For victims of child abuse at the hands of Catholic priests in Ireland, the Pope offers an apology. Victims of the Rwanda genocide, where many Catholic priests were complicit in the slaughter, have yet to hear a word from The Holy Father. Here's Martin Kimani at CiF:

Fifteen years ago, tens of thousands of Catholics were hacked to death inside churches. Sometimes priests and nuns led the slaughter. Sometimes they did nothing while it progressed. The incidents were not isolated. Nyamata, Ntarama, Nyarubuye, Cyahinda, Nyange, and Saint Famille were just a few of the churches that were sites of massacres.

To you, Catholic survivor of genocide in Rwanda, the Vatican says that those priests, those bishops, those nuns, those archbishops who planned and killed were not acting under the instruction of the church. But moral responsibility changes dramatically if you are a European or US Catholic. To the priests of the Irish church who abused children, the pope has this to say: "You must answer for it before almighty God and before properly constituted tribunals. You have forfeited the esteem of the people of Ireland and brought shame and dishonour upon your confreres."

The losses of Rwanda had received no such consideration. Some of the nuns and priests who have been convicted by Belgian courts and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, respectively, enjoyed refuge in Catholic churches in Europe while on the run from prosecutors….

In the last century, Catholic bishops have been deeply mired in Rwandan politics with the full knowledge of the Vatican. Take Archbishop Vincent Nsengiyumva. Until 1990, he had served as the chairman of the ruling party's central committee for almost 15 years, championing the authoritarian government of Juvenal Habyarimana, which orchestrated the murder of almost a million people. Or Archbishop André Perraudin, the most senior representative of Rome in 1950s Rwanda. It was with his collusion and mentorship that the hateful, racist ideology known as Hutu Power was launched – often by priests and seminarians in good standing with the church. One such was Rwanda's first president, Grégoire Kayibanda, a private secretary and protege of Perraudin, whose political power was unrivalled.

The support for Hutu Power was therefore not unknowing or naive. It was a strategy to maintain the church's powerful political position in a decolonising Rwanda. The violence of the 1960s led inexorably to the 1994 attempt to exterminate Tutsis. These were violent expressions of a political sphere dominated by contentions that Hutu and Tutsi were separate and opposed racial categories. This, too, is one of the legacies of the Catholic missionary, whose schools and pulpits for decades kept up a drumbeat of false race theories.

This turning away from the Rwandan victims of genocide comes at a time when the Catholic church is increasingly peopled by black and brown believers. It is difficult not to conclude the church's upper reaches are desperately holding on to a fast-vanishing racial patrimony.

Perhaps it is time Catholics forced the leaders of their church to deal with a history of institutional racism that endures, if the church is truly to live up to its fine words. Apologies are not sufficient, no matter how abject. What is demanded is an acknowledgment of the church's political power and moral culpability, with all the material and legal implications that come with it.

The silence of the Vatican is contempt. Its failure to fully examine its central place in Rwandan genocide can only mean that it is fully aware that it will not be threatened if it buries its head in the sand. While it knows if it ignores the sexual abuse of European parishioners it will not survive the next few years, it can let those African bodies remain buried, dehumanised and unexamined.

Posted in

7 responses to “The Silence of the Vatican”

  1. sam Avatar

    Hi there!!!!
    I didn`t know anything about the Catholic priests part in Rwanda, so thanks for this blog. I will look into this issue further…doubtless replicated in other parts of the world.
    Maybe you will like to see my blog where I have just posted about Catholic priests and child abuse 🙂 !!!!!!! eyehearer.blogspot.com
    Best Wishes to you….

    Like

  2. Dom Avatar
    Dom

    I thought the racial distinctions were instituted by the Belgians, who gave employment preferences to one group over the other. The historical accounts I’ve read up to this date (I’m not an expert, of course) mention nothing about the Catholic Church.
    And I’m confused by the “history of institutional racism that endures”. The Catholic Church is guilty of many things, especially it’s hypocricy on sexual matters, but racism never seemed like one of them.

    Like

  3. tolkein Avatar
    tolkein

    The article is tripe.
    That Catholics were involved, in a country colonised by Belgium, is true, and some were priests or nuns is also true. I expect some collected stamps or played chess, but that doesn’t mean the chair of Stanley Gibbons or the president of FIDE is complicit or has to apologise. For the article to stand up a claim against the Catholic Church it has to show that the Church organisation in Rwanda organised or was complicit in the organisation of the genocide. The facts show otherwise. It was a genocidal ethnic war between Tutsis and Hutus, where the candidates for blame (Mitterand?, the Leaders of the Hutus and Tutsis?) are already identified. Jared Diamond, in Catastrophes, has a good chapter on this – and, funnily enough, among lots of candidates for blame, doesn’t include the Church. This anti-Catholic stuff is truly looking like a mania, where any old story is used to blame the Church.

    Like

  4. Mick H Avatar
    Mick H

    The point seems clear enough to me. Some priests in Ireland – and elsewhere – were engaged in the abuse of children in their care. This abuse was not the Church’s official policy, but nevertheless the Pope has managed to come up with some kind of apology. Some priests in Rwanda were complicit in the slaughter of the Tutsi. The author gives a few names. Again, it wasn’t official Church policy, but that’s what happened. The Pope has made no apology.
    As for the history, yes, the Church’s role was new to me, but the author of the piece, Martin Kimani, is described as currently writing a book about Catholicism and genocide in Rwanda, so I tend to assume he knows what he’s talking about.

    Like

  5. tolkein Avatar
    tolkein

    The point about Ireland and the other sex abuse scandals is that the Church failed in its duty of care. There will always be bad priests and nuns. The Church, except for embarrassment is not at fault because of these bad people, except where the embarrassment gets in the way of dealing with them, which seems to have happened in Ireland. In Rwanda, the state authorities, army and leading Hutu and Tutsi parties carried out a genocide. They bore the responsibility, not the Church. Saying that everybody knew that this was going to happen, including the Church, and therefore they are complicit in not stopping it is nonsense. How many people really thought there was going to be a genocide in Rwanda before it happened? Even when it was going on the West stood by, so I think he has to make a case before his claims can be taken seriously. Just because someone writes a book about something does not mean they are right about what they write. David Irving was an ‘expert’ on Hitler but his books are tripe. Nothing this man wrote convinces me his book is not, also, tripe.

    Like

  6. Mick H Avatar
    Mick H

    The author gave a particular example, of the church congregation betrayed by the priest who declared the church no longer to be consecrated property, and then ordered a bulldozer to push the walls down. Seems rather more serious an example of a failure of the church’s “duty of care” than the sex abuse scandals.

    Like

  7. tolkein Avatar
    tolkein

    Mick
    Just because a bad person who happened to be a priest did something bad, as in the example, does not mean the Church was complicit. The Head of Haringey Social Services, a horrible woman in my opinion, was responsible for the supervision of the Baby P family. I don’t regard her as complicit in Baby P’s murder. Much as I detest Ed Balls, I don’t hold him complicit for what happened in Haringey, despite his ministerial responsibilities for the protection of children. Nor, on the facts, do I regard the Church, as an organisation, complicit in the Rwanda genocide.
    To repeat, this is looking like a mania.

    Like

Leave a reply to tolkein Cancel reply