Editorial

Security

Politics

World

Letters

Sports

Obituaries

Archives

Excerpts from the Pastoral Address of the Rt Rev Duleeep de Chickera, Bishop of Colombo, to his Diocesan Council.

Rt Rev Duleeep de Chickera, Bishop of Colombo.

The attention and energy of us all over the past few months has been Peace for Sri Lanka. The church is compelled to play our role in this endeavour. For this we must understand the Christian concept of peace, first. The thrust of my address this year will be an attempt to present this concept and review its implications.

There are certain non-negotiables of the Christian understanding of peace. They help us live and relate and minister more realistically. Every Christian must imbibe these principles.

First, peace is a paradox. Jesus said "My peace I give unto you..." He also said "Blessed are the peace makers". Peace is therefore both, gift from God as well as the fruit of human endeavour. It is received and worked for. Consequently we cannot sit back and merely await the gift; neither should we imagine that activated human effort creates peace. The paradox is best resolved in perceiving that somehow Divine initiative is both discerned and appropriated by human endeavour. The metaphor of digging for water is an useful example. Humans do not create water. It is a priceless gift from God. But human effort appropriates due reward.

Next, the opposite of peace is injustice. It is not as often thought, conflict. These opposites are like a see saw; as one increases the other decreases. Peace work therefore seeks to reduce injustice. A cluster of evil surrounds injustice. Poverty, violence, oppressive hierarchy, exploitation, oppression, suppression, the violation of peoples rights, corruption and so on comprise this cluster. To work for peace then necessarily means establishing justice.

In this pursuit we do well to keep in mind that today's liberator is tomorrow's oppressor. The wheat and tares are required to co-exist till the end. The wheat and tares are the mix of justice and injustice in and around us, not the least ourselves. We fool ourselves if we imagine the world can be clearly and cleanly divided between the just and unjust. The tendency to do so leads to the tendency to place ourselves within the former. While the ideal is that all should strive to be alert to injustice in humans and structures, including themselves, (Jesus gave much prominence to self criticism) only some do; others either remain insensitive to injustice or increasingly become its agents. Both latter positions are an obstruction to peace.

If injustice is the opposite of peace what then is conflict? How are we to perceive this recurring phenomenon in our personal and corporate lives? The popular and even very human understanding of conflict is that it is negative and bad; it therefore needs to be suppressed, ignored or avoided. This attitude inevitably worsens the situation and undermines relationships. The healthier approach is to perceive conflict as an indicator of grievance that invites attention.

The grievance itself may be real or imagined, and may reflect degrees of injustice, but this will only be known in addressing it. We may be able to resolve the grievance or we may have to live with it, and this too will only be known in addressing it. Conflict therefore may be seen as both friend, (often painful) of the peace maker, as well as an opportunity for peace. It is the knock on the door that opens possibilities of conversation, co-operation, compromise and just co-existence for all concerned.

Finally conflict is both an integral part of life as well as a recurring experience through life. It stays with us till the end. Often we deal with more than one conflict at a time, and as one is resolved another emerges. The metaphor of clouds is useful to suggest the nature of conflict. Like the clouds, conflict is always present in different sizes and shapes and always moving. Now and again there is a blue sky, but this soon changes.

Peace makers must develop a spirituality of sensitivity and realism that addresses continuing conflict without a shift to the extremes of idealism, panic, indifference or arrogance.

Four noble lessons

Keeping these principles in mind I now wish to direct our attention to four crucial areas that must be addressed in pursuit of a just peace for Sri Lanka. These areas are in fact four vital lessons our leaders and people have failed to learn.

There is first, the need to share political power. The Westminster model of parliamentary democracy tends to concentrate political power in majority groups. In pluralistic societies this often leads to the intentional or unintentional isolation of minority groups, whether ethnic or ideological. The outcome of this continuing isolation is an accumulating grievance that soon boils over into resistance and open violent conflict. An urgent concern for the peace initiative is to address Island-wide and regional minority grievance.

We hope there will be a substantial and constitutional sharing of political power. From the very beginning this should not simply be restricted to a power sharing contract between the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE. It must include a sharing of power between these two groups as well as all others who wish to play a part in the political destinies of the country.

We must also learn to celebrate pluralism. To tolerate each other is better than eliminating each other, but since God is the author of pluralism we must go beyond mere tolerance into celebration. So the diverse cultures of our country must see the potential for mutual enhancement in each other and rejoice in each others nourishing presence. We have done so fairly spontaneously in food and dance and dress.

Today kavum , wattalappan, payasam and love cake are no longer the food of their communities of origin only. They are also considered Sri Lankan. This trend must continue to include our rich and respective social customs and cultural strengths leading on to a more vibrant and dynamic Sri Lankan identity of unity in diversity. Surely this is the best way to eliminate fear of the unknown other.

A third area is the necessity to deal with poverty. When there is not enough to go around people can be manipulated to become racist. Also, those who have died on all sides in this war and violence are mostly the poor. Those with financial resources managed to stay in or get away to safe places. Some provoked the poor to fight for apparently higher ideals or even made money out of the war.

The tendency and sometimes seemingly valid excuse to promise justice and redress for the poor once peace comes, must be arrested. The ethnic crisis however central must not be allowed to dwarf or conceal the poverty crisis. These are parallel issues that influence each other and need to be dealt with concurrently. To attempt to deal with them separately leads to an inadequate response to both. To ignore or lessen the urgency of the poverty crisis compartmentalises ones understanding of peace and is counter productive in our widest aspiration for peace.

And finally, since human interaction from time to time leads to disagreement and dispute, we need to learn to settle our differences in a civilised manner. This is to talk and not kill or intimidate or ridicule each other. Isn't this how we deal with differences in our families? Cannot this approach be extended to all others as well, and will this not make all the difference in our relationships? It goes without saying that to talk includes affirmation of ones own position with dignity and listening as equals. This is why the intention of the MOU that facilitates talks between the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE must be commended; and surely this is also why the Government de-proscribed the LTTE.

Ecumenism

Decades of hard work and creative ecumenical enthusiasm came very near to initiating an united church of Sri Lanka in the early seventies. Litigation by a small group of persons from our Diocese scuttled this thrust. Since then radical political change and different missiological agendas have raised new concerns.

While there is still much ecumenical partnership and trust amongst our churches, the progress and co-operation we have a right to expect, does not seem forthcoming. Consequently, our recently renewed aspirations for unity in four stages needs careful analysis, clearer commitment and more focused co-operation.

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager