to the churches to deal with personal healing and trauma counseling, issues of the heart that the government cannot touch. If this were the plan, and this was articulated extensively by the churches, I could understand the deference to the government taking the lead in larger projects, but at the moment I do not think the churches have a concrete idea of what their place is in the process and their mission in that process.

Lastly, for now, I also perceive a struggle for identity within the churches, and between the churches and the community and government as well. The churches, while largely under completely new leadership since 1994, honestly have an image problem. The complicity of the churches in 1994 cannot be dismissed and they are having a difficult time overcoming the image of that complicity. Certainly, some new churches have moved in since the genocide and can claim to be clean churches, particularly the Pentecostals, but overall, Christianity has been tarnished from its legacy of complicity in the genocide and in the previous regime. Many churches are struggling to recreate legitimacy and show themselves as agents of tolerance and love, not division and hate. The process of reconciling the churches with the people is also a long journey, and in part is responsible for the limited role of the churches in international, intergroup, and community reconciliation than the government. Unfortunately, the churches are still plagued by internal and interdenominational conflict, which continues to tarnish the image of the churches. While many have said that such conflicts have decreased since 1994, there is no denying that churches are still immersed in both internal and external conflict. As one person I spoke with put it, how can churches teach reconciliation when they are fighting amongst themselves. Churches are supposed to be role models, another person said, and they cannot play that role unless churches reconcile with each other and with their communities.

Returning to my trip to the southwest, I also had the opportunity to meet with several individuals who had confessed to the involvement in the genocide and who were now working within the prisons as part of a reconciliation committee to help others in the prison accept their involvement, repent, and seek forgiveness. It was an eye opening experience both to meet with those who had played a role in the genocide, and also to see what they are doing now to heal the community. I think the work in the prisons, perhaps more than anything else, is contributing to social and interpersonal reconciliation in Rwanda. Although the prisons, gacaca, and overall system of justice in Rwanda has been criticized, and perhaps rightly so in some instances, there is no denying that the within the prisons the process of reconciliation is unfolding. From those I met with I was told that the churches had a large role to play in the prisons, and that the churches were widely credited with helping many people come to accept responsibility for their actions and repent and seek forgiveness. One person cited the statistic that 98% of the confessions were a direct result of the presence of the churches, and while this statistic is most certainly exaggerated, it shows the importance to which many people ascribe to the churches presence in the prison. Those I spoke with told me that the church leaders in the prison help the prisoners come to terms with their involvement in a safe – relatively speaking I suppose – environment, where prisoner can work individually with pastors and priests during their own personal process and reconciliation, and can receiving the counseling they need to present themselves to their victims and their communities ready to seek forgiveness and mend relationships. While the gacaca process has gone on too long, and while too many people have been jailed too long without trial, the silver lining to this cloud is that it has given the churches leaders an opportunity to continue to work with prisoners and prepare them to reintegrate into their communities.

I with I could investigate the prisons in more detail, and to really study the work of the churches therein, but I think that may have to wait for another time or person. For now I am grateful to have had that opportunity to see the work of the churches in southwestern Rwanda. I think this will add an interesting dimension to my work, and help share another dimension of the work of religious peacebuilders in Rwanda.

Comparative Study

Over the last two weeks my most successful sessions have been a part of my attempt to conduct a comparative study of the role of religious actors in the reconciliation process in Rwanda. I began my research working strictly within the churches – both because that was the most appropriate place to begin, and because we needed government approval to move beyond that point – but have recently been meeting with NGOs and other leaders who are involved in the reconciliation process, and may be religious leaders themselves, but are not responsible to any particular church body. I learned much great information from within the churches, but I am gaining a much clearer picture when I combine a view from within and from without. Largely, many of these meetings have served to confirm the assumptions I was making after working within the churches. However, more often than not these interviews enabled me to delve deeper into the underlying causes for the assumptions I was making. These have been very helpful in not only created a clearer image of the religious landscape of reconciliation in Rwanda, but I think it will also help the churches to see their own shortcomings and correct them, if they want to.

From here I would like to outline the strengths and weaknesses of the churches, as I see it, taken from conversations within and without the church. This is not to criticize the churches in any way, but any reasonable research project, and one with any integrity, must address what is going well, and what is not. In a sensitive process such as reconciliation in Rwanda, people cannot so sensitive as to not learn and grow as the move along the process.

Strengths of the churches:
As one person told me, the churches are everywhere. This pastor made the astute point of showing me that in most rural towns and villages, you will probably not see a clinic, a police station, or a government office, but what you will find is a church, or even many churches. The churches in Rwanda form a web that constitutes a vast network that can identify and address social needs and provide social services in a way that no other organization in Rwanda can. Even when there is no clinic or doctor or nurse available, the churches can mobilize in their small communities to find people who can care for the sick, the hungry, the injured or the lonely.

The churches teach and preach a compelling message. Unlike NGOs, community groups, or the government, the Churches provide a gospel of live and forgiveness. The churches also teach a message of inclusion. Certainly the churches were used in the past to divide the people and to insert within the Christian message and divisive and contentious view of society, something not at all uncommon in world history, and while this still exists today in Rwanda, the churches seem to be moving toward a message centered on love, forgiveness, and Christian reconciliation. No other group can provide such a strong message.

People attend church. While many people may not watch or read the news, attend community meetings, or participate in community groups, most Rwandese to attend church. In fact, if you try to find a cab on a Sunday morning, it is almost impossible because the drivers are either in church themselves, or other people are all using them to get to church. This provides the churches with a unique opportunity because the have a captive and attentive audience. I think the attention span of a Rwandan Christian might be greater than that of an American Christian considering that the services I have attended in Rwanda last between 90 and 150 minutes, whereas in the US, I have rarely attend a service that exceeded 75 minutes. This may only be a coincidence, or a consequence of style, but I think it might also show that people are more open and receptive to being in the church and to listening to the message of the church. As so many people attend the churches in Rwanda, there is a vast audience that can be fed the message of reconciliation.

Reconciliation is a process. The church leaders I have spoken with all understand that reconciliation is a process. Even though it has been 15 years since the genocide, there is a common understanding that the process of reconciliation is not over, in fact, I think many would say that it is just beginning. The churches contribute to this process by helping individuals to process their trauma – both victims and perpetrators – as well as help to bring people together in the process of social reconciliation.

Weaknesses of the churches:
Leadership: The Rwandan churches all have good leaders. I say this not only because I live and work with many of them, but from my conversations with them I can see that they are caring, compassionate, and educated men (there are women leaders too, but I have not met any to date) who care about the process of reconciliation. However, either through the multiple demands on the church leaders, or an unwillingness to fully commit to the process, there are no strong, vocal, and courageous leaders willing to take charge of a religious-based reconciliation program. It is true that religious leaders do work together on this process, but as a whole there are few, if any, who are taking ownership over the process and staking their careers and identities on this process. There are no Desmond Tutus or Martin Luther King Juniors, or Ghandis. I am not sure if the reconciliation process in Rwanda demands such a leader, but it does require more robust leadership to point the churches in the right direction and make them accountable.

Vision: I think this my go with leadership, but I have not yet seen a coherent vision of how the churches envision their role beyond the immediate projects they run and capacity to bring their communities together. Perhaps this is enough. As one NGO worker told me, as long as the churches preach the message of reconciliation, that is enough. However, while the government of Rwanda has am impressive vision for the country (Vision 2020), I do not see the same vision stemming from the churches. I would say that they view a role for themselves where they continue to bring people together and create and inclusive society, but I would not say that this vision has been articulated and the mechanisms being put in place to ensure this future.

Capacity: Needless to say, Rwanda is a poor country, and Rwandan churches are also poor. They lack the resources to fully fund, or even develop some projects. Many churches are not even able to staff ordained pastors in even a fraction of their congregations. Many congregations are ably staffed by trained evangelists, but this is different than a seminary trained and ordained pastor.

Competition: Churches in Rwanda, like elsewhere in the world, are competing with each other both for members and for resources. In fact, some churches are even competing for members with resources, meaning they try to appeal to the wealthier segment of the population to secure their tithes. Such a competition for members and resources can distract the churches and move their message away from reconciliation toward a more appealing, friendly, and comfortable message that does not force their members into addressing the uncomfortable subjects of repentance, forgiveness, and reconciliation.

These are just a sampling of both categories, but I hope they provide thumbnail sketch of the situation in Rwanda. I hope to be able to more fully develop these ideas in the thesis as a whole, and more generally as I continue my research. Overall, the religious community has incredible potential to do good in Rwanda, and many are trying, but there remains a lack of a concerted effort across the board that will inhibit the effectiveness of church-based reconciliation in the years to come.

A Busy Week

Administrative update: We have achieved success!! After almost five weeks of trying to secure government approval to conduct research outside the search, we were informed today that we should be receiving our letter granting us full approval to proceed. Better late than never I suppose. For those of you who may be interested in doing research in Rwanda in the future, or who are simply curious about the process, you must first seek the approval the of main office of ministry who oversees the subject you wish to research and then take their approval to the Ministry of Higher Education and Research. So, in my case, we went to the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission and then took their approval to the aforementioned ministry. We did not understand this before we began, so the person who informed our process simply told us to go to the same ministry who granted them permission without informing us of the entire process.

The research front has led to some interesting development this week, and looks positive for the next two weeks as well. On Sunday, March 1, I traveled outside of Kigali to a small village where victims and perpetrators who have confessed and sought forgiveness now live together. In this village there is a remarkable pastor that has been instrumental, yet relatively unheralded, in the reconciliation process. He was a victim who lost most of his family in 1994, but returned to Rwanda after fleeing to Burundi to help in the reconciliation process. I met and interviewed this man on Sunday, and he was truly remarkable. He does not come with a story about how God just called on him to forgive, and he cheerfully returned. He told a story of personal conflict about how to forgive, or even if he should forgive. He told me about how anger and bitterness had consumed his heart, and that the personal process of reconciliation for him was a long and difficult journey. He grew up in a Rwanda that sought Hutu and Tutsi living side by side, but in which there was an ideology of hate that set these two groups apart. He said from an early age he was pained from this division and the hatred he saw around him, but eventually he came to Christianity and started using Christianity to unite his community. For this he was arrested for a time before 1994.

After returning to Rwanda after the genocide, he came back to the community where his family had lived. He was conflicted about how reconcile, or even if he wanted to forgive and be reconciled. During one painful night of self-reflection he decided God was calling him to begin the process of reconciliation. He began to work in local prisons, ministering to the perpetrators and preparing them to seek and receive forgiveness and then to continue the process of reconciliation that proceeds after forgiveness. Reconciliation is not simply forgiving and forgetting; it is a long process of restoring relationships and building trust. During his time working in the prisons he encountered one of the men responsible for the deaths of his family members. The man was initially afraid of him, fearing he may be a government spy, but eventually he saw the sincerity of this pastor and began to attend church services with an open heart. Eventually these two encountered each other, prayed with each other, and seek, offer, and receive forgiveness. Today these two men live in the same village and their children play together. They also travel around Rwanda speaking to different groups about the process of reconciliation. This brief moment with this man illustrated to me the true process of reconciliation. It is not simply saying forgiveness and then moving on, and it is not something that Christians, or religious people, are drawn to easily. It can be a painful process of self-reflection and inner-conflict.

Tuesday was another moving day, but for different reasons. I returned to visit the group REACH I have written about in previous entries. They had arranged to meet several of the groups that they sponsor. REACH conducts seminars for different social groups – such as community leaders, women, youth, etc. – and after they give them a one to two week seminar on reconciliation and peacebuilding, the members of these groups are encouraged to develop ideas about how to continuing the process of reconciliation through different interdependent projects that focus on reconciliation. We met four such groups in and around the town of Kayonza: a group of women trying to start a basket weaving company, a reconciliation choir, a football group, and a reconciliation dance troupe. It was amazing to see what these different groups were doing to promote reconciliation. The basket weavers had talent beyond what I could do, but they were seeking to further develop their skills so at least the most talented could sell their products to western and Japanese markets – such as Macy’s who currently has an agreement to sell Rwandan baskets. What was really interesting to me, and to REACH as well I think when they made this same conclusion some time ago, is the important role women play in the reconciliation process. They focused on women because immediately after the genocide they were the group most in need. Many of their husbands, fathers, and sons had either been killed or imprisoned, and women constituted the largest part of the civil society at that time. This was a logical place for them to start the work of reconciliation, trying to reconcile those who were victims with those whose families were perpetrators. After working with the women to begin this process, REACH, and others, discovered, that once women were able begin to work together, they were able to contribute to the reconciliation and reintegration of prisoners once they returned to their communities.

I could go into more detail about the contributions of the choir and the dancers to the process of reconciliation, but I think I have illustrated the point about how bringing these different groups together can foster a sense of reconciliation of relationship building. None of these efforts are possible without the full involvement of the community, and the future of these groups depends on their ability to become self-sustaining. REACH will assist them to a point, but then it is up to the group to sustain themselves. What I do want to illustrate briefly about the choir and the dancers was just the shear beauty that they shared with us. The choir was composed of victims and perpetrators – or maybe more specifically the children of victims and perpetrators – and consisted of all denominations, including Muslims. They sang for us a sample of their songs in a beautiful little church made of mud bricks and wood beams. It was truly amazing and their voices were outstanding. The dancers displayed a series of traditional Rwandan dance routines complete with costume and drums. They performed to the backdrop of the rolling Rwandan hills and the setting sun. It was one of the most beautiful scenes of my life. The scenery in Rwanda, if you get out of Kigali, is stunning, and with the dance and the music, it was a truly peaceful setting.

This coming week constitutes continued research around the country, heading back to Nyamata, Kayonza, and Rukira to meet with community and religious leadership engaged in reconciliation programs. It is within these settings that you can really see reconciliation programs in their fullest. I am continually impressed by what I am seeing, but unfortunately it is not all positive images emerge from these scenes. I have been straining to find object critiques of church-led reconciliation programs, and have finally begun to find some sources willing to speak on the subject. I spoke with one large, international organization this week that provided just that critical insight I needed. They said that the churches have an important role to play, and are playing it, but that they are slow to act, and often crippled by corruption. They feared that the church leaders were often seeking their positions not out of a sense of religious obligation or duty to God, but because church leadership provided a good, and possibly lucrative, career option, and that some church leaders are corrupt. Such leaders, they cautioned, can distract the work of the church and the people they are suppose to serve away from the process of reconciliation. I have seen this myself, but from this meeting I found that this was not just my own skepticism, but a feeling shared by other more informed than myself. The good thing was that they felt that while the churches do suffer from weaknesses such as these, they do have a strong role to play in the process.