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.