Indianisation of Christianity: Whom are we fooling? (part1)

Recently, a news piqued my curiosity. In Himachal Pradesh, one pastor was beaten up and was threatened with death unless he and other believers participated in a ‘reconversion’ ceremony in which verses from the Bhagavata Gita will be chanted. It was very saddening. Did these people actually think that Christians could be ‘reconverted’ if they participated in some recital session? Perhaps so. In that case, these fundamentalist outfits should be pleased to hear that the Catholic Church is making serious efforts to incorporate Hindu practices like performing aarti (ritual practiced by Hindus in which light from wicks soaked in ghee or camphor is offered to one or more deities. The word may also refer to the traditional Hindu devotional song that is sung in the ritual of the same name) during mass, studying Sanskrit and the Vedas (the oldest and most authoritative Hindu sacred texts, composed in Sanskrit and gathered into four collections) and experiencing Ashram (monastic) life. Why? To give themselves “a feel of being an Indian.”

This is particularly interesting because in his recent, albeit controversial, visit to Punjab, RSS supremo, KS Sudarshan criticized the Church, saying that it should change its mindset and “feel Indian and act as Indian.” I wonder whether the Catholic Church is playing into the hands of the RSS?

With all due respect, I am a Christian, a “born again” as some would call me. I am also an Indian and feel Indian and act as Indian. And, for this, I do not need the RSS’s nod of approval or acceptance. However, it does not mean that to be an Indian, I must learn to recite Bhagvad Gita or study the Vedas or offer aarti. What next? Do we sing Saraswati Vandana in Christian schools? Do we put on saffron robes and tonsure our heads when we conduct sermons from the pulpits? How about worshipping cows, rodents or simians on Christmas Day or Easter?

Of course, one is tempted to argue that since Hindus constitute the majority community, their religious idiom ought to provide the binding cultural cement for a diversified people. One may also argue that since Hindus are uniquely tolerant, the minorities have nothing to fear from a takeover of public spaces and official occasions by Hindu rituals, nor should they feel insecure if the nation is designated as Hindu. Of course, Saraswati Vandanas and Vedas are, in any case, beautiful and profound, and it is very convenient to say that all “pseudo–secularists” who object to their use by the state are “anti– Hindu.”

It is, however, obvious that religious texts lose their “innocence” when they are used for coercive and discriminatory purposes. Since it is the Sangh Parivar (including the RSS) which proposes to Indianise not only our Constitution, but also Christianity and Islam, it is irrelevant to refer only to the original, literal meaning of the texts and the hymns, and not to the inclination and activities of the people who will enforce and shape their use. Whether Hindus are tolerant or not is not the point here. After all, no one can deny the Sangh Parivar's record of violent intolerance.

What is at issue here is not Indianisation of Christianity but secularism, democracy and
citizenship rights. In a multicultural democracy, the state and its associated offices and occasions have to be scrupulously non– denominational, not identified with any particular community to the exclusion of others. For, if the state affirms its affiliation to a particular denomination, the citizens belonging to other faiths or to no faith, would be relegated to a secondary status, and located at a greater distance from the state, upon which their claims would become correspondingly weaker. Again, in a democracy, tolerance cannot be a substitute for equal citizenship status. Tolerance implies a relationship of power, where some tolerate others who are dependent, on sufferance. In a democracy, on the other hand, citizenship is a matter of right, irrespective of what section the citizen belongs to.

If the nation, in its eagerness to “Indianise” everyone, designates itself as Hindu and the state acknowledges it in its official sphere, then non–Hindus will at best be tolerated as minorities, not as equal citizens.

(To be continued)