Dominic Nkoyoyo*
I admire the courage of Fr. Gabriel Dolan. And I believe that his references to the principles of Catholic Social Teaching at this point in time are very important and helpful to God's people in Kenya who find themselves in a difficult position relative to the Proposed Constitution. For the time has run out to make any amendments to the proposed constitution and very soon it must be voted in or out.
Fr. Gabriel Dolan and Retired Anglican Archbishop David Gitari (see CISA Issue N° 038, Tuesday, April 2010) are of the same mind. And so hold similar position on the Proposed Constitution, namely: that it is wise to vote «YES» for the Proposed Constitution come the referendum on 4th August this year. Both are pro-life, and so am I. Fr Dolan warns that we should not throw the baby out with bath water. And Archbishop Gitari advises that we are faced with two evils and therefore we should go for a lesser one.
In the Proposed Constitution there is a healthy baby weighing 5Kg! That is, all the good things in it. But there is also very dirty water, namely: the possibility it opens for enacting in the future laws legalising abortion implied in Article 26(4).
So what should God's people in Kenya do in such a complicated situation?
I do agree that if the Proposed Constitution sails through the referendum and becomes the Supreme Law of the land, it will be very difficult to make amendments. But we can at least be consoled that, being very difficult, does not mean being impossible. So a fierce battle could be launched afterwards to amend the problematic Article 26(4).
Now that the time has run out to make any amendments, I think the practical thing to do is to take the advice of Archbishop Gitari and Fr. Gabriel and go for the lesser evil.It is indeed a very sad situation to have to choose between two evils but this is where we find ourselves.
Leaving Article 26(4) in the Proposed Constitution and voting YES is in my opinion the lesser evil. The greater evil is to go to the 2012 polls without a new and better Constitution. And practically, this is what it means if the Proposed Constitution is rejected. For the process will be pushed back to square one by opposing forces! And then more time and more money will be needed to restart the process! But as many people have remarked that the Proposed Constitution is much better than the existing Constitution, I think we should go for it. The dangers of voting in 2012 with the existing Constitution are beyond count and will be regrettable.
Although a new Constitution too, does not guarantee that the 2012 general election will be peaceful, the people of Kenya will be consoled to know that at least they tried to do something to avoid a repeat of the 2007-2008 post election violence that nearly destroyed the country.
So while the struggle for getting a new Constitution goes on, I request all the people in Kenya, citizens and foreigners, to keep praying for peace and reconciliation in this country.
*Fr. Dominic Vincent Nkoyoyo is a Cistercian Monk at the Monastery Val Notre-Dame in Canada.
Disclaimer: Views expressed in this section do not necessarily represent the opinions of CISA.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Draft is Pro-life, Pro-poor and can Bring Social Justice
Gabriel Dolan*
Church leaders have both a right and duty to share with their flock their concerns over issues of national importance. We may not always agree with their sentiments but we must defend their right to be heard and also respect the sincerity of their views.
However, what was disturbing about the recent statement from the Catholic Bishops was their request to the President to delete Article 26(4) from the Proposed Constitution by way of an ‘executive order.’ Put another way, they were asking the two principals to break the law, disregarding parliament and the Kenyan public.
Such contempt for the rule of law was what prompted demands for a constitutional overhaul in the first place. Kenya is not a theocracy but a democracy and church leaders are not legislators but teachers and messengers of the Gospel.
Indeed, the faithful feel let down by their religious leaders who appear to be completely out of touch with the deep yearnings of the Kenyan public for a more humane and dignified existence. I am not being dismissive of their views, but I fail to see the wisdom of calling on Kenyans to reject the draft if sections on Kadhi’s courts and abortion are not removed.
Would this not be a classic example of throwing the baby out with the bath water, if you pardon the crude analogy in these circumstances! Worse still the ‘bath water’ will find its way back home by way of the Penal Code and the current constitution.
Giving guidance on the proposed constitution requires that we see the big picture and are familiar with the complete document. For Christians, the ultimate question is whether this draft is good news for the poor; whether it has the potential to set the downtrodden free; give liberation to the captives and proclaim a new era for the Kenyan nation. That is what the man from Nazareth identified as his mission. It remains the foundation of Catholic Social Teaching (CST) up until today. The Bishops made no reference to this tradition in their instructions.
As I stated in the March 27th column, I am pro-life myself, but my concern goes beyond the womb and continues right up to the tomb. I am not just concerned with the welfare of the unborn, but about the quality of life after birth. Jesus himself after all said ‘I came that you may have life and have in its fullness’ (John 10:10).
Catholic teaching states that ‘opposition to abortion does not excuse indifference to those who suffer from poverty, violence and injustice’. If compassion is the basis of our faith, then people of God must be moved by the poverty, deprivation and inequality that have characterised this country since independence.
The principles of CST that should form the basis of our social conscience are: the dignity of the person, option for the poor, solidarity, social justice and the common good. When we make an option for the poor we are stating that the needs of the poor take priority over the desires and interests of the rich and ‘the poor have the single most urgent economic claim of the conscience of the nation’.
The Chapters on the Bill of Rights and Land offer great hope that the economic claims of the poor may be addressed. Indeed the Land Chapter is practically a replica of the Land Policy that was approved in Parliament on December 3rd last year.
A rejection of the proposed constitution is a vote for the interests of the rich in this country. The proposed constitution is a pro-poor and pro-life document. Is it any wonder then that those who benefited most from the plunder of our country have branded it ‘socialist,’ in the same way that those who opposed Barrack Obama’s pro-poor health care plan dismissed him as a ‘socialist’?
This draft is not a panacea for all our ills, but it has the potential to promote the common good of the nation as opposed to serving the good of rulers or any economic, religious or social class. It provides us with an opportunity to correct past injustices, redistribute the wealth of the nation and promote the dignity and value of each Kenyan.
The document has been published, let us read it carefully and judge for ourselves whether it offers hope to the poor, a future for the marginalised and could be the springboard for a new era for all. In other words let us vote with an informed conscience.
*Fr Gabriel Dolan, St. Patrick’s Missionary, Archdiocese of Mombasa
Disclaimer: Views expressed in this section do not necessarily represent the opinions of CISA.
Church leaders have both a right and duty to share with their flock their concerns over issues of national importance. We may not always agree with their sentiments but we must defend their right to be heard and also respect the sincerity of their views.
However, what was disturbing about the recent statement from the Catholic Bishops was their request to the President to delete Article 26(4) from the Proposed Constitution by way of an ‘executive order.’ Put another way, they were asking the two principals to break the law, disregarding parliament and the Kenyan public.
Such contempt for the rule of law was what prompted demands for a constitutional overhaul in the first place. Kenya is not a theocracy but a democracy and church leaders are not legislators but teachers and messengers of the Gospel.
Indeed, the faithful feel let down by their religious leaders who appear to be completely out of touch with the deep yearnings of the Kenyan public for a more humane and dignified existence. I am not being dismissive of their views, but I fail to see the wisdom of calling on Kenyans to reject the draft if sections on Kadhi’s courts and abortion are not removed.
Would this not be a classic example of throwing the baby out with the bath water, if you pardon the crude analogy in these circumstances! Worse still the ‘bath water’ will find its way back home by way of the Penal Code and the current constitution.
Giving guidance on the proposed constitution requires that we see the big picture and are familiar with the complete document. For Christians, the ultimate question is whether this draft is good news for the poor; whether it has the potential to set the downtrodden free; give liberation to the captives and proclaim a new era for the Kenyan nation. That is what the man from Nazareth identified as his mission. It remains the foundation of Catholic Social Teaching (CST) up until today. The Bishops made no reference to this tradition in their instructions.
As I stated in the March 27th column, I am pro-life myself, but my concern goes beyond the womb and continues right up to the tomb. I am not just concerned with the welfare of the unborn, but about the quality of life after birth. Jesus himself after all said ‘I came that you may have life and have in its fullness’ (John 10:10).
Catholic teaching states that ‘opposition to abortion does not excuse indifference to those who suffer from poverty, violence and injustice’. If compassion is the basis of our faith, then people of God must be moved by the poverty, deprivation and inequality that have characterised this country since independence.
The principles of CST that should form the basis of our social conscience are: the dignity of the person, option for the poor, solidarity, social justice and the common good. When we make an option for the poor we are stating that the needs of the poor take priority over the desires and interests of the rich and ‘the poor have the single most urgent economic claim of the conscience of the nation’.
The Chapters on the Bill of Rights and Land offer great hope that the economic claims of the poor may be addressed. Indeed the Land Chapter is practically a replica of the Land Policy that was approved in Parliament on December 3rd last year.
A rejection of the proposed constitution is a vote for the interests of the rich in this country. The proposed constitution is a pro-poor and pro-life document. Is it any wonder then that those who benefited most from the plunder of our country have branded it ‘socialist,’ in the same way that those who opposed Barrack Obama’s pro-poor health care plan dismissed him as a ‘socialist’?
This draft is not a panacea for all our ills, but it has the potential to promote the common good of the nation as opposed to serving the good of rulers or any economic, religious or social class. It provides us with an opportunity to correct past injustices, redistribute the wealth of the nation and promote the dignity and value of each Kenyan.
The document has been published, let us read it carefully and judge for ourselves whether it offers hope to the poor, a future for the marginalised and could be the springboard for a new era for all. In other words let us vote with an informed conscience.
*Fr Gabriel Dolan, St. Patrick’s Missionary, Archdiocese of Mombasa
Disclaimer: Views expressed in this section do not necessarily represent the opinions of CISA.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)