Dear Editor,
I have stayed away and silent, until now, from the expressions on the church in local society. My thoughts follow.
The Christian Church is a constituency of multitudes; its leader is a figure who was fearless, outspoken, iconoclastic, revolutionary. Examine the Gospel record, and Jesus’s words are uncompromising, and consistently about the people, the downtrodden, afflicted people. In today’s politically correct times, his piercing words would be labelled intemperate and confrontational. But he set precedents in word and action for his church and its shepherds to imitate. The church is always special when it separates itself and stands against wrongdoing, the tyrannical and the diabolical, wherever such may be present; it imitates its Master. It does so when it is in the forefront of any struggle for social justice and equity. This is more than a programme of action, it is a holy mandate.
It is this belief, this kind of heartfelt commitment to a special way of life that made a martyr of Thomas Beckett from the blades of Henry II; that compelled Sir Thomas More to lose his head before Henry VIII over the complicated matter of a divorce; and drove Pope John Paul II in his stand against the communist evil. Similarly, Martin and Mohandas ignored the dictates of personal safety and tacit endorsement through silence to take a faith-based stand in the socio-political resistance of their times and peoples against oppression, against enslavement. There are many others, but these men lived conscience and faith in personal stands of integrity and an ethos that transcends the ugliness of their times and circumstances.
What sprouts from the ecclesiastical tree here in Guyana? Sadly, the examples are of identification with the political Sanhedrin and ruling Romans very present here; of open endorsement and public partnership; and of silent condoning, which is even more treacherous. In fact, there is a conspiracy of silence because personal and vested interests are served, hence wilful negligence and deliberate distance from the cries and despair of the peoples. It is deemed more progressive, more prosperous, and more sagacious to live on the knees, than to advance upright. It is far safer. When the church should be working for the common good, it is more concerned with its own good. Was this the way of the Master?
Instead of the church influencing events, it has become a reflection of what is awash on the outside. Ask the faithful and there it is: the suppression of contrarian views, censorship of truth, the perpetuation of mediocrity. And there is the comfort of encirclement in an embedded cast of fawning ‘yes’ people. All is well; no need to worry.
Thus, when ignominy piles upon obscenity, bringing great injury through even greater adversity, there is only the passivity of obscurity. This is the church in Guyana today, it brings peace, it affords continuity. It does so at the expense of the suffering multitudes. It is not Christ’s way.
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall
