更多資料：
卢旺达种族灭绝与当地教会所扮演的角色
RwandaGenocide and the role of the Church in Rwanda
What exactly was the role of the Catholic Church in the Rwandan
十多年前非洲卢旺达发生了严重的种族屠杀事件，死了近百万人。值得注意的是，卢安达是非洲基督徒比例最高的国家，一向是非洲宣教的典范。其中天主教徒与基督教徒各超过40%，全国有将近九成是基督徒（广义上）。然而在这样的国家居然发生了种族屠杀，真是令人难以置信。事件过后，一些宣教机构开会检讨时，有人就说：“在非洲，基督教好像一条宽达数公里的河流，但却只有几公分深。”
卢旺达大屠杀中，天主教(Catholic church)信徒为虎作伥，这部分解答了我的疑问。参与屠杀的人中就有天主教的牧师。“我亲眼目睹宗教犯错误，瞧瞧天主教会在卢旺达都干了些什么，这些事至今让我心神不宁国。”
——卢旺达现任总统卡加梅
在20世纪的后期，在一个80%是基督徒（天主教徒或者新教教徒）的非洲国家，发生了令人发指的种族大屠杀。这让人们不得不回忆起20世纪早期发生在基督教德国的法西斯。并问这麽一个问题：为什麽？
这篇下面文章对此有所反思：
Rwanda
Genocide and the role of the Church in Rwanda
http://www.newsfromafrica.org/articles/art_10231.html
genocide? NDAHIRO TOM, a Rwandan human rights commissioner, paints a picture of deep historical and political complicity and calls for the Church to restore its credibility by contributing to the process of justice.
16 April 2005 - Ndahiro Tom (A Commissioner of Human Rights in Rwanda.)
Source: PAMBAZUKA
http://www.pambazuka.org/
Why do they eat my people as they eat bread? (Psalm 14)
All over Rwandan hills, valleys and mountains, thousands of crosses
mark mass graves of genocide victims of 1994. During the genocide, many
Tutsis were massacred in or around places of worship, including Catholic churches – paradoxically, in a country which was the most Christianised in Africa, with Christians representing more than 80% of the population. Catholic bishops in Rwanda have sometimes claimed that all Rwandans believe in God. (Kinyamateka, No. 1614, January 2003, pg. 6) There are hundreds of churches and chapels everywhere and almost every day followers repeatedly recite the prayer, “Our Father who art in heaven”, pleading with the Father to deliver them from evil (Matthew 6:13). From where, then, did the malevolence at the root of the genocide come? How and by whom could it have been overcome? Part of the answer to these questions is the Church and its members.
According to Jean-Pierre Karegeye, a Jesuit priest, genocide is morally hideous, an evil expressed in forgetting God, and hence a new form of atheism. Karegeye asks several pertinent questions which merit consideration: “Christians killing other Christians? How could Rwandan
Christians who manifested commitment to their faith have acted with
such intense cruelty? How did ordinary people come to commit extraordinary evil…? Does the sin of genocide disturb the relationship between God and the perpetrators in official Catholic Church discourse? How can we explain the strange situation of priests involved in the crimes of genocide who are still running parishes in Western countries? Why are they protected by the Vatican against any legal proceedings?” He concludes: “The Church’s attitude towards genocide seems to suggest that the hierarchy of religious values is not usually in proportion to the hierarchy of moral standards.”
Generally, in Rwanda, the leadership of the Christian churches, especially that of the Catholic Church, played a central role in the creation and furtherance of racist ideology. They fostered a system which Europeans introduced and they encouraged. The building blocks of this ideology were numerous, but one can mention a few – first, the racist vision of Rwandan society that the missionaries and colonialists imposed by developing the thesis about which groups came first and last to populate the country (the Hamitic and Bantu myths); second, by rigidly controlling historical and anthropological research; third, by reconfiguring Rwandan society through the manipulation of ethnic identities (from their vague socio-political nature in the pre-colonial period, these identities gradually became racial). From the late 1950s, some concepts became distorted: thus democracy became numerical
democracy or demographic.
The philosophy of ‘rubanda nyamwinshi’ a Kinyarwanda expression, which
politically came to mean ‘the Hutu majority’, prevailed after the so-called social revolution of 1959 ignored the basic tenets of democracy. In my view, recurrent genocides in Rwanda since 1959 were meant to maintain the ‘Hutu majority’ in power, by killing the Tutsi. Distributive justice became equivalent to regional and ethnic quotas; and revolution came to mean legitimised genocide of the Tutsis.
Church authorities contributed to the spread of racist theories mainly
through the schools and seminaries over which they exercised control. The elite who ruled the country after independence trained in these schools. According to Church historian Paul Rutayisire, the stereotypes used by the Hutu-dominated Rwandan government to dehumanise Tutsis, were also spread by some influential clergymen, bishops and priests, before and after the genocide. The Catholic Church and colonial powers orked together in organizing racist political groups like the Party for the Emancipation of the Hutu (Parmehutu).
Mouvement Révolutionnaire National pour le Dévelopment (MRND) was the
party which in the mid-1970s had introduced and institutionalised policies of racial discrimination which they termed “équilibre éthnique et régional” (ethnic and regional equilibrium, a quota system). The Church fully supported the quota system, but on 30 April 1990, five Catholic priests from Nyundo diocese broke the silence. In a letter to the Church’s bishops in Rwanda, they called the quota system ‘racist’ and urged that it was high time “the Church of Jesus Christ established in Rwanda proclaimed aloud and tirelessly” to denounce it, since it constituted “an aberration” within their Church. They maintained that the only sure justice in schools and employment was the one which only took account of individual capacities, regardless of people's origins, and that it was on this condition that the country could have citizens capable of leading it with competence and equity.
In conclusion, they said: “The Church should not be the vassal of the scular powers, but it should be free to speak with sincerity and courage when it proves necessary.” The authors of this letter were Fr.Augustin Ntagara, Fr. Callixte Kalisa, Fr. Aloys Nzaramba, Fr. Jean Baptiste Hategeka, and Fr. Fabien Rwakareke. All but the last two were killed during the genocide.
Within the Catholic Church, this discriminatory policy had long been in the seminaries. According to Fr. Jean Ndolimana, the enrolment of Tutsis in the Nyundo diocese was limited to 4%. On the school card, very seminarian had to indicate his father’s ethnic group. Instead of condemning those who were against the racist system, instead of playing an important role in institutionalising injustice by convincing their congregants to accept a morally reprehensible policy, Church leaders should have spoken out against racist discrimination. Regrettably the Church took the side of the political regimes, and thus was unable to exercise its prophetic role. It did not denounce political and social injustices, nor did it condemn the first mass killings, nor those which followed.
It is difficult to describe the position taken by the institutional Church just before and during the genocide. It is appropriate to take note of a declaration made by some “Christians” who met in London in June 1996: “The church is sick. The historical roots of this sickness lie in part with the “mother churches”. She is facing the most serious crisis in her history. The church has failed in her mission, and lost her credibility, particularly since the genocide. She needs to repent before God and Rwandan society, and seek healing from God.” This diagnosis offers a good summary of the situation. The Church lacks a sense of remorse and therefore cannot repent; hence its active involvement, in my view, is the last stage of genocide – denial.
Twenty-nine Rwandan Catholic priests, from Goma, Zaire, wrote a letter to the Pope in August 1994, demanding that the Rwandan government hould allow all refugees home and then hold a referendum to determine the country’s political future. The authors of this letter had no good programme for the country. All they wanted was to hold in contempt the Pope’s acknowledgment of the genocide. As early as 15 May 1994, the Pope had declared that the massacres in Rwanda were indeed genocide.
The priests wrote to the Pope: “Everybody knows, except those who do not wish to know or understand it, that the massacres which took place in Rwanda are the result of the provocation of the Rwandese people by the RPF.” These priests, contaminated by the genocidal ideology, placed His Holiness the Pope in the category of “those who did not wish to know,” to cover up their own shortcomings and those of the government they served.
Accepting failure is a virtue. Even so, it is difficult for institutions like the Catholic Church that are known to command respect world wide – above all when such institutions, have been party to policies of racial iscrimination and genocide. The Church decided to adopt silence and slander as defence mechanisms. The question is why the Vatican has accepted or tolerated such tendencies.
The call for remorse and repentance still seems unnecessary and roblematical for the Catholic Church. In March 1996, Pope John Paul II told the Rwandan people, “The Church... cannot be held responsible for the guilt of its members that have acted against the evangelic law; they will be called to render account of their own actions. All Church members that have sinned during the genocide must have the courage to assume the consequences of their deeds they have done against God and fellow men.”
Had this been accepted and done, it would have helped to end a culture of impunity that has characterised Rwanda for more than thirty-five years. This could have been an established warning to anyone who harboured the archaic racist ideology. It could have acted as a deterrent to foreign mentors, warning that continuation of such politics contravenes the principle of natural justice and is liable to be punished by law. Thirdly, it offers the only premises on which durable reconciliation; rehabilitation and reconstruction could take place or be cemented.
I chose to write about the Catholic Church and the genocide in Rwanda because I would argue it was the only institution involved in all the stages of genocide. As a layperson, it is astounding to hear about the “love, truth and trust” that the Church has achieved in a country where genocide took more than a million lives in just a hundred days, and to see the institutional Church protecting, instead of punishing, or at least denouncing those among its leadership or in its membership who are accused of genocide.
There is no doubt that throughout the history of Rwanda, Church leaders have had ties with political power. The Church was also involved in the policy of ethnic division, which degenerated into ethnic hatred. In order to succeed in its mission of uniting people, the Church in Rwanda and elsewhere must examine its attitudes, practices, and policies that have too often encouraged ethnic
divisions.
Church leadership should both be on the side of and be perceived to be
on the side of justice and the victims of injustice rather than on the
side of genocide perpetrators and deniers. The Church must remember
what Dietrich Bonhoeffer said in his April 1933 essay, “The Church and
the Jewish Question”.
As he wrote, one way in which Churches could fight political injustices was to question state injustices and call the state to responsibility; another was to help the victims of injustice, whether they were church members or not. To bring an end to the machinery of injustice, he said, the Church was obliged not only to help the victims who had fallen under the wheel, but also to fall into the spokes of the wheel itself.
Since justice is an unavoidable integral element of the process of
reconciliation, the Church should be among those asking that the perpetrators of genocide be brought to justice. If the Church contributes to the process of justice, unity can be re-established among Rwandans, in general, and among Christians, in particular. It is the only way that the Church can restore its credibility, and thus be what it is called to be: a witness to faith, hope and love, to truth and justice. Only in this way will the Catholic Church in Rwanda be able to help save the people of Rwanda –all the people - from future suffering and bloodshed.
附文：基督教会的罪行
转载本文只是尊重历史，并不完全同意文章内容
http://www.tianyayidu.com/article-299056-14.html
卢旺达大屠杀1994年，非洲小国卢旺达几个月之内就有数十万平民被残杀，看上去这是一场胡图族和图西族的冲突。一直听说有天主教徒神职人员参与大屠杀的传言，在天主教会成员正式被指控参与屠杀之前，教会刊物就开始莫名其妙地辟谣。但是，1996年10月10日，对天主教谈不上有什么批评态度的电台 S2 在12点新闻节目播出了如下新闻：不论是圣公会的神职人员还是、而且主要是天主教的神父和修女，被指责积极参与了谋杀。特别是一个天主教神职人员的行为不仅仅在卢旺达首都基加里的新闻界成为持续了几个月的话题。他是“神圣家庭”教会的心灵抚慰者，被指控以最残暴的方式杀害了图西人。有目击者提供证词说，这位神职人员腰别手枪伴随了暴乱的胡图民兵，证人的证词未得到反驳。事实上，他所在的教会发生了对到教堂寻求庇护的图西人的屠杀。即使在两年后的今天，基加利还有许多天主教徒因为认为部分神父参与了大屠杀而不愿意再进教堂。在整个卢旺达，几乎没有一家教堂没发生寻求庇护的人——妇女、儿童、老年人——在十字架前被残酷屠杀的事情。有目击者证实，神职人员泄漏了图西人的藏身地，把他们交给了胡图民兵的长刀。现在，也有强有力的证据表明，有天主教的修女显然也在卢旺达种族屠杀期间欠下了重债。在这方面，反复被提到的是两个本笃会修女。为逃避卢旺达司法机关的追究，她们已经逃入一个比利时修女院。据不同证人一致的证词，其中一位修女招来胡图凶手，把他们引向藏在自己修女院的数千名难民，随后难民们被强行赶出修女院，直接在修女院门口在修女的注视下被屠杀。另一位本笃会修女也直接与图西民兵的杀手合作。据目击者的证词，后一位修女也冷酷地看着受害者被屠杀而毫无反应，甚至有证人指责她为杀手们提供了煤油，凶手们随后用煤油活活烧死受害者。[S2]这一新闻显然还有一段序曲。BBC 报道：Priests get death sentence for Rwandan genocideBBC NEWS April 19, 1998A court in Rwanda has sentenced two Roman Catholic priests to deathfor their role in the genocide of 1994, in which up to a million Tutsisand moderate Hutus were killed. Pope John Paul said the priests must be made to account for their actions. Different sections of the Rwandan church have been widely accused of playing an active role in the genocide of 1994...神父因卢旺达大屠杀而被判死刑BBC NEWS 1998年4月19日卢旺达一个法庭因其在1994年种族大屠杀中的角色判处两名天主教神父死刑。在这次大屠杀中，多达100万图西族人和温和派胡图族人被杀害。教皇宗若望保禄说，这些神父必须为自己的行为负责。卢旺达教会不同教区被广泛指责在1994年的种族灭绝中扮演了积极角色……我们可以看到，对基督教来说，中世纪还没有真正成为过去。但是最令人震惊的是，每一代基督徒都否认上一代基督徒以基督教的名义所犯下的罪行与所行的暴虐，或者，如果无法否认，他们马上就会声称：哦，他们不是真正的基督徒呀！只有爱人如己、行善的……才是真正的基督徒，等等，等等。不是任何一个宗教的追随者都可以这么自我宣称吗？现在如果听到基督徒谈道德，我就会恶心。
网站资料
20世纪的教会暴行天主教的集中营很少有人知道，二战时纳粹的集中营并不是欧洲独一无二的集中营。1942年到1943年，克罗地亚也有天主教政党乌斯塔沙及其独裁者 Ante Paveli? 建立的众多的集中营。Paveli? 是天主教徒，经常拜访当时的教皇。当时竟然还有专门的儿童集中营。在克罗地亚的集中营中，被谋杀的主要是东正教的塞尔维亚人，但是也有人数可观的犹太人。最臭名昭著的是 Jasenovac 集中营，其负责人有一段时间是一位名叫Miroslav Filipovi? 的方济会神父，他以“死亡弟兄”而著名。如同纳粹一样，乌斯塔莎也在焚烧炉焚烧受害者，与纳粹不同的是，纳粹至少事先还把受害者毒死，乌斯塔莎是直接把活人烧死。大多数受害者是被打死、刺杀或枪毙。在克罗地亚这么一个小国，受害者人数估计在30万到60万。许多凶手是方济会僧侣，他们当时都带冲锋枪。克罗地亚的暴行如此令人毛骨悚然，甚至连党卫军的几个军官都向希特勒提出抱怨（后者对此当然不关心）。当时的教皇知道这些暴行，但是没有为阻止暴行采取任何行动。[MV][作者补记：最近的关于巴尔干半岛冲突的新闻报道，在这一历史背景上简直给人阴森的感觉，其中毕竟提到了像 Banja Luka 这样的地方或 Save 这样的河流，在这些地方，半个世纪前被害人的骨骸今天还能偶尔被发现。]越南的天主教恐怖1945年，争取独立的越盟在北越战胜接受了美国20亿美元支持的法国殖民政府。尽管胜利一方宣布所有的人信仰平等——越南的多数非佛教徒都是天主教徒——大规模的反共宣传还是促成许多天主教徒逃往南越。在华盛顿天主教游说团和后来把在越南的美军称为“基督军队”的梵蒂冈驻美发言人 Spellman 枢机主教的支持下，南越发生政变，以阻止南越的民主选举，不然，越盟在选举中可能像在北越一样获胜。政变后，狂热的天主教徒吴庭艳被任命为南越总统。[MW 16ff]吴庭艳授意将来自美国的食品和医药援助以及技术和各种支援只分配给天主教徒，佛教徒和佛教徒村庄要么得不到照顾，要么必须出钱购买天主教徒可以免费得到的救援品，罗马天主教成了唯一得到支持的宗教。美国麦卡锡时代的政治女巫迫害运动在越南的反共歇斯底里中得到了更残暴的体现。1956年，吴庭艳总统下令：“危害国防和公共安全者，可以被政府机关关进集中营。”在与主义斗争的幌子下，南越政府关押了数以千计的佛教徒抗议者和和尚。数十名佛教老师和和尚为表达抗议而自 焚（请注意：佛教徒在这里是自焚，与此不同的是，基督徒更多的是焚烧他人；关于这一点，请参见最后一段）。在此期间，一些监狱已经变成了死亡营，囚犯中也早已经有了新教徒、甚至是天主教徒。据估计，在吴庭艳恐怖时期（1955-1960年），至少有2万4千人在骚乱中受伤，大约8万人被处决，27万5千人被捕并受到严刑拷打，大约50万人被关进集中营或俘虏营。[MW 76-89]另外，为了支持这么一个政府，在随后的十年越战中又有数以千计的美国士兵丧生。
Virus Catholicus —— 天主教病毒1976年7月1日，师范大学学生 Anneliese Michel 去世：她活活把自己饿死了。去世前，魔鬼般的异像骚扰了她几个月，同样，两个天主教神父在沃尔茨堡大主教的正式同意下用驱鬼术折磨了这可怜的姑娘几个月。当她最后死于克林根堡医院时，她浑身上下都是血淋淋的伤口。她的父母都是疯狂的天主教徒，因见死不救、尤其是因为未请医生诊断，被判处6个月的徒刑，但是两位神职人员未受到任何处罚。相反，Anneliese Michel 的墓现在成了虔信的天主教徒的朝拜地（17世纪，沃尔茨堡因为大量烧死女巫而著名）。这一事件不过是同类危险的迷信后果的冰山一角，其所以为人所知，只是因为造成了人员死亡。[SP 80]【乡下人感慨：美国牌的华人属灵基督徒们，当你们或你们的牧师为你们的亲戚朋友驱鬼的时候，希望你们能记起这个案件！】
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_5cf4c0070102ds94.html |
2011/12/1 23:01
| 
2011/12/1 23:13
| 
