Bishop de Chickera goes off God's rails

The contradictory voices of the Anglican Church on the Sri Lankan crisis are rather difficult to reconcile. Tragically, these discordant voices, which include the cacophony of other denominations, seldom conform to the proclaimed Christian principles of peace, justice and reconciliation. Instead it could be argued that their agendas have contributed substantially to the perpetuation of the bleeding and the misery of the Sri Lankan nation.

In a sense, the Anglican voices echo the gruesome political origins of this Church going back to the time of priapic Henry VIII who massacred over 70,000 Catholics and looted their Churches to establish his Church of England. The internal religious wars waged by the Tudor kings and their successors to break away from the authoritarian Papal domination of Christian Europe (the Holy Roman Empire, which was "neither Holy, nor Roman nor an Empire", historian H. A. L. Fisher) were not based on Christian principles but on brutal terror. Nor was the British Empire built on human rights and justice. The Anglican Church followed the British flag with an unswerving loyalty to serve British king and country that led to the genocidal holocausts of the indigenous people in the four As - America, Africa, Asia and Australia.

So when Bishop Dulip de Chickera points a finger at the Sri Lankan state now and say that "one way or the other that the State is responsible for these happenings" it is pertinent to ask where this righteous Church, guided by the Bible, stood when its political masters burnt our villages, massacred dissenting civilians, expropriated the land to make way for agents of imperialism to colonize their traditional homes and replaced them with imported Indian labour, exploited and exported the fauna and flora to glorify the empire of the Church, degraded the environment, introduced and encouraged communal politics by playing the classic games of divide and rule, violated the agreements to protect our religion and culture, imposed their language and values denying our rights to use our language, etc., etc. To use the phraseology of the good Bishop, did not these "several converging actions against the Sinhala-Buddhists convey that they are less important and are even dispensable?" Did not these "relentless strategies that geographically and ideologically segregated the majority could well be part of a wave of" minoritarian colonialism? Has not all this happened without a word of explanation regret or apology (from the British imperialists and its loyal Church) and further compounded....the crisis" faced by the nation today?

There is more than a touch of disingenuousness in the holier-than-thou posture of Bishop de Chickera. The Anglican Church and the other Christian denominations which straddled both communities had a constructive role in bridge-building to foster peace and harmony. They still have a role to play in ending divisive politics caused mainly by the misdirected, arrogant and intransigent minoritarianism holding a gun to the heads of all the other communities. Instead, the sanctimonious bureaucrats in the Christian hierarchy raise their heads from time to time reenacting the notorious act of Pontius Pilate washing his hands off the responsibility of crucifying the innocent.

Duplicitous Act

Consider, for instance, the voice of Bishop Kenneth Fernando who made a holy pilgrimage to Kilinochchi and returned, after enjoying some fizzy drink and biscuits offered by the Tigers, to proclaim that "Prabhakaran was a humane person!" By what stretch of imagination can this statement be reconciled with Christian principles of peace, justice and reconciliation? Even his parishioners were stunned by this statement to whitewash the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Prabhakaran. They asked: "If Prabhakaran is humane how will Bishop Fernando describe Herod, who had no compunction in sending innocent children to death like Prabhakaran?" Isn't this another duplicitous act of the Anglican Church making a futile bid to serve both God and Mammon? Or is it playing its colonial master's game of divide and rule?

Skipping other Christian voices consider now the latest clarion call of Bishop Duleep de Chickera urging Christian soldiers to march forward with the Bible in one hand and local politics in the other to meet the challenges faced by "the poor Nation". Though he invokes the Bible he is more concerned about local politics. And not surprisingly, his Pastoral Address is to the Diocesan Council of the Church of Ceylon - please note, NOT Sri Lanka, denoting that the Church is still linked to the name of British colonialists. Besides, to point out another contradiction, his text refers to "the Sri Lankan nation" and yet he prefers to locate his Church in the long gone colonial domain of " Ceylon "! If the Anglican Church does not know whether it is in Sri Lanka or Ceylon how competent can it be to give direction to its flock, or the nation?

Judging by the role played by Churchmen in global politics, it can be assumed that the primary task of any genuine Church based on principles of Jesus is to identify and deal with the source of political evil and its Satanic manifestations. But, sadly, the available pronouncements of the Bishops do not reveal whether the Anglican Church knows what it does - let alone identifying evil - when it ventures out to dabble in politics. It certainly claims that it can show the way to political heaven but in reality it has his feet firmly located in political hell of Kilinochchi. Of course, Bishop de Chickera has announced last week that he celebrated Echrist with the wine matured in Wanni and refined in Kilinochchi. Perhaps, his thinking may be somewhat overdetermined by the quantum wine he imbibes each time he gets a delivery from the Wanni.

Evil

That apart, in fairness, to Bishop de Chickera it must be stated that he makes passing references to the killers of Kilinochchi. But after making a minor diversion he returns to place the blame entirely on the state. He states categorically: "One way or the other the State is responsible for these happenings." In popular political theory it is generally believed that the responsibility of rectifying evils in society lies entirely with the state. The politicians too contribute to this myth by claiming that if they can lay their hands on the levers of power they can press the right buttons to right the wrongs.

However, there is no doubt that the state has a great responsibility in addressing evil in its domain. But in reality the state does not have the omnipotence to wave a magic wand and correct everything that goes wrong within its boundaries. If that were so President George Bush, driven by his Bible-based born-again beliefs and being the head of the mightiest power on earth today, would be the answer to all the problems of humanity. Or for that matter, the direct representative of God based in the tiny Catholic state of Rome, empowered with all the divine blessings, could sweep away the misery of at least the Catholics who are praying daily for the salvation of their spiritual and material conditions..

But this myth has no validity in reality. The powers of the state, like all other human institutions, are limited and its supreme power depends on the collective support of the members in its domain (example: the Anglican Church) to join hands in understanding correctly the nature of evil and working out strategies to meet the challenges. Bishop de Chickera lists two sets of evil - one referring to the state and the other to the Tamil Tigers.

The following are some of the complaints listed against the Tamil Tiger terrorists and other militant groups: The priority given in its agenda to retain its own power base uncompromisingly. Its intransigent stance adds to the endless suffering of the Tamils. Its harsh policy of child and compulsory conscription of one cadre per family has added to the misery of a people already under the oppression of war. Several live in fear, are in hiding to avoid conscription and want to get out. This power agenda explains the reluctance and even inability of the LTTE to negotiate with purpose for constitutionally entrenched devolution within a united Sri Lanka; perhaps the most prudent political settlement for us all. The conflicts and power struggles among politico-militant Tamil groups has further aggravated this situation.

Dispensable

And the following are some of the complaints he makes against the state: "Several converging actions against the Tamils convey that Tamils are less important and are even dispensable. Relentless strategies that geographically and ideologically segregate the Tamils could well be part of a wave of majoritarianism. All this happens without a word of explanation regret or apology and further compounds the Tamil grievance and crisis. To our utter shame and despite the rhetoric to the contrary, the Sri Lankan Nation has collectively signalled that the well being of the majority towers above the rights, dignity and safety of the Tamils. One way or the other the State is responsible for these happenings. The judicial system, adequately equipped with competent persons, is unable to deliver justice to the afflicted..

"Nothing else seems to work, other than the moral integrity of the people and what is left of the conscience of the country's political leadership. This includes the intimidation of voices of dissent and the media, the refusal to hear independent views, the arbitrary dismissal of student and worker concerns and a disregard for world opinion.

"Much more seriously, the dismissal of these views as unpatriotic, simply because they are different or dissenting... On the other hand the ability to listen to these voices is the real test of the spirit of democracy and inevitably paves the way to dialogue and a negotiated settlement. Even responsible reports from Parliamentary Committees like the COPE are now being sidelined. Most Sri Lankan Governments and the LTTE are guilty of this breach. This includes frustrating double standards of flaunting power sharing as the democratic face to good governance and then shooting down any and all constructive proposals by imposing impossible pre-conditions. It is now obvious that this is a feet dragging exercise so that more extreme agendas could fall into place."

Though the voice is that of the Bishop the complaint against the state seems to have been borrowed - no, not from the Bible! - but from the agenda of the British High Commissioner, Chilcott, and the NGOs. A striking feature of the political scene in Sri Lanka is the "converging actions" and the agendas of Western diplomats, NGOs and the Churches - the unholy trinity that talk, walk and stalk in unison. In fact, when Bishop de Chickera refers to "disregard for world opinion" by the state he means submitting on bended knees to the common agenda proposed by this political trinity..

Consider his accusation of "disregard for world opinion". Either the good Bishop is suffering from amnesia or is deliberately distorting the history known to him. Wasn't it in keeping with the "world opinion" and the agenda of the holy trinity that the state entered into the much-vaunted Ceasefire Agreement on February 22, 2002?

Didn't Ranil Wickremesinghe, the co-signatory with Velupillai Prabhakaran and Erik Solheim, declare, quite confidently, that it came with an "international safety net"? Isn't the Bishop aware that the Scandinavian Peace Monitors has blamed the Tamil Tigers for violating 98% of its terms and conditions and nullifying it? Leaving aside the long litany of complaints listed against the state and the majority by the Bishop for the moment, it is incontrovertible that the state agreed to work with the minority community and the international community to abide by a negotiated settlement for peace - and it stuck to it despite the multitude of provocative violations.

Justification

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the past may be, all political evil in the current context comes out of those who refuse to abide by negotiated settlements, or by those who find flimsy excuses to either not to come to negotiations or to walk out of negotiations that may open up opportunities to restore peace and normalcy, however tardy and convoluted the peace process may be. So in the light of the known history of the peace process, what is the justification for the Bishop de Chickera to blame the state as the sole representative of evil?

Besides, can the failure of the Ceasefire Agreement, which was hailed by the NGOs, international community and the Church groups as the panacea for the crisis, be attributed to "majoritarianism" or to "minoritarianism"? Is the majority responsible for this also or is it the intransigent, fascist and the belligerent minority that is responsible for this? Quite correctly, the Bishop states: "This (Tiger) power agenda explains the reluctance and even inability of the LTTE to negotiate with purpose for constitutionally entrenched devolution within a united Sri Lanka; perhaps the most prudent political settlement for us all." But in the same breath he says that the state alone is responsible for everything that happened contradicting his own statement that it is the "power agenda" of the Tamil Tigers that is preventing "the most prudent political settlement for us all."

Obviously, the contradictions and the dilemmas of the Churches arise from the simple fact that, despite their claim to be moral authorities on identifying evil in God's little acre in Sri Lanka, they are running away from the center of evil to blame the majority and the state. When it comes to identifying the center of evil, presided over by Satanic forces, the Church tip-toes out of its moral and religious duties. Predictably, he targets "majoritarianism" which can refer only to the Sinhala-Buddhists. Nothing surprising there! Bishop de Chickera's address should be read as another pastoral letter designed to be distributed abroad for the consumption of his counterparts campaigning against the Government of Sri Lanka in Western capitals. These pastoral letters distributed globally through the Church network not only accuse the Sinhala-Buddhists but are used by the counterparts of Bishop de Chickera to lobby foreign offices in the Christian -dominated countries which are more receptive to their political messages.

Of course, the good Bishop will not disagree that the Church has down the ages invoked God's name in vain to either justify the crimes against humanity committed under the flags of colonial masters or to cover up the sins of the Churchmen who backed the politics of the Christian flags because they believed collectively that it was the way to civilize the backward heathens by converting them to Christianity. The Church has never ceased to invoke the name of God to justify the follies and crimes of he ecclesiastical bureaucracies who pretend to speak on behalf of God.

Bishop de Chickera's address is the latest bureaucratic pronouncement disguised as a profound moral message derived from the authoritative principles enshrined in the Bible. Perhaps, it may be conducive for peace and harmony in Sri Lanka if the good Bishop should go back and re-read the Bible - and that too before he imbibes any more wine matured in the Wanni and refined in Kilinochchi !

Too much Wanni wine seems to have gone into his head and befuddled his rational faculties. If he goes down this track any further we can expect him to go on his own pilgrimage to Kilinochci, click glasses with the Sun God and return to announce: "Prabhakaran is not only humane but divine"!