|
Rev.
Dr Aquiline Tarimo, SJ Introduction Reports of human rights abuse in Africa are increasing every day. The widespread problems associated with human rights abuses concern the plight of people suffering at the hands of their own governments, torture, kidnappings and disappearances, State-organized violence, disrespect for private and communal properties, disrespect for freedom of expression and association, child-labor, detention without trial, massacre of innocent crowds, unjustified imprisonment and executions, dishonesty and corruption, exploitation of the poor, destruction of judiciary systems, unions, cooperatives and associations, domestic slave trade, manipulation of ethnic consciousness, victimization of certain ethnic groups, discrimination on the basis of ethnic affiliation and loyalty, and so forth. The litany is endless. The question of violation of human rights in Africa today is closely related to the problems of social organization. This is caused by the fact that the formation of nation-states in the 1960s and even the promulgation of the African Charter of Human and Peoples' Rights, both of them, favored the structure of the State at the expense of traditional communities. Such an approach suppressed also the localized and intermediate structures which regulated social relations. This paper, from a theological perspective, attempts to point out the relevance of the model rediscovered by the small Christian communities (SCCs) in promoting human rights within the context of AMECEA (Association of Members of Episcopal Conferences of Eastern Africa) countries. In conjunction with the principle of subsidiarity, this paper will identify, in particular, ways in which the paradigm rediscovered by SCCs could be appropriated in the grassroots communities to strengthen the idea of civil society. Such discussion will allow me to argue that the effort of promoting of human rights in AMECEA countries will depend very much on the local intermediaries and that the issue of human rights cannot be promoted by a single institution. This discussion is divided into four sections, namely, involvement of the local church in promoting human rights, the impact of the Bishops' Pastoral Letters, the role of small Christian communities (SCCs) in AMECEA countries, and the relevance of the model rediscovered by SCCs in promoting human rights. Involvement of the Local Church in Promoting Human Rights in AMECEA Countries Engagement of the Catholic Church in promoting human rights at the level of the local church after the Second Vatican Council has apparently created positive results. This approach has resolved some questions that theoretical approaches alone could not have resolved. This is seen from the fact that each local church suggests localized strategies to promote human rights according to the life conditions found in a given place. Some episcopal conferences, however, have accomplished more that others. This is related to the difference in historical background, culture, and sociopolitical and economic organizations. In order to understand more concretely how the issue of human rights has been promoted by local AMECEA churches, I propose to evaluate the impact of the Bishops' Pastoral Letters, occasional statements, and exhortations. This evaluation could be useful if we outline, very briefly, their achievements and weaknesses. The Impact of the Bishops' Pastoral Letters, Occasional Statements, and Exhortations Achievements. Although the "leadership of the Roman Catholic Church has sometimes seemed authoritarian and conservative," there have been important interventions by individual Church leaders as well as episcopal conferences through Pastoral Letters. Many bishops are convinced that denouncing and condemning social evils only is not enough. The Bishops of Kenya, for example, have partially succeeded in delivering a promising teaching on values of democracy, participation and the commitment of the Church in promoting these values. Between 1990 and 1993, the Catholic Bishops of Kenya expressed their desire that there must be an open and frank discussion about how to reform their national constitutions. They advocated a revision of the National Constitution of Kenya because this constitution was composed by a few individuals in ad hoc circumstances without full participation of the masses. Thus, they argued that national constitutions needed to be revised and endorsed by popular consent. These Bishops added that complete revision of the national constitutions must be entrusted to a large constituent body of experienced and competent citizens representing all trends of society and not just to a group of politicians who belong to a particular ethnic group. Most often when Bishops speak out, the reactions from government leaders has been that the Church and the State are separate. Government leaders argue that the Church should confine itself to spiritual matters and stop meddling in politics. A study of the public documents of episcopal conferences of AMECEA countries shows that where the Church has challenged civil authorities, these challenges have been characterized by the concern for the common good of the country and the concern for justice and human rights, and it is these concerns that constitute the Church's relations with the State. Although there has at times been inadequate cooperation with human rights activists, lawyers, unionists, and there has not always been an openness in ecumenical collaboration with other churches, there is no doubt that there is a visible evolution and progress in the social teaching of the AMECEA Bishops especially in issues of human rights and social justice. Weaknesses I s. do not wish to undermine the role of Bishops' Pastoral Letters, but rather discuss some of their weaknesses in order to better understand the entire process -- strengths and weaknesses -- of how the Catholic Church has been trying to address issues of human rights and social justice in AMECEA countries. To begin with, I would like to point out that the question of how the Church promotes human rights in AMECEA countries today is closely related to the formation of the clergy. Generally speaking, the formation of the clergy has been of the pre-Vatican II orientation. They are slow to accept the idea of inculturation because they are afraid that the truth of the Christian faith will be distorted. For them, revelation is communicated by the message revealed by Jesus Christ which is found intact in the scriptures and legitimated by Church authorities. This message should be communicated without further interpretation. As such, African Christians are obliged to identify with this revelation and forget about African cultures and customs if they want to be saved. Apparently, such a conservative approach has also been deliberately reinforced by the western Church as a means of control -- especially in making African theological training centers such as seminaries dependent on the western Church, both academically and financially. That is why most African theologies are merely translations and adaptations of western theologies. Second, it is sometimes difficult to overcome the thinking that the Church must separate itself from public affairs. Some politicians see the Church as a State within a State, rather than an institution that plays the role of forming the moral conscience of society. This attitude persists because little has been done to help people understand a proper relationship between Church and State. Third, Bishops' Pastoral Letters, typically, have little echo among ordinary people because of the language used. The language in which these letters are written is sometimes an obstacle to the spreading of the message. Most of these letters are written in European languages and aimed at elite groups and Church authorities outside the continent. With the exception of a few episcopal conferences, it is rare indeed to see these letters translated into local languages. The question of language reflects a top-down approach in the administration of the Catholic Church. My argument is that if these letters were written in local languages, their message could easily be understood and ultimately create an impact at the level of the parish, SCCs, faith-sharing groups, Christian associations, families, and so forth. Fourth, there is no adequate dialogue and collaboration between the Catholic Church and associations, other churches and religions, and traditional institutions in matters pertaining to human rights, social justice, and development. Fifth, issues of ecumenical and interreligious dialogue have not been taken seriously. This is due to the division, distrust, and an endless competition among churches to acquire followers. Most of them are only interested in numbers. The condition in which these Christians live is not a point of concern at all. My argument is that evangelization cannot be just a matter of handing on the faith in the form of doctrines, liturgical practices, and devotions as it has tended to be in Africa. It must first and foremost be a dialogue between the lives of people and the message of Jesus Christ in such a way that in this message people may find light and strength for their lives. In this respect, Aylward Shorter suggests that dialogue should be primarily experiential. It must involve sharing of life, openness, flexibility, and it must challenge social relationships rather than struggle to conform to a preconceived model which, after all, is outdated. The Church speaks much about the challenge of dialogue, but is often very slow putting this conviction into practice. This situation arises from the fact that the hierarchy tends to be so authoritarian and is hardly open to listening and learning from the people at every level and to accepting a legitimate diversity of viewpoints and approaches on many issues. Consequently, the Church finds the call to dialogue difficult in practice due to the frequent authoritarian actions of its hierarchy and its own interior tensions based on material privileges and ethnic differences. This problem is made evident also from the Church's reluctance to enter into a genuine dialogue of life and action with other churches and other religions especially with Muslims and followers of the African traditional religions. This is what makes bishops' teaching less effective. My conclusion is that if there is no cooperation among religions in promoting human rights, social justice and the common good, Bishops' Pastoral Letters will create an insignificant impact in public sphere. Sixth, on occasions of crisis some episcopal conferences tend to be silent as though there is nothing wrong. And when they react it is sometimes too late. This is not a condemnation, but is a matter for fair examination of conscience. The Church has a mission of teaching Christ's love even in difficult situations. It is true a crisis may be so deep that the Church is not able to act directly such as in the case of recent civil wars. However, in such a situation the Church can play a significant role by appealing to the Christian conscience. Furthermore, the Church should not wait until there is a full-blown civil war. Instead, it should speak about what is going on while the conditions for conflict are still developing, with the awareness that it may in time become too late to prevent open conflict, and the means to act will become severely limited. In collaboration, clergy and the laity should start addressing social problems that cause distrust in society. It is meaningless to emphasize that Jesus Christ came to liberate the human race, including Africans, if concrete problems of social life are not addressed directly from the perspective of gospel values. This is a challenge to Christians who preach Christian love in Africa. My suggestion is that the meaning of evangelization and the whole way of celebrating sacraments in AMECEA countries should be examined. This examination is imperative because primary evangelization today entails putting emphasis on issues of human rights and social justice. Seventh, some religious leaders have rarely been in the forefront of opposition to authoritarian and undemocratic governments because they are integrated into the ruling structure. Some Church leaders prefer a dubious system of working behind the scenes to perform their roles within the Church. My conclusion is that this approach is often used as an "excuse or a means of escape" in the face of sociopolitical and economic injustices. My suggestion concerning the initiative of the AMECEA local churches in addressing the issue of human rights is that they have to be more practical and take the aforementioned weaknesses seriously. This is important because the liberating act of God does not come without human commitment. It is God who takes the initiative, but human beings must cooperate. The emergence of SCCs in AMECEA countries in recent years seems to be a relevant structure that can overcome some of these weaknesses. Before we try to justify this assertion, let us first outline briefly the main reasons which made Bishops of AMECEA opt for SCCs.
The Role of the Small Christian Communities in AMECEA Countries In 1973, the Catholic Bishops of AMECEA proposed that SCCs be given priority in all pastoral activities of the Catholic Church. During their Study Conference in Nairobi, Kenya, they agreed: We are convinced that in these countries of Eastern Africa it is time for the Church to become really "local," that is: self-ministering, self-propagating and self-supporting. Our plan is aimed at building such local Churches for the coming years. We believe that in order to achieve this we have to insist on building Church life and work on basic Christian communities, in both rural and urban areas. Church life must be based on the communities in which everyday life and work takes place: those basic and manageable social groupings whose members can experience real interpersonal relationships and feel a sense of communal belonging, both in living and working. We believe that Christian communities at this level will be best suited to develop real intense vitality and to become effective witness in their natural environment. Later, in July 1976, they held a Plenary Session on building SCCs in Eastern Africa. This meeting evolved from the guidelines they recommended at their 1973 Conference. On this occasion, they stressed that the "systematic formation of small Christian communities should be the key pastoral priority in the years to come within Eastern Africa." AMECEA's decision to promote SCCs coincided with the decision of SECAM (Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar) during the 1974 Synod and during its fourth general assembly in 1975 which made clear option for the SCCs. The Bishops of SECAM declared: The Bishops of Africa and Madagascar emphasize the essential and fundamental role of living Christian communities: priests, religious and laity united in mind and action with their Bishops. It is the clear task of these communities rooted and integrated as they are in the lives of their peoples, to search deeper into the gospel, to set the priorities of pastoral planning and activity, to take the initiative called for by the mission of the Church, to discern, in a spirit of faith where there can be continuity between culture and Christian life and where cleavage is necessary in all aspects of life that hinder the penetration of the Gospel. The resolutions of the 1975 SECAM Plenary Assembly endorsed the decisions of the previous year. Again, during the 1994 African Synod, this same idea of adopting the SCC-model for evangelization in Africa was reaffirmed. The AMECEA Bishops opted for SCCs for six reasons: first, to ensure that people could practice their Christian faith in the places where they work and live in small groups; second, to overcome anonymity in big cities and large parish congregations; third, to bring about a greater lay participation; fourth, to inculturate the Christian faith in Africa, fifth, to create a cooperation among Christians and non-Christians by promoting traditional values of solidarity and mutual trust; and six, to carry out a "transition from a paternalistic Church for the people to a mature Church of the people by overriding a top-down model." As such, Christianity should be a religion which extends to all sectors of human life. It is true that SCCs have not yet become a means that can bring about social transformation, communion, localization, inculturation, and liberation. Despite these weaknesses, I am convinced that the organization of SCCs reflects a bright future in AMECEA countries. What is positive about SCCs is that they take into consideration African traditional values such as participation and mutual support at the grassroots level, the situation of the poor, and liberation of the oppressive social structures. The initiative of the Bishops of AMECEA to promote SCCs shows that the Catholic Church is about to take seriously issues of human rights and social justice in its mission. The Relevancy of the Model Rediscovered by SCCs in Promoting Human Rights The aim of this section is to argue that if the approach of SCCs is strengthened, it can be a relevant model for promoting human rights in contemporary Africa. I shall focus on the approaches adopted by SCCs: to stress the role of the Church in exploiting the African traditional value of participation in the grassroots communities, conscientization, and education. SCCs promote integral development. It is not enough to recognize and respect human rights in theory. Rather one must try to provide means for their fulfillment. As such, the Church has to deal not only with the root causes of the crisis of human rights, but also concentrate on establishing concrete conditions that can guarantee the realization of human rights. Since the Church has to be involved in the realities of the world in order to bear witness to the values of the gospel, an engagement in "analyzing the life situation and [drawing] principles of reflection, norms of judgement, and directives for action from social teaching of the Church" is inevitable. Such an engagement enables the Church to point out social evils such as corruption, abuse of power, exploitation, and so on. By so doing, the Church becomes the conscience of society for it resists any kind of authority that does not promote the common good. The SCC-model is attempting to put into practice the teaching of the Second Vatican Council. SCCs use Christian symbols in an authentic African form to illuminate the contemporary African experience and stimulate Christian behavior that is truly African. The need for cultural as well as sociopolitical, and economic liberation marks the origin of SCCs as a pastoral priority. In other words, SCCs are organized from the perspective of the African Christian experience, and the appreciation of community as having deep roots in the African cultural heritage. Furthermore, the relatively small size of SCCs enables members to relate to one another easily. Pastoral experience has often shown that the bigger the number, the more passive members are. Through small groups, the SCC-model challenges the individual not only to confront the changing world around himself or herself, but also to assume a sense of total commitment to the religious ideals and involvement in transforming social structures. This approach is facilitated by the fact that SCCs aim at forming groups of Christians who live in social proximity that enable them to know each other well. On this point Joseph Healey argues, SCCs can help to overcome the anonymity, alienation and mistrust in our big cities. . . . SCCs are the most fundamental means for mobilizing people to discover community and life of the Spirit, thereby overcoming urban isolation and alienation, to deepen their faith, reach out to those in need and analyze local problems with reference to their broader causes and consequences. Christian communities trust their own internal dynamics, make full use of community, and appeal to this new way of being the Church through SCCs, which Leonardo Boff calls "the reinvention of the Church." SCCs enable the members to experience the common faith, communion, and hope in addressing social problems in the light of gospel values. The SCCs function in a way that enables their participants to realize that they have an intrinsic worth, that they are able to reorder social structures, and that they have the support of others. It is from this perspective that the poor are empowered to speak and act in view of changing their life situation. The effort to encourage participation at the grassroots level is not limited to the Catholic Church. Rather, it is open to everybody. What this approach brings into light is that advocates of human rights from different spheres need to come together for an exchange of ideas. For instance, if we are addressing the issue of the rights of children, those who are familiar with these issues could enlighten others. The history of ecclesial renewal, for instance, has demonstrated that the Church has been able to look courageously inside itself and to find the strength for renewal when she felt the need to be more responsible in reforming its own structures of evangelization. When problems are analyzed and seen in a different light, the Church is helped to re-shape its priorities, activities, and share its experience with other institutions in view of promoting the sense of common good. Participation and empowerment of the grassroots communities. The SCC-model is a dynamic force of conscientization, participation and empowerment at the grassroots level. By practicing their own skills, people develop a character which sustains their personal identity and integrity. They build a history which they can claim as their own and from which they have the power to resist whatever the "predatory elite" would impose upon them. More important, the process of empowerment ensures that they have the power to choose actions which are consistent with who they are. In this way, they are empowered to participate in shaping the community in which they live. Consequently, an empowered community gives people an ongoing history and language within which they can locate, describe, understand, and put into practice their own decisions. The power of the moral agent in such a community becomes a social skill learned within the history of the community in which people find themselves. SCCs establish at the grassroots a practical contact with human situations. It is through SCCs that the knowledge of needs, problems, and expectations of the people is made possible. According to Julio Labayen, basic Christian communities reveal a new function in community and a new shape of the Church, that is alive to the world today -- a Church that seeks to know better, in order to respond more appropriately to the needs of the people today. A Church that listens intently to the cry of the poor, in order that it may not only announce, but also become to them the Good news of liberation and salvation. SCCs strive to assist people in their particular problems. They become real extended families that integrate and involve everybody in social transformation. Through SCCs, people feel they are in solidarity with their brothers and sisters in need. From this perspective, we can argue that SCCs are a place of dialogue, cooperation, and empowerment of the poor people. Likewise, Aloisio Lorcheider argues that these communities are a means whereby the faithful transmit the evangelical message to one another. In this way, SCCs become a force for the transformation of the way of life of a people. Everybody is drawn into community with God and with one another in deep relationships at the grassroots level. SCCs are a powerful instrument of liberating humankind from evil and leading them by prayer and action to the transforming grace of Christ. This is done by being a dynamic force of conscientization, creating new consciousness and social relationships, and encouraging participation of the laity in the activities of evangelization. Unity of all members, sharing of their responsibilities and cooperation with each other will change social relationships. Prayer, reflection on reality and praxis, discernment, decision and action are main events in basic Christian communities. This is done by an analysis of the reality, confrontation of the reality with the word of God, planning of action, and evaluation. This means people live their faith in the concrete struggles of life and participate in promoting collective responses for the sake of the common good. This participation becomes actuated when human relationships respect human dignity, mutual relationships, human freedom, reconciliation, and mutual responsibility. Conscientization and education. "Sensitization of consciences to uncover injustices, collective or individual action by Christians, must constitute the obligatory stages of a true pastoral policy to promote the fundamental rights of the human person." Sensitization of human conscience goes together with education. Education involves inspiring Christians to take practical initiatives in the field of human rights that SCCs find effective in their pastoral activity. This initiative could be facilitated by encouraging the faithful to attend forums and seminars on human rights as a way of widening the horizon of the activities of SCCs. This is important because "human rights cannot be just an object purely theoretical teaching without any relation to the conditions in which they may be realized. They must be put squarely in the actual context and dynamics of the society in which the person lives." The promotion of human rights must give people a chance to reflect seriously on the most urgent problems and their fundamental causes. In doing so, SCCs can move from being prayer groups to faith and experience-sharing groups in view of transforming public conscience. The purpose of this education is to make Christians ever more conscious of the dignity of the human person. This awareness aims at implanting and bringing to flower the will to respect fundamental rights in every moment of daily life. Through continuous education, Christians are encouraged "to live their lives in its entire reality and in accord with the evangelical principles of personal and social morality which are expressed in the vital Christian witness of one's life." All this emphasizes a continuous growing awareness of a special Christian vocation in social issues, responsibility, and dedication to the achievement of the common good. Education for life in society involves not only information on each one's rights, but also their practical commitment to recognize these rights in ordinary life by accepting the relationship between rights, duties and limitations in the exercise of personal and social freedom. This kind of education aims at forming the human person with respect to community, mutual responsibility, and the common good. Conclusion This paper has attempted to demonstrate the relevancy of the SCC-model in promoting human rights in AMECEA countries. This discussion revealed that there is a need to go beyond the customary morality which assumes that things must be done the way they have always been done. The call for cooperation between SCCs and associations in promoting human rights showed that we need a reflective morality which emerges from participation, engagement, empowerment, and freedom of choice. This approach requires questioning existing institutions and customs from the point of view of experience. Reflective morality, unlike customary morality, involves questioning one's behaviour and evaluating the existing social institutions, recognizing one's culture, context, and life-style. From this perspective, SCC-model hold forth the possibility of guiding people morally to challenge oppressive social structures. However, there are a few things that must be done in order to remain faithful to the original idea of creating small Christian communities. Those things include the transformation of the formation programmes of the clergy and formation of the laity in view of having creative agents who are able to guide SCCs. This effort must also find a way to overcome the conservative mentality and clericalism, encourage the laity to participate fully in the process of building SCCs, and establish localized publications destined to promote SCCs. Adminstratively, the fundamental conflict lies with the inherited parish structures. The problem arises from the fact that both AMECEA and SECAM have not defined the relationship between the organization of SCCs and centralized authority of the parish. Worse still, most parishes function with a pre-Vatican II model of evangelization, a model that stands in opposition to the SCC-model.
|