EXCEPT for a handful of countries, the separation of church and state is a sacred principle religiously embraced and practised to varying degrees. Some things that are acceptable in some countries will be abominable if practised in another.
For example, Germany takes up a church tax, the majority of which is used to fund certain church activities and to upkeep religious heritage buildings. This gives the state a major stake in certain church affairs. This practice will be socially abominable and legally unconstitutional in the USA.
In Iran, only religious clerics can occupy the top tiers of national leadership. In China, religious groups need a licence for places of worship. Religious gathering outside a licensed premises and sharing of religious paraphernalia are strictly forbidden. In Guyana, separation of church and state is tied to religious freedom which is guaranteed by the constitution. The extent of the state’s involvement in religious affairs is limited to declaration of public holidays to facilitate major religious observances.
When the British handed over Guyana to self-rule, Christianity was an apex and pedestal religion, the only one recognised by the state. One of the major positive contributions of President LFS Burnham was to give official state recognition to Islam and Hinduism.
In so doing, the state appointed two each of Hindu and Muslim religious observances as national holidays on the same level with Christmas and Easter.
The state has also adopted the practice of reciting one prayer from each of these religions during official state events.
An often-overlooked aspect of Burnham’s facilitation of religious tolerance was the legalisation of traditional African ritualistic practices that were strictly forbidden by colonial law. Many people often refer to this action by Burnham as being limited to legalising Obeah. It was deeper than that: there were many small groups practising traditional African tribal and religious rituals, including some Rastafarian ceremonies which had to be performed in hiding.
By removing this prohibition, a major cymbal for freedom of religious conscience was struck. Guyana is a model for religious freedom of expression that can only be dreamed about in many places on earth.
Right across the pond in the USA, “Land of the Free and home of the Brave,” such levels of religious tolerance would be unimaginable. Imagine a U.S. president signing an executive order to declare Eid ul Fitr a national holiday. Section 4 of the 25th Amendment of the constitution would be immediately evoked to remove him from office by reason of insanity.
A major contributing factor to the high level of religious tolerance in Guyana is the widespread practice of religious co-mingling. We’ve all been invited to sit in at religious rituals and ceremonies; especially for private social events such as funerals, weddings and family accomplishments.
On account of good-neighbourly relations, interfaith marriages and other family or friendship ties; regardless of our own religious avowals, we attend ceremonies of other groups as a way of life. We attend, not because we share their belief system, but because we want to be respectful or tolerant and to embrace the other person’s humanity and their experiential journey to dharma, repentance, tawbah or whatever tenets ultimately steers their embrace of truth, justice, peace and love.
Therefore, the co-mingling aspect of religious freedom and religious tolerance is possibly higher in Guyana than it is in most countries on earth. Elected politicians are extracts from the larger society and they too share this way of life from childhood and it often predates their political careers.
As such, it cannot be, by any stretch of the imagination, a strange occurrence for an elected office holder to co-mingle with worshippers and adherents to religious tenets different from their own.
Quite recently, there has been a brigade led by Ganesh Mahipaul, MP, and picked up by a lunatic fringe which include peddlers like Norman Browne, Darren Wade and the Burke brothers whose stock in trade is hate and division with critical endorsement by the cyber tabloid Village Voice.
They sought to criticise ministers and elected MPs for co-mingling during Ramadan religious ceremonies. More recently, the intolerance was heightened with attacks on Pastor Clarke, Head of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Guyana, for inviting President Ali to declare open a youth camp of over 2,500 youths from across the Caribbean.
These hateful critics were particularly incensed that Pastor Clarke used kind words in his introduction of President Ali. I rang Pastor Clarke on the matter and he said he was not fazed by the criticisms.
He said the work of ministering to a local membership of over 60,000 local members held his focus. He said he introduced President Ali guided by his personal interactions with him over a number of years. He also pointed out that for more than 50 years the SDA church has always invited elected leaders to its major celebratory events, regardless of party affiliation.
He was stern in pointing out that he has never asked or signalled his congregation to vote for any person or party even when members of his congregation are running for public office.
Being an SDA myself, I happen to know for a fact that Hoyte, Jagan, Jagdeo, Ramotar and Granger have all been invited to witness and speak at various major events of the church, in fact, I was present at one event where Aubrey Norton as Opposition Leader was an honoured invitee.
The protest by these folks has no resemblance to even a sliver of decency, they are just on an anti-Ali, anti-PPP tantrum rant and in doing so are attempting to influence gullible minds into dangerous realms of religious intolerance and hate.
Religious co-mingling and the practice of various religious sects extending invitations to elected politicians to attend special services will live on as part of our culture.
This robust endemic social phenomenon will withstand this naked and unashamed crusade of hate.