A three page summary of my Masters dissertation, for those of you interested.
Pluralist Paradise? The Interreligious Situation in Paramaribo, Suriname.
This research aims to help analyse Suriname as a multi-religious society and to see how in this society religion is apparently used as a means for preventing conflict rather than causing it. The situation as it stands in Suriname is worth researching with exactly this in mind. This small and relatively isolated community of 500.000 people seems to be miles ahead when it comes to interreligious participation and sincere tolerance. Suriname appears to be a country in which very few problems occur in interreligious communication. The population consists of people from many different ethnic and religious backgrounds of which none hold an absolute majority. There are many different aspects in Suriname’s history that have contributed to the situation as it now stands.
The diversity of ethnic and religious movements and organisations in Suriname is overwhelming. For the purpose of this dissertation, the focus will lie only on the three major religions Christianity, Hinduism, and Islam, which are most prominent in Suriname. Religion and ethnicity are not necessarily connected in Suriname. In this dissertation we deal with a society that consists of several groups with different ethnic and religious identities that all call themselves ‘Surinamese’. Their cultural, ethnic and national identities are fluent and have changed or mixed over time.
The Surinamese people today (with the exception of very few descendants of Dutch farmers and Indians) are all descendants of different peoples, brought there for a certain purpose, that of work. The country’s history is given by all interviewees as a reason for the tolerance displayed by the different ethnic groups in modern times. The sharing of a common oppressor is often cited as a reason for fraternisation. At this point in history there is no absolute, or dominant, majority in ethnic or religious form. Paramaribo is a small community that strives to function well not despite of, but because of, its diversities.
The enormous diversity of colour and practice of the people in Suriname is seen as such a normal thing for those living there that visiting a foreign country can cause some confusion.
“We Surinamese are raised with such great diversity, we are completely used to it. You can compare the diversity in Suriname to a lovely bouquet of mixed flowers. When you visit another country, all you see is roses. To us, that is a strange experience.” (Dr. S. William-Asgarali, personal communication, July 10, 2009)
It is very clear from my experiences that it is mainly social gatherings, parties, food and music that bring the people of Suriname together, despite their religious differences. They might not want to attend a religious ceremony of some differing religious tradition in a church or temple, but all are welcome and happy to attend celebrations regarding marriage, birthdays or celebrations of religious festivals at home or a non-religious space. Most neighbourhoods in Paramaribo are mixed and it is common that neighbours or friends from different religious traditions are invited over to the house for dinner or a celebration. The receiving family usually knows which religious tradition is followed by the guest and will adapt their choice of food for the celebration to the rules given to the guest by their religion.
When it comes to questions about religion, most informants focused on shared moral values and ‘humanity’. Discussion or underlying critique about differing religious truths is present under the surface, but generally it doesn’t surmount in violence or intolerance. Most interviewees gave me a version of this statement: “At the end of the day we focus on everyone being human and sharing the same rights and duties.” Shared moral values include the will not to offend anyone, or speak in negative terms about another’s religion. “If I don’t bother you, you won’t bother me.” The Surinamese are proud of their ability to tolerate everyone, within certain shared moral standards.
Until now, deeper underlying religious differences between groups have never been openly addressed. In the political arena political parties have chosen to use ethnicity as a means of distinction, religion has, as of yet, not entered the equation. Religious issues are not seen as something to be discussed openly, this however does not mean they do not exist. They might be present just under the surface. The unanswered question is, will it be constructive to start theological discussions to try to prevent such possible usage of religion in the political arena or is it better to leave the issues untouched and work instead on the practical implementation of interreligious cooperation on a basis of shared ethics?
Several interreligious or ecumenical bodies are functioning in Suriname to help set up and sustain social projects and humanitarian work. This research focuses on IRIS (Interreligious Council in Suriname) and the CCK (Committee of Christian Churches).
IRIS currently consists of five representatives from different religious institutions who come together every month to discuss predominantly social issues as they arise in Surinamese society and a possible contribution the council could provide in improving the situation. The participating religions are expected to bring their own religious morals and worldview to the table in council meetings. As practice shows, the representatives of the different religious organisations find common ground in complementing ethics and shared moral values. The dissertation pays attention to several projects initiated or supported by IRIS.
The aim of the CCK is to provide a body concerned with social and ecumenical issues. According to my informants members of the CCK are reluctant to join IRIS since this would give out a signal to their followers that could be interpreted as deviating from the churches’ teachings of the uniqueness of the Christian church as the only way to ultimate salvation. The resistance of the CCK, or members of the CCK, to join IRIS seems to be partially based on a misunderstanding of the councils aims and actions. Since the CCK itself does focus on bringing their different ‘Christianities’ closer together it may be that the members, or their followers, might think joining IRIS entails such theological sharing. As I have been told many times, this is not the case. IRIS is solely and exclusively focussed on finding practical solutions for social problems apparent in day to day life for the Surinamese.
It is of course understandable that, when preaching uniqueness and exclusivity in church, far reaching teamwork with other religions could be seen as sidestepping ones’ own teachings. Ultimately, this argument of non-compatibility could be used as a justification by all religions for not participating in any interreligious activities, yet the situation in Suriname provides an interesting look into how it could be when religious bodies do set aside their theological differences to participate in joint social projects and humanitarian work.
In Suriname there are many shared cultural factors emphasising a shared national identity but other cultural factors such as religion and the use of a secondary language also stress diversity. Differences in religion take a back seat to shared factors. It is not seen as a breaking point, nor are differences in language, since there is a shared factor which is emphasised more: that of a common humanity and a shared nationality.
Also remarkable about the situation in Suriname is the apparent capability of contrasting religious institutions to come to a consensus and to deal with social projects from the point of view of moral authorities. They are able to accept each other as equally valid moral authorities and join their forces to reach as high a percentage of the population as possible in fighting for their common goals.
It is clear that IRIS sees their role in providing social support and taking moral and ethical responsibility for what goes on in Suriname very seriously. Most striking is the fact that the inter-faith initiatives are being received so well. Unfortunately these positive projects and initiatives are paired with problems in administration and funds, and a general lack of organisational experience or resources. Regardless of its shortcomings; the successes, press releases and government involvement contribute to a trustworthy image. IRIS is accepted as an authoritative institution in Surinamese society. The Surinamese government actively contributes to the image of Suriname as being an interreligious community in which religions can act as an important player to help retain social cohesion.
Could the IRIS model of interreligious cooperation then be used in other countries as well? Public response and image is very important in helping IRIS to function with as much authority as it does now. The model would thus only function well under the condition that the religious leaders involved are respected and still seen as authoritative figures by the majority of society in the first place. This condition may then prove this Surinamese model to be unsuccessful in ‘western’ countries in which religious leaders have already generally lost their authoritative status. This being said, I also think the entire situation as it stands now in Suriname is unique to such an extent that trying to use it as a utopian interreligious model for other countries might in itself not be effective since it is based on a very complex system of factors.
Pluralist Paradise? The Interreligious Situation in Paramaribo, Suriname.
This research aims to help analyse Suriname as a multi-religious society and to see how in this society religion is apparently used as a means for preventing conflict rather than causing it. The situation as it stands in Suriname is worth researching with exactly this in mind. This small and relatively isolated community of 500.000 people seems to be miles ahead when it comes to interreligious participation and sincere tolerance. Suriname appears to be a country in which very few problems occur in interreligious communication. The population consists of people from many different ethnic and religious backgrounds of which none hold an absolute majority. There are many different aspects in Suriname’s history that have contributed to the situation as it now stands.
The diversity of ethnic and religious movements and organisations in Suriname is overwhelming. For the purpose of this dissertation, the focus will lie only on the three major religions Christianity, Hinduism, and Islam, which are most prominent in Suriname. Religion and ethnicity are not necessarily connected in Suriname. In this dissertation we deal with a society that consists of several groups with different ethnic and religious identities that all call themselves ‘Surinamese’. Their cultural, ethnic and national identities are fluent and have changed or mixed over time.
The Surinamese people today (with the exception of very few descendants of Dutch farmers and Indians) are all descendants of different peoples, brought there for a certain purpose, that of work. The country’s history is given by all interviewees as a reason for the tolerance displayed by the different ethnic groups in modern times. The sharing of a common oppressor is often cited as a reason for fraternisation. At this point in history there is no absolute, or dominant, majority in ethnic or religious form. Paramaribo is a small community that strives to function well not despite of, but because of, its diversities.
The enormous diversity of colour and practice of the people in Suriname is seen as such a normal thing for those living there that visiting a foreign country can cause some confusion.
“We Surinamese are raised with such great diversity, we are completely used to it. You can compare the diversity in Suriname to a lovely bouquet of mixed flowers. When you visit another country, all you see is roses. To us, that is a strange experience.” (Dr. S. William-Asgarali, personal communication, July 10, 2009)
It is very clear from my experiences that it is mainly social gatherings, parties, food and music that bring the people of Suriname together, despite their religious differences. They might not want to attend a religious ceremony of some differing religious tradition in a church or temple, but all are welcome and happy to attend celebrations regarding marriage, birthdays or celebrations of religious festivals at home or a non-religious space. Most neighbourhoods in Paramaribo are mixed and it is common that neighbours or friends from different religious traditions are invited over to the house for dinner or a celebration. The receiving family usually knows which religious tradition is followed by the guest and will adapt their choice of food for the celebration to the rules given to the guest by their religion.
When it comes to questions about religion, most informants focused on shared moral values and ‘humanity’. Discussion or underlying critique about differing religious truths is present under the surface, but generally it doesn’t surmount in violence or intolerance. Most interviewees gave me a version of this statement: “At the end of the day we focus on everyone being human and sharing the same rights and duties.” Shared moral values include the will not to offend anyone, or speak in negative terms about another’s religion. “If I don’t bother you, you won’t bother me.” The Surinamese are proud of their ability to tolerate everyone, within certain shared moral standards.
Until now, deeper underlying religious differences between groups have never been openly addressed. In the political arena political parties have chosen to use ethnicity as a means of distinction, religion has, as of yet, not entered the equation. Religious issues are not seen as something to be discussed openly, this however does not mean they do not exist. They might be present just under the surface. The unanswered question is, will it be constructive to start theological discussions to try to prevent such possible usage of religion in the political arena or is it better to leave the issues untouched and work instead on the practical implementation of interreligious cooperation on a basis of shared ethics?
Several interreligious or ecumenical bodies are functioning in Suriname to help set up and sustain social projects and humanitarian work. This research focuses on IRIS (Interreligious Council in Suriname) and the CCK (Committee of Christian Churches).
IRIS currently consists of five representatives from different religious institutions who come together every month to discuss predominantly social issues as they arise in Surinamese society and a possible contribution the council could provide in improving the situation. The participating religions are expected to bring their own religious morals and worldview to the table in council meetings. As practice shows, the representatives of the different religious organisations find common ground in complementing ethics and shared moral values. The dissertation pays attention to several projects initiated or supported by IRIS.
The aim of the CCK is to provide a body concerned with social and ecumenical issues. According to my informants members of the CCK are reluctant to join IRIS since this would give out a signal to their followers that could be interpreted as deviating from the churches’ teachings of the uniqueness of the Christian church as the only way to ultimate salvation. The resistance of the CCK, or members of the CCK, to join IRIS seems to be partially based on a misunderstanding of the councils aims and actions. Since the CCK itself does focus on bringing their different ‘Christianities’ closer together it may be that the members, or their followers, might think joining IRIS entails such theological sharing. As I have been told many times, this is not the case. IRIS is solely and exclusively focussed on finding practical solutions for social problems apparent in day to day life for the Surinamese.
It is of course understandable that, when preaching uniqueness and exclusivity in church, far reaching teamwork with other religions could be seen as sidestepping ones’ own teachings. Ultimately, this argument of non-compatibility could be used as a justification by all religions for not participating in any interreligious activities, yet the situation in Suriname provides an interesting look into how it could be when religious bodies do set aside their theological differences to participate in joint social projects and humanitarian work.
In Suriname there are many shared cultural factors emphasising a shared national identity but other cultural factors such as religion and the use of a secondary language also stress diversity. Differences in religion take a back seat to shared factors. It is not seen as a breaking point, nor are differences in language, since there is a shared factor which is emphasised more: that of a common humanity and a shared nationality.
Also remarkable about the situation in Suriname is the apparent capability of contrasting religious institutions to come to a consensus and to deal with social projects from the point of view of moral authorities. They are able to accept each other as equally valid moral authorities and join their forces to reach as high a percentage of the population as possible in fighting for their common goals.
It is clear that IRIS sees their role in providing social support and taking moral and ethical responsibility for what goes on in Suriname very seriously. Most striking is the fact that the inter-faith initiatives are being received so well. Unfortunately these positive projects and initiatives are paired with problems in administration and funds, and a general lack of organisational experience or resources. Regardless of its shortcomings; the successes, press releases and government involvement contribute to a trustworthy image. IRIS is accepted as an authoritative institution in Surinamese society. The Surinamese government actively contributes to the image of Suriname as being an interreligious community in which religions can act as an important player to help retain social cohesion.
Could the IRIS model of interreligious cooperation then be used in other countries as well? Public response and image is very important in helping IRIS to function with as much authority as it does now. The model would thus only function well under the condition that the religious leaders involved are respected and still seen as authoritative figures by the majority of society in the first place. This condition may then prove this Surinamese model to be unsuccessful in ‘western’ countries in which religious leaders have already generally lost their authoritative status. This being said, I also think the entire situation as it stands now in Suriname is unique to such an extent that trying to use it as a utopian interreligious model for other countries might in itself not be effective since it is based on a very complex system of factors.
