By Patricia Mukhim
The church (and I use the singular here because it includes all churches) has existed in Meghalaya for over a century yet there are no social reforms of any significance that merit mention. Corruption and poor governance continue to rob citizens of their rights yet the church maintains a conspiratorial silence. In Meghalaya we have had social problems that have reduced several families to poverty. One persistent problem in Meghalaya is teenage pregnancy leading to the girl-child being abandoned by her partner. She then not only has to mother the child but also look for work to feed herself and the child since she herself comes from a poor family. The only saving grace is that such a teenage mother is allowed to continue to stay in her parental home.
It is a given that teenagers in our tribal societies as in any other society, have the propensity to experiment with sex. But as always, when the girl gets pregnant her boyfriend/partner abandons her because he has no means of livelihood and was never ready to shoulder the responsibility of being a father when he is still looking to enjoy his youth. In such cases why is it a taboo to tell teenagers to use condoms when they have sex? Why is sex such a hush-hush word when people are indulging in it so freely? Why is the church against the idea of condom use?
Sadly, the church also refuses to endorse even the spacing of children so that there is enough gap between one pregnancy and the next one and children are better looked after. The reason for high school drop-out rates at the elementary level and of non-enrolment is because of poverty. Free and compulsory education does not include free uniforms. The only educational institution that gives out free uniforms and books at the beginning of every school year is Ramakrishna Mission. No church run school gives free uniforms or dispenses with the school fees for very poor children.
The church is expected to be the beacon for social change. It is expected to be the arbiter between the government and the people. But the church stays away from engaging in such people-centric issues and prefers to remain a ‘once in a week’ social club where people come to pray, sing, meet fellow congregation members and return home without ever taking a firm decision to do something to change the lives of people. The church congregation comprises well-connected people, bureaucrats, technocrats, politicians et al. The church knows the antecedents of each of these dignitaries but will never confront them on corruption even if they are well aware of the antecedents of each church member and how much tithe they pay.
It is the bounden duty of the church envisaged by Jesus Christ to leverage its influence and engage in governance issues and push for policy changes that align with social justice principles. Why do churches shy away from harsh sermons that challenge the members to take a stand on issues such as poor roads that could result in miscarriages for women in the early stages of pregnancy? Why can’t the church start a movement when those responsible for making those horribly cheap roads are held to account and asked to explain why they use substandard materials and where did the money for the quality road that was sanctioned has gone?
Look at the condition of the Civil Hospital Shillong and other PHCs, CHCs and sub-centres. Don’t churchgoers know the kind of third-rate treatment being meted out to the sick who are forced to seek treatment there because they cannot afford private hospitals? The church has very educated members who can raise questions and seek accountability through the RTI route but they would never do it because it does not affect them personally. Yet the church never dares challenge its members to take up these true Christian duties. Remember how Christ engaged with real issues during his lifetime? So why are his followers today looking for easy cop-outs? They see the poor in their churches but are not moved. What then is the point of coming to church if the heart remains hardened and unwilling to feel the pain of the poor?
The truth is that the church is still a beacon that has a moral voice which carries weight. If the church has the courage of conviction to lead a movement against deforestation; against illegal coal mining; against indiscriminate quarrying; against land sharks who are on a buying spree of more and more land, leaving nothing for other fellow tribals. How can the church remain blind to these inequities?
Many who are in the category of the downtrodden come to church but have no voice. Is it not the duty of the church to give them a voice? The church has the onus to uplift those who are at the margins. It has a duty to be with drug addicts to counsel them and give them solace so that they can come out of the addiction. When I say the church I am not alluding to an impersonal entity but to the members, many of whom mean well but are not part of a solidarity group. It is the church that can bring together such people with empathy and the goodwill to lend a helping hand to reach out to others in need.
Churches have the resources to provide a set of skills to its members because it has a wide range of members with different skills sets. Many of our women here need to understand financial literacy. They could be enabled to start some small scale business and hand-held for sometime until they can stand on their own feet. Every time we think of empowerment, we think of the government or NGOs when the church is best placed to demonstrate what empowering its own members actually means. Empowerment is not doing one-time charity. It’s giving people the tools they need to improve their lives and get out of the vicious cycle of poverty.
Why is it that the churches in our villages are not moved by the sight of young boys shepherding cows and sheep instead of being in school? Why are no interventions made by church members to counsel families that make their kids work and earn their food at such a tender age? Why cannot part of the church collection be used to send these drop-out kids for skills training and basic education?
Perhaps pastors are afraid of touching the conscience of the congregation lest they stop coming to church and the tithe dwindles. That would affect their salaries and make life a little difficult for them. Frankly speaking, the sermons we need today should be about addressing teenage pregnancy; about protected sex and about planning for a family instead of just blindly walking into parenthood and regretting it later when the man decides to leave. The church should also have been in the forefront of addressing the issue of single parenthood and its proliferation in the Khasi-Jaintia Hills. The church can argue that its members are advocates of social justice and other philanthropic work but that’s an easy escape. Members of the church using its platform to reach out and be advocates for economic empowerment of women; for addressing teenage pregnancies etc would have more impact since people ‘still’ respect the church
The church also runs educational institutions. Can those church-run schools become beacons of change and start discussions on issues that are most pertinent such as growing poverty, single parenthood, landlessness, corruption etc., and how those impinge on families? The church should itself be the platform for dialogues on contentious issues instead of skirting away from them. Social justice issues often spark strong opinions and heated debates. The church can provide a safe space for open and honest dialogue, where people can express their views without fear of judgment. This platform can help bridge divides and encourage understanding across political or social lines. Churches can host town halls, discussion panels, or forums that allow congregants to talk through difficult issues like the congenital hatred for the “dkhar,” and sometimes even contentious issues like why Meghalaya, Khasi-Jaintia hills in particular need the railways racial. Engaging in respectful conversations opens the door for collective action and helps people see each other’s humanity in the midst of complex issues.
If the church is unable to effect social and economic change here and now, what is the point of its existence? What is the point of being a church member other than the sense of belonging to a social club with zero outcomes?
