Silence changes nothing except that we sink further

Nov 15, 2014 Letters

---

DEAR EDITOR,
Robert Kennedy, the great American President once said, “The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who stay neutral in times of moral conflict.”
That was the first thing that came to mind when I read the letter by Reverend Chris Bowman, in which he states:
“The church is not a political, nor is it a secular entity; it is first and foremost a spiritual organism. As such, no church should seek to intervene in purely political matters since it would be exceeding its spiritual mandate in so doing. The church speaks on matters of morality. Therefore the church (the body of Christ) must strive to adopt common neutrality– impartiality and independent positions guided solely by the word of God.”  (“The church is not a political, secular entity…” SN – November 13, 2014).
What I found perhaps most interesting is the Reverend’s assertion that:
“Leaders therefore are appointed by God to serve the people, and must be held to a high standard of credibility, fairness, servitude, truthfulness and performance.”
This is precisely what I have said the religious community, including the Christian community, has failed to do with regard to government’s excesses, unless of course Mr. Bowman is suggesting that his community is comfortable with the standard of behaviour by government, hence its silence.
This supposed ‘neutrality’ is a convenient and hypocritical position taken by those members of the Christian community that have aligned themselves with the government of the day.  We can look at the late Myles Munroe who had close ties to both Pastor Alex Graham and Reverend Kwame Gilbert, PPP parliamentarian, both of whom I mentioned in my original letter.  After a 2009 meeting with President Bharrat Jagdeo, Munroe made the following glowing remarks:
“The transformation I’ve seen since then is one of the most amazing changes I have seen in any country before and that means that the people are working together, the leadership is working and the government is obviously making decisions that are helping in the infrastructural development of the country.”
This is certainly not an endorsement that duly elected members of the political opposition would have agreed with, nor other independent stakeholders, yet Munroe made the comments nevertheless; there was no objection from Graham or Gilbert.
Even more damning, two years later, Bishop Juan Edghill, not yet rewarded with the Junior Minister of Finance position, took to the political platform and spoke the words, “I want to say to all who are gathered here and Guyana as a whole, I believe if Jesus Christ who I serve was in Guyana and he had to vote, he would have voted for the PPP/C.”
I cannot recall Mr. Bowman’s condemnation of this statement, even within the tiny chorus of opposition that came from the Christian community.  I’m sure he’s had multiple opportunities to quietly correct Edghill so he could probably inform us if he did in fact do so.
And then of course, there is Reverend Bowman himself, a month ago, singing spontaneous praises for an ‘under-appreciated’ PPP government official:
“It is my view that we have in Prime Minister Samuel Hinds a great example of sacrifice and service, a man of decency and humility – a true Guyanese patriot, who has given thankless service to this nation. It is unfortunate that we have become so blinded as a people, we have failed to duly honour and celebrate this distinguished son of the soil.”  (“When we disagree…”  SN – October 11, 2014)
Ten days later, there he is again commenting on the actions of the Clerk of the National Assembly in what was clearly a matter of governance and not spirit:
“As I read Mr. S.E. Isaacs – Clerk of the National Assembly’s, intelligent and guided opinion on the authority to convene Parliament, I couldn’t help but think, here is a man who is just doing his job to the best of his ability.” (“Spare a thought for all the genuinely committed people” SN – October 22, 2014)
In short, in the midst of a contentious battle about the resumption of Parliament, the Reverend felt free to speak about the Clerk doing a good job, even as the Speaker of the National Assembly, also doing his job, was in direct opposition to the Clerk’s position.  If the Reverend felt so moved to pen his support for the Clerk as well as his fawning letter in praise of the Prime Minister, it is puzzling therefore that he has been silent on the Attorney-General’s issue or the President’s prorogation of Parliament.  He can perhaps enlighten us if he believes that these men are also simply doing their job and are being unfairly “ostracized and criticized by those who are driven by personal agenda and hatred.”
Also, since the Reverend clearly is on the side of persons facing struggles simply for doing their job professionally, perhaps he would offer his comments on the case of Maurice Arjoon, Kent Vincent, and Kissoon Baldeo, all of whom were just recently cleared of trumped up charges brought against them under the orchestration of the same President Jagdeo for whom Myles Munroe had such unwavering praise.
To the rest of the Christian community, and the religious community in general, not because the majority of wrong comes from the government means that you are taking sides or being partisan in your stance if you condemn it.  I understand your fear – I have been there, faced with crippling doubt.  But I have found solace, affirmation and a sense of duty in words of wisdom, whether it is Vaclav Havel who sanctions action against oppression even if the outcome is unsure, or in the Mahabharata where Krishna counsels a hesitant Arjuna that only dharmic action could free one from the cycle of repetitive adharmic action.
The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. perhaps best expressed the conflict that I believe faces people of spirit in Guyana:
“Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government’s policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one’s own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexing, as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we’re always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty. But we must move on. Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony. But we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak.”
I have not asked that anyone take any specific political side in this, simply that we speak out against what we observe as being wrong. That is the point from which true dialectic develops.  We cannot be sure of the path this conversation will take, but what is certain that silence changes nothing except that we sink further.
Ruel Johnson

---

---