The Genocide in Rwanda

&
Religion
See also Timothy Longman, “Christian
Churches and Genocide in Rwanda” and
Charles de Lespinay, “The Churches and
the Genocide in the East African Lakes
Region” in…
Longman, de Espinay, and others lay some
responsibility for the genocide on the
Catholic missionaries of the colonial period
who first supported the Hutu as the “elite”
and then switched to the Tutsi:

“While never publicly endorsing genocide,

the churches nevertheless are complicit
because they helped to create and maintain
the authoritarian and divided society that
made genocide possible and because the
entanglement of the churches with the state
made the churches partners in state policy.”
(157) [Is this a valid conclusion?]
Prior to 1956, seminary training of Tutsi was said
to include an elitist ideology that “the Tutsi
belonged to a superior race that excluded the Hutu
(de Espinay: 166). This, of course, caused
resentment by the Hutu.

In 1956 the first native Rwandese Archbishop

withdrew support for the Tutsi aristocracy and
began favoring the Hutu. Thus, the Tutsi now
became the “inferior.” (de Espinay: 167). He was
supported in this by the
European missionaries.
62% Roman Catholic
18% Protestant
8% 7th Day Adventist
4% Muslim
Numerous example of clergy who turned
people over to be killed. In several cases
they helped locate parishioners who were
hiding. In one incident in May, a Catholic
archbishop turned over to a death squad a
number of Tutsi nuns and priests who were
gathering in the cathedral (Longman: 156).
In several cases clergy participated in death
squads:
Rwanda genocide priest gets 23 years
Arusha - The UN tribunal trying the
masterminds of the 1994 Rwandan
genocide on Wednesday cut on appeal
the sentence of a Catholic priest to 23
years from 25.

Emmanuel Rukundo,
a former army chaplain, was
sentenced last year for
genocide, sexual assault
and kidnapping during
the killings in Rwanda
Numerous Tutsi priests, pastors, brothers,
and nuns were killed often by their own
parishioners and even their own fellow
clergy. (156)
According to some estimates, more people
were killed in church buildings than
anywhere else. The victims were apparently
seeking the ancient privilege of “sanctuary.”

At one parish, 17,000 bodies were recovered

from one set of latrines alongside the
church. (156)
Some of the perpetrators claimed that God
was on their side. (de Espinay 160) Some
actually paused in the process of killing to
pray at the altar of the church. Hutu priests
reported how perpetrators demanded that
they say mass for them and then they went
out to kill. (157)
Others, like Jean-Baptiste, “knew
that God was not on our side.”
(handout 137) or Leopold who
said “we didn’t even care about
the presence of God.” (138)
“In response to the genocide, church
hierarchies remained mostly silent. This
seems especially egregious in the failure to
condemn the violation of sanctuary.
Catholic and Protestant leaders signed a
joint letter for an end to massacres yet failed
to condemn them or characterize them as
genocides.” (157)
Some individual members of the religious community
attempted to protect civilians, sometimes at great risk to
themselves.
For example, Monsignor Thaddee Ntihinyurwa of
Cyangugu preached against the genocide from the pulpit
and tried unsuccessfully to rescue three Tutsi religious
brothers from an attack, while Sr. Felicitas Niyitegeka of
the Auxiliares de ‘’Apostolat in Gisenyi smuggled Tutsi
across the border into Zaire, until she was executed by a
militant militia in retaliation. In her book Left to Tell:
Discovering God in the Rwandan Holocaust (2006),
Immaculee Ilibagiza, a Tutsi woman, describes hiding with
seven other Tutsi women for 91 days in a bathroom in the
house of Pastor Murinzi - for the majority of the genocide.
At the St Paul Pastoral Centre in Kigali, about 2,000
people found refuge and most of them survived, due to the
efforts of Fr Celestin Hakizimana. This priest 'intervened at
every attempt by the militia to abduct or murder' the
refugees in his centre. In the face of powerful opposition,
he tried to hold off the killers with persuasion or bribes
Father Vjeko Curic, Bosnian Franciscan
“The African Oskar Schindler”
(1957-1997)
Remember, unlike most loves agape
does not require feeling. All that talk that
you heard in the film from various officials
about how bad they “felt” but true agape
requires action and not simply feelings.

As that ad for the MJHS health care agency

says:

“Caring is not just what you

feel, but what you do.”
 Theologically, they may have been “freed
from the power of sin” to love their
neighbors that is associated with love of
God (“Two Great Commandments”) and
specified in AGAPE: the sometimes painful,
sometimes unemotional taking care of the
needs of the loved one….
…an obligation expressed in various other
ways in various religions:

“…my brother’s keeper”

(Genesis 4:9)
The Fate of Faith
 1.
As in the Holocaust, some Rwandans thought
their ordeal was test of their faith, which is a
theme also found in the book of JOB.
(Brenner 206)

While one might defend the

idea of a test of faith to some
degree, many think that the
death of people is too extreme
a test.

19
20
 Theodicy Reminder:
Beware of “One Size Fits All”

“Individualized / Synthetic Approach”

Implied in the judgement against the

three friends of Job who saw all
suffering as punishment from God

And remember: Job never learns the reason why he

suffered
 2.

Vicarious or Redemptive Suffering

Some Rwandans did not bother with theoretical

theodicy but, rather, as part of practical theodicy
believed that one important way is to accept it and
“offer it up” as a sacrifice to God in the hope that
it might somehow save others from suffering.

One biblical basis for this is the “Suffering

Servant” of Isaiah 53:
22
23
24
25
“I am glad when I suffer for you
in my body, for I am
participating in the sufferings of
Christ that continue for his
body, the church”

- Colossians 1:34
And this is why Christian Churches display
crosses and crucifixes so often…to remind
Christians that they also will have to suffer
Along with him for others
 3.
Relying on the Grace of God for Strength to
Endure the Suffering

again, very practical, and also reflected in

the Christian tradition. As Paul writes: “join
with me in suffering…relying on the power
of God” (2 Timothy 3:8)
or …

28
But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient
for you, for my power is made perfect in
weakness." Therefore I will boast all the
more gladly about my weaknesses, so
that Christ's power may rest on me.

- 2 Corinthians 12: 9
 4.
We saw previously that some Armenians
refused to blame God, insisting that the
blame fell solely on the Turks who acted
of their own free will.

To this “free will defense” (FWD), others

insist that God either should not have
created humans free or should stop
people from acting this way if such
suffering is the price of free will. 30
We also saw that Elie Wiesel thought that all
the freedom in the world is not worth the
price of one dead baby. What’s so important
about freedom?

31
(1928- )
One response to this is that freedom is important
not so much for itself as because it is a condition
for the possibility of love. For God to not have
given people freedom or to interfere with it, would
be to eliminate the possibility of love is the basis
of the “Two Great Commandments” and the very
essence of God. Again, is love worth the price of
one dead baby?

32
 5.
Kenotic Theology

Fr. Curic and some Rwandans felt that

God himself was suffering along with
his people, while attempting to support
and comfort them with grace. (Brenner:
217, 232)
Rabbi Kalman Klonymus Shapira who died
in the Warsaw Ghetto thought that the
“suffering of the Jews was the suffering of
God himself.” (195)

1889 - 1943

34
The notion that God could suffer is
difficult for some religious people who
believe that as an omnipotent and
perfect being God cannot suffer.

The idea that a perfect God cannot

suffer is impassibility which was
essentially an idea derived from
ancient Greek philosophy
35
However, there are clear indications in both
Jewish and Christian scriptures that God
can suffer with and for His people.

The Christian tradition gives us the term

“kenotic” which in Greek means “to empty”
and is found in the key passage in Paul’s
letter to the Philippians (2:6-7):

36
37
But theologians, basing themselves on
such passages of scripture, argue that
omnipotence can mean that God can
choose to limit or “bind” God’s self...
39
Let’s see this Kenotic theology is reflected
in the words of Elie Wiesel (previous
handout “Prayer in the Days of Awe”) and
the excerpts from the perpetrators of the
Genocide in Rwanda posted on Blackboard.
Have you ever let a child win a game you
could easily crush?

Why?

Love ?
 6.

We already saw in connection with the

Holocaust the idea that God can bring good out of
evil. This principle was also held by the great (St.)
Augustine of Hippo (354-430). Perhaps his most
famous application of this was the idea of the
“Original Sin” of humans as “Felix Culpa” (from
the Latin meaning “Happy Fault”).

It was “Happy” in the sense that because of it God

became human (dogma of the Incarnation) to
“save” humans – a good and beautiful idea.
The idea that God can bring good out of evil
is, however, not necessarily a Christian
idea.

As already mentioned, some Jews could

consider the establishment of the State of
Israel in 1948 after 2,000 years of diaspora
(“scattering”) an application of this idea.
Ironically, even the great atheist philosopher
Friedrich (“God is dead!” and the
“Ubermensch” distorted by the Nazis)
Nietzsche held a similar principle (without
God): that even what we call great evils can
result in great goods.

(1844-1900)
applying this to the Rwandan and Balkan
genocides” they might be seen as pushing
the world to actually “do something” about
genocide instead of simply talking about it,
for example, establishing the International
Criminal Court in 2001.
 7.

Relying on the Grace of God for Strength to

Endure the Suffering

again, very practical, and also reflected in

the Christian tradition. As Paul writes: “join
with me in suffering…relying on the power
of God” (2 Timothy 3:8)

46
 8.
God is Good But Not Omnipotent

Some solve the problem of evil by

suggesting that God is not all-powerful. This
does conceptually preserve the absolute
goodness of God but opens itself up to the
objection that goes back to the days of
ancient Greece that such a God would be
“feeble” and not worth worshipping. Or as
Bauer puts it: “If God is weak, who needs
him?” (191)(Brenner: 222,)
This was the position of Rabbi Irving
Greenberg who believed that God needs
humans to help heal the brokenness of the
world and bring goodness into it. (191)

Any form of
“Process Theology”
holds essentially the
same idea that God is
not omnipotent. If God
is “in process,” then God
1933 -
is not complete.
This also seems to be the position of the
popular book by Rabbi Harold Kushner:

“Don’t blame God for

the bad things. He didn’t
cause them and he can’t
do anything about them…”
(110)

1935 -
How in 2012 Kushner published a book in
which he changed his position. He admitted
that his previous book had impugned the
omnipotence of God by saying God couldn’t
do anything about evil. He now rejected that
position and believed that God
cannot prevent evil in the sense
that he limits his own power for
his own purposes, including
making love possible through
free will (in other words, he
assumed a Kenotic Theology).
 9.
As we saw in the case of Armenia, some
took comfort in the belief that they and their
loved ones would be with God in whom
they would find their highest
happiness.ofort in the idea of life
after death

…which – again – some cynics would see

as cheap comfort 51
In fancy theological language, this is called
“eschatological comfort”

“Eschatology” (from the Greek meaning

“last things” refers to the final and ultimate
destiny of human beings, including such
“last things” as death, judgment, the
afterlife and the end of the world.
Yet others believed and believe in
“apocalyptic comfort:” the belief that in the
end [of the world as we know it] God
himself will bring about a final triumph of
good over evil and establish a “new heaven
and a new earth” (Revelation 21: 1) where
“He will wipe away all tears from their face;
there will be no more death, and no more
mourning or sadness.” (21: 4)
(“Apocalypse” refers to a dramatic and
usually violent end of the world, deriving
from the last book of the Christian
scriptures by that name which actually
means “revelation” which speaks about
such things)
AFTERMATH
So do you think about all that talk in the film
about the perpetrators being “evil”?
(Attribution error?)
According to most religions the actions
were undoubtedly evil because….

they were egregious violations of the “Two

Great Commandments” (however much
individuals in those traditions may have
violated them throughout history, including
in the genocides we have studied).

…and one may well argue that anyone who

did such evil deeds are deep down evil
people.
Many Religions insist that ultimately it is
only God who can judge the heart and that
God may still love such grievous sinners
“despite their sin” and forgive them, even if
some sort of “punishment” is
required out of justice for the
victims (Should a forgiven
Hitler go straight to heaven?).
 Should the perpetrators be forgiven?
Who should or can forgive…and why?
Can descendants apologize and ask or give
forgiveness?
For some religions punishment is
not inconsistent with forgiveness….

Have you decided on this

question?
The Catholic Church teaches a state of
existence known as purgatory in which a
person is gradually “purged” or purified of
the effects of their sin before attaining a
complete union with God.

Purgatory seems to provide

a nice balance between
justice and mercy.

(Some also think it could provide

a correlate with the notion of reincarnation)
And what do you think about the “Truth and
Reconciliation Commissions” that were set
up in South Africa after the end of apartheid
where perpetrators were promised immunity
if they told the whole truth about their
crimes.
And what is your answer to Wilkins’s
question: “Is it wrong to negotiate with the
devil in order to save lives?

As General Romeo Dallaire

put it: is it morally acceptable
to "shake hand with the Devil“
in order to save lives? A
Utilitarian (consequentialist)
probably would say it is.
And for the last time, why is it that some
exposed to those same social conditioning
processes as the perpetrators or bystanders
instead became resisters and rescuers?
Is it possible that one of the reasons might be…

Carl Wilkins
ADRA

whose power helped them to break free of the

albeit also powerful conditioning factors to know
the good and have the strength to do it?
Finally, does the UN resolution 1973
approved on 17 March 2011 authorizing
military action against the Libyan
government to protect innocent civilians or
the 2013 resolution about Syria’s chemical
weapons represent turning points in the
world’s reluctance to violation “national
sovereignty” to prevent or stop genocide?
We shall see.

65