On February 11, 1959, Bishop André Perraudin, then Vicar Apostolic of Kabgayi, published a pastoral letter known as the "Lent letter” that was circulated in churches all over Rwanda to brainwash Rwandans. It is said that every Rwandan above 18 years old was forced to attend mass that day.

This letter created confusion and raised contrasting reactions among the public. Some, especially King Kigeli V Ndahindurwa and his allies, criticized it, and others, especially the emerging Hutu leaders, gave it immense support. But, was it really important for Rwandans?

Let us look at the context in which it was written.

During this period, many groups of Rwandans wrote letters to the United Nations (UN), accusing the Belgian colonial authorities and the Catholic Church of creating trouble. Many of them pointed fingers at the Missionary Press of Kabgayi, accusing it of being the main cause of the riots. They were also accusing the White Fathers for supporting the enemies of the monarchy, and helping create division among Banyarwanda.

The problem of Hutu and Tutsi as ethnic races was still in debate, with Belgians and the Catholic Church pushing for the acceptance of both Hutu and Tutsi as different races while Rwandan authorities, especially the King and his allies refused to accept that the Hutu and the Tutsi were different races.

ALSO READ: Mutara III Rudahigwa remembered 65 years later

In the 1950’s, when King Mutara III Rudahigwa decided to concentrate his attention on independence, Belgians shifted alliances and started to hate their favorite group – the Tutsi – as it sought independence. A new alliance with the Hutu started. There was now a new coalition against the Tutsi who were labelled enemies of the Hutu, and anti-white.

ALSO READ: PHOTOS: A tribute to Mutara III Rudahigwa

So, the Belgian authorities and the Church had to hurry, deciding to defend the democratic rights of the Hutu majority, embodied by Grégoire Kayibanda. And the first to try to impose the narrative of Hutu/Tutsi as races was the Belgian Governor.

ALSO READ: How the monarchy was replaced by Hutu-based republic

On December 1, 1958, Jean-Paul Harroy, the then Governor General of Rwanda-Urundi, at the opening of the full session of the General Council, stated that there was really "a Tutsi-Hutu race problem” in Rwanda, and that it was even "the key problem of the country”.

Until then, only Harroy had officially announced the existence of the two races. The church also needed to do something. That is how, on February 11, 1959, a letter by Bishop Perraudin was published at the occasion of the Lent of 1959, to support the declaration of the Governor.

A month later, the Hutu manifesto was launched on March 24, 1959, agreeing in many aspects with "the Lent Letter”, denouncing the supposed exploitation of the Hutu by the ethnic Tutsi. The original name of the Hutu manifesto that goes with the "Lent Letter” was titled "Note on the social aspect of native racial problems in Rwanda” in French "Note sur l'aspect social du problème racial indigène au Rwanda.”

What is strange, to distance the Hutu Manifesto and the Lent Letter, some historians distorted the dates. It is well recorded that the Parmehutu Manifesto was written on March 24, 1959, and the party itself was born on October 19, 1959. But, to distance the Parmehutu manifesto from this "Lent Letter”, some historians propagated the idea that the manifesto was written in 1957 and the party was founded in 1957.

In this pastoral letter, he said that the resources as well as the political positions were within the hands of one race only. He predicted imminent bloodshed if the situation did not change.

In an Interview on April 8, 1995, about his letter, Perraudin said: "My pastoral letter of February 11, 1959 was for me a pastoral requirement. It was in no way a political intervention. I ultimately noticed that in the country, people of the Hutu ethnic group were despised: they were considered second-class men by others who said they were born to command... It is this situation which pushed me, after careful reflection, to write my pastoral letter.”

The letter starts, stating that: "There are also in our dear Rwanda, as in many other countries in the world, various social groups. The distinction between these groups comes largely from race but also from other factors such as wealth and political role or religion. There are Africans, Europeans and Asians. Among the Africans there are the Batutsi, the Bahutu and the Batwa; there are rich and poor; there are shepherds and farmers; there are traders and craftsmen; there are Catholics and Protestants, Hindus and Muslims and there are still many pagans; there are the Rulers and the Ruled.”

Then comes the real reason for the letter. "Let us first of all note that there are really several different races in Rwanda, although alliances between them have taken place and do not always make it possible to say to which race a given individual belongs. This diversity of races in the same country is a normal fact against which we can do nothing. We inherit a past that did not depend on us. Let us therefore accept to be several races together and try to understand and love each other as brothers from the same country.”

And to conclude, he says: "In our Rwanda, social differences and inequalities are largely linked to racial differences, in the sense that wealth on the one hand and political and even judicial power on the other hand, are in reality in a considerable proportion in the hands of people of the same race.”

The Lent Letter is long. But its main message can be divided into three main points, the first one being that Rwanda is made up of three races, the Bahutu, the Batutsi and the Batwa. However, as highlighted, the problem exists between the Bahutu and the Batutsi.

Second, the wealth and political positions in "our Rwanda” has been in the hands of one race, meaning the Batutsi.

Third, because of the love of God, and as Christians, the situation must change without violence. We have to accept the past and cannot change it, but we have the duty to correct it and give the wealth and political power to those who have been sidelined for centuries.

In one word, Tutsi who are against divisionism have to accept it in the name of biblical love, and Hutu accept their Hutuness, but not to be sidelined anymore.

I conclude by reminding readers that before the colonial era, the Batutsi and the Bahutu were siblings. Their separation occurred officially on February 12, 1959.

Lately, thanks to the government of national unity, everything possible is being done to heal the wound.