Thursday, March 6, 2008
Today we started the seminar with reports from each small group about the ideas they had been given through society, family, experience, etc., concerning the relative value of their group when compared with others.
I had expected the discussion to be a bit tense, with the backdrop of Hutu and Tutsi conflicts dating back decades. But what ended up dominating today's discussion was something different entirely.
Here are many of the people who attended the Reconciled seminar.
Women are a distinct minority in the seminar; there are only four here among the 50 or 60 who have shown up so far. But on this day, they had a lot to say.
One of the questions the small groups considered was the messages they had received concerning their gender in relation to the other. Across the board it was confirmed that the value of women was considerably inferior to that of men.
They shared many examples. And this is where things got interesting.
Because they were asked not only to cite the messages they had received, but then they were asked to cite God's opinion on the matter to see whether the two jibed.
We had already talked about Jesus's repeated affirmation in Scripture that we were were to love our neighbor as ourselves, meaning that we had to put our neighbor on the same level of worthiness as ourselves. But then they mentioned other Scripture, in particular Galatians 3:28-29.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
And then, as if to make sure that it was understood that loving our neighbors as ourselves included wives, they cited Ephesians 5:27-29.
In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
So is it possible to love God as Jesus said while not considering our neighbors (women and men, Hutu and Tutsi) as equal to ourselves?
NO? BUT ...
It was agreed that the answer to that question was no, but many began then to talk about other passages.
It was one woman in particular who asked about the idea of women submitting to men. Didn't that suggest that men were of greater value? She wasn't arguing for women' rights, she was simply trying to wrestle with different ideas she had received.
Another woman asked about a wife who is beaten by her husband. Did she have to stay in that marriage in forgiveness even if the husband continued to beat her?
AVOIDING THE CULTURE TRAP
Of course I came into this with my Western mindset, and I wanted to be careful not to impose my cultural thinking on their situation. The Bridge beleives that the key to our work is encouraging local people to develop models for peace and development that fit their culture.
We wanted to stick to the broad ideals and let them work out the applications for their own culture.
But we did ask one question: "Is it possible for a man to beat his wife day after day and still consider her equal in value to himself? Is it possible that he can do that and still follow the principle to love her as he loves his own body?"
"If not, then it seems we have a choice to make: Do we follow what our culture says or do we believe what Scripture has said? I don't have the answer for you. It's up to you guys to figure out how to follow Truth in Burundi. I have to do it in Paris and the United States."
It was a great example of the challenges that we face in the business of reconciliation. We need to repent from false ideas that affirm inequality if we are to have any hope of the forgiveness and repentance needed to see groups reconciled.
And those of us from the West, though perhaps more subtle and sophisticated in the way we talk about it (or not talk about it) still do not see women as completely equal. We still have received notions about women from past generations that go against the general truth of equality.
Burundians are not alone in their need to repent from these past notions. And we have little to say to them if we are not willing to look into our own hearts and turn from notions and actions that work to keep women in a second-class status.
ENCOURAGING SIGNS
I was encouraged to see that there was not major opposition coming from the young men that made up the majority of those in attendance. Most of the young men affirmed the value of their sisters, and nodded in agreement that when it was suggested that much needed to change.
One young brother and sister from the Congo later invited me to address their Congolese student group on campus on the women's rights subject. My schedule won't allow it, but I was encouraged to see the desire of young people to move to another place.
That bodes well for the possibility for reconciliation in this country and in this region. There is a generation in Burundi and Rwanda and Congo and elsewhere in this war-gutted region who have seen what the status quo has brought them.
It has destroyed their past an it threatens their future. They don't see holding onto the flaws of tradition as a quaint luxury. They know that it is vital that they root out the flaws in their tradition and redeem them with traditions based in equality, love and respect.
Today, I saw hopeful signs that men and women, Hutu and Tutsi, Europeans and Africans ... can come together to make some progress.
Recent Comments