becoming indian towards an indian contextual ecclesiology

KATHOLIEKE UNIVERSITEIT LEUVEN FACULTY OF THEOLOGY

BECOMING INDIAN

Towards an Indian Contextual Ecclesiology

A dissertation presented in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the

Doctor’s Degree (Ph.D) in Theology (S.T.D.)

Promoter by

Prof. Dr. Peter DE MEY Vijaya Joji Babu VALLE

2010

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Books not only tell a story, they also have a story of their own; a story of those

who have guided challenged and nurtured the author. This thesis too has a story of its

own. Accordingly, I am happy to place on record some of those who have nourished

and sustained me through the journey of this dissertation. I thank the Almighty God

for his benevolent graces that sustained me through this research. Deo Gratias!

I acknowledge with deep gratitude the contribution of my promoter, Prof. Dr.

Peter De Mey, who has ably guided me in this research. His depth of knowledge in

the fields of ecclesiology and ecumenism has been a rich resource for my work. The

perceptive corrections, warm encouragement, and at times gentle prodding I received

from him are a blessing I shall always treasure. I thank the board of examiners, Prof.

Dr. Paul M. Collins, Prof. Dr. Richard Brosse and Prof. Dr. Bert Broeckaert, for their

careful reading and insightful suggestions.

I acknowledge the services of the dean, Prof. Dr. Lieven Boeve, and all the

professors of the Faculty of Theology who deepened my knowledge and toned my

reflection. The staff of the Secretariat and the Library of the Faculty of Theology

deserves my great appreciation and profound gratitude.

I thank my bishop, Prakash Mallavarapu, Bishop of Vijayawada, Andhra

Pradesh, India, who has sent me here to KU Leuven to pursue higher studies. He has

been a constant source of support and encouragement. I am deeply grateful to the

Faculty of Theology for granting me scholarship during my Licentiate and the

Institute of Missiology (MWI), Aachen, for their financial assistance during my

doctoral studies. Their generosity is both encouraging and gracious.

I thank Ms. Pauline McManus for the valuable help she extended in the

language corrections of my texts. I also gratefully acknowledge the help rendered by

Peter, Bosco, Arulraj and Jeeva in the preparation of the final text of the thesis.

Last but not least, I thank my friends who have been part of the story of my

life in Leuven: Peter, Bosco and Prasad who have been never-failing sources of

support, care, challenge and inspiration; companions at Holy Spirit College, especially

of the Tamil group, and all other Indian students. I thank Frs. Thomas, Vijay, Suresh

and Anand for their friendship, and Frs. Solomon Anna and David Anna for their

special concern, and my family for all their warm love and support. I thank all whom

I do not mention here but have been an integral part of the story of this thesis.

Leuven

8 December, 2010 Vijaya Joji Babu Valle

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. i

BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................ ix

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1. Becoming Indian: Status Questionis ..................................................................... 1

1.2. The Scheme of Our Research ................................................................................ 1

1.3. Contextual Ecclesiology ....................................................................................... 3

1.3.1.Ecclesiology “Made in Context” ................................................................... 3

1.3.2. Mission Defines the Church: Ecclesiology “Made by Mission” .................. 4

1.4. Unity in Diversity .................................................................................................. 5

1.5. The Methodology .................................................................................................. 6

1.6. Some Preferential Options .................................................................................... 6

1.7. Some Limitations .................................................................................................. 9

1.8. Some Strengths ..................................................................................................... 9

CHAPTER ONE

BECOMING “LOCAL”: AN INCULTURATED CHURCH

1. ALIENS IN A HOME LAND .................................................................................... 10

1.1. SOME REASONS FOR THE “FOREIGNNESS” OF THE INDIAN CHURCH ........................ 13

2. ATTEMPTS TO BECOME AN INDIAN CHURCH ............................................. 17

2.1. NATIONALIST MOVEMENT AND INDIAN CHRISTIANITY ........................................... 19

2.1.1. Three Phases of Christian Participation in National Movement .................. 21

2.1.2. Three Responses of Indian Christians towards National Movement ............ 24

2.2. SOME ATTEMPTS AT THE CREATION OF INDIGENOUS CHURCHES ............................ 26

2.2.1. The Hindu Church of the Lord Jesus (1857) ................................................ 27

2.2.2. The National Church of India (1886) ........................................................... 30

2.2.3. The Calcutta Christo Samaj (1887) .............................................................. 33

2.2.4. Church of the New Dispensation (Sen) ........................................................ 35

2.2.5. “Hindu Catholic”: Brahmabandhab Upadhyaya (1861-1907) ...................... 38

2.2.6. Some Observations ....................................................................................... 41

2.2.7. A Critique of the National/Indigenous Church Movements ......................... 44

3. INCULTURATION AS A PROCESS OF BECOMING LOCAL ......................... 46

3.1. INCULTURATION: ORIGIN AND GROWTH OF THE CONCEPT ...................................... 46

3.1.1. Inculturation and Vatican II .......................................................................... 48

3.1.2. Inculturation and the Synod of Bishops (1974) ............................................ 50

3.1.3. Inculturation and Evangelii Nuntiandi .......................................................... 50

3.1.4. Inculturation and John Paul II ....................................................................... 51

3.1.5. Inculturation and FABC ............................................................................... 53

3.1.6. Inculturation and Ecclesia in Asia ................................................................ 54

3.1.7. Other Prominent Documents ........................................................................ 56

4. INCULTURATION IN INDIA: A RETROSPECT ................................................ 58

4.1. SYRIAN CHURCHES IN KERALA AND INCULTURATION ............................................. 58

4.2. SOME PIONEERS OF INCULTURATION IN INDIA ........................................................ 61

4.2.1. Robert de Nobili ........................................................................................... 61

4.2.2. Swami Parama Arupi Ananda (Jules Monchanin) ........................................ 63

4.2.3. Swami Abhishiktananda (Henri Le Saux) .................................................... 64

4.2.4. Francis Acharya (Francis Mahieu) ............................................................... 65

4.2.5. Swami Dayananda (Bede Griffiths) .............................................................. 66

4.2.6. Amalorpavadass ............................................................................................ 67

4.2.7. Other Indian Pioneers ................................................................................... 68

4.3. LITURGICAL INCULTURATION .................................................................................. 69

4.4. ASHRAMIC INCULTURATION .................................................................................... 72

4.5. THEOLOGICAL INCULTURATION .............................................................................. 76

4.6. TWO INCULTURATION TRENDS IN INDIA .................................................................. 83

4.7. DALIT CRITIQUE OF INCULTURATION ...................................................................... 86

4.7.1. Alienating High-Caste Brahmanical Inculturation ....................................... 87

4.7.2. Neglect of Alternative Cultures and Religions of India ............................... 88

4.7.3. Neglect of Cultures and Religions of the Poor ............................................. 89

5. CONTEMPORARY THEOLOGY OF INCULTURATION IN INDIA ............... 91

5.1. FELIX WILFRED: INTER-RELIGIOUS AND INTER-CULTURAL ..................................... 91

5.1.1. Inculturation as Cross-Cultural Hermeneutics .............................................. 93

5.1.2. Inculturation and the Context of Religious Pluralism .................................. 94

5.1.3. The Implications of an Inculturation within the Context of Religions ......... 95

5.1.4. The Local Church as the Agent of Inculturation .......................................... 99

5.2. MICHAEL AMALADOSS: TRANSFORMATIVE ENCOUNTER ...................................... 101

5.2.1. Critique of Inculturation ............................................................................. 101

5.2.2. Inculturation ................................................................................................ 102

5.2.3. Beyond Inculturation: ................................................................................. 103

5.2.4. Gospel-Culture Encounter .......................................................................... 103

5.2.5. Transformation through Dialogue .............................................................. 104

5.2.6. Prophetic and Counter-cultural ................................................................... 105

5.2.7. Building the Kingdom ................................................................................ 106

5.3. ALOYSIUS PIERIS: THROUGH POOR TO THE REIGN OF GOD ................................... 107

5.3.1. His Critique of Inculturation ....................................................................... 107

5.3.2. Rejection of the Western Models of Inculturation ..................................... 108

5.3.3. Inculturation is a Natural Process ............................................................... 110

5.3.4. Inculturation creates Local Churches ......................................................... 110

5.3.5. Inculturation and Proclamation ................................................................... 111

5.3.6. Beyond Cultic Inculturation ....................................................................... 112

5.3.7. An Asian Eucharist ..................................................................................... 113

5.3.8. Struggles of the Poor – Struggles for the Kingdom .................................... 114

5.3.9. Inculturation is Liberation .......................................................................... 115

5.4. SAMUEL RAYAN: EN-FLESHING INTO PEOPLE’S STRUGGLES ................................. 119

5.4.1. The Non-Incarnate Image of the Indian Church ......................................... 120

5.4.2. An “Incarnate Indian Church” with the “Flesh of India” ........................... 121

5.4.3. Inculturation of the Indian Church in People’s Struggles .......................... 121

5.4.4. “Flesh of the Church” as the “Flesh of the poor” ....................................... 123

5.5. SOME ANALYTICAL POINTERS ............................................................................... 124

5.5.1. Inculturation not a dead-story ..................................................................... 124

5.5.2. Beyond the Cultic Inculturation .................................................................. 124

5.5.3. Critical Inculturation ................................................................................... 125

5.5.4. Inculturation as Conversion ........................................................................ 126

5.5.5. Two Centres of Inculturation: Religious-Other and Suffering-Other ......... 126

6. “GOD ON/OF THE PERIPHERY”: SUBALTERN THEOLOGY OF

INCULTURATION ................................................................................................. 128

6.1. SUBALTERN ........................................................................................................... 128

6.2. INDIAN SUBALTERN RELIGIOSITY .......................................................................... 130

6.2.1. Feminine Divinity ....................................................................................... 131

6.2.2. Local Heroes ............................................................................................... 132

6.2.3. Liberative Forces ........................................................................................ 133

6.2.4. Rebellious Spirits ........................................................................................ 133

6.2.5. Dancing Spirits and Vibrant Visions .......................................................... 134

6.2.6. Orality ......................................................................................................... 134

6.2.7. Opposed to the Dominant Religiosity ......................................................... 135

6.2.8. Public Divinity (open space; no private religiosity) ................................... 136

6.3. SUBALTERN INCULTURATION ................................................................................ 136

6.3.1. Jesus and the Subalterns ............................................................................. 136

6.3.1.1. Jesus as Deviant .................................................................................. 136

6.3.1.2. Jesus as Subaltern ............................................................................... 137

6.3.1.3. Jesus, a Friend of the Subalterns ........................................................ 137

6.3.1.4. Jesus Challenges Elite Religiosity ...................................................... 138

6.3.2. Subaltern as the “locus” of the Church ....................................................... 138

6.3.3. “Option for the Poor” as “Option for the Subaltern” .................................. 139

6.3.4. Subaltern Religiosity as the Source of Inculturation .................................. 139

6.3.5. Subaltern Symbols as Liturgical Symbols .................................................. 139

6.3.6. Subaltern Theology as “Theo-graphia” and “Theo-phonia” ...................... 140

6.3.7. Subaltern Values as the “Values of the Kingdom” ..................................... 142

6.3.8. Subaltern Inculturation Counters the Hindutva Ideology ........................... 143

6.3.9. Subaltern Inculturation Incarnates Truly “Local Churches” ...................... 144

6.3.10. Subaltern Inculturation Fosters Harmony ................................................. 144

6.4. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................... 144

CHAPTER TWO

BECOMING “MARGINAL”: A MARGINAL CHURCH

1. THE POOR HAVE A FACE....................................................................................146

2. DISCRIMINATION OF DALIT CHRISTIANS...................................................148

2.1. DISCRIMINATION BY THE STATE ............................................................................ 148

2.2. DISCRIMINATION WITHIN THE CHURCH ................................................................. 150

2.2.1. Caste Discrimination by Early Western Missionaries ................................... 151

2.2.2. Caste Discrimination by the Syrian Churches of Kerala ............................... 156

2.2.3. Dalit Oppression in Catholic Church of Tamilnadu ...................................... 158

2.2.2. Prohibition from Priesthood ........................................................................... 160

2.2.2. Ambedkar: Voice of a Dalit Prophet .............................................................. 162

2.2.2. Discrimination in all Castes (Intra-Discrimination) ....................................... 163

2.3.2. Some Pointers………………………………………………………………. 164

2.3. RESPONSE OF THE CHURCH AGAINST DALIT DISCRIMINATION IN THE CHURCH .... 165

2.3.1. The Anti-Caste Discourse in the Church ....................................................... 165

2.3.2. Response of Indian Bishops ........................................................................... 167

3. THEOLOGY AGAINST DISCRIMINATION OF DALIT CHRISTIANS........169

3.1. CASTE DISCRIMINATION IN THE CHURCH: A BROKEN COMMUNION ...................... 169

3.2. CAN THE EUCHARIST MAKE A CASTE-RIDDEN CHURCH? ...................................... 170

3.3. THE CRUCIFIED OUTSIDE THE CAMP: A CALL FOR PROPHETIC COMMUNION ........ 173

3.4. A CASTELESS INDIAN CHURCH: A TRUE “KINGDOM KOINONIA” .......................... 176

4. THE PLIGHT OF THE ADIVASIS: A CALL FOR IDENTITY........................177

4.1. THE ADIVASIS IN INDIA ........................................................................................ 177

4.2. THE ADIVASIS IN THE CHURCH ............................................................................. 178

4.3. ADIVASIS AND DALITS: A COMMON IDENTITY? ................................................... 181

4.4. MARGINALISATION OF THE ADIVASIS IN INDIAN SOCIETY ..................................... 182

4.5. MARGINALISATION OF THE ADIVASIS IN THE CHURCH .......................................... 183

4.6. THE THEOLOGY OF THE ADIVASIS ......................................................................... 184

4.6.1. Jesus as an Adivasi: A Protector of Creation ................................................. 185

4.6.2. Messianic People: Seeking the Promised Land ............................................. 186

4.6.3. Joyful People of God: Living the Resurrection ............................................. 187

4.6.4. Church as an Egalitarian Community ............................................................ 188

4.6.5. Exposing the Lacuna of Modern Development ............................................. 188

5. CONVERSION OF DALITS/ADIVASIS: “FOR GOD OR FOR RICE?”.........189

5.1. “RICE-CHRISTIANS” ARE ALSO “FAITH CHRISTIANS”............................................ 191

5.2. MODERN MARTYRS FOR FAITH ............................................................................. 192

5.3. A HIGH-CASTE PREJUDICED ALLEGATION ............................................................ 193

5.4. UNDERLYING FALSE RELIGIOUS ASSUMPTIONS..................................................... 193

5.5. A NEW SUBJECTIVE IDENTITY ............................................................................... 194

5.6. BOTTOM-UP INDIAN CHRISTIAN HISTORY ............................................................. 195

6. AN INDIAN CHURCH THAT “EMPOWERS WOMEN IN INDIA”................198

6.1. WOMEN IN INDIA: SLAVES OR SAINTS? ................................................................. 198

6.2. VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ................................................................................. 200

6.3. WOMEN’S OPPRESSION IN RELIGIONS IN INDIA ..................................................... 201

6.4. WOMEN IN THE INDIAN CHURCH: COMMUNION DENIED ....................................... 204

6.5. JESUS EMPOWERS WOMEN .................................................................................... 205

6.6. FEMINIST THEOLOGY: THEOLOGY FROM THE MARGINS ........................................ 207

6.7. TELLING A DIFFERENT STORY: FEMINIST NARRATIVE ........................................... 209

6.7.1. Women Shaping india ................................................................................... 210

6.7.1.1. Woman Who Conquered the God of Death: Savitri.............................. 212

6.7.1.2. A woman who fought for india’s freedom: sarojini naidu .................... 213

6.7.2. Women Shaping the Indian Church .............................................................. 213

6.7.2.1. A Fearless Evangelist: Chandra Lila Sadhuni ...................................... 214

6.7.2.2. A Hindu-Christian Woman: Pandita Ramabai ...................................... 215

6.7.2.3. Woman Who Became the “Mother” to Modern India: Mother Teresa . 215

6.8. TOWARDS INCLUSIVE INDIAN FEMINIST THEOLOGY .............................................. 216

6.8.1.Dalit Feminism .............................................................................................. 217

6.8.2. Adivasi Feminism ......................................................................................... 219

6.9. THE “MAGNIFICAT” AS CRY OF LIBERATION ......................................................... 221

6.10. THE RISING SUN: WOMEN RELIGIOUS IN INDIA ................................................... 221

7.11. DISCIPLESHIP OF EQUALS: A WAY OF BEING CHURCH ........................................ 222

7. CHURCH AS “JESUS-COMMUNITY OF THE MARGINS”............................223

7.1. JESUS-COMMUNITY AS A PARADIGM FOR THE CHURCH ......................................... 224

7.2. JESUS-COMMUNITY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT ....................................................... 224

7.2.1. A Community of Radical Freedom ................................................................ 225

7.2.2. A Community of Radical Equality ................................................................. 225

7.2.3. A Community of Radical Sharing and Service .............................................. 226

7.3. JESUS-COMMUNITY IS A “COMMUNITY OF THE POOR” .......................................... 226

7.4. “JESUS-COMMUNITY OF THE MARGINS” ................................................................ 227

7.4.1. Jesus: the Marginal Nazarene......................................................................... 228

7.4.2. Marginal Followers of Jesus .......................................................................... 229

7.4.3. Galilee is Graceful: Grace of the Margins ..................................................... 231

7.4.4. Salvation comes from the Margins ................................................................ 233

7.4.5. Crucified Outside the Gate: Margin par excellence ....................................... 234

7.5. CHURCH OF THE MARGINS ..................................................................................... 235

7.5.1. Marginal People of God ................................................................................. 236

7.5.2. Marginal Ministries ........................................................................................ 236

7.5.3. Marginal Koinonia ......................................................................................... 237

7.5.4. Marginally One, Holy, Apostolic and Catholic ............................................. 238

7.5.5. Marginal Church as Equitable Church ........................................................... 238

7.5.6. Marginal Church as Liberative Church .......................................................... 240

7.5.7. Marginal Church as a Just Church ................................................................. 241

7.6. THE SPIRITUALITY OF THE CHURCH OF THE MARGINS ........................................... 242

7.6.1. Holiness as a Struggle for Justice................................................................... 242

7.6.2. Holiness as Participation in Ethical Praxis..................................................... 243

7.6.3. Living with the Crucified on the Margins ...................................................... 244

7.7. JESUS-COMMUNITY OF THE MARGINS IN INDIA TODAY ......................................... 245

7.7.1. Indian Church as an “Alien” on the Margins of India? .................................. 245

7.7.2. Misplaced Ministries of the Indian Church for the Margins of India? .......... 246

7.7.3. How will “Church become poor” and “poor become Church”? .................... 248

7.7.4. How will the “poor become theologians” and “theology become poor”? ..... 249

7.7.5. Theologians Listening to the Poor: ................................................................ 250

7.7.6. Can the non-dalit theologians of India not do Dalit Theology? ..................... 251

7.7.7. “Margin of the Margins”: Engendering the Margins of India........................ 252

7.7.8. Pilgrim Journey to the Margins of India ........................................................ 253

8. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................... 254

CHAPTER THREE

BECOMING “DIALOGICAL”: A DIALOGICAL CHURCH

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 255

2. DIALOGUE IN INDIA: A LIBERATING DIALOGUE ...................................... 256

2.1. THEOLOGICAL DIVIDE IN INDIA: LIBERATION VS. DIALOGUE ............................... 256

2.2. “MANY POOR” AND “MANY RELIGIONS”: AN INDISSOLUBLE UNITY .................... 257

2.3. THE “HOLY COVENANT” OF LIBERATION AND DIALOGUE ..................................... 258

2.4. NO GENUINE DIALOGUE IS POSSIBLE WITHOUT LIBERATION ................................. 258

2.5. NO INTEGRAL LIBERATION IS POSSIBLE WITHOUT DIALOGUE ............................... 261

2.6. LIBERATING DIALOGUE ......................................................................................... 262

2.7. DIALOGUE OVERCOMING VIOLENCE ..................................................................... 263

2.8. DIALOGUE EVOKING LIBERATION IN RELIGIONS ................................................... 264

2.9. POLITICAL DIALOGUE ............................................................................................ 266

3. “DUSTY DIALOGUE” IN INDIA: DIALOGUE FROM THE POOR .............. 267

3.1. THOU SHALL NOT FORGET THE POOR IN INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE ................... 267

3.2. OPPRESSION AS THE STARTING POINT OF DIALOGUE ............................................. 268

3.3. CRITIQUE OF THE RELIGIONS BY THE OPPRESSED .................................................. 269

3.4. CONVERSION OF RELIGIONS AS INTERRELIGIOUS PROJECT ..................................... 271

3.5. FIGHTING CASTE DISCRIMINATION AS INTERRELIGIOUS PROJECT .......................... 273

3.6. RESISTING HINDUTVA IDEOLOGY AS INTERRELIGIOUS PROJECT ............................ 274

3.6.1. Interreligious Affirmation of the Cultures and Religions of the Poor ........... 275

3.6.2. Interreligious Vision of Nationalism with the Poor ....................................... 276

3.6.3. Beyond the “Hindu-Christian” Rhetoric ........................................................ 276

4. CHURCH AS A DIALOGICAL COMMUNION ................................................. 277

4.1. DIALOGUE AMONG CHURCHES: ECUMENICAL COMMUNION ................................. 280

4.1.1. Ecumenical Relations in India ....................................................................... 280

4.1.2. Not Greater than my Brothers ........................................................................ 281

4.1.3. Trans-ecclesial Ecumenism: Broadening the Borders of Communion .......... 283

4.2. DIALOGUE AMONG RELIGIONS: INTER-RELIGIOUS COMMUNION .......................... 284

4.2.1. The Extended Communion ............................................................................ 284

4.2.2. Imperative of Interreligious Dialogue ............................................................ 286

4.2.3. Need for Dialogue Is a Need for Communion ............................................... 287

4.2.4. Striving In Communion for a Better India ..................................................... 290

4.2.5. Universal Communion of the Kingdom ......................................................... 291

4.3. DIALOGUE WITH NATURE: ECO-COMMUNION ...................................................... 292

4.3.1. Need for Eco-Communion ............................................................................. 292

4.3.2. Brother-Sun and Sister-Moon: Franciscan Perspective ................................. 296

4.3.3. Eucharistic Ecology ....................................................................................... 297

4.3.4. Earth as Ekklesia ............................................................................................ 299

5. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................... 301

GENERAL CONCLUSION

BECOMING INDIAN: A GANDHIAN PARADIGM

1. THE “ECCLESIAL” GANDHI .................................................................................... 302

1.1. Gandhi: the “Symbol” of Indianness................................................................. 303

1.2. Gandhi: the best Indian follower of “Jesus” ..................................................... 303

1.3. Gandhi: A Fine Fusion of Prayer and Politics .................................................. 305

2. BECOMING INDIAN: A GANDHIAN PARADIGM ....................................................... 306

2.1. Becoming Local: “Local Gandhi” and “Local Church” ................................... 306

2.2. Becoming Marginal: “Marginal Gandhi” and “Marginal Church” ................... 307

2.3. Becoming Dialogical: “Dialogical Gandhi” and “Dialogical Church” ............. 309

3. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 311

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abhishiktananda. Swami Parama Arubi Aanandam (Father J. Monchanin) 1895-

1957: A Memorial. Tiruchirapalli: Trichinopoly United Printers, 1959.

________. Hindu-Christian Meeting Point. Delhi: ISPCK, 1969.

________. Saccidananda: A Christian Approach to Advaitic Experience. Delhi:

ISPCK, 1974.

________. The Secret of Arunachala. Delhi: ISPCK, 1979.

Adamson, Walter L. Hegemony and Revolution: A Study of Antonio Gramsci‟s

Political and Cultural Theory. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.

Akkara, Anto. Shining Faith in Kandhamal. Bangalore: ATC, 2009.

Aleaz, K. P. “A Prophet to be Reclaimed: Brahmabandhab Upadhyay, the Indian

Christian Nationalist.” Third Millennium X:1 (2007): 10-15.

Alexander, Elisabeth Susan. The Attitudes of British Protestant Missionaries Towards

Nationalism in India, With Special Reference to Madras Presidency, 1919-1927.

Delhi: Konark Publishers, 1994.

Alexander, K. C. “The Problem of Caste in the Christian Churches of Kerala.” In

Caste among Non-Hindus in India, ed. Harjinder Singh, 50-65. New Delhi:

National Publishing House, 1977.

Allen, Michael. “The Hindu View of Women.” In Women in India and Nepal, ed.

Michael Allen and S. N. Mukherjee, 1-20. Canberra: Australian National

University, 1982.

Allman, James, ed. Women‟s Status and Fertility in the Muslim World. New York:

Praeger Publishers, 1978.

Almeida, Leslie J. “The Indian Church and the Invincible Virus of Casteism.” In

Caste Culture in Indian Church, eds. Sebasti L. Raj and G. F. Xavier Raj, 31-

36. New Delhi: ISI, 1993.

________. “Christian Response to the Reality of Caste and the Dalits.” In

Missiological Approaches in India: Retrospect and Prospect, eds., Joseph

Mattam and Krickwin C. Marak, 237-256. Mumbai: St. Pauls, 1999.

Altekar, A. S. The Position of Women in Hindu Civilization. Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass, 1962.

Amaladass, Anand, and R. Young, eds. The Indian Christian: A Concise Anthology of

Didactic and Devotional Literature in Early Church Sanskrit. Anand, Gujarat:

Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1995.

Amaladoss, Michael. “Ashrams and Social Justice.” In The Indian Church in Struggle

for a New Society, ed. D. S. Amalorpavadass, 370-378. Bangalore: NBCLC,

1981.

________. “Towards A Culture of Wholeness.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 47 (1983): 67-76.

________. “Culture and Dialogue.” International Review of Mission 74 (1985): 169-

177.

________. Faith, Culture and Inter-religious Dialogue. Delhi: Indian Social Institute,

1985.

________. “The Future of the Church‟s Mission in India.” Jeevadhara 17 (1987):

377-386.

x | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________. “Ecology and Culture: Some Indian Perspectives.” Jeevadhara 18 (1988):

40-54.

________. “Encounter of Religions: Some Concerns as We Face the 1990s.”

Jeevadhara 20 (1990): 5-16.

________. “Faith and Symbols: The Flute and the Chakra, the Cross and the

Crescent.” Jeevadhara 20 (1990): 209-219.

________. Making All Things New. Dialogue, Pluralism and Evangelization in Asia.

Anand: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1990.

________. “Inculturation of Religious Life in India.” Vidyajyoti Journal of

Theological Reflection 55 (1991): 507-516.

________. Becoming Indian: The Process of Inculturation. Bangalore: Dharmaram,

1992.

________. Walking Together: The Practice of Inter-Religious Dialogue. Anand:


________. A Call to Community. Anand: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1994.

________. “Inculturation in India: Historical Perspectives and Questions.” In

Yearbook of Contextual Theologies-1994, 42-57. Aachen: MWI, 1994.

________. “Mission in a Post-Modern World: A Call to be Counter-Cultural.” Indian

Missiological Review 18:3 (1996): 12-23.

________. Life in Freedom: Liberation Theologies from Asia. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1997.

________. Beyond Inculturation: Can the Many Be One? Delhi: ISPCK/Vidyajyoti,

1998.

________. “The Image of Jesus in the Church in Asia.” East Asian Pastoral Review

37 (2000): 233-241.

________. Making Harmony: Living in a Pluralist World. Delhi: ISPCK, 2003.

________. “The Eucharist and the Christian Community.” Vidyajyoti Journal of


________. “Liberation Theologies and Indian Experiences.” Vidyajyoti Journal of


________. Beyond Dialogue: Pilgrims to the Absolute. Bangalore: ATC, 2008.

________. “A New Way of Being Christian in India Today: Theological Reflections.”

Church‟s Engagement in Civil Society, eds., Anthony Kalliath and Francis

Gonsalves, 133-156. Bangalore: ATC, 2009.

________. “Swami Abhishiktananda‟s Challenge to Indian Theology.” Vidyajyoti

Journal of Theological Reflection 74 (2010): 338-349.

Amalorpavadass, D. S. Towards Indigenisation in Liturgy. Bangalore: NBCLC, 1971.

________. Our Christian World Vision. Bangalore: NBCLC, n. d.

________. Gospel and Culture. Bangalore: NBCLC, 1978.

Ambedkar, B. R. What Congress and Gandhi Have Done For the Untouchables.

Bombay: Thacker Co., 1945.

________. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, vol. 5. Bombay:

Government of Maharashtra, 1989.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xi

________. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, vol. 11. Edited by

Vasant Moon. Bombay: Department of Education, Government of Maharashtra,

1989-1992.

Anand, Mulkraj, and Eleanor Zelliot, eds. An Anthology of Dalit Literature. New

Delhi: Gyan Publishing, 1992.

Anand, Subhash. “Conversion: The Gandhian Critique and Our Response.”

Jnanadeepa 3:1 (2000): 121-140.

Andreassi, Anthony D. “After Peter. Book Review of A History of the Popes by John

W. O‟Malley, SJ,” America (1 March, 2010)

http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=12141

(accessed 21 February 2010).

Andrews, C. F. Mahatma Gandhi‟s Ideas. London: George Allen, 1929.

________. The Renaissance in India: Its Missionary Aspect. London: Church

Missionary Society, 1912.

Andy, Pulney. Are Not Hindus Christians? Madras: Cosmopolitan Press, 1984.

Animananda, B. The Blade: Life and Work of Brahmabandhab Upadhyaya. Calcutta:

Roy and Sons, 1947.

Anthony Raj. “The Dalit Christian Reality in Tamilnadu.” Jeevadhara 22 (1992): 95-

111.

________. Children of a Lesser God: Dalit Christians. Madurai: DCLM Publications,

1993.

Appadurai, Arjun. Gender, Genre, and Power in South Asian Expressive Traditions.

Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991.

Appasamy, A. J. Sunder Singh. Madras: Christian Literature Society, 1966.

Appavoo, James Theophilius. “Dalit Religion.” In Indigenous Peoples: Dalits and

Dalit Issues in Today‟s Theological Debate, ed., James Massey, 111-121. Delhi:

ISPCK, 1994.

Areeparampil, Mathew. Struggles for Swaraj. Chaibasa: Tribal Research and Training

Centre, 2002.

Ariarajah, S. Wesley. “Interfaith Dialogue.” In Dictionary of the Ecumenical

Movement, ed. Nicholas Lossky et al, 311-317. Geneva: WCC/Eerdmans, 2002.

Arinze, Cardinal Francis. “Interreligious Dialogue: Problems, Prospects and

Possibilities.” Bulletin 3 (1987): 258-269.

Arockiasamy, S. Dharma, Hindu and Christian according to Roberto de Nobili.

Rome: Gregorian University, 1986.

________. “Sarvodaya and Antyodaya.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection

51 (1987): 545-564.

________. “The Challenges of a Divided India to the Social Teaching of the Church.”

Indian Theological Studies 28 (1991): 234-258.

________. “Editorial: The Challenge of Social Conversion.” Vidyajyoti Journal of


Arul Raja, A. Maria. “Some Reflections on a Dalit Reading of the Bible.” In Frontiers

of Dalit Theology, ed. V. Devasahayam, 336-345. Delhi: ISPCK, 1997.

Arulsamy, S. “Challenges to Christian Community in Emerging India.” Indian

Theological Studies 37 (2000): 5-22.

http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=12141

xii | B i b l i o g r a p h y

Ashe, Geoffrey. Gandhi. New York: Stein and Day, 1968.

Asian Theological Conference (ATC). “The Final Statement.” In Asia‟s Struggle for

Full Humanity, Papers from the Asian Theological Conference, 7-20 January

1979, Wennappuwa, Sri Lanka, 152-160. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1980.

Avila, Rafael. Worship and Politics. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1981.

Ayrookuzhiel, A. M. A. “The Religious Resources of the Dalits in the Context of their

Struggle.” In Essays in Celebration of the CISRS Silver Jubilee, ed. S. K.

Chatterji, 35-48. Madras: CLS, 1983.

________. “Christian Dalits in Revolt.” Jeevadhara 23 (1993): 267-273.

________. “A Proposal for the Study of the Religious Heritage of Dalits: Some

Methodological Considerations.” Religion and Society 42:1 (1995): 17-28.

Azariah, M. The Un-Christian Side of the Indian Church: The Plight of the

Untouchable Converts. Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akademy, 1989.

Azariah, V. S., and Henry Whitehead. Christ in the Indian Villages. London: Student

Christian Movement Press, 1930.

Baago, Kaj. “The First Independence Movement Among Indian Christians.” Indian

Church History Review 1:1 (1967): 65-78.

________. Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity. Madras: Christian Literature Society,

1969.

Balasundaram, Franklyn J. “The Contribution of A. P. Nirmal to Theology and

Especially to Dalit Theology.” Religion and Society 45 (1998): 85-100.

Balasuriya, Tissa. The Eucharist and Human Liberation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1979.

________. “Towards the Liberation of Theology in Asia.” In Asia‟s Struggle for Full

Humanity: Towards a Relevant Theology, ed. Virginia Fabella, 2-10. Maryknoll,

NY: Orbis, 1984.

________. “Mary and Human Liberation.” Logos 29:1-2 (1990): 1-21.

Balthasar, Hans Urs von. The Glory of the Lord: A Theological Aesthetics. I: Seeing

the Form. Translated by E. Leiva-Merikakis. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988.

Barnes, Michael. “From Ashrams to Dalits: The Four Seasons of Inculturation.” The

Way 41 (2001): 61-71.

Barrett, David., ed. World Christianity Encyclopaedia. Nairobi: Oxford University

Press, 1982.

Barth, Markus. “Jews and Gentiles: The Social Character of Justification in Paul.”

Ecumenical Studies 5 (1968): 241-267.

Batley, Dorothea Sibella. Devotees of Christ: Some Women Pioneers of the Indian

Church. London: Church of England, Zenana Missionary Society, 1937.

Bauman, Chad M. Christian Identity and Dalit Religion in Hindu India, 1868-1947.

Grand Rapids, Mich./Cambridge, UK: W. B. Eerdmans, 2008.

Bayly, Susan. Saints, Goddesses and Kings: Muslims and Christians in South Indian

Society, 1700-1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

Beck, Lois, and Keddie Nikki, eds. Women in the Muslim World. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press, 1978.

Becker, C. History of the Catholic Missions in North East India. Shillong: Vendrame

Missiological Centre, 1980.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xiii

Beckers, G. “The Evangelization of the Santals.” Indian Missiological Review 19:2

(1997): 34-56.

Bell, Daniel M. Jr. Liberation Theology After the End of History. The Refusal to

Cease Suffering. London: Routledge, 2001.

Bernier, Paul. Eucharist: Celebrating Its Rythms in Our Lives. Indiana: Ave Maria

Press, 1993.

Berry, Thomas. The Dreams of the Earth. San Francisco: Sierra Books, 1988.

Bevans, Stephen, and Roger P. Schroeder. Constants in Context: A Theology of

Mission for Today. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2004.

Bhanu, Busi Suneel. “Women in the Primal Vision.” In Feminist Theology:

Perspectives and Praxis, ed. Prasanna Kumari, 185-197. Chennai: Gurukul,

1999.

Bharathi, Thummapudi. A History of Telugu Dalit Literature. Delhi: Kalpaz

Publications, 2008.

Boeve, Lieven. Interrupting Tradition: An Essay on Christian Faith in a Postmodern

Context. Louvain Theological & Pastoral Monographs, 30. Leuven: Peeters,

2003.

________. God Interrupts History: Theology in a Time of Upheaval. New

York/London: Continuum, 2007.

Boff, Leonardo. Jesus Christ, Liberator. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1987.

________, and Clodovis Boff. Introducing Liberation Theology, trans. Paul Burns.

Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1987.

________. Jesus and the Cosmos. New York: Paulist Press, 1991.

________. Ecology and Liberation, A New Paradigm. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1993.

________. The Path to Hope: Fragments from a Theologian‟s Journey. Translated by

Philip Berryman. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1993.

________. “Social Ecology: Poverty and Misery.” In Ecotheology: Voices from South

and North, ed. David G. Hallman, 235-247. Geneva: WCC, 1994.

________. Jesus, the Wisdom of God: An Ecological Theology. Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis, 1995.

________, and Elizondo Virgil, eds. Ecology and Poverty. London: SCM, 1995.

Boggs, Carl. Gramsci‟s Marxism. London: Pluto Press, 1976.

Bondurant, Joan. Conquest of Violence. Berkeley: University of California Press,

1967.

Børresen, Kari. “Mary in Catholic Theology.” Concilium: Mary in the Churches, eds.

Hans Küng and Jurgen Moltmann, no. 168 (1983): 48-58.

Boyd, Robin. An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology. Delhi: ISPCK, 2005.

Broderick, James. Saint Francis Xavier. New York: Doubleday Image Book, 1957.

Brown, Judith M. Modern India: The Origins of an Asian Democracy. Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 1994.

________. “Introduction.” In Christians, Cultural Interactions, and India‟s Religious

Traditions, eds. Judith M. Brown and Robert Eric Frykenberg, 1-8. Grand

Rapids, Michigan: W. B. Eerdmans, 2002.

Brownmiller, Susan. Against Our Will – Men, Women and Rape. New York: Penguin,

1976.

xiv | B i b l i o g r a p h y

Brueck, Laura R. “Mainstreaming Marginalised Voices: The Dalit Lekhak Sangh and

the Negotiations over Hindi Dalit Literature.” In Claiming Power from Below:

Dalits and the Subaltern Question in India, eds. Manu Bhagavan and Anne

Feldhaus, 151-165. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Bruner, Frederick Dale. The Christbook: A Historical/Theological Commentary.

Waco, TX: World Books, 1987.

Bruteau, Beatrice. “Eucharistic Ecology and Ecological Spirituality.” Cross Currents

40 (1990): 499-514.

Buckley, Francis J. The Church in Dialogue. Culture and Traditions. Lanham:

University Press of America, 2000.

Burke, Cormac. “Inculturation: John Paul II and the Third World.” East Asian

Pastoral Review 32: 3 & 4 (1995): 276-290.

Busby, Cecilia. “Renewable Icons: Concepts of Religious Power in a Fishing Village

in South India.” In The Anthropology of Christians, ed. Fenella Cannell, 77-98.

Durham & London: Duke University Press, 2006.

Byung-Mu, Ahn. “Jesus and the Minjung in the Gospel of Mark.” In Minjung

Theology: People as the Subjects of History, ed. Commission on Theological

Concerns of the Christian Conference of Asia (CTC-CCA), 138-152.


________. “Jesus and People (Minjung).” In Asian Faces of Jesus, ed. R.S.

Sugirtharajah, 163-172. London: SCM, 1993.

________. “Jesus and Ochlos in the Context of His Galilean Ministry.” In Asian

Contextual Theology for the Third Millennium: Theology of Minjung in Fourth-

Eye Formation, eds. Paul S. Chung and Kim Kyoung-Jae, Princeton Theological

Monograph Series 70, 33-50. Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2007.

Callewaert, Winand. Devotional Hindi Literature: A Critical Edition of Pañc-Vānī or

five works of Dādū, Kābir, Nāmdev, Raidās, Hardās with the Hindī songs of

Gorakhnāth and Sundardās, and A Complete Word-index, 2 vols. Delhi:

Manohar,1991.

________, and Peter G. Friedlander. The Life and Works of Raidās. Delhi: Manohar,

1992.

________. The Dictionary of Bhakti Tradition. New Delhi: D. K. Print World, 2009.

Campese, Gioacchino. “Walk Humbly with Your God! Notes on a Spirituality for

Missionaries.” Missiology 25:2 (1997): 131-140.

Caplan, Lionel. Class and Culture in Urban India – Fundamentalism in a Christian

Community. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1988.

Carey, William. Grammar of Sanskrit Language Composed from the Work of the

Most Esteemed Grammarians. Serampore: Mission Press, 1806.

________. A Grammar of the Bengalee Language. Serampore: Mission Press, 1813.

Carr, Anne E. “Mary in the Mystery of the Church: Vatican Council II.” In Mary

According to Women, ed. Carol Frances, 10-16. Kansas City: Leaven Press,

1985.

________. Transforming Grace: Christian Tradition and Women Experience. San

Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988.

Carter, Warren. Mathew and the Margins: A Socio-Political and Religious Reading.

Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xv

Carvalho, Nirmala. “Orissa Remembers Fr. Bernard Digal a Year After his Death.”

AsiaNews (27 October 2009), at

http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=16702&geo=2&size=A (accessed

on 29 October 2009).

Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI). “The Church in Dialogue,” The Final

Statement of 25th

General Body Meeting of the CBCI, 1-8 March, 2002,

Jalandhar. Indian Theological Studies 39:3/4 (2002): 369-378.

Chakkalakal, Pauline. “Asian Women Reshaping Theology: Challenges and Hopes.”

Feminist Theology 27 (2001): 21-35.

Chakkarai, Vengal. Jesus the Avatar. Madras: CLS, 1926.

________. The Cross and Indian Thought. Madras: CLS, 1932.

Champakalakshmi, R., and S. Gopal, eds. Tradition, Dissent & Ideology: Essays in

Honour of Romila Thapar. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Chandran, J. Russel. “The Role of the Churches in the Multifaith Context of India.”

Indian Missiological Review 19:2 (1996): 28-39.

Charanghat, Antony. “A Legacy to be Lived.” The Examiner (20 Sep, 1997): 5.

Chathanatt, John. “The Magnificat: A Hymn of Liberation,” Vidyajyoti Journal of


Chatterjee, Margaret. Gandhi‟s Religious Thought. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of

Notre Dame Press, 1983.

Chatterji, Saral K. “Why Dalit Theology?” In Towards a Dalit Theology, ed. M. E.

Prabhakar, 9-29. Delhi: ISPCK, 1989.

Chaudhuri, Nupur, and Margaret Strobel, eds. Western Women and Imperialism:

Complicity and Resistance. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press,

1992.

Chenchiah, P., V. Chakkerai, and A. N. Sundarisanam. Ashrams: Past and Present.

Madras: CLS, 1941.

Cherukarakunnel, Alexander. “Indianization Among the St. Thomas Christians.”

Jeevadhara 1 (1971): 361-373.

Chethimattam, John Britto. Consciousness and Reality: An Indian Approach to

Metaphysics. Bangalore: Dharmaram, 1967.

________. Dialogue in Indian Tradition. Bangalore: Dharmaram, 1969 [published in

US as Patterns of Indian Thought. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1971].

________. “Nature and Scope of Interreligious Dialogue Today.” Jeevadhara 22

(1992): 331-355.

________. Experience and Reality. Bangalore: Dharmaram, 1996.

________. Towards a Theology of Intercommunion. Bangalore: Dharmaram, 2001.

Chia, Edmund. “Of Fork and Spoon or Fingers and Chopsticks: Interreligious

Dialogue in Ecclesia in Asia.” East Asian Pastoral Review 37 (2000): 242-255.

Chitre, Dilip. “Namadeo Dhasal: The Maverick Dalit Poet who Changed Marathi

Poetry.” In Claiming Power From Below: Dalits and the Subaltern Question in

India, eds. Manu Bhagavan and Anne Feldhaus, 179-188. New Delhi: Oxford


Chottopadhayay, Kamaladevi. Indian Women‟s Battle for Freedom. New Delhi:

Abhinav Publications, 1983.

http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=16702&geo=2&size=A

xvi | B i b l i o g r a p h y

Chudhuri, M., ed. Feminism in India. New Delhi: Kali for Women, 2004.

Church of England‟s Mission and Public Affairs Council. Mission-Shaped Church:

Church Planting and Fresh Expressions of Church in a Changing Context.

Brookvale, NSW: Willow Publishing, 2005.

Clarke, Sathianathan. Dalits and Christianity: Subaltern Religion and Liberation

Theology in India. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1999.

________. “The Jesus of Nineteenth Century Indian Christian Theology: An Indian

Inculturation with Continuing Problems and Prospects.” Studies in World

Christianity 5:1 (1999): 32-46.

________. “Dalit Religion as a Resourceful Symbolic Domain: A Critical Review of

Theories of Religion and a Constructive Proposition to Glean the Richness of

Dalit Subjectivity.” Religion & Society 49:2&3 (2004): 30-48.

Clarke, Sunder. Let the Indian Church Be Indian. Madras: CLS, 1985.

Clarysse, L. Father Constant Lievens, S.J. Ranchi: Satya Bharati, 1984.

Clifford, Manshardt. “Indian Nationalist Movement.” Religious Education 25 (1930):

766-768.

Clooney, Francis X. “Christ as the Divine Guru in the Theology of Robert de Nobili.”

In One Faith, Many Cultures, ed. Ruy Costa, 25-40. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1988.

Codina, Victor. “Sacraments.” In Systematic Theology: Perspectives from Liberation

Theology, eds. Jon Sobrino and Ignacio Ellacuria, 216-232. Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis, 1996.

Coelho, Christopher. A New Kind of Fool. Meditations with a Sketchbook and a

Camera and in Prose, Poetry, and Song on Saint Francis and his Vision.

Secunderabad: Amruthavni, 1986.

Collet, Sophia Dobson, ed. The Life and Letters of Raja Rammohun Roy. Calcutta:

n.d., 1914.

Collins, Paul M. Context, Culture and Worship: The Quest for Indian-ness. Delhi:

ISPCK, 2006.

________. “The Praxis of Inculturation for Mission: Roberto de Nobili‟s Example and

Legacy.” Ecclesiology 3:3 (2007): 323-342.

________. “Culture, Worship and Power: A Case Study of South India.” In Church

and Religious „Other‟, 57-77. London: T&T Clark, 2008.

Comblin, José. People of God. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2004.

Cone, James H. “God is Black.” In Constructing Christian Theologies from the

Underside, eds. Susan Brooks Thistlewaite and Mary Potter Engel, 101-114.

San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1990.

________. A Black Theology of Liberation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1990.

________. God of the Oppressed. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1997.

________. Speaking the Truth: Ecumenism, Liberation, and Black Theology.


Conference of the Catholic Bishops of India (CCBI). “Sharing the Good News,”

Concluding Statement of the Fifteenth Plenary Assembly of the CCBI,

Tiruchirpalli, 15-19 January, 2003. Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection

67 (2003): 194-197.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xvii

Conn, Marie. “The Sacramental Theology of Leonardo Boff.” Worship 64 (1990):

523-532.

Copley, Antony. Religions in Conflict: Ideology, Cultural Contacts and Conversions

in Late Colonial India. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Cornille, Catherine. The Guru in Indian Catholicism: Ambiguity or Opportunity of

Inculturation? Leuven: Peeters, 1991.

Costas, Orlando E. Christ Outside the Gate: Mission Beyond Christendom.


Coward, Harold. “Hindu Spirituality and the Environment.” Ecotheology 3 (1997):

50-60.

Cox, Jeffrey. Imperial Fault Lines: Christianity and Colonial Power in India, 1818-

1940. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2002.

Cronin, Vincent. A Pearl to India: The Life of Robert de Nobili. New York: Dutton,

1959.

Crossan, John Dominic. Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography. San Francisco: Harper

Collins, 1994.

D‟Sa, Francis X. “The Notion of God.” In The Intellectual Challenge of Raimon

Panikkar, ed. Joseph Prabhu, 25-45. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1996.

D‟Sa, Thomas. “Contemplating the Faces of Christ.” Vidyajyoti Journal of


________. “Paths of Mission.” In The Church in India in the Emerging Third

Millennium, ed. Thomas D‟Sa, 533-549. Bangalore: NBCLC, 2005.

Dabre, Bishop Thomas. “Christian Influence in the Transformation of Indian Society.

II. Towards an Indian Christology.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 67 (2003): 103-111.

________. “The Church in Dialogue: Dialogue within the Church.” Pro Dialogo

112:1 (2003): 85-95.

Daly, Mary. Beyond God the Father. Boston: Beacon Press, 1973.

________. Gyn/Ecology: The Mathematics of Radical Feminism. London: The

Women‟s Press, 1981.

________. The Church and Second Sex. New York: Harper Colophon, 1984.

Dandoy, Georges. An Essay on the Doctrine of the Unreality of the World in the

Advaita. Calcutta: Catholic Orphan Press, 1919.

________. Karma, Evil, Punishment, Light of the East Series 31. Calcutta: Catholic

Orphan Press, 1940.

Darragh, Neil. When Christians Gather: Issues in the Celebration of Eucharist. New

York: Paulist, 1996.

Das, Bhagvan, and James Massey, eds. Dalit Solidarity. Delhi: ISPCK, 1995.

David, Ritamma. “Rural Women‟s Movements.” In Feminist Theology: Perspectives

and Praxis, ed. Prasanna Kumari, 48-56. Chennai: Gurukul, 1999.

de Chardin, Pierre Teilhard. The Divine Milieu. New York: Harper, 1960.

________. The Phenomenon of Man. London: Fontana, 1965.

De Mey, Peter. “Ernst Troeltsch: A Moderate Pluralist? An Evaluation of His

Reflections on the Place of Christianity Among the Other Religions.” In The

Myriad Christ: Plurality and the Quest for Unity in the Contemporary

xviii | B i b l i o g r a p h y

Christology, eds., T. Merrigan and J. Haers, 349-380. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum

Theologicarum Lovaniensium, CLII. Leuven: Peeters, 2000.

________. “A certain degree of unclarity” Observations on The Local and the

Universal Dimensions of the Church from a Roman Catholic Perspective.”

Exchange 37 (2008): 456-465.

de Souza, Desmond. “Handicaps of the Church to Gear Her Mission to Creating a

New Society.” In The Indian Church in the Struggle for a New Society, ed. D. S.

Amalorpavadass, 156-174. Bangalore: NBCLC, 1981.

Deenabandhu, Manchala. “Die Dalit-Theologie als Verbündete einer Gegenkultur in

Indien.” In Globaler Kampf der Kulturen? Analysen und Orientierungen, ed.

Dieter Becker, 135-156. Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer, 1999.

Dempsey, Corinne G. Kerala Christian Sainthood. Collisions of Culture and

Worldview in South India. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.

________. “Selective Indigenization and the Problem of Superstition in Kerala.”

Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 69 (2005): 404-414.

Department of Welfare, Government of India. Towards Equality, Comprehensive

Report of the Committee on the Status of Women in India. New Delhi:

Department of Social Welfare, Govt of India, 1974.

Devanandan, Paul David. The Gospel and the Renascent Hinduism. London: SCM,

1959.

________, and M. M. Thomas. Christian Participation in Nation-Building: The

Summing Up of a Corporate Study on Rapid Social Change. Bangalore:

National Christian Council of India, 1960.

________. Preparation for Dialogue: A Collection of Essays on Hinduism and

Christianity. Edited by Nalini Devanandan and M. M. Thomas. Bangalore:

CISRS, 1964.

Devasahayam, D. M., and A. N. Sudarisanam. Rethinking Christianity in India.

Madras: A. N. Sudarisanam, 1938.

Devasahayam, V. Biblical Perspectives on Women - Ten Bible Studies. Nagpur:

AICCW, 1990.

________, ed. Frontiers of Dalit Theology. Madras: Gurukul, 1997.

Dhavamony, Mariasusai.. “The Christian Theology of Inculturation.” Studia

Missionalia 44 (1995): 1-43.

________. Christian Theology of Inculturation. Documenta Missionalia-24. Roma:

Editrice Pontificia Universita Gregoriana, 1997.

Dietrich, Gabriele. “Patriarchy, Caste and Class.” Journal of Dharma 23 (1989): 104-

112.

________. “Dalit Feminism and Environment.” Religion and Society 45:4 (1998), 89-

98.

D‟Mello, John. “Patriarchy, Caste and Class.” Journal of Dharma 23 (1998): 104-

112.

________. “The World as the Body of God: Feminist Perspectives on Ecology and

Social Justice.” Ecotheology 5 & 6 (1998-1999): 25-50.

________. Dare to See Differently: A Feminist Point of View. Mumbai: Pauline, 2003.

Donald, Senior, and Stuhmueller Carroll. Biblical Foundations for Mission. London:

SCM, 1983.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xix

Douglass, James W. The Non-Violent Cross. London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1968.

Downs, Frederick S. Christianity in North East India. Gawhati: CLS, 1982.

________. “Import Substitution: Reflections of the Indigenization of Ecclesiastical

Conflict in Northeast India.” Indian Missiological Review 12:3 (1990): 71-80.

Doyle, Eric. “Ecology and the Canticle of Brother Sun.” New Blackfriars 55 (1974):

392-402.

du Boulay, Shirley. Beyond the Darkness. London: Rider, 1998.

Dube, Saurabh. Untouchable Pasts: Religion, Identity, and Power among a Central

Indian Community, 1780-1950. Albany: State University of New York, 1998.

Duignan, Peter. “Early Jesuit Missionaries: A Suggestion for Further Study.”

American Anthropologist 60:4 (1958): 725-732.

Dulles, Avery. The Survival of Dogma: Faith, Authority, and Dogma in a Changing

World. Crossroads, NY: 1987.

Dunn, James D. G. “The Justice of God: A Renewed Perspective on Justification by

Faith.” Journal of Theological Studies 43:1 (1992): 1-22.

Dupuis, Jacques. Jesus Christ at the Encounter of World Religions. Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis, 1991.

________. Towards a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism. Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis, 1997.

________. “„The Truth Will Make You Free‟: The Theology of Religions Revisited.”

Louvain Studies 24 (1999): 211-263.

________. Christianity and the Religions: From Confrontations to Dialogue.


Earle, Ralph. “Mathew.” In The NIV Study Bible, ed. Kenneth Barker, 1439-1489.

Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1985.

EATWOT Asian Women‟s Consultation. Spirituality for Life: Women Struggling

against Violence. Philippines: EATWOT, 1994.

Edwards, Denis. “Theological Foundations for Ecological Praxis.” Ecotheology 5 & 6

(1998-1999): 126-141.

Edwards, Donald. “Church and Community: The Church at Mission Transforming

Society.” Religion and Society 54:2 (2009): 28-44.

Edwin, and Ed Daly, eds. Journeying Together in Faith. Anand: Gujarat Sahitya

Prakash, 2008.

Ekka, Alex, and Mohammed Asif. Development-Induced Displacement and

Rehabilitation in Jarkhand 1951-1995. New Delhi: Indian Social Institute, n.d.

Ellacuría, Ignacio. Freedom Made Flesh: The Mission of Christ and His Church.


________. “The Crucified People.” In Systematic Theology, Perspectives from

Liberation Theology, eds. Jon Sobrino and Ignacio Ellacuría, 257-278.


Ellsberg, Robert, ed. Gandhi on Christianity. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1991

Empereur, James, and Christopher Kiesling. The Liturgy that Does Justice.

Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1990.

Erikson, Erik. Gandhi‟s Truth. New York: W. W. Norton, 1969.

xx | B i b l i o g r a p h y

Evers, Georg. “Reflections on the Situation of Asian Local Churches.” In Encounters

with the Word: Essays to Honour Aloysius Pieris, S.J., eds., Robert Cruz et al,

401-413. Colombo: The Ecumenical Institute for Study and Dialogue, 2004.

________. “Development in Indian Catholic Theological Reflections.” In Negotiating

the Borders: Theological Explorations in the Global Era. Essays in Honour of

Prof. Felix Wilfred, eds., Patrick Gnanapragasam and Elisabeth Schüssler

Fiorenza, 589-607. Delhi: ISPCK, 2008.

Exem, A. Van. “Conversion and Baptism – A Tribal Right.” Vidyajyoti Journal of


________. “Man-Nature Spirit: A Holistic Approach.” Vidyajyoti Journal of


Federation of Asian Bishops‟ Conferences (FABC). “BIRA-III: Statement and

Recommendations of the Third Bishops‟ Institute for Interreligious Affairs,

Madras (India), 20 November 1982,” no.7. In For All The Peoples of Asia:

Federation of Asian Bishops‟ Conferences Documents from 1970 to 1991, eds.

Gaudenclo Rosales and C. G. Arévalo, 119-123. Quenzon: Claretian, 1992.

________. “Evangelization in Modern Day Asia.” Statement and Recommendations

of the First Plenary Assembly, Taipei, Taiwan, 27 April, 1974. In For All The

Peoples of Asia: Federation of Asian Bishops‟ Conferences Documents from

1970 to 1991, eds. Gaudenclo Rosales and C. G. Arévalo, 11-25. Quenzon:

Claretian, 1992.

________. “Final Statement, Fourth Formation Institute for Inter-Religious Affairs

(FIRA IV), Bishops‟ Leadership Seminar, Pattaya, Thailand, 20-25 Auust,

2001.” In For All the Peoples of Asia, Vol.3, Federation of Asian Bishops‟

Conferences Documents from 1997-2001, ed. Franz-Josef Eilers, 139-146.

Quenzon City: Claretian, 2002.

________., Office of Theological Concerns, (OTC-FABC). Methodology: Asian

Christian Theology. Doing Theology in Asia Today, FABC Papers no.96

(January 2000). In For All the Peoples of Asia, Vol.3, Federation of Asian

Bishops‟ Conferences Documents from 1997-2001, ed. Franz-Josef Eilers, 329-

419. Quenzon City: Claretian, 2002.

Fabella, V., and S. Torres, eds. Irruption of the Third World. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1983.

________. “Christology From an Asian Women‟s Perspective.” In Asian Faces of

Jesus, ed. R. S. Sugirtharajah, 211-221. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1993.

Falk, Nancy Aver, and M. Gross Rita, eds. Unspoken Worlds: Women‟s Religious

Lives in Non-Western Cultures. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1980.

Fallon, Pierre. “Dialogue with Hinduism: An Introduction.” In Towards a “Dialogue

Of Life”: Ecumenism in the Asian Context, Cardinal Bea Studies IV, ed. Pedro

S. De Achútegui, 223-230. Manila: Cardinal Bea Institute, Loyola School of

Theology, 1976.

Fabry, H. J. “Dll.” In TDOT, eds., Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, trans.

T. Willis and Geoffrey, vol. 3, 203-230. Michigan: W. B. Eerdmans, 1978.

Faria, Stella. “On Language and Sexism.” Jeevadhara 17 (1985): 33-41.

________. “Stop This Slaughter Of Innocents.” The New Leader (6 July, 1986): 10.

Farquhar, John Nicol. The Crown of Hinduism. London: Oxford University Press,

1913.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xxi

________. A Primer of Hinduism. London: Oxford University Press, 1914.

________. Modern Religious Movements in India. New York: Macmillan, 1915.

________. An Outline of the Religious Literature of India. London: Oxford University

Press, 1920.

Fernandes, Jason Keith. “Muslims, Caste and the Challenge before the Catholic Inter-

faith Initiative.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 73 (2009): 431-

442.

Fernandes, Walter. “A Socio-Historical Perspective for Liberation Theology in India.”

In Leave the Temple: Indian Paths to Human Liberation, ed. Felix Wilfred, 9-

34. Trichy: Carmel, 1996.

________. “Conversion to Christianity, Caste Tension and Search for an Identity in

Tamilnadu.” In The Emerging Dalit Identity: Re-assertion of the Subalterns, ed.

Walter Fernandes, 140-156. New Delhi: Indian Social Institute, 1996.

________. “Tribals of India: A Challenge to Theology.” Jnanadeepa 1:1 (1998): 58-

98.

________. “Challenges to Tribal Culture in the Context of Globalization.” In

Responding to India‟s Social Challenges: Promoting Tribal Rights and Culture,

ed. Agapit Tirkey, 31-38. Bangalore: NBCLC, 2004.

Fernando, Leonard, and G. Gispert-Sauch. Christianity in India: Two Thousand Years

of Faith. New Delhi: Penguin Viking, 2004.

Fiorenza, Elisabeth Schüssler. In Memory of Her. New York: Crossroad, 1983.

________. “Breaking the Silence – Becoming Visible.” Concilium 182 (1985): 3-16.

________. Discipleship of Equals: A Critical Feminist Ekklesia-logy of Liberation.

New York: Crossroad, 1993.

________. In Memory of Her: A Feminist Theological Reconstruction of Christian

Origins, 10th

anniversary edition. New York: Crossroads, 1994.

________, and Mary Shawn Copeland, eds. Concilium: Violence Against Women.

(1994/1): 1-125.

________. Bread Not Stone: The Challenge of Feminist Biblical Interpretation, 10th

anniversary edition. Boston: Beacon Press, 1995.

________. “Jesus of Nazareth in Historical Research.” In Thinking of Christ.

Proclamation, Explanation, Meaning, ed. Tatha Wiley, 29-48. New York:

Continuum, 2003.

Firth, C. B. An Introduction to Indian Church History. Delhi: ISPCK, 1998.

Fischer, L. The Life of Mahatma Gandhi. London: Jonathan Cape, 1952.

Fox, Mathew. Original Blessing: A Primer in Creation Spirituality. Santa Fe, NM:

Bear and Company, 1983.

Fox, Thomas C. Pentecost in Asia: A New Way of Being Church. Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis, 2003.

Francis, B. Joseph. “Love of God and Fellowmen in the Life and Works of Mahatma

Gandhi.” Indian Theological Studies 27 (1990): 5-45.

________. “Man and World or Man Within the World?” Indian Theological Studies

28 (1991): 148-154.

________. “Secularism and Religious Pluralism in Gandhian Perspective.” Indian


xxii | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________. “Gandhian Methodology of Means to Achieve an Aim and its Application

to Evangelization.” Indian Theological Studies 35:3/4 (1998): 221-247.

________. “The Unpremeditated Communication Strategies Evolved by Mahatma

Gandhi and What they Reveal to the Genuine Evangelizer.” Indian Theological

Studies 41 (2004): 339-362.

French, Marilyn. The War Against Women. New York: Summit Books, 1992.

Freyne, Sean. “Galilee.” In The Orthodox Companion to the Bible, ed. Bruce Metzger

and Michael Coogan, 242-243. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Frykenberg, Robert. Guntur District, 1788-1848: A History of Local Influence and

Central Authority in South India. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965.

________, and Judith M Brown. Christians, Cultural Interactions, and India‟s

Religious Traditions. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002.

________. Christians and Missionaries in India: Cross-Cultural Communications

since 1500. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003.

Fuchs, Stephen. Rebellious Prophets: A Study of Messianic Movements in India

Religions. London: Asia Publishing House, 1965.

________. The Aboriginal Tribes of India. Delhi: Macmillan Company, 1973.

Fürer-Haimendorf, Christoph Von. The Naked Nagas. Calcutta: Thacker Spink & Co.,

1933.

Gaikwad, Roger. “Rethinking Indian Christianity from A Tribal Perspective.”

Religion and Society 44:4 (1997): 106-121.

Gajiwala, Astrid Lobo. “Power Struggles.” In God‟s Image 19 (2000): 51-57.

Gandhi, Mohandas Karamchand. An Autobiography or The Story of My Experiments

with Truth. Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1927.

________. The Message of Jesus Christ. Ahmedabad: Navjivan, 1940.

________. Christian Missions: Their Place in India. Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1940.

________. Women and Social Justice. Ahmedabad: Navjivan Publications, 1947.

________. Satyagraha: Non-violent Resistance. Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1951.

________. In Search of the Supreme, 3 vols. Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1961.

________. Harijan. A Reissue of original Journal. New York: Garland Press, 1979.

________. The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vols.100. New Delhi:

Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government

of India, 1958-1994.

Ganesh, Kamala. Culture and the Making of Identity in Contemporary India. New

Delhi: Sage, 2005.

Gangoli, Geetanjali. Indian Feminism: Law, Patriarchies and Violence in India.

Hampshire: Ashgate, 2007.

George, S. K. Gandhi‟s Challenge to Christianity. Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1947.

Ghose, Jogendra Chunder, ed. The English Works of Raja Rammohun Roy. Calcutta:

Srikanta Roy, 1901

Gilliland, Dean S., ed. The Word Among Us: Contextualizing Theology for Mission

Today. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1989.

Giroux, Henry A. Ideology, Culture, and the Process of Schooling. Philadelphia:

Temple University Press, 1981.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xxiii

Gispert-Sauch, G. “Meditation on the Bank of the Yamuna.” Jeevadhara 17 (1985):

64-79.

Gittins, Anthony J. “Conversion.” In Dictionary of Mission: Theology, History,

Perspectives, ed. Karl Müller et al, 87-89. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1997.

Gnanapragasam, Patrick. “Rays from a Prism: Felix – A Multi-dimensional

Contextual Theologian.” In Negotiating the Borders: Theological Explorations

in the Global Era. Essays in Honour of Prof. Felix Wilfred, eds., Patrick

Gnanaprakasam and Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, 639-651. Delhi: ISPCK,

2008.

Goel, Sita Ram. Catholic Ashrams: Sannyasins or Swindlers? 2nd

edn. New Delhi:

Voice of India, 1994.

________. History of Hindu-Christian Encounters AD 304 to 1996, 2nd

edn. New

Delhi: Voice of India, 1996.

Gomes, Janina. “Women Theologians in India Are Reclaiming Space.” National

Catholic Reporter (October 19, 2004): 6.

Gomes, Jules. “Portuguese Mission in Goa: Conflict and Collaboration Between

Colonial and Brahmanical Power.” Bangalore Theological Forum 32:1 (2000):

125-142.

Gomes, Olivinho J. F. Village Goa: A Study of Goan Social Structure and Change.

New Delhi: S. Chand and Co., 1987.

Goodwin, Raheja Gloria, and Ann Grodzins Gold. Listen to the Heron‟s Words:

Reimagining Gender and Kinship in North India. Berkeley: University of

California Press, 1996.

Gorantla, Bishop Johannes, and Anthoniraj Thumma. “Dalit Christians in the Third

Millennium.” In The Church in India in the Emerging Third Millennium, ed.

Thomas D‟Sa, 142-162. Bangalore: NBCLC, 2005.

Gordon, Andrew. Our India Mission, 1855-1885: A Thirty Year‟s History of the India

Mission of the United Presbyterian Church of North America, Together with

Personal Reminiscences. Philadelphia: Andrew Gordon, 1886.

Gordon, Florence M. “Three Knocks In the Night: Ida Scudder (1870-).” In

Missionary Hero Stories: True Stories of Missionaries and Christian National

Leaders From All Parts of the World, ed. Nina Millen, 81-86. New York:

Friendship Press, 1948.

Goreh, Nehemiah. A Letter to the Brahmos from a Converted Brahman from Banares.

Calcutta: Baptist Mission Press, 1867.

________. A Christian Response to the Hindu Philosophical Systems. Reprinted with

an Introduction by K. P. Aleaz. Calcutta: Punthi Pustak, 2003 [Originally

published as A Mirror of the Hindu Philosophical Systems in 1911].

Govinda, Radhika. “The Politics of the Marginalised: Dalits and Women‟s Activism

in India.” Gender & Development 14:2 (2006): 180-190.

Gracias, Archbishop Oswald. “Mission in Asia Today – Relations with Other

Religions Existing in Asia.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 71

(2007): 86-96.

Grafe, Hugald. History of Christianity in India. Vol-IV, Part-2: Tamilnadu in the

Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. Bangalore: Church History Association of

India, 1990.

xxiv | B i b l i o g r a p h y

Granberg-Michaelson, Wesley. A Worldly Spirituality: A Call to Redeem Life on

Earth. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984.

________. Ecology and Life: Accepting our Environmental Responsibility. Waco, TX:

Word Books, 1988.

Grant, Sara. Towards an Alternative Theology: Confessions of a Non-dualist. Notre

Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press, 2001.

Grassi, Joseph. Broken Bread and Broken Bodies: The Lord‟s Supper and the World

Hunger. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1985.

Green, Elizabeth, and Mary Grey, eds. Ecofeminism and Theology, Year Book of the

European Society of Women in Theological Research, 2. Kampen: Kok Pharos,

1994.

Gregorios, Paulos Mar. The Human Presence: Ecological Spirituality and the Age of

the Spirit. New York: Amity House, 1987.

Grey, Mary. The Unheard Scream: The Struggles of Dalit Women in India. New

Delhi: Centre for Dalit Studies, 2004.

________. “Dalit Women and the Struggle for Justice in a World of Global

Capitalism.” Feminist Theology 14:1 (2005): 127-149.

Griffiths, Bede. The Golden String. London: Harvill, 1954.

________. Christ to India, Essays Towards a Hindu-Christian Dialogue. New York:

Charles Scribner‟s Sons, 1966.

________. Return to the Centre. London: Collins, 1976.

________. “Mission is Dialogue: An Interview with Fr. Bede Griffiths.” Indian

Missiological Review 3 (1981): 43-53.

________. The Marriage of East and West. London: Collins, 1982.

Grigson, W. V. The Aboriginal Problem in the Central Provinces and Berar. Nagpur:

Government Press, 1944.

Gudorf, Christine. “Encountering the Other: The Modern Papacy on Women.” In

Change in the Official Catholic Moral Teaching, ed. Charles E. Curran, 264-

275. Readings in Moral Theology, no.13. New York: Paulist, 2003.

Guha, Ranajit, ed. Subaltern Studies: Writings on South Asian History and Society, 9

vols. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1982-1996.

________. “Preface.” In Selected Studies in Subaltern Studies, eds. Ranajit Guha and

Gayatri Spivak, 35-36. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.

Gunton, Colin E. Christ and Creation. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992.

________. The One, the Three and the Many. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1993.

Gutiérrez, Gustavo. The Theology of Liberation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1973.

________. The Power of the Poor in History. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1983.

________. We Drink from Our Own Wells: The Spiritual Journey of a People.


Haers, Jacques. “A Risk Observed.” Louvain Studies 21:1 (1996): 46-60.

________. “Defensor Vinculi et Conversationis: Connectedness and Conversation as

a Challenge to Theology.” In Theology and Conversation: Towards a Relational

Theology, eds., J. Haers and P. De Mey, 1-40. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum

Theologicarum Lovaniensium, CLXXII. Leuven: Peeters, 2003.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xxv

Hagner, Donald. World Biblical Commentary: Mathew 1-13. Dallas, TX: Word

Books, 1993.

Haokip, Peter. “The Tribal People of the Northeast: A Liberating Quest for Identity,

Equality and Respect.” Jnanadeepa 2:2 (1999): 63-72.

Hardgrave, Robert L. The Nadars of Tamilnadu: The Political Culture of a

Community in Change. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California

Press, 1969.

Harper, Susan Billington. “The Politics of Conversion: The Azariah-Gandhi

Controversy over Christian Mission to the Depressed Classes in the 1930‟s.”

Indo-British Review 15:1 (1988): 147-175.

________. In the Shadow of Mahatma: Bishop V. S. Azariah and the Travails of

Christianity in British India. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000.

Harvey, Peter. “Buddhist Attitudes to and Treatment of Non-human Nature.”

Ecotheology 4 (1998): 35-50.

Hauptman, Judith. “Images of Women in the Talmud.” In Religion and Sexism:

Images of Women in the Jewish and Christian Traditions, ed. Rosemary

Radford Ruether, 184-212. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1974.

Hearne, Brian. “Synod 1977: Catechesis and the Whole Community.” The Furrow

28:12 (1977): 728-738.

Hederia, Rudolf C. “Incarnating Christ in India: Pedro Aruppe and Inculturation.”


Hedlund, Roger E. “Previews of Christian Indigeneity in India.” Journal of Asian

Mission 3:2 (2001): 213-230.

Hegba, Meinrad. “The Particular Church and the Universal Church: Sociological and

Ecclesiological Considerations.” Indian Theological Studies 17 (1980): 47-63.

Helwig, Monika. The Eucharist and the Hunger of the World. 2nd

Revised Edition.

Kansas: Sheed & Ward, 1992.

Heredia, Rudolf C. “Development as Liberation: A Christian Perspective.” Vidyajyoti


Hess, Linda, and Sukhadev Singh. The Bijak of Kabir. San Francisco: North Point

Press, 1983.

Hick, John, and Paul Knitter, eds. The Myth of Christian Uniqueness: Towards a

Pluralist Theology of Religions. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1987.

________. The Rainbow of Faith. London: SCM, 1995.

Hill, Brennan R., Paul Knitter, and William Madges. Faith, Religion and Theology, A

Contemporary Introduction. Mystic, CT: Twentythird, 1990.

Hnuni, R. L. “Contextualizing Asian Theologies: Women‟s Perspectives.” Asia

Journal of Theology 18 (2004): 136-148.

________. Vision for Women in India: Perspectives from the Bible, Church and

Society. Bangalore: ATC, 2009.

Hoebing, Philibert. “St. Francis and the Environment.” In Divine Representations,

Postmodernism & Spirituality, ed. Ann W. Astell, 201-215. New York: Paulist

Press, 1994.

Horner, I. B. Women Under Primitive Buddhism. London: George Routledge, 1930.

xxvi | B i b l i o g r a p h y

Horrell, David. The Social Ethos of Corinthians Correspondence: Interests and

Ideology from 1 Corinthians to 1 Clement. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996.

Horsley, Richard. Sociology and the Jesus Movement, 2nd

ed. New York: Continuum,

1994.

________. Galilee: History, Politics, People. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press

International, 1995.

________. Archaeology, History, and Society in Galilee. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity

Press International, 1996.

________. Jesus in Context: Power, People and Performance. Minneapolis: Fortress,

2008.

Hosken, Fran P. The Hosken Report – Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females.

Lexington: Win News, 1983.

Hough, Adrian. God is Not Green: A Re-Examination of Eco-Theology. Leominster:

Gracewing, 1997.

Hoyland, John S. “Gandhi‟s Satyagraha and the Way of the Cross.” In Mahatma

Gandhi: Essays and Reflections on His Life and Work, ed. S. Radhakirshnan,

117-142. Mumbai: Jaico, 1957.

Hutton, J. H. Caste in India: Its Nature, Function and Origins. Bombay: Oxford


Ilaiah, Kancha. Why I am Not A Hindu: A Sudra Critique of the Hindutva Philosophy,

Culture and Political Economy. Calcutta: Samya, 1996.

________. “Productive Labour, Consciousness and History: The Dalitbahujan

Alternative.” In Subaltern Studies IX: Writings on South Asian History and

Society, eds. Shahid Amin & Dipesh Chakrabarty, 165-200. New Delhi: Oxford


________. God as Political Philosopher: Buddhist Challenge to Brahminism.

Calcutta: Samya, 2001.

________. Buffalo Nationalism: A Critique of Spiritual Fascism. Calcutta: Samya,

2004.

Indian Theological Association (ITA). “Ecological Crisis: An Indian Christian

Response,” Final Statement of Indian Theological Association, 20th

Annual

Meeting, April 26-30, 1997, Aluva. Indian Theological Studies 34 (1997): 379-

391.

________. Final Statement “Church‟s Engagement in Civil Society, A New Way of

Being Christian in India Today.” In Church‟s Engagement in Civil Society, eds.,

Anthony Kalliath and Francis Gonsalves, 177-190. Bangalore: ATC, 2009.

Indo-Asian News Serivce (IANS). “School Shocker: 48 pc [%] Indians Drop Out

Early.” IBN Live News (7 October 2009), at http://ibnlive.in.com/news/school-

shocker-48-pc-indians-dropout-early/102833-3.html?from=tn (accessed 7

October 2009).

Irudayaraj, Xavier, ed. Emerging Dalit Theology. Madurai: JEST & Tamilnadu

Theological Seminary, 1990.

Ishanand, Bandhu. “Ashrams and Mission Spirituality.” Third Millennium 2 (1999):

132-136.

Iyer, Raghavan. Moral and Political Thought of Gandhi. New Delhi: Oxford


http://ibnlive.in.com/news/school-shocker-48-pc-indians-dropout-early/102833-3.html?from=tn


B i b l i o g r a p h y | xxvii

Jacquin, Françoise. Jules Monchanin, prêtre. Paris: Cerf, 1996.

Japhet, S. “Christian Dalits: A Sociological Study on the Problem of Gaining a New

Identity.” Religion and Society 34:3 (1987): 59-87.

Jayakumar, Samuel. Dalit Consciousness and Christian Conversion: Historical

Resources for a Contemporary Debate. Oxford: Regnum International/Delhi:

ISPCK, 1999.

Jayal, Shakambari. The Status of Women in the Epics. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass,

1966.

Jafferlot, Christophe. Dr. Ambedkar and Untouchability: Analysing and Fighting

Caste. Delhi: Permanent Black, 2005.

Jala, Dominic. “Contributions of the Catholic Church to the Cultures of Northeast

India.” Indian Missiological Review 12:3 (1990): 173-186.

Jesudasan, I. Gandhian Theology of Liberation. Anand: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash,

1987.

Jesudason, S. Ashrams: Ancient and Modern: Their Aims and Ideals. Vellore: Sri

Ramachandra Press, 1937.

Jeyaraj, Daniel. “Indian Participation in Enabling, Sustaining, and Promoting

Christian Missions in India.” In India and the Indianness of Christianity: Essays

on Understanding –Historical, Theological, and Bibliographical– in Honor of

Robert Eric Frykenberg, ed. Richard Fox Young, 126-157. Grand Rapids,

Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009.

Jogdand, P. G., ed. Dalit Women in India, Issues and Perspectives. Delhi: Gyan

Publishing House, 1992.

Johanns, Pierre. To Christ Through the Vedanta: The Writings of Reverend P.

Johanns, S.J., 2 vols. Bangalore: United Theological College, 1996.

John Paul II, Pope. Dives in Misericordia. The text in Origins 10:26 (11 Dec. 1980):

401-416.

________. The Pope Speaks to India. Bombay: St. Paul‟s Publications, 1986.

________. “Peace with God the Creator, Peace with All Creation,” Message for the

World Day of Peace 1 Jan, 1990. Origins 19:28 (14 December, 1989): 465-468.

________. Evangelium Vitae. The text in Origins 24:42 (6 April, 1995): 689-730.

________. Sollicitudo Rei Socialis. The text in Catholic Social Thought: The

Documentary Heritage, eds. David J. O‟Brien and Thomas A. Shannon, 393-

436. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1992.

________. “Address to the Indonesian Bishops on the occasion of Ad Limina.”

L‟Osservatore Romano (3-4 June, 1996): 4.

________. “Mother Teresa Served Christ in the Poorest of the Poor.” L‟Osservatore

Romano (10 September, 1997): 1.

________. Ecclesia in Asia, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation. Text in The Future

of the Asian Churches: The Asian Synod & Ecclesia in Asia, eds. James H.

Kroeger and Peter C. Phan, 123-196. Quenzon City: Claretian Publications,

2002.

John, T. K. “Theology of Liberation and Gandhian Praxis: A Social Spirituality for

India.” In Liberation in Asia, Theological Perspectives, Jesuit Theological

Forum Reflections, eds. S. Arockiasamy and Gispert-Sauch, 115-142. Anand:


xxviii | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________, ed. Bread and Breath: Essays in Honour of Samuel Rayan SJ, Jesuit

Theological Forum Reflections 5. Anand, Gujarat: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash,

1990.

John, V. J. “Literary Structure of Mark and the Concerns of Ecology: Search for a

Connection.” Indian Theological Studies 40 (2003): 78-105.

Johnson, Elizabeth. She Who Is: The Mystery of God in Feminist Theological

Discourse. New York: Crossroad, 1992.

________. “Feminism and Sharing the Faith: A Catholic Dilemma.” In American

Catholic Social Teaching, eds. Thomas J. Massaro and Thomas A. Shannon,

107-122. Collegeville: Liturgical, 2002.

Jones, J. P. South Indian Protestant Missions 1800-1900. Madurai: Madura Mission

Press, 1900.

Joseph, G. Valentine. “Empowering the Weak – An Eucharistic Praxis.” Indian


Juergensmeyer, Mark. Fighting With Gandhi. New York and San Francisco: Harper

and Row, 1984.

________. “The Gandhi Revival –A Review Article.” The Journal of Asian Studies

43:2 (1984): 293-298.

Kajiyama, Y. “Women in Buddhism.” Eastern Buddhist 15 (1982): 53-70.

Kalliath, Antony. The Word in the Cave. New Delhi: Intercultural Publications, 1996.

________. “Ashram Ideal: A Comprehensive Model of Evangelization in India

Context.” Ishvani Documentation and Mission Digest 16:2 (1998): 203-207.

Kananaikil, Jose. “Caste Discrimination: A Challenge to the Christian Conscience in

India.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 46 (1982): 522-529.

Kandankavil, Thomas. “Salvation From the Dalit Perspective: Earthly or

Eschatological.” Journal of Dharma 22 (1997): 128-154.

Kanichikattil, Francis. To Restore or To Reform? Bangalore: Dharmaram

Publications, 1992.

Kanjamala, Augustine. “The Future of the Mission in the Hindi Belt.” Vidyajyoti


________. “Redemptoris Missio and Mission in India.” In Redemption and Dialogue,

ed. William R. Burrows, 200-215. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1993.

Kantowsky, Detlef. Sarvodaya: The Other Development. Delhi: Vikas, 1980.

Kappen, Sebastian. Jesus and Freedom. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1977.

________. Jesus and Cultural Revolution: An Asian Perspective. Bombay: A Build

Publication, 1983.

________. Jesus Today. Madras: AICUF, 1985.

________. Liberation Theology and Marxism. Puntamba: Asha Kendra, 1986.

Karkal, Malini. “How the Other Half Dies in Bombay.” Economic and Political

Weekly (24 August, 1985):1424.

Karlekar, Malairka. “The Unclean, Who Keep the City Clean.” Manushi (July-

August, 1979): 55.

Karokaran, Anto. “Evangelization in India Today.” Indian Missiological Review 3

(1981): 129-135.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xxix

Karotemprel, S. A Brief History of the Catholic Church Among the Tiwas (Lalungs).

Shillong: Vendrame Missiological Centre, 1981.

Kavunkal, Jacob. “Church‟s Service to the World.” In Vatican II: A Gift & A Task.

International Colloquium to Mark the 40th

Anniversary of Vatican Council II,

eds. Jacob Kavunkal et al, 116-130. Mumbai: St. Pauls, 2006.

Kaye, John William. Christianity in India: An Historical Narrative. London: Smith,

Elder & Co., 1859.

Kee, Alistair. “Blessed are the Excluded.” In Public Theology for the 21st Century,

eds. William F. Storrar and Andrew R. Morton, 351-364. London: T&T Clark,

2004.

Keer, D. Dr. Ambedkar: Life and Mission. Bombay: Popular Prakashan, 1985.

Kelber, Werner. The Oral and Written Gospel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.

Kelly, Petra. “New Forms of Power: The Green Feminist View.” Breakthrough 7

(Summer, 1986): 32-46.

Kent, Eliza F. Converting Women: Gender and Protestant Christianity in Colonial

South India. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Kim, Kirsteen. “The Holy Spirit in Mission. Where and How is the Spirit Working in

Religions, Cultures and movements for Liberation?” Connections 2:10 (2001):

23-35.

Kim, Sebastian C. H. In Search of Identity: Debates on Religious Conversion in India.

Delhi: Oxford University Publications, 2003.

Kinsley, David. “Reflections on Ecological Themes in Hinduism.” Journal of Dharma

16 (1991): 229-245.

Knight, James. “Mission and Dialogue in Asia. Can We Plumb the Depths?”


Knitter, Paul F. “Foreword.” In An Asian Theology of Liberation, Aloysius Pieris, xi-

xiv. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988.

________. One Earth Many Religions: Multifaith Dialogue and Global

Responsibility. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1995.

________. Jesus and the Other Names: Christian Mission and Global Responsibility.


________. “Pluralism and Oppression: Dialogue between the Many Religions and the

Many Poor.” In The Community of Religions: Voices and Images of the

Parliament of the World Religions, eds. Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns,

198-208. New York: Continuum, 1999.

________. “Religion, Power, Dialogue.” Swedish Missiological Themes 93:1 (2005):

29-41.

Koilparampil, George. Caste in the Catholic Community in Kerala. Cochin: St.

Theresa‟s College, 1982.

Kollaparambil, Jacob. “The Impact of the Synod of Diamper on the Ecclesial Identity

of the St. Thomas Christians.” In The Synod of Diamper Revisited, ed. G.

Nedungatt, 60-91. Rome: Oriental Institute, 2001.

Koltun, Elizabeth. The Jewish Woman. New York: Schocken Books, 1976.

Koonthanam, George. “Yahweh the Defender of the Dalits: A Reflection on Isaiah

3:12-15.” In Voices From the Margin: Interpreting the Bible in the Third World,

ed. R. S. Sugirtharajah, 105-116. Maryknoll, NY/London: Orbis/SPCK, 1995.

xxx | B i b l i o g r a p h y

Koshy, Ninan. “Rethinking Mission in India Today: Tasks and Challenges.” Religion

and Society 54:3 (2009): 1-14.

Kottuppallil, George. “Catholic Church in Northeast India: A Critical Perspective.”

Indian Missiological Review 12:3 (1990): 260-265.

Kottukapally, J. “The Rite Controversy: Should the Stalemate Continue.” Indian

Missiological Review 9 (1987): 66-86.

Koyama, Kosuke. “The Crucified Christ Challenges Human Power.” In Asian Faces

of Jesus, ed. R. S. Sugirtharajah, 149-162. London: SCM, 1993.

Kroeger, James H. “Rejoice, O Asia-Church.” East Asian Pastoral Review 37 (2000):

278-285.

Küng, Hans. “Towards an Ecumenical Theology of Religions: Some Theses for

Clarification.” Concilium 183 (1986): 119-125.

________. Global Responsibility: In Search of a New World Ethic. New York:

Crossroad, 1991.

Kumar, Radha. “From Chipko to Sati: The Contemporary Indian Women‟s

Movement.” In The Challenge of Local Feminism: Women‟s Movement in

Global Perspective, ed. Amrita Basu, 58-86. New Delhi: Kali for Women, 1995.

Kumaradoss, Y. Vincent. “The Swadeshi Movement and the Attitude of the Protestant

Christian Elite in Madras, 1905-1907.” Indian Church History Review 22:1

(1988): 10-15.

________. “Negotiating Colonial Christianity.” South Indian Studies 1 (Jan-June,

1996): 35-53.

________. “Creation of Alternative Public Sphere and Church Indigenisation in

Nineteenth Century Colonial Tamilnadu: The Hindu-Christian Church of Lord

Jesus and the National Church of India.” In Christianity is Indian: The

Emergence of an Indigenous Community, ed. Roger E. Hedlund, 3-32. Delhi:

ISPCK, 2004.

Kunnupuram, Kurien. “Inculturation in Vatican II.” Jeevadhara 6 (1976): 283-292.

Kuriakose, M. K. History of Christianity in India: Source Materials. Madras:

Christian Literature Society, 1982.

Kyung, C. H. “Who is Jesus for Asian Women?” In Asian Faces of Jesus, ed. R. S.

Sugirtharajah, 223-246. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1993.

Lee, Jung Young. Marginality: The Key to Multicultural Theology. Minneapolis, MN:

Fortress Press, 1995.

Lehmann, E. It Began at Tranquebar. Madras: CLS, 1956.

Leoncini, John PIME. A History of the Catholic Diocese of Vijayawada. Vijayawada:

Catholic Centre, 1988.

Lester, Julius. “God and Social Change.” Cross Currents (Fall, 2006): 303-311.

Li, Jung-his. Biographies of Buddhist Nuns: Pao-chang‟s Pi-chiu-nichuan. Osaka:

Tohokai, 1981.

Lipner, Julius J. and Gispert-Sauch, George. The Writings of Brahmabandhab

Upadhyay. Bangalore/New Delhi: UTC/Oxford University Press, 1991.

Lobo, Anthony. “Domestic Violence: The Indian Catholic Scene.” Vidyajyoti Journal

of Theological Reflection 57 (1993): 298-305.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xxxi

Lobo, Lancy. “Dalit Christians & Church Personnel in India.” Third Millennium III:3

(2000): 46-67.

Lohfink, Gerhard. Jesus and Community. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. [Originally

published in German as Wie hat Jesus Gemeinde gewollt?

Freiburg/Basel/Vienna: Herder Verlag, 1982].

Lonergan, Bernard. Method in Theology. New York: Herder & Herder, 1972.

Longchar, A. Wati. The Traditional Tribal Worldview and Modernity. Jorhat: N.

Limala Lkr, 1995.

________. “A Creation Poem of the Ao-Naga: A Theological Exploration.” In Doing

Theology with the Poetic Traditions of India: Focus on Dalit and Tribal Poems,

ed. Joseph Patmury, 114-124. Bangalore: PTCA/SATHRI, 1996.

Lourdusamy, S. Towards Empowerment of Dalit Christians. Equal Rights to All

Dalits. Delhi: Centre for Dalit/Subaltern Studies, 2005.

Lovelock, J. E. Gaia. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979.

Lozano, John M. Discipleship: Towards an Understanding of Religious Life. Chicago:

Claret Centre for Resources in Spirituality, 1977.

Malieckal, Louis. “Liberative Visions of the Vedas: Brahmanic Ritual Vision versus

Upanishadic Spiritual Vision.” In Towards an Indian Theology of Liberation,

ed. Paul Puthanangady, 24-48. Bangalore: ITA/NBCLC, 1986.

Malina, Bruce J. and Neyrey, Jerome H. Calling Jesus‟ Names: The Social Value of

Labels in Mathew. Sonoma,CA: Polebridge Press, 1988.

Mallampalli, Chandra. Christian and Public Life in Colonial South India, 1863-1937:

Contending with Marginality. New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2004.

________. “Caste, Catholicism, and History “from Below,” 1863-1917.” In India and

the Indianness of Christianity: Essays on Understanding –Historical,

Theological, and Bibliographical – in Honor of Robert Eric Frykenberg, ed.

Richard Fox Young, 144-157. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009.

Manickam, S. Studies in Missionary History: Reflections on a Culture-Contact.

Madras: CLS, 1988.

________. “Mission Approaches to Caste.” In Dalits & Women: Quest for Humanity,

ed. V. Devasahayam, 60-70. Chennai: Gurukul, 1992.

Mann, Denese Berg. The Woman in Judaism. Hartford, CT: Jonathan, 1979.

Manu, The Laws of Manu, trans. G. Buhler. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986.

Marshall, P. J. The British Discovery of Hinduism in the Eighteenth Century.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970.

Marshman, Joshua. Works of Confucius to Which is Prefixed a Dissertation of

Chinese Language. Serampore: Mission Press, 1809.

Martelet, Gustave. The Risen Christ and the Eucharist World. Translated by René

Hague. New York: Crossroad, 1976.

Martin, James P. “The Church in Mathew.” In Interpreting the Gospels, ed. James

Luther Mays, 97-114. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.

Mason, Simon. “Gandhi‟s Spirituality in Today‟s Ecological Crisis.” Ecotheology 5 &

6 (1998-1999): 226-238.

Massey, James. “Christian Dalits in India.” Religion & Society 37:3 (1990): 47.

xxxii | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________. “Christian Dalits: A Historical Perspective.” Journal of Dharma 16

(1991): 44-60.

________., ed. Indigenous Peoples: Dalits and Dalit Issues in Today‟s Theological

Debate. Delhi: ISPCK, 1994.

________. Dalits in India: Religion as a Source of Bondage or Liberation with

Speical Reference to Christians. New Delhi: Manohar, 1995.

Mathew, K. M. “In Search of a Theology of the Environment.” Vidyajyoti Journal of


Maurina, Z. “Gandhi: Image and Symbol of India.” In Mahatma Gandhi 100 Years,

ed. S. Radhakrishna, 240-242. New Delhi: Gandhi Peace Foundation, 1968.

Meuthrath, Annette. “Sita the Faithful Rebel: Liberative Aspects of the Sita Figure in

Valmiki‟s Ramayana.” In Encounters With the Word: Essays to Honour

Aloysius Pieris, S.J., eds., Robert Cruz et al, 475-487. Colombo: The

Ecumenical Institute for Study and Dialogue, 2004.

McCulloch, R. “Gregorian Adaptation in the Augustinian Mission to England.”

Missiology 6:3 (1978): 323-334.

McCully, B. T. English Education and the Origins of Indian Nationalism. Gloucester,

Mass.: P. Smith, 1966.

McDonagh, Sean. To Care for the Earth: A Call to a New Ecology. Santa Fe, NM:

Bear & Co, 1986.

McFague, Sallie. Models of God: Theology for an Ecological Nuclear Age.

Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986.

________. The Body of God: An Ecological Theology. London: SCM, 1993.

McGavran, Donald. The Bridges of God. London: World Dominion Press, 1955.

________. Understanding Church Growth. Grand Rapids, Michigan: W. B.

Eerdmans, 1990.

McGovern, Arthur. Liberation Theology and Its Critics: Towards An Assessment.


McGrath, James F. “Was Jesus Illegitimate? The Evidence of His Social

Interactions.” Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 5:1 (2007): 81-110.

McMahon, Andrew. “St. Francis, The Ever-Green Man.” Theology in Green 5.4

(1995): 43-46.

Meersman, Achilles. “Can We Speak of Indigenization of the Catholic Church in

India during the 19th

Century?” Indian Church History Review 7:2 (1973): 75-

82.

Meier, John P. A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, vol.1. New York:

Doubleday, 1991.

________. A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. Volume 3: Companions

and Competitors. New York: Doubleday, 2001.

Merrigan, Terrence. “Exploring the Frontiers: Jacques Dupuis and the Movement

„Towards A Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism.‟” Louvain Studies 23

(1998): 338-339.

Michael, S. M. “Inculturation in the Context of India.” In In His Foot Steps: Together

Towards the New Millennium. Divine Word Missionaries 1875-2000, eds.

Clarence Srampical et al, 167-173. Indore: Divine Word Missionaries, 2000.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xxxiii

________. “Culture, Nationalism and Globalization: Politics of Identity in India.” In

Globalization and Social Movements: Struggle for a Humane Society, eds. P.G.

Jogdand and S.M. Michael, 108-131. Delhi: Rawat, 2003.

Mies, M. Indian Woman and Patriarchy. New Delhi: Concept Publishers, 1980.

Miller, William. Indian Mission and How to View Them. Edinburgh: James Thin,

1878.

________. Lectures for Educated Hindus. Madras: SPCK, 1880.

Minz, Nirmal. “Meaning of Tribal Consciousness.” Religion and Society 36:2 (1989):

12-23.

________. “A Theological Interpretation of the Tribal Reality in India.” In Readings

in Indian Christian Theology, eds., R. S. Sugirtharajah and Cecil Hargreaves,

46-58. Delhi: ISPCK, 1993.

________. “Dalit-Tribal: A Search for Common Ideology.” In Towards a Common

Dalit Ideology, ed., Arvind P. Nirmal, 97-107. Madras: Gurukul, n.d. [A revised

version in Indigenous People: Dalits. Dalit Issues in Today‟s Theological

Debate, ed., James Massey, 134-142. Delhi: ISPCK, 1998].

Mittal, Mukta. Women in India: Today and Tomorrow. New Delhi: Anmol

Publication, 1995.

Moltmann, Jürgen. God in Creation: A New Theology of Creation and the Spirit of

God. Translated by Margaret Kohl. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985.

Monchanin, Abbé Jules and Le Saux, Dom Henri. A Benedictine Ashram. Douglas:

Times Press, 1964.

Monier-Williams, M. Sanskrit-English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1899.

Mookenthottam, Anthony. Indian Theological Tendencies. Berne: Peter Lang Verlag,

1978.

Morris, Leon. The Gospel According to Mathew. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1992.

Mosse, David. “The Politics of Religious Synthesis: Roman Catholicism and Hindu

Village Society in Tamilnadu, India.” In Syncretism/Anti-Syncretism: The

Politics of Religious Synthesis, eds. Charles Stewart and Rosalind Shaw, 85-

107. London: Routledge, 1994.

Mozoomdar, Pratap Chunder. The Oriental Christ. Boston: Geo H. Ellis, 1883.

________. The Life and Teachings of Keshub Chunder Sen. Calcutta: Baptist Mission

Press, 1887.

Mudge, Lewis S. The Gift of Responsibility: The Promise of Dialogue among

Christians, Jews, and Muslims. New York/London: Continuum, 2008.

Muggeridge, Malcolm. A Gift for God: Mother Teresa of Calcutta. London: Harper

Collins, 1975.

Muir, John. Original Sanskrit Texts on the Origin and History of the People of India.

London: Trubner, 1868.

Mukherjee, Prabhati. Hindu Women: Normative Models. New Delhi: Orient

Longman, 1978.

________. Beyond the Four Varnas: The Untouchables in India. Delhi: Sage

Publications, 1988.

Mullatti, Leela. The Bhakti Movement and the Status of Women: A Case Study of

Virasaivism. New Delhi: Abhinav Publications, 1989.

xxxiv | B i b l i o g r a p h y

Mullens, Joseph. Missions in South India. London: W. H. Dalton, 1854.

________. A Brief Review of Ten Years Missionary Labour in India. London: W. H.

Dalton, 1863.

Mullick, S. Bosu, and Samyadip Chtterji. Alienation Displacement and

Rehabilitation. New Delhi: Uppal Publishing House, 1997.

Mundadan, A. M. “Emergence of Catholic Theological Consciousness in India.” In St.

Thomas Academy for Research Documentation (STAR), no. 7, 2-10. Bangalore:

Dharmaram Publications, 1985.

________. “An Unknown Scholar: Ernest Hanxleden (Arnos Pathiri).” Indian Church

History Review 23 (1989): 39-63.

Muthumalai, Albert Z. “Report on India.” In Towards A “Dialogue Of Life”:

Ecumenism in the Asian Context, Cardinal Bea Studies IV, ed. Pedro S. De

Achútegui, 242-245. Manila: Cardinal Bea Institute, Loyola School of

Theology, 1976.

Nanda, B. R. Mahatma Gandhi: A Biography. London: Allen and Unwin, 1958.

Narayan, Badri. Women Heroes and Dalit Assertion in North India: Culture, Identity

and Politics. New Delhi: Sage, 2006.

Narchison, J. Rosario, and D. K. Kamal. “The Church and the Churches: the

Ecumenical Task in India Today.” Jeevadhara 22 (1992): 267-276.

Nash, James A. Loving Nature: Ecological Integrity and Christian Responsibility.

Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1991.

Natarajan, Nalini. The Missionary Among the Khasis. New Delhi: Sterling Publishers,

1977.

Natarajan, Swaminathan. “Indian Dalits Find No Refuge From Caste in Christianity.”

BBC News South Asia, 14 September 2010, at

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11229170 (accessed 14 September

2010).

National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB). “Crime in India.” In Indo-Asian News

Service (IANS). (http://www.eians.com/stories/2005/03/11/11dom.shtml access

on 11.03.2005).

Nayak, Jessie Tellis. “Why this Oppression of Women?” Jeevadhara 17 (1985): 7-22.

Nehru, Jawaharlal. The Unity of India. New York: The John Day Company, 1949.

Neill, Stephen. A History of Christian Missions. Baltimore: Penguin, 1964.

________. A History of Christianity in India: The Beginnings to AD 1707.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984.

________. A History of Christianity in India 1707-1858. Cambridge: Cambridge


Neill, Stephen. Builders of Indian Church: Present Problems in the Light of the Past.

London: Edinburgh House Press, 1934.

Nelavala, Surekha. “Smart Syrophoenician Woman: A Dalit Feminist Reading of

Mark 7:24-31.” The Expository Times 118:2 (2006): 64-69.

Nemet, Ladislav. “Inculturation in the FABC Documents.” East Asian Pastoral

Review 31: 1&2 (1994): 77-94.

Neuner, Josef, and Jacques Dupuis, eds. The Christian Faith in the Doctrinal

Documents of the Catholic Church. New York: Alba House, 1982.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11229170

http://www.eians.com/stories/2005/03/11/11dom.shtml%20access%20on%2011.03.2005

http://www.eians.com/stories/2005/03/11/11dom.shtml%20access%20on%2011.03.2005

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xxxv

________. “Proclaiming Jesus Christ: Reflections on Ecclesia in Asia.” Vidyajyoti


Niditch, Susan. Oral World and Written Word. Louisville, KY: Westminster/John

Knox, 1996.

Ninan, Thomas. “Emergence of Ecclesial Communities: A New Missionary

Phenomenon.” Religion and Society 54:2 (2009): 1-9.

Nirmal, Aravind P. Heuristic Explorations. Madras: CLS, 1990.

________, ed. A Reader in Dalit Theology. Madras: Gurukul, 1991.

________, ed. Towards a Common Dalit Ideology. Madras: Gurukul, n. d.

________. “Towards a Christian Dalit Theology.” In A Reader in Dalit Theology, ed.

Arvind P. Nirmal, 53-70. Madras: Gurukul, 1991.

Nothwehr, Dawn M. Franciscan Theology of the Environment: An Introductory

Reader. Quincy: Franciscan, 2002.

O‟Collins, Gerald. “Jacques Dupuis‟s Contribution to Interreligious Dialogue.”


O‟Mahony, Donal. “An Emerging Christian Perspective on Ecology, as Shaped by

Scripture, Cosmology, and Contemporary Science.” Journal of Dharma 26

(2001): 96-120.

Oborji, Francis Anekwe. Concepts of Mission: The Evolution of Contemporary

Missiology. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2006.

Oddie, Geoffrey A. “Indian Christians and the National Congress, 1885-1910.” Indian

Church History Review 2:1 (1968): 45-54.

________. “Anti-Missionary Feeling and Hindu Revivalism in Madras: The Hindu

Preaching and the Hindu Tract Societies, 1886-1891.” In Images of Man:

Religion and Historical Process in South Asia, ed. Fred W. Clothey, 217-143.

Madras: New Era Publications, 1982.

________, ed. Religion in South Asia: Religious Conversion and Revival Movements

in South Asia in Medieval and Modern Times. Delhi: Manohar, 1991.

________. “Indigenization and Nationalism.” Archives de sciences sociales des

religions 103 (1998): 129-152.

Oelschlaeger, Max. Caring for Creation: An Ecumenical Approach to the

Environmental Crisis. New Heaven: Yale University Press, 1994.

Omvedt, Gail. “Women and Rural Revolt in India: Part One.” Social Scientist 6:61

(Aug 1977): 3-18.

________. “Women and Rural Revolt in India: Part Two,” Social Scientist 6:62 (Sep

1977): 22-41.

________. Women in Popular Movements: India and Thailand During the Decade of

Women. Geneva: UN Research Institute, 1986.

________. Dalit Visions: The Anti-Caste Movement and the Construction of an Indian

Identity, Revised Edition. Hyderabad: Orient Longman, 2006 [first published in

1995].

________. “The Downtrodden Among the Downtrodden. An Interview with a Dalit

Agricultural Labourer.” In Gender & Caste, ed. Anupama Rao, 310-324. Delhi:

Kali for Women, 2005.

xxxvi | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________. “The Bhakti Radicals and Untouchability.” In Speaking Truth to Power:

Religion, Caste, and the Subaltern Question in India, eds. Manu Bhagavan and

Anne Feldhaus, 11-29. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Onesimu, J. A. David. Dr. Amedkar‟s Critique Towards Christian Dalit Liberation.

New Delhi: ISPCK, 2008.

Ong, W. “Text as Interpretation: Mark and After.” Semeia 39 (1987): 7-26.

Oo-Chung, Lee, et al, eds. Women of Courage: Asian Woman Rereading the Bible.

Seoul: Asian Women‟s Resource Centre for Culture and Theology[AWRC],

1992.

Oommen, George, and John C. B. Webster, eds. Local Dalit Christian History. Delhi:

ISPCK, 2002.

________. “Introduction.” In Local Dalit Christian History, eds. George Oommen

and John C. B. Webster, 1-17. Delhi: ISPCK, 2002.

________. “Pulaya Christians of Kerala: A Community in a Dilemma.” In Local Dalit

Christian History, eds. George Oommen and John C. B. Webster, 83-97. Delhi:

ISPCK, 2002.

________. “Historiography of Indian Christianity and Challenges of Subaltern

Methodology.” Journal of Dharma 28:2 (2003): 212-231.

Osborn, Lawrence. Guardians of Creation: Nature in Theology and the Christian

Life. Leicester: Apollos, 1993.

Padinjarekuttu, Issac. The Missionary Movement of the 19th

and 20th

Centuries and its

Encounter with India. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Peter Lang, 1995.

Padma Rao, Katti. “Caste, Dalit Women - Alternative Culture.” In Feminist Theology:

Perspectives and Praxis, ed. Prasanna Kumari, 57-81. Chennai: Gurukul, 1999.

Painadath, Sebastian. “Bhagavata Gita‟s Vision of Liberative Action.” In Towards an

Indian Theology of Liberation, ed. Paul Puthenangady, 49-65. Bangalore:

ITA/NBCLC, 1986.

Pandey, R. B. Hindu Samskaras. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1969.

Panikkar, Raimon. The Trinity and the Religious Experience of Man: Icon-Person-

Mystery. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1973.

________. The Intra-Religious Dialogue. New York: St. Paul‟s Publications, 1978.

________. Myth, Faith and Hermeneutics. New York: Paulist, 1979.

________. The Unknown Christ of Hinduism: Towards An Ecumenical Christophany.

Maryknoll,NY: Orbis, 1981.

________. Blessed Simplicity. New York: Seabury, 1982.

________. “Towards Ecumenical Ecumenism.” Journal of Ecumenical Studies

(1982): 781-786.

________. “The Invisible Harmony: A Universal Theory of Religion or a Cosmic

Confidence in Reality?” In Toward a Universal Theology of Religion, ed.

Leonard Swidler, 120-136. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1985.

________. The Silence of God. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1989.

________. Christophany: The Fullness of Man. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2004.

Paradkar, B. A. M. “Religious Quest of Ambedkar.” In Ambedkar and the Neo-

Buddhist Movement, T. S. Wilkinson and M. M. Thomas, 58-65. Bangalore:

CISRS, 1972.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xxxvii

Parekh, Manilal Chhotalal. Bramarshi Keshub Chunder Sen. Rajkot: Oriental Christ

House, 1931.

Parkhe, Camil. Dalit Christians: Right to Reservations. Delhi: ISPCK, 2007.

Pathil, Kucheria. Trends in Indian Theology. Bangalore: Asian Trading Corporation,

2005.

Pathy, Jaganath. “What is Tribe? What is Indigenous? Turn the Tables Towards the

Metaphor of Social Justice.” Religion and Society 38: 3&4 (1991), 23-34.

Pattery, George. “The Gandhian Attempt at Reconstructing India‟s Past.” In

Gandhian Spirituality, ed. Augustine Thottakara, 21-34. Rome/Bangalore:

CIIS/Dharmaram 1992.

________. “Gandhian Social Vision for the Twenty-First Century.” Jnanadeepa 2:1

(1999): 36-46.

________. “Centring the Border and Bordering the Centre, Spirituality of Mother

Teresa.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 67 (2003): 758-772.

Paul, Diana. Women in Buddhism. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1979.

Paviotti, O. The Work of His Hands: The Story of the Archdiocese of Shillong-

Guwahati 1934-1984. Shillong: Archdiocese of Shillong-Guwahati, 1987.

Pearson, Andrew. Making Creation Visible: God‟s Earth in Christian Worship.

Cambridge: Grove Books, 1996.

Pechilis, Karen. “Response to the Essays on „Selective Indigenization: Three Faces of

South Indian Christianity.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 69

(2005): 444-448.

Pensa, Corrado. “A Buddhist View of Ecology: Interdependence, Emptiness and

Compassion.” Journal of Dharma 26 (2001): 36-45.

Persaud, Winston D. “The Cross of Jesus Christ, the Unity of the Church, and Human

Suffering.” In The Scandal of a Crucified World, ed. Yacob Tesfai, 111-129.


Peter, John. “Evangelization and Dialogue.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 54 (1991): 401-411.

Phan, Peter C. Mission and Catechesis: Alexandre de Rhodes and Inculturation in

Seventeenth-Century Vietnam. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1998.

________. In Our Own Tongues: Perspectives from Asia on Mission and

Inculturation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2003.

________. Christianity With An Asian Face: Asian American Theology in the Making.


________. “Ecclesia in Asia: Challenges for Asian Christianity.” East Asian Pastoral

Review 37 (2000): 215-232.

________. “World Christianity and Christian Mission: Are They Compatible?

Insights from the Asian Churches.” International Bulletin of Missionary

Research 32:4 (2008): 193-200.

Pieris, Aloysius. “The Indian Mass Controversy.” Worship 43 (1969): 219-223.

________. “Monastic Poverty in the Asian Setting.” Dialogue 7 (1980): 104-118.

________. “To be Poor as Jesus was Poor.” The Way 24 (1984): 186-197.

________. “Western Models of Inculturation: How far are they Applicable in Non-

Semitic Asia?” East Asian Pastoral Review 22 (1985): 116-124.

xxxviii | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________. An Asian Theology of Liberation. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1988.

________. “Inculturation: Some Critical Reflections.” Vidyajyoti Journal of

Theological Reflections 57 (1993): 644-651.

________. God‟s Reign for God‟s Poor: A Return to Jesus Formula. Gonawila:

Tulana Research Centre, 1999.

________. “An Asian Way to Celebrate the Eucharist.” Worship 81 (2007): 314-328.

Pixley, Jorge, and Clodovis Boff. The Bible, the Church and the Poor: Biblical,

Theological and Pastoral Aspects of the Option for the Poor. Translated by Paul

Burns. Tunbridge Wells, Kent: Burns & Oates, 1989.

Podipara, Placid. “The Social and Socio-ecclesiastical Customs of the Syrian

Christians of India.” Eastern Churches Quarterly 7 (1947): 222-236.

________. “Hindu in Culture, Christian in Religion, Oriental in Worship.”

Ostkirchliche Studien 8 (1959): 82-104.

Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue. Dialogue and Proclamation (19 May,

1991). In Redemption and Dialogue, ed. William Burrows, 93-118. Maryknoll,

NY: Orbis, 1993.

Poonthuruthil, James. “The Christian Impact on the Khasi Family.” Indian


Poovathumkudy, K. “You Shall Be My Witnesses in Assam.” Indian Missiological

Review 19:2 (June, 1997): 15-23.

Potter, Philip. “Report of the General Secretary.” Ecumenical Review 25 (1973): 414-

429.

Potts, E. Daniel. British Baptist Missionaries in India, 1793-1837: The History of

Serampore and Its Missions. London: Cambridge University Press, 1967.

Prabhakar, M. E. “The Search for a Dalit Theology.” In A Reader in Dalit Theology,

ed. Arvind P. Nirmal, 41-52. Madras: Gurukul, 1990.

________. “Missions in a Dalit Perspective.” In Dalits and Women: Quest for

Humanity, ed. K. Rajaratnam, 71-89. Madras: Gurukul, 1992.

________. “The Dalit Poetry of Poet-Laureate Joshua.” In Doing Theology with the

Poetic Traditions of India: Focus on Dalit and Tribal Poems, ed. Joseph

Patmury, 3-20. Bangalore: PTCA/SATHRI, 1996.

Prabhakaran, C. K., ed. The History of the Carnatic Lodge 1883-1983. Madras:

Rathnam Press, 1984.

Prabhu, Joseph. “Trajectories of Hindu Ethics.” In The Blackwell Companion to

Religious Ethics, ed., William Schweiker, 355-367. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005.

Prakash Reddy, G. “Caste and Christianity: A Study of Shudra Caste Converts in

Rural Andhra Pradesh.” Religion and Society (1987): 113-128.

Prasad, Amar Nath, and M. B. Gaijan. Dalit Literature: A Critical Exploration. New

Delhi: Sarup & Sons, 2007.

Prasad, D. Manohar Chandra. The Book of Exodus and Dalit Liberation: With

Reference to Minjung Theology. Bangalore: ATC, 2005.

Prior, John Mansford. “Unfinished Encounter: A Note on the Voice and Tone of

Ecclesia in Asia.” East Asian Pastoral Review 37 (2000): 256-271.

________. “Dialogue and Culture: Reflections by a Temporary Sojourner.” East

Asian Pastoral Review 39:4 (2002): 328-349.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xxxix

Pulloppillil, Thomas. “The Values that Undergird a Tribal Theology.” Vidyajyoti


Puthenangady, Paul, ed. Towards An Indian Theology of Liberation. Bangalore:

NBCLC, 1985.

Puthiadam, Ignatius. “Education For Dialogue.” Indian Missiological Review 13

(1991): 33-47.

Raines, John C., and Daniel Maguire, eds. What Men Owe to Women: Men‟s Voices

from World Religions. New York: State University of New York Press, 2001.

________. The Justice Men Owe Women: Possible Resources from World Religions.

Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 2001.

Raj, Selva J., ed. Popular Christianity in India: Riting between the Lines. New York:

SUNY, 2002.

________. “Two Models of Indigenization in South Asian Catholicism: A Critique.”


Ralston, Helen. Catholic Ashrams: A New Religious Movement in Contemporary

India. New York: Edwin Mellen, 1987.

Ramabai, Pandita. The High-Caste Hindu Woman. Bombay: Government of

Maharashtra, 1982 [originally published in 1887].

Ramanathan, Suguna. “Stories Women Tell.” In The Silken Swing: The Cultural

Universe of Dalit Women, eds. Fernando Franco et al, 129-161. Calcutta: Stree,

2000.

Ramaswamy, Vijaya. Divinity and Deviance: Women in Virasaivism. New Delhi:


________. Walking Naked: Women, Society, Spirituality in South India. Shimla:

Indian Institute of Advanced Study, 2007.

Ramusack, Barbara N. “Cultural Missionaries, Maternal Imperialists, Feminist Allies.

British Women Activists in India, 1865-1945.” In Western Women and

Imperialism, eds. Nupur Chaudhuri and Margaret Strobel, 119-136.

Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1992.

Rasmussen, Larry L. “The Integrity of Creation.” The Annual of the Society of

Christian Ethics (1995): 168-177.

________. Earth Community Earth Ethics. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1996.

Ranade, E., ed. Indian Womanhood Through the Ages. Madras: Vivekananda

Prakashan Kendra, 1975.

Rao, Anupama. “Introduction.” In Gender & Caste, ed. Anupama Rao, 1-13. Delhi:

Kali for Women, 2005.

Rao, M. S. A., ed. Social Movements in India: Studies in Peasant, Backwad Classes,

Sectarian, Tribal and Women Movements. New Delhi: Manohar, 2004.

Ratzinger, Cardinal Joseph. Truth and Tolerance: Christian Belief and World

Religions. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2004.

Rayan, Samuel. “Editorial.” Jeevadhara 6 (1976): 255-258.

________. “Flesh of India‟s Flesh.” Jeevadhara 6 (1976): 259-267.

________. “Sociological Factors and the Local Church as Eucharistic Community.”


xl | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________. “Jesus and the Poor in the Fourth Gospel.” Biblebhashyam 4 (1978): 132-

140.

________. “The Churches and Justice to Christians of Scheduled Caste Origin.” Word

and Worship 11 (1978): 236-245.

________. “The March Has Begun.” Jeevadhara 9 (1979): 161-188.

________. Breath of Fire. The Holy Spirit: Heart of the Gospel. London: Geofrey

Chapman, 1979.

________. The Anger of God. Bombay: Build, 1981.

________. “Theological Priorities in India Today.” In Irruption of the Third World,

ed. Virginia Fabella et al, 30-41. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1983.

________. “The Ecclesiology at Work in the Indian Church.” In Searching for an

Indian Ecclesiology, ed. G. Van Leeuwen, 191-212. Bangalore: ATC, 1984.

________. “Reconceiving Theology in the Asian Context.” In Doing Theology in a

Divided World, ed. V. Fabella and S. Torres, 124-142. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1985.

________. “Asia and Justice.” In Liberation in Asia: Theological Perspectives, eds. S.

Arokiasamy & G. Gispert-Sauch, 3-15. Anand, Gujarat: Gujarat Sahitya

Prakash, 1987.

________. “Editorial.” Jeevadhara 17 (1987): 181-186.

________. “Spirituality for Inter-Faith Social Action.” In Liberation and Dialogue,

ed. X. Irudayaraj, 64-73. Bangalore: Claretian, 1989.

________. “People‟s Theology.” Jeevadhara 22 (1992): 175-202.

________. “The Challenge of the Dalit Issue: Some Theological Perspectives.” In

Dalits & Women: Quest for Humanity, ed. V. Devasahayam, 117-140. Chennai:

Gurukul, 1992.

________. “The Earth is the Lord‟s.” In Ecotheology: Voices from South and North,

ed. David G. Hallman, 130-148. Geneva: WCC, 1994.

________. “Outside the Gate, Sharing the Insult.” In Leave the Temple: Indian Paths

to Human Liberation, ed. Felix Wilfred, 125-145. Trichy: Carmel Publications,

1996.

________. “Evangelization: an Indian Perception.” Prepare the Way for God‟s

Government, CPCI News Letter 11 (1997): 17-27.

________. “Inculturation and Peoples‟ Struggles.” Indian Missiological Review 19

(1997): 35-45.

________. “Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread.” Basic Community Library Service 7

(1997-1998): 1-7.

________. “Decolonization of Theology.” Jnanadeepa 1 (1998): 140-155.

Richards, Glyn. The Philosophy of Gandhi: A Study of His Basic Ideas. New York:

Barnes and Noble, 1982.

Richards, H. L. Christ-Bhakti: Narayan Vaman Tilak and Christian Work among

Hindus. Delhi: ISPCK, 1991.

Rieger, Joerg. Remember the Poor: The Challenge to Theology in the Twenty-First

Century. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xli

________. “Theology and the Power of the Margins in the Postmodern World.” In

Opting for the Margins: Postmodernity and Liberation in Christian Theology,

ed. Joerg Rieger, 179-199. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Robinson, Rowena. Conversion, Continuity and Change: Lived Christianity in

Southern Goa. New Delhi: Sage, 1998.

________. Christians of India. New Delhi: Sage, 2003.

Rodhe, Sten. Jules Monchanin: Pioneer in Christian-Hindu Dialogue. Delhi: ISPCK,

1993.

Rosales, G., and C. Arevalo, eds. For All the Peoples of Asia: Federation of Asian

Bishops‟ Conferences Documents from 1970-1991. Quenzon City: Claretian,

1991.

Rudolph, Lloyd I., and Susanne Hoeber Rudolph. Gandhi: The Traditional Roots of

Charisma. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983.

Ruether, Resemary Radford. New Woman, New Earth: Sexist Ideologies and Human

Liberation. New York: Seabury, 1975.

________. “Disputed Questions: On Being A Christian.” In Journeys in Faith Series,

ed. Robert A. Raines, 117-132. Nashville: Abingdon, 1982.

________. Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology. Boston: Beacon

Press, 1983.

________. Womanguides: Readings Towards a Feminist Theology. Boston: Beacon,

1985.

________. Women-Church: Theology and Practice of Feminist Liturgical

Communities. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985.

________. “John Paul II and the Growing Alienation of Women from the Church.” In

The Church in Anguish: Has the Vatican Betrayed Vatican II? eds. Hans Küng

and Leonard Swidler, 276-288. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1986.

________. “The Place of Women in the Church.” In Modern Catholicism, ed. Adrian

Hastings, 258-272. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.

________. Gaia & God: An Ecofeminist Theology of Earth Healing. San Francisco:

Harper & Row, 1992.

________, ed. Women Healing Earth: Third World Women on Ecology, Feminism

and Religion. London: SCM, 1996.

________. “Ecofeminism: First and Third World Women.” Ecotheology 2 (1997): 72-

83.

Rynne, J. Terrence. Gandhi and Jesus: The Saving Power of Nonviolence. Maryknoll,

NY: Orbis, 2008.

Sadarangani, Neeti M. Bhakti Poetry in Medival India: Its Inception, Cultural

Encounter and Impact. New Delhi: Sarup & Sons, 2004.

Sahi, Jyoti. “Dance in the Wilderness.” In Doing Theology with Asian Resources,

vol.II, ed. Yeow Choo Lak, 112-119. Singapore: ATESEA, 1995.

________. “Seeds of Tradition.” Journal of Dharma 23:1 (1998): 76-97.

Sahtouris, Elisabeth. Gaia: The Human Journey from Chaos to Cosmos. New York:

Pocket Books, 1989.

Saldanha, Julian. Inculturation. Bombay: St. Pauls, 1987.

________. Patterns of Evangelization in Mission History. Bombay: St. Paul‟s, 1988.

xlii | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________. “An Historical Note: Christians of Scheduled Caste Origin.” Indian


Samartha, Stanley Jedidiah. The Hindu Response to the Unbound Christ. Madras:

Christian Literature Society, 1974.

________. Courage for Dialogue. Geneva: WCC, 1981.

________. One Christ – Many Religions: Towards a Revised Christology. Maryknoll,

NY: Orbis, 1991.

________. Between Two Cultures: Ecumenical Ministry in a Pluralist World. Geneva:

WCC, 1996.

Sandanam, John Peter. “Do This in Remembrance of Me: A Social Implication of the

Anamnesis.” Indian Theological Studies 39 (2002): 280-306.

Santmire, H. Paul. The Travail of Nature: The Ambiguous Ecological Promise of

Christian Theology. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985.

Sarkar, Sumit. Modern India, 1885-1947. Delhi: Macmillan India, 1983.

Saulière, A. His Star in the East. Revised and edited by S. Rajamanickam. Anand:


Savari Raj, Anthony. A New Hermeneutic of Reality. Raimon Panikkar‟s

Cosmotheandric Vision. Bern: Peter Lang, 1998.

Savramis, Demosthenes. The Satanizing of Women: Religion Versus Sexuality. New

York: Double Day, 1974.

Scherer, James A., and Stephen B. Bevans. New Directions in Mission and

Evangelization-I: Basic Statements, 1974-1991. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1992.

________, and Stephen B. Bevans. “Introduction: Faith and Culture in Perspective.”

In New Directions in Mission and Evangelization-3: Faith and Culture, eds.

James A. Scherer and Stephen B. Bevans, 1-14. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1999.

Schillebeeckx, Edward. Ministry, A Case for Change. London: SCM, 1981.

Schineller, Peter. A Handbook on Inculturation. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist, 1990.

Schreiter, Robert. Constructing Local Theologies. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1985.

Schurhammer, G. “Thomas Stephens, 1549-1619.” The Month 13 (1955): 197-210.

Schwab, Raymond. The Oriental Renaissance: Europe‟s Rediscovery of India and the

East, 1680-1880. New York: Columbia University Press, 1984.

Scott, David C., ed. Keshub Chunder Sen. Madras: CLS, 1979.

Scott, Peter. “Types of Ecotheology.” Ecotheology 4 (1998): 8-19.

Seal, Anil. The Emergence of Indian Nationalism: Competition and Collaboration in

the Later Nineteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968.

Selvanayagam, Israel. “Waters of Life and Indian Cups: Protestant Attempts at

Theologizing in India.” In Christian Theology in Asia, ed. Sebastian C. H. Kim,

41-70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Sen, Amartya. The Argumentative Indian. New York: Picador, 2005.

Sen, Keshub Chunder. “We Apostles of the New Dispensation.” In Sources of Indian

Tradition, ed. W. T. De Bary et al, 617-627. New York: Columbia University

Press, 1958.

Senn, Frank. The Witness of the Worshipping Community: Liturgy and the Practice of

Evangelism. New York: Paulist Press, 1993.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xliii

Sequeira, Leo. “The Cross, Symbol of Compassion.” Vidyajyoti Journal of


Seshagiri Rao, K. L. “Mahatma Gandhi: A Prophet of Pluralism.” In The Myth of

Religious Superiority: Multifaith Explorations of Religious Pluralism, ed. Paul

F. Knitter, 45-55. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2005.

Shanti, Margaret. “Religious Women and Their Theological Education.” Jeevadhara

22 (1992): 299-309.

Sharma, Aravind, ed. Women in World Religions. NY: State University of New York

Press, 1987.

Sharma, Kalapna. “Conversations About History.” The Hindu, Sunday Magazine (25

Jan, 2009) at

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2009/01/25/stories/2009012550010100.htm.

(accessed 25 Jan, 2009).

Sharpe, Eric J. Not to Destroy But To Fulfill: The Contributions of J. N. Farquhar to

Protestant Missionary Thought in India Before 1914. Lund: Gleerup, 1965.

________. “The Goals of Interreligious Dialogue.” In Truth and Dialogue in World

Religions, ed. John Hick, 77-95. Philadelphia: The Westminister Press, 1974.

________. “Mission Between Dialogue and Proclamation.” In Redemption and

Dialogue, ed. William R. Burrows, 160-172. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1993.

Sharpe, Gene. Gandhi as a Political Strategist. Boston: Porter Sargent, 1979.

Shekar, Vincent. “Significance of Jain Philosophy for preserving Life and

Environment.” Journal of Dharma 26 (2001): 46-59.

Sheldon, Joseph. Rediscovery of Creation: A Bibliographical Study of the Church‟s

Response to the Environmental Crisis. Metuchen, NY: Scarecrow, Press, 1992.

Shenk, Wilbert R. Changing Frontiers of Mission. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1999.

Sheth, Noel. “The Non-Violence of Mahatma Gandhi.” Jnanadeepa 4:1 (2001): 59-

78.

Shiri, Godwin. “Plight of Christian Dalits in Karnataka.” In Dalits & Women: Quest

for Humanity, ed. V. Devasahayam, 90-116. Chennai: Gurukul, 1992.

Shiva, Vandana. Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India. Delhi: Kali for

Women, 1988.

Shorter, Aylward. Towards A Theology of Inculturation. London: Geoffrey Chapman,

1988.

________. Evangelization and Culture. London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1994.

Sigmund, Paul E. Liberation Theology at the Crossroads: Democracy or Revolution.


Singaram, Charles. The Question of Method in Dalit Theology: In Search of a

Systematic Approach to the Practice of an Indian Liberation Theology. Delhi:

ISPCK, 2008.

Singh, Ajay Kumar. “Hindu Radicals Dominate Orissa‟s Schools.” UCANEWS (25-

06-2010), at http://www.ucanews.com/2010/06/25/hindu-radicals-dominate-

orissas-rural-schools (accessed on 25 June 2010).

Sivaramakrishna, M., and Sumita Roy. Poet Saints of India. New Delhi: Sterling

Paperbacks, 1998.

Slater, T. E. Studies in the Upanishads. Madras: CLS, 1989.

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2009/01/25/stories/2009012550010100.htm

http://www.ucanews.com/2010/06/25/hindu-radicals-dominate-orissas-rural-schools


xliv | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________. The Higher Hinduism in Relation to Christianity. London: Elliot Stock,

1909.

Smalley, William A. “Cultural Implications of an Indigenous Church.” In Readings in

Missionary Anthropology II, ed. William A. Smalley, 363-372. South Pasadena,

California: William Carey Library, 1978.

Smith, J. I., ed. Women in Contemporary Muslim Societies. Lewisburg: Bucknell


Soares-Prabhu, George M. “The Table Fellowship of Jesus: Its Significance for Dalit

Christians in India Today.” Jeevadhara 22 (1992): 140-159.

________. “From Alienation to Inculturation: Some Reflections on Doing Theology

in India Today.” In Biblical Themes for a Contextual Theology Today:

Collected Writings of George M. Soares-Prabhu, Vol.1, ed. Issac

Padinjarekuttu, 79-112. Pune: JDV, 1999.

________. “Inculturation – Liberation – Dialogue: Challenges to Christian Theology

in Asia Today.” In Biblical Themes for a Contextual Theology Today: Collected

Writings of George M. Soares-Prabhu, Vol.1, ed. Issac Padinjarekuttu, 51-78.

Pune: JDV, 1999.

________. “Jesus and the Poor.” In Theology of Liberation: An Indian Biblical

Perspective. Collected Writings of George M. Soares-Prabhu, S.J., Vol.4, ed.

Francis X. D‟Sa, 173-197. Pune: Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, 2000.

________. “Radical Beginnings: The Jesus Community as the Archetype of the

Church.” In Theology of Liberation: An Indian Biblical Perspective. Collected

Writings of George M. Soares-Prabhu, S.J., Vol.4, ed. Francis X. D‟Sa, 136-

149. Pune: Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, 2000.

________. “The Bible as Magna Carta of Movements for Liberation and Human

Rights.” In Theology of Liberation: An Indian Biblical Perspective. Collected

Writings of George M. Soares-Prabhu, S.J., Vol.4, ed. Francis X. D‟Sa, 73-84.

Pune: Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, 2000.

Sobrino, Jon. “A Crucified People‟s Faith in the Son of God.” Concilium 153 (1982):

26.

________. Christology at the Crossroads: A Latin American Approach. Translated by

John Drury. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1984.

________. The True Church and the Poor. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1984.

________. Jesus in Latin America. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1987.

________. Jesus the Liberator: A Historical-Theological Reading of Jesus of

Nazareth. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1993.

Solomon, Thanugundla. Structures of the Church in Andhra Pradesh. Secunderabad:

Amruthavani, 1977.

Song, C. S. “Oh, Jesus, Here With Us.” In Asian Faces of Jesus, ed. R. S.

Sugirtharajah, 131-148. London: SCM, 1993.

________. Jesus, the Crucified People. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996.

Sorrell, Roger D. St. Francis of Assisi and Nature: Tradition and Innovation in

Western Attitudes towards the Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press,

1988.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xlv

Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. “Subaltern Studies: Deconstructing Historiography.” In

Subaltern Studies IV: Writings on South Asian History and Society, ed. Ranajit

Guha, 330-363. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1985.

Staffner, Hans. Dialogue Stimulating Contacts with Hindus. Anand: Gujarath Sahitya

Prakash, 1993.

Stambaugh, John E., and David L Balch. The New Testament and Its Social

Environment. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1986.

Stanton, Helen, ed. Mary and Human Liberation: The Story and the Text. New York:

Continuum, 1997.

Stark, Rodney. The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History. San

Francisco: HarperCollins, 1997.

Steinfels, Peter. A People Adrift. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2003.

Stuart, James, ed. Swami Abhishiktananda: His Life Told Through His Letters.

ISPCK: Delhi, 1995.

Studdert-Kennedy, Gerald. British Christians, Indian Nationalists and the Raj. New

Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Sudarshanam, R. S. C. V. Chalam. New Delhi: Sahitya Academy, 2000.

Sugirtharajah, R. S. Troublesome Texts: The Bible in Colonial and Contemporary

Culture. Sheffield: Phoenix Press, 2008.

Swidler, Arlene. Woman in A Man‟s Church. New York: Paulist Press, 1972.

Swidler, Leonard. Women in Judaism. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1976.

________. “The Dialogue Decologue: Ground Rules for Intereligious Dialogue.”

Journal of Ecumenical Studies 20:1 (1983): 1-4.

________, and Paul Mojzes, eds. The Uniqueness of Jesus: A Dialogue with Paul

Knitter. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1997.

________. “Understanding Dialogue.” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 43:2 (2008): 9-

24.

Syiemlieh, David R. “Christianity and Political Awareness in Northeast India.” Indian


Taft, Robert. The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: The Origins of the Divine

Office and its Meaning Today. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1993.

Tagle, Luis Antonio. “The Challenges of Mission in Asia: A View from the Asian

Synod.” In The Asian Synod: Texts and Commentaries, ed. Peter C. Phan, 212-

221. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2002.

Tagore, Rabindhranath. Gitanjali. New Delhi/New York: Macmillan, 1918.

________. Car Adhyay. Santiniketan: Bisvabharati Granthalay, 1934.

Tanner, Mary. “Towards Common Understanding and Vision: A Faith and Order

perspective – Common Understanding and Vision: Continuing the Discussion.”

The Ecumenical Review 50 (1998): 357-366.

Taylor, Mark Lewis. “Subalternity and Advocacy as Kairos for Theology.” In Opting

for the Margins: Postmodernity and Liberation in Christian Theology, ed. Joerg

Rieger, 23-44. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Taylor, Richard W. “Christian Ashrams as a Style of Mission in India.” International

Review of Mission 63 (1974): 281-292.

xlvi | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________. “From Khadi to Kavi: Towards a Typology of Christian Ashrams.”

Religion and Society 24:4 (1977): 19-37.

Tete, Peter. “The Christian Mission and Tribal Identity.” Sevartham 24 (1999): 37-62.

Thangaraj, M. Thomas. “The History and Teachings of the Hindu Christian

Community Commonly Called Nattu Sabai in Tirunelveli.” Indian Church

History Review 5:1 (June 1971): 62-74.

Thangasamy, D. A. The Theology of Chenchiah. Bangalore: CISRS, 1966.

Thanzauva, K. Theology of Community: Tribal Theology in the Making. Aizwal: Mizo

Theological Conference, 1997.

Tharamangalam, Joseph. “Whose Sawdeshi? Contending Nationalism among Indian

Christians.” Asian Journal of Social Sciences 32 (2004): 232-246.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. “Instruction on Certain Aspects of the

“Theology of Liberation” issued on August, 1984.” In Liberation Theology: A

Documentary History, ed. Alfred T. Hennelly, 393-414. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1990.

________. “Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation (March 22, 1986).” In

Liberation Theology: A Documentary History, ed. Alfred T. Hennelly, 416-497.


Thekkedath, Joseph. History of Christianity in India, Vol-II: From the Middle of the

Sixteenth Century to the End of Seventeenth Century. Bangalore: TPI, 1982.

Thenayan, Paul. The Missionary Consciousness of the St. Thomas Christians: A

Historico-Pastoral Study. Cochin: Viani Publications, 1982.

Therukattil, George. “The Resurrection of Jesus and Human Liberation.” Vidyajyoti


Thistlewaite, Susan Brooks. “Every Two Minutes: Battered Women and Feminist

Interpretation.” In Weaving the Visions: New Patterns in Feminist Spirituality,

ed. Judith Plaskow and Carol Christ, 302-318. San Francisco: Harper and Row,

1989.

Thomas, George. Christian Indians and Indian Nationalism, 1885-1950. Frankfurt am

Main: Verlag Peter D. Lang, 1979.

Thomas, M. M. The Acknowledged Christ of Indian Renaissance. Madras: CLS, 1970.

________. Man and the Universe of Faiths. Madras: CLS, 1975.

________. “Towards an Indigenous Christian Theology.” In Asian Voices in Christian

Theology, ed. Gerald H. Anderson, 11-35. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1976.

________. “Ecumenism in Asia: An Assessment.” In Voices of Unity, ed. Ans van der

Bent, 92-101. Geneva: WCC, 1981.

________. Religion and the Revolt of the Oppressed. Delhi: ISPCK, 1981.

________, and Thomas, P. T. Towards an Indian Christian Theology: Life and

Thought of Some Pioneers. Tiruvalla: New Day Publications, 1992.

________. “Foreword.” In An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, Robin

Boyd, v-vi. Delhi: ISPCK, 2005.

Thomas, P. T. The Theology of Chakkarai. Bangalore: CISRS, 1968.

Thottakara, Augustine. “A Vedantic Perspective of Ecology.” Journal of Dharma 26

(2001): 9-26.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xlvii

Thuami, Lalmghak. “Hla Do – A Mizo Poetry: Its Implications for a Feminist Tribal

Theology.” In Doing Theology with the Poetic Traditions of India: Focus on

Dalit and Tribal Poems, ed. Joseph Patmury, 125-135. Bangalore:

PTCA/SATHRI, 1996.

Thurston, Edgar. Castes and Tribes of Southern India, Vol. VI. Madras: Government

Press, 1909.

Tillard, J.–M. R. Dilemmas of Modern Religious Life, Consecrated Life Studies 3.

Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1984.

________. Church of Churches: The Ecclesiology of Communion. Collegeville,

Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 1992.

________. “Communion and Salvation,” In Communion of Churches: International

Theological Conference on the Communion of Churches, ed., Xavier

Koodapuzha, 12-27. Vadavathoor: Oriental Institute of Religious Studies, 1993.

Tirkey, C. A. Bixal. “The Tana Bhagat Movement: The Uraon Quest for Liberation.”

Indian Missiological Review 19:2 (June, 1997): 28-33.

Trapnell, Judson B. “Two Models of Christian Dialogue with Hinduism (I).”


Tripathy, Rebati Ballow. Dalits: A Sub-Human Society. New Delhi: Ashish

Publishing House, 1994.

Troisi, Joseph. “Christian Missions and De-Tribalisation: Myth or Reality?”


________. “Social Movements Among Santals.” In Social Movements in India:

Studies in Peasant, Backward Classes, Sectarian, Tribal and Women‟s

Movements, ed., M. S. A. Rao, 341-364. Delhi: Manohar, 2004.

UCAN. “India – Youth Place Faith in God, not Clergy,” Report from the CBCI

Plenary Assembly, “Youth for Peace and Harmony,” at Guwahati, Assam, 24

February – 3 March, 2010. UCAN NEWS (26 February 2010), at

http://www.ucanews.com/2010/02/26/youths-place-faith-in-god-not-clergy

(accessed 26-02-2010).

Umansky, Ellen M. “Women in Judaism: From Reform Movement to Contemporary

Jewish Religious Feminism.” In Women of Spirit, eds. Rosemary Ruether and

Eleanor McLaughlin, 333-354. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979.

United States Bishops Conference (USBC). Economic Justice for All. The text in

Catholic Social Thought: The Documentary Heritage, eds. David J. O‟Brien and

Thomas A. Shannon, 572-680. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1992.

Upasi, Mihir. “The Feminine Dimension of the Holy Trinity.” Indian Theological

Studies 31(1994): 140-155.

Vadakkumchery, Johnson. “Religion in the Tribal Eco-System.” Journal of Dharma

17 (1992): 85-97.

________. “The Earth Mother and the Indigenous People of India.” Journal of

Dharma 18 (1993): 85-97.

________. “Subaltern Movements: Perspective of the Primal People.” Journal of

Dharma 23:1 (1998): 99-103.

________. “The Originals Inhabitants of India: Victims of Written Traditions.”

Indigenous People: Dalits. Dalit Issues in Today‟s Theological Debate, ed.,

James Massey, 123-133. Delhi: ISPCK, 1998.


xlviii | B i b l i o g r a p h y

van Leeuwen, J. A. G. Gerwin. Fully Indian Authentically Christian. Bangalore:

NBCLC, 1990.

Vandana (Mataji/Sr.). Social Justice and Ashrams. Bangalore: Asian Trading

Corporation, 1982.

________. “The Indian Face of Christ.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection

49 (1985): 46-47.

________. Waters of Fire. 3rd

edn. Bangalore: Asian Trading Corporation, 1989 [first

published in 1981 by CLS, Mardas].

________. Find Your Roots and Take Wing: Three Essays on Spiritual Formation for

the East and the West. Bangalore: Asian Trading Corporation, 1991.

________. “Ongoing Learning to Dialogue: Some Experiences and Reflections.” In

Pilgrims of Dialogue, ed. A. Pushparaj, 86-92. Munnar: Sangam Dialogue

Centre, 1991.

________. Christian Ashrams: A Movement with a Future. Delhi: ISPCK, 1993.

________. “Finding Our Roots Before We Take Wing.” In Christian Ashrams: A

Movement with a Future?, ed. Vandana Mataji, 6-22. Delhi: ISPCK, 1993.

________. “Response II [to J. B. Chethimattam] from the Perspective of an Ashramic

Spirituality.” In Towards an Indian Christian Spirituality in a Pluralist Context:

Papers and Statements of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Indian

Theological Association, ed. Dominic Veliath, 99-117. Bangalore: Dharmaram,

1993.

________. “The Christian Ashram Movement Today.” In Christian Ashrams: A

Movement with a Future?, ed. Vandana Mataji, 75-85. Delhi: ISPCK, 1993.

________. “The Yoga of Witness.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 57

(1993): 607-614.

________. “Introduction” (to Part VI) in Shabda Shakti Sangam, ed. Vanadan Mataji,

. Bangalore: NBCLC, 1995.

________. Living Water and Indian Bowl. Delhi: ISPCK, 1997.

________. Living with Hindus: Hindu-Christian Dialogues. My Experiences and

Reflections. Delhi: ISPCK, 1999.

________. “My Experience in Interfaith Dialogue.” Mission Today 3:1 (2000): 7-21.

________. Gurus, Ashrams and Christians. Delhi: ISPCK, 2004 [1st published in

1978].

Varaprasadam, Arul M. “The Social Psychology of the Church in India and Her

Mission Perspectives.” In The Indian Church in the Struggle for a New Society,

ed. D. S. Amalorpavadass, 175-197. Bangalore: NBCLC, 1981.

________. “Inculturation: The Crucial Challenges in the Indian Situation.” In

Building the Church in Pluricultural Asia, Inculturation: Working Papers on

Living Faith and Cultures-VII, ed. Arij A. Roest Crollius, 39-62. Rome: Editrice

Pontificia Universita Greoriana, 1986.

Velamkunnel, Joseph. “Church‟s Educational Services in the Struggle for a New

Society.” In The Indian Church in the Struggle for a New Society, ed. D. S.

Amalorpavadass, 198-223. Bangalore: NBCLC, 1981.

Venugopal, C. N. “Indian Caste Structure.” In Manorama Year Book 1998, 463-467.

Kottayam: Malayala Manorama, 1998.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | xlix

Vischer, Lukas, ed. Church History in an Ecumenical Perspective. Bern: Peter Lang,

1982.

Visvanathan, S. The Christians of Kerala: History, Belief and Ritual Among the

Yakoba. Chennai: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Waliggo, J.M. Inculturation: Its Meaning and Urgency. Kampala: St. Paul‟s-Africa,

1986.

Wallace, William. From Evangelical to Catholic by Way of the East. Calcutta:

Catholic Orphan Press, 1923.

Wannenwetsch, B. “The Political Worship of a Church: A Critical and Empowering

Practice.” Modern Theology 12 (1996): 269-299.

Ward, William. A View of the History, Literature, and Mythology of Hindoos.

London: Kingsbury, Parbury, Allen and Co., 1822.

World Council of Churches (WCC). Guidelines on Dialogue with People of Living

Faiths and Ideologies. Geneva: WCC, 1979.

________. “Towards a Common Understanding and Vision of the WCC.” Policy

Statement adopted by the Central Committee of WCC, September, 1997.

Geneva: WCC, 1997.

Weaver, Mary Jo. New Catholic Women. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988.

Webber, Joseph. In Quest of the Absolute. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Studies, 1977.

Webster, J. C. B. The Christian Community and Change in Nineteenth Century North

India. Delhi: Macmillan Company of India, 1976.

________. “Punjabi Christians in the Indian Nationalist Movement, 1919-1947.”

Indo-British Review 10:1 (1983): 126-138.

________. “Gandhi and the Christians: Dialogue in the Nationalist Era.” In Hindu-

Christian Dialogue: Perspectives and Encounters, ed. Harold Coward, 80-99.


________. The Dalit Christians: A History. Delhi: ISPCK, 1992.

________. “The Identity of Indian Christians.” In Church in Context: Essays in

Honour of Mathias Mundadan CMI, ed. Kanichikattil Francis, 56-71.

Bangalore: Dharmaram, 1996.

________. Religion and Dalit Liberation: An Examination of Perspectives. New

Delhi: Manohar, 1999.

Whitehead, Henry. The Village Gods of South India. New York/London: Garland

Publishing Inc., 1980.

Wicki, J. “P. Henrique Henriques SJ.” Indian Ecclesiastical Studies 4 (1965): 142-

150.

Wilfred, Felix. “The Problem of a Valid Starting Point for Theologizing in India.” In

Theologizing in India, eds., Michael Amaladoss et al,137-146. Bangalore: TPI,

1981.

________. “Temptation of the Church in India Today.” Vidyajoti Journal of


________. “Three Nodal Points in the Theology of the Laity Today. Part-II.”


________. “Dialogue Gasping for Breath?” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 51 (1987): 449-466.

l | B i b l i o g r a p h y

________. “Inculturation as a Hermeneutical Question.” Vidyajyoti Journal of


________. “World Religions and Christian Inculturation.” Indian Theological Studies

25:1 (March, 1988): 5-26.

________. “Towards an Anthropologically and Culturally Founded Ecclesiology.”


________. Sunset in the East? Asian Challenges and Christian Involvement. Madras:

University of Madras, 1991.

________. Beyond Settled Foundations: The Journey of Indian Theology. Madras:


________. “Indian Social Institutions and Movements of Protest: Towards An

Alternative Socio-Political Conception and Praxis From Indigenous Roots.”

Indian Theological Studies 30 (1993): 220-245.

________. “Liberating Dialogue: An Indian Perspective.” Journal of Dharma 19

(1994): 235-247.

________. “Some Tentative Reflections on the Language of Christian Uniqueness: An

Indian Perspectives.” Bulletin 85/86:1 (1994): 40-57.

________. From the Dusty Soil: Contextual Reinterpretation of Christianity. Madras:


________. “The Federation of Asian Bishops‟ Conference (FABC): Orientations,

Challenges and Impact.” In For All Peoples of Asia, Federation of Asian

Bishops‟ Conference Documents from 1970-1991, vol.1, eds. Gaudencio

Rosales and C. G. Arévalo, xxiii-xxx. Quenzon City: Claretian, 1997.

________. “Subaltern Religious Experience.” Journal of Dharma 23 (1998): 57-75.

________. “Inter-Religious Dialogue as Political Quest.” Journal of Dharma 27:1

(2002): 17-32.

________. On the Banks of Ganges, Doing Contextual Theology. Delhi: ISPCK,

2002.

________. “Whose Nation? Whose History?” Jeevadhara 32 (2002): 60-80.

________. Asian Dreams and Christian Hope. New Delhi: ISPCK, 2003.

________. “Searching for David‟s Sling: Tapping the Local Resources of Hope.”

Concilium (2004:5): 85-95.

________. The Sling of Utopia: Struggles for a Different Society. Delhi: ISPCK,

2005.

________. “Asia and the Social Teachings of the Church.” Vidyajyoti Journal of


________. Dalit Empowerment. Bangalore: NBCLC, 2007.

________. “Subalterns and Ethical Auditing.” Jeevadhara 37 (2007): 5-23.

________. “Dalit Future: Future of the Nation.” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 73 (2009): 325-336.

________. “Historiography of Indian Christianity: Some Reflections.” Vidyajyoti

Journal of Theological Reflection 73(2009): 737-751.

Wilkinson, Loren. “Gaia Spirituality: A Christian Critique.” Evangelical Review of

Theology 17 (1993): 176-189.

B i b l i o g r a p h y | li

Winslow, Barbara. “Feminist Movements: Gender and Equality.” In A Companion to

Gender History, eds. Teresa A. Meade and Merry Wiesner-Hanks, 186-199.

Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2004.

Winslow, Jack C. Narayan Vaman Tilak – The Christian Poet of Maharashtra.

Calcutta: Associated Press, 1923.

________. Christa Seva Sangha. Westminister: SPG, 1930.

Xaxa, V. “Tribes. “Sociological Impact of Evangelization in Northeast India.” Indian


________. Conversion and the Sangh Parivar.” Jnanadeepa 3:1 (2000): 23-35.

Yeago, David. “Messiah‟s People: The Culture of the Church in the Midst of the

Nations.” Pro Ecclesia 6 (1997): 146-171.

Yoder, John. Body Politics: Five Practices of the Christian Community before the

Watching World. Nashville: Discipleship Resources, 1992.

Zachariah, Mathai. Inside the Indian Church. Delhi: ISPCK, 1994.

Zaehner, R. C. Hinduism. London: Oxford University Press, 1962.

Zehol, Lucy Vashum. “Status of Tribal Women.” In The Anthropology of North-East

India, eds. T. B. Subha and G. C. Ghosh, 294-307. New Delhi: Orient Longman,

2003.

Zelliot, Eleanor and Mokashi-Punekar, Rohini, eds. Untouchable Saints: An Indian

Phenomenon. New Delhi: Manohar, 2005.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1. Becoming Indian: Status Questionis

The gravest failure of the Church in India is not its failure to successfully

bring more Indians into its fold, but its failure to root itself in local soil, its failure to

become authentically Indian. After centuries of presence in India, even today the

Church is considered “foreign” and “alien.” Not only do the non-Christians of India

consider the Church in India “foreign,” but Christians themselves feel the Church is

not genuinely rooted in Indian soil. So, the status questionis: how can the Church in

India become truly Indian? Our research here is a humble attempt to address this

question and the paradoxical situation of the Church in India.

1.2. The Scheme of Our Research

In addressing the above status questionis, we attempt in this research to

explicate what it means for the Church in India to become “Indian” or to be rooted in

Indian soil. We take the three features of the current “context” of India as the guiding

lights for the course of our research: the many cultures, the many poor and the many

religions. Our choice of these three features of the context is guided by the heart of the

FABC’s (Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences)1 theology of the local church.

The FABC understands the local Churches in Asia as being Churches that are in

dialogue with the cultures, the people (especially the poor), and the religions of Asia.

Thus, the mission and nature of the Churches in Asia is understood within and

through the contexts of the many cultures, many poor and many religions of Asia.

This programmatic vision of the FABC has defined the structure of our research.

Accordingly our research is broadly divided into three chapters: “Becoming

Local,” “Becoming Marginal,” and “Becoming Dialogical.” It is our conviction that

1 The Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences (FABC) is a transnational episcopal structure that

brings together fourteen bishops’ conferences from the following countries as full members:

Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Laos-Cambodia, Malaysia-Singapore-Brunei,

Myanmar, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. The FABC has eleven

associate members drawn from the ecclesiastical jurisdictions of East Timor, Hong Kong,

Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macau, Mongolia, Nepal, Siberia, Tadjikistan, Turkmenistan, and

Uzbekistan. Thus, in total, twenty-eight countries are represented in the FABC, which grew out of

the historic gathering of 180 Asian Catholic Bishops with Pope Paul VI during his 1970 Asian visit.

The supreme body of the FABC is the Plenary Assembly, which convenes every four years. There

are nine FABC offices focused on evangelization, social communication, laity, human

development, education and student chaplaincy, ecumenical and interreligious affairs, theological

concerns, clergy, and consecrated life. The FABC documents are available in the series For All the

Peoples of Asia. The FABC Papers are available on the UCANews website with “FABC Papers”

link: www.ucanews.com/fabcpapers.

2 | G e n e r a l I n t r o d u c t i o n

the Church in India can become authentically Indian through the three-pronged

process of becoming local, marginal and dialogical.

Chapter one titled “Becoming Local: An Inculturated Church” explores

the cultural context of the Indian Church and proposes inculturation as the process of

becoming local. We begin by an historical analysis of the movement of indigenous

churches in India, which we believe were the earliest attempts in the Indian Church to

root themselves in the local cultural realities, to become local, to become Indian. Then

our research progresses into an analysis of the second wave of attempts to become

local, namely, the project of inculturation which mainly evolved in the period after the

Second Vatican Council. While the movement of indigenous churches was

dominantly Protestant, the inculturation project was geared mostly by the Catholics.

In the review of the historical processes of attempting to become local in the Indian

Church, we conclude that these processes have been “elite projects” which not only

ignored the cultures and religions of the poor, but the very processes themselves

alienated the poor within the Church. We explore the theologies of inculturation

proposed by Felix Wilfred, Michael Amaladoss, Aloysius Pieris and Samuel Rayan

that critique the elite inculturation in India and propose a more relevant inculturation

that is rooted in the cultures, religions and struggles of the poor. Drawing on their

theologies of inculturation, we attempt in the final section of the chapter to propose

the “subaltern inculturation” that is rooted in the poor as the relevant process of

inculturation that can make the Church in India truly local.

The second chapter, titled “Becoming Marginal: A Marginal Church,”

explores the social context of the Indian Church and calls the Church in India to

become a “marginal Church.” The dalits, the tribals and the women of India are three

faces of the poor in India; as well the poor of the Indian Church. Thus, we attempt to

examine their discrimination within the Indian Church and accentuate the elimination

of such discrimination and alienation of the poor within the Indian Church. The first

section explores the discrimination of dalit Christians in the Indian Church and makes

theological propositions against such discrimination. The second section deals with

the plight of the tribal Christians in India. And the third section examines the situation

of women in Indian society and in the Indian Church. Drawing on such analysis of the

context of the poor, we propose in the final section of the chapter the “Jesus

Community of the Margins” as the suitable ecclesiological notion that can rightly

situate the Church in India at the margins and among marginal people of India.

G e n e r a l I n t r o d u c t i o n | 3

In the third chapter, titled “Becoming Dialogical: A Dialogical Church,”

we explore the religious context of the Indian church and call it to become a dialogical

communion. We begin the chapter by examining the theological divide of liberation

and dialogue which we use as the window to the exploration of the project of

interreligious dialogue in India. While pointing to the absence of the poor in the whole

interreligious dialogue in India, we affirm that within the context of the many poor of

India, interreligious dialogue necessarily will have to be liberative. Thus, we propose

in the second section of this chapter, a “liberative dialogue” that is rooted in the

struggles of the poor and is oriented towards their liberation. The very question of the

poor and their oppression is interreligious in India, and as such their liberation is

necessarily interreligious as well; all religious communities in India have to share the

mission of liberation of the poor of India. In the final section of the chapter, we

propose the ecclesiological concept of “Dialogical Communion” as the suitable notion

that situates the Church rightly within the multi-religious context of India.

We conclude our research in the General Conclusion by synthesising the

three-pronged process of becoming Indian in the Gandhian paradigm, based on the

life and thought of Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhian life and vision is a harmonious

communion of becoming local, marginal and dialogical. Thus, we believe the life and

thought of Gandhi can serve as a suitable paradigm for the Indian church to become

truly Indian by way of becoming local, marginal and dialogical.

1.3. Contextual Ecclesiology

The “context” is becoming increasingly important in the self-understanding of

the Church as well as its faith and mission.2 “The long range universal formulations of

the older theologies have had to give way to the shorter-range, situation-oriented

discourses which, though shorter in life span, are more relevant to the life-in-mission

of the church.”3 A local church cannot truly understand itself and its mission outside

the context; ecclesiology necessarily has to be contextual today.

1.3.1. Ecclesiology “Made in Context”

In the theology of the FABC, the context is not merely the canvas on which

theology is painted, but the very loci theologici of Asian theology; context is the very

2 Cf. Robert Schreiter, Constructing Local Theologies (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1985); Stephen B.

Bevans and Roger P. Schroeder, Constants in Context: A Theology of Mission for Today

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2004). 3 Orlando E. Costas, Christ Outside the Gate: Mission Beyond Christendom (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1982), 3.


raw material with which theology is made. Or as Felix Wilfred would express: “The

context is not merely a stage on which the theological truths are unpacked; the context

goes to make up the very texture of theology.”4 Theology in Asia is done with the

contextual realities of Asia:

The cultures of peoples, the histories of their struggles, their religions,…

economic and political realities and world events, historical personages, stories of

oppressed people crying for justice, freedom, dignity, life, and solidarity become

resources of theology, and assume methodological importance in our context.5

The methodological significance of the context in theology is based on two

theological convictions: “Christian faith considers the whole universe, all of creation,

as a manifestation of God’s glory and goodness,” and “Christian faith affirms that

God is the Lord of history … that God, who created the universe and humankind, is

present and active in and through his Spirit in the whole gamut of human history.”6

If the context is the valid and authentic source of theology, it is as well the

authentic source of ecclesiology. The contextual realities of India, we affirm, are valid

sources for an Indian Contextual Ecclesiology. It is with such an affirmation that we

make an effort in this research to understand the nature and reality of the Church in

India from its current context. And thus, the cultural, the social and the religious

contexts of India become the three main contextual realities within which we situate

the Church in India and attempt to explicate “what it means to be Church” in these

contextual realities. The cultural, social and religious realities of Indian context

become the very raw-material of the contextual ecclesiology that we propose in this

research.

1.3.2. Mission Defines the Church: Ecclesiology “Made by Mission”

Another theological principle on which our whole research is grounded is that

“the mission defines the Church.” Pointing to the fundamental change issued by the

“kingdom-centred missiology,” Peter Phan affirms that it is the mission that defines

the Church. “The church comes to be only because it has been called to mission. It

exists for the sake of mission. Mission defines what the church is and what it must

4 Felix Wilfred, Asian Dreams and Christian Hope (New Delhi: ISPCK, 2003), 278.

5 Office of Theological Concerns, FABC, Methodology: Asian Christian Theology. Doing Theology

in Asia Today, FABC Papers no. 96 (January 2000), 29. We should indicate that the FABC does not

negate the classical sources of theology. It does affirm that the context forms the source of theology

together with Scripture and Tradition; the contextual realities, insofar as God’s presence is

discerned in them. 6 FABC, Methodology, 38.


do.”7 Or as an Indian Protestant theologian suggests, the paradigm shift from “mission

of the Church” to “Missio Dei” implies a “shift from the church-centred-mission to a

mission-centred Church.”8 The mission of the Church in Asia is clearly defined by the

FABC. The Asian bishops insisted that in their particular context, the fulfilment of the

church’s mission entailed a threefold dialogue with the people – especially the poor,

with the religious traditions of the region and with the local cultures. This threefold

dialogue, in turn, is realized in the respective tasks of liberation, interreligious

dialogue, and inculturation.9

Accordingly, it is the three-pronged mission of inculturation, liberation and

interreligious dialogue of the Church in India that defines the self-understanding of

the Church in India in this research. What we attempt in this research is a contextual

ecclesiology that is defined by the mission of the Church in India; it is an Indian

ecclesiology that is “made in the context” of India and “defined by the context” of

India.

1.4. Unity in Diversity

We have to say that there is a “unity in diversity” in the scheme and content of

our research. One might suggest that the different issues that we deal with in this

research are diverse and cannot be integrated into a single thesis; inculturation,

liberation, and interreligious dialogue may be seen by some as differing subjects of

research. While we agree that they are indeed different issues, we would like to point

out also that there exists a contextual and ecclesiological unity among the diverse

issues dealt with here. The context of India is interwoven by many cultures, many

poor and many religions; they are all integral realities of the same Indian context. This

is also the context in which the Church in India exists and exercises its mission. The

FABC affirms that inculturation, liberation and interreligious dialogue “are not three

7 Peter Phan, In Our Own Tongues: Perspectives from Asia on Mission and Inculturation (Maryknoll,

NY: Orbis, 2003), 39. The Church of England in Australia reflected in similar orientation the

Church being shaped by mission as “Mission-Shaped Church.” See, Church of England’s Mission

and Public Affairs Council, Mission-Shaped Church: Church Planting and Fresh Expressions of

Church in a Changing Context (Brookvale, NSW: Willow Publishing, 2005). For a brief survey of

this book, see: Donald Edwards, “Church and Community: The Church at Mission Transforming

Society,” Religion and Society 54:2 (2009), 28-44. 8 Ninan Koshy, “Rethinking Mission in India Today: Tasks and Challenges,” Religion and Society

54:3 (2009), 3-4. 9 The “triple dialogue” is a recurring theme in the FABC’s statements. See For All the Peoples of

Asia, 1:14-16, 1:22-23, 1:34-35, 1:107, 1:135, 1:141-143, 1:281-282, 1:307-312, 1:328-334, 1:344,

2:196-203.


distinct and separate activities of the church; rather, they are intertwined dimensions

of the church’s one mission of evangelization.”10

Further, we consider all the three issues of inculturation, liberation and

dialogue as significant and integral features of the process of becoming the Indian

Church. The Church in India will not become authentically Indian preferring one of

these issues at the neglect of other issues; an inculturated Church is not authentically

Indian, if it is not also a liberated and dialogical Church; neither would a dialogical

Church be authentically Indian without also being at the same time a liberated and

inculturated Church; a liberated Church that is not dialogical and inculturated is not

authentic either. An authentically Indian Church is one which is integrally

inculturated, liberative and dialogical.

1.5. The Methodology

We follow the historical-critical-analytical method. “It has been said that

church historians keep theologians honest.”11

Thus, wherever necessary we read the

related history critically and analyse the same to draw lessons for the current research.

We analyse the historical evolution of indigenous church movements and

inculturation in India in the first chapter, the history of discrimination of dalits and

tribals in the second chapter, and the partial history of the theology of interreligious

dialogue in the third chapter. We use the critical and analytical reading of these

historical contexts of the Indian church to make theological propositions and propose

ecclesiological notions relevant for the current context of the Indian church.

1.6. Some Preferential Options

There are some deliberate and preferential options we make in our research.

We believe that such preferential options are necessary for our research so that our

research remains rooted in the soil of India and proves to be relevant to the context in

which we situate our research. These preferential options influence and define very

much the course of our research. By this we do not rule out the other options available

and may be preferred by some others.12

We must humbly accept that such preferential

10 Peter C. Phan, “World Christianity and Christian Mission: Are They Compatible? Insights from the

Asian Churches,” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 32:4 (2008), 198. 11

Anthony D. Andreassi, “After Peter,” Book Review of A History of the Popes by John W.

O’Malley, SJ, America (1 March, 2010)

http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=12141 (accessed 21 February

2010). 12

It is our theological conviction that the differing and diverse theological orientations in Christian

theology are nothing to be abhorred; they are not mutually eliminating. The plurality of theological


options can limit the scope of the study, colour our research in a particular way, and

even prevent us from taking an integral approach to issues involved. However, we

prefer to make these options as we believe these preferential options are significant

for the aim of our research. Such options are also significant because the majority of

Indian theologians are not choosing such options; there are only a few who are taking

such options in Indian theological research.13

Thus, we also affirm by making these

options that such options are important in Indian theological researches.

The first of such options is the “perspectives of the poor.” In all the three

sections of our research, we deliberately opt for the perspectives of the poor.14

Thus,

when we deal with inculturation in the first section, our focus is on how the cultures

and religions of the poor need to be integrated into the inculturation of the Church in

India. The second section deals with the dalits, tribals and women in the Church that

are the “faces of the poor” in India. In the final section, where we deal with dialogue,

our concern again is the poor: how the poor and their liberation is significant and

integral to interreligious dialogue in India. Important non-poor orientations certainly

exist in the theologies of inculturation and interreligious dialogue in Indian theology

as well as others. Though these may be important in their own right, we opt to follow

the orientation of the poor, for we believe that in the current context of the Church in

India, the revelation of God is communicated through the poor. We are convinced that

voices and orientations enrich the Christian theology. All orientations belong to the same womb of

theological endeavour, and are sojourners on the theological pilgrimage; co-travellers, even if they

are different from one another, can mutually strengthen their common journey. We can only be

friends on a pilgrimage! 13

Suffice it to take a look at the orientations of the theological research, Masters or Doctoral, done by

Indian students at the Faculty of Theology of this University. Such a look would make clear that the

orientations of the poor are not the preferred theological options among the Indian students of

theology at this University. Even if it needs to be evaluated, the social location of the Indian

theological students seems to determine by and large the theological orientations that they take in

their research here; only those that come from lower castes (and they are a negligible number here)

seem to take such theological orientations of the poor; those from higher castes (majority Indian

students here belong to this social group) in general seem to reject such perspectives of the poor in

theology. The same is generally true of Indian theologians in India. The non-poor theologians of

India are not taking theological orientations of the poor. Is the social location of the theologian

enslaving his/her theological mission? 14

A relevant question to be asked in the context: Does not the “preferential option for the poor” mean

also “preferential theological options for the poor”? What does “preferential option” mean for a

theologian? How does the theologian translate the “preferential option for the poor” in what he

does: theology? Does not the option call for options in theology too? A Final statement of Asian

Theological Conference states that theology in Asia must have a liberational thrust: “in the context

of the poverty of the teeming millions in Asia and their situation of domination and exploitation,

our theology must have a very definite liberational thrust.” “The Final Statement,” in Virginia

Fabella, ed., Asia’s Struggle for Full Humanity. Papers from the Asian Theological Conference, 7-

20 January 1979, Wennappuwa, Sri Lanka (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1980), 156.


“perspectives of the poor” are pivotal to any meaningful and relevant theological

endeavour in India today.15

Another option we have chosen is the option for the “Indian”: Indian

theologians, Indian theology, Indian literary sources. We deliberately use, if not

exclusively, mostly the writings of Indian theologians. By this, we do not exclude the

use of material from theologians of the West; we have used them where and when we

found something relevant and significant. Our preference for “Indian” is deliberate for

two reasons. Firstly, Indian theology is the most relevant to our research as we deal

with the particular context of India.16

Secondly, we wish to affirm by our preferential

option for Indian theological sources that Indian theology is integral to the

“theological heritage” of the global Church; there is so much theological material

produced in India which needs to be studied and analysed and creatively used in

researches related to India. This option for “Indian” may run the risk of making our

research impoverished, as there is a wealth of relevant theological material in the non-

Indian theological sources. But this is a risk, we believe, that needs to be taken.

The third option we make is to speak of the Church in India as a “whole.”

Whenever we speak of the Church in India in this research, unless it is specified, it

generally refers to the entire Church in India and not to any particular denomination

of Churches in India, Catholic or Protestant. Even if the majority of our resources are

drawn from Catholic theologians in India, we have made an effort to integrate as

much as possible the material from the Protestant theologians in India as well. This

option to speak of the Church in India as a whole is driven by the conviction that all

15 Peter Phan affirms the necessity of such perspectives of the poor for Asian theology: “There are,

then, in terms of theological method, two essential steps that must be performed as constitutive

parts of an Asian theology: first, personal commitment to and active solidarity with the teeming

masses of the poor and oppressed Asians in their struggle for justice and liberation; and second,

social analysis.” Peter C. Phan, Christianity With An Asian Face: Asian American Theology in the

Making (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2003), 102. 16

Even if we do not fully agree with the critique that Western theologies are irrelevant to the Asian

context, we, however, would have to agree that there exists a widespread perception among Asian

theologians that Euro-American theologies are not meaningful and relevant to Asian peoples. Cf.

Tissa Balasuriya, “Towards the Liberation of Theology in Asia,” in Virginia Fabella, ed., Asia’s

Struggle for Full Humanity: Towards a Relevant Theology (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1984), 2-10;

Aloysius Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988), 81-83; Jung

Young Lee, Marginality: The Key to Multicultural Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), 64-70;

We do not subscribe to such radical rejection of the Western theologies as totally irrelevant to Asian

context, as we believe there are elements in Western theologies which could be creatively used in

Asian contexts, as with elements in Asian theologies which could enrich Western theology. We

affirm that theologies in different contexts and continents are different, but they are not mutually

exclusive. The Church in Asia cannot fully reject the theological tradition of the universal Church

which is rooted in Western theology; nor can the Church in the West ignore the theologies of Asia,

Africa and Latin America which equally share the theological patrimony of the universal Church.

Mutual rejection is not helpful; rather, mutual recognition and interaction.


the Churches in India exist in similar cultural, social and religious context of India.

As such, they are striving for identity as Churches in a similar context. The mission to

which all the Churches in India are called is the same. All Churches in India are called

to be inculturated, liberative and dialogical; it is in becoming inculturated, liberative

and dialogical that any Church in India can become authentically Indian.

1.7. Some Limitations

Our general and overarching focus in this research is the attempt to explicate

“what it means to be Indian Church in current Indian context.” This aim leads us,

naturally, to explore different strands of the current Indian ecclesiological context:

inculturation, liberation of dalits, tribals and women in India, ecumenism,

interreligious dialogue and ecological responses. In this research, these different

subjects serve as the material with which we attempt to formulate ecclesiology, and

not as independent subjects and issues; they are used as springboards to leap into the

exploration of the ecclesiology implied in them. As such, our exploration into these

subjects remains very much limited, and cannot claim to be a substantial investigation

of these subjects. We believe that such a systematic and substantial treatment of these

subjects is neither possible nor necessary within the general purview and orientation

of this research.

1.8. Some Strengths

The merit of this research, we think, lies firstly in its attempt to seek the

identity of the Church in India within the cultural, social and religious realities of

India; and secondly, in its attempt to formulate the ecclesiological notions from the

analysis of these Indian contexts. Situating the Church within the broader Indian

context, this research attempts to project the diverse paths of inculturation, liberation

and dialogue as integral to the process of becoming an Indian church. The research

can be novel in the sense that it explores the ecclesiology of the Indian Church from

the perspectives of the poor within the broader contextual frame of inculturation,

liberation and dialogue. The main strength of this research, we believe, lies in its

theological and ecclesiological propositions from the preferred perspectives of the

poor of India: the “subaltern inculturation” in the first chapter, the “Jesus Community

of the Margins” in the second and the “dusty dialogue” in the third. We hope that this

humble attempt of ours can make a small contribution towards the self-understanding

of the Church in India to become a truly Indian Church.

CHAPTER ONE

“BECOMING LOCAL”

AN INCULTURATED CHURCH

1. ALIENS IN A HOME LAND

It is a strange experience for someone to be considered foreign in one‟s own

country. Strange but, unfortunately, true. It is even worse to feel foreign. Christians in

India are but a small minority of less than 3% of the total population. Christianity has

existed for 20 centuries in India and yet even today Christians are still considered a

foreign presence.

Christianity is considered by many Indians as a foreign religion, owing

allegiance to a foreign power. There is a unanimous and astounding agreement among

Indian Christians, as well as Indian theologians, that the Church in India remains

paradoxically „alien‟ in India. In the words of one of the great exponents of

indigenization of the Church in India, Bede Griffiths:1 “for the immense majority of

the Indian people, Christianity still appears as a foreign religion imported from the

West.”2 He further states: “The Church came to Asia largely in the wake of the

colonial powers and the Church was planted in India, not merely in its western Latin

form, but specifically in its Portuguese form, so that not only western forms of art, but

even social customs and (as a final insult) Portuguese names were imposed on Indian

converts.”3

Hindu communalists are rigidly opposed to Christians in India, preferring to

see them as „anti-nationals‟ and agents of Western powers. Even for the young

1 Bede Griffiths (also known as Swamy Dayananda), born in a British middle class family in 1906, is

considered by many to be one of the greatest religious leaders of the 20th

century whose influence is

only now beginning to emerge. After leaving Oxford and becoming a Catholic (1931) and a

Benedictine monk (1937), he came to India “to recover the other half of my [his] soul”. He lived for

10 years at Kurisumala Ashram in Kerala. Later, he joined the Shantivanam in Tamilnadu, where he

spent the remaining 38 years of his life. He died on 13 May, 1993. He is a great modern day mystic

in the history of the church, very significant for church and Christianity in India. 2 Bede Griffiths, Christ to India, Essays Towards a Hindu-Christian Dialogue (New York: Charles

Scribner‟s Sons, 1966), 55. 3 Griffiths, Christ to India, 163. While I cannot differ with Griffiths in what he says, I should add that

the Portuguese names are retained by Catholics (even to this day) only in those parts of India which

were Portuguese colonies, especially in Mangalore and Goa, and some pockets in coastal Kerala.

11 | I n c u l t u r a t e d C h u r c h

Mahatma Gandhi being a Christian was associated with eating meat and drinking

alcohol.

About the same, I heard of a well known Hindu having been converted to

Christianity. It was the talk of the town that, when he was baptized, he had to eat

beef and drink liquor, that he also had to change his clothes, and that henceforth

he began to go about in European costume including a hat… I also heard that the

new convert had already begun abusing the religions of his ancestors, their

customs and their country. All these things created in me a dislike for

Christianity.4

The first Prime Minister of India after independence, Jawaharlal Nehru was

bewildered at the imperialist Christian missionaries who, in his opinion, were a

counter-witness to the spirit of Christ:

With the coming of the British power, a new type of missionary came to India. He

was attached to officials, and the British army of occupation, and represented the

British imperialism far more than the spirit of Christ. It is strange that the gospel

of Jesus, the gentle but relentless rebel against untruth and injustice in all forms,

should be made a tool of imperialism and capitalism and political domination and

social injustice.5

The “foreignness” of the Indian Church is generally perceived to have

stemmed from the historical fact that many of the communities of the Indian Church

have originated and have grown during the colonial domination of India by the

Western powers. The „foreignness‟ is apparent in the life-style, theological

expression, and mode of worship of the Indian Church. What Bede Griffiths says

about the Goan Catholics and their offshoots in Bombay and Mangalore, also passes

for many other churches in India that were founded by European missions.

The gospel was brought to India in the train of the Portuguese armies and the

policy of the Portuguese was to make their converts renounce all their distinctive

Indian customs and to become Portuguese as far as possible in every way. They

were given Portuguese names (which they retain to this day) and compelled to

adopt European habits of food and clothing, which meant that they became

„outcastes‟ to the Hindus. Not only were all forms of religion, liturgy, theology

and devotional customs of a rigidly western pattern but all the external forms,

churches, statues, paintings and music, were all faithful copies of western models.6

India is not alone in such a sense of “feeling aliens in homeland”. Such images

of „foreignness‟ of churches are common in most Asian countries. Despite long

Christian histories, even today Christianity is still considered a foreign religion by

4 M. K. Gandhi, The Story of My Experiments with Truth: An Autobiography (Ahmedabad:

Navajivan, 14th

reprint, 1984), 28-29. 5 Jawaharlal Nehru, The Unity of India (New York: The John Day Company, 1949), 50-51.

6 Griffiths, Christ to India, 57.

I n c u l t u r a t e d C h u r c h | 12

many Asians.7 It is widely accepted that the churches in Asia have largely remained

„alien‟ in the Asian soil. Many agree that “Asian Churches are just copies of European

and American models.”8 Aloysius Pieris, a Jesuit theologian from Sri Lanka,

succinctly expresses that “the majority of the local churches in Asia are not yet local

churches of Asia. They are extensions of Euro-American local churches in Asia. That

is why we Catholics who are no more than members of the Asian branch of Rome

have no official theology except the local theology of the local church of Rome.”9 In a

much similar tone, albeit hard-hitting, what John Mansford Prior10

observes is worth

citing in full:

Whatever the nuances, however great the social contributions of the mission

Churches in the past, however heroic sacrifices of cross-cultural missioners over

the centuries, the fact remains in stark clarity: the Latin Churches of Asia are a

foreign presence. They are alien in the official dress of their rituals (despite use of

mother tongue); alien in their formation of cultic and community leaders in

foreign thought patterns in seminaries whose professors are foreign-educated;

alien in its large, often rich, institutions among people who are generally poor;

above all alien in that Christians have had to uproot themselves from their own

cultural identity in order to claim a “hybrid” Christian one. This is a major issue

for most Asian bishops.11

Even Pope John Paul II points out the paradoxical fact that “most Asians tend

to regard Jesus –born on the Asian soil –as a Westerner rather than an Asian figure.”12

Christianity has been largely a „potted plant‟ in Asia. It was transported without being

transplanted. It is still viewed by Asians as a foreign importation and imposition. The

fact that Christianity began in Asia (Jesus was an Asian!) did not matter; it travelled to

Asia for the most part by way of the West. The challenge has been for the churches to

relate themselves more fully to the soil of Asia –to get down to the rice-roots level of

Asian civilization.

7 Cf. Peter C. Phan, In Our Own Tongues: Perspectives from Asia on Mission and Inculturation

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2003), 14. 8 Meinrad Hegba, SJ, “The Particular Church and the Universal Church: Sociological and

Ecclesiological Considerations,” Indian Theological Studies 17 (1980), 61. 9 Aloysius Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988), 112.

10 John Mansford Prior is a member of the Society of the Divine Word (SVD) religious congregation

and has been a missionary in Indonesia since 1973. He has been a Consulter to the Pontifical

Council for Culture as well as to Commissions of FABC. He is one of the editors of the much-

acclaimed voluminous work Asian Christian Theologies: A Research Guide to Authors, Movements,

Sources, 3 vols. (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2005) 11

John Mansford Prior, “Unfinished Encounter: A Note on the Voice and Tone of Ecclesia in Asia,”

East Asian Pastoral Review 37 (2000), 261. 12

Ecclesia in Asia, no. 20. This document gives attention to the historical beginnings of Jesus in Asia

(no. 2), and to the Asian roots of Christianity (nos. 4, 9) and to the affinity of Jesus and Christianity

with the religions and spiritual traditions and their founders in Asia (no. 6).


1.1. SOME REASONS FOR THE “FOREIGNNESS” OF THE INDIAN CHURCH

One of the reasons for this persistent impression of Christianity‟s foreignness

is the Indian churches‟ past connections with colonial powers. Many enormous and

positive contributions were made by the Western missionaries to the religious,

educational, medical and social advancement in mission lands. Despite these

contributions, the Church‟s spiritual mission was severely compromised by the fact

that the missionary movement in India was financially underwritten by colonialist

countries such as Spain and Portugal and later by the British. Additionally, the fact

that, at times, the missionaries colluded with their governments in subjugating the

indigenous peoples was also responsible and both of these facts made Christianity

appear to be the handmaid of colonial powers.

Even if Syrian Christians of Kerala can trace their origins in India to the

Apostle Thomas, centuries before the European missionary expansions began, one can

perceive a superimposed Syrian culture in their Christianity, especially in the liturgy.

“Syrian Christianity which spread to Mesopotamia and Persia, Central Asia, Malabar

and China, did not attain full independence from Syrian culture.”13

If the Malabar

Christianity is described as “Hindu in culture and oriental in worship,” it implies a

very artificial separation, because there is no cult that is totally free from some

cultural expression, just as there is no culture that is completely free of cult. As

Thenayan indicates, in addition to an imported liturgy, the Syrian Christianity lacked

also an indigenous leadership and a missionary endeavour until the 10th

century.14

Thus, in a certain sense, even the Syrian Christians of Kerala manifest traces of such

“foreignness”; maybe the foreignness is not as distinctly visible as in other Christians

in India, because it is a foreignness coming from a similar Eastern tradition, and not a

foreignness coming from the alienating Western tradition.

By far the greatest problem for the Churches in India even today is the history

of Christian expansion itself. The fact that Christianity was transmitted to India as a

part of the Western “synthesis,” as exemplified by the Roman Catholic enterprise in

the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and by more recent Christian world missions,

is deeply rooted in the memory of peoples in the non-Western world even after the

end of Western colonialism. Indeed, many Western missionaries regarded Christians

13 Julian Saldanha, Patterns of Evangelization in Mission History (Bombay: St. Paul‟s, 1988), 30.

14 Paul Thenayan, The Missionary Consciousness of the St. Thomas Christians: A Historico-Pastoral

Study (Cochin: Viani Publications, 1982), 89-94.


of the non-Western world as semi-permanent wards. The tendency of the Christians in

the non-Western world to become carbon copies of Western Christians dies hard.

Many of them still feel closer to Christians in the West than to their non-Christian

neighbours. They still know more about Barth, Tillich, Rahner, or Pannenberg than

about indigenous Christian thinkers, or non-Christians for that matter.15

Seminary

curricula of the younger churches are slavishly modelled after Western seminary

curricula, and many clergy still aspire to pursue “higher” theological training in

Europe or North America.16

Understandably, younger church Christians get incensed

when non-Christians point out the “foreignness” of Christian churches in the non-

Western world, but they remain ineffective spectators of, rather than participants in,

the social, cultural, and political life of their own homelands.

Michael Amaladoss, the well-known Indian Jesuit theologian, cites reasons

beyond the “colonial interlude”: foreign architectural styles; foreign dress patterns for

bishops, priests and nuns; foreign rituals of worship; western education imparted in its

educational institutions; foreign funds, etc.17

Varaprasadam, an Indian Jesuit, cites

two factors which contribute to the foreignness of the Indian Church: the “highly

centralised authority in the Catholic Church” and heavy dependence of the Indian

Church on foreign aid “for the training and maintenance of its personnel as well as for

the expansion of their physical facilities.”18

Samuel Rayan, an Indian Jesuit

theologian, feels that “economic dependence often carries with it spiritual

dependence” and that the dependants begin to copy what the donors think.19

He

further states that such dependence leads to the creation of “ill-fit” programmes and

projects “which mock our cultural and spiritual sensibilities,” and present Christianity

and the Church as “foreign and culturally-nationally alienating.”20

Felix Wilfred,

another reputed Indian theologian, while pointing to similar reasons such as colonial

15 I must confess that I have not heard any Indian theologian‟s name in the classes during my four-

year theology course (1992-1996) at our regional theological seminary at Hyderabad. All professors

studied at foreign universities, mostly in Rome, and spoke only of foreign theologians. 16

In his discussion on “Ecclesiastical Studies in India or Abroad?” Saldanha argues that even higher

theological studies should be done in India rather than in foreign universities. See Julian Saldanha,

Inculturation (Bombay: St. Pauls, 1987), 98-105. 17

Michael Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation: Can the Many Be One? (Delhi: ISPCK/Vidyajyoti,

2005), 2. 18

Arul M. Varaprasadam, S.J., “Inculturation: The Crucial Challenges in the Indian Situation,” in Arij

A. Roest Crollius, ed., Building the Church in Pluricultural Asia, Inculturation: Working Papers on

Living Faith and Cultures-VII (Rome: Editrice Pontificia Universita Greoriana, 1986), 44. 19

Samuel Rayan, “Flesh of India‟s Flesh,” in Jeevadhara 6 (1976), 266. 20

Rayan, “Flesh of India‟s Flesh,” 267.


history, dependence on foreign resources, lack of involvement in national stream, and

failure of inculturation, thinks that the heart of the problem lies in the lack of “an

anthropologically and culturally founded ecclesiology.”21

One of the reasons, among many others, cited for the „foreignness,‟ as quoted

above, is the financial dependence of the churches in Asia on the European or

American churches. “It is believed that the modern missionary movements have

produced local churches which are very dependent on the mother churches of the

West.”22

As Dr. McGavran has pointed out in his tremendously significant book The

Bridges of God, missions have traditionally poured their funds not into the people‟s

movements but into the station churches, into the huge mission compounds, and into

the churches which are their satellites.23

While it is very true that many Asian churches are financially dependent on

their European or American counterparts, we wonder if this can be the true factor that

hampers the indigenization of local churches in Asia. Christian anthropologist

William Smalley disagrees with such an opinion. He cites the examples of the church

of Jerusalem remaining strongly indigenous in spite of receiving gifts from the

churches in Europe. “No one would argue that receiving of such gifts infringed upon

the indigenous nature of the Jewish church. Neither can one argue, I believe, that

receiving of such gifts by the younger churches today will necessarily infringe upon

their indigenous character.” 24

Smalley locates the problem of foreign funds not in their reception, rather in

their administration of the funds by the local churches. “It is the way the funds are

administered, the way the decisions are made, and the purpose to which they are put,

21 Felix Wilfred, “Towards an Anthropologically and Culturally Founded Ecclesiology,” VJTR 54

(1990), 501-511. 22

William A. Smalley, “Cultural Implications of an Indigenous Church,” in William A. Smalley ed.,

Readings in Missionary Anthropology II (South Pasadena, California: William Carey Library, 1978)

363. 23

Donald McGavran, The Bridges of God (London: World Dominion Press, 1955). This work has

become known as the classic summons for missionaries to utilize the “bridges” of family and

kinship ties within each people thereby prompting “people movements” to Christ. This is contrasted

with the “Mission Station Approach,” dominant in missionary strategy of the nineteenth century,

whereby individual converts are gathered into “colonies” or compounds isolated from the social

mainstream. McGavran is a renowned missiologist, born in India of missionary parents, himself

became a missionary in north India, and later founded the School of World Mission at Fuller

Theological Seminary. His other influential mission classic is Understanding Church Growth

published in 1970 (the latest updated edition with same title: Grand Rapids, Michigan: W. B.

Eerdmans, 1990). 24

Smalley, “Cultural Implication of an Indigenous Church,” 364.


that are diagnostic of an indigenous church, not the presence or absence of such

foreign funds.”25

He argues that the local churches can “be considered indigenous

even if funds are provided by an outside source,” when decisions are made locally by

the local churches as to how the funds may be used, “and does so on the basis of

economic patterns natural to it in its own cultural setting.”26

We would like to agree with Smalley that the dependence on foreign funds

neither causes foreignness in the local church, nor does it hamper the process of

indigenisation of the local church. On the contrary, as Smalley suggests, the problem

lies to some extent in the administration of these foreign funds. Most of these funds

have gone into institutions rather than communities, into structures rather than people.

As Varaprasadam rightly suggests, “with a lopsided system of values the Indian

Church has been spending enormous sums of money on material structures, while she

has invested almost negligible amounts on the development of human resources.”27

Throughout India all the campuses of the Christian institutions (educational, health or

charitable) are very huge, and buildings massive. Most of these campuses are

procured through foreign funds. While a non-Christian educational institution would

take many years to develop its buildings, Christian educational institutions build

massive structures in a couple of months. The best and the costliest buildings belong

in every town to Christian churches and, in most parishes, they stand in tall contrast to

the petty huts of most Christians around them. The poor Christian children of the

parish are not admitted into these elite Christian campuses. Poor Christians cannot

dream of being allowed entry and they would not dare to step into these Christian

campuses. So, the way foreign funds are used by Indian churches to raise these

massive structures and develop posh campuses, has not only made the local church

very “institutional,”28

but also alienated the poor from the institutions of the church.29

The poor are welcome in its churches but not into its institutions. Holding

25 Smalley, “Cultural Implication of an Indigenous Church,” 365.

26 Smalley, “Cultural Implication of an Indigenous Church,” 365.

27 A. M. Varaprasadam, SJ, “The Social Psychology of the Church in India and Her Mission

Perspectives,” in D. S. Amalorpavadass, ed., The Indian Church in the Struggle for a New Society

(Bangalore: NBCLC, 1981), 183. 28

Apparently, the church is called “society” in many parts of India even today. The image of the

Church is identified with prestigious schools. Cf. Joseph Velamkunnel, SJ, “Church‟s Educational

Services in the Struggle for a New Society,” in The Indian Church in the Struggle for a New

Society, 207. 29

Velamkunnel suggests that the numerous elite English medium schools run by the church in India

confines the mission of the church to the poor. Cf. Joseph Velamkunnel, SJ, “Church‟s Educational

Services in the Struggle for a New Society,” 206-208.


“institutionalization” as one of the main handicaps of the Indian church, Desmond de

Souza, laments that the “institutionalization of the Church immunizes and isolates the

Church personnel from the burning issues in society especially the struggle for a new

society.”30

Many are the reasons for the foreignness of the Indian church being deeply

embedded into the past and present. It is not fair to throw all the blame for it on the

past, on the foreign missionary movements and foreign missionaries and their

methods of mission. The current missions guided by local missionaries and leaders

share equally the blame for the persistent foreignness of the Indian church. Even

decades after the foreign missions have ended, the church in India still languishes

comfortably in the methods and patterns of mission set by the foreign missionaries

centuries ago. The current missions and their local leadership need to bear the blame

for failing to break away from the foreign missionary structures of the past, and for a

lack of consistent efforts to create new missionary structures which generate

indigenous local churches. Thus today, the reasons for foreignness of the church in

India need to be researched in the current history and not in a “dead remote past.” So,

here in our research, we are interested more in examining the present than the past.

We shall not study the foreign missions of bygone centuries, but the current century,

the recent decades of the life of the church in India. We are specifically interested in

the attempts made in our own times by the church in India to become an indigenous

and local church in India.

2. ATTEMPTS TO BECOME AN INDIAN CHURCH

Christians in India have always made attempts to create an indigenous Indian

Church in India right from the very early stages of the advent of Christianity in India.

We could see such attempts already in the Syrian Christian Churches of Kerala. There

is no lack of attempts either in the Western Christian Missions during the second stage

of Christianisation in India. Names such as Robert de Nobili remind one of the great

efforts at making the Church Indian. In the recent centuries of Christian history in

India, as the local Indian Christians became the Christian leaders of their churches in

30 Desmond de Souza, cssr, “Handicaps of the Church to Gear Her Mission to Creating a New

Society,” in The Indian Church in the Struggle for a New Society, 163. Though the author holds the

foreign missionaries responsible for the forms of institutionalization of the Church in India, we

would like to suggest that even after decades of leadership of local missions by native leaders, the

local churches have not dared enough either to reform their structures or to step away from the path

of institutionalization. As such, we wonder how far the blame for the “current state” of the churches

can happily be pushed on to the foreign missionaries who are dead and gone decades ago.


India, Indian clergy, Indian theologians, and Indian ecclesiastical bodies have made

bold attempts to reflect and renew efforts at making the church Indian. We shall

examine selectively some of these attempts in order to place them within the confines

and scope of the broader theme of this chapter. We believe that such a selected survey

of the past attempts at becoming an Indian Church will facilitate a deeper

understanding of the issues involved in our theme.

We shall have a selective focus on attempts in the period between 1857 and

1900 as the current context, and the context of 1857-1900s (the time of these

indigenous movements) seem to be defined by similar features. Both times witness a

Hindu revivalism and Nationalism discourse. BJP (Bharathiya Janatha Party), the pro-

Hindu political party in India, has brought back to the Indian public sphere the Hindu-

Indian discourse. In both contexts such revivalism has triggered anti-Christian

campaigns, calling Christians in India „unpatriotic, and anti-nationalistic.‟31

So, the

church‟s self-understanding today in India has lessons to learn from those times when

it faced similar problems and issues. As Vincent Kumaradoss depicts, for example,

one such context:

“[I]n the 1880‟s anti-missionary feelings swept across Madras presidency

generated by Hindu religious reform and revival movements. Madras city became

the centre of large scale and hostile Hindu revivalism in an organized form that

aimed at arresting the influence of the missionary movement and the spread of

Christianity… Christianity was viewed as a denationalising force and the converts

as agents of imperialism. The rise of nationalism affirmed and gave credence to

these trends of thinking”32

The current Indian context is similarly coloured by a robust and violent revival

of Hindu Nationalism (Hindutva) which has triggered a nasty hate-campaign against

Christians in India and more recently anti-Christian violence. Many of the early

attempts at indigenisation of the church in India came as a response to the anti-

31 Eminent Indian historian, Ramila Thapar, an Emeritus Professor at the Jawaharlal Nehru University

(JNU), Delhi, who was awarded the prestigious Kluge Prize in 2008, rightly points out that such

Hindutva ideology is gaining much ground among Indians today: “What worries me much more is

the way in which the ideology of Hindutva has inveigled much of the middle class into accepting

the idea that we should be only a Hindu country.” She, however, strongly refutes such an ideology:

“The attitude of treating members of other religious communities as the “Other,” as the ones who

are alien, and who will never be part of “us”, that is something that I find unacceptable as it goes

against the grain of the concept of being Indian.” See the interview given to Kalapna Sharma,

“Conversations About History,” The Hindu, Sunday Magazine (25 Jan, 2009) at

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2009/01/25/stories/2009012550010100.htm. (accessed 25 Jan, 2009). 32

Vincent Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Sphere and Church Indigenisation in

Nineteenth Century Colonial Tamilnadu: The Hindu-Christian Church of Lord Jesus and the

National Church of India,” in Roger E. Hedlund, ed., Christianity is Indian: The Emergence of an

Indigenous Community (Delhi: ISPCK, 2004), 12.

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2009/01/25/stories/2009012550010100.htm


Christian wave which tried to portray Christians as unpatriotic and betrayers. Many

Christian thinkers attempted to prove that being Christian is not being anti-Indian and

that the Christian religion does not sever one from Indian cultural and religious roots.

2.1. NATIONALIST MOVEMENT AND INDIAN CHRISTIANITY

The quest for an Indian Church is so deeply fused into the nationalist

movement in India, that one cannot legitimately bypass treating the subject. Noting

the significance of the nationalist movement for Christianity and Christian theology in

India, Felix Wilfred opines that the nationalist movement “presented the occasion to

rethink the traditional Christian theology and develop new theological frameworks.”33

Except those attempts at inculturation (which are mostly Catholic) which were

inspired and propelled by the renewal of theology at Vatican II, in the period that

followed the Council, the majority of the quest for an Indian Church seems to have

been fuelled by the nationalist movements in India.34

Leaders of the Hindu

Renaissance like Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Keshub Chandra Sen incorporated many

Christian features into a reformed Hinduism and stimulated the first attempts at an

indigenous Christian theology.

Brahmo Samaj, a Hindu revival movement, a kind of Renaissance for

Hinduism in India, founded by Ram Mohan Roy35

at Calcutta in 1828, played a

crucial role in the generation of indigenous conceptions of Christianity. Summing up

the two-pronged influence of Brahmo Samaj on indigenous Indian theology,

Sathianathan Clarke, an Indian evangelical theologian, says: “On the one hand, the

33 Felix Wilfred, On the Banks of Ganges, 56.

34 The literature on nationalism in India is extensive. Two of the best and more recent overviews are

Sumit Sarkar, Modern India, 1885-1947 (Delhi: Macmillan India, 1983) and Judith M. Brown,

Modern India: The Origins of an Asian Democracy, 2nd

ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press,

1994). 35

Raja Ram Mohan Roy (1774-1833), called as the prophet of Indian Nationalism, is the first Hindu

persona M. M. Thomas deals with in his path-breaking book The Acknowledged Christ of Indian

Renaissance. There was an interesting Christological controversy between Ram Mohan Roy and

Dr. Joshua Marshman which is discussed at length in the book. Cf. M. M. Thomas, The

Acknowledged Christ of Indian Renaissance (Madras: CLS, 1970), 1-38. Robin Boyd who authored

the much acclaimed and widely reprinted popular book An Introduction to Indian Christian

Theology, calls Raja Ram Mohan Roy “the first Indian to have written seriously and extensively on

Christian theological themes.” Robin Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology (Delhi:

ISPCK, 2005, 8th

reprint; first published in 1969), 19. Raja Ram Mohan Roy wrote much on Christ

and Christianity which includes his book The Precepts of Jesus published in 1820 in Calcutta. For

the works of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, see Jogendra Chunder Ghose, ed., The English Works of Raja

Rammohun Roy (Calcutta: Srikanta Roy, 1901); Sophia Dobson Collet, ed., The Life and Letters of

Raja Rammohun Roy (Calcutta: n.d., 1914; 3rd

edition edited by Dilip Kumar Biswas and Prabhat

Chandra Ganguli published with same title in 1962 by Brahmo Samaj, Calcutta).


Brahmo Samaj engendered a movement which sought to formulate reasonable self-

assertions of Hinduism in response to Christian-European understandings of itself and

Indian religions. On the other hand, Christ-inspired Hindus used the Brahmo Samaj to

work out their own convictions of the Christian faith within the reconstructive

dynamic of reformed Hinduism.”36

The very fact that many founders of the earliest

indigenous Indian Christian Churches, which we shall examine here below, were

somehow related to Brahmo Samaj stands as a strong witness to the impact that

Brahmo Samaj had on Indian Christian theology.

Nationalist movement in India spearheaded heroically by Gandhi made a great

impact on conceptions of Christianity and Church in India.37

Many noted Christians

figured in the inner circle of Gandhi: C. F. Andrews, Verrier Elwin, Ralph Richard

Keithan, Rajkumari Amrit Kaur, S. K. George, Aryanayagam, Bharatan Kumarappa,

and J. C. Kumarappa.38

While S. K. George considered Gandhi as the one who made

Jesus and his image real to him, and Gandhi‟s Satyagraha as Christianity in action,39

C. F. Andrews saw Gandhi‟s emphasis on ethics as expressing the essence of

Christianity, and the presence of Christ in the burning passion of Gandhi‟s sacrifice

for the weak and the oppressed.40

Gandhi suggested that Indian Christianity needs to

disassociate itself from Western civilization which he felt was based on violence and

materialism.41

The values displayed in the Gandhian nationalist movement led many a

36 Sathianathan Clarke, “The Jesus of Nineteenth Century Indian Christian Theology: An Indian

Inculturation with Continuing Problems and Prospects,” Studies in World Christianity 5:1 (1999),

33. 37

We do not dare to enter here into the theme of Gandhian influence on Indian Christianity for it is

very extensive and requires a great deal of time and space. However, we would like to suggest some

interesting works on the theme for readers interested in this. Gandhi‟s own views on Christ and

Christianity are found mainly in two of his books: The Message of Jesus Christ (Ahmedabad,

Navajivan,1940), and Christian Missions: Their Place in India (Ahmedabad, Navajivan, 1940). The

best short analysis is found in M. M. Thomas‟s treatment of Gandhi in his book, The Acknowledged

Christ of Indian Renaissance, 199-245. See further: Robert Ellsberg, ed., Gandhi on Christianity

(Maryknoll: Orbis, 1991); Joseph Francis, “Gandhi and Religious Pluralism,” Indian Theological

Studies 31 (1994), 115-117; Joseph Francis, “Gandhian Methodology of Means to Achieve an Aim

and Its Application to Evangelization,” Indian Theological Studies 35 (1998), 221-247; Joseph

Francis, “The Unpremeditated Communication Strategies Evolved by Mahatma Gandhi and What

they Reveal to the Genuine Evangelizer,” Indian Theological Studies 41 (2004), 339-362; Margaret

Chatterjee, Gandhi‟s Religious Thought (Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1983). 38

Cf. Joseph Tharamangalam, “Whose Sawdeshi? Contending Nationalism among Indian Christians,”

Asian Journal of Social Sciences 32 (2004), 238; Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of Indian

Renaissance, 221. 39

See S. K. George, Gandhi‟s Challenge to Christianity (Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1947). 40

See C. F. Andrews, Mahatma Gandhi‟s Ideas (London: George Allen, 1929), 34, 37, 42, 111, 337,

and 344. 41

Gandhi, The Message of Jesus Christ, 16.


Christian missionary to think that “Christ was on the other side” with the Indian

Nationalists rather than with the Christian missionaries and the British Governance. It

led many Christian missionaries working in India to an “inner questioning” which was

many times “most uncomfortable.”42

Thus, let us briefly review the Christian

participation in the Indian national movement.

2.1.1. Three Phases of Christian Participation in National Movement

The commitment of the Christians in India to the Indian National Movement

varies from indifference, scepticism to active involvement.43

Three basic phases can

be detected in the Christian relations with the nationalist movement.

The first phase is an early period of hope and enthusiasm leading to an active

involvement of Christians especially in the Indian National Congress. It was the

Western-educated Christian elites (those who had been exposed to Western ideas,

history, and literature) and a class who had experienced in their own life some of the

problems of European domination who were prominent in the early nationalist

movement. K. M. Banerjea, Kali Charan Banerjea, Kali Charan Chetterji, and others,

who like so many early nationalist leaders were Bengalis, were active in early

political associations which were beginning to show an interest in supra-regional

questions.44

The Indian Christian involvement in the early stages of the nationalist

movement is also reflected in the high levels of participation in the activities of the

Indian National Congress. For example, there were 35 Christians among the 607

registered delegates at the Madras meeting of 1887.45

The Indian Christian

community was well represented at the next four sessions of the Congress. The

proportion of Indian Christian delegates remained very much higher than their

proportion in the population.

The second phase of Christian relations with the nationalist movement might

be described as one of disillusionment, increasing suspicion, and withdrawal. In spite

of the initial enthusiasm and high rate of attendance at Congress meetings, official

figures suggest a gradual waning of interest among Indian Christians from about 1892

42 Manshardt Clifford, “Indian Nationalist Movement,” Religious Education 25 (1930) 768.

43 Felix Wilfred, Asian Dreams and Christian Hope (Delhi: ISPCK, 2003), 209-213.

44 Cf. Geoffrey A. Oddie, “Indigenization and Nationalism,” Archives de Sciences Sociales des

Religions 103 (1998), 129-152. 45

For a broader look at the involvement of Indian Christians in the Indian National Congress, see

Geoffrey A. Oddie, “Indian Christians and the National Congress, 1885-1910,” Indian Church

History Review 2:1 (1968): 45-54.


onwards. In 1892 only two Indian Christians attended the meeting at Allahabad and,

after 1897, the proportion of Indian Christian delegates was consistently below the

proportion of Christians in the population. This declining attendance at the meetings

of the National Congress coincides with an increasing evidence of a loss of

confidence in the nationalist movement in general. One important reason for the

declining enthusiasm for the Congress and the nationalist movement evident

especially in the 1980s and for some time thereafter (c. 1891-1917) was the Hindu

revivalism and anti-Christian activity apparent in some aspects of nationalist

agitation.46

There was a mounting disrespect for Christians, a hostility towards

mission schools as being “foreign”, and an association of Indian patriotism with a

devotion to Hindu deities.47

The Christian attitudes towards the nationalist movement

during this phase were strongly influenced by the rise of Hindu as distinct from a

more secular form of nationalism.48

The third, final, and somewhat ambiguous phase of Indian Christian relations

with the nationalist movement lasted from about the time of the rise of Gandhi to

independence in 1947. Significantly, this was a period when Hindu nationalism was

kept very largely in check and when the idea of a liberal democratic and secular state

was not only on the agenda, but was in the process of being developed in stages and

through negotiated constitutional change. What seems to emerge from all complex

and divided stands of Christians with the nationalist movement is a pattern of gradual,

if incomplete rapprochement, between Christian leaders on the one side and Hindus

on the other. Of crucial importance in this process of rapprochement was the

expulsion of the so-called “extremists” from the Indian National Congress in 1916

and a decline in displays of anti-Christian feeling associated with both Hindu revival

46 Church Missionary Intelligencer 58 (December, 1907), 727-735.

47 As Felix Wilfred notes, in many Asian countries “an important expression of nationalism was the

restriction if not outright rejection of Christian religion and its missionaries. A reading of the

history of Japan, China and the South East would bear this out. It was hardly thinkable that

Christianity was compatible with nationalism. In the minds of many, Asian Christianity stood in

alliance with the imperial powers of the West, and hence the nationalist sentiments against these

powers meant also anti-Christian attitude.” Felix Wilfred, Asian Dreams and Christian Hope, 209,

footnote no.6. 48

Cf. Elisabeth Susan Alexander, The Attitudes of British Protestant Missionaries Towards

Nationalism in India, With Special Reference to Madras Presidency, 1919-1927 (Delhi: Konark

Publishers, 1994).


movements and nationalist activities especially in Madras, Bengal and Bombay

presidencies.49

Reinforcing what was for most Christians a change for the better was the rise

of Gandhi and, with this, a change of tone in the political leadership, including an

emphasis on non-violence and on the importance of communal harmony.50

The

extension of Gandhi‟s control over the nationalist movement not only had the effect of

heading off Hindu extremism but reassured more of the Christians that their future

would be secure in the newly emerging nation state. Reflecting this new sense of trust

and hope for the future were resolutions passed at a conference of leading Christians

from all over India held at Ranchi in 1923. The conference averred that, “Swaraj,

Nationalism, or self-determination helps the Self-realisation of a people and is

consistent with the Christian religion and hopeful to the Christian life.”51

Another factor that contributed towards the rapprochement was the growth of

national feeling and idealism especially among the younger sections of the Christian

community in the 1920s and 1930s.52

The All India Conference of Indian Christians

in 1943 reaffirmed the commitment of the Christian community to the nationalistic

49 Cf. Y. Vincent Kumar Doss, “The Swadeshi Movement and the Attitude of the Protestant Christian

Elite in Madras, 1905-1907,” Indian Church History Review 22:1 (1988): 10-15; G. A. Oddie,

“Anti-Missionary Feeling and Hindu Revivalism in Madras: The Hindu Preaching and the Hindu

Tract Societies, 1886-1891” in Fred W. Clothey, ed., Images of Man: Religion and Historical

Process in South Asia, (Madras: New Era Publications, 1982), 217-143. 50

There were exceptions though of attitudes of Christian leaders towards Gandhian leadership and his

perceptions of the conversion of dalits in India. For example Bishop Azariah became increasingly

disenchanted with Gandhian leadership. Cf. Susan Billington Harper, In the Shadow of Mahatma:

Bishop V. S. Azariah and the Travails of Christianity in British India (Grand Rapids, Michigan:

Eerdmans, 2000) 342-343. For Gandhi‟s attitude towards untouchability and the conversion of

untouchables, see J. C. B. Webster, The Dalit Christians: A History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1992), chapter

3. For Azariah‟s opposing views, see Susan Billington Harper, “The Politics of Conversion: The

Azariah-Gandhi Controversy over Christian Mission to the Depressed Classes in the 1930‟s,” Indo-

British Review 15:1 (1988): 147-175. For an extensive discussion of Gandhi and Nationalism see

chapter 6 “Gandhi and the Problem of Authentic Nationalism,” in Gerald Studdert-Kennedy, British

Christians, Indian Nationalists and the Raj (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1999), 143-182. 51

As quoted in George Thomas, Christian Indians and Indian Nationalism, 1885-1950 (Frankfurt am

Main: Verlag Peter D. Lang, 1979), 169. 52

One such young Christian for example, S. K. George, a lecturer at Bishop‟s College, Calcutta

resigned from the college when the Metropolitan of Calcutta considered his participation in the

nationalist movement disloyal. His resignation, a printed statement, dated 31 March, 1932,

expresses his deep nationalist feelings: “believing as I do that the Indian Satyagraha is the Cross in

action and that it gives Jesus Christ His greatest opportunity to enter the hearts of a remade India. I

held it to be my highest duty both towards the College and the Church in India to identify myself

entirely with this non-violent movement, based absolutely on Truth and seeking solely to establish

Peace on Earth and Good Will among men.” File entitled “Gandhiji etc., 1921-1933 and Clergy and

Politics,” (Bishop‟s College Archive: Calcutta), as quoted in Studdert-Kennedy, British Christians,

Indian Nationalists and the Raj, 126.


cause: “We are behind no other community in our burning desire for a self-governing

India in the immediate future. We are nationalists as much as anyone else… While we

are Christians and proud to be such so far as our faith is concerned, in all other

matters we are Indians first and Indians last.”53

Summing up the sense of the new

spirit which developed among Indian Christians, E. C. Dewick, a leading British

missionary, declared that:

The old traditions of loyalty to the British Raj, and the imitation of the West in

dress and social customs have steadily been giving place to a much more

nationalistic outlook, and to the expressions of this in national costume and

national habits. A growing number of the younger Indian Christians have been

gathering courage to raise their voices in criticism of the British Government, and

have joined with their Hindu friends in the Non-Co-operation and Civil

Disobedience Movements.54

Linked with this new Spirit of collaboration with Hindus was an increasing

recognition that Christians, though a small minority, could contribute to the general

well-being and health of the embryonic nation state, not only through specific

educational and welfare projects, but also by acting as honest brokers and mediators

in disputes between different parties.55

2.1.2. Three Responses of Indian Christians towards National Movement

From the survey of three different phases of Indian Christian participation in

the Indian National Movement, we can point out three different responses or attitudes

of Indian Christians towards National Movement. Firstly, the great bulk of Christians

remained largely indifferent to pleas that they should become more involved in the

non-co-operation and civil disobedience movements against the British. For many

Christians, the sound and fury of the independence struggle was “in another country”.

Secondly, there were those who were not indifferent, but who saw the

nationalist movement as a threat. 56

Many of them were Christians of low castes who

53 M. K. Kuriakose, History of Christianity in India: Source Materials (Madras: Christian Literature

Society, 1982), 356. 54

As quoted in George Thomas, Christian Indians and Indian Nationalism, 170. Changes in the

attitude of younger generation Christians left Bishop Azariah with a feeling in 1938 that he was

increasingly isolated among the new generation of clergy and laity critical of Western missions. Cf.

Harper, In the Shadow of Mahatma, 241-242. 55

See J. C. B. Webster, “Punjabi Christians in the Indian Nationalist Movement, 1919-1947,” Indo-

British Review 10:1 (1983), 129. 56

We can mention here, for example, Alfons Väth, a Jesuit missionary who taught history at St.

Xavier‟s College, Mumbai, who argued that Catholic participation in the National Movement was

an action against conscience because it was directed against legally constituted government. He

called Christians to reject National Movement for he considered it anti-Christian. Cf. Isaac


had suffered from various forms of what they felt was Hindu “oppression.” They had,

in their own view, changed their identity from being a depressed and degraded people

in Hindu society to being Christians in church or mission, and hence they could in no

way be blamed for not wanting to support a movement which was dominated by

Hindus. In these circumstances their sympathy and sense of affinity was much more

with Europeans than with Hindus or the high caste Christian idealists who thought

they were doing good by participating in the nationalist movement.57

Thirdly, there were other Indian Christians, usually drawn from the higher

castes, whose feelings about the nationalist movement were very different. They were

actively immersed in the nationalist movement. Many of these elite Christians were

discontent with the European constructed and dominated Christian system where they

suffered humiliation and oppression under European Christian missionaries, and

found little difference between colonialism within the Christian church and

colonialism as a broader political system.58

As with many nationalists there was a

passion, a vision, a great motivating idea of “a new heaven and a new earth,” and as a

result a growing number of the elite Christians were beginning to identify their cause

with the program for an inclusive multi-faith and secular nation state.

One can argue that the links of the Christians in India with the Indian

Nationalist Movement were limited to a minority of “Western-educated urban

Christians.”59

As most Christians at that time in India were poor and illiterate and

Padinjarekuttu, The Missionary Movement of the 19th

and 20th

Centuries and its Encounter with

India (Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Peter Lang, 1995), 137. 57

Speaking at the 1942 Episcopal Synod, Bishop Azariah, who spent 33 years in the villages of

Andhra Pradesh (India), reported that the depressed classes felt they owed everything to the British

and were afraid of Congress gaining control. Cf. Harper, In the Shadow of Mahatma, 345. 58

For example: Lal Behari Day who started a movement against the exclusive missionary control of

the church and who was sent upcountry after advocating that Indian ordained ministers should be

put on an equal footing with the missionaries and have full membership of the Scottish Church

Council. Cf. Kaj Baago, “The First Independence Movement Among Indian Christians,” Indian

Church History Review 1:1 (1967): 66. Similarly, Gopi Nath Nandi was treated in much the same

way for making similar demands of the Presbyterian missionaries in north-east India in the 1840s.

Cf. J. C. B. Webster, The Christian Community and Change in Nineteenth Century North India

(Delhi: Macmillan Company of India, 1976), 210-212. Also on the Catholic side, though there were

some Indian clergy under Portuguese missions, no Indian was appointed bishop in India in the

nineteenth century. See also for others, Achilles Meersman, “Can We Speak of Indigenization of

the Catholic Church in India during the 19th

Century?” Indian Church History Review 7:2 (1973),

75-82. 59

K. M. Benejea, Kali Charan Banerjea and Kali Charan Chatterji and many other Christian

Nationalists were converts of Alexander Duff‟s institutions in Calcutta. On the influence of Western

education and the rise of the Western-educated elites see: B. T. McCully, English Education and

the Origins of Indian Nationalism (Gloucester, Mass.: P. Smith, 1966); Anil Seal, The Emergence


came from villages and rural areas, it is very unlikely that they had strong links with

the outside world or could feel much affinity with the Western-educated urban elites,

even if the latter were Christians attempting to act on their behalf.60

Thus the

nationalist feeling was first clearly apparent among India‟s tiny minority of western-

educated urban elites, mostly young men who were influenced by their contact with

Western ideas, literature, and learning. Though a sense of nationalism was greatly

encouraged by contact with these Western ideas and the rise and growth of nationalist

movements throughout Europe, it was also given further impetus by developments

within India itself. These changes included a growing recognition of the value of

India‟s historical and cultural achievements and an increasing disillusionment and

discontent with British rule. These were the same ideals which have sown the seeds

for the efforts towards building indigenous churches in India, and these efforts began

and took shape also during the same period of Indian Nationalist Movement. Having

surveyed the relationship of Indian Christians with the Indian Nationalist Movement,

we are now ready to study some of these early efforts at creating independent

indigenous churches.

2.2. SOME ATTEMPTS AT THE CREATION OF INDIGENOUS CHURCHES

The insights of the Christian (and non-Christian) individuals and movements

that have contributed to the search for the image of an Indian Church in the past are an

integral part of our own “quest for an Indian Church.” These men and movements had

entered into serious dialogue with the religions and secular cultures of the land, both

in their classical forms and in their renascent phases. Many of them tried to clarify to

themselves and to others the truth and meaning of their Christian faith, from within

their dialogical situation. They sought, however gropingly, to relate Christ to Indian

culture and to express the Christian faith and life in terms of the heritage of the Indian

thought and tradition. These insights of the past Indian Christians and movements

may be considered our own “Indian ecclesiastical tradition” from which the churches

in India in every age should draw inspiration and guidance.

of Indian Nationalism: Competition and Collaboration in the Later Nineteenth Century

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968). 60

Christians represented 0.73% in 1881 and 2.4% in 1951. For tables on the growth of the different

religious communities (as defined by the census) see G. A. Oddie, ed., Religion in South Asia:

Religious Conversion and Revival Movements in South Asia in Medieval and Modern Times, 2nd

ed.

(Delhi: Manohar, 1991).


According to Barret, from 1858 to 1975 India had more than 150 Hindu-

Christian movements or churches as well as modern neo-Hindu groups of devotees of

Jesus who explicitly acknowledge Jesus, and a number of more strictly Christian

movements.61

We have to indicate here, before we delve deeper, that this movement

in India to create indigenous churches has largely been a non-Catholic movement. As

was evident from our preceding sections, the movement to create indigenous churches

coincides with the Indian National Movement. While the Catholic missions remained

lukewarm in their response to the nationalistic movement, there generated a very

active and passionate participation of Protestants in it, specially led by the highly

educated Indian Protestants who were produced by the various educational institutions

established by the Protestant missions. As John Webster rightly suggests, “the critical

definitions of Christianity and of Indian Christian identity as “foreign,” made by many

leaders of the Indian renaissance and national movement outside church, had a telling

“indianizing” effect upon the educated Protestant elite‟s sense of identity.”62

This

movement not only led to the exploration of Indian theological expressions and

formulations and spiritualities, and in cases transfers of power and leadership from the

western missionaries to the local ecclesial bodies, but also to the creation of some

indigenous churches, some of which we can examine now.

2.2.1. The Hindu Church of the Lord Jesus (1857)

In 185763

a group of Nadar64

Christians at Prakasapuram in Tinnevelly district

of Tamilnadu broke away from the Church Missionary Society (C. M. S.) and formed

what can be considered the earliest forms of attempting to create an indigenous church

in India, The Hindu Church of the Lord Jesus. Arumainayagam Sattampillai, “a man

of high intellectual calibre and extraordinary qualities” is said to be founder of this

61 David Barrett, World Christianity Encyclopaedia (Nairobi: Oxford University Press, 1982), 374.

62 John C. B. Webster, “The Identity of Indian Christians,” in Kanichikattil Francis, ed., Church in

Context: Essays in Honour of Mathias Mundadan CMI (Bangalore: Dharmaram, 1996), 59. 63

While Kaj Baago puts its foundation around 1858, Vincent Kumaradoss places it in 1857. Cf. Kaj

Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity (Madras: Christian Literature Society, 1969), 1. Vincent

Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” in Roger E.

Hedlund, ed., Christianity is Indian: The Emergence of an Indigenous Community (Delhi: ISPCK,

2004), 3. 64

Nadars are a caste group in Tamilnadu that were earlier called as Shanars who were a socially and

economically deprived group. They achieved great economic and social advancement in the late

19th

and 20th

centuries. For a study on this, see Robert L. Hardgrave, The Nadars of Tamilnadu: The

Political Culture of a Community in Change (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California

Press, 1969).


church.65

While a rift between a missionary and some communities is said to be the

main reason for the birth of this new church, “nationalist feelings also seem to have

been one of the reasons.”66

By founding this church, Sattampillai was clearly attempting to negotiate the

contradictory impacts of conversions: the subordination and marginalisation of Shanar

converts within the church and the treatment of Christian converts as denationalised

and unpatriotic.67

He does this mainly by developing a critique of Western

Christianity and thereby questioning the authority of the missionaries in the church,

and by an incorporation of indigenous practices within the church. As Kumaradoss, a

reputed historian at Madras, concludes: “In displacing the Western Christianity of the

missionaries with new forms of „nationalised‟ Christianity, Sattampillai attempted to

retain the empowering elements of their new faith and at the same time repudiate their

disempowerment and marginalisation by the church and the dominant voices in the

nationalist discourse.”68

Countering the discrimination of Shanars by the missionaries within the

church seems to be the main objective in the foundation of this earliest indigenous

church in India.69

The European missionaries treated Shanars as inferior and made

derogatory references to their low caste origin.70

Sattampillai protested at such

inferior characterisation of Shanars by European missionaries and the foundation of

this church can be seen as the culmination of his protest. About 2500 Shanar

Christians left established mainline churches to join Sattampillai in the new church.

The Hindu Church of the Lord Jesus “comprised solely Shanar converts, did not

hesitate to acknowledge and support the aspirations of Shanars to affirm a new

identity.”71

One can observe efforts in them to indigenize their Church: “they have

rejected everything which appeared to them to savour of a European origin;” “they

65 Cf. Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” 6.

66 Cf. Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 1.

67 Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” 5-6.

68 Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” 6.

69 Cf. Joseph Mullens Missions in South India (London: W. H. Dalton, 1854) 99ff; as quoted in

Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” 6. 70

For more on the European missionaries‟ attitude towards Shanars, Cf. Y. Vincent Kumaradoss,

“Negotiating Colonial Christianity,” South Indian Studies 1 (Jan-June, 1996), 35-53. For an

example of such treatment see Caldwell, The Tinnevelly Shanars (Madras: SPCK, 1849). 71

Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” 7.


have abandoned infant-baptism and an ordained ministry;” “instead of wine they use

unfermented juice of grapes;” “observed Saturday instead of Sunday as their

Sabbath;” “cut themselves completely from all European help in money and

influence.”72

Its worship has been described as a fusion of Jewish and Christian

practices which appears “more Indian than the worship in other churches” with the

singing of South Indian classical tunes by a congregation standing with folded

hands.”73

The term „Hindu‟ had a geographical connotation rather than a religious one

for Sattampillai. He encouraged the practice of national traditions and customs as he

argued that they would “naturally be in accordance with the righteousness of Law.”74

Due to internal conflicts, this church split in 1883.75

While the small group

that stayed with Sattampillai disappeared after his death in 1919, the larger group that

parted ways with Sattampillai survived and is active even today. Kumaradoss recounts

that this church was re-christened as “The Indian Church of the Ekarashakar” (Only

Saviour) and has churches at Mukkuperi, Oyyangudi, Kulathukudiruppu, Salaiputhur,

Coimbatore, Madras and Salem.76

While Sattampillai should be highly commended for his efforts at

indigenisation of Christianity in India, the motives that have fuelled his movement of

indigenisation seem to be political and social, rather than theological and much less

doctrinal. As can be clearly detected from our study, the main objective of his

movement was the “empowerment of the discriminated Shanars.” And he tries to

achieve this by a critique of Western Christianity and by incorporation of indigenous

practices in his church. He paints a very negative picture of the European missionaries

which, we believe, undermines widely the good they have done. He sounds unfair in

his assessment of European missionaries.77

He blames the European missionaries of

72 Joseph Mullens, A Brief Review of Ten Years Missionary Labour in India (London: W. H. Dalton,

1863) 51ff; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 1. 73

M. Thomas Thangaraj, “The History and Teachings of the Hindu Christian Community Commonly

Called Nattu Sabai in Tirunelveli,” Indian Church History Review 5:1 (June 1971), 65. 74

Sattampillai, A Brief Sketch of Hindu Christian Dogmas (Palamkottah: Shanmuga Vilasam Press,

1890), 4; as quoted in Kumaradoss, “Creation of alternative Public Spheres and Church

Indigenisation,” 9. 75

According to Thomas Thangaraj the split occurred when the founder donned High Priestly garments

and decreed that the Church should offer animal sacrifices. Cf. M. Thomas Thangaraj, “The History

and Teachings of the Hindu Christian Community,” 43-68. 76

Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” 11. See also

Thangaraj, “The History and Teachings of the Hindu Christian Community, 43-68. 77

For example he says of European Missionaries: “overwhelmed for ages with various gross sins”;

“several unlimited carnal sins”; “immoral European Christianity.” See Sattampillai, A Brief Sketch


“adulterating the „the sincere milk of the Word‟ of God by mixing with it the poison

of „impure‟ national traditions of Europeans.”78

While Sattampillai sees the attempts

at indigenisation by Europeans to inculturate Christianity in their own national

traditions as „adulteration,‟ we wonder why his own similar attempts at indigenisation

of Christianity in India by adapting Indian traditions can not be labelled equally as

„adulteration‟? On the contrary, we can say that the blame on European missionaries

should be placed not on their „indigenisation of Christianity in their traditions,‟ but on

their failure to follow the similar process of indigenisation in India.

While we cannot approve his break-away from the mainline churches as the

real solution for countering discrimination of Shanars in the church,79

we cannot fail

to appreciate his vision for the empowerment of Shanars, and how such

„empowerment of the poor and oppressed‟ become fundamental to the life of the

church. Sattampillai‟s „real attempts of inculturation‟ to incarnate the church in India,

lie in his achievement in creating a „church of the poor‟ where the poor themselves are

the leaders. After more than a century, when the church in India still remains very

much a „church for the poor‟ and not a „church of the poor,‟ where the majority of

dalit and tribal Christians are still discriminated against within the church,

Sattampillai‟s insights and attempts at indigenisation prove valuable and relevant.

2.2.2. The National Church of India (1886)

An Indian medical doctor, S. Parani Andi80

founded “The National Church of

Madras” on 12 September 1886 with a small group of lay people in Madras. He seems

to have drawn inspiration for his idea of the National Church from the manifesto of

liberal theology in England, Essays and Reviews where he found an article entitled

of the Hindu Christian Dogmas, 4, 19, 25, 30; as quoted in Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative

Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” 7. 78

Cf. Sattampillai, A Brief Sketch of the Hindu Christian Dogmas, 30; as quoted in Kumaradoss,

“Creation of Alternative Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” 7. 79

One can easily be reminded of such attempts even in our times. Enough to think of the recent

internal conflicts between Vanniar and dalit Catholics of a parish in Tamilnadu. The dalit Catholics

were protesting their discrimination by the high-caste Catholics and were demanding a separate

parish. They built a new church for themselves and demanded the diocese to recognise it and

appoint a priest for it. For more details on the story see: http://www.ucanews.com/2008/03/12/two-

catholics-die-in-police-firing-church-leaders-call-for-calm/ (accessed on 15 May, 2008). 80

He is also known as Pulney Andy. He came from an upper-caste Hindu Viswakarma family. He

was the first ever Indian student to register for a British Medical degree and become a member of

the Royal College of Surgeons. He became a Christian in England, but was not baptized. On his

return to India, he was baptized by a Basel Missionary at Calicut in May 1863, but did not affiliate

himself to any church. He married an English lady.

http://www.ucanews.com/2008/03/12/two-catholics-die-in-police-firing-church-leaders-call-for-calm/

http://www.ucanews.com/2008/03/12/two-catholics-die-in-police-firing-church-leaders-call-for-calm/


“The National Church.”81

However, one can also see the influence of Brahmo Samaj

on this church even if it is not very explicit.82

Parani Andi voiced his ideas for a

National church through the two newspapers he published in Madras, The Christian

Patriot83

started in 1890 and the Eastern Star.84

The aim of the National Church of Madras was “to gather all Indian Christians

into one self-supporting and self-governing church.”85

The guiding principle of this

church was solely the New Testament, and the Western creed and confessions had no

value. They had no administration of sacraments and no ordained pastors, though such

a possibility was not entirely ruled out. The members of this church could still

continue their membership with their former churches.86

They had regular Sunday

services with sermons and Tamil songs.87

He repeatedly affirmed that Christ and

Christianity were Asian: “Christ is an Asiatic to the very backbone and it is folly to

say that He is a foreigner and His teachings are foreign and unsuited.”88

He believed

that Christianity would not make progress in India unless it shed its European garb

and adapted itself to the “tastes of the Eastern nations.”89

And he was convinced that

only Indians could successfully present Christianity in an Eastern form to Indians.90

Parani tried to establish that Christianity and Hinduism had common roots and

he locates the common roots to the times before the Great Deluge when he argues that

mankind had one God and one religion and one mode of salvation.91

However, when

he speaks of Hinduism, he means a “non-Brahminised” and “de-Brahminised”

81 A Collection of Papers connected with the Movement of the National Church of India (Madras)

(Madras: Cosmopolite Press, 1893); as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 8. 82

Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 9. 83

The very name of the newspaper “Christian Patriot” gives us an insight into the driving spirit of the

movement: to affirm that Christians are not unpatriotic. 84

Cf. Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 10. 85

Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 8. 86

A Collection of Papers connected with the Movement of the National Church of India (Madras), 29;

as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 8. 87

See Worship of Hymns of the National Church in The Garland of Divine Worship and A Collection

of Devotional Songs (both in Tamil) Madras, 1903; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous

Christianity, 8. 88

A Collection of Papers connected with the Movement of the National Church of India (Madras) 64;

as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 9, footnote no.31. 89





Pulney Andy, Are Not Hindus Christians? (Madras: Cosmopolitan Press, 1984); as quoted in

Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” 19.


Hinduism, for he believes that Hinduism was corrupted and distorted by the Brahmins

after the Deluge. He tries to draw similarities between Hinduism (as it was before the

Deluge) and Judaism in terminology, symbols, doctrines, ceremonies, etc. But, as

Kumaradoss rightly concludes, such comparisons “were full of uncertainties and not

very convincing and in some cases, thoughts had been carried to grotesque

extremes.”92

Parani Andi‟s anti-European and anti-Brahmin trends can be traced back to his

involvement with the Freemasonry tradition. He was drawn to it while he was in

England, and became an active member of the Freemason‟s Lodge at Madras. Though

he was granted an honorary membership (first Indian to receive it), the Freemason

Lodge questioned the eligibility of Indians for its membership, as it considered

Indians to be idol worshippers and thus of an inferior civilization. Such racial

prejudice among European Freemasonry members triggered an anti-European

movement in Andi‟s ideology. He was instrumental in the foundation of the rival

group of Freemasonry in India, an exclusively Indian Mason Lodge, “The Carnatic

Lodge of Freemasons”93

in 1883. In repudiation of the inferior status given to his

caste-group, he went on to critique the Brahmanical Hinduism which according to

him, manipulated Hinduism for their supremacy, and dislodged Viswakarmas from

their esteemed status. He traced back the origin of his caste group to the mythical god

of Viswakarma and tried to ascertain their superior status.94

The National Church of Madras too was not received well by the foreign

missionaries who criticized it to be immolating the important doctrines of the church.

While most missionaries agreed that the church in India should eventually become

self-governing, they felt that the time wasn‟t yet ripe for it. Parani‟s appeals to various

missionary societies seeking support for his plans for the National Church were

largely ignored. Though this movement enjoyed some success during 1894-1895

when some Christians in Tinnevelly, Travancore and Bombay broke away from their

churches and affiliated themselves to it, the movement has not made much progress in

later years.95

As Kumaradoss puts it: “Despite the initial sensation it generated, the


93 For more on the Carnatic Lodge of Freemasons, see C. K. Prabhakaran, ed., The History of the

Carnatic Lodge 1883-1983 (Madras: Rathnam Press, 1984). 94

Cf. S. Pulney Andy, Are Not Hindus Christians?; as quoted in Kumaradoss, “Creation of

Alternative Public Spheres and Church Indigenisation,” 16-17. 95

Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 10-11.


National Church of India never became precarious after the death of its founder, Dr.

Pulney Andy, in 1909.” It had “faded without any trace” by 1920s.96

The National Church of India could appeal only to the high caste converts,

especially to the Viswakarma caste-groups from which Andy himself came. He seems

to be more concerned about establishing the superior status of his caste-group within

the Indian social system and to disproving the superiority of the European

missionaries over the Indian converts. By his movement of the National Church,

Andy contested the European missionary domination on the one hand and the

Brahmin domination on the other. As Kumaradoss rightly evaluates, the “upper caste

converts of the National Church were keen to retain their caste identity as a part of

their cultural milieu so that they would not be treated as outcastes.”97

But, on the other

hand, such trend of the National Church has marginalised the low caste converts.

Their efforts to delineate themselves from the low-caste converts clearly stands

misplaced in their process of indigenisation of Christianity in India. While striving to

liberate themselves from a “domination” (by European missionaries) and creating a

new dignified identity for themselves, they were fuelling another “domination” (of

low-caste converts).

2.2.3. The Calcutta Christo Samaj (1887)

Kali Cheran Benerjea and Joy Govinda Shome, two Bengali Brahmin

converts, formed The Calcutta Christo Samaj in 1887, which the founders wished to

be “a Christian parallel to the Brahmo Samaj.”98

The foundation of this indigenous

church was the culmination of a series of efforts that Benerjea and Shome made since

1870 when they founded the newspaper The Bengal Christian Herald, later called The

Indian Christian Herald. They were quick to affirm that Christians in India were as

nationalistic as their fellow Hindu Indians: “In having become Christians, we have not

ceased to be Hindus. We are Hindu Christian, as thoroughly Hindu as Christian. We

have embraced Christianity but we have not discarded our nationality. We are as

intensely national as any of our brethren.”99

They vehemently argued for inculturating

the Hindu customs into Christian worship, and Benerjea himself “tried to introduce



98 Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 5.

99 Church Missionary Intelligencer (1871) 261; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous

Christianity, 3. Baago notes that a complete set of the newspaper “The Indian Christian Herald” are

not available, and that some old volumes may be found at the National Library in Calcutta.


among the Christians the Nagarkirtan (dancing and singing processions) taken from

the Bhakti traditions in Bengal.”100

They called for the need of the local church “to be

removed from the hot-house of European Church organization and planted in genial

soil of Bengali modes of thought and feeling.”101

During the Bengali Christian Conference which they organized in 1877,

Benerjea and Shome criticized the missionaries for “denationalizing Indian

Christians” and for creating divisive Christian denominations in India by transporting

“the theological and ecclesiastical differences of the West to India.” And they

“demanded indigenous forms of worship.” 102

They also tried to put forward their

programmes and plans for the formation of “an independent Indian church” during the

Missionary Conference held at Calcutta in 1882. They proposed that this church

would have pastors who would support themselves by secular work, and that it would

be modelled after Brahmo Samaj.103

Having been disappointed with the slight response to their proposals, Benerjea

and Shome left their mainline churches and formed the Calcutta Christo Samaj. While

they defined the purpose of the Christo Samaj as “the propagation of Christian truth

and promotion of Christian union,” they hoped to eliminate denominations among

Christians in India by gathering them all within it.104

Its confession was the Apostolic

Creed. They had weekly worships in private homes “led by members in turn, both

men and women.”105

No distinctions were made between clergy and laity, and as

such, baptism was administered even by the laity. While they had some form of

Communion, they had no fixed form of liturgy.106

K. C. Benerjea stressed so much the importance of indigenization. He blamed

the missionaries for the foreignness of Christianity in India, and called on them to

become Indian by living as “poor sannyasins or gurus” and “recognizing „the germs of

100 Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 4, footnote no.8. Baago notes that Benerjea defended

such liturgical inculturation in Indian Christian Herald 24/9, 1/10, 8/10, and 22/10, (1880). 101

Indian Christian Herald 22/2 (1883); as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 4. 102

Cf. B. R. Barber, Kali Charan Benerjea, Brahmin, Christian, Saint (Calcutta: n.d.) 42-46; as quoted

in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 4. 103

Report of the Second Decennial Missionary Conference held at Calcutta 1882-83 (Calcutta: n.d.,

1883) 278; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 4. 104

Cf. Barber, Kali Charan Benerjea, Brahmin, Christian, Saint, 46; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of

Indigenous Christianity, 5. 105

Baago notes that “Benerjea was an ardent supporter of the right for women to preach and to

minister in the churches.” Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 5. 106

Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 5.


truth‟ in the religions of India.”107

He distinguished between “substantive

Christianity” that cannot be changed (essential elements of faith expressed in the

Apostolic Creed) and “adjective Christianity” (confessional statements and

organisational forms) that can be changed, and called on the missionaries to refrain

from imposing their “adjective Christianity” on Christians in India.108

Even if Benerjea and Shome founded the Christo Samaj with lofty ideals, it

“never became what its founders had hoped for.”109

While it was opposed and

criticized by missionaries, it could not garner much support from Indian Christians

many of whom were financially dependent on the missionaries. Thus, Christo Samaj

typically consisted of educated, financially independent Indian Christians and so their

numbers dwindled and finally dissolved in 1894 within a short span of seven years.110

2.2.4. Church of the New Dispensation (Sen)

Keshub Chunder Sen, born in 1838 in Calcutta, was not only a member, but

also an acharya (teacher/minister) of the Brahmo Samaj.111

Like many other educated

elite Indians of his times, Sen had a great personal devotion to Christ, but never

became a Christian. In his own words, “I have always disclaimed the Christian name

and will not identify myself with the Christian Church, for I set my face completely

against the popular doctrine of Christianity.”112

“I repudiate the little Christ of popular

theology, and stand up for a greater Christ, a fuller Christ, a more eternal Christ.”113

Even if Sen was not a baptized Christian, Christ was the centre of his life and thought.

As J. N. Farquhar rightly states: “Keshub‟s richest experience came from Christ, and,

in consequence, in the latter part of his life, his deepest theological beliefs were fully

Christian.”114

Similarly Manilal C. Parekh who was influenced very much by Sen‟s

107 Cf. Barber, Kali Charan Benerjea, Brahmin, Christian, Saint, 63; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of

Indigenous Christianity, 6 108

Cf. Report of the Third Decennial Missionary Conference held at Bombay 1892-93 (Bombay: n.d,

1893), 121 ff; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 6. 109

See Indian Evangelical Review Jan (1888) and Report of the Third Decennial Missionary

Conference held at Bombay 1892-93 160; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity,

6. 110

Cf. Barber, Kali Charan Benerjea, Brahmin, Christian, Saint, 53; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of

Indigenous Christianity, 7. 111

He joined Brahmo Samaj in 1857 and was appointed Acharya in 1862. 112

Manilal Chhotalal Parekh, Bramarshi Keshub Chunder Sen (Rajkot: Oriental Christ House, 1931)

149; as quoted in Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance, 72. 113

Parekh, Bramarshi Keshub Chunder Sen, 160; as quoted in Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of

the Indian Renaissance, 72. 114

John Nicol Farquhar, Modern Religious Movements in India (New York: Mcmillan, 1915), 66.


thought concludes, “Keshub had really arrived at a point which is in a way within the

compass of Christianity.”115

He opined that Christians in India were “denationalised and isolated” from

Indian culture,116

and was thoroughly convinced that “the future Church of India must

be thoroughly an Indian Church.”117

He affirms the oriental origins of Christianity as

he draws a picture of the Oriental Christ:

Behold, he cometh to us in his loose flowing garment, his dress and features

altogether oriental, a perfect Asiatic in everything. Watch his movements and you

will find genuine orientalism in all his habits and manners, in his uprising and

down-sitting, his going forth and his coming in, his preaching and ministry, his

very language, style and tone. Indeed, while reading the Gospel, we cannot but

feel that we are quite at home when we are with Jesus, and that he is altogether

one of us. Surely Jesus is our Jesus.”118

Sen incorporated many elements of Christianity and the Church into his samaj

which he called “The Church of the New Dispensation.” Sen conceived this Church of

the New Dispensation as a kind of „ideal world religion.‟ He thought that the resulting

new religion would both sustain India and lead the world into a worldwide spiritual

brotherhood. The Hindu religious genius in continuity with the Old and New

Testament revelations would, he felt, be able to reconcile all religions by absorbing

“all that is good and noble in each other.”119

As Boyd says, Sen‟s church “though

modelled chiefly on the Christian Church and explicitly centred on Christ, yet claimed

for itself the best of all great religions.”120

Sen himself claims, “I do firmly believe

that whatsoever is true and good and beautiful is of Christ. … Nay, I would go further,

and declare Christ to be the Centre of this Broad Church.”121

Its emblem included the

Christian Cross, the Hindu trident and the Muslim crescent. Boyd points out that Sen

“developed a system of asceticism, rituals and sacraments, including baptism and a

115 Parekh, Bramarshi Keshub Chunder Sen, 174; as quoted in Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of

the Indian Renaissance, 69. However, both Farquhar and Parekh agree that Sen was not systematic

and coherent in his thought. Cf. Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance, 69-

70. 116

Cf. Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 35. 117

Pratap Chunder Mozoomdar, The Life and Teachings of Keshub Chunder Sen (Calcutta: Baptist

Mission Press, 1887) 176; as quoted in Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of the Indian

Renaissance, 73. P. C. Mazoomdar was a close friend and a distant relative of Keshub Chunder Sen. 118

Keshub Chunder Sen, “India Asks: Who is Christ?” Lecture given on 9th

April, 1879, in David C.

Scott, ed., Keshub Chunder Sen (Madras: CLS, 1979), 201-202. 119

Keshub Chunder Sen, “We Apostles of the New Dispensation,” in W. T. De Bary, Sources of

Indian Tradition, vol. 2 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969), 75. 120

Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 36. 121

Keshub Chunder Sen‟s Lectures in India (London: 1904), Lecture titled “That Marvellous Mystery

–The Trinity” (1882), 85-86; as quoted in Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 36.


form of communion, in which the elements were rice and water.”122

Sen saw himself

as divinely appointed and commissioned to be “the leader of the New Dispensation in

which all religions are harmonized and which all men are summoned to enter as their

spiritual home.”123

The New Dispensation disintegrated very soon after his death in

1884 due to many conflicts among the followers.124

One cannot brush away Sen‟s ideal of world religion as a mere syncretism,

since Sen places Christ as the indispensable centre of his vision of the New

Dispensation. Christ for Sen, is the fulfilment of all religions: “He [Christ] comes to

fulfil and perfect that religion of communion for which India had been panting.”125

For Sen, there is Christ in every true Hindu: “In every true Brahmin, in every loyal

votary of the Veda on the banks of the sacred Ganges, is Christ, the Son of God. The

holy word, the eternal Veda dwells in every one of us.”126

Boyd in his study of Sen cautions that Sen‟s church should not be seen

“simply as a piece of practical syncretism,” but as an attempt “to interpret the nature

of the Church in a way that made sense to people with a Hindu cultural

background.”127

Sen‟s attempt is theologically significant in as much as it was, in

Boyd‟s opinion, not only as “an illustration of the response of a great Hindu who was

gripped by Christ,” but also “as a demonstration of some of the factors which make it

difficult for a Hindu to accept the Christian Church as it is found in India.”128

122 Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 26-27.

123 Farquhar, Modern Religious Movements in India, 55; as quoted in Thomas, The Acknowledged

Christ of the Indian Renaissance, 74. 124

Scott, Keshub Chunder Sen, 41-42. 125

Keshub Chunder Sen‟s Lectures in India, 388-389 (Lecture titled “India Asks: Who is Christ?”

(1879); as quoted in Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 37. 126

Keshub Chunder Sen‟s Lectures in India, 33; as quoted in Boyd, An Introduction to Indian

Christian Theology, 38. One prominent follower of Sen, P. C. Mozoomdar would similarly say:

“Someday … the followers of Christ [will] realize that he does not supplant or abolish the prophets

and incarnations of other religions but that they all and each have their place in him, that he

completes and reconciles them.” P. C. Mozoomdar, The Oriental Christ (Boston: Geo H. Ellis,

1883); as quoted in Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance, 93. 127

Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 36-37. 128

Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 37. Some however differ in their opinion. For

example: the Unitarians of Britain criticized the religion of Sen‟s Church as “a mass of mysticism,

superstition and absurdity.” The Inquirer, 12 May 1883, quoted in The New Dispensation, vol. II,

2nd

ed., (Calcutta: Brahmo Tract Society, 1916); as quoted in Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of

the Indian Renaissance, 71. “These movements did not have their beginning in faith, but in

unbelief. From the point of view of the Church in India it is the story of a great rejection.” F.

Mulayil, “An Examination in the Light of NT Doctrines of the Treatment of Christian Theology in

Modern Reformed Hinduism, as illustrated by the Brahma Samaj” (Unpublished Oxford D. Phil.

Dissertation, 1952); as quoted in Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 39.


M. M. Thomas finds the „original seminal ideas‟ on ecclesiology in India

developed by Sen theologically significant.129

In particular, Sen‟s “idea of a Christ-

centred integration of the Indian and Western religious and cultural heritages,

expressing itself in an indigenous Christianity, is highly relevant to the future of the

Christian Church in India.”130

However, Thomas concludes that Sen‟s ecclesiology

lacked “the idea of a tradition giving the Church an historic continuity and unity based

on common authority of faith, sacraments and ministry.” Thomas points to

“predominance of the mystical over the historical and of self-sufficient individualism

over the discipline of a fellowship” as the weakness of Sen‟s theology.131

Keshub Chunder Sen‟s Church of the New Dispensation is also significant for

important issues it raises in relation to the status of Hindu devotees of Christ in India,

what today has come to be called “Kristu Bhaktas.” How can one categorize the

thousands of Hindu Indians who have been drawn to Christ and his message, who also

accept him as their saviour and worship him, but do not want to be baptized and

considered members of any church? M. M. Thomas rightly raises the issues involved

here: “Do we seek the conversion of Hindus or the conversion of Hinduism? In the

conversion of Hindu to Christ, can Hinduism play any positive role? Can the Hindu

who becomes Christian bring any new understanding of Christ to the world

Church?”132

Further, to what extent can the „Hindu Christianity‟ be considered an

embodiment of Christ and how much of it can be integrated into the development of

an Indian Christian theology? These questions remain to be explored and answered

even today in India.

2.2.5. “Hindu Catholic”: Brahmabandhab Upadhyaya (1861-1907)

The man who called himself a “Hindu Catholic” was born as Bhavani Charan

Banerji in 1861 in a Bengali Brahmin family.133

He was very much influenced by

Keshub Chunder Sen right from his childhood and became a member of the Church of

the New Dispensation in 1887.134

While he was a Brahmo teacher in Hyderabad (now

129 Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance, 58.




133 Kali Cheran Benerjea, a great Christian nationalist who founded the “Calcutta Christo Samaj,” was

his uncle. His father was a police-inspector. Upadhyaya tried twice without success to join the

Gwalior army to fight the British while he studied in the college in Calcutta. 134

He was a close friend of the great Indian sage, Swami Vivekananda together with whom he was

part of the Brahmo Samaj and later the Church of the New Dispensation.


in Pakistan), he was baptized in 1891 by Anglican missionaries but declared that he

did not want to belong to the Church of England nor any other denominational church.

By the end of the same year, he became a Roman Catholic through a conditional

baptism in which he was christened Theophilius, which he later translated as

„Brahmabandhab,‟ „the friend of Brahman.‟135

He disseminated his views mainly

through the Catholic monthly journal he edited, Sophia (Jan 1894- March 1899).136

Upadhyaya had a deep knowledge of Hinduism, especially of Vedanta, and as

a Christian, he always sought to study Christian revelation in relation to the insights of

Hinduism. As Wilfred rightly states, “He began to discover in it not an enemy but an

ally of Christian faith.”137

He was convinced that the best way of bringing the

Christian faith to Indian thinkers was by using the categories of the Vedanta:

Indian thought can be made just as useful to Christianity as Greek thought has

been to Europe. … The truths of the Hindu philosopher must be „baptized‟ and

used as stepping-stones to the Catholic Faith. … The European clothes of the

Catholic religion should be laid aside as soon as possible. It must assume the

Hindu garment which will make it acceptable to the people of India. This change

can only be effected by Indian missionary Orders who preach the Sacred Faith in

the language of the Vedanta.138

Our missionary experiences have shown us how unintelligible the Catholic

doctrines appear to the Hindus when presented in the scholastic garb. The Hindu

mind is extremely subtle and penetrative, but is opposed to the Graeco-Scholastic

method of thinking. We must fall back on the Vedantic method, in formulating the

Catholic religion to our countrymen. In fact the Vedantic philosophy must render

the same service as the Greek philosophy in Europe. The assimilation of Vedantic

philosophy should not be opposed because it contains certain errors. Were not

Plato and Aristotle guilty of monumental errors?139

Upadhyaya was convinced that only Indian Christian Sannyasins can

effectively communicate to the Indians the person of Jesus and his teachings: “We can

have no rest until we see the religion of Christ lived by Hindu ascetics and preached

by Hindu monks; until we behold the beauty of the Catholic Faith set off with oriental

135 Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 63-64; Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous

Christianity, 26-28. 136

K. P. Aleaz, “A Prophet to be Reclaimed: Brahmabandhab Upadhyay, the Indian Christian

Nationalist,” Third Millennium X:1 (2007), 13. 137

Felix Wilfred, Beyond Settled Foundations: The Journey of Indian Theology (Madras: University of

Madras), 24. 138

As quoted in Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 64. The quote is originally from

Sophia (Jan, 1896) 11; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 34. 139

Sophia, August (1898), 124; as quoted in Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 37.


vestments.”140

Brahmabandhab in 1894 gave up his European dress, “which he, like

most Christians at that time, had accepted almost as a part of their new faith,” and

dressed himself as a sannyasin in saffron robe. His dress code was opposed, and he

wasn‟t allowed to enter the Catholic Church unless he gave up his saffron garb. He

had to appeal to the local bishop recalling its usage by Robert de Nobili in the 17th

century, and get his permission. He lived in the same saffron garb of a sannyasin until

his death.141

He founded a Catholic Ashram on the banks of river Narmada, near

Jabalpur, whose members lived an austere life of a sannyasin. Upadhyaya envisioned

his Catholic Ashram to be a kind of “Pilot Seminary” for the formation of Indian

Christian Sannyasins.142

Wilfred sums up Upadhyaya‟s vision of an Indian Christian

thus: “To be a Christian is to continue to be a Hindu in everything as one has been in

India for so many centuries and generations, and to believe in Christ from this Hindu

location in which we have been placed by birth.”143

Max Muller suggested that Upadhyaya‟s overt Christian posture is merely the

logical extension of the late nineteenth century Brahmo Samaj‟s position, especially

as advocated by Keshb Chunder Sen and P. C. Mozoomdar.144

It is opined that

Upadhyaya can be regarded as “the Father of Indian Christian theology as well as

Indian dialogical theology,” because of “his explanation of the Trinity as

Saccidananda and the doctrine of Creation as Maya.”145

In his vision of the Trinity as

Saccidananda, God the Father is the Sat (Being), the Son is the Cit (Consciousness),

and the Spirit is Ananda (Plenitude). Rabindranath Tagore described Upadhyaya as “a

140 As quoted in B. Animananda, The Blade: Life and Work of Brahmabandhab Upadhyaya (Calcutta:

Roy and Sons, 1947) 78. 141

Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, 29. However, in the court after his arrest in 1907 he

appeared in plain Bengali clothes and not his saffron garb. Cf. Boyd, An Introduction to Indian

Christian Theology, 67. 142

But his efforts were hampered by the Apostolic Delegate of that time, Msgr. Zaleski who

established the Papal Seminary at Kandy (Sri Lanka) for formation of Indian clergy. Zaleski even

ordered the closure of Upadhyaya‟s journal Sophia. Cf. Wilfred, Beyond Settled Foundations, 29. 143

Felix Wilfred, Beyond Settled Foundations, 26-27. 144

Cf. Thomas, The Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance, 100. 145

Aleaz, “A Prophet to be Reclaimed: Brahmabandhab Upadhyay,” 14. However, M. M. Thomas

feels that Updhyaya must have got the vision of Trinity as Saccidananda from Keshub Chunder

Sen. Hahadev Govind Ranade (1842-1906), another Hindu reformer who was attracted to Christ,

also used such terminology “Sat-Chit-Ananda” to refer to Trinity. Cf. Thomas, The Acknowledged

Christ of the Indian Renaissance, 105. So, we can conclude that though Uphadyaya was not the first

to formulate the vision of Trinity as Saccidananda, such vision gained a full theological formulation

in his writings as is evident in Upadhyaya‟s famous Sanskrit hymn to the Trinity, “Vande

Saccidananda.” The hymn is found in C. F. Andrews, The Renaissance in India: Its Missionary

Aspect (London: Church Missionary Society, 1912), Appendix VIII, 289.


Roman Catholic ascetic, yet Vedantin-spirited, fearless, self-denying, learned and

uncommonly influential.”146

2.2.6. Some Observations

The movements towards foundation of National Churches seem to be

propelled by mainly two situations: the denominational divisions among Indian

Christians, and the foreignness of the Indian Church. Therefore, the main stated

purposes of these movements are: firstly, to bring all Indian Christians under one

Church beyond denominations; and secondly, the indigenization of Christianity in

India. Despite the little success these movements had in evolving into major churches

in India, they have initiated the process of “Becoming Indian.” Some contextual

factors that facilitated the birth and growth of these movements are: the discrimination

of the native church leaders by the foreign leaders of Indian churches, the Indian

National Movement of the times for an independent India, and the Hindu reform

movements such as Brahmo Samaj.

One of the significant contributions of these National Church movements was

the creation and strengthening of a “positive attitude” towards Hinduism and other

Indian religions. The non-Christian religious and philosophical resources of India

were seen as fields of theology, as creative and subtle tools for understanding

Christianity in India. The very existential context of the leaders of these movements

has nurtured such positive attitudes towards Indian religions. Most of them came from

conservative Hindu families and grew up as devout Hindus, and their conversion to

Christianity was both unapproved by their families and detested by them; many of

them were disowned by their families when they converted and they were considered

anti-Hindu and anti-Indian. So, these elite educated converts felt the need to bridge

the gap between “Being Hindu Indians” and “Being Indian Christians.” They also

found the life of the church in India strangely alienating. While some chose to revert,

others chose to cut themselves off fully from Hindu roots and integrate fully into the

new. However, some of these chose to seek to express their new-found faith according

to their native religiosity and traditions. As Copley rightly observes, some of these

Bengali converts to Christianity, alienated by their community and not fully accepted

146 Rabindhranath Tagore, Car Adhyay (Santiniketan: Bisvabharati Granthalay, 1934), cited in Julius J.

Lipner & George Gispert-Sauch, The Writings of Brahmabandhab Upadhyay, vol. I

(Bangalore/New Delhi: UTC/Oxford University Press, 1991), xv.


by the Europeans, tried “to discover a new Indian Christian identity.”147

Similarly,

Judith Brown, Professor of South Asian history at the University of Oxford, suggests

that these converts “did not leave behind their cultural inheritance but often used the

cultural and devotional resources of their earlier traditions in the expressions of their

new faith” and contributed to an evolution of “new Indian modes of Christian worship

and theological emphasis and understanding.”148

They believed that all that is Hindu,

all their past, need not fully be erased by becoming Christians, and that it can actually

help them understand and express their new faith in the local context. V. Chakkarai,

for example, asserts that “Christianity cannot, and nay, Christ himself does not profess

to erase with a magic sponge all this past.”149

Even if their efforts were theologically

very seminal, fragmentary and not very “systematic,” they laid the foundations for an

indigenous theology which seeks to express Christian faith in Indian idiom and

concepts. The value of their efforts should not be underestimated just because a

systematic treatise has not been produced. What M. M. Thomas says about such an

evaluation may be very helpful here:

The criticism one hears so often, that Indian Christians have not yet produced any

theology, only means that they have not produced summae or Church Dogmatics.

But living theology, which arises as tools for confessing the faith and fulfilling the

mission in specific situations, is often fragmentary and partial in character. It is the

raw material for systematic theology. It is foolish to underrate it simply because it

has not resulted in systems.150

These pioneers helped the growth of a gradual appreciation of the non-

Christian Indian religions and nurtured a positive attitude towards them. Commenting

on many of the Christian apologetics of these times, M. M. Thomas observed: “in

fact, it is in Christian apologetics in the context of Hinduism that the crucial issues of

an indigenous Christian theology have become clarified and its fundamentals

formulated.”151

147 Antony Copley, Religions in Conflict: Ideology, Cultural Contacts and Conversions in Late

Colonial India (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1997), 216. 148

Judith M. Brown, “Introduction,” in Judith M. Brown and Robert Eric Frykenberg, eds., Christians,

Cultural Interactions, and India‟s Religious Traditions (Grand Rapids, Michigan: W. B. Eerdmans,

2002), 4. 149

Vengal Chakkarai, The Cross and Indian Thought (Madras: CLS, 1932), 6; as quoted in Boyd, An

Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, 184. 150

M. M. Thomas, “Foreword,” in Boyd, And Introduction to Indian Christian Theology, vi. Cf. Israel

Selvanayagam, “Waters of Life and Indian Cups: Protestant Attempts at Theologizing in India,” in

Sebastian C. H. Kim, ed., Christian Theology in Asia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

2008), 41-70. 151

M. M. Thomas, “Towards an Indigenous Christian Theology,” in Gerald H. Anderson, ed., Asian

Voices in Christian Theology (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1976), 14.


Our study manifests Bengal and Tamilnadu to be the hotbeds of indigenisation

of the church in India in the 19th

century. As is evident from our survey of the

indigenous church movements, most of these movements were born in either

Tamilnadu or Bengal. While the robust growth of Christian missions in the Madras

Presidency which emerged as one of the most important centres of Protestant missions

in India,152

the reformation of Hinduism by the vibrant Brahmo Samaj in Bengal made

it another significant centre for indigenous theology. “Bengal has produced a number

of brilliant advocates of Christianity in an Indian mode.” 153

Surprisingly, nothing

noteworthy has been contributed to the growth of indigenous theology in India, by the

oldest Christian communities of Kerala, until the 20th

century. Syrian churches in

Kerala have not created a “space” for the growth of creative and native theology;

there seems to be a kind of resistance to creative theological vitality. There is no

doubt that there are few prominent theologians from Kerala in the 20th

century such as

Sebastian Kappen, M. M. Thomas, Samuel Rayan and J. B. Chethimattam, but their

theological visions, except for Kappen, have blossomed while they lived and worked

outside Kerala, in some theological institutes in Bangalore and Delhi, or elsewhere.

Mysteriously enough, even today, when one thinks of Indian theologians, the

immediate names that come to mind are not the names of some theologian from

Kerala, but the names of Felix Wilfred and Michael Amaladoss who are both from

Tamilnadu. 154

These indigenous church movements, as small and unsuccessful as they are,

do provide some pioneering insights into features and elements of “becoming an

Indian church.” Even if these insights are fragmentary and not very systematic, they

are the earliest steps in the process of “becoming Indian” and serve as guidelines and

directions for later growth in this process. Some of the ways in which these

movements tried to “become Indian” were: the integration of many cultural and ritual

elements from the Indian religions, the presentation of Christian truths through the

philosophical and religious concepts of Indian religions, the creation of non-alienating

152 Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres,” 12. He also indicates that there was in the

last two decades of the 19th

century, there was a growth of more than 300 percent in Madras

Presidency. Cf. J. P. Jones, South Indian Protestant Missions 1800-1900 (Madurai: Madura Mission

Press, 1900), 60; as quoted by Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres,” 3. 153

Roger E. Hedlund, “Previews of Christian Indigeneity in India,” Journal of Asian Mission 3/2

(2001), 229. 154

It is very surprising given the fact that all the Catholic Universities around the world have been

flooded by the priests and nuns from Kerala for the last few decades, and the Kerala Church as such

has an abundant number of priests and nuns with doctoral degrees in philosophy and theology.


liturgies and worship, the creation of alternative structures, efforts to overcome

denominational differences, joint efforts of the nationalist movement, native

leaderships, etc. Though there is a need for a more extensive study on these features

that marked their efforts in making the church Indian, we can indicate here that many

of these features emerge with greater force in the later developments in the Indian

church. Deeper theological reflections and research into the Indian religious and

philosophical systems and their use and integration into the Christian life in India is

manifest in the Christian Ashram Movement, and a more robust and theologically-

driven integration of Indian non-Christian rituals and creation of alternative forms of

worship and liturgies is apparent in the Liturgical Inculturation Movement which was

pioneered by Amalorpavadass. Efforts to overcome the denominational differences

also become strengthened and fructified in the formation of new churches in India:

Church of South India (1947)155

and Church of North India (1970)156

where many

denominational churches became unified into one church.

2.2.7. A Critique of the National/Indigenous Church Movements

While the pioneering indigenisation movement has many lessons to offer for

the process of inculturation in India, it is nevertheless blamed for “brahminising”

Indian Christianity. The movement for the creation or promotion of indigenous

churches or national churches was dominated by elite Indian Christians mostly high-

caste Brahmin converts. During these times there was a domination of the “educated

upper caste converts” in the Protestant Christian community.157

We can detect that the

theological reflections of these pioneers were seldom happy with anything other than

Brahminical Hinduism. As Caplan suggests, these thinkers were resolutely focussed

on the appraisal of the moral and ethical values in the Hindu epic literature, and

155 The Church of South India (CSI) was formed as a united church in 1947, and is currently the largest

Protestant Church in India. It has 22 dioceses with 14,000 local congregations and 3.8 million

members worldwide. While it has one diocese in Sri Lanka, it also has congregations in USA, UK,

Australia, Canada, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and UAE. It united the churches of South India United

Church (a union already of Presbyterian and Reformed), the southern provinces of the Church of

India, Pakistan, Burma and Ceylon (Anglican) and the Methodist Church of South India. In 1990

some other Baptist and Pentecostal churches also joined this church. 156

The Church of North India (CNI) was established as a united church in 1970, bringing together the

main Protestant churches working in north India: the Church of India, Pakistan, Burma and Ceylon

(Anglican), the United Church of North India (Presbyterian), the Baptist Churches of North India

(Baptists), the Churches of the Brethren in India, the Methodist Church, and the Disciples of Christ.

The jurisdiction of CNI covers all states of India except the four states of South India. It has

approximately 1,250,000 members in 3000 pastorates. 157

Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres,” 12.


turned their face against the popular religion of Hindus.158

Moreover, these pioneering

efforts of indigenisation also attempted to “baptize” Indian Christianity with Hindu

caste-theories under the disguised mantle of indigenisation. As Kumaradoss suggests,

these elite Christian leaders clung “tenaciously to Hindu customs” in order to

demarcate themselves from the lower caste converts.159

The indigenous movement to create and foster an Indian church compromises

the caste-system proposed by the Hindu tradition and, as such, the discrimination and

oppression of the millions of Indians belonging to low-castes and the Christian

converts from these castes. While they made efforts to delineate Christianity in India

from the Western cultural clothing, they have blasphemously diluted the Christian

message by integrating the caste-system into the Christian church in India. They have

failed to demarcate the evils inherent within Hinduism and follow a critical adaptation

of the elements of the Hindu religion which comply with the message of the Gospel.

The Christology proposed by these pioneers also seems to point to such

“brahminisation” of Christianity and the Church by them. As Sathianathan Clarke

points out, these Bengali Brahmin converts “severely downplay the human Jesus even

as they inordinately accent Divine Jesus” who is “grossly decontextualized and

dehistoricised.” Citing their reluctance to reflect on the praxis of Jesus and a kind of

refusal to recognize the socioeconomic locatedness of Jesus, Clarke rightly suspects

that these Bengali converts were “attempting to pass off Jesus as a pure-caste who

was the ideal of their Brahmin seers and sages.”160

Clarke feels that both Upadhyaya

as well as Benerjea were bent on some sort of a revocation of the Hindu caste-

hierarchy (varnashramic ideal) within Indian Christianity.161

Not only has there been no voice of a non-elite Christian in these efforts, but

the cultures, and religions of the poor and the subalterns have been totally ignored. As

a result, the pioneering efforts of indigenisation remain irrelevant to most Indian

Christians who come from the lower castes of India. A critical appraisal of alternative

158 Cf. Lionel Caplan, Class and Culture in Urban India – Fundamentalism in a Christian Community

(New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1988), chapter 7. 159

Kumaradoss, “Creation of Alternative Public Spheres,” 13. 160

Sathianathan Clarke, “The Jesus of Nineteenth Century Indian Christian Theology: An Indian

Inculturation with Continuing Problems and Prospects,” Studies in World Christianity 5:1 (1999),

39. 161

Clarke, “The Jesus of Nineteenth Century,” 41-43. Clarke cites for this the opinion of Lipner and

Sauch on Upadhyaya. See Julius Lipner and Gispert Sauch, The Writings of Brahmabandhab

Upadhyaya, vol.1 (Bangalore; UTC/Oxford University Press, 1991), xiii.


religious traditions of India within Hinduism that defy the caste-hierarchy and propose

the equality of all, and other non-Hindu religious traditions, would have directed the

process of indigenisation in a different path, more relevant, more prophetic and more

Christian.

3. INCULTURATION AS A PROCESS OF BECOMING LOCAL

In the previous section we have examined some of the earliest efforts in the

creation of indigenous churches in India. These movements grappled with the same

question: How to make the Church Indian? They have made significant and

commendable efforts to make the church Indian. We have to note, however, that most

of these efforts have come from non-Catholics. Even if there were no significant

efforts during this period from the Catholics in the process of indigenisation, most of

their efforts come under the blanket of the process of inculturation, especially after the

Second Vatican Council. We want to investigate these inculturation efforts of the

Catholic Church in India in making the Church Indian. However, because these

efforts are placed within the broader framework of inculturation, we need to make a

brief survey of the project of inculturation in general. Thus, we shall examine first the

origin and growth of the concept of inculturation and, subsequently, the process of

inculturation as it unfurled particularly in the Indian Church.

3.1. INCULTURATION: ORIGIN AND GROWTH OF THE CONCEPT

Inculturation, the concern and the process for making the Gospel meaningful

and challenging within a specific cultural context, has always been part of the

Church‟s life and mission. 162

Throughout the centuries of her existence, the Church

162 The origin of the term “inculturation” is traced earlier to a 1962 article “L‟Eglise ouverte sur le

monde. Aux dimensions du Concile,” Nouvelle Revue Théologique 84 (1962) 1032-1043, attributed

to Joseph Masson, S.J., a Louvain Jesuit missiologist who talked of un catholicisme enculturé

(p.1038). Cf. Waliggo, J.M. et al., Inculturation: Its Meaning and Urgency (Kampala: St. Paul‟s-

Africa, 1986) 32. Of late, scholars identify its origin with a 1959 article Mission et cultures non-

chrétiennes, in which inculturation appeared in the context of “l‟initiation valuer permanente en vue

de l‟inculturation” This term was present during the discussions in the 29th

“Semaine de

missiologie” of Louvain, in 1959, which dealt with the problem of “Mission et cultures non-

chrétiennes”. One of the participants reflected on the “Actualité du problème de l‟inculturation” and

on the “Lacunes et problèmes de l‟inculturation dans le context traditionnel et moderne”. See

Missions et cultures non-chrétiennes, Rapports et compte-rendu de la semaine de Missiologie,

Louvain, 1959 (Louvain: Désolée de Brouwer, 1960), 5, 50, 219-223, 235, 311, 315. Cf.

Dhavamony, Christian Theology of Inculturation, Documenta Missionalia-24 (Roma: Editrice

Pontificia Universita Gregoriana, 1997), 89. FABC (Federation of Asian Bishops‟ Conferences)

speaks of “inculturation” in its Final Statement of the First Plenary Assembly (Taipei, 22-27 April,

1974): “a church indigenous and inculturated”. His Gospel to Our Peoples, Vol. II (Manila:

Cardinal Bea Institute, 1976) 332. Fr. Pedro Aruppe SJ used the term “inculturation” for the first


has been challenged time and again to put into practice the principle of cultural

catholicity after its recognition at the Council of Jerusalem;163

to transcend her present

historical form and her culture-bound self by going beyond the national, cultural and

ethnic boundaries. Repeatedly, it has responded courageously to such challenges.

Church history is replete with such examples. Saints Boniface, Cyril and

Methodius,164

and Augustine of Canterbury are outstanding figures in mission history

in this sphere. The advice of Gregory the Great to Abbot Melitus of Sardes, a fellow

missionary of St. Augustine of Canterbury, concerning pagan temples and sacrifices

remains a classic document of the Church‟s continuing struggle for cultural

rootedness.165

Nearer to our times, during the 16th

and 17th

centuries, we can point to Matteo

Ricci‟s attitude toward the Chinese ancestor cult and Confucianism,166

and Robert de

Nobili‟s involvement in Hindu thought as other instances.167

Right from its very

beginning, the Congregation for the Propagation of Faith168

stood for inculturation,

strongly admonishing missionaries not to interfere with traditional ways and customs,

unless they clearly conflict with Christian faith and morals. In 1959 this was

time in an official ecclesiastical proceeding of the Vatican, during the 1977 Synod of Bishops. The

term “inculturation” appeared for the first time in a papal document in a statement John Paul II

made to the Pontifical Biblical Commission in 1979. Cf. AAS 71 (1979), 607. 163

Cf. Shorter, Towards A Theology of Inculturation, 128-130. Shorter refutes the claims of some

authors that inculturation began with the Church of Jerusalem. On the contrary, Shorter argues, the

Aramaic-speaking Judeo-Christian Church of Jerusalem was actually an obstacle to inculturation. 164

Shorter, Towards A Theology of Inculturation, 143-145. Shorter says that the example of Sts. Cyril

and Methodius demonstrates that, even in the high times of the Church‟s monoculturalism,

concessions were made to non-Latin cultures. 165

PL 77:1215 ff. See R. McCulloch, “Gregorian Adaptation in the Augustinian Mission to England,”

Missiology 6:3 (1978), 323-334. Cf. Schineller, A Handbook on Inculturation, 31-32. 166

Cf. Stephen B. Bevans and Roger P. Schroeder, Constants in Context: A Theology of Mission for

Today (Bangalore: Claretian, 2005), 187-189. 167

Peter Phan also points to another Jesuit who is often dwarfed by his confreres Francis Xavier,

Matteo Ricci, and Roberto di Nobili in the Jesuit epoch of Asian mission history of the sixteenth

and seventeenth centuries: Alexandre de Rhodes, S.J. (1593-1660). Rhodes, a French Jesuit

missionary, is one of the greatest missionaries of Vietnam and built the first mission church in

Vietnam in 1627. He is also the author of the first theological work in Vietnamese, and published

the first Portuguese-Latin-Vietnamese dictionary. See Peter C. Phan, Mission and Catechesis:

Alexandre de Rhodes and Inculturation in Seventeenth-Century Vietnam (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1998). 168

Pope Urban VIII founded this Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide in 1622. Shorter notes that

bringing missionary activity of the church under this ecclesial unit from the padroado system of the

colonial powers such as Spain and Portugal, while making evangelisation peaceful, paved the way

for respect of people‟s cultures in mission lands. Cf. Shorter, Towards A Theology of Inculturation,

155.


emphasized by the congregation in its instructions to missionaries in China and Indo-

China:

Do not attempt in any way, and do not on any pretext persuade these people to

change their rites, habits and customs, unless they are openly opposed to religion

and good morals. For what could be more absurd than to bring France, Spain, Italy

or any other European country to China? It is not your country but the faith you

must bring, that faith which does not reject or belittle the rites or customs of any

nation as long as these rites are not evil, but rather desires that they be preserved

in their integrity and fostered.169

The theological discussions on inculturation became the subject of many papal

and the other church documents following the Second Vatican Council.170

While we

cannot study all of them here, we shall examine a few of the most relevant to our

research.

3.1.1. Inculturation and Vatican II

Though the Second Vatican Council never used the term inculturation, one can

still find some scattered thoughts in its documents.171

The Council speaks more of

“incarnation of the Gosepl in local cultures.”172

Even if the Council does not explicitly

use the term “inculturation,” the theology of inculturation is surely present in the

conciliar teachings. Moreover, as Schineller rightly indicates, “the council itself was

an exercise in inculturation as the church tried to open its windows to the modern

world,” and by the visible representation of many different cultures and traditions at

the council proceedings.173

169 Joseph Neuner and Jacques Dupuis, eds., The Christian Faith in the Doctrinal Documents of the

Catholic Church (New York: Alba House, 1982), 309-310. The instruction is addressed to the

Vicars Apostolic, Bishop François Pallu of Tonkin and Lambert de la Motte of Cochinchina. 170

A few prominent ones are: Paul VI‟s Africae Terram (1967) and Evangelii Nuntiandi (1975); John

Paul II‟s Catechesi Tradendae (1979), Slavorum Apostoli (1985), Redemptoris Missio (1993), and

Fides et Ratio (1998); official church declarations such as the Latin Americam Episcopal

Conference‟s (CELAM) Final Documents at Medellín (1968), Puebla (1979), and Santo Domingo

(1992); the International Theological Commission‟s Faith and Inculturation (1988), the

Congregation for the Clergy‟s General Directory for Catechesis (1997), the post-synodal apostolic

exhortations following the special assemblies of the Synod of Bishops for Africa (1994), Asia

(1998), and Oceania (1999), and the numerous statements of the Federation of Asian Bishops‟

Conference (FABC). For a review of Papal Teachings on inculturation (adaptation) before Vatican

II, see Francis Anekwe Oborji, Concepts of Mission: The Evolution of Contemporary Missiology

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2006), 106-110. 171

Cf. Kurien Kunnupuram, “Inculturation in Vatican II,” Jeevadhara 6 (1976), 283-292. 172

Cf. Mariasusai Dhavamony, “The Christian Theology of Inculturation,” Studia Missionalia 44

(1995), 8. (1-43) 173

Schineller, A Handbook on Inculturation, 40.


Lumen Gentium‟s ecclesiology, particularly, the understanding of the Church

as a communion and the new conception of the catholicity of the Church (LG, 13)

forms the theological basis for the conciliar theology of inculturation. The Church is

conceived as a communion of churches, and in such a communion the local churches

retain their cultural diversities.174

Further, Orientalium Ecclesiarum appreciated the

diversity of the Eastern Catholic Church and noted that such diversity, rather than

harming, contributes to the unity of the Universal Church (OE, 2). Nostra Aetate too

affirmed the “true and holy” elements in other religions and cultures (NA, 2).

Sacrosanctum Concilium‟s call for the revision of liturgy according to the

local cultures and contexts of the local churches and the introduction of the vernacular

in the place of Latin for liturgies (SC, 37-40) breathed a new spirit of creativity into

the local churches.175

Sacrosanctum Concilium, inspite of a positive tone, dones not

move beyond a notion of “culture as costume” and Church‟s interaction with culture

as a mere cultural “adaptation” or a kind of “grafting” onto the normative Roman rite

some cultural customs (SC, 37). Both Ad Gentes and Gaudium et Spes base their

theology of inculturation on the “mystery of incarnation.”176

Ad Gentes says that the

Church “must implant itself among all these groups in the same way that Christ by

his incarnation committed himself to particular social and cultural circumstances of

the men among whom he lived” (AG, 10). Jesus made flesh in a human culture

becomes a paradigm for inculturation.177

Thus, Ad Gentes affirms:

Thus, in imitation of the plan of the incarnation, the young Churches, rooted in

Christ and built up on the foundation of the apostles, take to themselves in a

wonderful exchange all the riches of the nations which were given to Christ as an

inheritance (cf. Ps.2:8). From the customs and traditions of their people, from their

wisdom and their learning, from their arts and sciences, these Churches borrow all

those things which can contribute to the glory of their creator, the revelation of the

Saviour‟s grace, or the proper arrangement of Christian life.178

174 Cf. Lumen Gentium, 23.

175 Cf. Kunnupuram, “Inculturation in Vatican II,” 290-291.

176 Incarnation as a paradigm for inculturation is contested today. While “incarnation” helps in

understanding Christ as the subject of inculturation and states that by taking human flesh he was

inserted into the cultural dynamic of human history, it plays down the challenge which Christ

offered to his own culture. It can also suggest that the Gospel, like the pre-existence of Christ,

comes to the evangelized culture in a culturally disembodied form. Cf. Aylward Shorter,

Evangelization and Culture (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1994), 35. Also Michael Amaladoss

points out that incarnation as a model of inculturation may misleadingly suggest that the gospel is

somehow culture-free and needs only to be “incarnated” in each culture. See Amaladoss, Beyond

Inculturation, 14-17. 177

Schineller, A Handbook on Inculturation, 41. 178

Ad Gentes, 22.


Gaudium et Spes too, in tune with the incarnation theology, indicates the need

for the Church to enter into communion with local cultures: “Faithful to her own

tradition and at the same time conscious of her universal mission, she can enter into

communion with various cultural modes, to her own enrichment and theirs too” (GS,

58).179

There is a better understanding of culture (GS, 53).

3.1.2. Inculturation and the Synod of Bishops (1974)

The Synod of Bishops in 1974 was crucial for the development of the concept

of inculturation.180

Until the Synod, including Vatican II, we find only the inadequate

notion of adaptation in the official church documents. Some delegates of the Synod

rejected the theology of adaptation as out-of-date and called for a theology of

incarnation of the gospel into local cultures.181

Shorter opines that the development of

the theology of inculturation at the Synod had greatly influenced the positive attitude

of Evangelii Nuntiandi towards inculturation.182

3.1.3. Inculturation and Evangelii Nuntiandi

Evangelii Nuntiandi made a notable advance in the theology of inculturation

and paved the way for the many significant theological reflections on the subject in

the late 1970s. 183

Pope Paul VI even if he wavered towards “adaptation,” when he

affirms that evangelisation involves adaptation of the Gospel to different situations

(EN, 29), he however affirms “inculturation” when he says that evangelisation is not

“adding some decoration or applying a coat of colour, but in depth, going to the very

centre and roots of life” (EN, 20).184

While inculturation is spoken about as “transposition” (EN, 63), it also points

to the more dynamic understanding of inculturation as “transformation.” “For the

Church, evangelising means bringing the Good News to all the strata of humanity and

through its influence, transforming humanity from within and making it new” (EN,

179 See also nos. 44 and 53-62 where the document speaks extensively on culture and religion.

180 Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 6. For a list of the most important themes discussed in the Synod,

see “Topics Specially Discussed in the Synod,” Teaching All Nations 12:1 & 2 (1975) 9-14. 181

Cf. Oborji, Concepts of Mission, 110. 182

Shorter, Towards a Theology of Inculturation, 214. 183

The document does not use the term “inculturation,” but from the many insights it draws on the

topic, we can infer that it is intended. For a discussion on Evangelii Nuntiandi in the context of

inculturation, see Shorter, Towards A Theology of Inculturation, 215-219. 184

Cf. Phan, In Our Own Tongues, 27.


18).185

Transformation is a way of inspiring and challenging social realities;

transposition is transplanting the same content in different forms. While

transformation is dynamic and unique to each local context, transposition is

universalising, applying general principles to particular situations.

3.1.4. Inculturation and John Paul II

John Paul II was the first Pope to use the term “inculturation” in a papal

statement to the Pontifical Biblical Commission: “The term acculturation and

inculturation may be a neologism, but it expresses very well one factor of the great

mystery of the incarnation.” 186

Here the Pope drew attention to the important link

between incarnation and the need to express the Gospel in terms which have meaning

in the particular culture being addressed. He quotes the same text in his post-synodal

exhortation Catechesi Tradendae (no.53), in which John Paul II advances from an

understanding of inculturation as mere adaptation to actual “taking flesh” in cultures

and milieu.187

Catechesi Tradendae being a document that followed Bishops‟ Synod

in Rome in 1977 on the theme of catechesis, John Paul II deals with the theme of

inculturation (or “incarnation” often used as synonym) within the context of

catechesis.188

He encouraged the use of different methods for catechesis (CT 51) and

the wise and critical use of elements of cultural heritage of people (CT 53). He

suggests that good “catechesis must incarnate itself in different cultures and milieus”

and that the gospel does not change in its interaction with cultures but reforms and

renews the cultures (CT 53).

In his Encyclical Redemptoris Missio, John Paul II holds inculturation as an

integral and constitutive dimension of the mission of the Church and that it is

particularly urgent today (RM, 52). Here the Pope endorses inculturation as the

“normal and expected method of missionary activity.”189

Inculturation should involve

the whole people of God and not just a few experts (RM, 54). “Compatibility with the

185 The Italics are ours. See also Evangelii Nuntiandi, 19 and 20 for the development of the idea of

“transformation.” 186

Cf. AAS 71 (1979), 607. 187

Cf. Shorter, Towards A Theology of Inculturation, 225. 188

In fact, during the 1977 Bishops‟ Synod the proposition on inculturation (incarnating gospel in

cultures) received the largest number of placet votes and not a single vote against. Cf. Brian

Hearne, “Synod 1977: Catechesis and the Whole Community,” The Furrow 28:12 (1977), 732.

(728-738) 189

James A. Scherer and Stephen B. Bevans, “Introduction: Faith and Culture in Perspective,” in New

Directions in Mission and Evangelization-3: Faith and Culture, eds., James A. Scherer and Stephen

B. Bevans (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1999), 6.


Gospel and communion with the universal Church” are the two principles by which

inculturation should be guided (RM, 54).190

John Paul II‟s theology of inculturation is expressed more extensively during

his many visits to the so called global South.191

Speaking to the bishops of Zaire in his

visit to Africa in 1980, John Paul II called inculturation “the fruit of gradual maturity

in faith.”192

He called inculturation of the gospel “Africanization of the Church,” as

“Christ, the members of his Body, is himself African.”193

Addressing the bishops in

Nigeria in 1982, he affirmed that the Church upholds and uplifts all that is “good and

beautiful” in Africa.194

In Brazil, he insisted that the task of evagelisation is “to

perfect the basic elements of native culture, without distorting it or falsifying it.”195

In

the Philippines, the Pope said: “the Church must sink her roots deeply into the

spiritual and cultural soil of the country, assimilate all genuine values, enriching them

also with the insights that she has received from Jesus Christ.”196

In his assessment of John Paul II‟s theology of inculturation, however, Shorter

concludes that the Pope, in his extreme exaltation of the Christian culture, sees the

non-Christian cultures as potentially hostile to the gospel, and as such, shares in the

scepticism of Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) with regard to the Third

World cultures.197

Even if John Paul II indicates many times the dangers of

inculturation,198

we can still, from the above selective quotes from his speeches, say

that the Pope vigorously affirmed the value of the local cultures and called for their

assimilation and transformation in the light of the gospel. As a follow-up, in

recognition of the need and promotion of inculturation, John Paul II established in

1982 the Pontifical Council for Culture which functioned to promote dialogue

190 This insight is also found in Familiaris Consortio, 10.

191 Cormac Burke makes a good exposition of this in his article “Inculturation: John Paul II and the

Third World,” East Asian Pastoral Review 32: 3&4 (1995), 276-290. 192

Cf. African Ecclesial Review 22:4 (1980), 224-225. 193

Cf. African Ecclesial Review 22:4 (1980), 198. 194

Burke, “Inculturation: John Paul II,” 281. 195

Address given on 1 July, 1980, as quoted in Burke, “Inculturation: John Paul II,” 282. 196

Address given on 21 Feb., 1981, as quoted in Burke, “Inculturation: John Paul II,” 279. 197

Shorter, Towards a Theology of Inculturation, 236-237. 198

For example of his cautions on inculturation: Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 24; Centesimus Annus, 39;

Evangelium Vitae, 12, 19, 21, 24, 26, 28, 50, 64, 87, 95, 100. We could also say that despite his

repeated affirmations and calls for inculturation, Vatican policies during his papacy were deeply

suspicious of the evolving theologies of inculturation.


between cultures and gospel.199

It is on this occasion the pope states one of his

strongest statements on the necessity and relationship between faith and culture: “The

synthesis between culture and faith is not just a demand of culture, but also of faith.

… A faith which does not become culture is a faith which has not been fully received,

not thoroughly thought through, not faithfully lived out.”200

3.1.5. Inculturation and FABC

The word inculturation was first used by FABC in the Final Statement of the

Asian Bishops‟ Meeting in Taipei, Taiwan in 1974. Since then it has been frequently

used in the many FABC documents, and the notion of inculturation has changed and

evolved over the last three decades. Nemet identifies some theological foundations of

inculturation in the FABC documents.201

The most prominent among them is the

“theology of the local church,” while the Christological and pneumatological

foundations are significant. Along with the theology of the local church, the

Christological foundation that “Christ has a universal meaning for the whole of

creation and for all people” of Asia, and the pneumatological foundation that the Holy

Spirit is present in all peoples and cultures “calls each people and each culture to its

own fresh and creative response to the Gospel.”

For FABC, the “task of inculturation” would be to create an inculturated and

incarnate local church.202

A local church “is native, springing out of the local culture,

with a reverence for ancient customs and traditions, speaking the local language,

dressed in local clothing, expressing immortal truth in images which the common

people understand and love.”203

It is a community with local spirituality, local

199 L‟Osservatore Romano (28 June 1982), 1-8. In his letter to Cardinal Agostino Casaroli, directing

him to preside over the organisation, the Pope says: “I have considered the Church‟s dialogue with

the cultures of our time to be a vital area… I have decided to found and institute a Council for

Culture, capable of giving the whole Church a common impulse in the continuously renewed

encounter between the salvific message of the Gospel and the multiplicity of cultures, in the

diversity of cultures to which she must carry her fruits of grace.” 200

L‟Osservatore Romano (28 June 1982), 7. 201

Ladislav Nemet, SVD, “Inculturation in the FABC Documents,” East Asian Pastoral Review 31:

1&2 (1994), 77-94. 202

Cf. FABC I, nos. 9-11, in For All the Peoples of Asia: Federation of Asian Bishops‟ Conferences

Documents from 1970-1991, Rosales, G. and Arevalo, C. eds. (Quenzon City: Claretian, 1991), 14;

FABC Paper no. 60, “Theses on the Local Church,” The Theological Advisory Commission (TAC)

of FABC (Hong Kong: FABC, 1991), 18-37. 203

FABC I/B, no.9, in For All the Peoples of Asia, 22.


theology, local ministerial structures and organisations and local liturgical

expressions.204

For the Asian Bishops the “mode of inculturation” is dialogue205

with the

cultures, religions and the poor of Asia: “a church in humble dialogue with the living

traditions, the cultures, and the religions.”206

The dialogical encounter of the Gospel

and culture takes place in stages: learning of faith and cultural realities; assimilation

and perfection of faith and cultures in the light of the gospel; and the explicit

realisation of the community.207

The foundation of this dialogical mode of

inculturation is found in the inner-trinitarian dialogical life of the Father, the Son and

the Holy Spirit.208

Asian Bishops hold the Holy Spirit as the prime agent of

inculturation. FABC affirms that genuine inculturation takes place only under the

guidance of the Holy Spirit.209

3.1.6. Inculturation and Ecclesia in Asia

Ecclesia in Asia is the post-synodal apostolic exhortation of Pope John Paul II

culminating the end of the Asian Synod210

held in 1998. EA‟s approach to

inculturation211

is pedagogical-proclamatory, far from being hermeneutical and

204 FABC II, nos. 28-33, in For All the Peoples of Asia, 34-35; FABC IV, no. 4-5, in For All the

Peoples of Asia, 193; Bishops‟ Institute for Interreligious Affairs (BIRA) IV/12, nos. 36-37, in For

All the Peoples of Asia, 331; Asian Colloquium on Ministries in the Church (ACMC), Hong Kong,

5 March 1977, nos. 51-130, in For All the Peoples of Asia, 74-91. 205

Nemet calls dialogue the “modus operandi of the process of inculturation.” Nemet, “Inculturation in

the FABC Documents,” 90-91. 206

FABC I, no. 12, in For All the Peoples of Asia, 14. 207

FABC II, no. 27, in For All the Peoples of Asia, 30-31; Cf. also John Paul II, “Address to the

Indonesian Bishops on the occasion of Ad Limina,” in L‟Osservatore Romano (3-4 June, 1996), 4;

cf. also M. Dhavamony, Christian Theology of Inculturation, 29-31. 208

FABC Paper no. 48, “Theses on Inter-religious Dialogue: As Essay in Pastoral Theological

Reflection,” The Theological Advisory Committee (TAC) of FABC (Hong Kong: FABC, 1987),

thesis 3. 209

FABC II, no. 31, in For All the Peoples of Asia, 35; ACMC, no. 28, in For All the Peoples of Asia,

73. 210

The Special Assembly of the Synod of Bishops for Asia, popularly known as the “Asian Synod”

was held in Rome April 19 to May 14, 1998. There were 252 participants in the Synod (188 Synod

Fathers, 6 Fraternal Delegates, 18 Experts, 40 Auditors). The Lineamenta for the Asian Synod was

published on 3 September 1996 and the Instrumentum Laboris on 20 February 1998. Two good and

comprehensive works on Asian Synod are: Peter C. Phan, ed., The Asian Synod: Texts and

Commentaries (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2002); James H. Kroeger and Peter C. Phan, eds., The

Future of the Asian Churches: The Asian Synod and Ecclesia in Asia (Quenzon City: Claretian,

2002). 211

In all EA speaks eighteen times of „inculturation‟ or „inculturated theology‟ or „inculturated forms

of faith‟ or „inculturating faith‟; sixteen of them occur in chapter four, one in chapter five, and the

last in chapter six. So, we can conclude that chapter four is the most important for inculturation.


phenomenological.212

According to EA, inculturation can only take place when “the

complete truth of Jesus Christ” (23) is proclaimed, for “there can be no true

evangelization without the explicit proclamation of Jesus as Lord” (19). EA indicates

that Gospel is not identical to culture and that it is independent of it (19). EA appears

to understand the Church as an entity that is culturally free and therefore is able to

speak in a language that is culturally neutral. While the Gospel indeed cannot be

identified with any one culture, the Gospel we have is undeniably the product of a

historical process. Can we have a historically conditioned Gospel that is independent

of every culture? Hermeneutically speaking this would be impossible.

The focus of EA‟s way of looking at proclamation is on how to make the

Gospel intelligible to the Asian cultures. EA‟s understanding of inculturation then is

clearly pedagogical. We have the Good News! How can we make it intelligible to the

cultures of Asia? (19-21). “Through inculturation the Church, for her part, becomes a

more intelligible sign of what she is, and a more effective instrument of salvation”

(21). The approach of EA to culture is very superficial because it does not take the

cultures of Asia seriously. To take a culture seriously is to take into account that

Asian cultures have their own Good News and that therefore they cannot be mere

objects of evangelization but partners in evangelization.213

One can sense the wide gap between the concept of inculturation in FABC and

EA. While FABC‟s concept arises from the “westernised foreign image” of churches

in Asia, EA‟s concept seems to arise from “making Asia Christian” and so the stress

on “proclaiming Jesus as the only Saviour.” 214

We can conclude that EA‟s

interpretation of inculturation as translation and presentation (for example: nos. 20-

22) is a step backward from the post-conciliar advanced theology of inculturation,215

and its proclamational-inculturation is a total neglect of the theology of inculturation

of Asia.

212 The first mention of inculturation is found in no. 20 within a discussion of “pedagogy” and goes on

immediately to speak of “proclaiming Jesus as the only Saviour.” 213

In this sense, we can say the efforts of Matteo Ricci and Robert de Nobili were more pedagogical

than intercultural and interreligious dialogue. 214

Bishop Luis Antonio Tagle, one of the experts at the Asian Synod, indicates that the Vatican was

worried that the Asian theologians are “substituting dialogue for explicit proclamation of Jesus,”

and therefore the focus on proclamation can be seen as an attempt by Vatican to counter such

movement. Luis Antonio Tagle, “The Challenges of Mission in Asia: A View from the Asian

Synod,” in The Asian Synod: Texts and Commentaries, ed. Peter C. Phan (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

2002), 218. 215

Cf. John Manford Prior, SVD, “Unfinished Encounter: A Note on the Voice and Tone of Ecclesia

in Asia,” East Asian Pastoral Review 37:3 (2000), 264.


3.1.7. Other Prominent Documents

Some other Catholic documents would include the 1987 statement of the

International Theological Commission, “Faith and Inculturation,” and the 1991 joint

statement of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the Congregation

for the Evangelization of the Peoples, “Dialogue and Proclamation.”216

Dialogue and

Proclamation views the religious traditions of humanity positively, finds in them the

effects of God‟s grace and the Spirit. It stresses the role of the Church to perfect in

Christ the positive elements found in other religions. Dialogue is thus viewed as

culminating in the person and mission of Jesus Christ. Even though dialogue and

proclamation are interlinked, dialogue according the document is not the whole of

Church‟s mission and cannot replace proclamation.

There are also many non-Catholic documents that evolved a theology of

inculturation and contributed to the general discussion of faith and culture, some of

which we can mention here. In conciliar ecumenical circles, reflecting major

Protestant denominations and many Orthodox churches, intense engagement with the

gospel and culture relationships begin with the Bangkok CWME (Commission for

World Mission and Evangelism)217

Conference (1973) and continues through the

Salvador de Bahia CWME Conference (1996). The Bangkok Conference affirmed

that “Christ has to be responded to in a particular context.”218

The following WCC

Assembly at Nairobi in 1975 went beyond the Bangkok statement and affirmed that

cultural context can disclose something new and original about the confession of

Jesus in particular confessional contexts.219

The Melbourne CWME meeting in 1980

urged local churches to formulate their own responses to God‟s calling by creating

liturgies and forms of outreach and community rooted in their own cultures.220

The

next WCC Assembly at Vancouver in 1983 called for a deeper theological

216 The texts of the documents can be found in James A. Scherer and Stephen B. Bevans, New

Directions in Mission and Evangelization-I: Basic Statements, 1974-1991 (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1992), 177-200. 217

CWME was earlier known as “Division on World Mission and Evangelism” which was created by

the WCC in 1961 when International Missionary Conference (IMC) was merged with WCC. The

International Review of Mission (IRM) is published by CWME. Bevans indicates that the change of

the title of this magazine from “review of missions” to “review of mission,” illustrates the profound

trasition in mission. Bevans and Schroeder, Constants in Context, 260. 218

“Bangkok Report,” International Review of Mission (April, 1973), 188-90. 219

“The Official Report of the World Council of Churches, Nairobi, Nov-Dec. 1975,” in Breaking

Barriers: Nairobi 1975 (London: SPCK, 1976), 22-23. 220

“Report on the World Conference on Mission and Evangelism, Melbourne, Australia, May 1980,”

Your Kingdom Come: Mission Perspectives (Geneva: WCC, 1980), 182-183.


understanding of culture as part of a “new ecumenical agenda.”221

While the WCC

Canberra Assembly in 1991 kept this agenda alive,222

this new ecumenical agenda

became the starting point for the CWME Conference in Salvador in 1996, “Called to

One Hope: The Gospel in Diverse Cultures.” It affirmed that the “gospel to be most

fruitful needs to be both true to itself, and incarnate or rooted in the culture of a

people … the church must hold on to two realities: its distinctiveness from, and its

commitment to, the culture in which it is set … the gospel becomes neither captive to

a culture nor alienated from it, but each challenges and illuminates the other.”223

A positive view of culture can be seen in the Lausanne Covenant of the

Lausanne International Congress on World Evangelization in 1974.224

Later in 1978

the Lausanne Committee convened a special “Consultation on Gospel and Culture”

which declared: “the question of culture is vital. If the gospel must be contextualized,

so must the church.”225

The analytical studies published by Fuller Theological

Seminary in Pasadena, California, from the perspective of “contextual theology as

incarnational mission,” marked the ascendency of a biblically based understanding of

contextualization as the new norm for evangelical missions.226

From the second half of the twentieth century onwards there was a strong

movement of inculturation all over Asia and Africa. The political context of colonised

nations which attained freedom from colonial powers gave impetus to a spontaneous

return to their own cultures which were quite often discarded by the colonial empires.

But Vatican Council II, which was concluded in 1964, gave even greater impetus to

this movement through its decrees on Church, on mission, on non-Christian religions,

etc. In the light of these political and ecclesial aspirations the Churches of Asia and

Africa decided to come back to the formation of a Church deeply rooted in their own

ancestral traditions and values. However, in the beginning this movement was only

engaged in the adaptation of some external symbols and rituals into the Christian

prayer life. Later, as the movement gathered a momentum, it extended to other fields

221 David Gill, ed., “VI Assembly World Council of Churches, July-August 1983,” Gathered for Life

(Geneva: WCC, 1983). 222

“WCC Canberra Report,” Ecumenical Review (April, 1991), 32-33. 223

“Salvador, Brazil, Nov-Dec. 1996,” in Called to One Hope: The Gospel in Diverse Cultures

(Geneva: WCC, 1998), 21-22, 24. 224

See Lausanne Covenant, 10, in Scherer and Bevans, New Directions in Mission and

Evangelization-I, 257. 225

Scherer and Bevans, New Directions in Mission and Evangelization-I, 263. 226

Dean S. Gilliland, ed., The Word Among Us: Contextualizing Theology for Mission Today (Dallas:

Word Publishing, 1989).


of Christian life. In India, even if the movement was robust soon after Vatican II, as

the movement extended to inculturation in the light of the patterns of Indian thinking,

spirituality and mysticism, the Church became very hesitant. Inculturation in India is

considered more as a dream yet to be realized.

4. INCULTURATION IN INDIA: A RETROSPECT

Having made a brief survey of the origin and growth of the concept of

inculturation in the wider universal church, we are now ready to follow the journey of

inculturation in India. An exhaustive survey of the complete history of inculturation in

India is neither possible within the scope of this research, nor do we regard such

exhaustive study necessary for our research. We shall make a selective survey of the

history of inculturation in India. We shall first study the inculturation in the Syrian

Christians of Kerala, and then will investigate some pioneers of inculturation in India.

Subsequently, we shall examine inculturation in India under three main categories:

liturgical inculturation, ashramic inculturation and theological inculturation. Finally,

while pointing to the “elite and popular inculturations” as divergent trends in India,

we shall briefly present the dalit critique of inculturation in India which has been

strongly voiced since the 1980s.

4.1. SYRIAN CHURCHES IN KERALA AND INCULTURATION

The oldest Christian communities in India, the Syrian Christians of Kerala

trace their origin to the very dawn of the Christian era, and are older than most of the

Christian communities of Europe. While their efforts of inculturation cannot be

contested, not much can be said for sure as we do not have any documents of doctrinal

or theological nature relating to St. Thomas Christians prior to their contact with the

West in the sixteenth century.227

Things can only be inferred from their lifestyle,

customs and traditions and type of theology that might have shaped their thinking and

religious outlook.

Some Kerala theologians have tried to articulate the implicit theology of

Syrian Christians before the sixteenth century. A. Mundadan sums up this search into

three basic trends among the early community in India: a) their attitude towards

indigenous culture, a sort of “incarnational theology,” though not a systematized one;

227 Most of the original sources about St. Thomas Christians, both in Syriac and Malayalam, are

claimed to have been burnt by the Portuguese bishops and missionaries. Cf. Jacob Kollaparambil,

“The impact of the Synod of Diamper on the Ecclesial Identity of the St. Thomas Christians,” in G.

Nedungatt, ed., The Synod of Diamper Revisited (Rome: Oriental Institute, 2001), 60-91.


b) a special idea of the individual church in which an autonomous status was

preserved through the local assembly of lay leaders though governed by metropolitans

and archdeacons; and c) their attitude towards other religions – everyone can be saved

in his or her own religion – and all laws are right – which was condemned by the

Synod of Diamper.228

Anthony Mookenthottam, for example, comes to the conclusion

that “their identification with their socio-cultural milieu was so thorough. … This

oneness with their socio-cultural milieu implies an implicit incarnational theology

lived, awareness that Christ, in becoming man, assumed everything human and

redeemed all social and cultural values.”229

Another suggests that for the Syrian

Christians, Christianity was a “way of life” and as such “they lived a profound

theology, rather than created a theological system of categories.”230

However, such

twentieth-century theological reflection into the early Christian community in India,

needs to be carefully evaluated, as Paul Thenayan observes that “living in isolation

and in the midst of an overwhelming majority of Hindus and separated from other

Christian communities, the Thomas Christians were not aware of, or concerned with,

the theological disputes in the other parts of Christendom.”231

We can agree with

Tharamangalam that the “Syrian Christians, like their Hindu neighbours, were rarely

pre-occupied with theological questions while jealously developing their ritual

practices and caste-related rules, which enabled them to maintain their social status

and the delicate relationship with the ruling and other upper castes.”232

According to

some analysts, the situation is not much different even today: there are more concerns

over succession, authority and control over church resources, than over theological

issues.233

However, some features of inculturation among the Syrian Christians of

Kerala can be pointed out. It said that up to 1570 Christian churches were built after

228 A. M. Mundadan, “Emergence of Catholic Theological Consciousness in India,” in St. Thomas

Academy for Research Documentation (STAR), no. 7 (Bangalore: Dharmaram Publications, 1985),

2-10. 229

Anthony Mookenthottam, Indian Theological Tendencies (Berne: Peter Lang Verlag, 1978), 24. 230

Kucheria Pathil, Trends in Indian Theology (Bangalore: Asian Trading Corporation, 2005), 25. 231

Paul Thenayan, The Missionary Consciousness of the St. Thomas Christians (Cochin: Viani

Publications, 1982), 34. 232

Tharamangalam, “Whose Sawdeshi? Contending Nationalism among Indian Christians,” 237. 233

See S. Visvanathan, The Christians of Kerala: History, Belief and Ritual Among the Yakoba

(Chennai: Oxford University Press, 1993); Susan Bayly, Saints, Goddesses and Kings: Muslims and

Christians in South Indian Society, 1700-1900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989);

Rowena Robinson, Christians of India (New Delhi: Sage, 2003), 39-41. “Malankara Factional

Fights Take to Streets,” http://www.cathnewsindia.com/2010/09/28/malankara-church-fight-takes-

to-streets/ (access on 30 Sep 2010).

http://www.cathnewsindia.com/2010/09/28/malankara-church-fight-takes-to-streets/

http://www.cathnewsindia.com/2010/09/28/malankara-church-fight-takes-to-streets/


the fashion of the local Hindu temples. Royal umbrellas (muthukuda), musical

instruments, torches and so forth were used in both Christian and Hindu processions.

An imitation of the Hindu Prasad in the offerings of eatables, money, fowls, sweets

and so on made to the church and returned to the people; the Hindu marriage custom

of tying a thali (gold chain or yellow thread) around the neck of the bride by the

bridegroom; the administration of the temple properties by a yogam (assembly) are

some of the instances of inculturation in the life of St. Thomas Christians.234

The

Synod of Diamper in 1599 forbade a number of customs and practices the Portuguese

considered “pagan” (Hindu).235

Their socio-cultural environment was predominantly

Hindu, and it affected their lifestyle, their customs and traditions, but this influence

was only external. Their faith-life, form of liturgy and theology remained that of East-

Syrian Christians of Persia. And that led to the oft-quoted description of them as

“Hindu in culture, Christian in faith and Syrian in worship.”236

As Pathil suggests

inculturation by Syrian Christians was limited only to adopting social customs, while

little was done in the areas of liturgy, theology and spirituality.237

Perhaps as the

Latin-rite Christianity in India was under the “Latin captivity,” the Syrian-rite

churches of India too are a captive of “Syrian captivity,” which as Mundadan

suggests, was “detrimental to the development of the Indian Church” and prevented a

genuine inculturation.238

Syrian Churches have no doubt made efforts in inculturation. But the question

that needs to be raised is: How far is their inculturation “gospel-oriented”? While they

have integrated themselves well into the socio-cultural milieu of Kerala, have they not

compromised the values of the gospel in domesticating the caste system of India?

Syrian churches remain to this day very caste-conscious groups.239

They rejected

234 Joseph Thekkedath, History of Christianity in India, vol. 2 (Bangalore: TPI, 1982), 139-140. See

also Placid Podipara, “The Social and Socio-ecclesiastical Customs of the Syrian Christians of

India,” Eastern Churches Quarterly 7 (1947), 222-236; Alexander Cherukarakunnel, “Indianization

Among the St. Thomas Christians,” Jeevadhara 1 (1971), 361-373. 235

Some of these forbidden practices are introduced and integrated now in the post-Vatican II scenario,

as elements of inculturation. As Thekkedath suggests, the missionaries were inclined to see

superstition where there was none. Thekkedath, History of Christiany in India, 136. 236

Cf. Placid Podipara, “Hindu in Culture, Christian in Religion, Oriental in Worship” Ostkirchliche

Studien 8 (1959), 82-104. Podipara‟s description is criticized by J. Kottukapally as theologically

unsound, “as though faith could remain floating over a culture capped by a liturgy created in some

other cultures.” J. Kottukapally, “The Rite Controversy: Should the Stalemate Continue,” Indian

Missiological Review 9 (1987), 79. 237

Pathil, Trends in Indian Theology, 153. 238

Mundadan, “Emergence of Catholic Theological Consciousness in India,” 34. 239

Cf. Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 3.


admission of the low-castes into their Churches. They directed the low-castes to the

Portuguese for baptism, but, even after baptism the Syrian Christians would not admit

the low-caste converts into their churches or have relations with them.240

While all the

Syrian-rite Christians belong to the higher castes of Kerala, all the Latin-rite Catholics

belong to the low-castes of Kerala, mainly fishermen. As Dempsey indicates,

“significant divide continues to lie between Latin and Syrian Catholics in terms of

social and economic status as well as political clout.”241

We affirm that no church in

India that domesticates the caste-structures can be considered inculturated, for

inculturation is not simply about integrating local socio-cultural elements into

Christian life, but also Christ assuming and transforming the culture of the local

community, challenging and redeeming it of its evil structures. On such a measure of

inculturation, Syrian churches of Kerala are in no less need of inculturation, as are all

other churches of India.

4.2. SOME PIONEERS OF INCULTURATION IN INDIA

We shall examine some pioneers of inculturation in India. Our selective study

of the pioneers does not exhaust the field since there are many others who have made

numerous pioneering efforts in inculturation in India. While we will not be able to

survey all the pioneering efforts, we believe that our selective reading of some of

them will give us considerable comprehension of the process of inculturation in India.

Our examination includes one missionary pioneer who made the earliest attempts,

four gurus who were prominent in the Christian Ashram movement, and finally some

other Indian pioneers.

4.2.1. Robert de Nobili

Robert de Nobili can be considered one of the great missionary figures of the

seventeenth century, and his was one of the most innovative Jesuit experiments at

inculturation in India. He started his great experiment in inculturation by living as a

holy man in the southern city of Madurai in the early seventeenth century.242

He came

240 Thekkedeth, History of Christianity in India, 22.

241 Corinne G. Dempsey, Kerala Christian Sainthood. Collisions of Culture and Worldview in South

India (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 7. 242

See Vincent Cronin, A Pearl to India: The Life of Robert de Nobili (New York: Dutton, 1959); A.

Saulière, His Star in the East, revised and edited by S. Rajamanickam (Anand: Gujarat Sahitya

Prakash, 1995). See also, S. Arokiasamy, Dharma, Hindu and Christian According to Roberto de

Nobili (Rome: Gregorian University, 1986). Francis X. Clooney, “Christ as the Divine Guru in the

Theology of Robert de Nobili,” in One Faith, Many Cultures, ed. Ruy Costa (Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis, 1988), 25-40.


to India in 1605 and tried for 37 years to bring the Christian faith nearer to the high

caste Brahmins of Madurai, the citadel of South Indian Hinduism, through his

adaptation practices and his knowledge of the language and customs of the people.243

He lived the life of an Indian holy man, sannyasi, learned the classical languages of

Sanskrit and Tamil and tried to interpret their sacred texts.

Nobili was the first among the Western missionaries in India who chose to

enter into a dialogue with Indian religions and cultures and interpret Christianity

through Indian categories.244

In spite of his controversial attitudes to the institution of

the caste system and to other customs and traditions of the people, his experiment was

a unique one although not yet evaluated and appreciated adequately. 245

Quantitatively

his success was very moderate. But the whole concept which he evolved was original

and it caused him innumerable hardships and calumniations. He perceived clearly the

three basic principles of mission: 1) Adaptation of the life of the missionary to that of

the people; 2) appropriation of harmless customs and ceremonies for Christian use,

and 3) the study of the language and religion of the people. Most of the practices

which he adopted were harmless social customs without religious connotations such

as the kudumi (the tuft of hair), the punul (the sacred thread), the sandal paste on the

forehead, the usual ablutions, and the thali worn by married women, etc.; but at a time

when the attitude towards other religions was rigid and inimical, it was impossible to

evaluate these practices objectively.

Most of the problems were caused by the imprudence and intolerance of his

own co-workers in the mission and it was to end in the so-called “Malabar Rite

Controversy.” In spite of opposition, Pope Gregory XV approved of these practices in

243 Peter Duignan argues that de Nobili‟s choice to work with the elite Brahmins was in harmony with

Loyola‟s notion of obtaining power by influencing important people. Cf. Peter Duignan, “Early

Jesuit Missionaries: A Suggestion for Further Study,” American Anthropologist 60:4 (1958), 725-

732, at 726-727. 244

Pathil, Trends in Indian Theology, 27. For example, Francis Xavier, the first Jesuit to come to India

in 1542 failed to show respect for the Hindu religion. He did not realize the value of the principle of

partial truth which enabled his successors de Nobili and Beschi to show respect for the religions of

India. However, Xavier chose to bring the Gospel to the poor, while de Nobili chose to convert the

elite. For a comparative discussion see, James Broderick, Saint Francis Xavier (New York:

Doubleday Image Book, 1957), 90-96. 245

Cf. Paul M. Collins, “The Praxis of Inculturation for Mission: Roberto de Nobili‟s Example and

Legacy,” Ecclesiology 3:3 (2007), 323-342; Paul M. Collins, “Culture, Worship and Power: A Case

Study of South India,” in Gerard Mannion, ed., Church and Religious „Other‟ (London: T&T Clark,

2008), 59-61. Nobili‟s adaptation methods are sometimes viewed as shallow transposition of the

“externals” of Hindu traditions and his approach to caste unchristian. See further our critique on

Nobili‟s stance on caste in the “Caste Discrimination by Western Missionaries” section of our

second chapter.


1623 through his Bull Romanae Sedis. When the problem resurfaced in 1704 the

apostolic legate for the East, Charles Thomas de Tournon (1688-1710), who was

appointed by Pope Clement IX to clear up the matter, withdrew almost all the liberties

which Gregory XV had given to de Nobili in 1623 and condemned the rites, and this

was confirmed by the Holy Office in 1706. Pope Benedict XIV forbade these

altogether through his bull Omnium Sollicitudinum.

4.2.2. Swami Parama Arupi Ananda (Jules Monchanin)

Swami Parama Arupi Ananda246

(Jules Monchanin, 1895-1957) was a priest of

the diocese of Lyon in France, a man endowed with great intellectual gifts and a

respected Indologist. He came to India in 1939 convinced that only contemplative life

can root the church fully in India. Together with Henri Le Saux, he founded

Saccidananda Ashram at Shantivanam247

near Kulittalai on the banks of the Kaveri

river in Tamilnadu in 1950.248

Monchanin explored the mystery of the Trinity as Saccidananda for he

believed that in it the monism and pluralism, personal and impersonal, are

reconciled.249

He felt that India was specially destined by God to contemplate the

mystery of the Trinity.250

He proposes that Christian mysticism can only be

Trinitarian.251

The personal union that we seek in Christian mysticism must always

share in the tri-personal inner colloquy of Saccidananda.

Monchanin was guided by an intense theological vision of a world already being

“assumed, purified and transformed” by the Spirit of Christ. This seems to be the key

to his thought. He was not interested in making converts, nor was he concerned with

what we have become accustomed to call „dialogue.‟ He wanted to evangelize the

religious culture of India, to change it from within through the witness of personal

holiness. He was not, therefore, trying to „Christianize Hinduism‟ but to develop a

246 The name “Parama Arubi Anandam” means “Bliss of the Highest Formless One.”

247 “Shantivanam” comes from Sanskrit and means “grove of peace.”

248 Henri Le Saux gives a good account of his friend and companion Jules Monchanin in

Abhishiktananda, Swami Parama Arubi Aanandam (Father J. Monchanin) 1895-1957: A Memorial

(Tiruchirapalli: Trichinopoly United Printers, 1959). The fullest biography of Monchanin is that by

Françoise Jacquin, Jules Monchanin, prêtre (Paris: Cerf, 1996). A briefer biography in English is

that by Sten Rodhe, Jules Monchanin: pioneer in Christian-Hindu Dialogue (Delhi: ISPCK, 1993).

The most useful collection of his writings in English is that by Joseph Webber, In Quest of the

Absolute (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Studies, 1977). 249

Abhishiktananda, Swami Parama Arubi Anandam, 18. 250

Abhishiktananda, Swami Parama Arubi Anandam, 103. 251

Abhishiktananda, Swami Parama Arubi Anandam, 187.


more profound awareness of himself as Christian and to make present that personal

witness to Hindus. He led a contemplative life of prayer and study, sharing the

customs and culture of local people in the manner of an Indian ascetic.

4.2.3. Swami Abhishiktananda (Henri Le Saux)

Swami Abhishiktananda252

(Henri Le Saux, 1910-1973) was a French

Benedictine, who developed an interest in Indian religions and mysticism and,

through contact with Jules Monchanin, came to India in 1948, and founded with him

Saccidananda Ashram at Shantivanam. Between 1952 to 1958 he made several

retreats at Arunachala, a Hindu ashram, living as a hermit in a cave. Here he

encountered Guru Sri Ramana Maharshi, a Hindu hermit, who greatly influenced

him.253

In 1968 he left Shantivanam and went away into the Himalayas and lived in a

hermitage until he died in 1973.

Swami Abhishiktananda appropriated Hindu spirituality into the evolving of

an Indian Christian theology. 254

For him the encounter with Hindu spirituality should

lead to a rediscovery of ourselves in the „cave of the heart.‟255

His reflections

culminated in two new insights: the seed is already sown by the Holy Spirit in the

Indian soil in a hidden or unknown way and it is for us to unveil the hidden Christ and

make him known and, secondly, Indian soil is spiritually fertile.256

He sought to reconcile Christianity through experience and interpretation of

advaita.257

He believed that the mission of every Christian is to manifest the unknown

Christ who dwells in the abyss of the human heart, and that this could be achieved

through a monastic way of life. Abhishiktananda‟s experience emerged from his

252 The name “Abhishiktananda” means “Bliss of the Anointed One.”

253 He wrote about his experience at this Hindu ashram in his book, Abhishiktananda, The Secret of

Arunachala (Delhi: ISPCK, 1979). 254

Cf. Abbé Jules Monchanin and Dom Henri Le Saux, A Benedictine Ashram (Douglas: Times Press,

1964). 255

Abhishiktananda, Hindu-Christian Meeting Point (Delhi: ISPCK, 1969), 31. 256

For good account of Henri Le Saux, see James Stuart, ed., Swami Abhishiktananda: His Life Told

Through His Letters (ISPCK: Delhi, 1995). 257

His book Sagesse hindoue, mystique chrétienne (published originally in 1965 is republished with a

foreword by Jacques Dupuis in 1991 by Bayard-Centurion) contains an extensive thesis on Hindu-

Christian mysticism in the context of advaita. It should be noted that Abhishiktananda is influenced

by the Advaita Vedanta of Sankara. Cf. Collins, The Quest for Indian-ness, 133. Collins points out

that Abhishiktananda as well as Sara Grant focus on Sankara‟s unqualified advaita. For an

understanding of their exposition of advaita, see Abhishiktananda, Saccidananda: A Christian

Approach to Advaitic Experience (Delhi: ISPCK, 1974), and Sara Grant, Towards An Alternative

Theology (Bangalore: ATC, 1991). See also Judson B. Trapnell, “Two Models of Christian

Dialogue with Hinduism (I),” Vidyajyoti 60 (1996), 10.


plunging into the advaitic experience. The advaitic experience, in his very words, is a

“profound preparation to the Christian realization of union with the triune God; it is to

discover the reciprocity and communion of love.”258

4.2.4. Francis Acharya (Francis Mahieu)

Francis Acharya259

(Francis Mahieu, 1912-2002), a Belgian Cistercian monk

arrived in India in 1955 and spent a year at Shantivanam. Later in 1958, he founded

with Bede Griffiths Kurisumala Ashram in Kerala. He attempted a harmonious

synthesis of the Cistercian spirituality, the Christian monasticism and the Hindu

monasticism which he had already seen being inculturated in the lives of Monchanin

and Le Saux. This synthesis was to be expressed in the very structure of the

community life that he developed at Kurisumala.

Francis Achrya appreciated very much the Syro-Malankara tradition and

adapted many of its rituals and symbols and customs into the community life of the

Ashram.260

The initiation rites of Toulbasho d‟Dairoye (clothing rite of the monks of

Syro-Malankara tradition) is one such adaptation to the initiation rites of the monks in

the ashram. For a long time, the ashram also celebrated the Syro-Malankara Eucharist

called the Qurbana.261

The Liturgy of the Hours is again taken from the Malankara

monastic tradition. Francis Acharya spent a great part of his life composing the entire

office based on the Syrian monastic prayer books, which he called “Prayer with the

Harp of the Spirit, the Prayer of Asian Churches.”262

258 Abhishiktananda, Hindu-Christian Meeting Point, 92.

259 He took this name in 1968 when he received Indian citizenship. For biographical information of

Francis Acharya, see Marthe Mahieu-De Praetere, Kurisumala – Francis Acharya. Un pionnier du

monachisme chrétien en Inde, Cahiers Scourmontois 3 (Scourmont, 2001). See also a book

published by Kurisumala Ashram itself, Kurisumala Ashram: A Cistercian Abbey in India

(Kurisumala, 1999). 260

Cf. Catherine Cornille, The Guru in Indian Catholicism: Ambiguity or Opportunity of

Inculturation? (Leuven: Peeters, 1991), 137-138. 261

As Qurbana takes more than two hours, following Vatican II they have a simpler celebration of the

Eucharist called the Bharathiya Puja (Indian Mass) integrating Indian religious symbols such as

fire, flowers and incense. Cf. Vandana, Gurus, Ashrams and Christian (Delhi: ISPCK, 2004), 95-

96. 262

This was published by Kurisumala ashram between 1981 to 1989 in four volumes and 3000 pages,

and has since undergone several reprints. Earlier they used the shorter Syriac version called S‟himo

of Syriac monks, which was translated by Bede Griffiths and published in 1965 as “The Book of

Common Prayer.” But later, Francis Acharya searched for the original larger version of the same

which was called Fenqith. It couldn‟t be found as most of them were burned by the Portuguese

when they tried to unite the Syrian churches of Kerala into the Roman Catholic Church. But he

found it finally at Mossul in Iraq containing 4000 pages of Syrian text in seven volumes. Francis

Acharya meditated, translated and composed the English version adding in the each office under the


4.2.5. Swami Dayananda (Bede Griffiths)

Swami Dayananda (Bede Griffiths, 1906-1993) was a Benedictine monk in

Great Britain for 25 years until he travelled to India in 1955. His interest in Indian

religions dates back to his time at Oxford. He became interested in the intentions of an

Indian Benedictine living in France, Father Benedict Alapatt, and came to India with

him. Together they founded a monastic community at Kengeri near Bangalore which

failed to flourish. During his visits to Shantivanam in 1956 and 1957, he came in

contact with Francis Mahieu, which subsequently led them to find the Kurisumala

Ashram in Kerala in 1958. Ten years later, he left Kurisumala Ashram and took

charge of Shantivanam in 1968 when Abhishiktananda left for the Himalayas.

Bede Griffiths was an acharya (teacher) at Shantivanam for some 25 years

until his death in 1993.263

Under his guidance and leadership, the ashram became one

of the most prominent centres of inculturation in India, especially of the Indian

Christian spirituality. In contrast to the dualistic interpretation of the West and the

Semitic Religions on God-man-world, Griffiths wanted to articulate a Christian

theology in the Advaitic context.

Michael Barnes points to a different characteristic of Griffiths which he thinks

is equally important in the discussion of inculturation and dialogue in India, namely,

Bede‟s gentle humanity. Describing him as a very warm human person, Barnes says

that Bede‟s “reputation depends less on anything he wrote than on his deep and warm

humanity.” He was much loved and greatly respected as a typical Hindu god-man.

Holding his gentle humanity in high esteem and a great lesson to be learned, Barnes

says: “If Bede had an answer to the inculturation dilemma, it was that Christian faith

could not be explained in the language of another culture without being first rooted in

human relations.”264

rubric “Seeds of the Word” some texts drawn from sacred books of India. This work was much

appreciated by Professor Robert Taft of the Oriental Pontifical Institute in Rome. Cf. Robert Taft,

S.J., The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West: The Origins of the Divine Office and its Meaning

Today (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1993), 244-246. 263

For an excellent biography of Bede Griffiths, see Shirley du Boulay, Beyond the Darkness (London:

Rider, 1998). Bede speaks of his journey until he departed to India in The Golden String (London:

Harvill, 1954). His other autobiographical work is The Marriage of East and West (London:

Collins, 1982). His many works include Return to the Centre (London: Collins, 1976). 264

Michael Barnes, SJ, “From Ashrams to Dalits: The Four Seasons of Inculturation,” 65-66.


4.2.6. Amalorpavadass

Father Amalorpavadass265

can be rightly called the “Father of the Liturgical

Inculturation” in India. His theology is deeply influenced by the conciliar

aggiornamento and he made great and renowned efforts at an effective

implementation of the teaching of Vatican II in India, particularly in the fields of

evangelization, interreligious dialogue and inculturation.

Liturgy, Catechesis and the development of an Indian spirituality can be

counted as his best efforts at inculturation. His pioneering efforts in liturgical

inculturation were made mainly during his time as founder-director of the National

Biblical Catechetical Liturgical Centre (NBCLC), and as Secretary of the CBCI

Commissions for Biblical Apostolate, Catechetics and Liturgy (1967-1982). He is

known for developing an Indian liturgy. He proposed a fourfold process of liturgical

inculturation: creation of an Indian atmosphere through postures, gestures, music etc.;

translation and composition of vernacular liturgical texts; use of non-Christian

Scriptures; and making liturgy relevant to present-day life.266

Amalorpavadass bases his theology of inculturation on two fundamental

doctrines: the incarnation and the catholicity of the Church. The Church becomes

catholic when a local church incarnates in its soil, “expresses its faith and worship

through signs drawn from its religious and cultural heritage, tradition and activity, and

offers its diakonia through full solidarity and genuine involvement.”267

Thus, in India

to be catholic would mean to be fully Indian. Inculturation enables the church to

realize her catholicity.268

265 Father Amalorpavadass (Swami Amalorananda, as he preferred to call himself during his later

years) was born in 1932 at Kallery near Pondicherry, and was ordained priest in 1959. He studied at

Institut Catholique de Paris. He attended the second Vatican Council as a journalist, being the editor

of Thozhan, a Tamil journal he started. He died in a tragic accident in 1990. 266

Cf. J. A. G. Gerwin van Leeuwen, Fully Indian Authentically Christian (Bangalore: NBCLC,

1990), 246-247. 267

Amalorpavadass, Towards Indigenisation in the Liturgy (Bangalore: NBCLC, n. d.)17-18; as

quoted in Leeuwen, Fully Indian Authentically Christian, 228. 268

Amalorpavadass, Our Christian World Vision (Bangalore: NBCLC, n. d.), 19; as quoted in

Leeuwen, Fully Indian Authentically Christian, 227.


He felt that what was most urgently needed was the development of an Indian

Christian spirituality.269

One cannot but be impressed by the wholeness, integrity and

comprehensiveness of his approach and synthesis which can be seen in his booklets

Vision of Religious Life in the Future and the Future of Religious Life (1980), and

Poverty of the Religious and the Religious as Poor (1984) published by NBCLC.

During the last years of his life he continuously and consistently developed and

promoted this Indian Christian spirituality in his own ashram life, in the set-up and

layout of Anjali Ashram and the courses and initiations he gave both in his ashram and

in many other places.

4.2.7. Other Indian Pioneers

While we focused on the Catholic pioneers due to the context and concerns of

our research, there have been also many pioneering non-Catholic inculturation

movements. While we can‟t deal with them extensively in the context of this research,

we shall still mention a few of them. But we can also remind ourselves that we have

examined in detail the non-Catholic efforts at creation of indigenous churches in India

earlier in this chapter: Arumainayagam Sattampillai, Parani Andi, Kali Cheran

Benerjea, Keshub Chunder Sen, Sadhu Sunder Singh and Brahmabandhab

Upadhyaya. These men made the earliest attempts at creating Indian Churches. We

could add to these a few more pioneering efforts made in the twentieth century.270

N.

V. Tilak, a renowned poet, founded an ashram at Satara in 1917 which welcomed to

both baptised as well as the non-baptised.271

This is considered the first Christian

Protestant Ashram in India.272

Another Protestant pioneering effort in the ashram

movement is made by S. Jesudason (1882-1969) and E. Forrester-Paton (1891-1970),

who founded Christukula (Family of Christ) in 1921.273

Christa Seva Sangha (Christ-

269 His seminars on Prayer and Indian Spirituality at NBCLC were very popular and well appreciated.

For a detailed analysis of these seminars see, Leeuwen, Fully Indian Authentically Christian, 110-

117. 270

Paul M. Collins, himself a minister of the Church of England, examines in detail the Protestant

efforts at inculturation in India in his book Context, Culture and Worship: The Quest for Indian-

ness (Delhi: ISPCK, 2006). See especially pp. 75-78, 114-126, 194-195, and 223-225. See further,

Collins, “The Praxis of Inculturation for Mission: Roberto de Nobili‟s Example and Legacy,” 330-

340; Collins, “Culture, Worship and Power: A Case Study of South India,” 57-77. 271

For a detailed study of Tilak, see Jack Winslow, Narayan Vaman Tilak – The Christian Poet of

Marashtra (Calcutta: Association Press 1923). 272

Cf. Richard W. Taylor, “Christian Ashrams as a Style of Mission in India,” International Review of

Mission 68 (1979), 284. 273

Cf. Collins, Context, Culture and Worship: The Quest for Indian-ness, 125; Taylor, “Christian

Ashrams,” 284. See also S. Jesudason, Ashrams: Ancient and Modern: Their Aims and Ideals

(Vellore: Sri Ramachandra Press, 1937).


Service-Society) was another ashram founded by Jack C. Winslow in 1922 near

Pune.274

4.3. LITURGICAL INCULTURATION

Responding to the call of the Second Vatican Council for liturgical renewal,

the Roman Catholic Church in India earnestly initiated the process of inculturation in

liturgical life with the objective of developing an “Indian liturgy” and a “Common

Rite.”275

Many post-Vatican II missionaries hold the perspective of “unity in liturgy

with due scope for regional diversity.”276

Experimentation on an inculturated liturgy

was allowed in some centres at two levels: “adaptation at the external level” and

“adaptation at the deeper level.”277

As part of the process of the “adaptation at the external level,” the liturgy was

translated into the vernacular languages in the 1960s, though not without

opposition.278

At that point the All India Liturgical Committee (AILM) proposed the

Twelve-Point Plan dealing with an external adaptation that was accepted for optional

implementation in worship.279

The response to this Twelve-Point Plan was mixed; it

ranged from enthusiastic welcome, to strong criticism, to outright rejection. The most

serious accusation against this Plan was that it led to the “Hinduization” of

Christianity.280

For many, the Plan was more a frustrating syncretism than a liberating

inculturation.

As part of the process of the “adaptation at a deeper level,” the Liturgical

Commission in 1969 proposed three important suggestions for Sacramentals, Feasts

and Votive Masses. These are: (i) incorporation of the nuances of Hindu samskaras

(rituals of initiation) with the Christian Sacraments; (ii) integration of Christian Feasts

with Hindu Festivals;281

and (iii) the use of non-biblical Scriptures.282

If the bishops

had taken up these proposals, radical changes in Christian life would have resulted

from this. Only the latter two proposals are implemented partially in training centres.

274 Jack C. Winslow, Christa Seva Sangha (Westminister: SPG, 1930).

275 First All-India Liturgical Meeting (AILM) (Feb. 1968).

276 AILM (Jan.1969).

277 Catholic Bishops‟ Conference of India (CBCI), Plenary Assembly in 1972.

278 Julian Saldanha, Inculturation (Mumbai: St. Paul‟s, 1997), 60.

279 The CBCI permitted this proposal in March 1969.

280 D. S. Amalorpavadass, Gospel and Culture (Bangalore: NBCLC, 1978) chapter 4.

281 Saldanha, Inculturation, 63.

282 See “Statement of Research Seminar on non-Biblical Scriptures,” Word and Worship 8 (1975), 159.


Composing an Indian liturgy with an Indian anaphora has been a long

cherished goal.283

In 1972, the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) in its

plenary assembly gave official approval to the Liturgical Commission (of the CBCI)

to use the Indian anaphora ad experimentum in certain centres. Subsequently, three

liturgical texts were produced. Firstly, “An Order of the Mass for the Indian Church”

was prepared by Dharmaram College of St. Thomas Christians in Bangalore.

Secondly, the Latin Church produced another text by the name “Text of an Order of

the Mass for India.”284

Thirdly, the Liturgical Centre of Archdiocese, Ernakulam

worked out another text in 1974 with the title Bharathiya Pooja.285

Unfortunately, the vibrant inculturation process initiated immediately after the

Second Vatican Council came to a grinding halt with the injunction from the

Congregation for the Divine Worship in June 1975.286

Consequently, the inculturation

process has lost its élan and ease today. The Indian liturgy is now very Latin or it is

Syrian. Nevertheless, there are still earnest attempts going on silently towards a

greater inculturation in our worship, especially in tribal areas. Hopefully, such

isolated initiatives keep the issue alive and will gather momentum in the future,

especially in the light of the instruction from the Congregation for the Divine

Worship. As for now, liturgical inculturation remains incomplete.

Liturgical inculturation in the non-Catholic churches in India is most

pronounced in creation of the eucharistic rite of the Church of South India (CSI) in

1950 called as the “CSI Liturgy for Holy Communion.”287

This eucharistic rite is

critiqued by Bishop Sunder Clarke to have not taken shape within the actual CSI

communities and to being far removed from the life of the people.288

However,

Bishop Clarke‟s suggestion for the adaptation of the classical Indian dance form

Bharatanatyam,289

what he calls as Mauna, the contemplative silence,290

yoga,291

the

283 Aloysius Pieris, “The Indian Mass Controversy,” Worship 43 (1969), 219-223.

284 D. S. Amalorpavadass, Towards Indigenisation in Liturgy (Bangalore: NBCLC, 1971).

285 See Francis Kanichikattil, To Restore or To Reform? (Bangalore: Dharmaram Publications, 1992)

73-75. 286

Saldanha, Inculturation, 70-71. Under the direction of the Congregation for Divine Worship, the

circular issued by the Catholic Bishops Conference of India, dated 20 October, 1975, while

cautioning about unjustifiable liberties and unauthorized experimentation with regard to liturgical

renewal in India, forbade two things in particular: the use of Indian Anaphora and the readings of

non-Biblical Scriptures in the liturgy. Cf. Samuel Rayan, “Editorial,” Jeevadhara 6 (1976), 255. 287

Sunder Clarke, Let the Indian Church Be Indian (Madras: CLS, 1985), 80. 288

Clarke, Let the Indian Church Be Indian, 63-81, chapter VI titled “Towards an Indian People‟s

Liturgy.” 289

Clarke, Let the Indian Church Be Indian, 68-69.


use of musical instruments such as Veena, Tabla, Sitar etc.,292

and other liturgical

symbols,293

misplaced within his call for integration of people‟s culture in liturgy. The

Bharatanatyam as well as the Mauna are rooted in the elite Hindu tradition the

adaptation of which Bishop Clarke critiques. Similarly, the musical instruments he

suggests are also rooted in the elite Hindu tradition and they are not integral to

subaltern worship. As we shall see later in the end section of this chapter, the religions

of the subalterns in India have dance forms which are contrary to the classical

Bharatanatyam, have different musical instruments and their worship has no place

for Mauna.294

In fact, Bishop Clarke himself refers in the same section, where he

suggests Bharatanatyam and Mauna, to the forms of subaltern religions such as the

“spirit of buoyance, light heartedness and informality,” but fails to recognize their

distinctiveness in relation to the elite forms he suggests. His appeal to adaptation of

the above cited elite Hindu forms of worship and his lack of a sensibility to the

distinct religious and cultural elements of dalits in his own state of Tamilnadu, and

may be to his own dalit Christian flock as bishop, shrouds his call for the revision of

liturgy in doubt. He does talk of the necessity of liturgy blending with the life of the

people in rural communities, but never shows an awareness of the underlying

dynamics of caste and culture in India. These limitations of his calls for revision of

liturgy can be attributed to the simplistic conception of Indian culture as monolithic.

He defends “a core of commonness in the bed-stream of Indian culture.”295

Bishop

Clarke‟s call for a revision of the CSI rite of the eucharist to integrate the Indian

290 Clarke, Let the Indian Church Be Indian, 7, 69.

291 Clarke, Let the Indian Church Be Indian, 9.

292 Sunder Clarke, Let the Indian Church Be Indian, 70. In my own experience, the CSI dalit Christian

communities in Andhra Pradesh, especially in the villages, do not use these musical instruments in

their churches. They rather use “dappu” (a kind of drum which is deeply rooted in the culture and

religion of Madiga dalit caste of Andhra Pradesh) or a revised version of the same which are heavy

and louder in contradiction to the more soft and controlled stringed instruments Veena and Sitar

which Bishop Clarke suggests. The symbolism of the drum is Madiga dalit culture and religion is

explored in P. Y. Luke and John B. Carman, Village Christians and Hindu Culture: Study of Rural

Churches in Andhra Pradesh, South India (London: Lutterworth Press, 1968). Interestingly one the

most creative theological books on dalit theology, the study of dalit religion in Tamilnadu, and

reinterpretation of Christian faith in dalit symbolic in “Christ as Drum” comes from Sathianathan

Clarke who hails from the very family of Bishop Clarke. Sathianathan Clarke, Dalits and

Christianity: Subaltern Religion and Liberation Theology in India (Delhi: Oxford University

Publications, 1999). 293

Clarke, Let the Indian Church Be Indian, 70-74. He suggests gifts of nature and light. 294

See the final section of this chapter on “subaltern inculturation.” See also our critique of a similar

suggestion by Aloysius Pieris in the section “contemporary indian theology of inculturation” of this

chapter. 295

Clarke, Let the Indian Church Be Indian, 12.


culture resulted in the production of the CSI Indian Contextual Liturgy in 1986 which

manifests a greater sensibility to the social and cultural context of its local

congregations.296

4.4. ASHRAMIC INCULTURATION

One of the earnest attempts of inculturation of the Gospel in India has been

experimented by the institution of “Ashram,” which is uniquely Indian.297

It is a

mystico-monastic model through which insights of non-Christian spirituality are

incorporated into Christian life. The ashram ideal always has an inviolable place in

the religious psyche of India because ashrams are considered to be centres of spiritual

realization.298

The leaders of the Indian renaissance of the nineteenth century

discovered the potential of the ashram ideal and steered their social and political

movements from ashrams.299

Robert de Nobili can be considered the first Christian

sannyasi of India who laid foundation for the ashramic inculturation.300

Paul Collins

attributes the origin of the Christian ashram movement, as well as the “modern”

ashram movement in Hinduism, to the Brahmo Samaj movement, and as such he

suggests that Christian Ashram Movement inherits the tradition of Brahmo Samaj, as

much as the tradition of Robert de Nobili.301

Though late, the ashram ideal fired the

imagination of Christian missionaries who found it a competent model for

inculturation.302

All through the twentieth century, we find many ashrams with

various agendas beginning in different parts of the country.303

296 Collins, “Culture, Worship and Power,” 67-68. Bishop Clarke prepared this new liturgy with

Christopher Duraisingh and and Eric Lott. 297

For a short historical evolution of Ashrams in Indian traditions, see Michael Amaladoss, “Ashrams

and Social Justice,” in D. S. Amalorpavadass, ed., The Indian Church in Struggle for a New Society

(Bangalore: NBCLC, 1981), 370-378. Amaladoss in this article actually depends on a book that

explores the birth and growth of Ashrams right into the Indian epics, P. Chenchiah, V. Chakkerai,

and A. N. Sundarisanam, Ashrams: Past and Present (Madras: CLS, 1941). 298

Bandhu Ishanand, “Ashrams and Mission Spirituality,” Third Millennium 2 (1999), 132-136. 299

Bharat Ashram was founded in 1872 at Belgharia near Calcutta by Keshub Chander Sen who had

profound sympathy for Christianity. Other Ashrams include Ramakrishna Ashram of Swami

Vivekananda (1897), Santiniketan of Rabindranth Tagore (1888), Aurobindo Ashram of Sri

Aurobindo Ghose (1910), Satyagraha Ashram of Mahatma Gandhi (1915), Sivagiri Ashram of

Narayana Guru (1912), Sevagram of Vinoba Bhave (1921), and Sivananda Ashram of Swami

Sivananda (1934). 300

Michael Amaladoss, Beyond Dialogue: Pilgrims to the Absolute (Bangalore: ATC, 2008), 157. 301

Collins, Context, Culture and Worship: The Quest for Indian-ness, 106. 302

Antony Kalliath, “Ashram Ideal: A Comprehensive Model of Evangelization in India Context,”

Ishvani Documentation and Mission Digest 16:2 (1998), 203-207. 303

Vandana Mataji, Gurus, Ashrams and Christians, 67-104 and 108-110.


The first Christian Ashram in the Indian Protestant tradition is said to be the

one founded by Narayana Vaman Tilak, a renowned poet, in Satara in 1917.304

A

more successful attempt was the founding of the Christukula ashram at Tirupattur in

Tamilnadu in 1921 by Dr. S. Jesudason (1882-1969) and Dr. E. Forrester-Paton

(1891-1970).305

About ten years later, another Protestant Ashram, Christa Seva

Sangha was founded by Jack C. Winslow at Pune in 1922.306

The earliest attempts at founding a Christian Ashram by a Catholic can be

traced back to 1899 when Brahmabandhab Upadhyay, together with Brahmachari

Rewachand (Animananda) attempted to find a Hindu-Catholic monastery near

Jabalpur. Of course this attempt did not come to full realization until Animananda

founded an Ashram at Ranchi in 1940.307

The main concern of Catholic ashrams is inculturation: the integration of

Hindu and Christian ways of meditation and worship, Indian spirituality (sannyasa

and yoga meditation), indigenous theological formation, interreligious dialogues, and

inculturation in the fields of art, dance, and music. The spirituality promoted in an

ashram is profoundly Guru-oriented. Christian ashrams claim only one Guru though,

Jesus Christ, who graces the ashramites in their various sadhana of realization.

An inculturated spirituality is often understood within the framework of an

ashram life. When Swami Abhishiktananda together with Father Jules Monchanin,

founded the Shantivanam Ashram in 1950 at Kulithalai, they envisaged “a Christian

ashram where both a contemplative ideal and a total indianization could be realized,

striking a creative balance between the Indian heritage and Christian tradition.”308

They wanted to bring about a synthesis between Christian monasticism and Indian

sannyasa (life of total renunciation) in an ashram context of austerity, solitude,

silence, study, and asceticism. In accordance with Indian traditions, they clad

304 Taylor, “Christian Ashrams,” 284. Paul M. Collins traces the first articulation of the idea of

Ashrams among Protestants in India to S. K. Rudra in 1910, and to K. T. Paul in 1912. Cf. Collins,

Context, Culture and Worship: The Quest for “Indian-ness,” 124. 305

Amaladoss, “Ashrams and Social Justice,” 374. 306

Collins, Context, Culture and Worship: The Quest for „Indian-ness,‟ 125. This ashram evolved into

an ecumenical ashram where Anglican and Catholic members live together. Sister Sara Grant RSCJ

is a prominent member of this ashram. Sister Vandana directed this ashram for few years but she

left it in 1976 in search of deeper Hindu ashram life, and later founded Jeeva Dhara Ashram in

Rishikesh in 1981. 307

Richard W. Taylor, “Christian Ashrams as a Style of Mission in India,” International Review of

Mission 63 (1974), 286. 308

Antony Kalliath, The Word in the Cave (New Delhi: Intercultural Publications, 1996), 56.


themselves in saffron robes which are the traditional sign of renunciation and

awakening. Many in the ashram take only vegetarian food because Hindu monks

never eat non-vegetarian food. Also, as in the Hindu tradition, when people adopt the

lifestyle of a sannyasi, they often take Indian names to signify the focus of their

pursuit. For example, Father Jules Monchanin became Parama Arubi Anandam (Bliss

of the Supreme Formless One) and Henry Le Saux took the name Abhishiktananda

(Bliss of the Anointed One).

Ashrams are now regarded as the centres of “authentic incarnational Christian

spirituality” and “interreligious dialogue.”309

What we find today is a slow emergence

of ashram spirituality and theology propagated through ashram literature.

Nevertheless, both dalits and tribals feel alienated from the ashram ideal since it exists

in the purview of caste religion, Hinduism. It is often criticized as promoting an elite

spirituality.

The inculturationist model for Ashrams has attracted much criticism from

those who take a liberationist approach, particularly from perspectives of dalits. The

basic critique is that the ashramic movement does not participate in “the struggle” for

a new society.310

As Amaladoss puts it: “People who are committed to the poor see

life in ashrams, practicing Indian methods of prayer and spirituality as running away

from the challenge of the gospel which is proclaimed to the poor and the outcasts.”311

The strongest critique of Ashram movement came from Georg Soares-Prabhu. He

finds the ashramic inculturation too superficial and a mere dressing up of the gospel in

the local garment. He considers the theology that comes from the ashrams irrelevant

for it does not relate to the religiosity of the poor, but to the brahminical spirituality.312

309 Likewise, the ashram movement received solid support among Protestants at the World Missionary

Conference held at Tambaram, Madras, in 1939. 310

Barnes, “From Ashrams to Dalits: The Four Seasons of Inculturation,” 67-70. 311

Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 12. 312

Soares-Prabhu, George M, “From Alienation to Inculturation: Some Reflections on Doing Theology

in India Today,” In Biblical Themes for a Contextual Theology Today: Collected Writings of

George M. Soares-Prabhu, Vol.1, ed. Issac Padinjarekuttu (Pune: JDV, 1999), 79-112. Vandana

Mataji herself the founder of a Catholic ashram in Himalayas responds to the critique of Soares-

Prabhu and defends the importance of the contemplative and mystic tradition of ashrams. She

argues ashrams can help remove problems of the society such as corruption and communalism by a

simple and honest ashramic life style and that ashramic theology can help wider theology in mult-

religious contexts. Cf. Vandana, “The Christian Ashram Movement Today,” in Vandana, ed.,

Christian Ashrams: A Movement with a Future? (Delhi: ISPCK, 1993), 76-78, 84; Vandana,

“Finding Our Roots Before We Take Wing,” in Vandana, ed., Christian Ashrams: A Movement with

a Future, 10-13; Vandana, Find Your Roots and Take Wing: Three Essays on Spiritual Formation

for the East and the West (Bangalore: Asian Trading Corporation, 1991), 68.


Ashramic inculturation is watched with great suspicion by the Hindus in India, as

these efforts are seen by them as conversion mechanisms to lure Hindus into Christian

conversion. For example, Sita Ram Goel who was closely associated with

Abhishiktananda Society has later accused the work of Abhishiktananda as

proselytization under a clock of ashram. Goel describes leaders of Catholic ashrams as

“swindlers” and accuses them of the “spiritual genocide of Hindu dharma.” 313

In the context of this discussion on the critique of the Christian ashrams in

India, we would like to suggest that much of the criticism can only be directed

towards the Catholic Ashrams and not towards the Protestant Ashrams. Drawing on

R. W. Taylor‟s broad division of Christian ashrams into Khadi (service) and Kavi

(contemplation),314

Amaladoss concludes that Catholic ashrams have tended more

towards the kavi type, while Protestant ashrams evolved as the khadi type sourcing

more inspiration from the Gandhian ashram ideals.315

The reason for these divergent

tendencies may be attributed to the “sources of inspiration” for the founders of these

ashrams. While Protestant ashrams drew their inspiration from reformist Hindu

ashrams, Catholic ashrams drew their inspiration from non-reformist Hindu ashrams.

As Helen Ralston suggests, the founders of Protestant ashrams “drew their inspiration

from the Neo-Hindu reformers who founded ashrams for the collective reshaping of

Indian society.”316

Likewise, Catherine Cornille too suggests that Protestant ashrams

“drew their inspiration” from reformist Hindu ashrams such as “Aurobindo Ashram in

Pondycherry, Tagore‟s Sahntiniketan, especially Satyagraha ashram of Gandhi.”317

She affirms too that Catholic ashrams, unlike the Protestant ashrams, are associated

“with the more purely contemplative branch of Hindu ashram tradition.” She supports

the view pointing to the strong influence of Ramana Maharshi of Arunachala in

313 Sita Ram Goel, Catholic Ashrams: Sannyasins or Swindlers? 2

nd edn. (New Delhi: Voice of India,

1994 [1st edn 1988]); Sita Ram Goel, History of Hindu-Christian Encounters AD 304 to 1996 2

nd

edn (New Delhi: Voice of India, 1996), 62-65 on Abhishiktananda and Chapter 19: “Sannyasins or

Swindlers?”, 386-404. For a discussion of this and other contemporary Hindu criticisms of the

ashram movement, see Sebastian C. H. Kim, In Search of Identity: Dabates on Religious

Conversion in India (Delhi: Oxford University Publications, 2003), 117-121. 314

Richard W. Taylor, “From Khadi to Kavi: Towards a Typology of Christian Ashrams,” Religion

and Society 24:4 (1977), 19-37. 315


Helen Ralston, Catholic Ashrams: A New Religious Movement in Contemporary India (New York:

Edwin Mellen, 1987), 113. 317

Cornille, The Guru in Indian Catholicism, 126. Later, Cornille while speaking about Christa Prema

Seva Sangha, a Protestant Ashram founded in 1927, points to the preference of calling itself

“sangha” rather than “ashram” which may allude to the ashram‟s preference to Buddhist ashram

tradition rather than Hindu ashram tradition. Cornille, The Guru in Indian Catholicism, 139.


Tiruvannamali and Sivananda ashram at Rishikesh,318

who represents the “non-

reformist contemplative” ashram tradition, on Abhishiktananda and several other

founders of Catholic ashrams.319

Even if Ashrams can engage in some kind of human service, particularly a

service to the poor, an active participation in the struggle for a just society is certainly

„alien‟ to the very setting and milieu of ashrams. The proposal of Amaladoss sounds

more viable in this context, a kind of a via media. According to him, Christian

ashrams can promote the struggle for social justice in three ways:

1) Build up and be a community that every movement for social justice wants to

create through its struggle; 2) Be a place of training where people who wish to

engage in service can be trained in ideals, motivation and methods; 3) Play a

leadership role in the promotion of social justice in the community.320

4.5. THEOLOGICAL INCULTURATION

The beginnings of theological inculturation in India can be traced back

primarily to the work of Roberto de Nobili. Though Syrian Christians existed in India

since the very early centuries of Christianity, we can trace little of their contribution to

Indian theology until the advent of Western missionaries in India. Robin Boyd, thus,

concludes: “the theology of the Syrian Church, founded as it is mainly in the liturgy

and in formularies for ordination and consecration, has remained entirely Syrian,

based on the Syriac language, and, despite its age-long sojourn on Indian soil,

theologically as far removed from Indian thought as is Roman or Protestant

theology.”321

Felix Wilfred suggests that their “heavy dependence” on the far-off

church in Syria might not have facilitated creative theological thinking, and their

“easy accommodation” to caste-system sealed all prophetic orientations within their

theology.322

Theological inculturation in India beginning from Roberto de Nobili up until

the nineteenth century is largely defined by its encounter and interaction with

Hinduism, its religion, culture and philosophy. Rightly so, Amaladoss categorizes the

318 The influence of these for example on Vandana can be read in Vandana, Gurus, Ashrams and

Christians, 3-18 (of Sivanada Ashram) and 90-92 (of Ramana Maharshi). Abhishiktananda also

made a lot of retreats at Arunachala ashram of Ramana Maharshi and was deeply influenced by

him. Cf. Abhishiktananda, The Secret of Arunachala (Delhi: ISPCK, 1979). 319

Cornille, The Guru in Indian Catholicism, 127. 320



Wilfred, Beyond Settled Foundations, 8.


Indian Christian theology before Vatican II into three main streams: attempts by

Hindus to “appropriate the moral teachings of Jesus in an Indian-Hindu context,”

attempts by Christians to point to Christianity as the fulfilment of Hindu aspirations,

and finally, the attempts by Christians to “find their Christian faith meaningful in a

Hindu cultural context.”323

They laid foundations on which generations of theologians

in India would build their theological edifice. The first among them is Roberto de

Nobili (1577-1656) who initiated a deeper study of Hinduism and a Christian

theology in interaction to Hinduism; a path that scores of Indian theologians

continued to tread through the centuries until today. Another Jesuit who worked in the

Carnatic mission from 1723 to his death, Jean Calmette (1692-1740) also contributed

much to the Catholic approach to Vedanta.324

These are later followed by other Jesuits

in Calcutta in West Bengal, especially the Belgian Jesuits: William Wallace (1863-

1922),325

Georges Dandoy (1882-1962),326

and Pierre Johanns (1882-1955).327

The

Protestant contributions came mainly from William Miller (1838-1923),328

Frederick

323 Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 4; Amaladoss, “Inculturation in India: Historical Perspectives

and Questions,” in Yearbook of Contextual Theologies (Aachen, MWI, 1994), 44. 324

He wrote Satyavedasarasamgraha, which is a theological treatise utilizing advaitic terminology.

For a selection of Calmette‟s writings, see A. Amaladass and R. Young, eds., The Indian Christiad:

A Concise Anthology of Didactic and Devotional Literature in Early Chruch Sanskrit (Anand,

Gujarat: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1995). 325

Born in Dublin, he arrived in West Bengal as a missionary of Church Missionary Society in 1889.

He became a Catholic and joined the Jesuits in England. Returned back to India in 1901 and joined

the Belgian Jesuits in Calcutta. He wrote his autobiography From Evangelical to Catholic by Way

of the East (Calcutta, Catholic Orphan Press, 1923). He desired to utilize Indian philosophy to make

an acceptable presentation of Christianity to Hindus. The unpublished manuscripts by Wallace on

Introduction to Hindoo Clairvoyance and A Bengali Commentary on the Yoga Philosophy are held

at Goethals Library, St. Xavier‟s College, University of Calcutta. 326

Dandoy, from Hemptinne in Belgium, arrived in India in 1909, after studying Sanskrit at Oxford for

two years. He taught English and History at St. Xavier‟s College in Calcutta. His works include: An

Essay on the Doctrine of the Unreality of the World in the Advaita (Calcutta: Catholic Orphan

Press, 1919); L‟Ontologie du Vedānta: Essai sur L‟Acosmisme de L‟Advaita (Paris: Descleé de

Brouwer, 1932); Karma, Evil, Punishment, Light of the East Series 31 (Calcutta: Catholic Orphan

Press, 1940). 327

Pierre Johanns hails from Luxembourg and joined the South Belgian Province of Jesuits in 1903.

After studying theology at the Catholic University of Leuven, and Indology at Oxford, he came to

India in 1921. He taught at St. Xavier‟s College in Calcutta and the Jesuit theologate at Kurseong,

Darjeeling. He published a series of booklets entitled To Christ Through Vedanta, under the series

Light of the East (1922-1924) which are later published as two volumes: To Christ Through the

Vedanta: The Writings of Reverend P. Johanns, S.J., 2 vols. (Bangalore: United Theological

College, 1996). 328

William Miller, the British missionary, arrived in Madras in 1864, and was the Principal of Madras

Christian College, and later the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Madras (1901-1907). He wrote

Lectures for Educated Hindus (Madras: SPCK, 1880); Indian Mission and How to View Them

(Edinburgh: James Thin, 1878).


Kellett (1862-1904),329

T. E. Slater (1840-1912),330

and John Nicol Farquhar (1861-

1929).331

These are but a few on a long list, and there were also other western

missionaries who helped such theological inculturation indirectly by engaging in the

pursuit of Indian linguistics and Indology.332

329 Kellett wrote the pamphlet “Christ the Fulfillment of Hinduism” in 1896. It was a 23 page pamphlet

and was No. 10 under CLS series of Papers for Thoughtful Hindus. See E. Sharpe, Not to Destroy

But To Fulfill: The Contributions of J. N. Farquhar to Protestant Missionary Thought in India

Before 1914 (Lund: Gleerup, 1965), 105. 330

Slater worked in Calcutta from 1866-1887 and in Bangalore from 1888-1904. He wrote Studies in

the Upanishads (Madras: CLS, 1989), and The Higher Hinduism in Relation to Christianity

(London: Elliot Stock, 1909). 331

Farquhar is from Aberdeen, and taught at Calcutta from 1891, and worked with the Young Men‟s

Christian Association (YMCA) from 1902. He wrote several important studies on Hinduism: The

Crown of Hinduism (London: Oxford University Press, 1913); A Primer of Hinduism (London:

Oxford University Press, 1914); Modern Religious Movements in India (New York: Macmillan,

1915); An Outline of the Religious Literature of India (London: Oxford University Press, 1920). 332

We can mention a few of them here: Thomas Stephens, S. J. (1549-1619) worked in Goa for 30

years, and produced an important writing, Krista Purana, a biblical epic poem in Marathi. Cf. G.

Schurhammer, “Thomas Stephens, 1549-1619,” The Month 13 (1955), 197-210. Antonio Criminali,

S. J. (1520-1549) was the first martyr of the Society of Jesus and worked on the fishery coast;

acquired fluency in Tamil. Henrique Henriques, S. J. (1520-1600) also worked on the fishery coast

of Tamilnadu and wrote books in Tamil. He also produced a grammar and dictionary for the Tamil

language. Cf. J. Wicki, “P. Henrique Henriques SJ,” Indian Ecclesiastical Studies 4 (1965), 142-

150. J. F. Pons, S. J., collected Sanskrit manuscripts and had them catalogued back in Europe in

1740. He displayed wide knowledge of Hindu literature. Cf. Raymond Schwab, The Oriental

Renaissance: Europe‟s Rediscovery of India and the East, 1680-1880 (New York: Columbia

University Press, 1984), 147-148. J. E. Hanxleden (1681-1732), a Jesuit scholar in Kerala, wrote a

Sanskrit grammar and lexicons for both Sanskrit and Malayalam. J. Tieffentaller (1710-1785) was a

Jesuit missionary who produced scholarly studies of Hindustani religion, geography and history. J.

Bartholomaeo (1749-1806) wrote Sanskrit grammar. See M. Mundadan, “An Unknown Scholar:

Ernest Hanxleden (Arnos Pathiri),” Indian Church History Review 23 (1989), 39-63.

There were also significant contributions made by Protestant missionaries: Abraham Roger

(d.1649) prepared an edition of the poems of Bhartrhari. Bartholomaus Ziegenbalg (1628-1719)

was the most prominent Lutheran missionary to Tanquebar. He produced two major scholarly

treatises on Hindu religion entitled Genealogie der malabarische Götter (ed. W. German, Madras,

1867) and Ausführliche Beschreibung des malabarischen Heidentums (ed. W. Caland, Amsterdam,

1926). See E. Lehmann, It Began at Tranquebar (Madras: CLS, 1956). Carey (1761-1834) was

professor of Bengali and Sanskrit at Fort William College, Calcutta. He wrote A Grammar of the

Bangalee Language (Serampore: Mission Press, 1813) and Grammar of Sanskrit Language

Composed from the Work of the Most Esteemed Grammarians (Serampore: Mission Press, 1806).

Marshman (1768-1837) was co-founder of Serampore College and translated the Bible into Chinese

while residing in Bengal. Marshman, Works of Confucius to Which is Prefixed a Dissertation of

Chinese Language (Serampore: Mission Press, 1809). Ward (1769-1832) was a printer and

administrator of Serampore Baptists. He published a classic treatment called A View of the History,

Literature, and Mythology of Hindoos (London: Kingsbury, Parbury, Allen and Co., 1822). Cf. E.

Daniel Potts, British Baptist Missionaries in India, 1793-1837: The History of Serampore and Its

Missions (London: Cambridge University Press, 1967). There were also non-missionary British

personnel in India who published helpful works: John Muir (1810-1882) wrote Original Sanskrit

Texts on the Origin and History of the People of India (London: Trubner, 1868); M. Monier-

Williams published Sanskrit-English Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1899). Cf. P. J.

Marshall, The British Discovery of Hinduism in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1970), 196-289.


The theological inculturation under the category of “Religio-Cultural”

diversifies into two main streams in the later Indian theology. It continued in

Protestant circles through the “Bengali converts” located around Calcutta, the

“Rethinking Christianity Group” located around Madras, and in Catholic theology

within the context of the Ashram Movement. The dialogue with Indian cultural and

religious elements was creatively pursued by Bengali Protestant converts, who were

greatly influenced by the Brahmo Samaj. Prominent among them are: Keshub

Chandra Sen (1838-1884), Nehemiah Goreh (1825-1895),333

Brahmabandhav

Upadhyaya (1861-1907), Narayana Vaman Tilak (1862-1919).334

Even if not from

Bengal, Sadhu Sunder Singh (1889-1929) from Punjab and A. J. Appasamy (1891-

1975) from Tamilnadu can rightly be placed with the former, for they have developed

a deep dialogue with the Bhakti religious traditions of India. These early Indian

theologians initiated a truly Indian approach to Christ, even if none of them developed

complete and systematic treatises of theology, and their writings are more

fragmentary in nature.

The “Rethinking Christianity Group,” comprising of V. Chakkarai (1880-

1958), P. Chenchiah (1886-1959), A. N. Sudarisanam, Eddy Asirvatham, G. V. Job,

S. Jesudason, D. M. Devasahayam, and Paul D. Devanandan335

has contributed

333 Nehemiah Goreh (1825-1895) was born Nilakanth in Kasipuran, near Jhansi into an orthodox

Brahmin family, and took the name Nehemiah at Baptism in 1848; later ordained an Anglican

minister. After some work in different places as a minister, he settled down in Pune in order to

witness Christ to orthodox Hindus. His most famous convert is Pandita Ramabai. His primary

mission was to give an apologetic against reformed Hinduism such as Brahmo Samaj and Prarthana

Samaj. A prolific writer, he authored more than 35 books in English, Hindi and Marathi. His

magnum opus is the Hindu apologetic Shaddarshana Darpana published in English under different

titles as Hindu Philosophical Systems: A Rational Refutation (1862), A Rational Refutation of the

Hindu Philosophical Systems (1897), A Mirror of the Hindu Philosophical Systems (1911), and

which is reprinted with an introduction by K. P. Aleaz as A Christian Response to the Hindu

Philosophical Systems (Calcutta: Punthi Pustak, 2003). Another popular work is A Letter to the

Brahmos from a Converted Brahman from Banares (Calcutta: Baptist Mission Press, 1867). 334

Narayana Vaman Tilak, a noted Marathi poet, patriot and social activist, was born in 1861 in

Maharashtra. After reading the Bible handed him by a missionary on a journey, he became a

Christian in 1895. He served the church for about 24 years teaching and preaching. He started using

traditional Indian methods of worship like bhajan (devotional worship song) and kirtan (sermons

delivered in song and poetry). He himself composed many devotional songs; a prolific writer, he

has more than 2100 poems to his credit. See, J. C. Winslow, Narayan Vaman Tilak (Calcutta:

Associated Press, 1923); H. L. Richards, Christ-Bhakti: Narayan Vaman Tilak and Christian Work

among Hindus (Delhi: ISPCK, 1991). 335

Paul David Devanandan (1901-1962) was born in Madras. After his doctorate at Yale, he taught at

United Theological College, Bangalore. Until he died an untimely death in 1962, he was the

director of the newly formed Christian Institute for the Study of Society (CISS) which later came to

be called the Christian Institute for the Study of Religion and Society (CISRS). His works include:

The Gospel and the Renascent Hinduism (London: SCM, 1959), (with M. M. Thomas) Christian

Participation in Nation-Building: The Summing Up of a Corporate Study on Rapid Social Change


significantly to indigenous theology, beginning with their publication of Rethinking

Christianity in India.336

Chakkarai337

whose theology of the cross related Bhakti

tradition with a social action, was the most systematic among them, while

Chenchiah338

who pictured Jesus as a new creation, the „man in our history‟ was the

more original. This Rethinking Group reflected strong nationalistic aspirations along

with a deep appreciation of Hindu tradition.

We have already seen in the earlier section the prominent theologians of the

Ashram movement: S. Jesudason, E. Forrester Paton, Jules Monchanin, Henri Le

Saux, Francis Mahieu, Bede Griffiths, Amalorpavadass, Vandana Mataji,339

Sara

Grant340

and many others that followed them in the ashramic path and founded

different Christian ashrams in India. Ashrams became the centres of deeper Hindu-

Christian dialogue and places of experimentation in the integration of religious and

cultural elements of India into Christian life. Today, they have become “important

(Bangalore: National Christian Council of India, 1960), and the posthumously published

Preparation for Dialogue: A Collection of Essays on Hinduism and Christianity, Nalini

Devanandan and M. M. Thomas, ed. (Bangalore: CISRS, 1964). 336

D. M. Devasahayam and A. N. Sudarisanam, Rethinking Christianity in India (Madras: A. N.

Sudarisanam, 1938). 337

Vengal Chakkerai was a Hindu convert. Baptized in 1903, he worked for the Danish Missionary

Society as an evangelist and educator. In 1941 he was elected mayor of Madras. Christology was

the starting point of theology for him. God‟s incarnation, for Chakkerai, did not end with Jesus, but

continued through the work of the Holy Spirit as a dynamic and continuing presence of God. He

wrote Jesus the Avatar (Madras: CLS, 1926), and The Cross and Indian Thought (Madras: CLS,

1932). For overview of his theology, see P. T. Thomas, The Theology of Chakkarai (Bangalore:

CISRS, 1968). 338

Pandipeddi Chenchiah came from a Brahmin family and converted from Hinduism while studying

at Madras Christian College. He was a lawyer by profession, a chief judge of the Pudukkottah

princely state in South India, and a lay theologian. He was the leading member of the famous

“Rethinking Christianity Group” of Madras. He rejected institutional Christianity by separating

Christ from Christianity and sought what he called, the “raw fact of Christ.” He emphasised the

distinctive nature of Christ over and against Christian and also Hindu tradition. He stressed a direct

encounter with Christ, rather than through the church, its dogmas and its sacraments which present

Christ only indirectly. Cf. D. A. Thangasamy, The Theology of Chenchiah (Bangalore: CISRS,

1966). 339

Vandana Mataji is a sister of the Society of the Sacred Heart (RSCJ). She taught History and

Politics at Sophia College, Bombay for 18 years, and later served as Provincial of the congregation.

In answer to an inner calling, she took to ashram life. She is the founder-acharya of Jeevan Dhara

Ashram in the Himlayas founded in 1976. Her books include: Gurus, Ashrams and Christians

(Delhi: ISPCK, 2004, 1st published in 1978), Christian Ashrams: A Movement with a Future (Delhi:

ISPCK, 1993), Living Water and Indian Bowl (Delhi: ISPCK, 1997), Living with Hindus: Hindu-

Christian Dialogues. My Expriences and Reflections (Delhi: ISPCK, 1999). 340

Sara Grant (1922-2000) was born of Scottish parents in Shrewsbury, England. After studies at

Oxford, she came to India to head the Department of Philosophy at Sophia College, Bombay. In

1972, she took to ashram life with a group of her RSCJ confreres at Christa Prema Seva Ashram, an

ecumenical Christian ashram in Pune, of which she later became the acharya. Her works include:

Sankaracharya‟s Concept of Relation (Motilal Banarsidass, ), Towards an Alternative Theology:

Confessions of a Non-dualist (Note Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press, 2001).


venues of interreligious dialogue.”341

Wilfred places into this category of Indian

theology with “religio-cultural orientations” the contemporary Catholic theologians

like Raimon Panikkar (1918-2010),342

D. S. Amalorpavadass, John Britto

Chethimattam (1922-2006)343

and Michael Amaladoss (1936-). 344

We could place

well in this list an important Protestant theologian who worked with the same

theological orientations, Stanley J. Samartha.345

Post-Vatican II theology in India, Amaladoss argues, though influenced by

Latin American Liberation theology, is “characteristically Indian, even if it is not yet

spelt out clearly.” While Indian theology, like Liberation Theology, theologizes from

below, it builds on the two faces of Indian reality: great poverty and deep

religiosity.346

Wilfred in his study of Indian theology, calls this “Theologizing with

the Socio-Political Orientation” because it addresses itself to the socio-political

contexts of India. While Wilfred places the contemporary Catholic theologians such

as Sebastian Kappen (1924-1993),347

Samuel Rayan (1920- ) and George Soares-

341 Kucheria Pathil, Trends in Indian Theology, 34.

342 Raimon Panikkar was a leading Jesuit theologian in the area of interreligious dialogue and

comparative religions. He was born of an Indian father and a Spanish mother. He holds doctorates

in Philosophy and Science (Madrid University) and theology (Lateran University). He served as a

professor at the Complutense University of Madrid (1946-1953), after which he left for India to

study Indian philosophy at the University of Mysore and the Banaras Hindu University. He later

served as professor in Rome (1961-1962), at Harvard University (1967-1971), and at the University

of California, Santa Barbara (1971-1978). He died on 26 August, 2010 at his home at Tavertet

outside Barcelona. He has authored some 40 books and more than 900 articles. His works include:

The Trinity and the Religious Experience of Man: Icon-Person-Mystery (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1973), The Unknown Christ of Hinduism: Towards An Ecumenical Christophany (Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis, 1981), Christophany: The Fullness of Man (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2004). 343

John Britto Chethimattam is a CMI priest from Kerala. He taught philosophy and theology at

Dhramaram College, Bangalore, and also served as its Rector. He was professor at Fordham

University, USA for more than two decades. A prolific writer he authored many books and articles.

His works include: Consciousness and Reality: An Indian Approach to Metaphysics (Bangalore:

Dharmaram, 1967), Dialogue in Indian Tradition (Bangalore: Dharmaram, 1969) reprinted as

Patterns of Indian Thought (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1971), Experience and Reality (Bangalore:

Dharmaram, 1996), and Towards a Theology of Intercommunion (Bangalore: Dharmaram, 2001). 344

Felix Wilfred, Beyond Settled Foundations, 99-137. 345

Stanley Jedidiah Samartha (1920-2000) came from Karnataka in South India, and taught initially at

Basel Evangelical Mission Theological Seminary in Mangalore of which he later became the first

Indian principal. From 1960 to 1966 he taught at Union Theological College, Bangalore, and then

for two years was principal of Serampore College near Calcutta. From 1968 to 1970, he was

secretary in the Department of Studies in Mission and Evangelism at the WCC in Geneva, and from

1971-1980 director of the newly founded subunit on Dialogue with People of Living Faiths and

Ideologies. His publications include: One Christ – Many Religions: Towards a Revised Christology

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1991), Courage for Dialogue (Geneva: WCC, 1981); Between Two

Cultures: Ecumenical Ministry in a Pluralist World (Geneva: WCC, 1996). 346

Amaladoss, “Inculturation in India,” 48-49. 347

Sebastian Kappen is a renowned Jesuit Indian theologian from Kerala. He received his doctorate

from the Gregorian in 1961 with a thesis “Praxis and Religious Alienation According to the


Prabhu (1929-1995), we can very neatly place Wilfred himself into the same category

of theologians. Wilfred is certainly one of the most promising and popular

representatives of Indian theology with socio-political orientations. However, he

believes that the future of Indian theology remains in the right fusion of these two

categories, the religio-cultural with the socio-political.348

M. M. Thomas,349

a lay Mar

Thoma Church theologian, cannot be missed in the list of Indian theologians who

worked with socio-political orientations. Kuncheria Pathil, in his book on Indian

theology, calls him a “Christian Socialist” who defines the mission of the church as

humanization and social transformation.350

Boyd feels that Thomas‟ thought is very

similar to that of Gandhi, and that “if Gandhi had become a Christian… his theology

might have been something like” the theology of Thomas.351

A creative and vibrant theological inculturation in India began with the

emergence of dalit theology a couple of decades ago. In the words of one of the most

prominent Catholic theologians of India, Felix Wilfred, dalit theology is “the greatest

achievement of Indian theology.”352

Even if in the 1970s, due to the influence of

liberation theology, there was an orientation towards the socio-political issues in

Indian theology, it “failed to see in the struggle of Indian dalits for liberation a subject

matter appropriate for doing theology in India.”353

Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of Karl Marx.” He is one of the earliest liberation

theologians of India. His research is geared towards a transformative social action in India through

Jesus, and through the tradition of dissent represented by Buddha and the Bhakti movement. His

most famous book is Jesus and Freedom (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1977) on which he was

admonished by Vatican. His many works include: Jesus and Cultural Revolution: An Asian

Pespective (Bombay: A Build Publication, 1983), Jesus Today (Madras: AICUF, 1985), Liberation

Theology and Marxism (Puntamba: Asha Kendra, 1986). 348

Wilfred, Beyond Settled Foundations, 254-257. 349

M. Mammen Thomas (1916-1996) was the most prominent ecumenical theologian of India. From

1947-1953 he served on the staff of the World Student Christian Federation in Geneva, and from

1968-1975 was the chairperson of the Central Committee of the WCC. In India, he served as

associate director and director of the Christian Institute for the Study of Religion and Society

(CISRS), and from 1989-1994, he was the governor of Nagaland in northeast India. His

publications include: The Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance (Madras, CLS, 1970),

Man and the Universe of Faiths (Madras: CLS, 1975). 350

Pathil, Trends in Indian Theology, 43. 351


Wilfred, “Indian Theologies: Retrospect and Prospects,” 147. 353

Arvind P. Nirmal, “Towards a Christian Dalit Theology,” in Arvind P. Nirmal, ed., A Reader in

Dalit Theology (Madras: Gurukul, 1991), 57. Cf. Manchala Deenabandhu, “Die Dalit-Theologie als

Verbündete einer Gegenkultur in Indien,” in Dieter Becker, ed., Globaler Kampf der Kulturen?

Analysen und Orientierungen (Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer, 1999), 144-156.


4.6. TWO INCULTURATION TRENDS IN INDIA

We have reviewed above the different streams of inculturation in India

beginning with the Syrian Christians of Kerala, to the Jesuit missionary endeavours of

sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, to the indigenous church movements, to the

interreligious trends, the liturgical and ashramic and theological inculturation,

culminating in the recent history in dalit theology. While these are different streams of

inculturation through the history of the Indian church, we also need to point out the

two main trends of inculturation throughout the history. While most of the above

streams of inculturation originated from the efforts by the official church represented

by bishops, clerics, religious, and theologians, we can‟t ignore the inculturation efforts

initiated by the laity and the communities themselves. These two divergent trends

have featured not just in Indian inculturation history, but in the wider church history

as well across different continents of the world.

José Comblin identifies thus two types of inculturation in the West: “one for

the ruling classes, essentially the clergy, and another for the world of the people,

especially in the countryside.”354

While the elite inculturation integrated Greek

philosophy and the Roman monarchial system of government, the popular/people‟s

inculturation integrated their native and traditional religious practices and feasts.355

The caution regarding the elite cultures to which José Comblin alerts us is helpful

here: “The elite culture is more visible and seeks to ignore other culture, i.e., the

culture or subculture of the subordinate masses, which is dependent on that of the

elites and is not such a well-articulated system as that of the elites. It is fashioned by

combining fragments from the culture of the rich to shape a way of life.”356

In the Indian Church, similarly, we see two trends of inculturations: an elite

inculturation initiated by the theologians and the popular inculturation that germinates

and grows in the faith experience of the ordinary lay people. The attempts of the elite

inculturation have failed as they came from intellectual theologians who were far-

removed from the actual faith-experience of the people, and their attempts didn‟t

manage to gain acceptance and momentum in the actual Catholic communities. On the

354 José Comblin, People of God (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2004), 154. Please refer to footnote no.409 in

this chapter for a critique of Comblin‟s views on inculturation. 355

Cf. Comblin, People of God, 154-155. Comblin cites a few examples of people‟s inculturation. One

among them: “St. Anthony was the great marrying saint, obtaining fiancés for millions of anguished

young women.” 356

Comblin, People of God, 87.


other hand, the popular inculturation has made a dent into the faith-experience of the

people and communities. For example, many Indian lay Catholics follow the ritual

practice of offering floral worship to God. In every community, people bring flowers

to the church and offer them to God. Another prevalent practice is the offering of

fruits, rice, and other food material in the church and also sharing those offered food

materials among all gathered for worship.

Selva J. Raj357

, in his judicious article on inculturation in Indian Catholic

Church, distinguishes between the “institutional inculturation” and the “popular

inculturation” which are prominent in the Indian Church.358

Institutional inculturation

is the “inculturation from above” which is “essentially an elite enterprise” with no

involvement of the masses. He defines institutional inculturation as “the conscious

and contrived attempt by the Church hierarchy, progressive theologians and the

religious elite at incorporating and adapting imagery, ritual idioms, theological

concepts, scriptural texts and practices from Sanskritic Hinduism into the official

Catholic ritual system and theological database.”359

And this institutional inculturation

is said to be operative in three distinct yet related modes. The first is the “missionary

model,” represented by Roberto de Nobili, which has the missionary agenda of

gaining converts from Hindus by adaptation of Hindu lifestyle, customs, habits, dress

and diet. The second is the “monastic model,” represented by European monks who

set up Catholic ashrams in India like Bede Griffiths, which adopts the Hindu symbols,

theological and metaphysical concepts and ascetic lifestyle. The third and final is the

“ecclesial, liturgical model,” represented mainly by the NBCLC (National Biblical

Catechetical Liturgical Centre) Bangalore spearheaded by Amalorpavdoss, which

incorporated classical Indian dance forms, music, Sanskrit texts, religious art, ritual

objects and ritual idiom into Catholic liturgy.360

357 Selva J. Raj is the Stanley S. Kresge Associate Professor and Chair of Religious Studies at Albion

College, USA. A Past-President of the Midwest American Academy of Religion, he received his

Ph.D. in the History of Religions from the University of Chicago. He co-edited two volumes:

Popular Christianity in India: Riting Between the Lines (New York: SUNY, 2002). 358

Selva J. Raj, “Two Models of Indigenization in South Asian Catholicism: A Critique,” Vidyajyoti

69 (2005) 415-430. This was actually a paper presented at the International Conference on

“Christianity and Native Cultures” held at the University of Notre Dame, Indiana, USA, in

September, 2002. The author uses the terms “inculturation” and “indigenization” interchangeably in

this article. 359

Raj, “Two Models of Indigenization,” 417. 360

Raj, “Two Models of Indigenization,” 417-420.


The “popular inculturation” on the other hand, is the “inculturation from

below”; it is “the spontaneous and natural incorporation by the Catholic laity of

rituals, practices, and customs from popular Hinduism and indigenous tribal heritage

into day-to-day religious life and practice.”361

While the “form and content” of these

rituals are essentially Hindu, Raj argues, “the agent, recipient and the locus” of the

ritual, and the “inclusion of typical Catholic elements like rosary and holy water,”

make these rites distinctively Catholic.362

Pointing to the differences between “institutional” and “popular” inculturation

in the Indian Catholic Church, Raj explains that unlike the institutional inculturation

which is initiated by the elite, the popular inculturation is “a grass-roots experience of

the laity or religious masses that organically emerges from the lived experience and

human needs.”363

While the institutional inculturation relies heavily on Brahminic and

Sanskritic Hinduism, popular inculturation draws from popular lay Hinduism. The

former is concerned with the proper, while the latter is concerned with the

efficacious.364

Interestingly, the orthodox Hindu community is more resentful of the

institutional inculturation which attempts to appropriate Sanskritic Hinduism to the

Catholic faith and worship, while it exhibits no such opposition to the popular

inculturation in which the symbols and ritual the practices of popular Hinduism are

appropriated by Catholic laity.365

361 Raj, “Two Models of Indigenization,” 420. The author cites some examples like “water-garland,”

rite of stripping the widow, “Saturday Corpse” rite, etc., connected with funeral rites in South India,

especially among Tamil Catholics in Tamilnadu. See Ibid., 420-426. The author also points to the

prevalence of such customs among Goan Catholics. Corinne Dempsey points to the prevalence of

similar customs and practices among the Catholics in Kerala. Cf. Corinne G. Dempsey, “Selective

Indigenization and the Problem of Superstition in Kerala” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 69 (2005), 404-414. 362

Raj, “Two Models of Indigenization,” 426. Responding to the paper of Raj, Karen Pechilis

comments on the question as to why lay Catholics would adapt such Hindu rites: “either they

appealed unreflectively to their habitus, or they showed an awareness of the distinctive habitus of

Christian and Hindu authorities, but indicated that, although they know the rite as a Hindu practice,

they believe that it is efficacious in preventing misfortune in their own lives. Lay Catholics thus

perceive that there is something at stake for them in participating in this aspect of the Hindu

habitus, while they do not perceive any compelling reason from within Christian habitus to dissuade

them from practising the rite.” Karen Pechilis, “Response to the Essays on „Selective

Indigenization: Three Faces of South Indian Christianity,” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 69 (2005), 444-448. 363

Raj, “Two Models of Indigenization,” 427. The author also opines that popular inculturation often

occurs in opposition to, and in defiance of institutional norms and ecclesial directives, and thus the

process reflects the power struggle between the elite or clergy and the laity. 364

Raj, “Two Models of Indigenization,” 428. 365

Raj, “Two Models of Indigenization,” 428. The author proposes “popular inculturation” as a

paradigm for interreligious dialogue. He believes that dialogue happens primarily on the periphery


In India, while the Catholic enterprise of inculturation looks more at an „elitist‟

inculturation, the non-Catholic enterprise looks more at a „people‟ inculturation. The

Catholic theology of inculturation in India has mainly drawn on the elitist Hindu

traditions, automatically eliminating the majority of dalits and tribals in the Indian

Church who belong to the subaltern traditions of India. But, the non-Catholic theology

of inculturation in India drew its resources from the very experience of the dalits and

tribals in India. “Dalit Theology” can be termed as the most indigenous theology in

India, and it has mainly been a non-Catholic enterprise.

4.7. DALIT CRITIQUE OF INCULTURATION

There is today a general opinion among theologians in India that the project of

inculturation in India has not been very successful due to its exclusionary focus on the

elite culture of India, resulting in the neglect of all other religious traditions of India,

as well as the cultures and religions of the poor. As Amaladoss asserts, such

inculturation based on the elite culture of India “is bound to be irrelevant to the

majority of Christians” in India, for many dalits and tribals “not only do not identify”

with such high culture, but also “find it oppressive of their own identity and

tradition.”366

Indigenous dominant cultural forms are rejected by low castes because of the

hierarchy and subordination they imply. This presents a dilemma to the established

Christian churches in India, which are attempting to „inculturate‟ in the context of a

firm commitment to social justice and have a membership which is overwhelmingly

low-caste or tribal. Emerging out of this dilemma is the new tradition of “dalit

theology” – the theology of “the oppressed, the down-trodden, or broken.” Through

the „concrete subjectivity … of the oppressed, their particular experience and

histories, and aspirations,‟367

dalit theology aims to provide an analysis of the socio-

religious roots of oppression in India. Combining traditions of liberation theology and

inculturation, it generates a critique of hegemonic Hindu religious culture and sets

about constructing liberating dalit counter-cultures.368

In this, dalit theology draws on

among the religious masses rather than the religious elite. For him, efficacious dialogue can occurs

in the world of rituals rather than in a world of theological concepts and, as such, dialogue in action

happens amidst the laity. Raj, “Two Models of Indigenization,” 429. 366

Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 10-11. 367

Saral K. Chatterji, “Why Dalit Theology?” in M. E. Prabhakar, ed., Towards a Dalit Theology

(Delhi: ISPCK, 1989), 9. 368

Cf. Xavier Irudayaraj, ed., Emerging Dalit Theology (Madurai: Tamilnadu Theological Seminary,

1990).


the wider „dalit movements,‟ which are dalit or tribal political and cultural movements

asserting socio-religious identities for dalits which are separate from the dominant

„Hindu culture.‟ To this, dalit theologians add a critique of Indian Christianity‟s „Latin

and Sanskrit captivity,‟369

and emphasize the authenticity of Indian subaltern religious

traditions (low-caste or tribal religion, often characterized as non/pre-Hindu) as the

proper basis for a dalit Christian inculturation.370

Dalit theology is strongly critical of

forms of inculturation which draw on high-caste or Brahmanical traditions, and would

probably characterize the Hindu-Christian synthesis arising from de Nobili‟s mission

as simply a Christian form of high-caste Hindu hegemony.

4.7.1. Alienating High-Caste Brahmanical Inculturation

Arvind P. Nirmal,371

one of the pioneers of dalit theology, criticizes the

perpetuation of the elite Brahmanic tradition in Indian theology: “most of the

contributions to Indian Christian theology in the past came from high caste converts to

Christianity. The result has been that Indian Christian theology has perpetuated within

itself what I prefer to call „Brahmanic‟ tradition.”372

Indian Christian theologies “were

in the beginning mainly the reflections of converts or children of converts from

Brahmanism to Christianity, who carried the dialogue between Christianity and

Brahmanism within themselves and sought to express their faith in God, Christ and

the Church in relation to their own past Hindu tradition in the setting of the Indian

National self-awakening.”373

Though Indian culture is generally spoken of as being a single culture, India

indeed is a melting pot of many cultures; there are significant differences among the

cultures of Indian peoples, broadly coinciding with the linguistic regions. Indian

culture should be seen as “a shroud for a host of sub-cultures with different layers

within each of them.”374

Like the nation –made up of numerous cultural, language,

369 Prabhakar, Towards a Dalit Theology, 4.

370 See A. M. A. Ayrookuzhiel, “The Religious Resources of the Dalits in the Context of their

Struggle,” in S. K. Chatterji, ed., Essays in Celebration of the CISRS Silver Jubilee (Madras: CLS,

1983). 371

Arvind P. Nirmal (1936-1995), himself a dalit Christian, belonged to the Church of North India. He

taught at the United Theological College, Bangalore, and later at the Gurukul Lutheran Theological

College in Madras where he headed the department of Dalit Theology. 372

Arvind P. Nirmal, Heuristic Explorations (Madras: CLS, 1990), 27. 373

M. M. Thomas and P. T. Thomas, Towards an Indian Christian Theology: Life and Thought of

Some Pioneers (Tiruvalla: New Day Publications, 1992), 4. 374

Varaprasadam, “Inculturation: The Crucial Challenges in the Indian Situation,” 43.


ethnic groups375

–, the Christian community in India too is made up of many cultural,

ethnic, language and social groups.376

Amaladoss suggests there are three main

traditions in Indian culture: the Great Tradition, the Little Traditions and the Tribal

Traditions.377

As Varaprasadam rightly points out, one should be careful to avoid the

“instinctual impulse to identify Indian culture with the ancient Brahmanical culture

which has been dominant for centuries in India.”378

4.7.2. Neglect of Alternative Cultures and Religions of India

As Clarke rightly points out, “for at least the last two hundred years, Indian

Christian theology occupied itself with the challenging process of recollecting,

reinterpreting and reappropriating its religious and cultural legacy mainly in terms of

the Hindu tradition.”379

The non-Hindu alternative religious traditions such as

Buddhism and Jainism and other counter-cultural traditions were largely excluded

from inculturation processes in India. The emergence of Buddhism and Jainism in the

6th

century BCE, repudiating the authority of Orthodox Brahminism, is reckoned to be

the first major religious protest movement known in India. Jainism denied the

authority of the Vedas and revolted against Vedic sacrifices. Buddhism, while

accepting the essential teaching of the Upanishads, joined hands with Jainism in

denouncing Vedic sacrifices and Brahminic supremacy. 380

Both are oriented to the

375 The Indian population is racially diverse combining six main racial types: the Nagrito, the Proto-

Australoids or Austrics, the Mongoloids, the Mediterranean or Dravidian, the Western

Brachycephals and the Nordic Aryans. There are about 3000 castes, large and small. Caste

consciousness is still strong especially in the hinter-lands of Indian villages. Cf. C. N. Venugopal,

“Indian Caste Structure,” Manorama Year Book 1998 (Kottayam: Malayala Manorama, 1998) 463-

467. Of the 1652 mother-tongues and dialects listed in the 1991 census of India, 33 are spoken by

groups numbering over one hundred thousand. The Indian Constitution recognizes eighteen major

languages. 376

Authors have variant divisions of the groups that make up the Catholic Church in India.

Varaprasadam categorizes six main groups: the Syrian Catholics of Kerala; the Konkan and West-

Coast Catholics; the Latin-rite Catholics of South India; Converts of North India; the Adivasi

converts of North India; and, finally, the North-Eastern tribal converts. Cf. Varaprasadam,

“Inculturation: The Crucial Challenges in the Indian Situation,” 42-43. 377

Amaladoss, Becoming Indian, 38-39. Amaladoss opines that Indian culture is closer to the West

than to the East. “The Indian tradition, in languages, symbol and thought, is related to the West

more than to China and Japan whose cultures are shaped by a worldview expressed in ideorams.

The Aryans and the Dravidians are migrants from the West… On the other hand, the Indian

emotional and artistic tradition, especially as it develops after the search inwards in the 6th

cent

B.C., is oriental and the Yogic and Buddhist traditions of sadhana links India firmly to the Orient...

One could say graphically that India has a „western‟ head and an „oriental‟ heart.” 378

Varaprasadam, “Inculturation: The Crucial Challenges in the Indian Situation,” 43. 379

Clarke, Dalits and Christianity, 18. 380

Cf. R. S. Sugirtharajah, Troublesome Texts: The Bible in Colonial and Contemporary Culture

(Sheffield: Phoenix Press, 2008), the chapter on “Gautama and the Galilean,” 1-31.


cause of the common people, assert the common spiritual right of all men,

acknowledge compassion and love for life, preach the language of the common people

and rejecting the authority of the Brahmin.

Another important Indian tradition which refuted the Brahminical

domination381

in Hinduism by interpreting religion in terms of love and devotion

rather than knowledge, and affirming the equality of all human persons, is the Bhakti

tradition.382

The Bhakti tradition of the medieval period, like Buddhism, repudiated

Vedic sacrifices and the practice of ritual purity. The Bhaktas saw no meaning in

devotion to the Lord divorced from neighbourly love and the practice of justice. This

movement flourished greatly between the thirteenth and seventeenth centuries.

Prominent representatives of this tradition include, Namdev (1270-1350), Kabir

(1440-1518),383

Nanak (1469-1539), Tukaram (1598-1650), Chaitanya (1468-1533)

and Tulsidas (1532-1623). Virasaivism is one important sect of the Bhakti

movement.384

Bhagavata Purana is one of the chief sources of the Bhakti

movement.385

4.7.3. Neglect of Cultures and Religions of the Poor

The culture and religion of millions of Indians, the dalits and tribals, have

seldom featured in the indigenising efforts of Indian theologians. As Clarke rightly

points out, the Indian-Christian theology not only “tends to be exclusionary and non-

dialogical by turning a deaf ear to the collective religious resources of the Dalits,” but

381 Leela Mullatti in her study of the movement suggests that “Bhakti movement totally rejected the

need of Brahmins in religious performance.” Leela Mullatti, The Bhakti Movement and the Status of

Women: A case Study of Virasaivism (New Delhi: Abhinav Publications, 1989), 4. 382

Cf. Felix Wilfred, “Indian Social Institutions and Movements of Protest: Towards An Alternative

Socio-Political Conception and Praxis From Indigenous Roots,” Indian Theological Studies 30

(1993), 229-231. Sadhu Sunder Singh and A. J. Appasamy have used the Bhakti tradition in their

theologies, but have failed to orient a deep theological appraisal of the tradition in a successful way. 383

See Neeti M. Sadarangani, Bhakti Poetry in Medival India: Its Inception, Cultural Encounter and

Impact (New Delhi: Sarup & Sons, 2004), 90-149. 384

Virasaivism developed in the 11th

and 12th

centuries in Karnataka, and is said to have more than 300

male and female saints, of whom Bhasaveshwara and Akkamahadevi are the most prominent. Cf.

Mullatti, The Bhakti Movement and the Status of Women, 5-6. 385

Winand Callewaert, an emeritus professor at our Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, has published

many works on the Bhakti saints of Hindi-speaking belt of North India. Cf. Winand Callewaert,

Devotional Hindi Literature: A Critical Edition of Pañc-Vānī or five works of Dādū, Kābir,

Nāmdev, Raidās, Hardās with the Hindī songs of Gorakhnāth and Sundardās, and A Complete

Word-index, 2 vols (Delhi: Manohar,1991); Widnand Callewaert and Peter G. Friedlander, The Life

and Works of Raidās. Delhi: Manohar, 1992); Winand Callewaert, The Dictionary of Bhakti

Tradition (New Delhi: D. K. Print World, 2009).


also “fosters the hegemonic objectives of the caste communities.”386

While Indian

theology serves the interests of the dominant caste communities, “its symbolic forms,

themes and media are not attuned to the religious sensibilities of the subaltern

communities.”387

“Though Dalits account for a major proportion of Christians in

India, Indian theology has largely ignored the factuality and fecundity of this socio-

historical reality.”388

Dalit theologians argue that the rich resources of dalits and

tribals and women in India need to become the main resource of Indian theology and

inculturation, for these resources have notions of transcendence in them, they bear the

promise of peace, prosperity, equality and liberation. The indigenising and

inculturation efforts must seek the pathos, the aspirations, and the faith of the

culturally, socially and economically dominated subaltern people.

That brings us to the end of our study of the history of inculturation in Indian

Church. It is evident from our survey, that inculturation has been happening in the

Indian church since the very early centuries of Christianity. While it had a very

dormant and mellowed focus in the earlier centuries, it has expanded into a vibrant

and vigorous stream in the life of the Indian church from the advent of Roberto de

Nobili and, later, through the liturgical and ashram movements which have become

the “two feet of inculturation” in India in the twentieth century. Despite the many

fruits reaped from the twenty-century-long process of inculturation in India, today it is

evaluated as an inadequate and misdirected process with many limitations, and one

which has failed in creating a truly indigenous church in India. The biggest critique of

inculturation in India is its exclusive fascination for the dominant culture of India, and

a total and blasphemous neglect of the alternative cultures/religions and the

cultures/religions of the poor. This very complex context where twenty centuries of

inculturation have failed to truly “inculturate” the church in India, has called many

current Indian theologians to reflect on inculturation. Many have proposed “theologies

of inculturation” to remedy the situation and help an inculturation that will create a

truly Indian church. Thus, we shall proceed now to review some of these

contemporary theologies of inculturation, which will not only assist a better

comprehension of the “Indian theology of inculturation,” but will also enable us to

propose, through them, our own insights for an inculturation that will create a truly

Indian church.

386 Clarke, Dalits and Christianity, 2.




5. CONTEMPORARY THEOLOGY OF INCULTURATION IN INDIA

Indian theology of inculturation in the past was based on two principles: that

the church needs to be inculturated in each local cultural milieu, and that there are

positive elements in other Indian religions (mainly the Hindu tradition) to be imbibed

into the life and ritual of the church. Based on such a theology of inculturation, the

church in India for twenty centuries has made an indiscrete adaptation of many

cultural and ritual forms of Hindu tradition. The early inculturation movements

undertaken by the Syrian Christians of Kerala; the second phase pioneered by Roberto

de Nobili, and the most recent liturgical and ashramic movements are all guided by an

overly positive attitude to the elite Hindu tradition, and a neglect of other religions

and cultures of India. Such inculturation has not only failed to inculturate the church

in India, but also has alienated the majority of the poor within the church. Thus, in

recent decades, there has been a univocal critique of such inculturation in the Indian

church, and a call to reform the theology and the process of inculturation in India.

While there have been many theologians who made such attempts, we shall make a

selective review of four current Indian theologies of inculturation. We shall review the

theologies of inculturation of three Indian theologians – Felix Wilfred, Michael

Amaladoss and Samuel Rayan – and Aloysius Pieris, a Sri Lankan Jesuit. The three

Indian theologians, Wilfred, Amaladoss and Rayan, are the most reputed Indian

theologians, who have proposed significant and ground-breaking theologies of

inculturation and moved away from the traditional theologies of inculturation in India.

We have included Pieris, a non-Indian theologian whose Sri Lankan context closely

mirrors the context of India. Pieris is the most reputed theologian in Asia, and we

believe that his theology of inculturation is very significant and relevant to our

research on this subject. Moreover, all these four theologians seem to base their

theologies of inculturation on the two faces of Indian reality: the religions and the

poor which we believe are fundamental to inculturation in India.

5.1. FELIX WILFRED: INTER-RELIGIOUS AND INTER-CULTURAL

Felix Wilfred‟s theology of inculturation is bound up with the theology of

religions and is founded on the premise that one cannot genuinely and fruitfully

engage in inculturation of Christianity without encountering non-Christian


religions.389

An inculturation that neglects the understanding and encounter of non-

Christian religions can become very questionable and counter-productive.390

Our understanding of inculturation and its practice are very much bound up with

our attitudes towards and relationships with other religions, because of the

intimate connection between culture and religion. Commitment to inculturation

cannot go together with negative and exclusivist attitude towards other religions.

Therefore the task of inculturation imposes on us the obligation and provides us

the opportunity to establish fresh relationships with followers of other world

religions evolve new perspectives and develop the right attitudes towards them.391

When Christianity is inculturated into a particular culture of people, this

culture which has developed over many centuries, has been influenced and formed by

the non-Christian religions which the people have practised prior to becoming

Christians. Most cultures in the world are shaped by different religions. Religions are

so much interwoven into the cultures of people, that one can never comprehend the

culture of people without entering into dialogue with the religions that have shaped

it.392

“If culture is the body, religion is the soul, the ultimate or core element of

culture; if culture is language, religion is the thought permeating it.”393

And “to adopt

only cultural elements without coming to grips with religions would be tantamount to

relate to a body without the soul.”394

When we talk of religions, we can‟t delineate religion from the people. We

need to bear in mind unfailingly that “behind religion are people, believing, hoping,

experiencing and expressing themselves.”395

In Asia, religion is not just a part of

people‟s lives, but it is life itself, a total way of life. As José Comblin similarly puts it:

389 Felix Wilfred, “World Religions and Christian Inculturation,” Indian Theological Studies 25:1

(March, 1988), 9. 390

Felix Wilfred, Sunset in the East? Asian Challenges and Christian Involvement (Madras: University

of Madras, 1991), 142-143. 391

Wilfred, Sunset in the East, 140. 392

Bede Griffiths affirms that it is especially true of Indian culture: “These ancient cultures, especially

that of India, are intimately bound up with religion; in fact, they are the expression of religion in all

the different forms of human life, social, economic, political, artistic and philosophical.” Bede

Griffiths, Christ in India (New York: Charles Scriber‟s Sons, 1966), 164. Similarly Pope Benedict

XVI, in one of his earlier writings affirms the fusion of culture and religions: “In all known

historical cultures, religion is an essential element of culture, is indeed its determinative center; it is

religion that determines the scale of values and, thereby, the inner cohesion and hierarchy of all

these cultures.” Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance: Christian Belief and World Religions (San

Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2004), 59. 393


Wilfred, “World Religions and Christian Inculturation,” 10. 395

Wilfred, Sunset in the East, 141.


This [people of God] is a people made up of persons who belong to their peoples

by birth or adoption. Its members bring their entire way of life, the entire culture,

politics, and economics of their nation, and likewise their entire religion. Even if

subjectively they want to be converted, they continue to bear most of what they

acquired in their people and continue to acquire through a shared life. Even if they

strive to be pure Christians they are always only partly so, because they are still

pagans in many aspects of their life, especially religion.396

5.1.1. Inculturation as Cross-Cultural Hermeneutics

Wilfred finds the prevalent methodologies of inculturation “defective” for

their inadequate dealing with culture. They do not value culture sufficiently and

consider it as a mere “instrument” for the indigenisation of Christianity. The focus is

on the “universality of Christian faith” rather than on culture.397

These models of

inculturation “let the theological precede the anthropological” and, according to

Wilfred, true inculturation can happen “only when the anthropological precedes the

theological.”398

Thus, he suggests a shift in the methodology of inculturation, and that

“cross-cultural hermeneutics” should be at the heart of a methodology. The question

then is not how to make Christianity Asian, but how to understand what the church is

in terms of one‟s culture? For Felix, the anthropological and the cultural are not mere

“contexts of the Church” but are “part of the very text of the Church.”399

Wilfred indicates some principles of such “cross-cultural hermeneutics” and

their implication for the church. Such methodology will attempt to understand the

church through the cultural world of the local people. He points out, for example, that

Asians who perceive truth as “more an ontic than a mental reality,” would have

difficulty understanding “church as an institution proclaiming truth in the form of

concepts.”400

Since every culture has a particular world-view, in the context of

religious pluralism, true inculturation cannot take place without a dialogue of

religions. Pointing to the numerous devotees of Christ in Asia who are not baptized,

he indicates that inculturation in such context calls for an “ecclesiology not simply

centred on redemption and salvation, but integrated within the larger frame of

396 Comblin, People of God, 152.

397 He addresses similar critique also to the Christian theology of religions and interreligious dialogue.

He argues as long as starting point of dialogue is how Christianity relates to other religions, focus

remains on Church and other religions will not be treated with their due value. Cf. Felix Wilfred,

“Dialogue Gasping for Breath?” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 51 (1987), 450-451. 398

Felix Wilfred, “Inculturation as a Hermeneutical Question,” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 52 (1988), 423-424; emphasis in the original. 399

Wilfred, “Towards an Anthropologically and Culturally Founded Ecclesiology,” 505. 400

Wilfred, “Inculturation as a Hermeneutical Question,” 427.


theology of creation.”401

Since culture is intimately related to the socio-political

realities of life, and culture can be a force of transformation, inculturation is

concretely linked to the realities of poverty and injustice in Asia.402

And the

normativity of inculturation has to be sought from within the cultural world of a local

church in its concrete living of the Gospel.403

5.1.2. Inculturation and the Context of Religious Pluralism

Religious Pluralism is undoubtedly the most daunting challenge the Church

faces today. Even though Christianity has encountered many ancient religions of

Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Syrian and European worlds, the context has drastically

changed when Christianity began encountering the great world religions such as

Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam.404

“The question is shifting today from what is the

relationship of Christianity to non-Christian religions to what is the place of

Christianity in a religiously pluralistic world?”405

Religious Pluralism is reshaping the theology of the Church and as such it

shapes the theology of inculturation too.406

Wilfred suggests that “commitment to

401 Wilfred, “Inculturation as a Hermeneutical Question,” 429. Wilfred elaborates in another article the

concept of “Jesus-Community.” He argues that the disciples of Jesus in the Gospels had variant

degrees of belonging to the Jesus-Community, and that such ecclesiological concept is more

suitable for India where many disciples of Christ choose to remain outside the official structure of

the church, and yet are more devoted to Christ than many Christians. See Wilfred, “Towards an

Anthropologically and Culturally Founded Ecclesiology,” 505-509. 402

Wilfred, “Inculturation as a Hermeneutical Question,” 430-431. 403

Wilfred, “Inculturation as a Hermeneutical Question,” 434-435. 404

Because it is also here in the East that Christianity encounters great spiritual traditions, as Bede

Griffiths sums up: “Here for the first time the Church is confronted with the ancient cultures of

Asia, which represent the greatest spiritual tradition of mankind. Griffiths, Christ in India, 163.

Similarly José Comblin says: “In the Roman empire, Christianity did not encounter any great

religion, but simply the vestiges of a decadent polytheism which was scorned by Greek and Roman

intellectuals. The church encountered a philosophy and a law, but not a religion. Today it has to

accept the encounter with major religions and their imposing concomitant cultures.” Comblin,

People of God, 155-156. 405

Wilfred, Sunset in the East, 140. The emphasis is in the original; See also Wilfred, “Dialogue

Gasping for Breath?” 450. Ernst Troeltsch (1865-1923), while he was professor at the University of

Heidelberg (1894-1915) dealt with this question in his work Die Absolutheit des Christentums und

die Religionsgeschichte (Tübingen, J. C. B. Mohr, 1902). It is translated by David Reid as The

Absoluteness of Christianity and the History of Religions (Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1971).

Peter De Mey offers an excellent overview as well as an evaluation of Troeltsch. Peter De Mey,

“Ernst Troeltsch: A Moderate Pluralist? An Evaluation of His Reflections on the Place of

Christianity Among the Other Religions,” in T. Merrigan and J. Haers, eds., The Myriad Christ:

Plurality and the Quest for Unity in the Contemporary Christology, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum

Theologicarum Lovaniensium, CLII (Leuven: Peeters, 2000), 349-380. 406

Francis J. Buckley, S.J., similarly, speaking about the link between pluralism and inculturation,

enumerates many benefits of pluralism for inculturation and to theology: “Cultural and religious

pluralism can alert us to many different facets of God‟s revelation and help us express praise and


inculturation cannot go together with a negative and exclusivist attitude towards other

religions.”407

In our days so distinctively marked by religious pluralism, we cannot

reflect on inculturation outside the context of religious pluralism. It goes without

saying that in a country like India which is so predominantly pluralistic and the birth-

place of many world religions, a reflection of inculturation within the context of

religious pluralism needs no vindication.

5.1.3. The Implications of an Inculturation within the Context of Religions

Wilfred points to four implications of an inculturation that is practised in

fruitful dialogue with other world religions: recognition of cultural conditionings;

interpreting the past; shedding of prejudices, positive perspective on other religions;

living dialogue; and cross-cultural hermeneutics.408

The first implication of such an approach to inculturation is the recognition of

cultural conditioning. As is the case with other world religions, Christianity too is

culturally conditioned.409

“Christian faith has existed only and always in the concrete

gratitude to God in ways that touch the hearts of different racial and ethnic groups. Pluralism

expresses proper humility before the infinite mystery of God and our fragmentary grasp of that

mystery. It manifests respect for the presence and gifts of God in each person and culture. Pluralism

can thus ease fears of the loss of ethnic or cultural identity through conversion to Christianity.”

Francis J. Buckley, S.J., The Church in Dialogue. Culture and Traditions (Lanham: University

Press of America, 2000), 6. 407


Wilfred, Sunset in the East, 143- 155. 409

José Comblin summarises well the shaping up of the Church by different philosophies, cultures and

systems in the West. He says that the finest and most eloquent examples of the reception of culture

by the Church can be found in Greek and Roman adaptations. Christian conception of truth was

shaped by Greek philosophy; Scholasticism facilitated a clear and coherent formulation of doctrine;

Greek spiritualism shaped Christian life into a matter of mortifying the body. From Rome the

Church received the structure and very conception of power as empire, monarchy and domination.

See Comblin, People of God,144-153. But, Comblin calls these adaptations obsolete. “ Today,

however, we must recognize that the legacies of both Greece and Rome are primary obstacles to

evangelization. Within the system created by these legacies, it is impossible to evangelize current

Western culture. It is radically impossible to evangelize Asian peoples who live in very ancient

civilizations, which do not accept the model of domination. It is radically impossible to evangelize

the Indigenous people of the Americas and African peoples, who may possibly submit because they

are fascinated by the church‟s power, but their inner soul cannot be reached this way.” Comblin,

People of God, 152. We feel that Comblin fails to recognize that these adaptations were significant

in their own times and contexts. Those generations were only attempting a contextual understanding

of their faith in their milieu, as we are doing in our own times, as Cardinal Avery Dulles rightly

said: “Christianity has been a vital religion for so many centuries because Christians of successive

generations have had the courage to rethink their faith in the light of the most pressing problems of

their day. This was done by the biblical authors, by the Greek and Latin Fathers, and by the

Scholastics. The ancient creeds bear the impress of the life-and-death encounters between the

Christian fifth and the secular cultures of the past.” Avery Dulles, The Survival of Dogma: Faith,

Authority, and Dogma in a Changing World (Crossroads, NY: 1987) 201. While affirming the

necessity of a renewal of the past creeds in the context of present-day world and its concerns,


and definite cultural and religious environments. What is often presented as the

universal essence of Christianity is but a conditioned and particularized expression of

Christian faith and experience.”410

While saying this, Wilfred is aware that “it is not

possible to refrain from articulating the Christian faith and message in a particular

language and culture” and he does affirm the “transcendence of the Christian message

above all particular traditions, forms, etc.”411

He suggests though that the

“universality of Christian faith is affirmed not by denying or transcending

particularities but by experiencing the universal and the transcendent in the particular

or in the concretum of a determined cultural context.”412

Wilfred warns of two

dangers that churches can fall into in affirming that the Christian faith is expressed in

the particular. He warns the younger churches against the danger of making the

Christian faith devoid of all forms and cultural expressions, and the older churches

claiming against the possession of the “universal essence of faith.”413

The second implication is the interpretation of the past. With a brief survey of

the biblical literature, Wilfred concludes that what was said in the Scriptures in

relation to other religions and cultures was “dictated by the immediate concerns of the

community and the concrete problems”414

of their times. As such, Wilfred affirms that

we cannot legitimately extrapolate these texts to our times and to our relations with

other religions and cultures. Undoubtedly, the Scriptures do not have a comprehensive

theology of non-Christian religions. Wilfred affirms that while one can easily perceive

the negative attitudes of the early Fathers of the Church towards other religions and

cultures, positive attitudes are not missing.415

And he concludes that the approach

Cardinal Dulles cautions against a mindless rejection of all that is old: “We should, however, be on

guard against a mindless rejection of the old. For the continuing self-identity of the Church, as a

world-wide community of faith that traces its origins to biblical times, it is important to keep the

memory of the past alive. By a process of education not beyond the capacities of the normal lay

believer, it is still possible to grasp the message of the Bible and the ancient creeds.” Dulles, The

Survival of Dogma, 202. We can only agree with his suggestion that certain discrete archaism is

helpful. 410

Wilfred, Susnset in the East, 143. Emphasis in the original. 411



Wilfred, Sunset in the East, 144. Emphasis in the original. 414


Wilfred, “World Religions and Christian Inculturation,” 16.


perceptible in the integration of Greco-Roman cultures and philosophies into

Christian theology is dialogical and not adaptive.416

The third implication he indicates is shedding prejudices. Wilfred calls for

shedding all prejudices of the past against the other religions and cultures, as

“meaningful and fruitful inculturation and dialogue can take place only if there is

freedom from prejudices.”417

Reactionary attitudes towards other religions and

cultures, ethnocentrism, cultural romanticism and exaggerated reactions to neo-

colonial experience are some of the prejudices Wilfred calls all to shed. He rightly

points out that “Christian attitudes and positions against other religious traditions were

formed in a polemical and apologetic climate.”418

A positive enquiry and empathetic

understanding of other religious traditions is vital and impending.

Reducing other religions (without attempting to enter into the world of their

experience) into our theological categories and condemning them (without giving

them an opportunity to explain themselves) would be an epistemological naïveté

and an ethical impropriety. Our cognitive efforts should be such that they respect

the self-understanding of these religions and cultures. By forcing other religions

into our mould we would, apart from missing what is valuable in them, fail, more

basically, in fidelity to truth.419

Bede Griffiths similarly reiterates the necessity of the change of attitudes

towards Indian religions. “It is a question of how the gospel message itself is to be

presented. As long as we try to present the gospel message as something opposed to

the religion and culture of India we are doomed to failure. We have to learn to

understand the Indian mind, its art and philosophy and above all its religious

aspirations, and to present the gospel in its vital relation to this living tradition.”420

A

more positive understanding of Indian religions and cultures is pivotal for the mission

of the Church in India, since much of the Indian culture and people are deeply rooted

in their religion.

While Wilfred does not deny the truth that religions and cultures are mixed

with elements of sin, ambiguity and falsity, he suggests that we should not compare

the best elements of Christianity with the worst elements of other religions and

416 Wilfred, Sunset in the East, 148. See also Felix Wilfred, “Some Tentative Reflections on the

Language of Christian Uniqueness: An Indian Perspectives,” Bulletin 85/86:1 (1994), 42. 417

Wilfred, “World Religions and Christian Inculturation,” 18. 418



Griffiths, Christ to India, 164.


cultures. We should also be aware that Christianity itself contains such elements and

that the Church is “always in need of being purified” (LG 8).421

The fourth implication is the living dialogue. Wilfred suggests that a “living

dialogue” that goes beyond mere discussions of concepts, will enable the genuine

process of inculturation.422

The living dialogue while leading to a progressive

discovery of other religions, will also “enable us to find authentic ways of living and

expressing our own Christian faith. It will reveal to us many riches of our own

faith.”423

Living dialogue fosters the collaboration with other religions in building the

kingdom of God and eradicating everything that is evil in the human society.424

The

“Christian participation in such common tasks with neighbours of other faiths is an

important and much needed form of inculturation.”425

The higher the participation, the

deeper the inculturation.

Finally, Wilfred suggests the practice of cross-cultural hermeneutics, the lack

of which will make the process of inculturation very superficial.426

Cross-cultural

hermeneutics will enable a deeper comprehension of the “religious world” of the

other, and will produce a deeper inculturation. He rejects an inculturation which “culls

out from the culture of peoples elements which suit us” as done, for example, by

Roberto de Nobili. Such efforts, Wilfred believes, make inculturation “nothing more

than a window-dressing.”427

Wilfred rejects such inculturation as he argues that

“religions and culture are organic wholes” and any sign or a symbol cannot be severed

from the “horizon of the whole.”428

He believes that cross-cultural and cross-religious

hermeneutics can help a more holistic understanding of religions429

and eventually

enable a deeper inculturation.

421 Wilfred, Sunset in the East, 150.

422 Wilfred, “World Religions and Christian Inculturation,” 22-24.


424 Felix Wilfred, “Asia and the Social Teachings of the Church,” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 71 (2007), 485-509. 425


Cf. Wilfred, “World Religions and Christian Inculturation,” 24-25. 427



Wilfred, Dialogue Gasping for Breath,” 456, 463-465.


5.1.4. The Local Church as the Agent of Inculturation

Felix Wilfred holds the “local community” as the agent of inculturation. The

community of believers living within a particular socio-cultural milieu is the agent of

inculturation, and in its very life the church becomes incarnate in a place. The local

church is responsible for the incarnation of the Gospel. Inculturation is the “very

mode” of being Church, not an “activity of the Church” among many.430

Local

Church only can authentically discern the “Christian authenticity” of its inculturation,

and not any external body which is not actually involved within the dynamism of the

community.431

Inculturation is a “spontaneous process of a community becoming a

local church.” Even within the local community, the laity should be the active agents

of inculturation, not the clerics. As such, inculturation should not be imposed from

outside the local community. 432

Wilfred attempts to affirm that the Church in India can become truly Indian

through a relevant theology and practice of inculturation. His main orientation in the

theology of inculturation seems to be the dynamics of religions and cultures and how

these should guide a genuine process of inculturation. Today, when Church in India

interacts with Indian cultures and religions, it cannot conceive itself in a isolation

from these cultures and religions for it lives with these religions in a “face to face”

relationship within a “long history of mutuality.”433

Very truly, the process of

inculturation cannot understand Indian culture in an isolated manner keeping itself

outside it as the Church itself, for 2000 years in Kerala and for about 500 years in

other parts of India, has contributed what “Indian cultures” have shaped to be today.

Church in India has certainly played a great role in the evolution of Indian cultures

and as such it is already part of them. Indian Church is a co-creator of the Indian

cultures together with other religions, civilizations and movements; as such, it is

already within the great story of Indian cultures and religions, and its theology of

inculturation cannot be explored in isolation from these cultures and religions of

India.

430 Wilfred, Sunset in the East, 154-155.

431 Felix Wilfred, “The Problem of a Valid Starting Point for Theologizing in India,” in Michael

Amaladoss et al, eds., Theologizing in India (Bangalore: TPI, 1981), 144; Wilfred, Sunset in the

East, 181-183. 432

Felix Wilfred, “Three Nodal Points in the Theology of the Laity Today. Part-II,” Vidyajyoti Journal

of Theological Reflection 50 (1986), 571. 433

Cf. Wilfred, “Some Tentative Reflections on the Language of Christian Uniqueness,” 45.


Inculturation for Wilfred is not a mere “transposition” but an “act of

interpretation” out of the Indian context.434

Thus, he has problems with the earlier

attempts of indigenisation where Indian theologians developed Indian theology basing

on Hindu religious thought. But, that is “no less a system than that of the West.” In

such attempts one simply replaces Western philosophical language with an Indian

one. In Wilfred‟s view, this is not really an Indian theology but “an Indianised

Western theology.” Moreover, the Hindu categories these indigenizers used are those

“often very remote from the present day Indian context.”435

Rightly so, Indian

theological inculturation as well as the liturgical and ashramic inculturations need to

cross the frontiers of a mere transposition of Hindu forms and thought to a deeper

inculturation of Christian faith within the Indian context.

The question of the poor in the project of inculturation is not completely

missing in the writings of Wilfred. While his main “texts of inculturation”436

do not

treat, as is evident in the above treatment, the necessity and urgency of inculturation

from the perspectives of the poor, his writings in general manifest a deep sensitivity to

the issues of the poor and a radical affirmation of the privilege of the poor in the entire

theological discourse, especially in India.437

One can find in his writings on other

subjects references to the significance of the poor and their liberation in the project of

inculturation,438

but he fails to sufficiently extend such statements into lengthy

treatments. Further, we feel that Wilfred does not manifest an fruitful translation of

his general “privileging the poor” in his theology into the very theology of

inculturation he proposes in the texts which substantially deal with inculturation. On a


435 Felix Wilfred, “The Problem of a Valid Starting Point for Theologizing in India,” in Michael

Amaladoss et al, eds., Theologizing in India (Bangalore: TPI, 1981), 138-139. 436

His extensive and most comprehensive treatment of inculturation remains to date the section on

“Inculturation and Dialogue” in his book Sunset in the East, which was also the main interactive

text for us in the above section, and which brings together many of his earlier articles on

inculturation. No recent extensive work on inculturation by Wilfred since Sunset in the East,

published almost two decades back, might indicate the general waning of theological interest on the

subject in the eighties and nineties in India. The nineties has shifted the theological engagement to

interreligious dialogue. The case is also similar with Michael Amaladoss whom we treat next in this

section. He began with inculturation with Becoming India in 1992, moves already Beyond

Inculturation in 1998 to interreligious dialogue, and Beyond Dialogue in 2008. 437

Cf. Felix Wilfred, Dalit Empowerment (Bangalore: NBCLC, 2007); Felix Wilfred, The Sling of

Utopia (Delhi: ISPCK, 2005), especially 104-163 and 307-325; Felix Wilfred, Asian Dreams and

Christian Hope: At the Dawn of the Millennium (Delhi: ISPCK, 2003), especially 26-78, 97-121,

and 245-266; Felix Wilfred, “Liberation in India and the Church‟s Participation,” in Felix Wilfred,

ed., Leave the Temple: Indian Paths to Human Liberation (Trichy: Carmel, 1996), 175-198. 438

For example: “An inculturation that is not liberation-oriented can become church-centred and not

kingdom-centred,” Wilfred, “Liberation in India and the Church‟s Participation,” 180;


more positive note though, we can say that his very “privileging the poor” in

theological reflection is itself the greatest and most relevant theological inculturation

in the perspectives of the poor in India; he is undoubtedly one of the most creative

liberation theologians of India and an outspoken academic defender of the rights of

the poor and the oppressed.

5.2. MICHAEL AMALADOSS: TRANSFORMATIVE ENCOUNTER

Michael Amaladoss can be regarded as the Indian theologian, next only to

Amalorpavadass, who has developed a systematic theological reflection on

inculturation in India.439

His early research fields of liturgy and mission440

seem to

have led him naturally into a deeper theological reflection on inculturation. This in

turn has led him into his later and more recent research into the theology of

interreligious dialogue through which he has become widely known, particularly in

the West.441

While we shall at a later stage of this research examine his theology of

interreligious dialogue, we shall limit ourselves here to the elucidation of his theology

of inculturation.442

5.2.1 Critique of Inculturation

In his critique of inculturation in India, there are two ways Amaladoss thinks

in which it went wrong. Firstly, the inculturation project in India, as led by the elite,

culled elements of culture from literary sources of Indian culture compatible with

Christianity, rather than finding them in the actual life of the people.443

Secondly,

inculturation in India was based on the „high‟ culture of India and, as a result, it was

irrelevant to most Christians who were poor and who did not identify themselves with

439 Amaladoss actually collaborated with Amalorpavadass at the National Biblical Catechetical and

Liturgical Centre (NBCLC), a pioneer institution of inculturation in India, and taught courses there.

Cf. Michael Amaladoss, “Faith Meets Faith: Living with Cross-Cultural Experiences,” Yearbook of

Contextual Theologies (1998), 13. 440

He did his masters in liturgy and Ph.D. in sacramental theology at the Institut Catholique in Paris.

He says that he became a missiologist by accident, rather than by his design. Cf. Amaladoss, “Faith

Meets Faith,” 16. He served first as Vice-President and later President of the International

Association of Mission Studies (IAMS), 1988-1994. 441

His important books on interreligious dialogue include Making All Things New. Dialogue,

Pluralism and Evangelization in Asia (Anand: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1990); Walking Together:

The Practice of Inter-Religious Dialogue (Anand: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1992); Making

Harmony: Living in A Pluralist World (Delhi: ISPCK, 2003). 442

The two important books on inculturation by Amaladoss are: Becoming Indian: The Process of

Inculturation (Bangalore: Dharmaram, 1992) and Beyond Inculturation: Can the Many Be One?

(Delhi: Vidyajyoti/ISPCK, 1998). 443

Michael Amaladoss, “Inculturation in India: Historical Perspectives and Questions,” Yearbook of

Contextual Theologies (1994), 46.


the high culture of India. Pointing out that there is no mono-Indian culture, but that

Indian culture is indeed a mosaic of cultures, he calls for a multicultural gospel-

culture encounter.444

5.2.2. Inculturation

In his early work, Becoming Indian, Amaladoss clarifies some basic concepts

and assumptions about inculturation. Inculturation “is not merely a new way of

expressing, but a new way of being.”445

Inculturation leads to the emergence of a local

Church.446

Inculturation is an unending process and the process has to go on in all

churches, not just in new churches.447

Inculturation was a natural process in the early

Church and in later missions but it can‟t be a natural process in our days.448

Inculturation is necessary “not only for the life of the Christian community, but also

for its ongoing mission.”449

He widens the scope of inculturation as he argues that it

has a greater outreach than the local Church, to establishing the Reign of God, and as

such it has two dimensions.450

Like Wilfred, he affirms the indispensable link between

inculturation and interreligious dialogue, and suggests that there can‟t be inculturation

without interreligious dialogue.451

Referring to the positive change and transformation

the message of Christ has brought to Indian people and their culture, Amaladoss

points out that the goal of inculturation should reach beyond the realm of the local

Church to the wider human community, to creating the Reign of God.452

444 Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 10-11.

445 Amaladoss, Becoming Indian, 5.

446 Amaladoss, Becoming Indian, 5, 8. “Inculturation is the way in which the people freely respond to

the Gospel, live their faith and become Church in a particular place.” Becoming Indian, 10. 447

Amaladoss, Becoming Indian, 5, 12-13. 448

Amaladoss, Becoming Indian, 6-7. 449

Amaladoss, Becoming Indian, 7. 450

Amaladoss, Becoming Indian, 15-17. 451

Amaladoss, Becoming Indian, 13-14. Cf. Michael Amaladoss, Faith, Culture and Inter-religious

Dialogue (Delhi: Indian Social Institute, 1985); Felix Wilfred, “World Religions and Christian

Inculturation,” Indian Theological Studies 25 (1988) 5-26. 452

Amaladoss, Becoming Indian, 15-17. Amaladoss cites here also the example of Gandhi whose

doctrine of non-violence was inspired by the Sermon on the Mount and who said that if a Christian

is someone who follows the teachings of Christ, then he (Gandhi) claimed to be a Christian. Cf. I.

Jesudasan, Gandhian Theology of Liberation (Anand: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1987). See also

Stanley J. Samartha, The Hindu Response to the Unbound Christ (Madras: Christian Literature

Society, 1974); M. M. Thomas, Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance (London: SCM

Press, 1969).


5.2.3. Beyond Inculturation

Amaladoss feels that inculturation understood as „embodiment of the gospel‟

in a culture based on the paradigm of the incarnation is insufficient and unsuitable to

the current context because he thinks that such an approach looks at the gospel as

something dominant and ignores the need to enrich the gospel through the good

elements found in the cultures it encounters. So he proposes that we must go beyond

inculturation choosing it as the very title of his second book on inculturation: Beyond

Inculturation: Can the Many Be One?453

Additionally, if the goal of inculturation is the creation of an authentic local

church, and a local church cannot alienate itself from the local reality, in which it

emerges, the local church which itself is a “symbol and servant” of the Kingdom of

God must of necessity engage in dialogue with other religions. Being an alienated

community within a larger human community, and not being in dialogue with the

wider world, wouldn‟t make the church authentically local. So Amaladoss argues that

the church must go beyond inculturation which seeks a “Christianizing of culture,”

towards dialogue which seeks the transformation of cultures through the gospel.454

5.2.4. Gospel-Culture Encounter

Beyond Inculturation, Amaladoss prefers and proposes what he calls “Gospel-

Culture Encounter.”455

According to him, this “Gospel-Culture Encounter” is not

oriented to the embodiment of the gospel in a given culture, but to the transformation

of culture through the gospel in dialogue with other religions. This encounter is not

defined by conquest and dominance, but by “humble witness and dialogue.”456

This encounter happens not merely between people, but between culture and

religions.457

In India, this encounter becomes multi-cultural and multi-religious since


454 Cf. Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 16-17. Amaladoss seems to take in the earlier meaning of

inculturation (or to the magisterial teachings on inculturation) where inculturation is seen as

Christianization of the cultures. But, the concept of inculturation has evolved extensively and

inculturation today is understood as transformation where not only the gospel transforms the culture

it encounters, but the encountered culture also transforms the gospel. 455

He also suggests a move away from the „Gospel-Culture‟ paradigm to a „Church-World‟ paradigm.

Cf. Amaladoss, “Inculturation in India,” 57. 456


Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 20, 22. Amaldoss affirms elsewhere that religions do not

encounter in the abstract, but in believers. See Michael Amaladoss, “Encounter of Religions: Some

Concerns as We Face the 1990s,” Jeevadhara 20 (1990), 10.


India is multi-cultural and multi-religious.458

Gospel-Culture Encounter becomes

inter-cultural and inter-religious, for the culture which the gospel encounters is

already embodied in a religion.459

This encounter can only be in the form of dialogue,

because Christianity cannot displace another cosmic religion which has already been

domesticated in a place, and people who respond to the gospel only respond from

within their cultural-religious milieu. 460

For an Indian Christian then, it becomes an

encounter between his ancestors‟ religion and Christianity.461

Amaladoss speaks of three stages in this Gospel-Culture Encounter. “Freeing

the foundational experience” is the first stage. It is freeing the “good news” from the

“historically and culturally conditioned embodiment.”462

Freed from cultural

conditioning, the gospel, in the second stage, encounters the community in its

existential life-situations. The community reads and interprets its life in the light of

the gospel, and discerns the presence of God‟s Spirit in its life. In the third and final

stage happens a “creative re-making of the community” where the community is

transformed. People change the unjust values-systems and structures of their cultures

and societies.463

Thus, inculturation becomes transformative for Amaladoss.

5.2.5. Transformation through Dialogue

When Gospel-Culture encounter is transformative it should promote the good,

purify the imperfect, and make it new.464

But, church can transform culture only

through dialogue and collaboration with other religions. This is particularly true in

India where Christianity is a negligible minority.465

In a country like India,

transformation of culture cannot just be an exclusive task of any single religion, but a

joint dialogical effort of all religions of India.466

And in a religiously and ideologically

458 Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 54-57. He points to elite and popular cultures, great and little

traditions, dominant and subaltern cultures. 459

Amaladoss, “Inculturation in India,” 53. 460

Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 23-27. 461


He points out that this embodiment can be in the biblical culture, early ecclesial culture and the

culture of the missionary. 463

Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 27-32 464

Michael Amaladoss, “Culture and Dialogue,” International Review of Mission 74 (1985), 169. 465


Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 72. Amaladoss also suggests that such inter-religious dialogical

encounter will make religions avoid the dangers of becoming ghetto communities and turning their

religious symbols into indices. See Michael Amaladoss, “Faith and Symbols: The Flute and the

Chakra, the Cross and the Crescent,” Jeevadhara 20 (1990), 209-219.


pluralistic world, we are called to dialogue with other faiths and cultures.467

The

church has to be prophetic and counter-cultural amidst the wider community through

its witness of service to the poor. Amaladoss indicates that “the real challenge of

inter-religious encounter today is not simply at the religious level, but what they can

do together to promote a community of fellowship, justice and peace.”468

5.2.6. Prophetic and Counter-cultural

Amaladoss criticizes the Indian church for choosing to be accommodating,

rather than being prophetic and counter-cultural, which is glaringly exemplified in the

prevalence of caste-discrimination within the church.469

Christianity as a religion must

prophetically challenge culture.470

Thus, he calls the church in India to be a “prophetic

and counter-cultural gospel-community.” As a prophetic church, it will always be on

the margins, but a “credible witness to the Kingdom.”471

Being prophetic and counter-

cultural would always mean, in India, to be counter-caste, and being with the poor and

the oppressed. “Church will have to be a community of sharing, committed to justice

for all, opting particularly for the poor and oppressed, to struggle with them for

equality and justice.”472

Being a prophetic and counter-cultural gospel-community

cannot be limited to some religious communities, but has to extend to the entire

community.473

Amaladoss suggests that in the current post-modern milieu, the dominant

liberal capitalist economic systems and radical modernity of scientific-technology also

necessitate the counter-cultural witness of the church.474

The church is called to offer

an alternative way of living that is life-affirming, community-affirming, and

transcendence-affirming.475

The church should not only offer such alternative way of

living, but actually live it, and get involved in the world for transformation. As such,

467 Amaladoss, “Culture and Dialogue,” 169.

468 Amaladoss, “Encounter of Religions,” 11.

469 Amaladoss, “Inculturation in India,” 52-53.

470 Michael Amaladoss, “Inculturation of Religious Life in India,” Vidyajyoti 55 (1991), 509.


472 Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 73. Cf. also pages 71-72, 63-66.

473 Amaladoss thinks that creating “Basic counter-cultural communities” on the model of “Basic

Christian Communities” can be a good structure for making the entire community prophetic. 474

Michael Amaladoss, “Mission in a Post-Modern World: A Call to be Counter-Cultural,” Indian

Missiological Review 18:3 (1996), 12-15. 475

Amaladoss, “Mission in a Post-Modern World,” 16-19. In another article, Amladoss also affirms

that such an alternative way of living also affirms nature and resolves our ecological crisis. See

Michael Amaladoss, “Ecology and Culture: Some Indian Perspectives,” Jeevadhara 18 (1988), 40-

54.


the church as a counter-cultural community should be both „model of‟ and „model for‟

the communities of the Reign of God.476

5.2.7. Building the Kingdom

Gospel-Culture encounter and dialogue should not be limited to polite

conversation but to engagement in common action for the defence of justice and the

promotion of community. Encounter and dialogue are aimed at building the Kingdom

of God.477

He calls for a paradigm shift in the mission of the church from conquering

other religions and strengthening „our‟ religion to building the Kingdom of God and

making other religions our allies.478

“Being a local Church and serving the

Kingdom479

are not two separate processes. It is in serving the Kingdom in this

particular historical and cultural situation that the gospel community becomes a local

church.”480

He suggests that religions in dialogue for building a better human

community should also integrate the secular sphere, collaborating in the same cause

with the secular ideologies.481

Amaladoss affirms that any attempts at building a new

humanity must address poverty, fight injustice and inequality, and, in the case of

India, eradicate caste discrimination.482

Amaladoss has produced an enormous amount of material on varied subjects

of theology. He has begun writing much on inculturation during the 80s which made a

gradual and logical shift to interreligious dialogue in the 90s and to living in harmony.

His theology of inculturation is rooted in the religions and transformation.

Inculturation as a Gospel-Culture encounter happens within a multi-religious context

resulting in transformation of the religions. Thus, inculturation and interreligious

dialogue are interlinked and both projects in the theology of Amaladoss should be

directed towards creating the kingdom of God where people of all faiths can live in

476 Amaladoss, “Mission in a Post-Modern World,” 20-21.

477 Michael Amaladoss, “Towards A Culture of Wholeness,” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 47 (1983), 75-76. 478

Amaladoss, “Mission in a Post-Modern World,” 22. 479

For Amaladoss the “Kingdom is not simply co-extensive with the church but transcends it.”

Amaladoss, “Culture and Dialogue,” 176. The Church “is not itself the Kingdom, because the Word

and Spirit are also active outside its frontiers.” Cf. Amaladoss, “Faith Meets Faith,” 28. 480


Amaladoss, “Culture and Dialogue,” 174. He presents Gandhi as an example of this integration of

the secular and the religious. Gandhi once remarked that those who say that religion has nothing to

do with politics do not know what religion means. Cf. M. K. Gandhi, The Story of My Experiments

with Truth (Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1945), 615. 482

Amaladoss, “Towards A Culture of Wholeness,” 68-70.


harmony. His current theological work, as can be seen in Beyond Dialogue steps

towards new frontiers of multi-faith communities.483

5.3. ALOYSIUS PIERIS: THROUGH POOR TO THE REIGN OF GOD

Aloysius Pieris, the Sri Lankan Jesuit, is one of the most distinguished

theologians in Asia. He is the founder director of Tulana Research Centre at Kelaniya

in Sri Lanka. He is also an expert in Indology and Buddhism.484

A prolific writer,485

he has published in many journals, the most prominent of his writings being An Asian

Theology of Liberation.486

We are concerned here with his theology of inculturation.

However, as we shall see in the pages below, his theology of inculturation is richly

coloured by the two urgent questions he tackles in his theology, many poor and many

religions, and as such gives a view into his theology of liberation and theology of

religions. He made one of the earliest attempts at inculturation of the Mass in Sri

Lanka which later came to be known as the “Pilimatalawa experiment.”487

5.3.1. His Critique of Inculturation

Pieris says that inculturationists in Asia “ignore and gloss over” the negative

aspects of Asian religions and Asian poverty, and as such he finds their approach too

accommodative.488

Rightly so, the inculturationists in India have grossly overlooked

483 Cf. Amaladoss, Beyond Dialogue. See especially chapter 4 on “Eucharistic Hospitality,” 79-96,

chapter seven “From Syncretism to Harmony,” 133-156, and chapter ten “Do We Need Borders

Between Religions?” 193-210. See also, Michael Amaladoss, “Swami Abhishiktananda‟s Challenge

to Indian Theology,” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 74 (2010): 340-342. 484

Aloysius Pieris‟ works in Christian-Budhism dialogue include: Love Meets Wisdom: A Christian

Experience of Buddhism (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1988); Fire and Water: Basic Issues in Asian

Buddhism and Christianity (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1996); “Liturgy and Dialogue with Buddhism:

An Experiment,” Dialogue 15 (1968), 1-12; “The Spirituality of Buddhist Monk in Sri Lanka,”

Inter Fratres 27 (1971), 121-132; “Monkhood: Some Elementary Facts About Its Origin and Its

Place in a Buddhist-Christian Dialogue,” Tjurunga 10 (1975), 67-74; “The Political Vision of

Buddhists,” Dialogue 12 (1985), 68-86; “Reincarnation in Buddhism,” A Christian Appraisal,”

Concilium 5 (1993), 16-22; “Comparative Study of Religions: Lecture Notes for Buddhist Students

Studying Christianity,” Dialogue 27 (2000). 485

A book published to honour him on his 70th

birthday enlists his writings. Robert Cruz et al,

Encounters with the Word: Essays in Honour of Aloysius Pieris, S. J. (Colombo: The Ecumenical

Institute for Study and Dialogue, 2004). 486

Aloysius Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1988). This book

actually brings together nine previously published materials under three sections in the book:

Poverty and Liberation, Religion and Liberation, and Theology of Liberation in Asia. It provides a

good overview of the thought of Pieris. 487

This experiment at inculturation of the Mass carried out in 1968 predates the one conducted in

India, the Poona experiment which inaugurated what came to be known as the “Indian Mass.” Pieris

reflects on the Indian Mass controversy in his article “The Indian Mass Controversy,” Worship 43

(1969) 219-223. 488

Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation, 38.


the negative aspects of Indian religions and cultures. While most Indian

inculturationists since the pioneer Roberto de Nobili, have vigorously adopted

elements of Hinduism, they failed totally to acknowledge and criticise the draconian

“caste system” designed by Hinduism which has discriminated against, exploited and

oppressed millions of dalits in India for thousands of years.489

Pieris further disagrees with another commonly held presupposition of

inculturationists; namely that churches in Asia are not inculturated. He considers this

presupposition to be erroneous because he believes that every local church is

“essentially an inculturated church.”490

All churches in Asia are “truly churches, and,

therefore, authentically local.” He hastens to add though that this does not imply that

“all local churches in Asia are necessarily local churches of Asia.” 491

So, he considers

the question of whether a particular church is inculturated or not, as irrelevant.492

On

the other hand, he suggests that the relevant questions to be asked are: “Whose culture

does the official church reflect? […] Do the poor […] constitute a culturally decisive

factor in the local church?”493

Here again, if these questions are addressed to the

Church in India, then the inevitable answer would be that the culture which the

official church in India reflects is an “elite culture” of the elite sections of the society,

and that the “poor” dalits and tribals and their subaltern cultures have not become a

decisive factor in the Indian church.

5.3.2. Rejection of the Western Models of Inculturation

Pieris considers the western models of inculturation as neither suitable nor

successful for churches in non-semitic Asia. He detects four strands of inculturation in

the Christianization of Europe: the Latin Model (incarnation in a non-Christian

culture), the Greek Model (assimilation of a non-Christian philosophy), The North-

489 The most heinous crime on humanity in India the “law of untouchability,” that prevailed until

recently in India was prescribed and safeguarded by Hindu religion and scriptures. So Gandhi, who

was very devout Hindu himself, said of untouchability: “I regard untouchability as the greatest blot

on Hinduism.” Young India, May 4, 1921; as quoted in Samuel Rayan, “Outside the Gate, Sharing

the Insult,” in Felix Wilfred, ed., Leave the Temple: Indian Paths to Human Liberation (Trichy:

Carmel Publications, 1996), 125. 490

Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation, 40. 491





European Model (accommodation to a non-Christian religiosity), and the Monastic

Model (participation in a non-Christian spirituality).494

He rejects the “Graeco-Roman Model of Inculturation” because of its “Christ-

against-religion theology,” which stands in opposition to the “Christ-of-Religions

theology” of Asia.495

Another hurdle he finds is “the separation of Religion from

culture (as in Latin Christianity) and religion from philosophy (as in Hellenistic

Christianity)” which does not make sense in Asia where “culture and religion are

overlapping facets of one indivisible soteriology.”496

Further, Pieris argues that

neither the “instrumentalizing of philosophy” (pulling Greek philosophy out of its

religious context and moulding it to fit the Christian religion as a tool for doctrinal

expression), nor the “instrumentalizing of a non-Christian culture” in service of

Christianity will be productive in the Asian context. On the contrary, these methods

can become counter-productive.497

Finally, he feels that the current historical

circumstances of Asia, which are much different from those of the early centuries

when the Graeco-Roman model successfully inculturated Christianity in Europe,

render these methods unproductive.498

He considers the North-European Model of inculturation obsolete as most

pockets of Asia have already been domesticated by other metacosmic religions which

preceded Christianity by centuries. He feels that “Christianity has come a bit too late

on the scene” in Asia.499

Pieris also rejects the Western Monastic Model for its lack of

symbiosis of the gnostic (fuga mundi) and agapeic (involvement with the poor)

components of spirituality, and he affirms that the Asian churches should always

stand in solidarity with Asia‟s poor. Paraphrasing Lozano, Pieris points that “the

monks‟ search for God at least in theory, if not always in practice, was inseparably

associated with their service to and solidarity with the poor.”500

494 Pieris, “Western Models of Inculturation: How far are they Applicable in Non-Semitic Asia?” East

Asian Pastoral Review 22 (1985) 116. This article is also published as chapter 5 of his book An

Asian Theology of Liberation, 51-58. 495

Pieris, “Western Models of Inculturation,” 116; An Asian Theology of Liberation, 52. For more on

“Christ-Against-Religions” and “Christ-of-Religions,” see Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation,

89. 496

Pieris, “Western Models of Inculturation,” 117; An Asian Theology of Liberation, 52. 497

Pieris, “Western Models of Inculturation,” 117-118; An Asian Theology of Liberation, 52-53. 498



Pieris, “Western Models of Inculturation,” 121; An Asian Theology of Liberation, 56-57. Cf. John

M. Lozano, Discipleship: Towards an Understanding of Religious Life (Chicago: Claret Centre for


5.3.3. Inculturation is a Natural Process

For Pieris inculturation is a natural process.501

“It is something that happens

unconsciously and spontaneously in the course of the struggle to bring in God‟s Reign

in our local context.”502

Pieris suggests that our primary target should be the “Liturgy

of Life” which immerses us in the lives and struggles of people, a natural “by-

product” of which would be inculturation. “Inculturation is the by-product of an

involvement with a people rather than a conscious target of a program of action.”503

As we have noted in an earlier discussion in this chapter, there have been two

kinds of inculturation processes in India: the official inculturation and the popular

inculturation. In his research on inculturation in India, Paul M. Collins terms these

inculturations differently as: “intentional inculturation” referring to the official and

“unintentional inculturation” as referring to the popular.504

Collins‟ very use of the

term “intentional” and “unintentional” points to their being natural or not. Evaluating

these inculturations, one can say that the “official inculturation” has been artificial,

while the popular inculturation was natural. The official inculturation was not

something that developed from within the “liturgy of life” of the local church, but was

imported from the great Hindu tradition. On the other hand, the “popular

inculturation” grew in a natural way from the “liturgy of life” of the communities.

5.3.4. Inculturation creates Local Churches

For Pieris clearly inculturation should be a process which creates “truly local

churches” each church attaining its “local ecclesial identity.”505

Pieris finds the term

“local church” tautological, as “there is no church that is not local.” Churches in Asia

are “truly churches, and, therefore, authentically local.” He hastens to add, however,

that it does not imply that “all local churches in Asia are necessarily local churches of

Asia.” He feels that the churches of Asia are “branches of local churches such as those

Resources in Spirituality, 1977) 115-120. Pieris also speaks about the monastic tradition and the

struggle for the poor in his articles: “Monastic Poverty in the Asian Setting,” Dialogue 7 (1980)

104-118; “To be Poor as Jesus was Poor,” The Way 24 (1984) 186-197. 501


Pieris, “Inculturation: Some Critical Reflections,” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflections 57

(1993), 644. 503


Collins, Context, Culture and Worship: The Quest for „Indian-ness‟. In chapters 2, 4 and 5, he

surveys different inculturations of art, architecture and rites in India as “intentional” and

“unintentional.” 505

Pieris, “Inculturation: Some Critical Reflections,” 644.


of Rome, England, and so on.” Having said that, he does not uphold the view that “the

immediate task of the churches in Asia is to become local churches of Asia.” Neither

does he consider it as “an indispensable condition for the evangelization of Asian

nations.” He believes that this –becoming a local church of Asia– is only “an

accompaniment or corollary to the process of fulfilling the mission of evangelizing

the (Asian) nations.” Thus, he attributes the failure to produce local churches of Asia

to the failure of fulfilling the mission. 506

The churches in Asia have failed to become

truly local churches of Asia because they have failed in their evangelizing mission to

the poor of Asia. Mission is essentially a “mission to the poor” because the author of

the mission, Jesus himself, has defined it as such. Thus he observes: “a local church in

Asia is usually a rich church working for the poor, whereas the local church of Asia

could only be a poor church working with the poor.”507

5.3.5. Inculturation and Proclamation

One of the important principles of inculturation for Pieris is proclamation.

“Inculturation derives its significance from the local church‟s basic mission to bring –

and become– the good news to the poor in Asia.”508

Through inculturation “the local

church becomes proclamational in its life and action before the non-Christian

world.”509

“What we celebrate among us, we also proclaim to the rest of the

world.”510

He asserts that the liturgy should be comprehensible not only to Christians

but to all people who live around us, and that non-Christians have a right to

understand our liturgies. “It is not enough to explain the liturgy to our faithful so that

they know what is being done. We Christians must use the language, the idiom, the

media, the signs and symbols, of all the people around us who have a right to

understand what we celebrate in the liturgy.”511

The Church would be missing

something essential in its life if its liturgy becomes incomprehensible to non-

Christians. “If our non-Christians do not understand what we celebrate, the spirit of

Pentecost is absent in our life and liturgy.”512

506 Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation, 36.



509 Pieris, “Inculturation: Some Critical Reflections,” 644.





5.3.6. Beyond Cultic Inculturation

Pieris calls for an inculturation that transcends mere cultic adaptations and

accommodation. Inculturation is not merely cultic, “a matter of merely substituting

the Roman rite with an indigenous rite.” Pieris believes that the Eucharist cannot be

the starting point of inculturation, while much of the history of inculturation in

different parts of the world started and revolved around the Eucharist.513

He states

clearly that “inculturation cannot begin with the Eucharist; it culminates in it.” “It

ultimately manifests itself as something that has already taken place in the minds,

hearts and lives of the faithful.” 514

“Inculturation cannot begin in the sacramental

liturgy.”515

But the Eucharist, Pieris affirms, can be a good index of inculturation.

“The way we celebrate the Eucharist is an index of the degree to which we are

inculturated.” “Eucharist is a clear sign and an infallible index of the stage of

inculturation we are in.”516

For Pieris, the starting point of inculturation is the local

community and its “liturgy of life.” “The starting point in inculturation is not the

Eucharist, but the local community which must first become proclamational in word

and life.”517

Drawing a distinction between the “liturgy of the Church” and the

“liturgy of life,” Pieris insists that “inculturation begins, not with the liturgy of the

Church, but with the Liturgy of Life.”518

Explaining what he means by “liturgy of

life,” he says that it “is the daily struggles of the people in their lay vocation, trying to

live the demands of the Kingdom.”519

This “liturgy of life,” for Pieris, is deeply linked

to the “Word of Yahweh” and the “poor of Yahweh.” “Liturgy of Life presupposes a

constant communitarian hearing of the Word of God in the midst of the Poor of

Yahweh.” Indicating that the “Liturgy of Life and the Liturgy of the Word go hand in

hand,”520

he suggests to inculturationists “begin, not with the liturgy of the Church

513 We note that in India most Roman Catholic inculturation efforts went into creating an “Indian

Mass” (Indian Anaphora) which ran into controversy with the Vatican and never has been

approved. See the discussion of Pieris on the subject in his article “The Indian Mass Controversy,”

219-223. We also note here that an important breakthrough in inculturation in Africa has been the

formulation and approval of the Congolese rite of the Eucharist. 514

Pieris, “Inculturation: Some Critical Reflections,” 643. 515






Pieris, “Inculturation: Some Critical Reflections,” 644.


(sacramental liturgy), but with the Liturgy of Life which includes the Liturgy of the

Word.”521

5.3.7. An Asian Eucharist

Pieris does provide though a model of an inculturated Eucharist, an Asian way

to celebrate the Eucharist, which the participants called “the Contemplative Mass, the

Silent Mass.”522

He defines the genuine Asian Eucharist as “a Eucharist that can

transform the participants into an ecclesiola (a mini-church).”523

He calls for the elimination of what he calls “three deviations” (three forms of

ecclesiastical domination) of the Roman Eucharistic tradition: the oss of the Word of

God in a “concatenation of human words,” the eclipse of the people of God by a

“clerical class of liturgical performers,” and the loss of intimate encounter with God

by “anachronistic paraphernalia of an imperial past.”524

And he invites Asians to

restore the three opposite features to the Eucharistic liturgy: “the centrality of the

Word of God, the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, and an intimacy with Abba-Amma.”

These three features would imply a threefold change:

Christologically, a shift from a manipulative use of words to a creative hearing of

the Word of God; ecclesiologically, a shift from a clerical control of God‟s People

to a discipleship of equals animated by the Spirit of God; and eschatologically, a

shift from a triumphalistic display of an imperial past to a celebration of hope

which anticipates Abba-Amma‟s end-time intimacy with the little ones.525

He criticizes the new “Indian Rite Mass” on the same grounds as he feels that

it “has outdone the Roman rite in verbosity while its „Brahmanism‟ competes with

Rome‟s androcentric clericalism.” He thinks that the rite “contradicts the great Indic

tradition of contemplatively communicative silence,” because of its excessive use of

words and the “prolix Eucharistic Prayer which tries to impose on the assembly an

elaborate treatise on the entire Indian theology of salvation.”526


522 Pieris celebrated this Mass for the students of his course at the East Asian Pastoral Institute, Manila.

He reproduces a version of his instructions for this mass in his article, “An Asian Way to Celebrate

the Eucharist,” Worship 81 (2007) 314-328. 523

Pieris, “An Asian Way to Celebrate the Eucharist,” 320. 524

Pieris, “An Asian Way to Celebrate the Eucharist,” 320-321. 525

Pieris, “An Asian Way to Celebrate the Eucharist,” 321. 526

Pieris, “An Asian Way to Celebrate the Eucharist,” 323.


The poor of Asia are undoubtedly the centre of an Asian Eucharist. For Pieris,

the Eucharist is “the feast of the powerless, not the banquet of the pompous.”527

Like

Mary in whose “liturgy of praise (Lk. 1:47-55) the powerless, the hungry and the poor

broke their silence,” the Asian Church should “celebrate the Good News to the poor in

her worship.”528

Everything in the Eucharistic liturgy – the place, the vessels, the

table, the words, the gestures, the postures – must represent the Asia‟s poor.529

The

“Asian Christ” whose death and resurrection we celebrate in the Eucharist is “the

Silence of the Asian Poor whose cries of protest are muffled.”530

5.3.8. Struggles of the Poor – Struggles for the Kingdom

As “liturgy of the Word” and “liturgy of Life” are intensely linked in the

theology of inculturation of Pieris, so are the “struggles of the poor” and the

“struggles for the Kingdom.” We can definitely say in line with his thinking that the

“struggles of the poor” are indeed the “struggles for the Kingdom.” He calls on the

church to participate in the struggles of the poor but always to be attuned to the God

who speaks. “Participate, in a consciously Christian manner, in the life-struggles of

the simple folk, the least of the brethren of Jesus, the rural peasants, the workers, the

unemployed; work and struggle for the Kingdom of God, but always listening to the

Word of God that you hear in the history of Israel and the first Christians and in the

history of our people.”531

He points rightly to the teaching of Dei Verbum which

“boldly insisted that revelation is both Word and Event, both speech and deed.”

“History is not just a setting for God‟s word to be expressed; rather history is itself

revelatory. God‟s Word is heard even today in history.”532

The Salvation History and

the present human history together form God‟s revelation. “The Scriptural History

and our History together are the Revelatory Word.”533

Affirming the revelatory

significance of the struggles of the poor, Pieris says, “the culture of the poor and

oppressed “must educate us in God‟s language of liberation, the language that God

speaks to us through Jesus the Christ.”534

Indicating the undeniable link between the

527 Pieris, “An Asian Way to Celebrate the Eucharist,” 328.









stories of the poor and the Bible, he says, “unlike our scholastic theology, the

Scriptures use the popular idiom of the simple folk: story, parable, poem, proverb and

drama… [The] Bible was written by and for an oppressed people who found God to

be their Covenant partner. The Bible, therefore, can be best understood by a people

who know the pain and the anguish of the poor, by those who see in Yahweh their

faithful defender.”535

Anyone who undertakes the project of inculturation cannot turn a deaf ear to

the struggles of the poor, the stories of the poor, for God speaks to us through the

poor. As God revealed himself through the stories and struggles of the poor in the

Scriptures, he reveals himself today through the struggles and stories of the poor in

our world. Inculturation in the struggles of the poor is indeed the call of God who “is

there where the tiller is tilling the hard ground and where the path-maker is breaking

stones.”536

5.3.9. Inculturation is Liberation

The theology of inculturation and the theology of liberation are intricately

fused in the thought of Pieris, and he believes that “liberation and inculturation are not

two things anymore in Asia.”537

He insists that “inculturation and liberation, rightly

understood, are two names for the same process.”538

According to Pieris, “[t]rue

inculturation is a rooting of the Asian Church in the liberative dimension of voluntary

poverty. When a follower of Jesus opts to be poor for the sake of the gospel, he or she

would live not only in solidarity with the Asian monks in their quest for the

metacosmic reality, but more so in solidarity with the Asian poor who aspire for a

cosmic order that is more just and holy.”539


536 Rabindranath Tagore, Gitanjali (New Delhi/New York: Macmillan, 1918), poem xi; as quoted by

Felix Wilfred, “Introduction,” in Felix Wilfred, ed., Leave the Temple: Indian Paths to Human

Liberation, 7. 537

Pieris, “Western Models of Inculturation,” 123; An Asian Theology of Liberation, 58. In a footnote

reference in this regard, Pieris notes that there is also an agreement among the Ecumenical

Association of Third World Theologians (EATWOT) that “inculturation and liberation almost

converge not only in Asia but in other parts of the Third World, and that this can be inferred from

Final Statement of the EATWOT fifth conference held in New Delhi, 1981.” Cf. V. Fabella and S.

Torres, eds., Irruption of the Third World (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1983), 201-202. See footnote n.

21 on page 130 of Pieris‟ An Asian Theology of Liberation. 538


Pieris, “Western Models of Inculturation,” 122; An Asian Theology of Liberation, 57.


An “inculturated church” is a “liberated church” and therefore a “church of the

poor.” The Churches in Asia would not become Churches of Asia, by mere desperate

attempts of inculturation of rites and rituals, but only by liberating themselves from

mammon and becoming churches of the poor. As long as the Churches of Asia do not

become Churches of the poor, all attempts at inculturation can be considered futile

and, churches of Asia cannot be considered incultured churches.

“A church inculturated in Asia is indeed a church liberated from Mammon, and is

therefore, necessarily composed of the Poor: Poor by option and Poor by

circumstances. In other words inculturation is the ecclesiological revolution

already initiated by basic human communities – with Christian and non-Christian

membership, wherein mysticism and militancy meet and merge: mysticism based

on voluntary poverty and militancy pitched against forced poverty.”540

True to his theology of liberation and his characteristic fusion of the “many

religions” and “many poor,” Pieris‟ theology of inculturation is also deeply rooted in

the two faces of the Asian reality: many poor and many religions. In critique of the

“inculturationists” whose attempts have been blind to the faces of the poor in Asia, he

proposes a liberative inculturation which is both natural and is rooted in the struggles

of the poor. Such an inculturation can transform the churches in Asia into churches of

Asia.

Pieris proposes a kind of natural inculturation. But the question is, if

inculturation is a natural process, then should there be any official ecclesial efforts at

inculturation as reflected by theologians, experts and the magisterium? While we can

agree with Pieris that inculturation, as a natural process, should originate from within

the local community, we would still like to affirm the significance of theological

reflection in the process of inculturation. We feel that theological expertise would

greatly benefit from the inculturation of local churches around the world, when it

helps the local communities to discern and evolve the natural inculturation processes

that emanate within them. A fusion of theological expertise on inculturation with the

natural inculturation processes of the local communities can bear much fruit. Such a

fusion would hold both trends in balance where theological reflections on

inculturation will not become too withdrawn from the actual realities and life of the

community, and the natural process of inculturation of the community will not tend to

become syncretic and shallow. The theological reflection can check and challenge the

anti-Gospel elements that sometimes can flow naturally into the ecclesial life through

540 Pieris, “Western Models of Inculturation,” 122; An Asian Theology of Liberation, 57.


inculturation. For example, we can think of the “caste” reality that has through an

uncritical adaptation become part of the life of the Church in India. It is only a deeper

theological reflection that can now challenge and check the unfortunate adaptation of

caste in Indian Church.

Another issue of discussion for us in Pieris‟ theology of inculturation is the

accent on the ritual silence and contemplation. While Pieris rightly accentuates the

centrality of the poor of Asia in the Eucharistic liturgy, his emphasis on “silence and

contemplation” in the Eucharistic celebration in Asia looks misplaced, for “silence

and contemplation” are alien to the “rituals of the poor.” The rituals of the poor are a

celebration of life in its full bloom. They are a celebration of sounds and colours.

They are noisy and bright. The subaltern rituals are neither silent nor contemplative.

The beating of drums, masking or sprinkling of vibrant colours, vigorous and

sometimes violent dancing, shouts and screams are characteristic marks of the rituals

of the poor. Dance, game, dramatic performance, entertainment, and leisure are very

characteristic to the rituals of the subalterns.541

As Felix Wilfred in his analysis of

subaltern religiosity rightly points out, the subaltern religiosity in fact “challenges the

type of religiosity of the elites centred on silence, asceticism, renunciation.”542

And

the “bloody sacrifices” of the subaltern rituals are very different from the “vegetable

offerings and pujas performed in a silent corner of home or temple.”543

The poor

experience a kind of liberation from their struggles in the sounds and shouts of their

rituals. Their suppressed cries for liberation find a voice in the sounds of their rituals.

The failure of the “official inculturation” or the “Indian mass” which is

criticized for adopting the symbols, rituals, and language of the Brahminic tradition,

can also be attributed to its neglect of the sounds and colours of the rituals of the poor.

All liturgical inculturation in India attempts to be very contemplative and very mystic,

while the rituals of the poor, on the contrary, are very noisy and very active. An

observation of two ecclesial trends in India can vouch for our argument: the flow of

Catholics into Pentecostal churches, and the great success of charismatic movements

in the Catholic Church.

541 Cf. Felix Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia: Struggles for a Different Society (Delhi: ISPCK, 2005), 159-

161; See also Wilfred, Asian Dreams and Christian Hope, 257-266. 542

Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia, 160. 543

Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia, 160.


In recent years, there is a steady shift of dalit and tribal Catholics to

Pentecostal churches. In his study of low-caste Pulaya Christians of Kerala, George

Oommen indicates that many Pulaya Christians are moving away to Pentecostal

churches as these provide “space for the traditional communal lifestyle and ample

means to revive their pre-Christian religious belief systems”; their “activities and

language” rightly “recapture[s] many of the traditional views of Dalit Christians.”544

While one can find many other reasons for such a flow, the underlying reason seems

to be the resonance of Pentecostal worship with the rituals of the poor. The

Pentecostal worship is very lively, a fine mix of sounds and shouts, drums and claps.

It engages the worshipper fully into the worship. Neither the current form of the

Eucharist, nor the new Indian Mass, resonate the rituals of the poor. Thus, the poor

Catholics find the Pentecostal worship in better tune with their subaltern religiosity,

creating a space in worship for expressing their innate longings for justice and

liberation.

The Catholic charismatic movement also has gained a lot of popularity among

Indian Catholics. The Divine Retreat Centre at Muringoor, Kerala, which is the largest

in the world, and the most popular charismatic centre of India, where retreats are

conducted all the year through in seven different languages, boasts of over 10 million

attendants who made their retreats here since its inception in 1977.545

Many such

charismatic centres have mushroomed all over India.546

While we cannot disprove the

fact that it is not exclusively the poor who attend these charismatic conventions and

retreats, we would argue that the charismatic movement has gained widespread

popularity in India because the majority of Catholics in India who are poor (60% of

them being dalits and tribals) feel at home in the charismatic style of prayer.547

Rowena Robinson‟s research on Indian Christians points out that most clientele of the

charismatic and Pentecostal meetings are people of the lower social and economic

544 George Oommen, “Pulaya Christians of Kerala: A Community in a Dilemma,” in George Oommen

and John C. B. Webster, eds., Local Dalit Christian History (Delhi: ISPCK, 2002), 94-95. 545

Cf. their website for further information: http://www.drcm.org (accessed 14-12-2008). 546

In my own state, Andhra Pradesh, there are no less than five such popular charismatic centres which

were set up in the last 15 years. 547

When I organized a 3-day charismatic convention during three consecutive years, 2001, 2002 and

2003 at Nandigama parish of my diocese Vijayawada, India, conducted by the “Divine Retreat

Centre” Muthangi, Hyderabad, India, who are specialised in it, we had about 10,000 people

attending it every day. The numbers were as great whenever such convention was conducted in any

parish of our diocese. Most of these people who attended were poor dalits (as most Catholics in my

diocese are dalits) and they found the charismatic style of prayer very appealing.

http://www.drcm.org/


strata.548

The higher social groups keep away from charismatic meetings.549

The

marginalized are attracted to these meetings because there is clapping, singing,

shouting, crying, dancing, a free spirit that gives expression to the aspirations for

liberation and freedom.

A Eucharist which gathers the poor to celebrate the death and resurrection of

Christ will become a counter-sign when it tries to eliminate from the worship their

longings for freedom and cries for liberation. On the contrary any true worship and

liturgy should become a prophetic space where the suppressed cries of the poor for

liberation can be voiced and enacted.

Aloysius Pieris‟ theology of inculturation remains a very creative, challenging

and relevant for not only the Church in India but for all the Church in Asia. It

certainly has lessons for the local churches in other parts of the world. As one of the

most prominent and leading Asian theologians of liberation, he has not only

fashioned his theology into a truly inculturated theology, but also his very life and

activity in Sri Lanka as an inspiring and courageous example of inculturation.

5.4. SAMUEL RAYAN: EN-FLESHING INTO PEOPLE‟S STRUGGLES

Samuel Rayan,550

one of the distinguished theologians of India today, argues

for “inculturation of struggles of the poor.” The “poor” are glaringly perceptible in his

theology, as Kirsteen Kim rightly suggests: “Rayan became a liberation theologian

because for him the most important thing about the gospel was that it should be good

news to the poor.”551

Explaining the title of the Festschrift published to honour

Rayan‟s 70th

birthday, Bread and Breath, the editor, John T. K., says that it is

“suggestive of the two main poles around which Rayan‟s … theological reflections

548 Rowena Robinson, Christians of India (New Delhi: Sage, 2003), 179.

549 Robinson, Christians of India, 181. According to Robinson the elite keep away from the

charismatic movement they perceive it as contesting their higher positions in the regular worship

and structures of the church. 550

Samuel Rayan is currently emeritus professor at the prestigious Jesuit theological institute,

Vidyajyoti in Delhi. He also served earlier as the dean of the same institute. He is a key member of

the Ecumenical Association of Third World Theologians (EATWOT), and also served as a member

of the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches from 1968 to 1982. He was

also the first principal of the Ecumenical School of Theology in Bangalore (1988-1990). Some of

his writings include: Breath of Fire. The Holy Spirit: Heart of the Gospel (London: Geofrey

Chapman, 1979); The Anger of God (Bombay: Build, 1981). 551

Kirsteen Kim, “The Holy Spirit in Mission. Where and How is the Spirit Working in Religions,

Cultures and movements for liberation?” Connections 2:10 (Spring, 2001), 25.


turn: the question of Bread for all…, and the role of the Spirit…”552

Wilfred, in his

analysis of Rayan‟s theology, considers “sensitizing” the method of theology to the

issues of justice, human rights and struggles of people, as his best contribution to

Indian theology.553

We shall limit ourselves here to explicate only his “theology of

inculturation” as calling for “an inculturation into the life, struggles and sufferings of

the poor.”

5.4.1. The Non-Incarnate Image of the Indian Church

The Church in India, in Rayan‟s view, has been “largely shaped by West

Asian and European perceptions, experiences, interests, questions and needs.”554

Rayan‟s rationale is: “… no living things grow according to rules written down in a

book or orders given from far or near. Life develops within according to its own

dynamism. … in the process of the communication of the Gospel, [life has] to keep

dying and rising, sprouting and growing afresh in every locality and every age within

the context of concrete needs and challenges.”555

Speaking of Indian ecclesiology in one of his articles, Rayan picks out a

concept of the church at work in the Indian churches. The concept, he noted, “can be

discerned from the Church‟s life, history and structure; from its attitudes and values;

its reactions, struggles and hopes; from its priorities and alignments no less than from

its institutions, controversies and self-criticism.”556

Rayan detects that the self-

understanding of the Indian churches is “borrowed from the self-understanding of the

local church of Rome” and “a Roman theology which harmonizes very well with the

„order model‟ of society.”557

Rayan is critical of “a capitalist or class ecclesiology”

which is at work in the Indian churches which appear as religious societies “with

unequal divisions of religious work, and with the control of means of religious

production in the hands of one group,” that is, the higher clergy.558

Hence, an

independence of the churches in India from “various forms of dominion both personal

552 T. K. John, ed., Bread and Breath: Essays in Honour of Samuel Rayan SJ, Jesuit Theological

Forum Reflections 5 (Anand, Gujarat: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1990), xii. 553

Wilfred, Beyond Settled Foundations, 157. 554

Samuel Rayan, “Decolonization of Theology, “ in Jnanadeepa 1 (1998) 140-141. 555

Samuel Rayan, “Flesh of India‟s Flesh,” in Jeevadhara 6 (1976) 262. 556

Samuel Rayan, “The Ecclesiology at Work in the Indian Church,” in G. Van Leeuwen, ed.,

Searching for an Indian Ecclesiology (Bangalore: ATC, 1984) 194. 557

Rayan, “The Ecclesiology at Work in the Indian Church,”197-198. 558

Rayan, “The Ecclesiology at Work in the Indian Church,” 205-206.


and structural” is required.559

Moreover, a real concern of the church in India is

outside itself, to other churches, to other religions, and to the vast secular world with

its multiple concerns.560

In other words, the church in India “with an act of respect for

and fidelity to the mystery of Incarnation” must become rooted and enfleshed in the

culture of the people.561

5.4.2. An “Incarnate Indian Church” with the “Flesh of India”

Rayan roots his theology of inculturation in the very mystery of the

“incarnation” of Jesus Christ. For Rayan, Jesus was not simply “God‟s eternal Word

in a particular cultural clothing,” but a “deeply historical, densely human reality, a

sharer in our bodily existence and earthly conditions, flesh of our flesh, man among

men, like us in all things though never sinning, never closing himself to God. His

body was of this earth, fruit along with us of its evolutionary process.”562

Likewise,

the church has to incarnate in each local cultural context, taking on the “flesh of the

local context.” This is risky, but the risk has to be taken, so that there is a constant

“dying and raising” of God‟s Word in each local church.563

5.4.3. Inculturation of the Indian Church in People’s Struggles

Like other Indian theologians such as Felix Wilfred and Jacob Kavunkal,

Rayan rejects an inculturation which is in exclusive dialogue with the dominant or

Brahminical traditions. Rayan explains that such an exclusive dialogue with the

dominant culture betrays a false analysis of the cultural world of India, and a denial of

the culture of the poor.564

He is convinced that the church in India should inculturate

into the struggles of the poor. Inculturation should “dialogue with dalits and all the

drowntrodden, and their experience and its symbols.”565

Jesus himself remains the “model” for en-fleshing into peoples‟ struggles, for

he was a “man of the masses”, “a man of the crowds.” He lived with the masses,

559 Rayan, “The Ecclesiology at Work in the Indian Church,” 207.

560 Samuel Rayan, “Reconceiving Theology in the Asian Context,” in V. Fabella and S. Torres, ed.,

Doing Theology in a Divided World (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1985) 137. 561

Samuel Rayan, “Evangelization: an Indian Perception,” in Prepare the Way for God‟s Government,

CPCI News Letter 11 (1997) 23. 562

Rayan, “Flesh of India‟s Flesh,” 260. 563

Rayan, “Flesh of India‟s Flesh,” 263. 564

Samuel Rayan, “Inculturation and Peoples‟ Struggles,” in Indian Missiological Review 19 (1997)

40. 565

Samuel Rayan, “Spirituality for Inter-Faith Social Action,” in X. Irudayaraj, ed., Liberation and

Dialogue (Bangalore: Claretian, 1989), 70.


taught through their metaphors and parables, acted on their behalf, challenged them

and led them to liberation.566

The Word becomes incarnate and inculturated by

identifying with the poor and the lowly, emptying himself and becoming a slave.

Jesus made the culture of the masses his own.567

Likewise, the church needs to make

the culture of the poor its own through inculturation into the peoples‟ struggles. So,

Rayan suggests, inculturation “must be oriented towards the incarnation of the Church

in the life and sufferings of the excluded, regardless of religious affiliations, in their

struggles for dignity and rights,”568

as “God is with the oppressed in their

struggles.”569

People‟s movements which represent the struggles of the poor are

theologically significant for Rayan, for they are not only “the chief record of God‟s

self-revelation in world history,” but because they are also the spaces of “action for a

new social order,” of God‟s Reign.570

The stories and struggles, the myths and

metaphors, the parables and proverbs of the poor become the “chief source of

theology” and liturgies would generate from within the struggles themselves.571

People‟s theology, Rayan suggests, is “shy and hidden” like God, veiled in the “womb

of people‟s stories and struggles” and “people‟s yearning and hopes.”572

Here one can

both “hear” the “voice of God,” as well as “see” God‟s choice for the oppressed.573

God is absolutely involved in all these People‟s Movements for justice and human

dignity.574

566 Samuel Rayan, “The March Has Begun,” Jeevadhara 9 (1979), 182-186.

567 Rayan, “Inculturation and Peoples‟ Struggles,” 42.


569 Samuel Rayan, “Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread,” in Basic Community Library Service 7 (1997-

1998) 1. 570

Rayan, “The March Has Begun,” 180-181. 571

Rayan, “Inculturation and Peoples‟ Struggles,” 45. In another article Rayan suggests that the

Eucharistic celebration should reflect the values of the poor, and that it has to be restructured in

relation to justice and human rights. Cf. Samuel Rayan, “Asia and Justice,” in S. Arokiasamy & G.

Gispert-Sauch, eds., Liberation in Asia: Theological Perspectives (Anand, Gujarat: Gujarat Sahitya

Prakash, 1987), 13-14. He explores the subject at greater length in his article “Sociological Factors

and the Local Church as Eucharistic Community,” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 40

(1976), 307-314. 572

Samuel Rayan, “People‟s Theology,” Jeevadhara 22 (1992), 175. In this article Rayan enumerates

some of the People‟s Movements in India and their significance for theology. 573

Rayan, “People‟s Theology,” 177. 574

Rayan, “People‟s Theology,” 185.


5.4.4. “Flesh of the Church” as the “Flesh of the poor”

Inculturation, Rayan argues, is both “fidelity to” and “practice of” the

mysteries of incarnation and the Paschal Mystery of the death and resurrection of

Jesus. Inculturation, on the one hand, is a “fresh coming of God‟s creative Energy, of

God‟s Dhabar” and, on the other, it is dying to the embodiment in an older culture,

and raising to new life in the new cultural context.575

In other words, inculturation for

Rayan is a fresh instance of incarnation, death and resurrection of Christ in history

within a particular cultural milieu.

Rayan argues that the “incarnation of church in India” is founded on the very

mystery of the incarnation of Christ. But incarnation for Rayan, is an “incarnation into

the poor,” as he explains that in the incarnation God‟s Word became not “just a

human being, but flesh, a week human being, a member of the powerless, suffering,

rejected, oppressed and fragile class.”576

The incarnated Word was truly a “flesh of

the poor,” sharing the sufferings and plight of the poor and the oppressed. “Jesus

becomes a slave, an oppressed person, an outcaste.”577

Jesus is flesh, “carrying in his

corporate personality all flesh, all who are weak and vulnerable, the powerless

multitude of the wretched of the earth.”578

His sarx is a “divine sharing in the

powerlessness” of the poor.579

The “flesh of the church” then has to be a “flesh of the poor.” Being followers

of Christ, and sharing his “flesh and blood” would mean “identifying ourselves with

his powerless and rejected condition,” “sharing his insult,” and sharing in the “flesh of

the poor.”580

The concern of the church, Rayan writes, “is not Christians but the poor;

its struggle is not for itself but for the liberation of all men and women who are held

captive.”581

Thus, the Indian church can only become incarnate in India by “en-

fleshing” into the “flesh of the poor” for God in Jesus has himself become poor.


576 Rayan, “The March Has Begun,” 188.

577 Samuel Rayan, “Outside the Gate, Sharing the Insult,” in Felix Wilfred, ed., Leave the Temple:

Indian Paths to Human Liberation, 137. 578

Rayan, “Outside the Gate, Sharing the Insult,” 140. 579

Rayan, “People‟s Theology,” 197. 580

Rayan, “Outside the Gate, Sharing the Insult,” 140-141. 581

Samuel Rayan, “The Churches and Justice to Christians of Scheduled Caste Origin,” Word and

Worship 11 (1978), 238.


Rayan‟s theology of inculturation is very Christological, deeply grounded in

the very mystery of incarnation. Inculturation, like incarnation, needs to be fleshed

into the very life of the poor. The incarnation of the church in a local context cannot

happen in alienation of the poor and their realities. It is in becoming poor and a

Church of the poor that the local church becomes truly an incarnate church. The “joys

and sorrows” of the poor and the oppressed become the “joys and sorrows” of the

local church in a liberative inculturation.

5.5. SOME ANALYTICAL POINTERS

We can neatly place the four theologies of inculturation which we have

investigated above under one roof: “inculturation with the poor in dialogue with other

religions.” All of them stress the need for inculturation to be in dialogue with other

religions, calling for some kind of “interreligious inculturation,” and for integrating

the cultures and struggles of the poor in inculturation. While Wilfred and Amaladoss

accentuate more the dialogue of religions in inculturation, Pieris and Rayan

emphasize the indispensable privilege of the poor and their cultures, religions and

struggles. Drawing on our study above, we wish to propose here some concluding

remarks on inculturation in India, which will serve as pointers for its future course.

5.5.1. Inculturation not a dead story

Some thinkers have already sung the swansong for inculturation in India.

While we have to concede that inculturation has not succeeded in creating truly

indigenous churches in India, we still believe that inculturation is very important for

the church in India, as is the theological reflection on it. Undoubtedly, inculturation

should be a crucial process that enables the Church in India to become the Church of

India. Our theologians above affirm its importance and call for a reinvigorated

inculturation.

5.5.2. Beyond the Cultic Inculturation

Inculturation should go beyond the ritualistic acculturation of the Christian

faith in India. Most efforts at inculturation in India have been at the levels of cult and

ritual. An inculturation beyond such cultic level would make the Indian Church truly

Indian. It should be an inculturation of the „Indian spirit‟ and the Indian ethos, not just

the Indian ritual. People who vouch for wearing the Indian „shawl‟ in place of the

Roman chasuble in the name of inculturation, do not wear during the day a „dhoti‟ or


a „kurta‟ instead of the foreign shirt and pants.582

While they argue for squatting in the

church, they never squat in their houses and offices; they sit on chairs and eat off

tables, use cutlery to eat food. It would appear that the Indian Christian wants to be an

„Indian‟ when he prays in the Church, but a „foreigner‟ for the rest of his daily life.

Can this in any way be „Becoming India‟? An Indian Christian may pray in an Indian

form of worship, but such worship would be very shallow if he doesn‟t manifest in his

daily life the Indian spiritual and cultural values. Inculturation of the gospel has to

occur at the level of life and not in mere externals. Symbols are not a substitute for

experience and action.

5.5.3. Critical Inculturation

The mission of the local church includes not only the inculturation of the

Christian message in its own cultural traditions but also looking critically at its own

culture in the light of the Gospel and of the world situation. For example, in the Indian

Church this means both a deeper insertion of Christian values into the Indian culture

and the incorporation of Indian values into the universal Church. The Indian Church

must look critically at the culture of its people as well as develop a commitment to

promote the insights of its people, which have matured for centuries. This implies that

the Church must be aware of the relationship between religious and cultural values

and the poverty, inequality and religiously sanctioned social oppression of the Indian

people. Both the Indian Church and the Western Church must look at themselves

critically to evolve a balanced approach to the future of the universal Church.

Inculturation without self-criticism, whether in the East or in the West, may not be

able to provide a common vision for the future of humankind. That is because every

culture is limited by its historical and environmental conditions.

It is important for the Indian Church to incorporate the good values of the

Indian traditions. At the same time, the credibility of Indian values has to be seen in

the light of its grinding poverty and its vast system of legitimized social oppression. In

this context, the Church also needs to live at two levels. On the one hand the Church

582 We remember here the option of Gandhi for an Indian dress in his Nationalist Movement, and the

rejection of the foreign clothing. The Swadeshi movement boycotted British goods. Cf. Raghavan

N. Iyer, The Moral and Political Thought of Mahatma Gandhi (New Delhi: Oxford University

Press, 2000), 347. The “spinning wheel” which was symbolic of the Nationalistic Movement

signified weaving the clothes locally. Gandhi interpreted and developed the concept of Swadeshi as

self-reliance later.


needs to be rooted in the local culture; and on the other, the church needs to play its

prophetic role by pointing out the limitations of the local cultural values.

5.5.4. Inculturation as Conversion

Interestingly, many of the initiatives in inculturation in India came from the

foreign missionaries. In addition to the paradox of foreign missionaries who

established the indigenous process by which foreign domination was questioned, there

is a theological paradox to this story: missionaries entered the missionary field to

convert others, yet in the translation process it was they who first made the move to

“convert” to a new language, with all its presuppositions and ramifications. We have

the example of the “Father of Inculturation” in India, de Nobili, an Italian nobleman

who arrived in India as a missionary, and passed for a guru, an Indian saintly figure,

and even for a sanyasi, who adopted Hindu customs, lifestyle and religious

terminology to define his own personal piety. Examples abound of later figures of

inculturation such as Henri Le Saux and Bede Griffiths who converted themselves

into sannyasis. Herein lies one of the greatest lessons to be learnt by the church in

India to inculturate itself in India: the Church needs to “convert” itself before it can

seek to “convert” the Other. Inculturation in not merely geared towards

transformation of the Other, but a transformation of the church as well; that is, a

transformation of the other by a self-transformation. We believe a genuine and true

inculturation happens only when the church transforms the “local” by converting itself

into “the local.”

5.5.5. Two centres of Inculturation: Religious-Other and Suffering-Other

The spectrum of Indian reality is like an elliptic circle having two centres,

religious-Other and suffering-Other. The meaning, as well as relevance of,

inculturation critically depends on how Christianity responds simultaneously to the

challenges of the many poor and the many religions because of their hermeneutical

link. That is to say, liberative inculturation will not work for India‟s poor unless it is

couched in, and inspired by, the symbols and beliefs of their own religious world.

Often our inculturation theology ignores the “soteriological nucleus” or the

“prophetico-political resources” of other religions. In the name of inculturation, the

symbols of other religions are emptied of their soteriological content and employed in

our theology and prayer. Interreligious dialogue that does not come out of an

experience of human suffering and does not explore the liberative message of all

religions, is a betrayal of religions. Since the core of Indian culture is religious, no


social revolutions will succeed unless the liberative potentials of the masses‟

religiosity are explored and applied.

Two significant facets of Indian socio-cultural reality are the “religions of

India” and the “poor of India”. These two realities of religions and poor are so very

closely interwoven in India (and Asia) that one cannot treat one of these without the

other. As Pieris rightly points out “the theological attempts to encounter Asian

religions with no radical concern for Asia‟s poor and the ideological programs that

presume to eradicate Asia‟s poverty with naïve disregard for its religiousness, have

both proved to be misdirected zeal.”583

Any cultural and religious process in India

cannot afford to neglect either of these two realities: the religions and the poor. As

any theological reflection in India cannot ignore either of these, it follows that

inculturation in India must embrace these two facets of India in a creative harmony.

Therefore, in our successive chapters, we shall engage ourselves in a

theological reflection of “the poor of India” and the “religions of India.” Although we

propose in the following chapters that the Church in India needs to become a “church

of the poor” and a “church in dialogue with other religions,” we affirm also that these

two facets form an integral part of the process of inculturation. The Church‟s dialogue

with the poor and the religions of India becomes the very ministry of inculturation,

and it is through the living of such inculturation that the church in India will become

truly Indian.

But, before we launch into these successive chapters, we believe it is very

important to make a proposal of “subaltern inculturation” as the concluding section of

the current chapter. We have seen that the story of inculturation in India has been

mostly one of inculturation of the elite Hindu tradition of India, and we have criticized

such inculturation for its neglect of the cultures of the poor. The theologies of

inculturation of Wilfred, Amaladoss, Rayan and Pieris, similarly call for integration

and centering of the cultures and religions of the poor in the process of inculturation.

In the following pages, we shall briefly attempt to propose a “subaltern theology of

inculturation” which will reflect on what would be the features and content of such a

theology of inculturation that germinates from the world of the poor.



6. “GOD ON/OF THE PERIPHERY”: SUBALTERN THEOLOGY OF

INCULTURATION

The “inculturation discourse” in India has largely neglected the poor and their

subaltern religiosity. Inculturation theologies in India have forgotten the liberative

potentials of subaltern religions, and have preoccupied themselves with Scriptural

Indian religions and their texts on a philosophical, theological and mystical realm.

Consequently, inculturation theologies have addressed mostly the Brahmanic tradition

and never relocated into the religiousness of subaltern religions or the little traditions

of the dalits and tribals who constitute the vast majority of Indians.

Even if the Church in India has made many efforts at inculturation, most

attempts have been rejected by the poor who form about 70% of the Indian Church.

Naturally, “any project of inculturation based on the „high‟ culture of India is bound

to be irrelevant to the majority of the Christians,” as “it is the poor dalits and tribals

that have largely responded” to the gospel in India; they do not identify themselves

with the mainstream „high‟ culture of India, and therefore “find it oppressive of their

own identity and tradition.”584

One can perceive a glimmer of success in the Ashramic

inculturation, but its impact has remained restricted to a few people who choose to

live in the few Christian Ashrams which exist in different parts of India. Therefore,

the story of inculturation in India is, unfortunately, one of failure to a great extent. As

we believe that the failure of inculturation in India is due to the neglect of the cultures

of the poor, we shall make an attempt here to propose an “inculturation of Subaltern

religiosity” for the ecclesial inculturation of the church in India.

6.1. SUBALTERN

Antonio Gramsci,585

the Italian Marxist popularized the term “subaltern” in his

writings countering fascism in the 1920s and 1930s. He substituted it for the popular

584 Michael Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation, 10-11.

585 “Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) was an Italian socialist who founded the Communist Party in Italy

in 1921. He became a theoretician and writer after his arrest by fascists in 1926. Although loyal to

socialist ideas, Gramsci was radically uneasy with the economism and scientism of much of Marxist

thinking. He devoted much time and effort exploring and explicating both the non-economic means

of exploitation and control of the masses and the role that subaltern people themselves play in the

perpetuation of such ideological mechanisms.” Clarke, Dalits and Christianity, 41. For an analysis

of Gramsci‟s thought, see: Henry A. Giroux, Ideology, Culture, and the Process of Schooling

(Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1981); Carl Boggs, Gramsci‟s Marxism (London: Pluto

Press, 1976); Walter L. Adamson, Hegemony and Revolution: A Study of Antonio Gramsci‟s

Political and Cultural Theory (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980).


Marxist term „proletariat.‟586

The linguistic construction of the term explains its

nature: “sub” points to its experiences of sub-ordination, and “altern” (alter, other) to

its alterity with the powerful system.587

In India the term was popularized by the

group of thinkers referred to as the “Subaltern Studies Collective,” who have

published nine volumes in the series titled: “Subaltern Studies: Writings on South

Asian History and Society.”588

Subaltern is a category which denotes a context of subjugation and oppression,

but it brings out the cultural aspects of the issue which the term “oppressed” does not

express. Forced marginalisation, oppression and powerlessness are the features of the

subalterns. Subaltern is not a „single underlying consciousness‟ but a „collective

consciousness‟.589

Similarly the Latin American Subaltern Studies Group point out in

their Founding Statement that the “subaltern is not one thing,” it is rather a “mutating,

migrating subject.”590

Guha, most prominent on the “Subaltern Studies Collective”

group, defines the notion of subaltern as “a name for the general attribute of

subordination … whether this is expressed in terms of class, caste, age, gender and

office or in any other way.”591

Subaltern Cultures are cultures of people who are

oppressed and marginalized because of ethnicity, class, caste, gender, economic or

social status, etc.

Amartya Sen calls this shift of attention from the elite to the non-elite as “one

of the most exciting developments in historiography in India.”592

The rejected,

neglected and forgotten cultures of the non-elite people are being widely discovered,

unearthed and studied today. As Arjun Appadurai points out whether it is the

586 Cf. Sathianathan Clarke, Dalits and Christianity: Subaltern Religion and Liberation Theology in

India (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1999), 6. 587

Cf. Mark Lewis Taylor, “Subalternity and Advocacy as Kairos for Theology,” in Joerg Riger, ed.,

Opting for the Margins: Postmodernity and Liberation in Christian Theology (New York: Oxford

University Press, 2003), 29. Taylor suggests in this essay that the notion of the subaltern offers two

opportunities of transformation for theology, “unlocking as it does the advantages of unmasking

lucid postmodernism and of rendering more complex liberation theologians‟ notion of the poor”

(40). 588

The series is published as: Ranajit Guha, ed., Subaltern Studies: Writings on South Asian History

and Society, 9 vols. (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1982-1996). 589

Cf. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, “Subaltern Studies: Deconstructing Historiography,” in Subaltern

Studies IV: Writings on South Asian History and Society (New Delhi: Oxford University Press,

1985), 330-363. 590

Latin American Subaltern Studies Group, “Founding Statement,” Boundary 2 20:3 (1993), 121. 591

Ranajit Guha, “Preface,” in Ranajit Guha and Gayatri Spivak, eds., Selected Studies in Subaltern

Studies (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 35. 592

Amartya Sen, The Argumentative Indian (New York: Picador, 2005), 156.


Dravidian tradition moving out of the shadow of the Sanskritizing north, or women

taking centre-stage, or „untouchables‟ telling their stories and singing their songs,

there can be no doubt that the counter-systems of the subcontinent have been

receiving a great deal of scholarly attention in the recent times.593

Subaltern studies are being critically recognized and appreciated in the third

world. They are being increasingly appreciated as counter-cultural movements to the

homogenisation of the ongoing globalisation. The mainline religions and great

traditions are considered seemingly embedded in the dynamics and structures of

globalisation; hence their credibility to counter globalisation is being contested. As

subaltern religions are currently outside the flux and ambit of globalisation, and being

people-participatory and non-institutional, they are believed to have greater vitality to

be counter cultural to the onslaught of globalisation.

6.2. INDIAN SUBALTERN RELIGIOSITY

Any study engaged in the recovery of a subaltern identity needs to examine the

expressive religious traditions of the group concerned, for it is in these that the

group‟s inner life most powerfully expresses itself. The older understanding of

subaltern as simple and unsophisticated has been replaced by one that sees it as a

storehouse of culture‟s hidden discourses flourishing alongside the mainstream „great‟

traditions by which they are marginalized. Since a subaltern (oral) tradition defines

itself against a classical (written) tradition, it is bound to express the more silent or

less visible side of the power relation. So, before we propose a subaltern inculturation,

let us briefly examine the religiosity of the subalterns in India.

Felix Wilfred defines subaltern religiosity as “a particular kind of religious

experience that derives from the condition of being marginalized.”594

In contradiction

to the elite religions, the subaltern religiosity “emerges from the experience of being

subjugated, dominated.”595

Wilfred considers the religious experiences of the dalits,

the tribals and women in India as belonging to the subaltern religiosity. Sathianathan

593 Cf. Arjun Appadurai, Gender, Genre, and Power in South Asian Expressive Traditions

(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991). 594

Felix Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia, 138. Wilfred also talks here about “Subaltern Religiosity” not

simply “Popular Religiosity.” The context of being oppressed is not always integral to the popular

religiosity. Further, popular religiosity is also practiced by the elite groups. 595

Felix Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia, 139.


Clarke596

defines subaltern religion as “an emerging symbolic order, which

obstinately expresses the collective subjectivity of outcaste communities, and which

purports to emanate at the locus of Divine-Human encounters, within the overall

dynamics of subjection by and subordination to the mechanisms of the caste

system.”597

Wilfred distinguishes three strands of subaltern religiosity: the world of spirits,

the emergence of gods and goddesses from the conflictual social context, and the

superimposition of the religiosity of the dominant castes and classes.598

Similarly

Clarke also cites three significant features of subaltern religion drawn from his

analysis of dalit religion and culture:

1) Subaltern religion is not mere „false consciousness‟ that is manufactured by the

vested devices of the dominant classes. Rather, it is a locus for the reconfiguration

of subaltern subjectivity. 2) Subaltern religion is a complex interweaving of at

least the following factors: profuse, though cautious, borrowing from dominant

religion; resourceful, though piecemeal, patching together of all available

symbolic capital; and creative use of alternative forms to express collective

experience. 3) And finally, subaltern religion incorporates realistic elements of the

tacit and the subtle in its manifestations.599

6.2.1. Feminine Divinity

One of the salient features of subaltern religiosity is the prominence of

goddesses over gods. A majority of the subaltern deities are goddesses.600

John

Webster points out that the main object of Paraiyar worship was the village deity, a

goddess who guarded the village boundaries from invasion and danger. These village

goddesses varied from village to village and had different names. Each of these

goddesses was the village benefactress protecting its inhabitants and its livestock from

disease, disaster and famine as well as promoting the fecundity of humans, cattle and

596 Sathianathan Clarke, an ordained minister of the Church of South India (CSI), is an Indian

theologian who currently holds the Bishop Sundo Kim Sum Chair in World Christianity, and

Professor of Theology, Culture and Mission at the Wesley Theological Seminary in Washington

DC. He is also a visiting professor of World Christianity at the Harvard University Divinity School

where he pursued also his doctoral studies. Earlier he served as Professor of Theology at the United

Theological College, Bangalore, India for nine years. 597


Felix Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia, 140-147. 599

Sathianathan Clarke, Dalits and Christianity, 4. 600

Henry Whitehead in his study of village gods in South India says that they are female with few

exceptions. He suggests that it may be due to the fact that “Aryan deities were gods of a race of

warriors, whereas the Dravidian deities were goddesses of an agricultural people.” The Village

Gods of South India (New York/London: Garland Publishing Inc., 1980), 17.


goats.601

Felix Wilfred indicates that the subaltern goddesses are protectors of people,

cattle and hamlets from the assault of the high castes. Unlike the goddesses of the

great traditions who are married and submissive, the goddesses of the subaltern

tradition are “generally unmarried and are symbols of vibrant power.”602

In different

regions of North India, a majority of lower-caste deities are feminine such as Kali,

Behula, Jagadamba, Kamla, Sheetla, Phoolmati, Parvati, Ambika Bhavani, Koila

Mata, Keti Bhavani, Mhathin Dai, and Shahjadi Mai. Many of these goddesses are

believed to be protectors from diseases: Mari Mai and Umariya Mata are goddesses

who control cholera; Kamthi Matha is the goddess of plague; Sitala Mata is the

goddess of small-pox; Agwani is the goddess of fever. 603

The feminine representation

of the divine and the multitudes of goddesses presented by the subaltern religions

itself suggest very vividly the different axis on which these religions function in

opposition to the elite religions that are very patriarchal.

6.2.2. Local Heroes

Deities of subaltern religions are mostly persons from the oppressed classes

who have resisted and revolted against the oppressors and the oppressing systems and

structures. As Wilfred puts it, “the subaltern gods do not descend from above but

ascend, as it were, from under the feet of the society.”604

For example, Abraham

Ayrookuzhiel cites the example of three such local dalit heroes in Kerala who began

three anti-caste religious movements and are worshiped today as deities by the

dalits.605

Stephen Fuchs‟ research presents a number of messianic movements where

the leaders who led revolts against oppressors were always locals from the oppressed

groups who claimed divine election and divinity.606

For example, Birsa who was

601 John C. B. Webster, Religion and Dalit Liberation: An Examination of Perspectives (New Delhi:

Manohar, 1999), 11. Cf. Edgar Thurston, Castes and Tribes of Southern India, Vol. VI (Madras:

Government Press, 1909), 105. 602

Felix Wilfred, “Subaltern Religious Experience,” Journal of Dharma XXIII:1 (1998), 60. He cites

specifically the example of goddess Ellaiamma among dalits in Tamilnadu. 603

Cf. Badri Narayan, Women Heroes and Dalit Assertion in North India: Culture, Identity and

Politics (New Delhi: Sage, 2006), 162-163. 604

Wilfred, “Subaltern Religious Experience,” 61. 605

Cf. Abraham Ayrookuzhiel, “A Proposal for the Study of the Religious Heritage of Dalits: Some

Methodological Considerations,” Religion and Society 42:1 (1995), 18. He says that the founder-

gurus themselves are worshipped. 606

Stephen Fuchs, Rebellious Prophets: A Study of Messianic Movements in India Religions (London:

Asia Publishing House, 1965), 5. Stephen Fuchs also studied reform movements among Gonds (a

tribal group in India) in his book The Gond and Bhumia of Eastern Mandla (Bombay: 1968).


effaced as a leader of the Mundas607

in Bihar in 1895 and led many revolts was

himself a Munda; he claimed to have received his vocation from God, and later that

he himself was God (Bhagawan). People venerated him as God and never considered

him dead even though he died in 1900; many believed that he had returned to heaven

and that he would return back and would lead them to liberation. 608

6.2.3. Liberative Forces

Subaltern deities are “liberative forces” who transgressed caste norms,

revolted against the feudal systems, fought against injustices, and defended their

communties even unto death. Many of these deities suffered violent death.609

Subaltern religious stories challenge and defy the dominant cultural and social

traditions.610

6.2.4. Rebellious Spirits

Subaltern religiosity is replete with spirits and these spirits seem to be very

proximate to the humans and their daily lives. Many Indian tribal religions associate

spirits with forests. In some traditions these spirits are the spirits of ancestors. In his

analysis of the spirits in subaltern religiosity, Wilfred points to “materiality of life” of

these religions. The spirits are connected with the everyday materiality of the

subalterns, and as such do not belong to a different realm but to an extension of the

607 Mundas are a prominent tribe in the Chotanagpur region of India. The famous Flemish Jesuit

missionary, C. Lievens, was very successful in the mass conversion movements among Mundas for

seven years beginning in 1885. He was considered messianic by Mundas who believed he would

help them reclaim their tribal lands from the rich. Though he had much success during the short

span of his stay there, he had to return to Belgium due to ill-health and died. He is often called “the

apostle of Chotanagpur.” For more on Lievens, see L. Clarysse, S. J., Father Constant Lievens, S. J.

(Ranchi: Satyabharathi, 1985). 608

Cf. Fuchs, Rebellious Prophets, 25-34. 609

Felix Wilfred gives examples of such deities in Tamilnadu: Kanthavarayan, Kauthalamaadan,

Muthupatten, Madurai Veeran (Karuppusami), etc. He also points out that the Tamil expression

refers to them as “Kolayil Uthitha Theivangal” (Gods born out of murder). Wilfred, “Subaltern

Religious Experience,” 61. 610

The question of whether oral forms contain challenge by allowing them to be safely expressed

through song and dance cannot be fully addressed here. Raheja and Gold take account of this when

they admit that rituals of rebellion have a socially cathartic function, ensuring that conflicts occur

only in prescribed ritual contexts, leaving the dominant ideology intact; but they follow Davis in

arguing for a transformative spill over. Cf. Raheja Gloria Goodwin and Ann Grodzins Gold, Listen

to the Heron‟s Words: Reimagining Gender and Kinship in North India (Berkeley: University of

California Press, 1996), 24. That is, they suggest that while these expressive forms control rebellion

on one level, they also make active resistance conceivable on another. If women sing repeatedly of,

say, outwitting the mother-in-law, chances are that some day they will enact what they have

conceived.


material world. This suggests that in the subaltern religiosity, “there is continuum

between life before death and life after death.”611

6.2.5. Dancing Spirits and Vibrant Visions

While most elite religions have great significance for silence and

contemplation, subaltern religiosity is vibrant and vigorous. There is a mix of sound

and play; there is entertainment and performance; there is drama and dance. There is

singing, shouting and beating of drums. As the subalterns go through rigorous, hard

and oppressive regimes of work, “the elements of leisure and entertainment are

interwoven with their religious experience.” These ritual performances become

mediums to express their anger and frustration against the oppression, criticise the

oppressive systems, and even to ridicule the oppressive powers. Through these lively

performances of dance and game, subalterns experience in their rituals a kind of

freedom and liberation which they are denied by the dominant. 612

6.2.6. Orality

While the great traditions of India are based on written scriptures, the

subaltern religions are basically oral traditions.613

Before the advent of the written

word, the experience of the community was richly expressed through many non-

verbal forms of images, rituals and music. While the transmission of the message in

an oral tradition is always in danger of being altered and subverted by various story-

tellers through generations, it still has the advantage of remaining open ended. A

written tradition becomes rigid and „is fixed in the idiom of the past.‟614

Subaltern traditions are bound up with oral narrations.615

“Orality is the

language of the marginal peoples,” the culture of the subalterns and a “symbol of

611 Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia, 141.

612 Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia, 159-160.

613 Jyothi Sahi narrates a legend about the evolution of oral tradition. “One legend from the North East

of India, claims that originally even their culture was a written one, but in the process of their

wanderings, the tribe had to cross a great raging torrent of a river, and so the books which they were

carrying had to be carried in their mouths, as they swam across. In the process of trying to get

across the waters, they had to swallow their traditions, and that is why their most precious stories

remain only orally transmitted.” Jyoti Sahi, “Seeds of Tradition,” Journal of Dharma XXIII:1

(1998), 85. Though the legend sounds very unrealistic, it does point at the same to the common

false presupposition that the “written tradition” is superior to the “oral tradition.” Because of such a

false presupposition, some tribal groups of oral tradition must have created this legend to say that

they were also written traditions in the past, and thereby claim equality with other written traditions. 614

Sahi, “Seeds of Tradition,” 85. 615

The importance of “orality” is also recognized important in the biblical scholarship. Literacy in the

biblical time was limited and even when the texts existed in script, they were always performed


powerlessness.”616

On the one hand these narratives reconstruct their collective

identities and theories of their origin compared to the ones imposed by the dominant

traditions. On the other, these narratives also express their hopes for liberation.617

For

example, the rich religious experience of the dalits is expressed in various non-

textual/non-scriptual forms, such as music, painting, dance, weaving, song,

architecture, etc. These non-literary forms, on the one hand, “contain, shape and

express their reflections on the Divine, the world, and human beings,” and, on the

other, they become vehicles to capture and communicate “the Dalit reflection on their

experiences of all aspects of reality.”618

The life of Birsa, considered a messiah of the

Mundas of Bihar, is a popular theme of the Munda folk songs and stories.619

6.2.7. Opposed to the Dominant Religiosity

Subaltern religiosity is opposed to the dominant religiosity. It presents a

symbolism and narrative that are contrary to the ones proposed by the elite religions.

Subaltern religiosity especially negates the sacred theories of the elite religions which

try to justify the oppression of the subaltern groups. For example, Kancha Ilaiah,620

an

Indian social activist, polarizes one such subaltern religiosity, the dalit religiosity,

against the elite Hindu caste-religiosity. Dalit religion is based on labour and

production, while the Hindu religion is based on leisure and exploitation. Dalit

religion is primarily concerned with protection, while Hindu religion initiates and

nourishes violence. And Dalit religion is egalitarian, decentralized and women-

orally. Study of scriptures within the context of orality throws new insights into the world of the

texts and the communities. Horsley attempts to approach Q (Quelle) source and Marks texts as Oral

performance. Horsley, Jesus in Context, 56-108. See also Susan Niditch, Oral World and Written

Word (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1996); Werner Kelber, The Oral and Written

Gospel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983). 616

Felix Wilfred, “Whose Nation? Whose History?” Jeevadhara 32 (2002), 73. 617

Cf. Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia, 157-158. While the Hindu tradition suggest that the dalits are

“untouchables,” dalit religiosity claims a theory of their being the indigenous people of the land

who have been exploited and dominated by an oppressive invading ethnic group. 618

Sathianathan Clarke, “Dalit Religion as a Resourceful Symbolic Domain: A Critical Review of

Theories of Religion and a Constructive Proposition to Glean the Richness of Dalit Subjectivity,”

Religion & Society 49 (2004), 46. 619

Fuchs, Rebellious Prophets, 34. 620

Kancha Ilaiah is head of the department of Political Sciences at the Osmania University. He is a

Buddhist and a major figure in the ideological movement against the Indian caste system. His

writings have been very critical of Hinduism. They include Why I am Not A Hindu: A Sudra

Critique of the Hindutva Philosophy, Culture and Political Economy (Calcutta: Samya, 1996); God

as Political Philosopher: Buddhist Challenge to Brahminism (Calcutta: Samya, 2001); Buffalo

Nationalism: A Critique of Spiritual Fascism (Calcutta: Samya, 2004).


affirming, in contrast to the Hindu religion that is hierarchical, patriarchal and

ritualistic.621

6.2.8. Public Divinity (open space; no private religiosity)

Another contrasting feature of subaltern religiosity is their open spaces of

worship. Subalterns do not have structured “spaces of worship” like temples. Their

places of worship are mostly fields, groves, and streets; they are not secluded spaces.

Subaltern religions are also less ritualistic and legalistic; there are no prescribed

rubrics and rituals, and even if there are some norms they are very fluid. Further, the

subaltern religiosity is also non-mediated; “there is little place for persons or

institutions mediating the sacred to the larger masses.” The point of reference for the

religiosity is neither sacred texts nor traditions, but the community itself as a whole.622

Similarly, unlike the dominant, the subalterns maintain little secrecy and express their

emotions openly; their lives are “like an open book.”623

6.3. SUBALTERN INCULTURATION

6.3.1. Jesus and the Subalterns

6.3.1.1. Jesus as Deviant

Clarke interprets “Jesus as deviant.”624

He suggests that the first characteristic

of Jesus‟ deviance is the concrete and actual social and economic situatedness; Jesus

„being out of normal place‟ is characteristic of his deviance.625

He is born outside

Bethlehem in a stable; he deliberately befriends displaced people; he dies outside

Jerusalem. Clarke finds the second characteristic of Jesus‟ deviance in Jesus‟ „being

out of line,‟ since he violates the lines which distinguish purity and pollution. Clarke

believes that Jesus initiated and inspired the subaltern resistance. A third characteristic

of Jesus‟ deviance indicated by Clarke is Jesus‟ affirmation of the full humanity of the

621 Cf. Kancha Ilaiah, Why I am not a Hindu, 90-101. See also Kancha Ilaiah, “Productive Labour,

Consciousness and History: The Dalitbahujan Alternative” in Shahid Amin & Dipesh Chakrabarty,

eds., Subaltern Studies IX: Writings on South Asian History and Society (New Delhi: Oxford

University Press, 1996). 622

Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia, 152-153. 623

Felix Wilfred, “Subalterns and Ethical Auditing,” Jeevadhara 37 (2007), 12. 624

He acknowledges that he borrows the image “Jesus as Deviant” from Malina and Neyrey, who

through their study into the social and cultural contexts of Jesus‟ time, propose diverse images of

Jesus, one of which is “Jesus as Deviant.” Cf. Bruce J. Malina and Jerome H. Neyrey, Calling Jesus

Names: The Social Value of Labels in Mathew (Sonoma,CA: Polebridge Press, 1988). 625

Clarke, Dalits and Christianity, 202; Clarke refers here to John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A

Revolutionary Biography (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1994), 23.


deviant before God, and his altering thereby the value system of the society.626

Jesus

as deviant shares the “polluted space” of the outcastes, and “sets into motion the

resistive forces which challenge the social, cultural, economic and religious structures

that maintain the unjust divisions between the „prominents‟ (dominant) and the

„deviants‟ (subaltern).” Jesus affirms the human identity of deviants, and “empowers

the deviants to subvert, in their own subaltern way, the hierarchies, distinctions and

discriminations.” While being a “liberator for the deviants,” Jesus “does not cease to

be a saviour for the prominents,” as he “postures his praxis at the borderline of

emancipatory resistance and emancipatory reconciliation.”627

6.3.1.2. Jesus as Subaltern

Jesus‟ humanity and divinity are to be understood in terms of his subalternity.

The genealogy of Jesus (Mt. 1: 1-17) is suggestive of his subaltern conditions. The

names of Tamar, Rahab and even illegitimate Solomon are suggestive. Moreover,

Jesus is referred to as a „carpenter‟s son.‟ One group of “Son of Man” sayings speak

of the Son of Man encountering rejection, mockery, contempt, suffering and finally

death (Mk. 8:31; 9:12; 10:45). Jesus underwent these subaltern experiences as the

prototype of all subalterns. We should also note that Jesus identified himself totally

with the subalterns of his day (Mk. 2:15-16). Above all, Jesus‟ subalternity is best

manifested on the cross; on the cross he was the broken, the crushed, the oppressed

and the subjugated. The cross thus symbolises the subalternity of both divinity and

humanity. The feeling of being God-forsaken is central to the subaltern experience.

6.3.1.3. Jesus, a Friend of the Subaltern

The Gospels present Jesus as being a true friend of the subalterns of his time.

He associated with the subalterns of every sort: publicans, prostitutes, lepers,

Samaritans, the common and the working-class people. He touched lepers and let

prostitutes and woman with haemorrhage touch him. Jesus asks for and accepts water

from a Samaritan woman. He sat in the homes of tax collectors and sinners; with

those whose moral conduct or disreputable profession made them ritually unclean and

social outcasts. He ate with them and made them welcome in his own home, to the

horror and anger of the elite Pharisees and Scribes.

626 Clarke, Dalits and Christianity, 203-205.



6.3.1.4. Jesus Challenges Elite Religiosity

Jesus challenges the elite religiosity of his days, calling the elites to conversion

and transformation. He critiques their religious rituals, practices and norms; he

contests their claims of superiority. Aylward Shorter, who made a substantive

explication of the theology of inculturation through his many books on the subject,

suggests that Jesus‟ contestation of Jewish culture is of interest in the theology of

inculturation.628

Jesus was enculturated into the culturally heterogeneous Galilee.629

Even if Jesus was born a Jew, his culture was more of a “popular Jewish culture” than

the “elite Jewish culture.” Jesus challenges very strongly many aspects of the

established Jewish culture, its structures, its laws and rituals. Jesus declared an

inclusive view of God‟s people where people from the east and west will sit down at

the banquet and that, while the Galilean towns reject him, the Gentiles will accept him

(Mt. 10:15; 11:20-24).

6.3.2. Subaltern as the “locus” of the Church

Clarke presents Jesus as deviant because of his concrete situatedness „outside

the normal space.‟ He was born outside Bethlehem and died outside Jerusalem. He

always lived in the company of sinners and tax-collectors. Except for the few

occasions when he is geographically situated within the synogogues or cities, he

mostly lived outside: on streets, on hills and near the seas. His interaction with the

Father and the Spirit are also located mostly in open spaces, on the hills and in the

groves. The Church is where Jesus is. And if Jesus is „outside,‟ the locus of the

Church is also „outside.‟

Subalterns in India are always located „outside‟ the „normal‟ spaces of living.

While dalits are always made to live in segregated outskirts of villages, tribals always

are pushed into the forests and hills. Spaces of women are mostly “eliminated” and

“marginalised” in most social, religious, political and economic contexts in India. The

subaltern exists at the periphery. As Jesus places himself at the peripheries, Church

also needs to find its locus at the peripheries, at the loci of the subalterns.

628 Shorter, Toward A Theology of Inculturation, 119.

629 Shorter presents here four general theories about Jesus‟ mission to the Gentiles as proposed by

Senior Donald and Stuhmueller Carroll, in their book Biblical Foundations for Mission (London:

SCM, 1983) : 1) Earthly Jesus called the apostles in his lifetime to the Gentile mission; 2) Jesus did

not inaugurate this mission in his lifetime, but he had such a mission in his mind and instructed his

apostles about it post-Resurrection; 3) Gentile mission was a product of the early church; 4) It is

centred on the Kingdom preached by Jesus. While the first two theories cannot validated from the

Gospel accounts, the fourth theory can be the most acceptable. Cf. Shorter, Toward A Theology of

Inculturation, 120-121.


6.3.3. “Option for the Poor” as “Option for the Subaltern”

When God wanted to be born as a man into the world, he chose to be born

poor. Choice for the poor is indeed a choice of God. Undoubtedly, it is the voice of

those who have “no voice,” the poor, the despised, the humiliated, which has the right

to be heard in Christian theology. Theology must begin from the experience of the

“other,” the “non-person,” and it must seek an alliance with the poor of the world in

order to create a “new human person.” In the context of oppression, the poor are not

only hearers but privileged bearers of the gospel. That is the meaning of the poor (Lk

6:20). They are capable, by reason of their lived participation in the struggle, to

apprehend and articulate the true meaning of the kingdom of God. The exploited

sectors of society, the despised races, and the marginalized cultures are the subject of

a new understanding of the faith.

6.3.4. Subaltern Religiosity as the source of Inculturation

Subalterns have a long historical heritage of religious movements of protest

against Brahmanical values which were started by untouchables and lower-castes and

tribal saints.630

Because these movements never enjoyed political and economic

support, they never struck institutional roots, and their teaching never acquired the

status of sacred scripture in the society. Therefore, their teachings continued in oral

forms of songs, stories and ritual practices. The stories and rituals of these prophetic

movements can richly benefit from the evolution of an incarnate theology and an

inculturated church in India where the subalterns as well as others can discover

together the kingdom of God present amidst them.

Subaltern religiosity and culture play a role in welding the oppressed as a

group, not by discarding subaltern religiosity as the dominant classes have

traditionally done, but by using it to revive their identity, improve their self-image,

reinforce their sense of being human, and affirm their right to self-respect and to

control over their resources and productive assets. When inculturation in India en-

fleshes into the subaltern religiosity it becomes prophetic and liberative.

6.3.5. Subaltern Symbols as Liturgical Symbols

Sometimes though subaltern religious symbols are borrowed from the

dominant religions; they are given different meaning and roles within the subaltern

630 Cf. Fuchs, Rebellious Prophets.


system. Subaltern symbolism is able to forge an identity for an oppressed people

which would otherwise be denied to them by the dominant classes. The day-to-day

life with all its joys and sorrows and the longings for a dignified life are expressed in

the subaltern religious symbolic. Their myths and symbols are very “exterior,”

“materialistic” and down-to-earth. The subaltern religious symbols are vibrant,

colourful, celebrative and communitarian. As an Indian Jesuit theologian,

Anthonysamy affirms regarding the liturgical symbols of the subalterns: “Miracles,

mysteries and myths still fill them with awe and wonder; dance, dramas and songs

help them to give meaning to their empty and broken lives.”631

When inculturation integrates subaltern religious symbols, the Indian Christian

liturgies can become very lively and participatory, people-oriented and

communitarian.632

Such subaltern liturgical inculturation will be attuned to the

subalterns aspirations and longings for freedom. It will make the subaltern very

welcome and comfortable with the liturgies, unlike the elite inculturation where the

liturgical symbolism of the dominant religiosity makes the subaltern feel eliminated,

marginalised and betrayed.

6.3.6. Subaltern Theology as “Theo-graphia” and “Theo-phonia”

The subaltern orality “puts into circulation resources that are ignored by

theology done from within the dictates of the culture of literacy.”633

For example, the

rich religious experience of the dalits “is expressed in non-textual/non-scriptual forms,

i.e. music, painting, dance, weaving, song, architecture, etc.”634

Additionally, dalit

theology uses dalits‟ languages and expressions, stories and songs, as well as their

popular wisdom including their values, proverbs and folklores to interpret their

history, culture and faith.635

As Clarke rightly suggests, any authentic theology in

631 Anthonysamy, SJ, “Biblical and Theological Perspectives of Neo-Pentecostalism” in Colloquium

on Neo-Pentecostalism (Bangalore: NBCLC, 1998), 2; as quoted by Thomas D‟Sa, “Paths of

Mission,” in Thomas D‟Sa, ed., The Church in India in the Emerging Third Millennium (Bangalore:

NBCLC, 2005), 546. 632

Roger Gaikwad speaks about how communitarian values of the tribals in Mizoram have made the

Mizo Christians church-life very communitarian. Cf. Roger Gaikwad, “Rethinking Indian

Christianity From A Tribal Perspective,” Religion and Society 44:4 (1997), 112-113. 633



Cf. M. E. Prabhakar, “The Search for a Dalit Theology,” in A Reader in Dalit Theology, ed. Arvind

P. Nirmal (Madras: Gurukul, 1990), 47.


India “must go beyond text and language” where “theo-logia” includes “theo-graphia”

and “theo-phonia.”636

While most dalit and tribal Christians in India are kept illiterate, the reading of

the Bible as a written text with the logo-centric orientation is inappropriate and

irrelevant for them. Arul Raja, a dalit scholar, calls for orality as a model for

approaching the Bible, in which “the Bible should be carefully uncoded from the

written text and re-encoded in the form of oral dalit discourses.637

Such discourses are

oriented towards an „empirical mode of experiencing reality‟ and „basically of the

performative order.‟638

In terms of resources, dalits are accustomed to „rich

interpretation of the down-to-earth myths and symbols‟ and hence they are attracted to

the world of apocalyptic literature which exhibits the symbolism of evil, the suffering

of the marginalized and eschatological hopes.639

Jyoti Sahi, the Indian painter-theologian calls us “to liberate the symbol from

its secondary position to the word, as part of a much bigger programme of finding the

sources of insight in the common people.”640

Theology in this context should be

committed to making room for the symbolic reflections of dalits and tribals in its

enterprise. It is not simply enough for Indian Christian Theology to champion the

inclusion of the subaltern communities; it must also create space for their particular

mode of expressing and communicating their reflections. Historically the subalterns

have been prevented from using the „sacred‟ mode of the written word; their rich

communal religious reflectivity is expressed in non-textual forms. If Indian Christian

theology wishes to critically reflect upon a dialogical symbolic intercourse that is all-

inclusive, then it must extend beyond text and language in its traditional sense.


637 A. Maria Arul Raja SJ, “Some Reflections on a Dalit Reading of the Bible,” in V. Devasahayam

(ed.), Frontiers of Dalit Theology (Delhi: ISPCK, 1997), 336-345 at 336. For a discussion on the

significance of orality, cf. W. Ong, “Text as Interpretation: Mark and After,” Semeia 39 (1987), 7-

26, especially p.9: “In so far as a text is static, fixed, “out there,” it is not utterance but a visual

design. It can be made into an utterance only by a code that is existing and functioning in a living

person‟s mind. When a person knowing the appropriate code moves through the visual structure and

converts it into a temporal sequence of sound, aloud or in the imagination, directly or indirectly –

that is, when someone reads the text – only then does the text become an utterance and only then

does the suspended discourse continue, and with its verbalised meaning. Texts have meaning only

insofar as they emerge from and are converted into the extra-textual. All text is pretext.” 638

Arul Raja, “Some Reflections on a Dalit Reading of the Bible,” 338. 639

Arul Raja, “Some Reflections on a Dalit Reading of the Bible,” 339. 640

Jyoti Sahi, “Dance in the Wilderness,” in Yeow Choo Lak, ed., Doing Theology with Asian

Resources, vol.II, (Singapore: ATESEA, 1995), 113.


6.3.7. Subaltern Values as the “Values of the Kingdom”

The dalit religion “was a mode of coping with, challenging, and within limits,

transforming an oppressive social order.”641

As Suguna Ramanathan points out, unlike

the expressive traditions of the higher and the middle castes, the expressive traditions

of dalits articulate more egalitarian relations.642

The tribal traditions of India also have

an egalitarian ethos: the spirit of democracy, mutuality, justice and equality.643

The

spirit of sharing what they produce and equal distribution is very much reminiscent of

the early Christian community.644

“The generosity of the tribals always outshines the

exclusivism and superiority consciousness of the non-tribals.”645

Subaltern inculturation not only accentuates the oppression of dalits and their

struggle for equality and justice, but it also calls for transformation of unjust,

undemocratic and oppressive structures.646

There is an “ethic of human solidarity”

among the subalterns and there is affirmation and promotion of life in its whole.647

Pointing to the open and transparent culture of subalterns that rejects secrecy which is

usually the power of the dominant, Wilfred suggests that an inculturation of the

Church in India into the “subaltern ethical auditing” can transform it into a more

transparent and credible community.648

He also proposes what he calls as the

“subaltern art of negotiating the borders” as a relevant subaltern cultural feature as

helpful in the efforts of Christianity to resist the evils of globalisation and defend the

641 Saurabh Dube, Untouchable Pasts: Religion, Identity, and Power Among a Central Indian

Community, 1780-1950 (Albany: State University of New York, 1998), 21. 642

Suguna Ramanathan, “Stories Women Tell,” in Fernando Franco et al, eds., The Silken Swing: The

Cultural Universe of Dalit Women (Calcutta: Stree, 2000) 131. 643

For some elaborate dealing of some values of tribals, cf. Gaikwad, “Rethinking Indian Christianity

From A Tribal Perspective,” 106-121. Among many other values, he speaks, for example, of

tlawmngaihna by the Mizos and the Sobaliba of the Ao Nagas, which represent a life-style where

one gives top priority to the interests of the community through self-denial and self-sacrifice. For

more on this values see, K. Thanzauva, Theology of Community: Tribal Theology in the Making

(Aizwal: Mizo Theological Conference, 1997), 125-126. 644

Johnson Vadakumchery, “Subaltern Movements: Perspective of the Primal People,” Journal of

Dharma XXIII:1 (1998), 99-103. He points out the study of Grigson among Maria Gonds in Central

India. Among these people the village elder allots them an area of land for cultivation. But the work

is done on a co-operative basis. When the produce is ready a share is given to all those who

laboured together. A share sufficient for the maintenance of the old and sick people is also set apart.

Cf. Grigson W. V., The Aboriginal Problem in the Central Provinces and Berar (Nagpur:

Government Press, 1944), as quoted in Vadakumchery, “Subaltern Movements,” 99. 645

Vadakumchery, “Subaltern Movements,” 100. 646

Cf. M. E. Prabhakar, “The Search for a Dalit Theology,” 48. 647

Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia, 160-161. 648

Wilfred, “Subalterns and Ethical Auditing,” 12, 20-21. By “Subaltern ethical auditing” Wilfred

means making the subalterns the criteria for ethical accountability; the subalterns are the litmus test

on whether an institution or enterprise is ethically oriented or not.


rights of the weak and the vulnerable of the world.649

Subaltern religions are also

women-affirming and they reinforce the equality of man and woman.650

In the context of ecology, the values of the tribal cultures and religions are of

great importance. Around 70% of the 70 million Indian tribals are forest dwellers and

they have always lived in a culture of communal property where the community

owned the land and not the individuals. They have also developed a culture of

sustainable forest and natural resources management that ensured renewability and

protection, inter-and-intra-generational equality.651

Theologically, this tribal

ecological culture symbolises respect for, and preservation of, the creation of God.

Thus, the egalitarian tribal concepts of nature call the Church to transform its concepts

of nature. The Church has long viewed man as the centre of things with the right, even

the duty, to conquer, subdue and have dominion over nature. Interpreting Genesis

1:28, “be masters of the earth and conquer it,” the church viewed the natural world as

something to be conquered and dominated. In the context of the ecological crisis

worldwide, the subaltern values of nature, and their sustainable and just management

of it need to be inculturated into the life of the Church. An inculturated church in

India would then be a church which fosters a sustainable and just management of

nature.

6.3.8. Subaltern Inculturation Counters the Hindutva Ideology

While elite inculturation feeds Hindutva ideology, subaltern inculturation

fights against it. While contesting the claim of the unitary mode of knowledge that is

literary and exclusive to the high-caste Hindus, Clarke argues that the subaltern non-

literary and multimodal forms of knowledge resist the homogenizing tendencies of

Hindutva. “The multimodal frames of knowing and communicating such knowledge

resist the tendency of homogenization since they insist that knowledge cannot be

abstracted from the persons and the processes of production.”652

An affirmation of the

non-literary forms of knowledge of the subalterns in India “removes the stigma that

Hindutva places on the labouring class as non-reflexive communities,” and validates

the “human knowledge that arises from the blood and sweat of everyday activity.”653

649 Felix Wilfred, “Searching for David‟s Sling: Tapping the Local Resources of Hope,” Concilium

(2004:5), 85-95. 650

Cf. Kancha Ilaiah, Why I am not a Hindu, 90-101. 651

Cf. Walter Fernandes, “Tribals of India: A Challenge to Theology,” Jnanadeepa 1:1 (1998) 58-98. 652

Sathianathan Clarke, “Dalit Religion as a Resourceful Symbolic Domain,” 48. 653

Clarke, “Dalit Religion as a Resourceful Symbolic Domain,” 47.


The drum of the Paraiyars of Tamilnadu, for example, “becomes a surrogate language

in resistance to the script of the Hindu Caste community.”654

Based on the subaltern

dalit religiosity, Clarke advocates “the symbolic constructivist model” in resistance to

“the unitary constructions” of Hindu nationalists based on Hindutva ideology.655

6.3.9. Subaltern Inculturation Incarnates Truly “Local Churches”

Subaltern Inculturation makes the churches truly local. When the churches

become “subaltern churches” for the subaltern Christians in India, then one can say

that the churches have become local. In many local churches in India, while the

churches are made up of 100% dalit or tribal Christians, they are ministered by non-

dalit/tribal clergy, non-dalit/tribal religious, and follow a non-dalit/tribal liturgy

guided by a non-dalit/tribal theology. Subaltern inculturation can critique the denial of

their religiosity by the church in India and call for an integration of their religiosity

and culture into the process and fabric of inculturation in India.

6.3.10. Subaltern Inculturation Fosters Harmony

Subaltern Inculturation can foster peace and harmony in India where the

experience is one of increasing communal violence. While elite religiosity fortifies

borders to maintain purity, orthodoxy, power and control, the subaltern religiosity

“cuts across borders with ease.” While the elite religions tend to be very rigid,

subaltern religions are very fluid. As such they foster integration, peace, harmony and

wholeness of life.656

6.4. CONCLUSION

In the past the “inculturation theologies,” so conversant with Brahmanic

religions, have forgotten both the religiousness of India‟s poor and the struggles of the

poor. In the history of the Church in India, the profile of Christ was either a “Gnostic

Christ”, a “Colonial Christ,” or a “Brahmanic Christ.” From the nineteenth century,

Christ was presented in the frame of fulfilment theology. In the 1960s, monks and

mystics propagated an ashramite Christ. Later, in the 1970s, a universal Christ was

the theme of inculturationists. The focus of inculturation was on a personal and

interior meta-cosmic liberation. Now the promise of inculturation resides in the

struggles of the oppressed and in their mass culture and religiosity centred around a

654 Clarke, “Dalit Religion as a Resourceful Symbolic Domain,” 44.

655 Sathianathan Clarke, “Dalit Religion as a Resourceful Symbolic Domain,” 29-48.



“Dalit Christ.” This promise holds the hope for a process that turns the Church in

India to a Church of India. Only by embracing a perspective and an approach of a

liberative inculturation can the church overcome its current “credibility-crisis.” If the

church wants to contain the external threat of “mission crisis” it has to make an

irrevocable covenant with the poor, only through whose medium can the Gospel

genuinely be inculturated. The Church in India can thus be faithful to Jesus Christ and

in the process, can become the Church of India, which is the only acceptable form of

the Church in the unfolding millennium to one billion Indians.

CHAPTER TWO

“BECOMING MARGINAL”

A MARGINAL CHURCH

1. THE POOR HAVE A FACE

“The poor do not exist,” is an epigraph of Joerg Rieger‟s provocative book

Remember the Poor.1 Rieger does not say that the “poor” do not exist, but that the

universal category of the “poor” is false. He considers the universal category of the

poor as one created by the elite, the powerful and the rich, and he contends that the

“poor” are so real that they cannot be defined in universal categories of the rich and

powerful. Rieger conceives the very process of universalization as a construct of the

rich and powerful “who seek to define people on the margins in terms of unified

identity and a common essence in order to pull them back into the system.” The

power of the poor and the margins lie, says Rieger, “in a flexible identity that can

never be quite grasped in terms of the status quo.”2

The “poor” do exist in millions in India, but they do not exist as the “universal

poor.” They exist as dalits,3 Adivasis

4 (tribals), lowcastes, women, etc. We believe

1 Joerg Rieger, Remember the Poor: The Challenge to Theology in the Twenty-First Century

(Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998). 2 Joerg Rieger, “Theology and the Power of the Margins in the Postmodern World,” in Joerg Rieger,

ed., Opting for the Margins: Postmodernity and Liberation in Christian Theology (New York:

Oxford University Press, 2003), 183. 3 For a detailed account of the evolution of the term „dalit,‟ see Bhagvan Das and James Massey,

eds., Dalit Solidarity (Delhi: ISPCK, 1995), 9-14. The term „dalit,‟ some authors claim, has also

root in Hebrew word „dal‟ which means low, weak, poor, helpless, etc. In OT different forms of this

term are used to describe those people who are reduced to nothing or helpless or poor: Ex. 23:3 dal;

Judges. 6:15 h-dal; Jer. 40:7 um-dalat; Jer. 52:15,16 um-dalot; Amos. 2:7 dales. In the Hebrew

Bible, dll is used in synonimity with other terms (ani, anav, „ebhyon, rash, qaton) used for „poor‟.

The LXX translates dal in different ways such as: poor, lowly, powerless, needy, to be poor. See H.

J. Fabry, “Dll” in TDOT, eds., Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, trans. T. Willis and

Geoffrey, vol. 3 (Michigan: W. B. Eerdmans, 1978), 203-230. It is said that the Dalit Panthers

movement of Maharashtra popularized this term and broadened its scope to include peasants,

women, landless and all those exploited. Cf. James Massey, “Christian Dalits: A Historical

Perspective,” Journal of Dharma 16 (1991), 44. Dalits prefer the term „dalit‟ to call themselves as it

is not a mere name but has become an expression of hope for recovering their past self-identity. It

has become a positive assertive expression. 4 This term “Adivasis” refers to the tribal people in India. We prefer using the term “Adivasis” rather

than “tribals”. The word “tribal” has negative connotations which are negated by the tribals

themselves. Like the term “dalits” which was coined by dalits themselves to represent their self-

identity, the term “Adivasi” represents the self-identity of tribals. Etymologically the term “adivasi”

compounded from two Sanskrit words “adi” which means primordial or the beginning and “vasi”

means dweller. Therefore, “Adivasi” means the first one to dwell. The term “Adivasi” means the

“indigenous people,” and these people claim to be the original people who inhabited India (together

with dalits) before the Aryan invasion. Of course, we need to indicate that the claim of the tribals to

147 | M a r g i n a l C h u r c h

talking of the poor as they “exist” rather than as they are “conceived” makes much

greater sense for theological reflection. The “real poor people” are different from the

“poor of the concepts.” Talking of the poor as they “exist” takes theology to the “real

poor.” We believe that reflecting on different sections of the poor as they exist in

India also saves us from the danger of theological concepts and reflection remaining

too alienated from the “real poor people.” When we talk of the poor as a universal

category, it does not have a face and as a result it can alienate one from a real

encounter with the poor. The poor do have a face in India; the poor in India have

multiple faces. The faces of the poor in India are dalit, Adivasi, women, etc.

Proclaiming “Jesus is Poor” may not raise many eyebrows, but when James

Cone pronounced “Jesus is Black”5, it did create a flutter. Similarly, an affirmation

that “Jesus is Poor” and “Church of the Poor” seems non-controversial in India, but

such general connotations are meaningless and much less challenging for such phrases

do not portray the “real face” of the poor in India. The poor have a face in India, and

that face of the poor needs to colour the theological terminologies. Thus, in this

chapter, when we speak of the poor in India in relation to the church, we choose to say

“Jesus is dalit,” “Jesus is Adivasi” and “Jesus is women”; similarly, a “Dalit Church,”

“Adivasi Church,” and a “Women-Church”.

As it is our intent to study the situation of the poor in the church in India and

its relation and dialogue with the poor in India, so that it can truly become a local

church, we propose to treat the subjects under three heads. We shall first treat the

situation of the dalits in the Indian church while calling for an end to their

discrimination within the church and their empowerment. We shall secondly treat the

issues of women and call for a greater space within the church in India for the

participation of women. In the third section, we propose to create and evolve the

ecclesiological concept of “Church as Jesus-Community of the Margins” as a suitable

ecclesiological paradigm for the church in India in the context of the oppressed dalits

and women of India.

being the “indigenous people” of India is contested and needs much historical research to ascertain

the facts. However, we choose to use this name, even if contested, as it is the name the tribals

themselves prefer and identify with. The term “Adivasis” (indigenous people) also resists the

identity given them by the Hindu fundamentalist groups as “vanavasis” (people of the forests). 5 Cf. James H. Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1990); James H. Cone,

“God is Black,” in Susan Brooks Thistlewaite and Mary Potter Engel, eds., Constructing Christian

Theologies from the Underside (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1990);

M a r g i n a l C h u r c h | 148

2. DISCRIMINATION OF DALIT CHRISTIANS

2.1. DISCRIMINATION BY THE STATE

Christian dalits do not enjoy the same constitutional rights as those guaranteed

by the Indian Constitution to the scheduled castes and tribes generally. These include

reservation of seats in Parliament and the state legislative assemblies and claims to a

whole series of civil service and government posts, reservation of admissions in

colleges and universities, scholarships, fees-exemptions, subsidies for agriculture,

cottage industries, housing etc.6 Through such positive discrimination, the aim of the

legislation is to ensure that dalits can progress. However, such rights are not

guaranteed to Christians of Scheduled Caste origin.7 The Presidential Order of 1950

states “no person who professes a religion different from the Hindu religion shall be

deemed to be member of a Scheduled Caste.” The Order of 1950 specifically provided

only for those scheduled castes which are Hindu; i.e. dalits were defined by religion

and tied into the system.8 When the General Secretary of CBCI (Catholic Bishops

Conference of India), Archbishop Thomas Pothacamury made a representation to the

Government regarding this issue, the Home Minister of India, Pundit Govind Ballabh

Pant wrote on 13 October 1958:

the position under the law is that person who belongs to one of the Scheduled

Castes while in the Hindu fold ceases to be a member of such Scheduled Caste

when he relinquishes Hinduism and adopts some other faith different from

6 J. Saldhana, “An Historical Note: Christians of Scheduled Caste Origin,” Indian Missiological

Review 18:3 (1996), 52. 7 Article 15 outlaws discrimination on grounds of „religion, race, caste, place of birth,‟ but Article

341 empowers the president to issue Orders identifying which sections of the population need

special concession. The effect of legislation is actually to reinforce the degree of caste dependence.

See John C.B. Webster, The Dalit Christians: A History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1992),139ff; Amaladoss, A

Call to Community (Anand: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1994), 76ff. 8 But there is a debate if Dalits can be considered Hindus. Ambedkar argues that dalits are not Hindus

for they do not fit into the Hindu four-fold caste system. For Ambedkar caste is an essential feature

of Hinduism and a man who does not belong to a recognized caste cannot be a Hindu. See, B. R.

Ambedkar, What Congress and Gandhi Have Done For the Untouchables (Bombay: Thacker Co.,

1945), 175-177. James Massey reports that the British Census of India during their colonial rule did

not consider the dalits as Hindus. British Census authorities said Untouchables are those who deny

the authority of the Vedas, supremacy of the Brahmins, denied access to the interior of the Hindu

temples, have no Brahmin priests and do not worship Hindu Gods. See James Massey, ed.,

Indigenous Peoples: Dalits and Dalit Issues in Today‟s Theological Debate (Delhi: ISPCK, 1994),

62. Some however feel that „dalit religion‟ is a variant of Hinduism. This variant is identified as

“little tradition” of the dalits in opposition to the “great tradition” of the Sanskrit scriptures. But

James Theophilius Appavoo, in his article “Dalit Religion” tries to prove that the dalit religion is

not the little tradition in Hinduism, and that dalits have a religion of their own. He enumerates

differences between dalit religion and Hindu Sanskrit religion, in relation to the concept of deities

worshipped, the rituals, the place of worship and purpose of worship. See James Theophilius

Appavoo, “Dalit Religion,” in James Massey, ed., Indigenous Peoples: Dalits and Dalit Issues in

Today‟s Theological Debate (Delhi: ISPCK, 1994), 111-121.


Hinduism. Hence, he is no longer eligible to those concessions which under the

Constitution had been reserved for members of the Scheduled Castes.9

Subsequently this provision was extended by Parliament in 1956 to include

Sikh dalits, and in 1990 to include Buddhists. So, after these amendments the

Presidential Order of 1950 thus states: “no person who professes a religion different

from the Hindu, the Sikh or the Buddhist religion shall be deemed to be a member of

a Scheduled Caste.” Muslims and Christians are still excluded. The above Order holds

that the disabilities suffered by the scheduled castes do not exist in Christianity –

which, according to the witness of its own scriptures (Gal. 3:26-28 is oft quoted), is an

egalitarian religion.10

By conversion to Christianity, Christian dalits lose out on the

legitimate aid guaranteed to dalits who belong to the same sub-caste but profess a

different religion.11

Despite repeated attempts by means of representations and public protests to

the Indian Government to recognize dalit Christians as Scheduled Castes according to

the Constitution, so far there has not been any progress in this regard. To this day,

dalit Christians are constitutionally treated as “Other Backward Classes” (OBC) and

not Scheduled Castes (SC). Researchers clearly show that the social and economic

status of the dalits has not changed by conversion to Christianity, and that they

continue to suffer the same social and economic oppression as other Hindu dalits in

India. For that matter, dalits have remained dalits, no matter what religion they

belonged to; change of religion has not changed their social and economic

oppression.12

Even the Government appointed “Ranganath Mishra Commission”13

9 As quoted in Saldhana, “An Historical Note: Christians of Scheduled Caste Origin,” 53-54.

10 Cf. James Massey, Dalits in India: Religion as A Resource of Bondage or Liberation? With a

Special Reference to Christians (Delhi: Manohar, 1996), 81ff. 11

There are different theories on the origin of caste system and the accommodation of dalits into it. It

is argued that the dalits are an ancient race who are the descendants of the original inhabitants of the

land but were deprived of the land and reduced to slavery by the Aryan invaders. According to

Aryan invasion theory, the Aryans who invaded the Northwest of India around 1500 B.C. looked

down upon the indigenous people as ritually unclean. Aryans incorporated indigenous people as

inferior castes. See J. H. Hutton, Caste in India: Its Nature, Function and Origins (Bombay: Oxford

University Press, 4th

ed. 1963, 3rd

print, 1975); Prabhati Mukherjee, Beyond the Four Varnas: The

Untouchables in India (Delhi: Sage Publications, 1988); for a more recent historical data on this

subject, see James Massey, ed., Indigenous People: Dalits and Dalit Issues in Today‟s Theological

Debate (Delhi: ISPCK, 1994). 12

As Camil Parkhe, a Pune-based journalist, indicates, conversion of dalits to Christianity, Buddhism,

Sikhism, Islam have not changed their dalit status. Cf. Camil Parkhe, Dalit Christians: Right to

Reservations (Delhi: ISPCK, 2007), 5-6. 13

The National Commission for Religious and Linguistic Minorities (NCRLM) also called the

Ranganath Misra Commission after its Chairman, Justice Ranganath Misra, was established in 2004

to study the social and economic backwardness of religious and linguistic minorities in India, and

make recommendation to the government. It started its work in March 2005, but the submission of


after a prolonged study of the dalit Christians and Muslims, has recommended to

extend the status of Scheduled Caste to dalit Christians and Muslims, affirming that

the dalit Christians and Muslims are no different from Hindu/Sikh/Buddhist dalits and

suffer the same discrimination, oppression, and social and economic backwardness.14

But time and again the Indian Government has refused to amend the Presidential

Order of 1950 in favour of Christian dalits. The underlying fear of the high caste

political leadership of India is that such an amendment will greatly increase the

conversion of dalits to Christianity. The Hindu fundamentalist political parties like

BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) which propagate the Hindutva ideology thwart

vehemently any move towards such an amendment.

2.2. DISCRIMINATION WITHIN THE CHURCH

The dalits within the Church in India have been discriminated for centuries

across all churches. It was clearly voiced by the former Apostolic Pro-Nuncio to

India, Archbishop George Zur, in his inaugural address to the Catholic Bishops

Conference of India (CBCI) at their general assembly at Pune in 1991:

Though Catholics of the lower castes and tribes form 60 percent of Church

membership, they have no place in decision-making. Scheduled caste converts are

treated as low caste not only by high caste Hindus but by high caste Christians

too. … Separate places are marked out for them in the parish churches and burial

grounds. … Casteism is rampant among the clergy and religious. Though Dalit

Christians make 65 percent of the 10 million Christians in the South, less than 4

percent of the parishes are entrusted to Dalit priests. There are no Dalits among 13

Catholic bishops of Tamilnadu or among the Vicars-general and rectors of

seminaries and directors of social assistance centres.15

Similarly, Bishop M. Azariah of the Church of South India (CSI) observes:

The SC (Dalit) Christians are thus discriminated against and oppressed by fellow

Christians within the very Church for no fault of their own but the accident of

birth, even when they are 2nd

, 3rd

or 4th generation Christians. The high caste

Christians who are in a minority in the Church carry their caste prejudices even

after generations, unaffected by Christian belief and practice.16

Discrimination of dalit Christians within the churches in India began right from the

time of the earliest missionaries to India, and has evolved through years. Let us

its report was delayed many times, until it was finally submitted on 21 May 2007. But the report

was not tabled in the Parliament until 19 December 2009. 14

Confer the report of the Misra Commission available online on the NCRLM website:

http://minorityaffairs.gov.in/newsite/ncrlm/ncrlm.asp (accessed 10 December 2009). See specially

pages 140 and following. 15

Quoted in editorial: The Examiner 143 (18 January, 1991), 3. 16

M. Azariah, The Un-Christian Side of the Indian Church: The Plight of the Untouchable Converts

(Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akademy, 1989), 10.

http://minorityaffairs.gov.in/newsite/ncrlm/ncrlm.asp


explore a selective evolution of this “un-Christian face” of the Indian church in the

following pages.

2.2.1. Caste Discrimination by Early Western Missionaries

Right from the beginning of the modern missionary movement in India,

starting with the arrival of the Portuguese in 1448, the Catholic Church tried to

conform more to the prevailing caste-system in India than to condemn it. The Church,

in a sense, preferred the conversions from upper castes to the conversion of lower

castes.17

“Only after their first love for the high and the rich was broken did the

missions turn towards the low and the poor.”18

As the renowned historian Stephen

Neill vindicated, while it was natural for the missionaries to turn to the poor who

would more readily accept their message, mission history demonstrated that the exact

opposite was the case. “Almost every mission started with the attempt to reach higher

castes, and when movements started among the poor they were viewed with anxiety

and a measure of embarrassment by the missionaries who saw that their whole cause

might be prejudiced by the influx of masses of ignorant and despised people.”19

Early

Portuguese missionaries not only concentrated their mission work in the conversion of

the top-caste, Brahmins, to Christianity, but also limited Catholic priesthood to

Brahmins alone.20

As Jules Gomes deplores, “the „power evangelism‟ of the

Portuguese not only perpetuated power structures of caste and wealth, but also

bequeathed to Goa a Christianity that is enmeshed in hierarchical power structures.”21

They clearly devised two separate movements, one aimed at the upper castes and the

other later to convert the lower castes. However, we must note here that there was

however an exception to such discriminative preference of the early missionaries for

high caste converts: the conversion of the low caste fishing community, the Paravas,

in great numbers on the Coromandel Coast by Francis Xavier who reached India in

1542. While he baptized people of different castes, the majority of his approximately

700,000 converts were low castes. Historian John William Kaye describes Xavier as a

missionary whose “warm heart had expanded towards the poor and the oppressed.”22

17 Cf. Rowena Robinson, Christians of India (New Delhi: Sage, 2003), 51.

18 Manickam, “Missions‟ Approaches to Caste,” 65.

19 Stephen Neill, A History of Christian Missions (Baltimore: Penguin, 1964), 364.

20 Charles Singaram, The Question of Method in Dalit Theology: In Search of a Systematic Approach

to the Practice of an Indian Liberation Theology (Delhi: ISPCK, 2008), 102. 21

Jules Gomes, “Portuguese Mission in Goa: Conflict and Collaboration Between Colonial and

Brahmanical Power,” Bangalore Theological Forum 32:1 (2000), 136. 22

John William Kaye, Christianity in India: An Historical Narrative (Smith, Elder & Co.: London,

1859), 30. The famous dalit Christian historian and theologian, James Massey, would think that


Another good example of the fascination of the Western missionaries for the

conversion of Brahmins is the famous Italian Jesuit, Robert de Nobili who called

himself a “Christian Brahmin,” adopted their customs and lifestyle and dedicated

himself to the conversion of Brahmins with almost a total exclusion of dalits.23

He

became “an upper caste Indian in everything but colour.”24

He even forbade low-

caste parava Christians from his church,25

and instituted Brahminsanyasis to serve

high-castes and Pandaraswamis to work among other castes.26

He argued that caste

was a social system and it could be retained in Christianity, as he wrote in a letter in

1609: “By becoming a Christian one does not renounce his caste, nobility or usages.

The idea that Christianity interferes with them has been impressed upon people by the

devil, and is the great obstacle to Christianity”27

In the opinion of a Protestant Indian

theologian, Singaram, “Nobili reinforced caste separation and laid the foundation for

the separation of castes and caste discrimination in the Church.”28

Another renowned

dalit theologian and historian, James Massey, would conclude: “Ultimately, the efforts

of de Nobili and his associates brought fruit, which for the future proved negative: a

divided Church was created. By their actions they perpetuated the distinctions which

it is the ambition of Christianity to destroy.” 29

It is not just the Roman Catholic missionaries who adopted such

discriminative missionary methods in India, but the Protestant missionaries as well.

The latter who began their mission work in India with the arrival of Bartholomeo

Zeigenbalg and Plutschau at Tranquebar in 1706, followed suit and compromised with

the caste-system and discrimination of low-castes. They had separate seating places

Francis Xavier‟s work was limited to mere religious and moral teachings bereft of social

consciousness. Cf. James Massey, “Christian Dalits in India,” Religion & Society 37:3 (1990), 47.

But Samuel Jayakumar opines that Massey does not take the comprehensive review of the related

history in his judgement of Xavier‟s missionary efforts, and suggests that Xavier‟s missionary work

among the fishing people has indeed initiated and constructed a new social identity for the fishing

communities and fostered their upward social mobility. Cf. Samuel Jayakumar, Dalit

Consciousness and Christian Conversion: Historical Resources for a Contemporary Debate

(Oxford: Regnum International/Delhi:ISPCK, 1999), 93-34. 23

Cf. Stephen Neill, A History of Christianity in India: The Beginnings to AD 1707 (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1984), 299-283. 24

Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 147-148. 25

S. Manickam, Studies in Missionary History: Reflections on a Culture-Contact (Madras: CLS,

1988), 39. 26

Cf. Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 149-150. The Jesuit John de Britto is the most famous

of the pandaraswamis who were devoted to the conversion of non-Brahmin castes. 27

As quoted in C. B. Firth, An Introduction to Indian Church History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1998), 114. 28

Singaram, The Question of Method in Dalit Theology, 105. Fernandes expresses also a similar view.

Cf. Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 149. 29

James Massey, Dalits in India (Delhi: Manohar, 1995), 88.


for different castes in churches and preferred to ordain higher caste candidates rather

than lower caste converts.30

The Baptist missionaries, Joshua Marshman, William

Ward and William Carey, who arrived in Bengal in 1793, preferred to convert

Brahmins in Bengal.31

The famous English educational missionary work of Alexander

Duff who reached Calcutta in 1830 benefitted largely the Hindus of the upper

classes.32

Among the Protestants, the Leipzig Lutherans were the most extreme

adapters of the caste system in their communities. In their churches they had three

different places: seats for Europeans, mat or carpet for high castes and bare floor for

the low castes.33

But such preferential and discriminative trends changed in the later

Protestant missions. The so-called mass movements or mass conversions which

converted multitudes of dalits/Adivasis in India occurred very late in the Indian

missionary movement, during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The

missionary movement directed towards the conversion of dalits in India was chiefly

initiated by Protestant Churches.34

Missionary preference for high castes was not limited to the conversions of

high castes, but also a preference of high castes in ministerial and other ecclesial

employment opportunities. The Portuguese missions in Goa, Bombay and

Pondycherry employed mainly the high caste Brahmin converts in administrative jobs

and offices.35

Similarly the Jesuits in Madurai mission shunned low caste Shanars

(Nadars) as mission office holders and employed high caste converts, mainly Vellalas

in such positions.36

There have been many explanations of such caste attitudes of missionaries.

Clearly, as Manickam indicates, the political, social and economic ideologies of the

home countries of the missionaries played a great role in defining their attitudes

30 Cf. Singaram, The Question of Method in Dalit Theology, 106-107; Kaye, Christianity in India,

353. 31

D. Manohar Chandra Prasad, The Book of Exodus and Dalit Liberation: With Reference to Minjung

Theology (Bangalore: ATC, 2005), 64. 32

Massey, Dalits in India, 92-93. 33

Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 158. 34

Cf. Felix Wilfred, Dalit Empowerment (Bangalore: NBCLC, 2007), 144. 35

Cf. Robinson, Christians of India, 49, 52-53. Even today, the Goan Catholic hierarchy of priests

and especially bishops is dominated by Brahmins, and most control over church associations in

parishes is almost exclusively dominated by high caste gauncars. Cf. Olivinho J. F. Gomes, Village

Goa: A Study of Goan Social Structure and Change (New Delhi: S. Chand and Co., 1987), 85. 36

Cf. Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 151. This is the foundation, as Fernandes suggests, for

a long history of caste dispute among Catholics of this area. The low caste converts who

outnumbered high caste Vellalas challenged the ritual ascendency of Vellalas.


towards caste in India, and its rejection or accommodation into church.37

Rowena

Robinson, who made a sociological study of Christians in India, links the attitudes of

missionaries for or against caste to the Western native countries the missionaries came

from and to the historical and sociological context of societies there. Thus, the early

missionaries who came from societies which were themselves very hierarchical

tended to be more tolerant towards the caste system in India, while the later

missionaries who came from countries where the ideas of equality and individuality

prevailed viewed the caste system as horrific.38

Robinson explains the case of the

Portuguese missionaries in Goa, thus:

Clearly the Portuguese missionaries were not at all ill-disposed to the privileges of

social rank. Many came from the top ranks of a hierarchically organised society

themselves. This explains why they incorporated Brahmins into the priesthood and

why they granted administrative posts and offices principally to the higher

castes.39

Missionaries who came from countries such as Italy, Spain and Portugal, where the

societies were hierarchical, accommodated caste in church when they came to India.

A similar point is made by the Indian Jesuit sociologist, Walter Fernandes. He says

that most Protestant missionaries came from Northern European countries where

egalitarian ideologies prevailed due to the Enlightenment, the 18th

century political

revolutions and the 19th

century worker‟s movements, and thus they were opposed to

the caste system in India and considered untouchability unjust. But the Catholic

missionaries who came mostly from Southern Europe, which has not yet experienced

political revolutions, considered caste system in India legitimate and adapted it in

Christian churches.40

Further, a historian of Indian Christianity, Hugald Grafe, thinks

that the western missionaries, specially the Protestants, in the late nineteenth and early

twentieth centuries came from lower social backgrounds unlike the earlier ones who

came mostly from noble backgrounds, and as a result were supportive of egalitarian

reforms in missions.41

While the above reasons remain historical, social and political explanations of

accommodation of caste by missionaries, another sociologist, David Mosse, however,

37 Cf. S. Manickam, “Mission Approaches to Caste,” in V. Devasahayam, ed., Dalits & Women:

Quest for Humanity (Chennai: Gurukul, 1992), 61. 38

Robinson, Christians of India, 32, 48-49. 39

Rowena Robinson, Conversion, Continuity and Change: Lived Christianity in Southern Goa (New

Delhi: Sage, 1998), 54. 40

Cf. Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 154-155. 41

Hugald Grafe, History of Christianity in India. Vol-IV, Part-2: Tamilnadu in the Nineteenth and

Twentieth Centuries (Bangalore: Church History Association of India, 1990), 98.


brings to light another perspective. He argues that varied conceptions of religion

resulted in adaptation or opposition of caste in churches. He suggests that the early

western missionaries in Madurai mission “held a very other-worldly view of religion

which clearly dichotomized the spiritual and the temporal.”42

The missionaries acted

more like spiritual leaders (the renounced) and did not claim authority of churches and

festivals. As such, caste was considered a “worldly issue” which does not affect or

interfere with the practice of “spiritual religion.” But such a dialectical view of

religion, Mosse suggests, changed after British colonial rule began in India, and the

later missionaries began claiming and asserting more administrative powers in

parishes and challenged the local caste and political leaders. At that time, it was

“difficult to separate out questions of power and authority from those of religion,” and

as a result, “Catholic religion had become firmly institutionalized” and synonymous

with church authority. And as a firm religious institution, “the Catholic church will no

longer permit expressions of caste –as a ritual and social system– in the church.”43

Further, Felix Wilfred suggests that the higher ideal of “saving souls” has made the

missionaries compromise the social issue of caste: “they preferred to accommodate

themselves to the caste situation as a social reality so that the more important goal of

salvation of souls was not endangered.”44

Stephen Neill, who wrote voluminous works on the history of Christianity in

India, opines that caste was adopted by all missions in India: “The majority of

missions, whatever their professed theology or background, have in practice found it

necessary to recognise in some degree the existence of caste and to adapt themselves

to its penetrating reality.”45

While different missions have adapted it to different

degrees, Neill thinks that the “extreme form of adaptation” is found in the Roman

Catholic Church. Even if there may be some exaggeration in what Neill says of the

Roman Catholic adaptation of caste –as he is considered to be biased against Catholic

missionaries–, his contention, nevertheless, cannot be disproved.46

42 David Mosse, “The Politics of Religious Synthesis: Roman Catholicism and Hindu Village Society

in Tamilnadu, India,” in Charles Stewart and Rosalind Shaw, eds., Syncretism/Anti-Syncretism: The

Politics of Religious Synthesis (London: Routledge, 1994), 92. 43

Mosse, “The Politics of Religious Synthesis,” 95. 44

Felix Wilfred, On the Banks of Ganges: Doing Contextual Theology (New Delhi: IPSCK, 2002),

131. 45

Stephen Neill, A History of Christianity in India 1707-1858 (Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1985), 404. 46

Cf. Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 146.


While the early centuries of Christian missionary movement in India

discriminated against dalits and other low-caste Christians, the later missionary

history presents a heroic commitment of missionaries, especially the Protestant, to

fighting the evils of caste system and working for the welfare of dalits and Adivasis.47

As George Oommen indicates in the study of dalit Christian history, in memory of the

present-day dalit Christians, western “missionaries are placed on a high pedestal as

liberative agents,” and they weigh their “self-sacrificing and life-giving involvement”

against the “present oppressive leaders and upper castes within Christianity.”48

2.2.2. Caste Discrimination by the Syrian Churches of Kerala

James Massey attributes the origin and development of the caste

discriminations in the Indian church to the Syrian Christians of Kerala.49

Before the

arrival of the Portuguese in India, Syrian Christians in Kerala “were more or less

homogeneous caste-like group, living within the framework of a caste society.”50

They claimed and maintained high status in the society “by adhering strictly purity-

pollution codes of regional Hindu society.”51

As a Catholic church historian from

Kerala, Joseph Thekkedath confirms: “Thomas Christians, like the high caste Hindus

of the time, were strict in keeping the caste laws pertaining to untouchability and

unapproachability in their relations with the converts from the lower castes.”52

They

never admitted any low caste to their churches and shunned their company.53

The

successful survival and remarkable growth of the Syrian Church in Kerala amidst a

dominant Hindu majority for centuries can be attributed to their rigid adherence to the

Hindu caste laws of purity and pollution; they never challenged the social hierarchical

system of Hindus, and so were never considered a threat to the Hindu dominance.

47 Cf. Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 155.

48 George Oommen, “Introduction,” in George Oommen and John C. B. Webster, eds., Local Dalit

Christian History (Delhi: ISPCK, 2002), 3, 7. 49

Cf. James Massey, Dalits in India: Religion as a Source of Bondage or Liberation with Speical

Reference to Christians (New Delhi: Manohar, 1995), 85-86. 50

K. C. Alexander, “The Problem of Caste in the Christian Churches of Kerala,” in Harjinder Singh,

ed., Caste Among Non-Hindus in India (New Delhi: National Publishing House, 1977), 51. 51

Robinson, Christian of India, 41. Refer George Koilparampil, Caste in the Catholic Community in

Kerala (Cochin: St. Theresa‟s College, 1982), 156-161 for a detailed description of the purity and

pollution practices of Syrian Christians. 52

Joseph Thekkedath, History of Christianity in India, Vol-II: From the Middle of the Sixteenth

Century to the End of Seventeenth Century (Bangalore: TPI, 1982), 22. 53

Cf. Thekkedath, History of Christianity in India, 22-23. See also, Koilparampil, Caste in the

Catholic Community of Kerala, 164.


K. C. Alexander, a Protestant theologian from Kerala, depicts well the

discrimination of Pulaya Christians by the Syrian Christians in his article.54

While

Pulaya Christians addressed the Syrian Christians as Tampuram (Lord) and Panikke

(Master), the Syrian Christians addressed Pulaya Christians as “Thomas Pulaya” or

“Chacko Pulaya” adding the suffix “Pulaya” to the name of the Pulaya Christians. The

Pulaya Christians “had to remove their head-dress” in the presence of Syrian

Christians, and “had to keep their mouth closed with a hand” while speaking to Syrian

Christian masters. The Syrian Christians served food to Pulaya Christians only outside

the house and in broken dishes.55

Pulayas were slaves and bonded labourers with the

high castes, and naturally also to Syrian Christians. Thus, the relationship between the

Syrian Christians and Pulaya Christians was indeed defined by a master-slave matrix.

The Syrian Christians treated the low caste converts as “Pulayas” and “Parayas”

rather than as “Christians.”56

The dalit Christians in Kerala are always called “New Christians”

(Puthuchristianikal) even after generations of receiving the faith. As Koilparampil

suggests the attribute “new” does not mean new but that they are “low castes.”57

While today the discrimination of Pulaya Christians by the Syrian Christians has

changed much for good, the story is far from over. Syrian Christians today are open to

“accept Pulaya Christians in certain areas if they imitate the Syrian Christians‟

lifestyle.”58

In other words, “Dalit Christians have to eat, speak and dress like Syrian

Christians in order to be accepted.”59

Today, dalit Christians in Kerala assert their

rights to human dignity in society and oppose the dominance of the Syrian Christians

within the Church.60

The change for the better in social interaction between high caste

Syrians and low caste Latins, is warranted more by the social protest movements of

the low castes which fight for equality, and less through a genuine Christian

reconciliation movement on the part of the Syrian Christians.

As Thekkedath points, the caste discriminations among Christians of Kerala

“show that in actual practice the Christians of Kerala paid little attention to the

54 K. C. Alexander, “The Problem of Caste in the Christian Churches of Kerala,” in Harjinder Singh,

ed., Caste Among Non-Hindus in India (New Delhi: National Publishing House, 1977), 50-65. 55

Alexander, “The Problem of Caste in the Christian Churches of Kerala,” 54-55. 56

Koilparampil, Caste in the Catholic Community of Kerala, 164. 57

Koilparampil, Caste in the Catholic Community of Kerala, 163. 58

George Oommen, “Pulaya Christians of Kerala: A Community in a Dilemma,” in George Oommen

and John C. B. Webster, eds., Local Dalit Christian History, 96. 59

Oommen, “Pulaya Christians of Kerala,” 96. 60

Oommen and Webster, Local Dalit Christian History, 10.


Christian belief in universal brotherhood, and the fundamental equality of men.”61

The

high caste Syrian Christians were discriminating against the lower castes –Christians

or other– like the high caste Hindus. Of course, many of the discriminative practices

have weakened in modern Kerala; nevertheless, one cannot say that caste

discriminations do not exist today, in the society and in the church. At least, today

they are not as widespread, as rigid, and as explicit as earlier.62

But it can be said that,

if today the caste discrimination has weakened amongst the Syrian Catholics in

Kerala, it can be attributed neither to the action of the church, nor to a genuine

practice of the gospel. The historical and sociological changes in the wider society

have propagated and resulted in a more egalitarian society, which eventually

manifests a corresponding effect in the Catholic community. I am afraid that no

Syrian Catholic has openly called for a reform of their discriminating treatment of the

non-Syrian Catholics. On the contrary, even today the Syrian churches vigorously

seek to preserve and assert their claims for higher social and religious status in Indian

church.

2.2.3. Dalit Oppression in the Catholic Church of Tamilnadu

Chandra Mallampalli, in his sociological study of Christians in South India

between 1863-1937, indicates that dalit Catholics in some parts of Tamilnadu were

“required to occupy separate sections of churches and were served Communion

separately from the caste Catholics.”63

He cites an example of high-caste Vellala

Catholics who sued the Bishop of Trichinopoly in 1916, demanding some caste

privileges at Holy Family Church at Vadakkankulam. Erection of walls separating

them from low-caste Nadars, exclusive ownership of the church, separate entrances to

church for them and Nadars, and the sole right to perform services at the altar and

processions, and the custody of church bells and keys of the church.64

Interestingly,

while the civil Court was upholding the equality of all believers in Christianity,

Christians who were supposed to reject such caste divisions among themselves were

fighting for the restoration of such divisions. The Court‟s verdict in the above case

said that the theory of pollution and defilement by touch could not be recognized in

the case of Christians. Mallampalli elsewhere indicates that the study of court cases

involving the Catholics in South India reveals, on the one hand, “the high degree to

61 Thekkedath, History of Christianity in India, 23.

62 Koilparampil, Caste in the Catholic Community of Kerala, 166-167.

63 Chandra Mallampalli, Christian and Public Life in Colonial South India, 1863-1937: Contending

with Marginality (New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2004), 177. 64

Mallampalli, Christian and Public Life in Colonial South India, 178.


which Catholics had accommodated themselves to South Indian culture and their use

of the courts to secure their immemorial rights,” and on the other hand, “the

unwillingness of the courts to recognize caste distinctions among those who “profess

the Christian religion.”65

Mosse, in his study of religious synthesis among Catholics of Alapuram, a

village in Ramnad district of Tamilnadu, indicates many practices of caste

discrimination which existed there. The low-caste Pallar Catholics of this village, until

1919, had separate places at the back of the church and received communion after the

high castes. He further points out that there existed separate entrances to church and

separate burial grounds for different castes in many churches in the region.66

A recent

report of the BBC points to the existence of separate burial grounds even today in

Tamilnadu.67

Anthony Raj in his article “The Dalit Christian Reality in Tamilnadu,”

presents the results of a survey on social discrimination against the Dalit christians in

Tamilnadu undertaken by the Jesuits of Madurai Province.68

Some 79.6% of dalit

christians are landless, 65% are illiterate, 54% live under a mere thatched roof, 85%

of households buy clothes only once a year and 25% of the households do not go to a

doctor because they do not have the means.69

The dalit Christians are denied power in

the Catholic church. While 70% of the Catholics in Tamilnadu are dalits, only one out

65 Chandra Mallampalli, “Caste, Catholicism, and History “from Below,” 1863-1917,” in Richard Fox

Young, ed., India and the Indianness of Christianity: Essays on Understanding –Historical,

Theological, and Bibliographical – in Honor of Robert Eric Frykenberg (Grand Rapids, Michigan:

Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009), 145. However, we must say that the author seems to understand the

“from Below” as “from high caste lay men as against missionaries and ecclesiastical hierarchy”

who sought to accommodate caste into Christianity in India. The author argues for the “Indianness”

of Christianity as the accommodation of an Indian culture fashioned by caste. We believe, whether

Indian or other, any discrimination that denies humans their basic dignity, cannot simply be

“Christianity”; it may be “Indian” but cannot be “Christian.” Moreover, the author falsely

categorizes “Indian” as represented by “high caste Indian.” Is “Indian” only “high caste Indian”?

On the other hand, we think that the “history from Below” should represent the dalit, the Adivasi

and the subalterns histories which are totally obscure in general histories. 66

Mosse, “The Politics of Religious Synthesis,” 92. 67

Swaminathan Natarajan, “Indian Dalits Find No Refuge From Caste in Christianity,” BBC News

South Asia (14 September 2010), at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11229170

(accessed 14 September 2010). 68

For this case study, we totally depend on Anthony Raj, “The Dalit Chritian Reality in Tamilnadu,”

Jeevadhara 22 (1992), 95-111. All reports of the survey are drawn from this article. 69

Every year millions of dollars pour into each diocese in India from different donor agencies in the

West for the development of dalits. Even after decades of such funding, the dalits remain very much

in the same poor condition. So, what has been happening to all the foreign funds in the name of the

poor? The Catholic Church of India needs a serious self-examination in this regard.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11229170


of the 14 Catholic bishops in the state is a dalit.70

No dalit priest has been appointed

Vicar General, Procurator, Director of Social Service Centre, Director of Pastoral

Centre, and Rector of Minor Seminary. No dalit priest is admitted to any diocesan

college of Consultors. There were only 3.8% priests from the dalit community. Out of

43 vacancies for teacher posts in Palayamkottai diocesan schools in June 1991, only

three were given to dalits.71

The survey above about the plight of the dalit Catholics within Tamilnadu

represents the situation, discrimination and oppression of dalit Christians all over

India. Undoubtedly, the situation of dalit Christians in India has undergone a lot of

change over the years. While there have been a number of appointments of bishops

from dalit and Adivasi communities, still these figures are very marginal; most

bishops in India still come from high castes. Further, most of the important

responsibilities in dioceses, regional and national bodies are held mainly by high caste

priests.72

A survey was conducted among Catholic youth of India in view of the CBCI

Plenary Assembly on the theme of “Youth for Peace and Harmony” held in Guwahati,

Assam, 24 February – 3 March. It reported that dalit and Adivasi youth are not treated

equally in the parishes, and 68% of the respondents said that parishes give special

preference to youth from rich families.73

2.2.4. Prohibition from Priesthood

Prakash Reddy reports: “Till 1950 there was an unwritten convention in the

Catholic Church of India that except under extraordinary circumstances no

untouchable Catholic should be admitted to priesthood.”74

The law that limited the

admission to Catholic priesthood only to Brahmins which was introduced in 1613

70 These figures are from 1991. They are not the same now. Now, there are 4 dalit bishops out of 18

bishops in Tamilnadu. 71

See the figure against the statement of Catholic bishops of India: “Resources of the Church should

be made available for the educational empowerment of the dalits and tribals. Training and

educational opportunities for jobs and leadership will be offered to the dalits and the tribals.” “Both

the diocesan and the religious personnel involved in institutions should adopt a clear policy in

favour of the poor and marginalized…” CBCI, “The Church in Dialogue,” Final Statement of 25th

General Body Meeting of the Catholic Bishops‟ Conference of India, March 1-8, 2002, Jalandhar,

Indian Theological Studies 39 (2002), 378. 72

Lancy Lobo, “Dalit Christians & Church Personnel in India,” Third Millennium III:3 (2000): 46-67. 73

UCAN, “India – Youth Place Faith in God, not Clergy,” Report from the CBCI Plenary Assembly,

“Youth for Peace and Harmony,” at Guwahati, Assam, 24 February – 3 March, 2010, UCAN NEWS

(26 February 2010), at http://www.ucanews.com/2010/02/26/youths-place-faith-in-god-not-clergy

(accessed 26-02-2010). 74

G. Prakash Reddy, “Caste and Christianity: A Study of Shudra Caste Converts in Rural Andhra

Pradesh,” Religion and Society (1987), 119. He also cites examples to show that Catholic

missionaries even disliked the conversion of untouchable castes. Cf. Ibid., 123.



remained in vogue right up to the early twentieth century in Indian Portuguese

missions.75

The Third Provincial Council of Goa in 1585 stated: “Candidates for the

priesthood should commonly be from the honoured (high) and clean castes” (Accao

Quarta, Decreto 5, 3 December).76

The statement of the Fifth Provincial Council of

Goa in 1606 sounds even more discriminative:

For the dignity of the priesthood and the respect due to the ecclesiastical persons,

low castes should not be admitted to orders. Only sons of higher castes, for

example Brahmins, Prabhus, should be ordained. The Synod instructs Rectors of

Seminaries not to teach Latin to non-Brahmins. But all Thomas Christians, being

Christians of long and noble standing, may be admitted to all sacred studies and to

Latin (Accao Terceira, Decreto 40, 4 December).77

Such discrimination in admission to priesthood continued also in the 18th

century in the Malabar mission. When the missionaries sought advice on admission of

candidates to priesthood from the fishermen, Propaganda Fide replied: “Youth of the

fishing clan will not be admitted to the seminary of Verapoly, but the Vicar Apostolic

will see that they are instructed in piety and knowledge in Bombay” (Instruction of

Propaganda Fide, 2 June 1832).78

When a seminary at Nandigama (Krishna District,

Andhra Pradesh) which was started in 1938 with dalit students failed, its failure was

hailed: “A Seminary was opened for the “pariahs” at Nandigama. This was the first

Seminary of its kind in India but, fortunately, it was closed down. If it continued, it

would have perpetuated the differences among the clergy.”79

It exposes the general

attitude towards the admission of dalits to priesthood even until the 1940s.

Such ministerial discrimination of dalit converts can also be found in

Protestant missions. When there was a need for the ordination of a local candidate in

the Lutheran mission in Tranquebar, Aaron, a high caste Vellalar was preferred by the

German missionaries to senior and efficient Savarimuthu and Rayanayakkan who

were low caste Pariahs. Aaron was actually brought to faith and taught by

Savarimuthu. As Daniel Jeyaraj of Liverpool Hope University explains, “the decision-

makers thought that while a Pariah would be willing to receive the Eucharist from the

75 Cf. Walter Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity, Caste Tension and Search for an Identity in

Tamilnadu,” in Walter Fernandes, ed., The Emerging Dalit Identity: Re-assertion of the Subalterns

(New Delhi: Indian Social Institute, 1996), 144-145; See also, Xavier Irudayaraj, SJ, Emerging

Dalit Theology (Madras & Madurai: JEST & TTS, 1990), 20. 76

Saldhana, “An Historical Note: Christians of Scheduled Caste Origin,” 55. 77



Cf. Thanugundla Solomon, Structures of the Church in Andhra Pradesh (Secunderabad:

Amruthavani, 1977), 212, as quoted in John Leoncini, PIME, A History of the Catholic Diocese of

Vijayawada (Vijayawada: Catholic Centre, 1988), 188. This seminary reopened in 1957 at Nuzvid,

and has produced to date more than 200 dalit priests; I am proudly one of those.


hands of a Vellalar pastor, the Vellalar people would not take it from the hands of a

Pariah pastor.”80

Many more such examples could be cited from Protestant missions

in India.

2.2.5. Ambedkar: Voice of a Dalit Prophet

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar81

may be regarded as the first known dalit critic of Indian

Christianity.82

A man who had great hope in Christianity for the liberation of the

oppressed in India,83

and wished to become a Christian,84

moved away from it for the

glaring caste discrimination he perceived soon in the Indian church.85

80 Daniel Jeyaraj, “Indian Participation in Enabling, Sustaining, and Promoting Christian Missions in

India,” in Richard Fox Young, ed., India and the Indianness of Christianity: Essays on

Understanding –Historical, Theological, and Bibliographical– in Honor of Robert Eric Frykenberg

(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009), 145. Jeyaraj reports “Gotthilf August Francke

(1696-1769), the director of the Francke Foundations in Halle, wondered why Rayanayakkan,

whose work was thus far successful, could not be ordained.” Such discrimination was explained by

the caste differences prevalent in India. 81

The discussions on dalits between Ambedkar and Gandhi are interesting. Dr. Ambedkar, himself a

dalit (Mahar from Maharashtra), rejected the term harijan as used by Gandhi because of its social

patronage implications and its pejorative connotations of being the children of god born to

devadasis (the temple prostitutes). See M. E. Prabhakar, “Missions in a Dalit Perspective,” in Dalits

and Women: Quest for Humanity, ed. K. Rajaratnam (Madras: Gurukul, 1992), 71-89, esp.74. There

are also opinions that Hindus under the leadership of Gandhi began to work against the practice of

untouchability in order to prevent dalits from going over to Christianity and other religions and to

own them in their own fold. For this opinion and for a discussion of Gandhi‟s view on caste system,

see Rebati Ballow Tripathy, Dalits: A Sub-Human Society (New Delhi: Ashish Publishing House,

1994), 51-95. Gandhi thought he could retain the caste system by interpreting it as a functional

order expressing differentiation; though not necessarily inequality. In this attempt, “he was naïve at

best and self-deluded at worst.” See Joseph Prabhu, “Trajectories of Hindu Ethics,” in William

Schweiker, ed., The Blackwell Companion to Religious Ethics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2005), 366.

Gabriele Dietrich, Director of Centre for Social Analysis in Madurai, India, feels that “Gandhian

position of fighting untouchability but maintaining caste…has watered down the struggle against

caste considerably.” Gabriele Dietrich, “Patriarchy, Caste and Class,” Journal of Dharma 23

(1989), 104. S. Arockiasamy, SJ, opines that Gandhi did not understand that the process of

liberation is recognition of liberation from “below.” He feels that Gandhi‟s struggle against

untouchability was a failure because it was pitched from “above.” S. Arockiasmay, SJ, “The

Challenges of a Divided India to the Social Teaching of the Church,” Indian Theological Studies 28

(1991), 253. 82

Cf. J. A. David Onesimu, Dr. Amedkar‟s Critique Towards Christian Dalit Liberation (New Delhi:

ISPCK, 2008), especially 38-45. 83

D. Keer, his biographer, notes that Ambedkar was a devout student of the Bible and possessed a

huge collection of Biblical literature. He hoped that Christianity could be a viable solution for

healing the social divisions in India. See D. Keer, Dr. Ambedkar: Life and Mission (Bombay:

Popular Prakashan, 1985), 299. 84

Ambedkar enjoyed friendship with Bishop Pickett of Bombay, who testifies that Ambedkar seemed

to be on the verge of declaring himself a Christian and he twice inquired whether the Bishop could

baptise him secretly. Cf. B. A. M. Paradkar, “Religious Quest of Ambedkar,” in T. S. Wilkinson

and M. M. Thomas, eds., Ambedkar and the Neo-Buddhist Movement (Bangalore: CISRS, 1972),

59-61. See also Christophe Jafferlot, Dr. Ambedkar and Untouchability: Analysing and Fighting

Caste (Delhi: Permanent Black, 2005), 119-123. 85

Cf. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, vol.5 (Bombay: Government of

Maharashtra, 1989), 455-456; Keer, Dr. Ambedkar, 299.


He declared that “the services rendered by Missions in the field of education

and medical relief” do not benefit the Indian Christians (mostly untouchables). “They

go mostly to benefit the high caste Hindus.” And thus, “the services of the Missions

are so much misplaced.”86

He discusses the plight of the dalit Christians expressed in

the memorandum submitted by dalit Christians to the Simon Commission (1929) and

asks:

What has Christianity achieved in the way of changing the mentality of the

convert? Has the Untouchable convert risen to the status of the touchable? Have

the touchable and untouchable converts discarded caste?87

Speaking of discrimination of dalit Christians in churches, he says that the “picture is

more true of the Catholics than of the Protestants.”88

He declares that “the Indian

Christians, as a community never fought for the removal of social injustice.”89

He

accuses the missionaries who compromised caste with Christianity.

The Christian Missionaries have never thought that it was their duty to act and get

the injustice that pursues the untouchable removed even after his conversion to

Christianity. That Missions should be so inactive in the matter of the social

emancipation of the untouchable is of course a very sad thing.90

2.2.6. Discrimination in all Castes (Intra-Discrimination)

While we have pointed out the caste discrimination of dalits or lowcastes by

the middle or higher castes, we have to note also that the caste discrimination is not

solely a sin of the higher or middle castes. Caste discriminations exist in all castes:

high, middle or low. While the high castes discriminate against the middle and low

castes, the middle discriminate against the lower castes; even the lower castes

themselves discriminate against the lower among themselves. However, caste

discriminations by the higher castes of the lower castes, and specially dalits, are more

abominable and horrendous, while the discrimination of the lower among the lower

castes tends to be less rigid and less alienating.

As Thekkedath indicates, though the caste discriminations were high among

the Syrian Christians towards lower caste converts, they are not limited to them; even

other different caste groups within the Latin Church in Kerala discriminated against

the Christians of lower castes in their churches.91

Similarly, Fernandes indicates that

86 Cf. B. R. Ambedkar, “Christianizing the Untouchables,” in Writings and Speeches, vol.5, 452.

87 Ambedkar, “Christianizing the Untouchables,” 454.

88 Ambedkar, “Christianizing the Untouchables,” 455-456.

89 Keer, Dr. Ambedkar, 299.

90 Ambedkar, Writings and Speeches, vol.5, 471-472.

91 Cf. Thekkedath, History of Christianity in India, 23.


caste conflicts within the Church in the nineteenth century were not predominantly

between Brahmins and backward castes, but among various non-Brahmin caste

groups.92

In Vadakkankulam of Tamilnadu, while the high caste Vellalas had a wall

separating them from Shanars in the church, the Shanars in turn wanted another

barrier to be erected to separate themselves from dalit Pariah Christians.93

In Andhra

Pradesh, dalits belong to two different caste groups: Mala and Madiga. Even though

both these groups are dalits, the Mala group considers itself higher than the Madiga

group and social mobility between these groups is limited. Sometimes, when both

groups exist in the same Christian community, they have two different churches and

do not worship in a single church. So, even dalit Christians themselves seem to have

not overcome their „caste identity‟ and a sub-caste rivalry within the dalit Christians is

apparent in many regions.94

2.2.7. Some Pointers

We have chosen to survey above the caste discriminations among Christians

particularly in Kerala and Tamilnadu because they seem to have been “hotspots” of

such caste conflicts within the Church. The Syrian Christians in Kerala, claiming the

highest social status in society, and with the deepest accommodation of Hindu rite and

ritual, remained an alienated caste group and, as such, shunned low castes from their

churches and were very alienating in their communion with the low caste Latin

Christians in Kerala. Christians in Tamilnadu, more than anywhere else in India, have

been involved in the most bitter caste conflicts in the history of the Indian church.95

Though we have chosen to highlight the plight of dalit Christians in Kerala

and Tamilnadu –as therein we find the caste discrimination against dalit Christians

most apparent – they are representative of the situation in the other states of South

India: Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. Godwin Shiri enumerates well the similar

plight of dalit Christians in Karnataka. The “Mangalorean Catholics” claim an upper

caste origin and distinguish themselves from the rest of the Christians in the state of

Karnataka. Church leadership, especially the bishops, priests and religious, are

dominated by high caste Christians. The elite and urban Christians not only alienate

92 Cf. Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 150.

93 Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 161.

94 Cf. Manickam, “Missions‟ Approaches to Caste,” 67.

95 Cf. Grafe, History of Christianity in India, Vol-IV, Part-II, 97.


and discriminate against the rural dalit Christians, but they also reject all issues of

dalit Christians as damaging and unchristian.96

The situation is different in North India, where the majority of the Christians

are Adivasis and dalits, and there hardly exist high caste Christians in the north who

would discriminate against and oppress the low-caste Adivasi Christians. The

problems of course in the north of India relate more to the plight of the “Adivasi

Christians.” The biggest problem within the Christian community in the north is the

control or domination of the church leadership by the bishops, priests and religious

from South India; most bishops, priests and religious who work in the north hail from

the south. As Lobo suggests, the non-dalit clergy from the South does not socialise

well with the dalit or Adivasi Christians in the north.97

Growth of vocations from

within the Adivasi Christian communities to priesthood and religious life, and the

recent appointments of Adivasi bishops in some dioceses in the north, including a

Cardinal, Cardinal Toppo, have been a welcome change, but the situation needs

greater attention and effort.

The story of caste discrimination is far from over in the life of the Indian

Church. As it continues to strengthen in new and modern forms in our own days, it

needs to be condemned and eradicated no less forcefully today. The Final Statement

of Indian Theological Association (ITA) as recent as 2008, reveals the sinful presence

of caste in the Church:

The continuing practice of untouchability has been not only institutionalized but

also sanctified by caste ideology. Unfortunately, even though Christianity does not

accept such an ideology in principle, in practice, we find that caste, even though it

militates against human dignity and basic equality, exerts an impact on some

Christians greater than that of the Gospel values! Such practices are diametrically

opposed to the Creator‟s design for an egalitarian society as proclaimed,

inaugurated and fostered by Jesus Christ.98

2.3. RESPONSE OF THE CHURCH AGAINST DALIT DISCRIMINATION IN THE

CHURCH

2.3.1. The Anti-Caste Discourse in the Church

The anti-caste discourse has not been very strong and popular in the Indian

church. While such discourse was boldly initiated by the foreign missionaries working

96 See Godwin Shiri, “Plight of Christian Dalits in Karnataka,” in V. Devasahayam, ed., Dalits &

Women: Quest for Humanity (Chennai: Gurukul, 1992), 90-116, esp.92, 95 and 96. 97

Lobo, “Dalit Christians & Church Personnel in India,” 57. 98

ITA, Final Statement “Church‟s Engagement in Civil Society, A New Way of Being Christian in

India Today,” in Anthony Kalliath and Francis Gonsalves, eds., Church‟s Engagement in Civil

Society (Bnagalore: ATC, 2009), 179.


in India, the discourse has not gained favour among the local elite clergy and

theologians who belonged mostly to the higher castes. The discourse has weakened

following the exit of the foreign missionaries and takeover of the local leaders. The

anti-caste discourse is being revisited and regenerated by the dalit theologians and

leaders of the church today. It is not our intent to review the discourse extensively, but

we wish to note some representative examples of this anti-caste discourse.

John William Kaye speaks of Mr. Rhenius of the Church Missionary Society,

as described by Christian David, who resisted the accommodation of caste in the

church and sought to make the repudiation of caste an essential condition of

admittance to the church.99

Between 1820 and 1826 Haubroe had the Christian

children seated together in the school as well as in the church, irrespective of their

caste. But it was revoked by Bishop Heber of Calcutta. Anglican Bishop Wilson

Samuel of Calcutta demanded that new converts renounce caste before baptism and

confirmation. In 1846 Kohlnoff insisted on taking a dalit catechist with him into a

Vellala house, where he was resisted. The American Madurai Mission introduced a

new „test‟ as a proof of having renounced caste: their members were required to drink

tea with a dalit.100

By the year 1850, there was more or less a consensus among the

Protestant missionaries that caste was an evil system and that it should be opposed

and eradicated. The Missionary Conferences of Protestants held in 1858, 1879 and

1900 voiced strong opposition to caste and its accommodation in the church. The

conference of 1958, thus stated: “it is also the duty of Missionaries and Churches to

require its unreserved and unequivocal renunciation, with all its outward

manifestations. No man should be regarded as worthy of the name of Christian who

refuses to renounce caste and to remove all its outward marks.”101

The strongest and

systematic response has come within the Church only from Dalit Theology as this

theology takes as the starting point the very discrimination and oppression of the

dalits within the society and in the Church.102

99 Kaye, Christianity in India, 353-354.

100 Cf. Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 158-159.

101 The Report of the South Indian Missionary Conference 1858 (Madras, 1858), 294-295; as quoted in

Manickam, “Mission‟s Approaches to Caste,” 63. 102

It is to be noted that “Dalit Theology” in India has been developed mostly by non-Catholic

theologians. May be the catholic theologians who come dominantly from “high castes” of India are

unconcerned about dalit liberation in Indian church and society. While India has a multitude of

catholic theological institutes, none of them are known for developing dalit theology. Much

institutional support for dalit theology came from two non-Catholic institutes: Gurukul Lutheran

College of Theology, Chennai (which also has a Department of Dalit Theology) and Christian

Institute for the Study of Religion and Society (CISRS), Bangalore. Another to follow was also a


2.3.2. Response of Indian Bishops

Though the episcopal conferences in India have not made tangible and

sustained efforts to eradicate caste and caste discrimination within the church in India,

some strong condemnation of caste and caste discrimination are apparent. The earliest

condemnation of caste discrimination within the church came in 1978 in the statement

of the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) in 1978:

The dignity of man confers certain inalienable rights upon him, whatever be the

accident of his birth. Any curtailment or, what is worse, denial of these rights is an

act of injustice. Hence, discrimination of any type must be part of our Christian

concern. When, unfortunately, it is practiced within the Church itself, it becomes a

countersign to the Gospel values we profess.103

In another meeting of the Indian bishops at Tiruchirapalli in 1982, the CBCI stated

that caste and caste discrimination cannot have a place in church:

We state categorically that caste, with its consequent effect of discrimination and

„caste mentality‟ has no place in Christianity. It is, in fact, a denial of Christianity

because it is inhuman. It violates the God-given dignity and equality of the human

person.104

Similarly, the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) also affirmed that the

abolition of caste in the church in India is a top priority:

The abolition of caste among Christians and the integration of the Christians of

Scheduled Caste origin in the mainstream as equals will be for us a top priority.

The continuation of untouchability and discrimination based on caste is

diametrically opposed to the Gospel message of love and brotherhood and

sisterhood of humankind. … We will become builders of peace by raising our

voice against all forms of injustice and discrimination. As in the Church so also in

non-Catholic institute: United Theological College of Bangalore. Cf. Mathai Zachariah, Inside the

Indian Church (Delhi: ISPCK, 1994), 76-77. It is interesting to note that a recent book on Indian

Christianity authored by two Catholic theologians very honestly mentions just one catholic

theologian who developed dalit theology while it mentions four non-Catholic theologians. It says

that the leaders of dalit theology were first from non-catholic churches. Cf. Leonard Fernando, and

G. Gispert-Sauch, Christianity in India: Two Thousand Years of Faith (New Delhi: Penguin Viking,

2004), 200.

Arvind P. Nirmal is one of the pioneers in the development of Dalit Theology in India. For a review

of his contribution, see Franklyn J. Balasundaram, “The Contribution of A. P. Nirmal to Theology

and Especially to Dalit Theology,” Religion and Society 45 (1998), 85-100. See: Arvind P. Nirmal,

“Towards a Christian Dalit Theology,” in A Reader in Dalit Theology (Madras: Gurukul Lutheran

Theological College, 1991); Arvind P. Nirmal, ed., Towards a Common Dalit Ideology (Madras:

Gurukul, n. d.). A very comprehensive book on Dalit Theology is V. Devasahayam ed., Frontiers of

Dalit Theology (Madras: Gurukul, 1997). 103

CBCI, “Statement of the of the General Body Meeting of the CBCI, Mangalore, 9-17 January,

1978,” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 42 (1978), 181. 104

CBCI, “Statement of the of the General Body Meeting of the CBCI, Tiruchirapalli, 1982,”

Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 46 (1982), 149.


the country as a whole we will stand for the rights of the Scheduled Castes and

Tribes.105

The Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI), while humbly acknowledging the

existence of caste within the church, proclaims any caste discrimination a sin against

God and humanity.

The prevalence of the Caste system, not only in society but also in some parts of

the Church in India even at the close of the 20th century is a matter of shame and

disgrace to all of us. It is a cause of sorrow and expression of our inability to live

our Christian faith adequately. It is not only a denial of human dignity and

equality but also against the fundamental teachings of Christ who was a friend of

the outcastes of His time, and freely mixed with them. … Hence, discrimination

against anybody on the basis of caste is a sin against God and humanity. This

needs to be proclaimed from the housetops so that the caste system will be

removed from the Christian community totally…106

Even Pope John Paul II has many times condemned the practice of caste

within the church and the discrimination of dalit Christians within Indian church. He

admonished many times the bishops of India to work towards eliminations any such

discrimination within the church.

At all times, you must continue to make certain that special attention is given to

those belonging to the lowest castes, especially the Dalits. They should never be

segregated from other members of the society. Any resemblance of a caste-based

prejudice in relations between Christians is a countersign to authentic human

solidarity, a threat to genuine spirituality and a serious hindrance to the Church‟s

mission of evangelization. Therefore, customs or traditions that perpetuate or

reinforce caste divisions should be sensitively reformed so that they may become

an expression of the solidarity of the whole Christian community.107

Despite such condemnations and statements in the strongest words possible,

caste still remains a strong force in the Indian church. As Amaladoss laments, “the

Bishops of India declared some years ago that the caste system is sinful. But they

have not launched any credible social movement to abolish it even within the

Church.”108

Majority of the bishops themselves are not committed to the statements

they make and no significant action follows their categorical statements condemning

caste discriminations in church. Thus, Almeida suggests that “the Church in India

105 CBCI, Report of the General Body Meeting of the CBCI, Kottayam, April 1988. (New Delhi: CBCI

Centre, 1988), 171-172. 106

CBCI, Report of the CBCI Meeting at Varanasi, 21-28 March, 1998 (New Delhi: CBCI Centre,

1998), 32. 107

Address of Pope John Paul II to the Bishops of Tamilnadu during their ad limina visit to the Pope

on 17 November, 2003, L‟Osservatore Romano 48 (26 November, 2003), 5. 108

Amaladoss, “A New Way of Being Christian in India Today: Theological Reflections,” in Anthony

Kalliath and Francis Gonsalves, eds., Church‟s Engagement in Civil Society (Bangalore: ATC,

2009), 147.


does not need more documents to conscientize people towards caste eradication,” but

“credible people to implement those directives.” 109

3. THEOLOGY AGAINST DISCRIMINATION OF DALIT CHRISTIANS

3.1. CASTE DISCRIMINATION IN THE CHURCH: A BROKEN COMMUNION

The European missionaries, who founded the Christian communities in India,

compromised with caste because of their thorough misunderstanding, confusing it

with a kind of class system prevalent in their societies, and for the sake of

conversions.110

But what is most surprising is that, down the centuries, Christians in

India have been able to tolerate and accommodate the caste practices without serious

conflict with their Christian sensibility.111

Soares-Prabhu very prophetically says that

“the existence of christian dalits with their inbuilt situation of inferiority is a reminder

to us of how deeply we have sinned.”112

He sees the very expression „Christian dalit‟

as a contradiction for there can be no dalit in a Christian community, for “in Christ”

there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free (Gal. 3:28).113

“It is an

outrageous and sadly ironic situation that the Church itself is divided by casteism and

is party to perpetuation of untouchability.”114

Caste-based discrimination within the Christian fellowship is a theological

contradiction and liturgical aberration.115

However, it is a fact that the caste system is

a deep wound of the Indian church and the Christian community. Such discrimination

finds its place “in worship, rites and village festivals; in shaping social interaction

within the Christian community; in determining the leadership and distribution of

power in the community and in the ministry and the mission of the churches.”116

“Separate seating in places of worship; separate burial places in Catholic cemeteries

and separate hearses to carry the dead; the inferior roles assigned for the dalits in

109 Jesuino Almeida, “Christian Response to the Reality of Caste and the Dalits,” in Joseph Mattam and

Krickwin C. Marak, eds., Missiological Approaches in India: Retrospect and Prospect (Mumbai:

St. Pauls, 1999), 250. 110

J. C. B. Webster, The Dalit Christians: A History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1992), 33-76. 111

Jose Kananaikil, “Caste Discrimination: A Challenge to the Christian Conscience in India”,

Vidyajyoti 46 (1982), 522-529; George Soares-Prabhu, “The Table Fellowship of Jesus: Its

Significance for Dalit Christians in India Today,” Jeevadhara 22 (1992), 154-159. 112

George Soares-Prabhu, “The Table Fellowship of Jesus,” 158. 113

Soares-Prabhu, “The Table Fellowship of Jesus,” 158-159. 114

S. Arockiasamy, SJ, “The Challenges of a Divided India to the Social Teaching of the Church,”

254. 115

Cf. John Peter Sandanam, “Do This in Remembrance of Me: A Social Implication of the

Anamnesis,” Indian Theological Studies 39 (2002), 295. 116

John Webster, The Dalit Christians, A History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1994), 179.


Catholic funerals and in the celebration of the Christian festivals in the villages”117

are

a few glaring examples of what dalit christians suffer.118

Contemplating the present

scenario in the church, Almeida agrees that, “Caste factors still play an important role

in the choice of candidates to the priesthood and religious life, in the appointments of

pastors to parishes and as religious superiors and allotment of posts in administration

in the diocese and religious institutes.”119

The continuing discrimination in the Church has triggered off irruption of the

dalits. Consequently, many dalit Christian movements have come into existence to

fight for human dignity, equality and justice for the aggrieved dalits and dalit

communities.120

They even threaten to break away from the present Church,

dominated by upper castes, and to form a “Dalit Church” where the dalits will be on

their own as citizens and believers.121

3.2. CAN THE EUCHARIST MAKE A CASTE-RIDDEN CHURCH?

Soares-Prabhu brings out best the incompatibility of the Eucharist and caste

discrimination.122

He says that celebrating the Eucharist with caste discriminations

among the participants is a mockery of the Eucharist.123

Speaking of the „real

presence‟ of Jesus would be meaningless in such a community divided by caste.124

A

Eucharistic celebration that tolerates caste discrimination is an “utterly scandalous

Eucharist.”125

In reference to the eucharistic abuses in Corinth condemned by Paul (1

117 S. Japhet, “Christian Dalits: A Sociological Study on the Problem of Gaining a New Identity,”

Religion and Society 34 (1987), 73-76; Anthony Raj, Children of a Lesser God: Dalit Christians

(Madurai: DCLM Publications, 1993), 10-12. 118

Cf. George Soares-Prabhu, Biblical Themes for a Contextual Theology Today, 150. He says that

“caste discrimination is more pronounced among the Syrian Christians than among say the

Westernized Christians of the Konkan Coast, and converts of Portuguese mission (Goans,

Mangaloreans and the East Indians) where caste discrimination rarely goes beyond a reluctance to

marry outside the caste. It is particularly rigid among Christians of Tamilnadu and Andhra, where

quite objectionable forms of caste discrimination can exist.” Ibid. 119

Leslie J. Almeida, “The Indian Church and the Invincible Virus of Casteism,” in Caste Culture in

Indian Church, eds. Sebasti L. Raj and G. F. Xavier Raj (New Delhi: ISI, 1993), 32. 120

A. M. A. Ayrookuzhiel, “Christian Dalits in Revolt,” Jeevadhara 23 (1993), 267-273. 121

Felix Wilfred, “Dalit Christians – Quest for Dignity”, in From the Dusty Soil: Reinterpretation of

Christianity (Madras: University of Madras, 1995), 131-133. 122

George Soares-Prabhu, “The Table Fellowship of Jesus”, 140-159. See also G. Valentine Joseph,

“Empowering the Weak – An Eucharistic Praxis,” Indian Theological Studies 40 (2003), 357-374. 123

Soares-Prabhu, “The Table Fellowship of Jesus”, 156-157. Cf. John Peter Sandanam, “Do This in

Remembrance of Me,” 304-305. 124

Soares-Prabhu, “The Table Fellowship of Jesus”, 156. 125

Soares-Prabhu, “The Table Fellowship of Jesus”, 157. An increasing number of social activists as

well as theologians are stressing the importance of the intrinsic relationship between Eucharistic

celebration and the responsibility of the Christians. See for example, Joseph Grassi, Broken Bread

and Broken Bodies: The Lord‟s Supper and the World Hunger (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1985); Monika


Cor. 11:20ff),126

Soares-Prabhu says that the Eucharistic abuses happening in many

churches in India today are worse than those in Corinth. He sees the class divisions in

the Corinthian Eucharistic communities as far less damaging than the caste divisions

in Indian Eucharistic communities.127

To bring caste discrimination into the

celebration of the Eucharist is surely to “despise the Church of God and humiliate

those who have nothing” (1 Cor. 11:22) and thus is a “sin against the body and the

blood of the Lord” (1 Cor. 11:27).128

John Peter Sandanam rightly says that caste divisions “within the Christian

communities are obstacles to the truthfulness of the celebration of the Eucharist.”129

According to Boff, we betray the Eucharist when we utilise it for the concealment of

the presence of unjust relations in the community of the faithful.130

As Rafael Avila

says:

To celebrate the Eucharist, therefore, is to affirm the act by which the Father

radically negated the injustice resulting from the sin of the world, and to proclaim

publicly the injustice committed against the Just One, not simply that it may be

exposed and denounced, but primarily to collaborate with the Father in the

resurrection (affirmation) of those affected by injustice (negation).131

Helwig, The Eucharist and the Hunger of the World (Kansas: Sheed & Ward, 1976, 2nd

rev. ed.

1992), 12-19; 52-86; James Empereur and Christopher Kiesling, The Liturgy that Does Justice

(Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1990); Paul Bernier, Eucharist: Celebrating Its Rythms in Our

Lives (Indiana: Ave Maria Press, 1993); Leonardo Boff, “Sacraments of the Poor,” in The Path to

Hope, trans. Philip Berryman (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1993), 68-74; Neil Darragh, When Christians

Gather: Issues in the Celebration of Eucharist (New York: Paulist, 1996). 126

For a recent study on this Corinthian issue, see David Horrell, The Social Ethos of Corinthians

Correspondence: Interests and Ideology from 1 Corinthians to 1 Clement (Edinburgh: T&T Clark,

1996). 127

Prabhu, “The Table Fellowship of Jesus”, 157-158. 128

Prabhu, “The Table Fellowship of Jesus”, 158. 129

John Peter Sandanam, “Do This in Remembrance of Me,” 298. 130

Leonardo Boff, “Sacraments of the Poor”, 70. 131

Rafael Avila, Worship and Politics (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1981), 48. However, we note about this

quote that the political interpretation of the Eucharist has completely overshadowed, and therefore

obscured, any theological interpretation of the central event of the Christic saga. So goes the critic

of extreme liberation theologians: “they turn the „Gospel of Mark‟ into the „Gospel of Marx‟ – Das

Kapital.” But Leonardo and Clodovis Boff, though they acknowledge that liberation theology “uses

Marxism purely as an instrument” they quickly add that “it [liberation theology] does not venerate it

[Marxism] as it venerates the gospel.” See Leonardo and Clodovis Boff, Introducing Liberation

Theology, trans. Paul Burns (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1987), 31. We opine that the liberation theologians

emulate the socio-economic implications of Christianity in using the analysis of Marx so

dialectically in conjunction with a Christian social application lacking in the Communist analysis.

Though liberation theology is generally associated with third world countries, we cannot forget that

they had their predecessors not only in the Bible and in the early fathers but also in the nineteenth-

century theologians of Europe and North America. For a good balanced review of liberation

theology and its critics, please see: Paul E. Sigmund, Liberation Theology at the Crossroads:

Democracy or Revolution (Oxford University Press, 1992). Sigmund‟s analysis is sophisticated, and

though he sympathizes with liberation theologians, he takes no sides. He discerns well the sound

and unsound arguments of liberation theologians and their critics. See also, Arthur McGovern,


Clearly, the Eucharist is more than a devotional action, and certainly not an act of

individual piety; it is „community devotion.‟132

Thus, any division among believers

was systematically denounced, as in the early prayer:

Just as this loaf was previously scattered on the mountains, and when it was

gathered together it became an unity, so may your church be gathered from the

end of the earth into your kingdom.133

“The concern for the poor and the marginalised arise not as a consequence of the

Eucharistic celebration, but rather, it is the very essence of it.”134

The bread and wine

we receive at Jesus‟ table makes us hunger and thirst for the coming of God‟s justice.

We cannot be guests of the Crucified without living the solidarity he practised. So the

Church is celebrating the meal unworthily if it does not live in solidarity;135

it belies

the hope offered to the hungry and the oppressed. As Gutiérrez rightly expresses:

The objects used in the Eucharist themselves recall that brotherhood is rooted in

God‟s will to give the goods of this earth to all people so that they might build a

more human world…The Eucharist rite in its essential elements is communitarian

and oriented toward the constitution of human brotherhood…Without a real

commitment against exploitation and alienation and for a society of solidarity and

justice, the Eucharistic celebration is an empty action, lacking any genuine

endorsement by those who participate in it…“To make a remembrance” of Christ

is more than the performance of an act of worship it is to accept living under the

sign of the cross, and in hope of the resurrection.136

Liberation Theology and Its Critics: Towards An Assessment (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1989). For the

criticism of liberation theology by Vatican, see the Instruction on Certain Aspects of the “Theology

of Liberation” issued by The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (August, 1984). A more

balanced view of liberation theology by the same Congregation is found in its later document

Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation (March 22, 1986). For English translations of

these documents, see Alfred T. Hennelly, ed., Liberation Theology: A Documentary History

(Maryknoll: Orbis, 1990) 393-414 and 416-497. 132

For John Yoder, the Eucharist represents not just our private appropriation of the grace of God

towards us as individuals, but a paradigmatic enactment of the „political economy‟ of God‟s

kingdom. Cf. John Yoder, Body Politics: Five Practices of the Christian Community before the

Watching World (Nashville: Discipleship Resources, 1992), 20. In this perspective liturgical

worship is the crucial site for the recovery of the „public-ness‟ of Christian faith, where we learn

what it means to be what David Yeago calls „the civic assembly of the eschatological city‟, the

place in which the Christian community is constituted as God‟s new „polis.‟ Cf. David Yeago,

“Messiah‟s People: The Culture of the Church in the Midst of the Nations,” Pro Ecclesia 6 (1997),

146-171. See also B. Wannenwetsch, “The Political Worship of a Church: A Critical and

Empowering Practice,” Modern Theology 12 (1996), 269-299. 133

The Didache 9.4. 134

John Peter Sandanam, “Do This in Remembrance of Me,” 281. See also Marie Conn, “The

Sacramental Theology of Leonardo Boff,” Worship 64 (1990) 523-532, esp.526; Victor Codina,

“Sacraments,” in Systematic Theology: Perspectives from Liberation Theology, eds. Jon Sobrino,

Ignacio Ellacuria (New York: Orbis, 1996), 216-232. 135

The social teaching of the Church on the dignity of the human person becomes real and effective

only when it contextually affirms the liberation of dalits in Indian society. Cf. S. Arockiasamy, SJ,

“Sarvodaya and Antyodaya,” Vidyajyoti 51 (1987), 545-564. 136

Gustavo Gutiérrez, The Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1973), 263;


3.3. THE CRUCIFIED OUTSIDE THE CAMP: A CALL FOR PROPHETIC

COMMUNION

“Jesus suffered outside the gate to sanctify the people with his own blood”

(Heb.13:11-12).137

Jesus is crucified outside Jerusalem and he finds himself outside

the walls where the untouchables are forced to live and suffer.138

“He refuses to be

part of an oppressive system and opts out of it to be with an oppressed people.”139

In

Jewish worship animal blood was brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for the

atonement of sin, while the bodies of the slaughtered animals were burned outside the

camp. The camp meant Jerusalem. Jesus‟ death outside the camp meant to disclose, to

proclaim140

and to affirm the inborn dignity and the native purity of all castes.

It [the Cross] is the manifestation of his ultimate love for the poor and the

downtrodden groaning under the weight of socio-political oppression, economic

exploitation and religious legalism. Jesus on the Cross shares their lot to the very

end. He was totally poor and wholly outcast. He takes upon himself the suffering

humanity and suffers with everyone who is being tortured and crucified on the

cross of life.141

To join Jesus outside the camp is to discover in him a new and surprising Crucified

God.142

The Crucified God, by being crucified outside the camp, sets aside the entire

system of taboos, which is based on ideas of purity and pollution of races, contact and

137 Jesus was also born outside the camp. And as Boff says, “His mission is clear from the start: to

stand up for the deprived and to identify with the excluded.” Leonardo Boff, Ecology and

Liberation, A New Paradigm (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1993), 180. 138

M. K. Gandhi, the father of the Indian nation, realized that the poor are the choicest representation

of God: “I count my sacrifice too great for the sake of seeing God face to face. The whole of my

activity, whether it may be called social, political, humanitarian or ethical, is directed to that end.

And as I know that God is found more often in the lowliest of His creatures than in the high and

mighty, I am struggling to reach the status of these. I cannot do so without their service. Hence my

passion for the service of the suppressed classes.” M. K. Gandhi, Collected Works XXV,

(Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1992),117. For a view of Gandhian Social Thought, see T. K. John,

“Theology of Liberation And Gandhian Praxis: A Social Spirituality for India,” in Liberation in

Asia, Theological Perspectives, Jesuit Theological Forum Reflections, ed., S. Arockiasamy and

Gispert-Sauch (Anand: Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 1987), 115-142; B. Joseph Francis, “Love of God

and Fellowmen in the Life and Works of Mahatma Gandhi,” Indian Theological Studies 27 (1990),

5-45. 139

Aloysius Pieris, SJ, An Asian Theology of Liberation (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988), 10. In this

context, Pieris also highlights the Christological interpretation of Moses, that his journey, unlike

that of Abraham, begins on the other end, from a „commitment‟ to the people, but ended up

discovering God because his journey began with self-negating love. 140

“The death of Jesus is a powerful act of affirmation and proclamation of his firm commitment and

loyalty to the people. To the fisher-folk that followed him, to wineless and breadless crowds, to

broken, crippled and handicapped men and women, to the exploited working class, to the destroyed

and fleeced wretched of the earth, to those held captive in tombs of poverty, ignorance and disease.

Therefore, the death of Jesus is an affirmation of human dignity.” Samuel Rayan, “Jesus and the

Poor in the Fourth Gospel,” Biblebhashyam 4 (1978), 138. 141

Leo Sequeira, “The Cross, Symbol of Compassion,” Vidyajyoti 67 (2003), 128-129. 142

Samuel Rayan, “Outside the Gate, Sharing the Insult,” in Leave the Temple, ed. Felix Wilfred

(Maryknoll: Orbis, 1992), 138.


occupations.143

The Crucified outside the camp, extends a double invitation and

challenge. To the higher caste Indian Christians, those within the camp, he invites

them to join him outside the camp, in the margins, with the marginalized. Jean-Marie

Tillard says that the “Cross is a sharing in human distress.”144

Rightly does Jon

Sobrino say “God is to be found in the crosses of the oppressed rather than in beauty,

power, or wisdom…it is not a matter of looking for God or not looking for him, but

rather of looking for him where he himself says that he is.”145

Tillard insists that

“Incarnation is God-made-Poor.”146

Samuel Ryan, in very challenging words, equates

143 The “crucified people” is used to denote the oppressed poor. Bishop Oscar Romero was the first to

make this connection when, during his visit to a village that had been terrorized by the Salvadorian

security forces, he proclaimed to the long-suffering poor that they were Christ crucified in history

today. Echoing Romero, Ignacio Ellacuría and Jon Sobrino make the connections between those

who are crucified today and the crucified Christ. The poor, they assert, are the historical body of

Christ today. “In Latin America” writes Sobrino, “the crucified people are the actualization of

Christ crucified, the true servant of Yahweh.” Likewise, Ellacuría asserts, “this crucified people is

the historical continuation of the servant of Yahweh.” See Ignacio Ellacuría, “The Crucified

People” in Jon Sobrino and Ignacio Ellacuría, eds., Systematic Theology, Perspectives From

Liberation Theology (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1993), 257-278; idem, Freedom Made Flesh: The Mission

of Christ and His Church (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1976); Jon Sobrino, Jesus in Latin America

(Maryknoll: Orbis, 1987); idem, The True Church and the Poor (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1984).

Anticipating objections, they acknowledge that the relation between Christ and crucified people is

not one of absolute identity. The crucified people neither replace nor repeat Christ‟s work. They do

not assert that all the poor and oppressed, simply by virtue of their poverty and oppression,

constitute the body of Christ. As Sobrino assures, “There is no question of idealizing, much less

sacrilizing the poor.” The True Church and the Poor, 95. Gustavo Gutiérrez adds: “the world of the

poor is not made up simply of victims, of solidarity and the struggle for human rights. The universe

of the poor is inhabited by flesh-and-blood human beings, pervaded with the forces of life and

death, of grace and sin…Insofar as the poor are part of human history, they are not free of the

motivations found in the two cities of which St. Augustine spoke: love of God and love of self.” We

Drink from Our Own Wells (London: SCM, 1984), 125. Tillard too says in much similar tone: “It is

obvious that there are bad people just as there are good rich people and a dispassionate examination

will discover the same mixture of moral grandeur and misery which is the common lot of mankind.”

Tillard, Dilemmas of Religious Life, 65. For a short but comprehensive presentation and review of

the views, see the section “The Crucified People” in Daniel M. Bell, Jr., Liberation Theology After

the End of History. The Refusal to Cease Suffering (London: Routledge, 2001), 165-171. Alistair

Kee changes from „poor‟ to the „excluded‟ in his article “Blessed are the Excluded” in William F.

Storrar and Andrew R. Morton, eds., Public Theology for the 21st Century (London: T&T Clark,

2004), 351-364, esp. 362. 144

Jean-Marie Roger Tillard, Dilemmas of Modern Religious Life, Consecrated Life Studies 3

(Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1984), 70. The use of Tillard in this section might appear strange

and misplaced. Even if Tillard, a great ecumenist, is not a liberation theologian, and is known for

his writings on ecclesiology of communion, we find his insights on poverty within the context of

religious life very relevant for this section. 145

Jon Sobrino, Christology at the Crossroads: A Latin American Approach, trans. John Drury

(Maryknoll: Orbis, 1984), 201. Sobrino says that the people who do not belong to the oppressed

classes, can make present the incarnate presence of God in history “by consciously lowering

themselves, integrating themselves in the people in various ways, making common cause with the

crucified people, taking on their struggle and their destiny. This type of partisan incarnation is itself

an expression of faith in Christ.” Jon Sobrino, “A Crucified People‟s Faith in the Son of God,”

Concilium 153 (1982), 26. 146

Tillard, Dilemmas of Modern Religious Life, 67-69.


the solidarity of the Church with the dalits “outside the camp” with the authentic

Christian identity of the Church in India:

This surprising invitation, uncompromising and radical, to join Jesus outside the

camp and share his shame defines our spirituality, defines the faith of the church,

defines the Church‟s gospel task. The call is to identify with Jesus in his dalitness

which is inseparable from the experience of the dalits of our day. … Sharing

Jesus‟s degradation and death in the outcast place is what stamps us and our

church with the Christian character.147

On the other hand, the Crucified God challenges the outcastes, the dalits and

the Adivasis of India, to live in open freedom and to refuse every mode of

enslavement.148

“Through looking at Christ crucified, they [the poor and oppressed]

come to know themselves better, and through looking at themselves, they come to

know Christ crucified better.”149

Jesus represents a new image of God as one

dethroning the ruling classes and high castes and putting the dalits and Adivasis in

charge of history.150

Tillard affirms: “In the plan of salvation, the poor become lords

of the rich and mighty because of Jesus, the Poor Man, made Lord by His Cross.”151

Tillard is both radical and prophetic in his treatment of preference for the poor.

He sees incarnation as “God made poor.”152

According to Tillard, “Jesus was not poor

because he was born of poor parents or because he chose to live austere life. But that

God made the condition of mankind in its most tragic aspect His own.”153

Tillard sees

God‟s choice for the poor so complete and absolute because “he [God] does not limit

himself to being God-for-the-poor or even God-with-the-poor, but in Jesus God-was-

147 Samuel Ryan, “The Challenge of the Dalit Issue: Some Theological Perspectives,” in V.

Devasahayam, ed., Dalits & Women: Quest for Humanity (Chennai: Gurukul, 1992), 121. 148

In this context, the Resurrection of Jesus, will be the foundation for rebellion and liberation. As

Rafael Avila puts it: Returning Jesus to life, which the powerful of his time had taken from him, the

Father „topples the powerful from their throne,‟ annihilating the worst they could do to the struggle

for justice. The annihilation (negation) thus placed in the hands of all those who had been wronged

the most powerful weapon to continue the struggle. The resurrection is, therefore, the ultimate basis

for rebellion.” Rafael Avila, Worship and Politics, 71. Similar views on the significance of

Resurrection for human liberation are also expressed by George Therukattil, MCBS, “The

Resurrection of Jesus and Human Liberation,” Vidyajyoti 56 (1992), 403-412. Boff sees

Resurrection as the announcement of total liberation. Cf. Leonardo Boff, Jesus Christ, Liberator

(New York: Orbis, 1987), 122. 149

Jon Sobrino, Jesus in Latin America (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1987), 162. 150

Cf. Jon Sobrino, The True Church and the Poor (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1984), 84-124. In similar terms

S. Arulsamy says that the “poor are not a „part‟, even a privileged part of the church, but is the

centre of the whole.” “Challenges to Christian Community in Emerging India,” Indian Theological

Studies 37 (2000), 16. 151

Tillard, Dilemmas of Modern Religious Life, 76. 152


Tillard, Dilemmas of Modern Religious Life, 68.


made-poor.”154

It is in Jesus-made-poor, Tillard says, that “Incarnation reveals its true

meaning.”155

Tillard affirms that Christ “is in communion with the human misery and

in whom God himself is in communion with the human misery.”156

3.4. A CASTELESS INDIAN CHURCH: A TRUE “KINGDOM KOINONIA”

The Indian Church as a community of faith, should transcend the hierarchical

grading of people into low and high castes.157

It is, however a missiological error to

project Christianity as a religion of all castes. To do so would amount to

accommodating the caste hierarchy within the Church. Caste is not a social order but a

social disorder that grades human beings into high and low according to the degree of

purity or impurity reputedly inherited by birth. This is a moral outrage and a betrayal

not only of the democratic principle but also of the Gospel of Jesus.158

Today, this

question assumes great importance in the work of evangelisation and in theology and

ecclesiology. There can be no true Church of Christ without a collective metanoia

regarding caste structures of power, mentality and attitude.159

This question calls for a

self-examination of all Christians, whether Syrian or Latin, whether Dalit or Adivasi.

If today the Catholic Church may feel justifiably honoured by having a Cardinal from

the Adivasi community as the head of its Episcopal body, it is not this ethnic factor

that will make it an authentic community of disciples of Jesus, but the measure in

which all groupings within the Church heed the call of Jesus “to serve and to lay

down one‟s life as a ransom for many” (Mk.10:45).

The Church in India cannot withdraw from its task of creating a casteless Church.160

As Michael Amaladoss laments, “The Church is effectively abandoning any

pretensions about trying for a casteless society. May be it is a more honest attitude;

154 Tillard, Dilemmas of Modern Religious Life, 68.

155 Tillard, Dilemmas of Modern Religious Life, 68.

156 Tillard, Church of Churches, 30.

157 S. Arockiasamy, SJ, says that “the goal of social justice will demand from us that we work for a

non-casteist society.” S. Arockiasamy, SJ, “The Challenges of a Divided India to the Social

Teaching of the Church,” 251. 158

The Catholic Bishops of India see “vestiges of casteism and discrimination among Christians” as

one of the internal factors hampering evangelization in India today. Cf. “Sharing the Good News”

Concluding Statement of the Fifteenth Plenary Assembly of the CCBI (Conference of Catholic

Bishops of India-Latin Rite), Tiruchirpalli, 15-19 January, 2003, published in Vidyajyoti 67 (2003),

194. 159

Thomas D‟Sa suggests that for some Religious Congregations, it almost amounts to taking a fourth

vow: “Do you denounce casteism?” Thomas D‟Sa, “Contemplating the Faces of Christ,” Vidyajyoti

67 (2003), 671. 160

In divided India based on caste, working to create a new just social order is of paramount

importance for the Indian church. Cf. S. Arockiasamy, SJ, “The Challenges of a Divided India to

the Social Teaching of the Church,” 252-254.


but not more evangelical – nor prophetic.”161

The call to “social conversion,”

metanoia demands renunciation of casteism and its anti-human practices.

S. Arockiasamy, S.J., the editor of Vidyajyoti journal, rightly asserts the imperative of

creating a casteless church in India:

Sharing the Good News includes an exorcism of casteism. After more than fifty

years of Independence, the demon of casteism remains alive and is reactivated by

the power of politics of vested interests. It is true that in the Church a lot of change

has taken place in this area. But the exorcism is not yet complete. Both personal

and collective metanoia towards a casteless community of disciples of Jesus has to

go on. In this respect the social, cultural and ecclesial transformation is an

unfinished agenda. Our ecclesiology needs the liberative élan of the Gospel at the

level of practice at the grass-root levels of parish, basic ecclesial communities and

families, for the transformation of our caste-ridden society.162

4. THE PLIGHT OF THE ADIVASIS: A CALL FOR IDENTITY

4.1. THE ADIVASIS IN INDIA

The Adivasis,163

designated by the state as “Scheduled Tribes,” belong to 573

tribes and total to 84.32 million (8.2% of total Indian population) according the 2001

Census of India.164

The Adivasis are spread out across many states of India, but the

thickest populations are found in the Chotanagpur region (consisting regions in

Jharkhand, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, West Bengal states) and the Northeast

region (comprising of seven states: Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Tripura,

Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram). The Adivasis are the highest in Mizoram, 94.5% of

the total state population, followed by Nagaland (84%), Meghalaya (80.54%) and

Arunachal Pradesh (69.78%).

The social structure of the Adivasi communities is very egalitarian; they are

mostly non-hierarchical communities.165

The sense of equality among members of the

tribe is extended to women as well; women enjoy a better social position among

161 Michael Amaladoss, “The Future of the Church‟s Mission in India,” Jeevadhara 17 (1987), 381.

162 S. Arockiasamy, “Editorial: The Challenge of Social Conversion,” Vidyajyoti 67 (2003), 158.

163 We prefer to use in our research the term “Adivasis” instead of the term “tribals.” For the reasons of

such choice, refer footnote number 4 above in the same chapter. 164

Government of India, “Census Data 2001, Indian at a Glance, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled

Tribes,” http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/India_at_glance/scst.aspx (accessed 10

April 2010). Santals is one big tribe of about 8 million, forming 13% of the Adivasis of India.

Majority of them live in Bihar, Bengal and Orissa. The Garos live in the states of Assam,

Meghalaya, Nagaland, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura and West Bengal. Abors of Assam and

Arunachal Pradesh, the Baiga of Madhya Pradesh, the Gaddis of Himachal Pradesh, the Khasis of

Meghalaya, the Gonds of Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, and Orissa, the Lepchas of Sikkim, the Mizos of

Mizoram, the Mundas, the Hos, the Oraons, the Kharias, the Kherwars, the Savars, the Bhils, the

Nagas, the Chenchus, the Meenas, the Kurmis etc. are the other major tribes in India. 165

There exist Adivasi chiefs and priests, but by no means higher or lower in relation to others.

http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/India_at_glance/scst.aspx


Adivasis than non-Adivasi communities in India.166

The life and ethic of the Adivasis

is profoundly community-oriented; they are closely knit as a community.167

The

Adivasi life-style is very simple; they are honest and hard-working. The Adivasis

maintain a special relationship with the land and have a deep love for it. Nirmal Minz,

the emeritus-bishop of the Gossner Evangelical Lutheran Church, and one of the most

prominent Adivasi theologians, suggests that even if there are many different tribes

among the Adivasis in India, there is a “corporate tribal personality” which is

expressed in similar forms across all Adivasis in India.168

He considers the people, the

land, power and gods as the four major ingredients of Adivasi reality.169

The religion of the Adivasis is more naturalistic. They believe in spirits. They

offer sacrifices to appease the spirits, so that the spirits will not harm them and will

protect them. They worship the ancestral spirits.170

The deities of the Adivasis are

nature personified in hills, rivers and trees. The Adivasis have great reverence to

nature, and worship it in its various forms. While particular religious beliefs can differ

widely from tribe to tribe, there is much in common in their conceptions of spirits and

gods. Magic and divination play a dominant role in their religions.171

4.2. THE ADIVASIS IN THE CHURCH

Many Adivasis in India have embraced Christianity. Some of the Northeast172

states are predominantly Christian. The Northeast states have the highest percentages

of Christians in India, far greater than those of Goa (26.7%) and Kerala (19%):

Mizoram (90.5%), Nagaland (90.2%), Meghalaya (70.3%), Manipur (34%). It is said

166 Unlike in non-Adivasi communities, where the parents of the bride have to pay the dowry to the

bridegroom‟s family, in the Adivasi communities the bridegroom‟s family have to pay the dowry to

the bride‟s family. Women in Adivasi communities can officiate at all worship offered to spirits. 167

Land was held collectively by the community and did not belong to individuals. 168

Cf. Nirmal Minz, “Meaning of Tribal Consciousness,” Religion and Society 36:2 (1989), 12-23. 169

Nirmal Minz, “A Theological Interpretation of the Tribal Reality in India,” in R. S. Sugirtharajah

and Cecil Hargreaves, eds., Readings in Indian Christian Theology, Vol. I (Delhi: ISPCK, 1993),

47. 170

Cf. A. Van Exem, “Conversion and Baptism –A Tribal Right,” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 45 (1981), 465-466. 171

Cf. Stephen Fuchs, The Aboriginal Tribes of India (Delhi: Macmillan Company, 1973). 172

Two important historical resources for the history of the spread of Catholicism among North East

India tribes: C. Becker, History of the Catholic Missions in North East India, trans. G. Stadler and

S. Karotemprel (Shillong: Vendrame Missiological Centre, 1980); O. Paviotti, The Work of His

Hands: The Story of the Archdiocese of Shillong-Guwahati 1934-1984 (Shillong: Archdiocese of

Shillong-Guwahati, 1987). Important for the Protestant mission history in North East India is: F. S.

Downs, Christianity in North East India (Gawhati: CLS, 1982).


that Adivasis make up approximately 20% of the total Indian Christian population.173

It should be noted that non-Catholic missionaries were always the first ones to reach

the Adivasis regions in Chotanagpur and well as in the Northeast.174

Even today, the

non-Catholic churches are much more active than Catholics in the fields of

evangelisation, science, politics, administration, etc.175

However, mention must be

made about Constant Lievens who arrived in Chotanagpur region in 1885 and

changed the face of Adivasi mission.176

The young Belgian Jesuit converted nearly

75,000 Adivasis in a short span of seven years. The Adivasis are strong in their

Christian faith, as a missionary among them states: “By and large Adivasis are very

faithful Christians and they have a strong sense of allegiance to the Church and

authority. It is very rare that they abandon their Christian faith in crisis situations or

for a paltry gain.”177

The Church has contributed a lot to the development of the cultures of the

Adivasi people.178

The Church has been “the greatest catalyst of change” in Northeast

India.179

The first such contributions are literary contributions. Many missionaries in

the Adivasi regions have introduced script to the many Adivasi languages and have

published much literature in these languages which earlier did not have written

literature in their languages. The Bible has been translated and published in these

languages. Jeremiah Philips translated two Gospels into Santali language in 1852, and

P. O. Bodding published the entire Bible in 1914, and 7 volumes of Santal

dictionary.180

Jeremiah Philips published in 1861 the Santali grammar called

Introduction to Santali. E. L. Puxley published Vocabulary of the Santali Language in

173 K. Thanzauva, Theology of Community: Tribal Theology in the Making (Aizwal: Mizo Theological

Conference, 1997), 14. 174

American Free Will Baptists, the Church Missionary Society of England (CMS), United Free

Church of Scotland, American Seventh Day Adventists, Wesleyan Mission etc are the main non-

Catholic missionary groups that worked early among the Adivasis. Cf. Joseph Troisi, “Christian

Missions and De-Tribalisation: Myth or Reality?” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 43

(1979), 476-478. 175

Cf. V. Xaxa, “Sociological Impact of Evangelization in Northeast India,” Indian Missiological

Review 13:1 (1991), 22. 176

See L. Clarysse, Father Constant Lievens, S.J. (Ranchi: Satya Bharati, 1981). 177

K. Poovathumkudy, “You Shall Be My Witnesses in Assam,” Indian Missiological Review 19:2

(June, 1997), 18. 178

Cf. Dominic Jala, “Contributions of the Catholic Church to the Cultures of Northeast India,” Indian

Missiological Review (1990), 173-186. 179

David R. Syiemlieh, “Christianity and Political Awareness in Northeast India,” Indian

Missiological Review 12:3 (1990), 246. 180

Cf. G. Beckers, “The Evangelization of the Santals,” Indian Missiological Review 19:2 (1997), 36-

37.


1868.181

Missionaries in the Northeast such as Elias Hopewell Sohlia, Emmanuel

Bars, J. Bacchiarello and J. Costa have made valuable contributions to Khasi language

literature.182

Fr. M. Balawan (Balvoine) published 14 books in the language of Tiwas

(Lalungs) tribe mainly found in Assam.183

Similarly, Paul Pananchikal and T. Mankin

published literature in Garo language, and Paviotti published an Assamese

Grammar.184

Such massive literary contributions have given the Adivasis a new sense

of identity and initiated their development.

Education is the next best contribution of the Church to the Adivasis of

India.185

Jeremiah Philips of the American Free Baptists opened the first school for

Santals in 1845.186

The Church opened many primary and middle schools in its

missions and contributed immensely to the education of the Adivasi children.

Education helped the Adivasis to forsake many former habits of superstition, head-

hunting, gave them a new identity, greater mobility, and interaction with other tribes.

Frederick Downs, a prominent Protestant historian of Christianity in Northeast India,

indicates that Christianity has helped the Adivasis to overcome their traditional tribe-

centred identities and created a new Adivasi consciousness which improved positive

relations at “intra-Adivasi,” “inter-Adivasi” and “extra-Adivasi” levels.187

It also

made them politically active. The Church has also done a lot of great medical work

extending health services to the poor Adivasis. The Church is also believed to have

played a significant role in the Naga and Mizo insurgent movements, the Bodoland

movements.188

181 Cf. Troisi, “Christian Missions and De-Tribalisation,” 476-477.

182 Cf. Nalini Natarajan, The Missionary Among the Khasis (New Delhi: Sterling Publishers, 1977),

124. 183

Cf. S. Karotemprel, A Brief History of the Catholic Church Among the Tiwas (Lalungs) (Shillong:

Vendrame Missiological Centre, 1981), 18. 184

Paviotti, The Work of His Hands, 171. 185

George Kottuppallil, “Catholic Church in Northeast India: A Critical Perspective,” Indain

Missiological Review 12:3 (1990), 261-262. 186

Troisi, “Christian Mission and De-Tribalisation,” 477. 187

Frederick S. Downs, “Import Substitution: Reflections of the Indigenization of Ecclesiastical

Conflict in Northeast India,” Indian Missiological Review 12:3 (1990), 75. Downs uses the terms as

“intra-tribal” to refer to relations within a single Adivasi group, “inter-tribal” to relations between

different Adivasi groups and “extra-tribal” to mean relations of the Adivasi communities with non-

Adivasi communities. 188

Syiemlieh, “Christianity and Political Awareness in Northeast India,” 249-250.


4.3. ADIVASIS AND DALITS: A COMMON IDENTITY?

The Adivasis are most often treated together with the dalits in Indian

theology.189

The Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) has a single

commission for the Scheduled Castes (dalits) and Scheduled Tribes (Adivasis) and

also Backward Castes (middle castes) and very often treats their issues together. We

believe that such general and superficial categorization of Adivasis with dalits does

not do justice to the distinct identity of the Adivasis. It is true that dalits and Adivasis

are the most oppressed people in India, and are discriminated within the Church as

well, but the similarity ends there. The Adivasis do not consider themselves as part of

dalits; neither do the dalits as part of Adivasis. Sometimes there is the argument that

Adivasis and dalits together form the “indigenous people” of India even if the state

does not recognize them as such and it needs to be yet historically proved. It is argued

that while dalits have been totally captured and captivated by the Aryans, the Adivasis

withdrew to inaccessible parts of the country and thereby maintained their unique

cultures and structures.190

Even if they were the indigenous people of India, they were

different indigenous groups with entirely different histories, cultures and religions;

their identities are distinct and merit individual treatments.

The Adivasis have a very unique and distinct identity and they cannot be

superficially categorized under either Hindu tradition or the dalit tradition. Similarly

the Adivasi theology will have to be correspondingly different from both the

mainstream Indian Christian theology (dominated by the high-caste orientations) and

dalit theology.191

The Adivasis have different traditions in terms of culture, ethic,

religions, structures, myths and histories. It will be the task of Adivasi theology to

creatively engage with the Adivasi world in the interpretation of Christian faith. Such

theological task of creating a distinct Adivasi theology in India is very significant

189 Cf. Nirmal Minz, “Dalit-Tribal: A Search for Common Ideology,” in Arvind P. Nirmal, ed.,

Towards a Common Dalit Ideology (Madras: Gurukul, n.d.), 97-107; see also in the same volume:

“Seminar Statement: Towards Developing a Common Dalit Ideology,” 127-132. A revised version

of Minz‟s article is also published as: Nirmal Minz, “Dalit-Tribal: A Search for a Common

Ideology,” in James Massey, ed., Indigenous People: Dalits. Dalit Issues in Today‟s Theological

Debate (Delhi: ISPCK, 1998), 134-142. While Minz in his exploration affirms the distinct identities

of Adivasis and Dalits, he favours a move towards a common ideology for both. 190

Minz, “Tribal Issues in India Today,” 4; Minz, “Dalit-Tribal: A Search for Common Ideology,”

102-105. See also: Johnson Vadakumchery, “The Originals Inhabitants of India: Victims of Written

Traditions,” in James Massey, ed., Indigenous People: Dalits. Dalit Issues in Today‟s Theological

Debate (Delhi: ISPCK, 1998), 123-133. 191

Cf. Rudolf C. Heredia, “Development as Liberation: A Christian Perspective,” Vidyajyoti Journal

of Theological Reflection 72 (2008), 517.


today when the Hindu fundamentalist groups are trying to force the Adivasis to

integrate into the larger Hindu identity and caste-structure.

4.4. MARGINALISATION OF THE ADIVASIS IN INDIAN SOCIETY

The marginalisation of Adivasis is mainly caused by the alienation and

displacement of the Adivasis from their ancestral lands; the landed Adivasis are

becoming landless poor. The government as well as the rich landlords are taking away

the lands of the Adivasis and pushing them to peripheries.192

Public sector industrial

projects, construction of dams, mining operation displace millions of Adivasis from

their lands. The rich non-Adivasi population is infiltrating into the Adivasi regions

and exploiting the Adivasis of their resources. Even if the Constitution of India

provides special rights and protective measures to Adivasis,193

they are caught in a

deep struggle for survival. The Adivasis themselves have no say in the creation of the

Government policies that deal with them. They continue to be treated as “second-class

citizens” in India, and as inferior and primitive people.

At the religio-cultural level the Hindu fundamentalist forces which have

garnered the political power in these regions are imposing their religio-cultural

imperialism over the Adivasis by calling them „Hindus‟ and „vanavasis.‟ These forces

are assimilating the Adivasis into the Hindu caste structure which is a subtle process

of marginalisation of the Adivasis; they are being treated as low castes in the Hindu

caste structure on the same level as dalits.194

The overpowering globalisation also

pushes the Adivasis and their traditions to the periphery. The capitalist ethos of

globalisation rejects and marginalises the Adivasi ethos of equality, sharing and

mutual enrichment.195

The Adivasis are “made to feel inferior in matters of their own

life-style, dance, dress, house, art, customs and folklore, their history is disdained, and

their language, religion and culture are severely impaired and stigmatized. This is a

192 For example in Jharkhand alone, 23,417.082 sq. km. has been taken away by the government out of

the total area of 79,714.00 sq. km. Cf. Alex Ekka and Mohammed Asif, Development-Induced

Displacement and Rehabilitation in Jarkhand 1951-1995 (New Delhi: Indian Social Institute, n.d.),

67. See also S. Bosu Mullick and Samyadip Chtterji, Alienation Displacement and Rehabilitation

(New Delhi: Uppal Publishing House, 1997). 193

Article 342 of the Indian Constitution empowers the Union to notify Scheduled Tribes and

scheduled tribe areas. Article 46 makes the state responsible for the promotion of the social and

economic interests of the tribes and protect them from social injustice and exploitation. 194

Cf. Virginius Xax, “Tribes, Conversion and the Sangh Parivar,” Jnanadeepa 3:1 (2000), 23-35. 195

Walter Fernandes, “Challenges to Tribal Culture in the Context of Globalization,” in Agapit Tirkey,

ed., Responding to India‟s Social Challenges: Promoting Tribal Rights and Culture (Bangalore:

NBCLC, 2004), 31-38.


kind of cultural ethnocide.”196

The ideologies and aspirations of the Adivasis are

ignored and marginalised in the wider society in India.

4.5. MARGINALISATION OF THE ADIVASIS IN THE CHURCH

The marginalisation of Adivasis within the Church is caused by the dominant

presence of South Indian clergy and religious in Adivasi regions. Many Catholic

bishops serving in the dioceses in North India come mostly from Kerala and other

South Indian states. This missionary situation is the cause of constant identity

conflicts and tensions.197

At times the Adivasi churches consider the missionaries

from South India as “Indian foreigners” because of their lack of genuine integration

within the local Adivasi communities they serve.198

A non-integrating non-Adivasi

clergy and religious, as well as non-Adivasi bishops, can sadly become “counter-

signs” to the very mission of the local Churches among Adivasis, and “hurdles” in the

process of becoming truly Adivasi local Churches.

The Catholic clergy serving the Adivasi communities remain largely non-

Adivasi and non-local. In a church where most resources of the church are held by

bishops, clergy and religious, the presence of a majority of non-Adivasi clergy and

religious in an Adivasi church would naturally translate into the dominance of the

non-Adivasis within the local church. The laity plays a very minor role in the

administration of the church and its resources in India.199

Thus, one can hardly find

Adivasi laity in the management of Catholic educational and charitable institutions,

nor are they being trained to take such positions.200

In such an ecclesial dominance of

the Adivasi Christians by the non-local and non-Adivasi church personnel, it is

important to promote native vocations to priesthood and religious life. Becoming a

local church for the Adivasi communities would, first of all, imply having local

bishops, clergy and religious.201

Adivasis already feel that they are marginalised

196 Jaganath Pathy, “What is Tribe? What is Indigenous? Turn the Tables Towards the Metaphor of

Social Justice,” Religion and Society 38: 3&4 (1991), 23. 197

Augustine Kanjamala, “The Future of the Mission in the Hindi Belt,” Vidyajyoti Journal of

Theological Reflection 56 (1992), 261-262; “Statement of the Centenary Seminar on Evangelisation

of the North-East (18-21 September 1990),” Indian Missiological Review 13:1 (1991), 79. 198

Kanjamala, “The Future of the Mission in the Hindi Belt,” 273. 199

Kottuppallil indicates the problem of clericalism in Catholic communities in relation to the

democratic set of Protestant churches, and how Adivasis resent clericalism. Kottuppallil, “Catholic

Church in Northeast India,” 265. 200

Cf. Xaxa, “Sociological Impact of Evangelization in Northeast India,” 23. 201

Dominic Jala, “Contributions of the Catholic Church to the Cultures of Northeast India,” Indian

Missiological Review 12:3 (1990), 184.


within the Catholic Church in India.202

Thankfully now, there are many native

vocations among the Adivasi communities, and few Adivasi bishops and an Adivasi

Cardinal (Cardinal Pascal Toppo), and these hold the future of the Adivasi Church in

India.

The “Adivasi Theology” as a distinct stream of Indian theology has been

recognized very lately. The theological voices of Adivasi Christians were ignored in

the mainline theological explorations in India.203

The religions and cultures of

Adivasis in India have not been considered and utilized for theological reflection. The

Indian Christianity needs to affirm the Adivasi context to which some 20% of its

people belong. The Church in India cannot understand itself without a true integration

of the realities of the Adivasi Christians; the Indian Church would be less Indian and

less Christian without the inclusion of the Adivasi Christianity. The struggles of

identity of the Adivasis, the faith expressions of the Adivasis, the spiritual and

material longings of the Adivasis, need to become integral to the issues of theological

reflection in India.

4.6. THE THEOLOGY OF THE ADIVASIS

Serious study will have to be made of Adivasi thought processes, of Adivasi

philosophy and theology, of the myths and folklores of the people of the region.

Christian theology in India needs to “dig deep into the riches” of Adivasi culture,

religion and history.204

While the culture of the Adivasis can be different from one

tribe to the other, there are however, some common features among most tribes. There

is a strong sense of community among all Adivasi tribes in India. Another source of

theological reflection could be the liberative movements among the Adivasis.205

The

202 The situation in the Protestant Churches is better as they have more democratic processes of

governance in Churches and leadership is held mostly by Adivasis themselves as pastors and

personnel. Cf. Kottuppallil, “Catholic Church in Northeast India,” 265. 203

The much popular and acclaimed book on Indian Christian theology does not have any treatment of

the Adivasis and their theologies. Robin Boyd, An Introduction to Indian Christian Theology

(Delhi: ISPCK, 2005) [first published in 1969]. Neither does a recent one: Sunand Sumitra,

Christian Theologies from an Indian Perspective (Bangalore: Theological Book Trust, 1995). 204

Cf. C. A. Bixal Tirkey, “The Tana Bhagat Movement: The Uraon Quest for Liberation,” Indian

Missiological Review 19:2 (June, 1997), 32. 205

Some prominent Adivasi liberation movements are: The Chuar Rebellion (1769-1784), Tilka Majhi

(1781-1784), Chero Revolt (1771-1819), Kol Insurrection (1831-1832), Santal Insurrection (1855-

1856), etc. Cf. Mathew Areeparampil, Struggles for Swaraj (Chaibasa: Tribal Research and

Training Centre, 2002). This book documents well the various struggles for liberation among

different Adivasi communities of India. For the insurrection of the Santals, see also Joseph Troisi,

“Social Movements Among Santals,” in M. S. A. Rao, ed., Social Movements in India: Studies in

Peasant, Backward Classes, Sectarian, Tribal and Women‟s Movements (Delhi: Manohar, 2004),

341-364.


Adivasis movements are broadly divided into three phases: the first phase (1795-

1860) in the context of expansion of British Empire in India, the second phase (1860-

1920) within intensive colonialism, and the third phase (1920-1947) of secular and

political movements.206

These movements manifest the resistance and struggles of the

Adivasis against the exploitation of their people and lands by the non-Adivasi

landlords, rulers and business firms. Christian theology in India can benefit much

from the Adivasi theological insights in ecology, community and celebration of life.207

Adivasi theology needs to be oriented also towards the transformation of the

Adivasi communities. There are many Adivasi values which are egalitarian and which

need to be reaffirmed, restored and integrated into the wider Christian story in India.

However, we cannot ignore to affirm that there are some aspects in the cultures and

structures of the Adivasis which need to be refined and purified by Christian faith.

While much can be gained from the Adivasi sense of community, it can at the same

time indicate negative implications in relations among tribes; one ethnic tribe does not

embrace another ethnic tribe, and there are bitter conflicts among different tribes. In

the same way, while women enjoy better freedom among Adivasi communities, there

remain issues of subordination and oppression of women which need to be challenged

and transformed. Moreover, the traditional higher status of women among Adivasi

communities has declined with the influence of non-Adivasi cultures.208

Similarly, the

Adivasis have a deep sense of cosmic oneness with nature. But, there are aspects in

the cosmic sense of the Adivasis that need to be checked: the practices of hunting and

killing of animals and an excessive use of forest lands for profit-oriented agricultural

cultivation.

4.6.1. Jesus as an Adivasi: A Protector of Creation

Adivasis in India identify themselves as being the “first dwellers” of the land.

In the light of such an identity, Jesus needs to be presented to them as an Adivasi. The

prologue of the Gospel of John (Jn. 1:1-2) points to the “Adivasi-ness” of the

Incarnate Son. He was from the beginning; he existed before the world was made.

Thus, the context of “in the beginning” can mean that the Logos was an Adivasi,

because he dwelt before anything came into existence. Further, Jesus says that he

existed even before Abraham: “before Abraham was, I am” (Jn. 8:58). Jesus is the one

206 Tirkey, “The Tana Bhagat Movement: The Uraon Quest for Liberation,” 29.

207 Cf. Thomas Pulloppillil, “The Values that Undergird a Tribal Theology,” Vidyajyoti Journal of

Theological Reflection 61 (1997), 187-191. 208

Cf. James Poonthuruthil, “The Christian Impact on the Khasi Family,” Indian Missiological Review

12:3 (1990), 236.


who existed in the beginning; Jesus is “Adivasi.” Jesus who existed in the beginning

“took flesh and dwelt among us” to save the world (Jn. 1:14). In the Adivasi tradition,

the Ancestors of the Adivasis are believed to continue to work for the wellbeing of

their families even after their death. Thus, Jesus is an ancestor “Adivasi” who takes

flesh among the Adivasis to save the tribe and the creation.209

Jesus needs to be

presented in an Adivasi way to them while reinterpreting the Adivasi tradition in the

light of the Gospels. In the context of current situation of displacement and oppression

of the Adivasis in India, Jesus as an Adivasi and ancestor is not only the source of

grace and truth but also of liberative action.

A theological interpretation of “Jesus as an Adivasi” has also rich ecological

implications which can prove useful for the current theological reflection on

environment. The Rebellious Prophets210

of the Adivasi Liberation movements are

regarded as divine by Adivasis; they are incarnations of the divine and are

worshipped. These heroes of the Adivasi revolutionary movements led courageous

battles for the protection of not only the Adivasi people but also their natural habitat:

their lands, their forests. A theological interpretation of Jesus as Adivasi will have to

explicate also how Jesus and the faith in Him and His Gospel call for a mission of

protecting the creation. Being a follower of “Jesus the Adivasi” the “rebellious

Adivasi prophet” would mean today to follow a path of sustainable natural resource

management. The community of “Jesus the Adivasi” will have to be a “community of

the land” with deep ecological sensitivity and which, like the Adivasi communities,

does not exploit the natural resources of the land in a selfish non-sustainable way. The

community of “Jesus the Adivasi,” the protector of creation, will necessarily have to

be a community that protects the creation.

4.6.2. Messianic People: Seeking the Promised Land

The Adivasi community in India can be theologically imagined as the people

in search of the Promised Land. Their current life is comparable to the life of the

people of Israel wandering in the wilderness in the hope of the possession of the

Promised Land. The Adivasis of India are being uprooted and displaced from their

own lands and habitat and are wandering in the wilderness of migrations hoping to

209 One can argue how Jesus a “Jew” who is not born into their tribe can become one of them? By

recourse to the Asur myth of the Adivasis, we can argue that the accursed one can become a saviour

of the people and the whole of creation. Further, a non-Adivasi can be adopted into a tribe if one

can incarnate oneself fully into the Adivasi way of life and culture. 210

The title of the book on Adivasi and other liberation movements in India religions: Stephen Fuchs,

Rebellious Prophets: A Study of Messianic Movements in Indian Religions (London: Asia

Publishing House, 1965).


possess the land that belonged them. Adivasis today are becoming people without a

home. Nirmal Minz very poignantly expresses the significance of land for the

Adivasis: “Land is very symbolic of the home –No land no home. No home no life for

the Adivasis.”211

Displaced and dispersed from their lands by exploiters, the Adivasis

are living as strangers in the society where they are alienated in terms of their culture,

lifestyle and ethos. They are like “people in exile” who long to return to their

homeland; they have undying hopes that God will lead them to their homeland. The

oppressed Adivasis are seeking for a Moses and a Messiah who will guide them

through the wilderness to the Promised Land and will restore them to their homeland.

They are “looking to a God who will take the side of the poor and neglected, exploited

and oppressed Adivasis and show them a vision of their homeland, a land flowing

with milk and honey.”212

The spiritual and the material are fused into an integrated

whole in the Adivasi praxis,213

and as such the Christian search for the “new Promised

Land” would have to be both material and spiritual; materially, it is a search for

possession of their lands and resistance to their displacement from these lands. The

Church as the “community of salvation” needs to become that “new Moses,” the

“Messianic community” which can guide these “wanderers in wilderness” of today‟s

Indian society to their lost homelands and settle them in their new homelands.

4.6.3. Joyful People of God: Living the Resurrection

The Adivasi communities in India are “joyful communities;” they are people

who celebrate. These communities possess a wealth of community songs and dances

which affirm their solidarity and express their hopes and aspirations. As Adivasi

Christians they can truly characterize the church as “joyful people” who celebrate the

Christian faith and hope, and who celebrate the resurrection. As Peter Haokip of

Oriens Theologial College in Shillong would say, the Adivasi youth “must be taught

how to sing their cultural songs; how to dance their cultural dances.”214

Such a

theological reflection of Adivasis as the “joyful people of God” implies also a

recognition of their exploitation and suffering, and a mission to restore their “joys” to

them so that they live true to their identity as “joyful people.” Their “lost joys” that

need to be restored are their lands, their livelihoods, their cultures, their ethos and

211 Minz, “Dalit-Tribal: A Search for Common Ideology,” 100.

212 Nirmal Minz, “A Theological Interpretation of the Tribal Reality in India,” 53.

213 A. Van Exem, “Man-Nature Spirit: A Holistic Approach,” Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 48 (1984), 567. 214

Peter Haokip, “The Tribal People of the Northeast: A Liberating Quest for Identity, Equality and

Respect,” Jnanadeepa 2:2 (1999), 70.


their identities. The mission among Adivasis is deeply rooted in leading them from

their current “crucifixion” towards their “resurrection,” so that they live truly as the

“joyful people” of God.

4.6.4. Church as an Egalitarian Community

The strong sense of community is the heart of Adivasi people in India. The

community gives them identity, solidarity, purpose and commitment. The sense of

community among the Adivasis is defined by Thanzauva as “a concept and life

principle in which a homogenous people live together sharing their joys and sorrows

in mutual love and care.”215

Elaborating how the sense of community is pivotal to the

Adivasi religions, Longchar says: “The tribal religion is basically a community

religion. To be truly human is to belong to the whole community, including the

ancestors and creation, and to do so involves the active participation in the beliefs,

ceremonies, rituals and festivals of the community. A person cannot live in isolation

from one‟s community.”216

Even if the close-knit community spirit of the Adivasis

has been disrupted by the modern technological developments and globalisation, and

their community-life is not the same today as earlier, they still maintain some strong

sense of the community.

A theological reinterpretation of the Church in India through the Adivasi

communitarian feature can significantly contribute to remedy the growing sense of

individualism in the modern society. A reinterpretation of the Church as a community

through the Adivasi features of community can help to restore the deep sense of

community that form the very basis of the faith-community. Further, such Adivasi

theological reinterpretation will also call the Church in India to overcome the

unchristian caste differences, rites controversies, and regional and language

differences, and become the egalitarian community of the Kingdom. Further, the

Adivasi communal values can make the Christian theology and community eco-

sensitive and harmonious with nature, as the Adivasi community concept is inclusive

of the nature.

4.6.5. Exposing the Lacuna of Modern Development

An Adivasi theological perspective can serve well to expose the lacuna of the

modern development in India of which the Adivasis have become the most affected

victims. All over India, the Adivasis are losing their lands to the project of modern

215 Thanzauva, Theology of Community: Tribal Theology in the Making, 106.

216 A. Wati Longchar, The Traditional Tribal Worldview and Modernity (Jorhat: N. Limala Lkr, 1995),

7.


development; their habitat is deforested and they are displaced to make place for the

establishment of modern developmental projects. The result of such a modern

development project in India has become detrimental to the Adivasis in India. Thus,

the plight of the Adivasis manifests the mismanagement of the modern development.

The poor are becoming poorer, while the rich are getting richer through this

development.

The theological reflection from the Adivasi perspective will begin from the

pathetic plight of the Adivasis in India today which is the result of modern

development project that undermines the welfare of the poor. A critical theological

analysis of the Adivasi situation will call for the transformation of the concept of

modern development. The Adivasi management of eco-systems can provide good

insights into creation of good renewable use of eco-system. Christian Adivasi

perspectives will seek a sustainable development which seeks the welfare of the poor

and a sustainable management of the natural resources.217

5. CONVERSION OF DALITS/ADIVASIS: “FOR GOD OR FOR RICE?”

The Conversion Debate in India always revolves around the conversion of

dalits/Adivasis. Surprisingly, even if a lot of non-dalits/Adivasis in India convert to

Christianity, the conversion debate concerns itself only with dalit/Adivasi

conversions. The reason for this could be that the conversion debate itself is an upper-

caste device – Hindu or Christian. The Hindutva ideology is basically an upper-caste

ideology in India which revokes and fuels the conversion debate time and again. It

seeks to restore the Hindu caste-system in modern India and they see the conversions

of dalits/Adivasis to Christianity as a threatening force to the reinforcement of the

caste-system and eventually a loss of their dominance over the low-castes.218

Thus, it

seems less concerned about the conversions of upper-castes to Christianity for their

conversions do not pose a threat to the upper-caste dominance over the

dalits/Adivasis.

Unfortunately, it is not just the Hindus in India who in the conversion debate

allege that the dalits/Adivasis are lured into conversion by material benefits; the

upper-caste Indian Christians too join the bandwagon of such allegations. Many

upper-caste Indian missionaries who serve the dalit/Adivasi Christian communities in

217 Cf. Walter Fernandes, “Tribals in India: A Challenge to Theology,” Jnanadeepa 1:1 (1998), 58-68.

218 Right from the time mass movements began, the high castes have always perceived conversion as a

threat to their loss of power and dominance over low-castes. Cf. Fernandes, “Conversion to

Christianity,” 156.


different parts of India consider the dalits/Adivasi Christians as “Rice Christians,” a

derogatory term by which they imply that dalits/Adivasis have converted to

Christianity for material benefits.

Conversion to Christianity has not improved the social status of dalits. As

Robinson indicates, for the earliest low-caste Catholic converts along the southern

coast of India, the Mukkuvars and Paravas, conversion “served not to climb up the

status ladder” but to provide a strengthening of their caste identity.219

Similarly,

regarding the low caste converts in Kerala, Cecilia Busby points out that “Conversion

to Christianity has not altered their caste status, and they remain very low in local

hierarchies.”220

Also in Goa, the low caste converts “remained at the bottom of the

social hierarchy” even after conversion.221

Similarly in Punjab, conversion to

Christianity among low caste Churas and Chamars changed little their socio-economic

status.222

In fact, as Robinson concludes in her analysis of the conversions, high caste

converts have benefitted much more by conversion than low castes: “Thus, for the

upper castes conversion meant alignment with the rulers and the protection of their

economic, social and ritual privileges. For the low-ranking there may have been the

expectation of social mobility… In many cases, though, it is likely that things worked

differently.”223

If the conversion to Christianity has not improved their social status since the

beginning, then why have the dalits/Adivasis converted in such large number in

subsequent centuries and still continue to do so? They have seen other dalits who

converted and have suffered the same plight following conversion and yet, there are

large numbers of dalits/Adivasis converting even today. Based on their own

experience, and if material benefits were the main reason for dalits/Adivasis

converting in the first place, it would be logical to assume that such conversions

would have ceased long ago.

219 Robinson, Christians of India, 43.

220 Cecilia Busby, “Renewable Icons: Concepts of Religious Power in a Fishing Village in South

India,” in Fenella Cannell, ed., The Anthropology of Christians (Durham & London: Duke

University Press, 2006), 79. 221

Robinson, Christians of India, 52. 222

Cf. Jeffrey Cox, Imperial Fault Lines: Christianity and Colonial Power in India, 1818-1940

(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2002), 133. 223

Robinson, Christians of India, 52.


5.1. “RICE-CHRISTIANS” ARE ALSO “FAITH-CHRISTIANS”

“Rice-Christians” is a derogatory term coined by the foreign missionaries who

believed that the poor dalits and Adivasis converted for “rice”, i.e., for material

benefits. The term creates a kind of spiritual hierarchy between the faith of the higher

castes and that of the lower castes; the latter being depicted as the weaker in faith. 224

Can the quality or the depth of faith be judged based on the caste of a person? There

are accounts in Indian Church history, even if very few, that witness to the deep faith

of the “rice-Christians.” Low caste converts have not only endured hardships and

persecution at the hands of their masters because of conversion to Christianity, but

continue to be persecuted today within the Church as well as in the society because of

their Christian faith.

Bishop Azariah of Dornakal was one of the earliest local leaders of the church

in India who refuted the false claims of some missionaries and affirmed the faith and

conversion of dalits and Adivasis to Christianity in India. Bishop Azariah was an

outspoken critic of Gandhi‟s opposition to the conversion of dalits to Christianity.225

He appreciates the faith of dalit converts when he says, “the courage and steadfastness

of new converts under persecution is itself very wonderful, when we consider how

little they know and how brief is their experience of Christ.”226

Refuting the often

repeated claim that the low caste converts “have everything to gain and nothing to

lose” by conversion, Bishop Azariah of Dornakal, explains the hardships that the low

caste converts had to face because of conversion:

When the outcastes of a village first join the Christian Church, especially in the

early days of a movement, they are often subjected to bitter and cruel persecution

by their Hindu masters; they are beaten, deprived of their land and cattle, if they

have any, false charges are brought against them and they are thrown into prison.

Yet they stand firm.227

Bishop Azariah enumerates various other heroic acts of faith by the low caste

converts. A group of low caste converts tell their master who offers to cease their

persecution if they give up Christianity, “imprison us; hang us if you like; but we have

224 See the section on “What is Wrong Rice-Christians?” in Felix Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia:

Struggles for a Different Society (Delhi: ISPCK, 2005), 307-325. 225

Cf. Susan Billington Harper, “The Politics of Conversion: The Azariah-Gandhi Controversy over

Christian Mission to the Depressed Classes in the 1930‟s,” Indo-British Review 15:1 (1988): 147-

175. Refer to footnote no. 50 in Chapter one for more. 226

Rt. Rev. V. S. Azariah and Rt. Rev. Henry Whitehead, Christ in the Indian Villages (London:

Student Christian Movement Press, 1930), 34. 227

Azariah, Christ in the Indian Villages, 34.


taken hold of God and we are not letting go.”228

One dalit convert stood firm when his

hand was put in boiling oil by a village headman when he refused to desert his faith in

Christ. Elsewhere, another dalit Christian named Job rejoiced in his faith despite

being stripped of his cattle and land by the village headman for becoming a

Christian.229

Andrew Gordon in his book Our Indian Mission speaks about Ditt, belonging

to the low Chura caste, from Shahabdike village of Punjab, who stood firm in his

Christian faith in the face of resistance and rejection from his family and relatives

after his conversion to Christianity.230

Ditt eventually became instrumental in

expanding the Christian mission in Punjab.231

Without expounding on other examples

from history of heroic faith among the dalits and Adivasis, we believe these should

serve as pointers to the firmness of faith manifested by the dalit Christians. Thus, the

depth of faith, even enduring persecution for its sake, is certainly no monopoly higher

caste Christians. Examples of such heroism of faith can be found across all castes.

“Rice-Christians” are also “Faith-Christians.”

5.2. MODERN MARTYRS FOR FAITH

Who are the “martyrs of faith” in modern India? It is the poor dalit and

Adivasi Christians of India. The carnages of Orissa in recent years, where thousands

of dalit/Adivasi Christians were persecuted bear witness to the heroic faith of the low

caste converts. They were beaten, they were raped, they were brutally killed and their

houses burned because they were Christians, because they were “dalit/Adivasi

Christians” of India.232

Bishop Raphael Cheenath, the archbishop of Cuttack-Bhubaneshwar,

remembering Father Bernard, a Adivasi priest who died due to the anti-Christian

violence at Kandhamal in Orissa, says: “The extremists beat him for hours with

crowbars, lathis [batons], wooden boards, leaving him completely naked. His blood

228 Azariah, Christ in the Indian Villages, 35. He quotes it from C.M.S. Mass Movement Quarterly,

March 1927 and March 1928. 229

Azariah, Christ in the Indian Villages, 35. 230

Andrew Gordon, Our India Mission, 1855-1885: A Thirty Year‟s History of the India Mission of the

United Presbyterian Church of North America, Together with Personal Reminiscences

(Philadelphia: Andrew Gordon, 1886) 422-424. 231

Cf. John C. B. Webster, The Dalit Christians: A History (New Delhi: ISPCK, 2000), 46-47. 232

For a detailed and gripping study of the heroic faith manifested by Adivasi Christians of

Kandhamal, see Anto Akkara, Shining Faith in Kandhamal (Bangalore: ATC, 2009).


was shed for the Kandhamal in the true sense of the word, to encourage and support

the faith of Christians today, and nourish the seeds of faith for future generations.”233

5.3. A HIGH-CASTE PREJUDICED ALLEGATION

The “Rice-Christians” discourse is perpetuated today by the high-caste

Christians to safeguard and strengthen their dominance within the Church. The Hindu

high-caste hierarchical attitudes of considering themselves “pure” and the low castes

“polluted” is transposed by the high-caste ecclesiastical leadership into Christianity in

India. So, even in the church, they consider themselves as the “pure and faithful

Christians” who have converted to Christianity for “noble and spiritual reasons” while

considering the low castes as the “polluted and perverted Christians” who have

converted to Christianity for “lower or material reasons.”

The high caste converts have always enjoyed great privileges in the Church

right from the earliest times of conversions in India to this day. The missionaries had

a “preferential likeness” towards them in conversions as well as in admission to the

priesthood; the high caste converts were bestowed higher ecclesial offices in the

church by the missionaries.234

Most ecclesial leadership today also remains in the

hands of the minority of high caste Christians in India. So, can it also be said then,

quite logically too, that these high caste Christians of India have converted to

Christianity because of the high status and high privileges that they enjoy in the

church? The very perpetuation of the “Rice-Christian” discourse into our own times

needs some serious reflection on the underlying religious assumptions it signifies.

5.4. UNDERLYING FALSE RELIGIOUS ASSUMPTIONS

Felix Wilfred points to the two false assumptions underlying these allegations

on dalit/Adivasi converts. The first is the false assumption that “material and physical

realities of life are foreign to religious quest and practice” and the second is the

“subtle creation of hierarchy also in the matters of faith” in which the upper-caste

Christians consider themselves better Christians strong in faith; whereas the

dalit/Adivasi Christians are lower Christians with a wavering faith. Wilfred argues

that material realities of food, shelter, clothing and health “cannot be foreign to any

authentic religious life” and that the faith of the dalit/Adivasi Christians is no lower

233 Nirmala Carvalho, “Orissa Remembers Fr. Bernard Digal a Year After his Death,” AsiaNews 27

October 2009, at http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=16702&geo=2&size=A (accessed on

29 October 2009) 234

Cf. Robinson, Christians of India, 49, 52-53; Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 151.

http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=16702&geo=2&size=A


than that of upper-caste Christians for dalits/Adivasis “forego at great cost the

material benefits for the sake of their faith.”235

Stephen Neill conveys clearly the firm

faith of low castes when he speaks about the low caste Paravas on the fishery coast of

Tamilnadu:

He [Xavier] somehow succeeded in impressing the Catholic faith so indelibly on

the souls of that primitive tribe that no manner of violence or cajolery has ever

been able to erase it. When the Dutch conquered the Fishery Coast in the

seventeenth century, they used every kind of persuasion in their power to win the

Paravas to Calvinism, but they failed egregiously.236

5.5. A NEW SUBJECTIVE IDENTITY

Fernandes thinks that while conversion has neither improved their social status

nor their economic status, it nevertheless provides them with a “new subjective

identity.” It is due to this that, despite many disadvantages and the cost of losing many

civil privileges, dalits continue to remain Christian and many continue to become

Christian.237

In his lengthy study of Christians in Punjab, Jeffrey Cox suggests that

while conversion to Christianity did not always prove socially and economically

advantageous to the low castes in Punjab, and many times brought disadvantages, the

low castes were willing to make the sacrifice because of the dignity and self-respect

that conversion brought.238

The proponents of liberation theology in India, similarly,

point to the “motive of liberation” in the conversion of the masses in India. They

suggest that the conversion of the masses is neither guided by the “proselytizing

activities of the outsiders” nor swayed by “ulterior motives”. It is a movement for

liberation from the oppression of the caste system. Further, the church is invited to

become the “catalyst” of this social movement for liberation: “Because their

conversion was a move towards liberation from caste-bondage, the church, which

proclaims liberation, must not only accept this movement but the church itself must

also „convert‟ towards these people who are in need of solidarity.”239

If it is true that dalits acquire a “new subjective identity” by conversion to

Christianity and they convert for such a reason, we see nothing wrong in this. By

baptism we become the children of God; we gain a new identity. If a dalit convert

seeks to free himself from caste oppression – though he continues to suffer that in the

235 Wilfred, Dalit Empowerment, 148-149.

236 Neill, A History of Christian Missions, 151.

237 Fernandes, “Conversion to Christianity,” 164.

238 Cox, Imperial Fault Lines, 127-130.

239 Sebastian C. H. Kim, In Search of Identity: Debates on Religious Conversion in India (New Delhi:

Oxford University Press, 2003), 122.


church – such an aspiration is neither un-Christian nor inhuman for Christ promises

liberation. If a dalit converts to Christianity for a “new identity” – a new Christian

identity of being a child of God– it is neither a wrong reason for conversion nor an

illusory one; he is not becoming Christian either for rice or for status since his socio-

economic conditions have not improved much, despite being a Christian for centuries.

He is still considered to be socially and religiously low and is discriminated against in

the Church. Such being the case, a dalit Christian is neither a “Rice-Christian” nor a

“wavering Christian.”

Another significant aspect which is totally ignored in the conversion debate in

India is the “converts” themselves. Most conversion debates draw their conclusions

from their surveys and seem to represent little or nothing of what the “dalit converts”

feel about the whole debate. What do the dalit converts think about the missionary,

theological and political allegations that their conversions are not genuine and that

they have converted merely for material benefits? Such research would explore the

issue of conversion from a new perspective and would be very revealing, throwing

fresh light on the whole debate. Very rightly so, Sebastian Kim, in his analysis of the

conversions debates in India, suggests that the conversion debates need to give

significant space to the sensibilities of the “converts” themselves:

The motivations behind Christian conversion – in fact any religious conversion–

are undoubtedly complex and have to be examined according to individuals and

their wider context, but this needs to be done in a way respectful of the struggle of

the people themselves, who possess the willingness and ability to meet the

challenge of religious conversion. Though they may not be aware of the wider

socio-political context and theological implications at the time of their decision,

conversion represents their decision to change or not to change according to their

own understanding of truth, salvation and liberation.240

5.6. BOTTOM-UP INDIAN CHRISTIAN HISTORY

The history of Christianity in India is an elite Christian history recorded and

read from the “top.” Adapting what Georg Evers says about Asian Churches, we

could say that the histories we have are only “histories of Christian mission in India”

and not “histories of local churches of India;”241

theses histories speak more of what

“the givers” and “the elites of mission” do than what actually happens with the

“people of the mission.” It is a history recorded as seen by the foreign missionaries

and the elite church personnel of the Indian missions. It is the history of the church

240 Kim, In Search of Identity: Debates on Religious Conversion in India, 194.

241 Georg Evers, “Reflections on the Situation of Asian Local Churches,” in Robert Cruz et al, eds.,

Encounters With the Word: Essays to Honour Aloysius Pieris, S.J. (Colombo: The Ecumenical

Institute for Study and Dialogue, 2004), 401.


through the “eyes of the non-poor.” Such history, while magnifying the elite, relegates

the poor to the margins. Christian histories in India were mostly written by foreign

missionaries or Indian church historians who were mostly high caste clergy. So, it is

not surprising that such historical narratives have little to say about the dalit and

Adivasi Christian leaders, and even the few references we find about them are

references that degrade and devalue their conversion and faith. Such elite

ecclesiastical histories have ignored the significant role played by dalits themselves in

leading the dalits to Christianity and formation of lively Christian communities. Thus,

there is an impending need to study Indian Christian history from “bottom-up” rather

than “top-down.” Such attempts will begin to witness to the heroism of the “faith of

the poor” in the Indian church, and will contest the elite ridicule of the “faith of the

poor.”

Wilfred believes that the history of Christianity in India suffers the general

problematic of historiography: “history is distorted when the people and groups about

whom they report are mute and their voice is not heard.”242

He is afraid the magnum

opus of Christianity in India, the series History of Christianity in India published by

the Church History Association of India (CHAI) suffers from such distortions.

Similarly, George Oommen critiques the series on Christianity in India as “glorifying

the role of the elites and the dominant groups.”243

Wilfred reiterates: “We need to hear

the voice of the subalterns of Indian Christianity” to be able to have clearer and more

authentic record of Christianity in India.244

He asserts the need for a subaltern Indian

Christian history which he believes “will throw light on forces and factors that have

been brought to light so far and make alive what is invisible, hidden or forgotten.”245

Wilfred suggests that the history of Christianity in India needs to a “historiography

from below” modelled after the Bible which “is a historiography from below,”

recording the struggles of the people on the margins rather than the glories of the

Egyptian or the Roman empires.246

The hallmark of Robert Frykenberg‟s impressive career has been the method

of reading the history of India “from below.” He is not impressed by grand and

242 Felix Wilfred, “Historiography of Indian Christianity: Some Reflections,” Vidyajyoti Journal of

Theological Reflection 73 (2009), 749. 243

Geroge Oommen, “Historiography of Indian Christianity and Challenges of Subaltern

Methodology,” Journal of Dharma 28:2 (2003), 213. 244

Wilfred, “Historiography of Indian Christianity,” 749. 245

Wilfred, “Historiography of Indian Christianity,” 748. 246

Wilfred, “Historiography of Indian Christianity,” 751.


imperial stories, but searches for the little and the local stories in recording history.247

Later on in his career, Frykenberg follows the same methodology in his study of

Indian Christian History. He approaches the Indian Christian History from below. The

sources of his Christian history are not the foreign missionaries or the elite

ecclesiastical authorities or assemblies, but the local catechists and evangelists.248

It

contests general conceptions of Christianity as “foreign” or “colonial.” Webster‟s

Local Dalit Christian History249

also reveals a history from the bottom. Such histories

will dispel the darkness on the faith of dalit Christians, and shed light on their strong

faith manifested throughout Indian Christian history.

In one such attempt to read history from “bottom-up,” Jeyaraj presents the

histories of two significant low caste evangelizers in the Lutheran Tranquebar

mission: Savarimuthu and Rayanayakkan,250

both converts from Roman Catholicism,

who worked tirelessly for the spread of the mission and who both were denied the

opportunity to be ordained because of the low caste social status. Savarimuthu was a

fisherman from Nagapattinam who founded a Christian school at Cuddalore.

Rayanayakkan was instrumental in establishing the Tanjore mission because he was a

former soldier-captain in the Tanjore Muslim kingdom, and served 44 years as a

catechist. He has composed many Christian poems and indigenized biblical concepts

so that his audience could easily understand the Christian message. Jeyaraj concludes

that Rayanayakkan “accomplished much more than any of his Christian

contemporaries in Tajore.”251

It is on the foundations laid by Rayanayakkan that the

famous Frederich Schwartz (1729-1798, in Tranquebar from 1750) would build on as

he settled in Tajore a year after the death of Rayanayakkan in 1771. Hopefully, more

attempts at such bottom-up histories will flourish.

247 Robert Frykenberg‟s brilliant book, Guntur District, 1788-1848: A History of Local Influence and

Central Authority in South India (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965) is the finest example of

such methodology. This book moved the historiography of India away from big centres as Delhi

and Calcutta to an unknown part of South India. 248

See for example, Robert Frykenberg, Christians and Missionaries in India: Cross-Cultural

Communications since 1500 (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2003); Robert Frykenberg and

Judith M. Brown, Christians, Cultural Interactions, and India‟s Religious Traditions (Grand

Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2002). 249

George Oommen and John C. B. Webster, eds., Local Dalit Christian History (Delhi: ISPCK,

2002). 250

Cf. Jeyaraj, “Indian Participation,” 28-30 on Savarimuthu, and 30-39 on Rayanayakkan. 251

Jeyaraj, “Indian Participation,” 38.


6. AN INDIAN CHURCH THAT “EMPOWERS WOMEN IN INDIA”

Women in India are often called “thrice-Dalit” since they suffer oppression

because of poverty, of caste, and of being feminine. Thus, having studied in the above

section the discrimination of dalits and Adivasis in the Indian church and calling for

an end to their discrimination within the church, we now plan to explore the issues of

women in India. Whilst exposing some underlying realities of oppression of women in

India both in India and in the Indian church, we hope to call for a greater and equal

communion of women in the Indian church, thus making the church in India a

“community of equality.”

6.1. WOMEN IN INDIA: SLAVES OR SAINTS?

Like the sacred rivers of India, Ganga, Yamuna, Cauveri, Godavari252

and

others, desired for cleansing of the soul yet violated by the indiscriminate disposal of

wastes into them, the lives of a great majority of Indian women253

mirror the

ambiguity of being bearers of life yet driven to death in multiple ways.254

A great

252 All these names of the rivers are feminine in Indian languages and they are considered sacred. A dip

in them is believed to be causing purification. And India has a multitude of feminine deities. The

men in India who worship the feminine deities and dip in feminine rivers, are so disrespective of

women living in their midst. For a reflection on „feminism of rivers,‟ see Sr. Vandana, Waters of

Fire (Madras: Christian Literature Society, 1981). 253

For a study of general situation of Indian women, see Gail Omvedt, Women in Popular Movements:

India and Thailand During the Decade of Women (Geneva: UN Reseach Institute, 1986); idem.,

Dalit Vision: The Anti-Caste Movement and the Construction of An Indian Identity (Hyderabad:

Orient Longman, 1996); Mukta Mittal, Women in India: Today and Tomorrow (New Delhi: Annol

Publication, 1995). 254

Malairka Karlekar in her poem named “The Unclean, Who Keep the City Clean” Manushi (July-

August, 1979), 55, presents very succinctly the plight of women in India.

“I didn‟t want to be- no, never.

I didn‟t want to come.

Yet I had to come, had to be,

My tears, mingling with my mother‟s tears.

What? Again! A girl Again!

Aren‟t you ashamed woman? growled the man,

And crushed under the burden of guilt, hiding her face, the woman wept.

Unloved, uncared for, hungry, exhausted, the unwanted howled.

That was the entry. The path from then on narrow, circuitous, was filled

With stones, but the rhythm the same.

To fetch, to carry, to cook, to wash

To meet the lust in bed, to bear year after year,

A submissive silent slave sold to life for nothing.

And then the exit –sins washed clean in a deep, cool pool.

Sins burnt to cinders in a golden blaze-

Suicide? Accident? Murder? Who cares?


paradox surrounds the lives of Indian women. In spite of being carriers of life, culture,

tradition and religion and considered symbols of honour, they become targets for

revenge in conflict situations: communal violence, inter-caste rivalries, and religious

strife.255

Many Indian women go through fetters that keep them in a perpetual state of

subjugation especially in the socio-political-economic sphere. Even today, the content

of the UN Report (1985) rings true:

Women perform nearly two-thirds of the society‟s work, receive a tenth of its

income and own less than a hundredth of the property at a time when India posts a

high growth rate in the corporate sector. Marginalised from decision making

processes at all levels and confined within domestic walls, they are unable to make

an adequate contribution to society. The male has done the classifying, the

organising and the writing; the female has been the subject of philosophizing and

sometimes day-dreaming.256

Patriarchal culture that is deeply embedded in the Indian ethos has sanctioned

an institutionalized system of male domination at many levels.257

Domesticated under

the idealized labels of being “caring wives” and “nurturing mothers” whose

sacrificing love sustains the home, women are – for the most part – excluded from

public office and professions that include roles of leadership and equal partnership

with men.258

Some philosophies even view a woman as an „incomplete man‟ and

Just a woman has died, Just a female.” 255

Almost five million newborn female babies are killed every year in India. The girl child population

shows a shocking decline in India – a national average of 927 girls to 1000 boys as per the 2001

census – because of the alarmingly increasing female infanticide. According to a report, an

estimated 6,000 female babies have been poisoned to death in a single decade (1975-1985) in the

Usilampatti Kallar community of Tamilnadu. Reported in “Born to Die” India Today (15 June,

1986), 26-31. See also Stella Faria, “Stop This Slaughter Of Innocents,” The New Leader (6 July,

1986), 10. A heartbreaking 69.9% of the deaths of women by accidents are reported to be due to

„burns‟ (in other words, dowry deaths). See Malini Karkal, “How the Other Half Dies in Bombay,”

Economic and Political Weekly, 24 August, 1985, p.1424. The latest UN report puts the number of

missing women in India at 42.7 million. See Asia-Pacific Human Development Report (APHDR,

2010) published under the title Power, Voice and Rights: A Turning Pont for Gender Equality in

Asia and the Pacific (New Delhi: Macmillan Publishers India Ltd, 2010), 42. 256

Arlene Swidler, Woman in A Man‟s Church (New York: Paulist Press, 1972), 11. 257

In the 19th

century, Indian Reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy fought against sati (widow‟s self-

immolation), Gandhi advocated remarriage of widows. I. C. Vidyasagar also fought against ban on

widows‟ remarriage. Yet these reforms, says Arockiasamy, did not really touch the basic socio-

cultural patriarchy. Cf. S. Arockiasamy, SJ, “The Challenges of a Divided India to the Social

Teaching of the Church,” 255. 258

When we look at the recent emergence of women leaders in Asia we find that the influence they

exercised on the public mind was partly related to connections with their fathers and husbands who

were victimised by opposing forces. Sri Lankan president Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunge‟s

and Bangladesh prime minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed‟s fathers were assassinated, Benazir Bhutto‟s

father was executed by the military. Sonia Gandhi, like Corazon Aquino of the Philippines, belongs

to the group whose husbands were assassinated. Burmese opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi,

under house arrest from 1989 to 1995 fighting the army dictatorship in Burma is the daughter of the

slain General Aung San. The father of Megawati Sukarnoputri of Indonesia, now emerging as a

political leader, is the daughter of Sukarno, considered to be a kind of founding father who was

forcibily dislodged from power by Suharto. So, it begs the question: Can women leaders in Asia be

seen as emerging signs of the emancipation of women in Asia?


portray her as underdeveloped, unfit to love and exercise responsibility in affairs of

the state. Having internalized the sex role stereotyping which has relegated them to

the position of „the second sex,‟ the average Indian woman‟s self-image has become

one in which social approval of her being, status and function depend on her

compliance with, and submission to, male domination. It was stipulated that it was a

woman‟s duty to obey her father before marriage, obey her husband after marriage,

and obey her son in her widowhood.

6.2. VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

Neither in the public nor in the private spaces of their homes are women safe

from violence.259

In addition to being victims of chronic hunger and susceptible to

various diseases, so many of them continue to experience battering, harassment,

rape,260

incest and dowry deaths.261

The largest and worst affected groups are women

who are dalits, adivasis and those living in urban slums. In India, female feticide,

infanticide, and dowry deaths, not only diminish women in terms of numbers but also

deny women, especially at the grassroots, their full humanity and right to life.262

As

the Statement of the Ecumenical Association of Third World Theologians

(EATWOT) Asian Women‟s Consultation (1994) observes:

…female infanticide, surrogate motherhood, dowry system, arranged marriages,

bride sale or mail-order brides, polygyny, infidelity, rape, incest, wife-battering,

and other forms of violence against women are becoming rampant in Asian

259 We have to note that the violence against women is also highly prevalent in the Western society.

Marilyn French cites research indicating that 28 percent of all couples admit physical violence as

occurred in their marriage. However, she says, the true rate of violence directed at women in a

family might be as high as 50 percent. A man beats a women every four seconds in the United

States, and four women die from man‟s beating every day. Marilyn French, The War Against

Women (New York: Summit Books, 1992), 187. Oppression of women is a global phenomenon. As

Petra Kelly says: “…across the cultural divide, sexism is the only thing all countries have in

common…it is the one thing a black man and a white man can shake hands on, if on nothing else”.

Petra Kelly, “New Forms of Power: The Green Feminist View,” Breakthrough 7 (Summer, 1986),

36. 260

Men not only rape women but also often inflict deep wounds on the victims, mutilate their sexual

organs, dismember them and murder them brutally. Susan Brownmiller gives a broad spectrum of

how rape is used to subjugate a woman and to get back at her by man whose property she is

considered to be. See Susan Brownmiller, Against Our Will – Men, Women and Rape (New York:

Penguin, 1976). 261

The latest report “Crime in India” related to 2002, compiled by the National Crime Records Bureau

(NCRB) gives a clear picture of the enormity of violence on women in India. According to this

report, 59 housewives commit suicide everyday, 17 crimes are committed against a woman every

hour, and there is one dowry death every hour. See a summary of this report posted on the website

of Indo-Asian News Service (IANS). (http://www.eians.com/stories/2005/03/11/11dom.shtml

(accessed on 11.03.2005). Speaking of domestic violence, we should say that the church in India is

little aware of and opposes this widespread form of violence. Cf. Anthony Lobo, “Domestic

Violence: The Indian Catholic Scene”, Vidyajyoti 57 (1993), 298-305. 262

Pauline Chakkalakal, “Asian Women Reshaping Theology: Challenges and Hopes,” Feminist

Theology 27 (2001), 25.

http://www.eians.com/stories/2005/03/11/11dom.shtml


Countries. These acts of violence against women all serve to support male

dominance and to downgrade woman‟s worth. What is shocking and painful to us

is the participation of women in their own violence…Patriarchy has turned woman

against herself, her daughters, her daughters-in-law, her sisters, her mother and her

mother-in-law.263

6.3. WOMEN‟S OPPRESSION IN RELIGIONS IN INDIA

The oppression of women is found in most religions.264

Barbara Winslow

writes: “The major religions buttress male authority by ordaining that men should rule

over women.”265

In fact, religions have played an extensive role in keeping women

subordinate in the Indian society.266

Through the use of patriarchal language and a

selective interpretation of the use of scriptures, myths, rituals and practices, religions

tend to validate and perpetuate the dehumanizing status of women.267

The clearly

discernible religiosity of women and their loyal practice of religious observances are

exploited to keep them in a state of dependency that relegates them to positions of

compliance at the periphery. Religious epics and rituals have been used to perpetuate

the image of the ideal woman as one who accepts the superiority of the male and is

submissive to androcentric norms.268

By enlisting divine sanctions to maintain the

263 EATWOT Asian Women‟s Consultation, Spirituality for Life: Women Struggling Against Violence

(Philippines: EATWOT, 1994), 20. 264

The third world societies had until very recently inhuman violence against women which were

religiously and culturally sanctioned. The practice of Sati in India where the widows were forced to

walk into the husband‟s funeral pyre to immolate themselves. In China for over 1000 years foot-

binding (mutilating the girl‟s feet, crushing the bones and binding them to prevent growth) was

inflicted on girls. Female Genital mutilation in Africa from which over 85 million women and girls

suffer. Thousands of women in Europe were hunted and burnt alive in the „witch hunt.‟ For a wider

view of these evil practices inflicted on women, see Mary Daly, Gyn/Ecology: The Mathematics of

Radical Feminism (London: The Women‟s Press, 1981); Kamaladevi Chottopadhayay, Indian

Women‟s Battle for Freedom (New Delhi: Abhinav Publications, 1983); Fran P. Hosken, The

Hosken Report – Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females (Lexington: Win News, 1983). 265

Barbara Winslow, “Feminist Movements: Gender and Equality,” in Teresa A. Meade and Merry

Wiesner-Hanks, eds., A Companion to Gender History (Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, 2004), 187. 266

In Stri-Dharma (Women-Duty), Manu, the Indian law giver par excellence thus said: “Though

destitute of virtue, or seeking pleasure elsewhere or devoid of good qualities, yet husband must be

worshipped as God by a faithful wife.” According to him, “Heaven is only attainable through the

husband, and as a reward for having duly worshipped him as God on earth.” As quoted in

“Women‟s Liberation Movement” in Indian Womanhood Through the Ages (Madras: Vivekananda

Prakashan Kendra, 1975), 252. For a comprehensive study of women in world religions, see

Aravind Sharma, ed., Women in World Religions (NY: State University of New York Press, 1987).

A good study of women in Adivasi Religions, Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism,

Judaism, Christianity and Islam are presented in this book. 267

Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza believes that society‟s ambivalence toward violence committed

against women is a means of social control in a partriarchal culture. Schüssler Fiorenza, “Breaking

the Silence – Becoming Visible,” Concilium 182 (1985), 6-7. See also Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza

and Mary Shawn Copeland, eds., Concilium: Violence Against Women (1994/1). 268

The traditional story to which many women are made to look up to be faithful wives is that of

Savitri. She is warned that Satyavan is doomed to death within a year, but she is not prepared to

change her decision to marry him. After their marriage she goes with him to the forest. Three days


subordinate position of woman, patriarchy thrives and obstructs the humanizing

process in both women and men. Mahatma Gandhi rightly said, “Hindu culture has

erred on the side of excessive subordination of the wife to the husband and has

insisted on the complete merging of the wife in the husband.”269

It is out of our scope to deal extensively with the issue of oppression of

women in different religions.270

However, we shall briefly present the oppression of

women in Hinduism, it being the largest and oldest religion in India. Hindu tradition

views woman as man‟s better half,271

as temptress,272

and having been created for the

before the fatal hour she fasts and prays that her husband‟s life be spared, but in vain. Yama (God

of death) comes and takes away the soul of Satyavan, leaving behind his lifeless body. Savitri

follows Yama, engages him in a conversation, elicits boons from him, and eventually gets Yama to

restore her husband back to life. This episode is found in Mahabharata, 3.277,83. Even to this day,

Savitri is used as the figure for faithful and good wife. The Hindu tradition very highly eulogizes

the faithful wife – this itself is seen as one symptom of the malaise of male chauvinism. 269

Cf. M. K. Gandhi, Women and Social Justice (Ahmedabad: Navjivan Publications, 1947). 270

For a study of women in different religions, see, HINDUISM: Michael Allen, “The Hindu View of

Women,” in Women in India and Nepal, ed., Michael Allen and S. N. Mukherjee (Canberra:

Australian National University, 1982), 1-20; A. S. Altekar, The Position of Women in Hindu

Civilization (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1962); Shakambari Jayal, The Status of Women in the

Epics (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1966); Prabhati Mukherjee, Hindu Women: Normative Models

(New Delhi: Orient Longman, 1978); Nancy Aver Falk, and M. Gross Rita, eds., Unspoken Worlds:

Women‟s Religious Lives in Non-Western Cultures (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1980).

BUDDHISM: Y. Kajiyama, “Women in Buddhism,” Eastern Buddhist 15 (1982), 53-70; Jung-his

Li, Biographies of Buddhist Nuns: Pao-chang‟s Pi-chiu-nichuan (Osaka: Tohokai, 1981); I. B.

Horner, Women Under Primitive Buddhism (London: George Routledge, 1930); Diana Paul,

Women in Buddhism (Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1979). ISLAM: Lois Beck and Keddie

Nikki, eds., Women in the Muslim World (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978); James

Allman, ed., Women‟s Status and Fertility in the Muslim World (New York: Praeger Publishers,

1978); J. I. Smith, ed., Women in Contemporary Muslim Societies (Lewisburg: Bucknell University

Press, 1980); JUDAISM: Leonard Swidler, Women in Judaism (Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press,

1976); Ellen M. Umansky, “Women in Judaism: From Reform Movement to Contemporary Jewish

Religious Feminism,” in Rosemary Ruether and Eleanor McLaughlin, eds., Women of Spirit (New

York: Simon and Schuster, 1979); Denese Berg Mann, The Woman in Judaism (Hartford, CT:

Jonathan, 1979); Elizabeth Koltun, The Jewish Woman (New York: Schocken Books, 1976); Judith

Hauptmann, “Images of Women in the Talmud,” in Rosemary Ruether, ed., Religion and Sexism

(New York: Simon and Schuster, 1974). 271

The Brhadrānyaka-Upanishad (1.4.1-3) tells that in the beginning man was alone. Consequently he

experiences no delight, there is vacuum in his life. He causes himself to be divided and that is how

husband and wife came to be. This idea that was first expressed about 600 B. C. is repeated in a

very popular text about 1000 A. D. The Bhāgavata-purāna (3.14.16-19) says that the wife, being

the other half of man, helps him to achieve the first three goals of human life: artha, kāma, and

dharma, and with her help man can easily conquer his senses. 272

In Rg-veda (10.10), Yami tries to seduce her own twin-brother Yama who remains firm in his

refusal, insisting that such behaviour is sinful. Subsequently in Hindu mythological thinking, Yama

becomes Dharmaraja, the Lord of the Righteousness. And there is classical example of the celestial

courtesan Menaka sent by the gods to tempt Visvamitra, as the latter was engaged in severe penance

which threatened their supremacy. What was implicit in early stories of the seduction of sages by

women becomes very explicit in subsequent didactic texts. The Bhāgavata-purāna (3.31.39-42)

says that woman is the door to hell; like a grass-covered well leading man to sure death; like the

alluring call of hunter out to trap its victims. In fact the Bhāgavata-purāna (6.18.30) goes so far as

to say that woman was created by Brahma precisely to arouse desire in man. She is like the fire that

sets ablaze a pot full of butter-oil (Bhāgavata-purāna, 7.12.9). It is not man who is ruined by


sake of procreation.273

A woman who cannot bear a male child can be cast off.274

She

is kept away from sacred study.275

Perhaps the quote below from Manusmriti

succinctly depicts the scandalous treatment of women in Hindu religious scriptures:

The wife should ever treat the husband as God, though he be characterless, sensual

and devoid of good qualities… A woman has no separate sacrifice, ritual or

fasting. She gains a high place in heaven by serving her husband…. That woman

who prides in her father‟s family and disobeys the husband should be made by the

king a prey to the dogs in the presence of a big assembly of people… If the wife

disobeys the husband when he is given to bad habits or becomes a drunkard or is

suffering from physical ailment, then after three months she should be deprived of

her valuable clothes and jewels and kept away.276

In Hinduism there are goddesses of wisdom and learning (Saraswati), of

wealth and beauty (Lakshmi), of destruction (Kali) and also the goddess who fights

the evil power (Durga). However, in most of the Indian religious traditions, the

Supreme God has always been a male God (for example: Brahma, Vishnu, Siva,

Rama, Krishna, etc.). The female element of the divinity has always been portrayed as

a subordinate divine being.277

Christianity too has its share of oppression of women.278

It is said that the

“Bible is a male book.” The text of the Bible was born in cultures and contexts that

woman, but even the devas (gods) and asuras (demons) are bewitched by her. God Vishnu appears

as a charming woman and distracts the asuras when they churn the ocean for the nectar

(Bhāgavata-purāna, 8.8.9). God Siva, the otherwise ascetic god, is completely overcome by the

beauty of the bewitching damsel, the form taken by God Vishnu to distract demons (Bhāgavata-

purāna, 8.12.31). God Brahma is swept off his feet by the charm of his own daughter (Bhāgavata-

purāna, 3.12.20-33). 273

Manu-smrti, 3.55-58. Mies concludes that “the purpose of life of the woman was determined only

by this goal [procreation]”. See M. Mies, Indian Woman and Patriarchy (New Delhi: Concept

Publishers, 1980), 41. And thus woman herself doesn‟t seem to have any value and then she is like

the property of man. 274

Manu, the law giver, says that only a putra (son) freed his parents from hell (Manu-smrti, 9.138).

Thus, when the first signs of pregnancy appeared, the woman had to undergo a special samskāra

(ritual) to ensure the birth of the male child. See R. B. Pandey, Hindu Samskaras (Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass, 1969), 49, 57. The inhuman infanticide of girl children at enormous levels in India had

to be ascribed to such cultural thinking. 275

There was no provision for women receiving Upanayana-samskara, the rite which marks the

beginning of a sacred student life. Manu-smrti (2.66) allows a woman to go through Upanayana-

samskara, but in her case the rite must be performed without the mantras (recitation of sacred

prayers). According to Brahmanical theology the efficacy of a rite depends on the mantras. 276

The Laws of Manu, Trans. G. Buhler (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986), V: 166, pp. 195-196. See

also IX: 3.78,81, and IX: 230. 277

Cf. Mihir Upasi, “The Feminine Dimension of the Holy Trinity,” Indian Theological Studies

31(1994), 152. 278

Christine Gudorf notes: “Before Vatican II, popes assumed and explicitly taught women‟s

inequality and subordination to men, as well as condemned advocates of both women‟s equality and

public roles for women.” Christine Gudorf, “Encountering the Other: The Modern Papacy on

Women,” in Charles E. Curran, ed., Change in the Official Catholic Moral Teaching, Readings in

Moral Theology, no.13 (New York: Paulist, 2003), 270.


were patriarchal. Androcentric passages tell stories and construct worlds that eclipsed

women, marginalizing their historical presence and contribution to salvation history.

Some Biblical texts are so interpreted that they nullify women‟s contribution to

mainstream religion; these texts are seen to foster a negative image of woman,

judging her as evil and unclean and casting her in the role of temptress!279

Hence,

women experience difficulty in appropriating to themselves the liberating vision of

God‟s word in the scriptures.

In the course of religious socialization, women tend to internalize traditional

religious practices and behaviour that are entrenched in a patriarchal worldview.280

As

a result, they are alienated from their true-life experiences and even led to negate the

God-given reality of their bodies. Devaluing women‟s sexuality and bodily processes

adversely affects their way of understanding the self, the world and even God; it

inhibits their building up of healthy and fulfilling relationships with women and men,

and renders their bodies acceptable targets for exploitation.

6.4. WOMEN IN THE INDIAN CHURCH: COMMUNION DENIED

Women experience marginalization in the Church by the fact that they are

excluded from active and adult participation in its life. While being appreciated for

their compliant services and passive presence in the congregation, they are barred

from ministerial roles and decision-making processes. Sisters themselves uncritically

presume that male clerics have divine gifts, for most religious communities hunt for

priests to direct retreats, seminars, train their novices, and facilitate general or

provincial chapters. Token representation of women at the parish, diocesan and

national levels adds little to alter the subordinate status of women in the Church.281

As

Edward Schillebeeckx suggests, “as long as women are left completely outside all

279 Demosthenes Savramis describes women as either being “satanized” or “tolerated” in Catholic

theology. The Satanizing of Women: Religion Versus Sexuality (New York: Double Day, 1974), 64. 280

Minister and feminist theologian Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite notes that women with strong

religious backgrounds have great difficulty believing violence against them is wrong. Resistance to

the injustice of violence is “unbiblical and un-Christian” for these women. Susan Brooks

Thistlewaite, “Every Two Minutes: Battered Women and Feminist Interpretation,” in Weaving the

Visions: New Patterns in Feminist Spirituality, ed. Judith Plaskow and Carol Christ (San Francisco:

Harper and Row, 1989), 305. 281

But, especially in the case of India, it cannot in anyway be denied that women enjoy a better place

in Christian communities than in the communities of other religions. “Her [woman‟s] participation

in congregational prayers, absence of purdah [Muslim veil], no rigid insistence on segregation of

the sexes, monogamy, emphasis on husband-wife relationship, value of charity and service to other

–all these features of Christianity place women in relatively better position than in other religions”.

See Towards Equality, Comprehensive Report of the Committee on the Status of Women in India

(New Delhi: Department of Social Welfare, Govt of India, 1974), 41.


decision making authorities in the church, there can be no question of real women‟s

liberation.”282

The Church today is impoverished and incomplete because it follows only one

mode of being church, the patriarchal mode. Women encounter several restrictive

barriers in their efforts to be Church. The ordinances surrounding the ordained

ministry in the Church have excluded them from both mainstream Christianity and

active participation in the Church. Like other marginalized groups, women may be

consulted but their voice is conspicuously absent in decision-making. They are invited

to catechize but not permitted to proclaim the Word – as ordained men can – and thus

share their unique experience of God. Women are included in pastoral councils but

excluded from active ministerial services, in spite of the clear shift in Vatican II from

older patterns.283

Two thousand years after Jesus, half the number of his followers are

not counted. They are neither visible, nor audible except in token form.

6.5. JESUS EMPOWERS WOMEN

Jesus comes across as one who had an open and positive attitude towards

women. As Tissa Balasuriya, the eminent Sri Lankan theologian, insists Jesus violated

and contested the standard Jewish norms on women, and its male domination. 284

In

282 Edward Schillebeeckx, Ministry, A Case for Change (London: SCM, 1981), 97.

283 GS 29: “…with respect to fundamental rights of person, every type of discrimination, whether

social or cultural, whether based on sex, race, colour, social condition, language or religion is to be

overcome and eradicated as contrary to God‟s intent.” However, some modern feminist theologians

differ in evaluating Vatican II in respect to women‟s liberation. Ruether feels that the Second

Vatican Council gave little attention to women in the conciliar documents. Rosemary Radford

Ruether, “The Place of Women in the Church,” in Modern Catholicism, ed. Adrian Hastings (New

York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 260. Kari Børresen says: “The Council‟s attitude was a result

of the return to patristic sources that has characterized Catholic theology in the twentieth

century…its [Lumen Gentium] use of the traditional sources was still dominated by the

androcentric assumptions of the early fathers…” Kari Børresen, “Mary in Catholic Theology”, in

Concilium 168 (1983), 53. Anne Carr opines that the council fathers‟ usage of the term and

language of “cult of Mary” in expressing Mary‟s role in LG was a mitigation of Marian devotion,

although her image was too powerful to suppress entirely. Anne Carr, “Mary in the Mystery of the

Church: Vatican Council II,” in Mary According to Women, ed. Carol Frances (Kansas City:

Leaven Press, 1985), 10-16. Ruether also finds Pope John Paul II‟s conservative perspective

destructive to the efforts of the women‟s movement within the Church: “in the pontificate of John

Paul II, [we] have seen increasing evidence of reactionary backlash on all matters having to do with

sexuality and the status of women in the Church…” Rosemary Radford Ruether, “John Paul II and

the Growing Alienation of Women from the Church,” in The Church in Anguish: Has the Vatican

Betrayed Vatican II? (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1986), 280. 284

Tissa Balasuriya, The Eucharist and Human Liberation (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1979). See especially

the section on “The Liberation of Women,” pp. 51-58 for our emphasis. We can indicate here that

Balasuriya has elaborated on the dynamic role of women in his later work “Mary and Human

Liberation,” Logos 29:1-2 (1990), 1-210. Here Balasuriya challenges traditional Western images of

Mary as submissive, virginal and obedient Mother of God as he tries to draw an image of Mary that

can be used and understood in Third World Cultures to bring justice, especially to women and the

impoverished. It may be noted that Fr. Balasuriya was excommunicated by the Vatican in 1997


the story where a woman is condemned for adultery (Jn. 8:1-11), Jesus questions

radically the misrepresentation of the Jewish judicial system that easily victimises the

woman taken in adultery, but lets the man go free. Jesus‟ own disciples were amazed

to see him holding a long conversation with the Samaritan woman in public (Jn. 4:27).

Unlike the other rabbis of his time, Jesus had a number of women friends and

disciples who followed him (Mt. 27:55-56, 28:1; Lk. 10:38-42; Jn. 11, 19:25).285

Far

from having no contact with women, Jesus was friendly with them, included them

among his followers, and even befriended women of ill repute. Moreover, Christ‟s

injunction against divorce was in fact a defence of the rights of women, who earlier

could be easily repudiated by their husbands. Furthermore, it was to faithful women

who stood by the cross that Jesus first revealed himself after his resurrection. Tillard

shows from the Johannine tradition, the role of women such as Mary, Samaritan

woman, Martha, Mary Magdalene in Jesus‟ company.286

Women were associated in the life of Jesus at crucial moments: at his birth,

death and Resurrection. Several women were healed or helped by Jesus (Mt 9:20-26;

Mk 5:35-43, 7:24-30; Lk 4:38-39, 7:11-17), and these women experienced the power

and compassion of Jesus and proclaimed it. The Syro-Phoenician woman (Mt 15:20-

28) and a Samaritan woman (Jn 4:42) become pioneers in opening the Jesus

Movement and community to the non-Jews. Mary Magdalene, the first witness of the

Resurrection announces the Good News to Peter, John and other disciples (Jn 20:18),

and becomes “the apostle to the apostles.”287

The alternative ethos of the Jesus Movement, which “differ[ed] significantly

from the patriarchal structures and values of Greco-Roman cities,”288

specially

attracted women who were sidelined in the dominant patriarchal culture. The

inclusive table-fellowship practised by Jesus brought together women and men,

because of such liberal-progressive view of Mary and women. Later he was re-instated. For all the

controversy that revolved around this work and all concerned documents, see Helen Stanton, ed.,

Mary and Human Liberation: The Story and the Text (New York:Continuum, 1997). 285

Lee Oo-Chung et al, ed., Women of Courage: Asian Woman Rereading the Bible (Seoul: Asian

Women‟s Resource Centre for Culture and Theology[AWRC], 1992), chapters 10, 11, 14 and 16. 286

Tillard, Church of Churches, 97. 287

Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, 121. 288

John E. Stambaugh and David L. Balch, The New Testament and Its Social Environment

(Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1986), 106. The authors also point to the

“omission” of the word “fathers” in two key texts: Mark 3:31-35 and 10:28-30. Jesus mentions in

these texts “brothers, sisters and mothers” and avoids “fathers”.


sinners, the poor, tax-collectors, prostitutes and outcastes (Lk 14:16-24, 15:2; Mk

2:16; Mt 22:1-14).289

Jesus is the first feminist.290

By being male he could update the male-female

relationship challenging both men and women to change life-patterns.291

Jesus

empowers women.292

He affirms and transforms their personality.293

6.6. FEMINIST THEOLOGY: THEOLOGY FROM THE MARGINS

A theological response294

to women‟s concerns beckons to heed the groaning

of life at the margins. Choosing the margins as the site or the locus of theologizing

activity enables us to witness closely the daily life situation of marginalized women

and to see them not only as victims but also as agents who can take charge of

themselves. As theological subjects, they are capable of experiencing and interpreting

the action of God in their lives. They can see meaning even in the most difficult

circumstances of life.295

Elizabeth Johnson rightly observes: “The engine that drives

289 Cf. Fiorenza, In Memory of Her, 121.

290 Stella Faria, “On Language and Sexism,” Jeevadhara 17 (1985), 40.

291 Fabella V., “Christology From An Asian Women‟s Perspective,” in R. S. Sugirtharajah, ed., Asian

Faces of Jesus (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1993), 211-221. 292

Cf. The critique of Historical-Jesus Research from a feminist perspective, Elisabeth Schüssler

Fiorenza, “Jesus of Nazareth in Historical Research,” in Tatha Wiley, ed., Thinking of Christ.

Proclamation, Explanation, Meaning (New York: Continuum, 2003), 29-48. 293

Kyung C. H., “Who is Jesus for Asian Women?” in Asian Faces of Jesus, 234. 294

For a representative reading of feminist Christian theology, see Rosemary Radford Ruether, Sexism

and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology (Boston: Beacon Press, 1983); idem, New Woman,

New Earth: Sexist Ideologies and Human Liberation (New York: Seabury, 1975); idem,

Womanguides: Readings Towards a Feminist Theology (Boston: Beacon, 1985); idem, Women-

Church: Theology and Practice of Feminist Liturgical Communities (San Francisco: Harper &

Row, 1985); Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her: A Feminist Theological

Reconstruction of Christian Origins, 10th

anniversary edition (New York: Crossroads, 1983, 1994);

idem, Bread Not Stone: The Challenge of Feminist Biblical Interpretation, 10th

anniversary edition

(Boston: Beacon Press, 1984, 1995); Mary Daly, Beyond God the Father (Boston: Beacon Press,

1973); idem, The Church and Second Sex (New York: Harper Colophon, 1984); Weaver, New

Catholic Women‟s Experience (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988); Ann Carr, Transforming

Grace: Christian Tradition and Women Experience (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988). 295

As a priest in India serving in rural parishes, I was brought very close to the hardships of poor

women in the remote villages. The way that women endure their troubles in faith has never ceased

to amaze me. As a priest I have lent my ears to a number of heart-breaking stories of women in the

Sacrament of Reconciliation or otherwise. Some women are beaten up by their husbands almost

every other day. They work like slaves in homes. They work in the fields as men and for the same

number of hours. And yet they have to do all the household jobs too: cooking (with no gas/electric

stoves), washing clothes (no machines), cleaning the house (no vacuum cleaners), cleaning dishes

(no dish washers), take care of kids, etc. Women work from almost five in the morning to nine at

night. After all this hard labour, what women receive as reward at the end of the day is harassment

and violence by their drunken husbands. Yet, they endure the suffering and they safeguard their

families. Why do they endure such suffering? How do they endure? From where do they draw

strength to endure such suffering? How can they be so good to their bad husbands who beat them

up?… A theological reflection from such a locus and agents would shed a great light on the way we


feminism is women‟s experience of being marginalized, with all the suffering this

entails.”296

The contemporary liberation movements among dalits, Adivasis and women in

India show hopeful signs for transformation that privileges the powerless

peripheries.297

The feminist ferment and other subaltern awakenings are the silver

lining on the horizon.298

These give hope that humankind will be spared of any bizarre

and lopsided growth so that a holistic humanity can be constructed by conscious and

concerted human efforts.299

A reconstruction of the humanity that reflects the image

of God, will succeed when women are restored to their true personhood. As John Paul

II says we must “acknowledge and affirm the true genius of women in every aspect of

the life of society, and overcome all discrimination, violence and exploitation.”300

This is a trend that will grow and have far reaching consequences.

Feminist theology in India301

is born in the context of women‟s pains and

struggles for liberated existence. It rests on the firm belief that both male and female

understand God and life. They give me a deeper understanding into the „crucifixion‟ and

„resurrection.‟ They endure the crucifixion and gain the „resurrection‟. I do not mean to imply that

they should have to suffer. But, finding themselves in the situation of „crucifixion‟ the way in which

these poor women patiently endure their sufferings; the hope and faith they manifest in the

„resurrection,‟ and their trust in a good future, are awesome and inspirational. They are hopeful

even in a most hopeless situation…With all the suffering they endure, they are still the most

religious people in India. Let me make clear that in my linking the suffering women with

crucifixion, I do not mean to suggest or encourage women to endure their suffering, nor do I

downplay the „need of resisting violence‟ by women. As Elizabeth Johnson observes, the concept of

a suffering God does also steal a source of religious empowerment from women. Elizabeth Johnson,

She Who Is: The Mystery of God in Feminist Theological Discourse (New York: Crossroad, 1992),

253. 296

Elizabeth Johnson, CSJ, “Feminism and Sharing the Faith: A Catholic Dilemma”, in Thomas J.

Massaro and Thomas A. Shannon, eds., American Catholic Social Teaching (Collegeville:

Liturgical, 2002),” 108. R. L. Hnuni also says that the suffering of women becomes the starting

point for feminist theology. Cf. R. L. Hnuni, “Contextualizing Asian Theologies: Women‟s

Perspectives,” Asia Journal of Theology 18 (2004), 140. 297

Ecofeminism and Dalit Feminism are seen as non-Brahminical movements in India. They originate

not in the “great tradition” of the Sanskrit scriptures but in the “little tradition” of the Adivasis and

dalits. 298

Vandana Shiva beautifully brings out the strongly feminist dimension of ecological wholeness and

healthy environment. Vandana Shiva, Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India (Delhi:

Kali for Women, 1988). 299

Women‟s liberation movements in India not only reveal the liberative potential of women to

become subjects of their own freedom, growth and life but also the indispensable contribution they

make towards the creation of a just, humane, brotherly and sisterly society. Cf. S. Arockiasamy, SJ,

“The Challenges of a Divided India to the Social Teaching of the Church,” 257. 300

John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, no.99, in Origins 24 (April 6, 1995), 689-730. 301

Some notable feminist theologians in India are: Sr. Pauline Chakkalakal, Sr. Evelyn Monteiro

(teaching theology at Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, Pune), Sr. Pushpa Joseph (teaches at Department of

Christian Studies, University of Madras), Sr. Shalini Mulackal (on the faculty of Vdyajyoti, Delhi),

Sr. Kochurani Abraham (cordinator of Streevani, Pune) and Sr. Philomena D‟Souza (member of


knowledge and discussion about God are valid and important. Christian feminists in

India realize that they have the authority to reflect on God‟s liberative activities in

India and articulate their own theology302

through new myths, stories,303

and

symbols.304

This would necessitate a reinterpretation of the Scriptures and

understanding traditional doctrines from a new perspective so that they are effectively

freed from their patriarchal baggage.305

Through a critical feminist interpretation, the

Bible can offer a spiritual vision and resource in the struggles for women‟s

emancipation and liberation.306

6.7. TELLING A DIFFERENT STORY: FEMINIST NARRATIVE

We believe the feminist discourse as well as the feminist theological discourse

in India should tell a different story of women in India. While much of the feminist

discourse revolves around the plight of women and their oppression, the narrative of

women‟s achievements in India is very much neglected. Since many religious

traditions have narratives that are oppressive of women, it is the duty of the feminists

and feminist theologians in India to narrate and revive the empowering stories of

Indian Theological Association since 1994). Cf. Janina Gomes, “Women Theologians in India Are

Reclaiming Space” National Catholic Reporter , October 19, 2004. 302

Deprivation of women from theological education means excluding them from being shapers of

public culture and confining them to a passive and secondary role. As Rosemary Radford Ruether

says exclusion of women from theological education would also mean that public theological

culture is defined by men not only in the absence of women but against women. See Rosemary

Radford Ruether, “Disputed Questions: On Being A Christian,” in Journeys in Faith Series, Robert

A. Raines, ed. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1982), 120. 303

The stories told by women theologians in India and Asia at large are ordinary stories, part of an

extraordinary movement. These stories echo their sufferings, struggles, groans, cries, hopes, tears,

songs, insights, laughter, tenacity and anger. Commenting on the feminist theology in Asia, Samuel

Rayan says: “Like Bible, these are stories and voices of the oppressed. Like the Bible stories, these

too are the people‟s theology. Asian theology, like the Bible, is a narrative theology. It is symbolic,

poetic and suggestive. Theology is latent in the story. The story is pregnant with perspective of the

oppressed on life, human beings, God, sexuality, grace, the earth and human wholeness. It is up to

the reader to exercise a theological midwifery and assist these perspectives to come to birth in some

form of art.” Samuel Rayan, “Editorial” Jeevadhara 17 (1987), 186. 304

Peter Steinfels writes, “feminism ultimately challenges Catholicism even more profoundly at the

level of sacred texts and fundamental religious symbols and theology”. Peter Steinfels, A People

Adrift (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2003), 275-276; see also Elizabeth Johnson, CSJ,

“Feminism and Sharing the Faith” 112. 305

Jessie Tellis Nayak, an Indian feminist, says that “cleansing patriarchal society of its biases against

women” would be one of the tasks of evangelization in India. Rightly so, Christian Churches could

give the lead to enable other religions, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism and others, to realise

that they have “erred against women.” See Jessie Tellis Nayak, “Why this Oppression of Women?”

Jeevadhara 17 (1985), 21-22. 306

For resources in different religions on the intrinsic value of women, see John C. Raines, and Daniel

Maguire, eds., What Men Owe to Women: Men‟s Voices from World Religions (New York: State

University of New York Press, 2001). A shortened and popularized version of the same book is,

John C. Raines, The Justice Men Owe Women: Possible Resources from World Religions

(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 2001).


women. For example, Annette Meuthrath reinterprets Sita as a rebel in a liberative and

empowering perspective. She calls theologians to rediscover such female narratives of

cultural and religious traditions and engage in a women-empowering reinterpretation

to “make them fruitful for women‟s struggles.”307

Indian religions and cultures are

replete with thousands of such female narratives whose empowering reinterpretation

can make feminist theology very creative and impressive and prove very beneficial to

the empowerment of women. We do not say that the critique of religions and societies

by the feminist groups and theologians is not important; neither do we hold any less

significant the stories of suffering and oppression of women which feminists

highlight. But, we want to suggest that the feminist theories and theologies need also

to use the narratives of success and achievement of Indian women which can be

empowering for the women of today. Stories of women should narrate something

different from what we normally hear about women in religious traditions. We believe

that feminist theology should not simply relate to the specific suffering context of

women, but it should also include stories of the triumphs and achievements of women.

We shall briefly attempt to point to a few of these empowering stories of women in

India and in the Indian church.

6.7.1. Women Shaping India

Women shape India. Throughout the history of India, women played a

significant, if not equal, role but the andocentric record of history has irreverently

ignored the part played by Indian women in shaping India. Post-colonial feminist

movements have been making efforts to retrieve and recreate the stories and struggles

of Indian women who played significant roles in its history.

Though all great religions of India remain very patriarchal, contributions of

women in these religious histories are not lacking. However less prominent they were,

their role in shaping the course of these religions cannot be denied. In her very

readable book, Walking Naked, Vijaya Ramaswamy takes the reader on a long, richly

textured and remarkably detailed journey of women bhakta saints in peninsular India

from the Sangam age up to the arrival of the Dutch, Portuguese and English traders on

the Coromandel/Malabar coasts in the 15th

to the 16th

centuries.308

She depicts through

the narratives of women saints in South Indian religious history, peppered with Hindu,

307 Annette Meuthrath, “Sita the Faithful Rebel: Liberative Aspects of the Sita Figure in Valmiki‟s

Ramayana,” in Robert Cruz et al, eds., Encounters With the Word: Essays to Honour Aloysius

Pieris, S.J. (Colombo: The Ecumenical Institute for Study and Dialogue, 2004), 484. 308

Vijaya Ramaswamy, Walking Naked: Women, Society, Spirituality in South India (Shimla: Indian

Institute of Advanced Study, 2007).


Buddhist and Jain spiritual movements, the empowering potential of the spirituality of

these women saints, who protest, deviate from and defy the patriarchal religiosity of

Indian religions. Vijaya Ramaswamy also similarly presents the significant

contributions of women spiritualists within the Virasaivite movement in Karnataka.309

In her study of women in Virasaivism, Leela Mulatti indicates that a “large number of

saints (may be more than 60) who propagated Virasaivism were women,”310

Akkamahadevi (Mahadeviyakka) and Neelambika being the most prominent.

Women were at the forefront in the marches and protests during the rural

upsurge of peasants between 1970 and 1973 years of famine,311

and the communist-

led agitations of labour organizations for wages and land from 1967-1970.312

Rural

women played great roles in Telangana Movement (1946-1951) and women

themselves led many women movements against wife-beating, alcoholism and other

forms of exploitation.313

Women play active roles in the social movements in

contemporary India. Medha Patkar is the most recognized face of social work in India

today. An epitome of social protest in present day India and a tireless social worker,

she founded and leads the popular Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) against the

construction of the Narmada Dam.

While India had a woman Prime Minister in the person of Indira Gandhi

(1966-1977 and 1980-1984), the contemporary political scenario is dotted with many

active women-politicians who play a significant role in the administration and shaping

of modern India. Sonia Gandhi, the president of the ruling Indian National Congress

(INC) party, is arguably the most influential woman in India today. According to

Forbes‟ magazine‟s list of “Top 100 Most Powerful Women of 2008”, Sonia is the

21st most powerful woman in the world. Mayawati, the first ever dalit woman Chief

Minister in India, and currently the head of state in Uttar Pradesh, is considered one of

the most powerful women politicians of modern India. She secured the 59th

position in

the Forbes‟ list of “Top 100 Most Powerful Women” in 2008. Shiela Dikshit is the

long-time Chief Minister of the capital state of India, Delhi. Currently, India also has

309 Vijaya Ramaswamy, Divinity and Deviance: Women in Virasaivism (Delhi: Oxford University

Press, 1996). 310

Leela Mulatti, The Bhakti Movement and the Status of Women (New Delhi: Abhinav Publications,

1989), x. 311

Gail Omvedt, “Women and Rural Revolt in India: Part One,” Social Scientist 6:61 (Aug 1977), 4. 312

Gail Omvedt, “Women and Rural Revolt in India: Part Two,” Social Scientist 6:62 (Sep 1977), 32-

33. 313

For these and more rural women movements, see: Ritamma David, “Rural Women‟s Movements,”

in Prasanna Kumari, ed., Feminist Theology: Perspectives and Praxis (Chennai: Gurukul, 1999),

48-56.


the first woman President, Pratibha Patil. The speaker of the current Lok Sabha

(House of Representatives) is a dalit woman, Meira Kumar. The Parliamentiary

Leader of the Opposition Party, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), is a woman named

Sushma Swaraj. Another woman, Brinda Karat, plays an important role in the

Communist Party of India (CPI).

6.7.1.1. Woman Who Conquered the God of Death: Savitri

The story of how Savitri, the daughter of a king, marries Satyavan, knowing in

advance that he would die within a year of the marriage and then battles against

Yama, the God of Death, to finally wrest her husband back to life, is taken from the

Mahabharata. The story of Savitri becomes an allegory of the struggle of the immortal

human soul against mortality, eventually defeating death. Savitri symbolizes the

Vedantic deathless soul, Satyavan represents Truth, and Yama represents the

contingent human conditionality, the world of the persisting senses. Savitri‟s victory

symbolizes the ultimate triumph of human spirit.

For I am the woman and the force of God,…

My will is greater than thy law, O Death;

My love is stronger than the bonds of Fate;…

Yes, my humanity is a mask of God;

He dwells in me, the mover of my acts,

Turning the wheel of his great cosmic work.

I am the living body of his light.

I am the thinking instrument of his power.

I incarnate Wisdom in an earthly breast,

I am his conquering and unslayable Will.

The formless spirit drew in me its shape;

In me are the Nameless and the secret Name;…

My heart is wiser than the Reason‟s thoughts,

My heart is stronger than thy bonds, O Death.

It sees and feels the one Heart beat in all,

It feels the high Transcendant‟s sunlike hands,

It sees the cosmic Spirit at its work;…

My heart‟s strength can carry the grief of the universe

And never falter from its luminous track,314

314 Sri Aurobindo, Savitri, Book Ten, Canto III, (1954)


6.7.1.2. A Woman Who Fought for India’s Freedom: Sarojini Naidu

Sarojini Naidu (1879-1949) was the daughter of a Bengali educationist who

settled in Hyderabad. She studied at London and Cambridge and on her return to India

in 1898, she married Dr. Govindarajulu Naidu. A close companion of Mahatma

Gandhi, she played a conspicuous role in the struggle for freedom. She became the

President of the Indian National Congress in 1952 and was appointed Governor of

Uttar Pradesh in free India. She is called the “Nightingale of India.”

In the cause of national freedom, starting as early as 1903, she travelled

countless miles, campaigning in her strong orator‟s voice all over India. Naidu met

Gandhi in London in 1914. Their friendship strengthened her nationalist instincts and,

in 1930, five years after she was elected president of the Indian National Congress,

Naidu found herself leading Gandhi‟s Salt March. When Gandhi was arrested on May

5, the leadership of the nonviolent movement fell to Sarojini Naidu. She never

flinched from the violent blows of the police, and continued to protest until she herself

was arrested. Her life was consumed by the rigours of public campaigning, her years

punctuated by imprisonment. She suffered frequent imprisonment, the most lengthy

and painful spell being in 1942 after the Quit Indian Resolution when she, together

with Gandhi and his wife, Kasturba, was incarcerated in the Aga Khan Palace. Gandhi

was released when his wife died, and Naidu herself was set free on March 21, 1943,

aged sixty-four. Throughout India, Naidu was famed as an orator and in many of her

speeches she voiced the deprivation suffered by the women around her and by her

own self. Through Naidu, restoration of women‟s rights became a necessary condition

for national freedom.

6.7.2. Women Shaping the Indian Church

Foreign women missionaries undertook many social reform projects to

ameliorate the most deleterious effects of colonialism. Indeed, one can argue that

some Western women did help to soften the impact of colonialism or actively

militated against it.315

Consider the examples of Mary Carpenter, an educationist who

315 This is not to deny the critique of male-centred histories of colonialism that blame the white women

for destroying an imagined Arcadia of harmonious relations between colonizers and colonized by

their racism, sexual jealousy, and petty preoccupation with the rituals of bourgeois society. Neither

do we ascribe to this critique of white women. We suggest the challenge of the historiography of

white women‟s involvement in colonial rule is to describe and understand their contribution in ways

that recognize both their complicity with, and resistance to, the exploitative, racist dimensions of

colonization. In our opinion, one such recent feminist historiography presents a justified evaluation:

Nupur Chaudhuri and Margaret Strobel, eds., Western Women and Imperialism: Complicity and

Resistance (Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1992).


campaigned in both India and England for Indian women‟s education and promoted

India in the 1860s and 1870s as a potential field for the labours of women trained in

Britain to be teachers;316

or the two Irishwomen, Margaret Cousins, who founded the

All-India Women‟s Conference in 1927, and the theosophist Annie Besant, the first

president of the Congress party. To these can be added also the names of Annette

Akroyd Beveridge,317

Margaret Noble-Sister Nivedita, and Eleanor Rathbone and Ida

Scudder.318

6.7.2.1. A Fearless Evangelist: Chandra Lila Sadhuni

Another significant woman in Indian church history was the fearless

evangelist Chandra Lila Sadhuni. Chandra Lila was born a Hindu Brahmin in 1840 in

Nepal. Her father was the prestigious family priest of the Rajah of Nepal. She was

married at the age of seven, and was soon widowed when she was nine years old. Her

thirst for the divine led her to many major Hindu shrines in India enduring long and

arduous journeys, and three years of hard ascetic life, all of which could not satisfy

her soul. She finally found the answer to her inner search in Christ, after she read the

Bengali New Testament. She soon became a Christian, defying all threats from her

316 Mary Carpenter (1807-1877), daughter of a Unitarian minister in Bristol, who dedicated her life to

philanthropy and social reform in India. She visited India in 1866 wanting to promote female

education in India. Carpenter believed that the key to any expansion of female education was an

increase in the supply of female teachers. She lobbied British officials and presented memorials that

urged the government of India to give grants to support female normal schools to provide secular

female teachers for Indian girls. On her return to England, she used her celebrity status to awaken

public opinion to conditions in India and to English responsibilities to promote social reform in

India. This propagandist activity became her dominant focus after her effort to assume a direct

leadership role in India during three other visits in 1868, 1869, and 1875 failed. In September 1870,

she founded National Indian Association to spread knowledge of India in England. Cf. Cf. Barbara

N. Ramusack, “Cultural Missionaries, Maternal Imperialists, Feminist Allies. British Women

Activists in India, 1865-1945,” in Nupur Chaudhuri and Margaret Strobel, eds., Western Women

and Imperialism,120-122.

317 Annette Akroyd Beveridge (1842-1929), daughter of a successful Unitarian business man of

Stourbridge, arrived in Calcutta in 1872. She helped first at Native Ladies‟ Normal School of

Keshub Chandra Sen, but was not happy with the restricted curriculum which emphasized only the

domestic arts. She broke with Sen and in 1873 opened a boarding school for girls, named Hindu

Mahila Bidyalaya. Lack of support made the maintenance of the school difficult. She retired from it

and married Henry Beveridge, a Civil Service Officer, after which she devoted herself to her four

children, including Lord William Beveridge. Cf. Ramusack, “Cultural Missionaries, Maternal

Imperialists, Feminist Allies. British Women Activists in India, 1865-1945,” 122-124. 318

Ida Scudder (1870-) was an American of the Reformed Church who came to India to see her sick

mother. Having witnessed the plight of the poor women and lack of a woman doctor, she decided to

study medicine. She returned to India in 1899 as Dr. Ida and served in many rural areas in

Tamilnadu. She founded the Missionary Medical College for Women at Vellore which is now the

famous Christian Medical College (CMC), most reputed Christian college in India. Cf. Florence M.

Gordon, “Three Knocks In the Night: Ida Scudder (1870-),” in Nina Millen, ed., Missionary Hero

Stories: True Stories of Missionaries and Christian National Leaders From All Parts of the World

(New York: Friendship Press, 1948), 81-86.


Hindu disciples. She became a passionate and fearless preacher, preaching in many

villages, at Hindu shrines she had visited earlier, and to Kings. She returned to Nepal

and preached the Gospel in her country. Her desire to preach the Good News was so

great even during her last days, she insisted upon having a place built on the roadside,

“so that when I am too old and weak to walk, I may crawl to the door and tell the

Good News to the people as they pass by.”319

She died in 1907 at the age of 65,

having preached the Gospel for 30 years with astonishing boldness.

6.7.2.2. A Hindu-Christian Woman: Pandita Ramabai

Batley, speaking about Pandita Ramabai in her book Devotees of Christ,

remarks: “If the Protestant churches had ever adopted the custom of canonising

persons of outstanding devotion, sanctity, and power, they would surely have

accorded a halo to that wonderful woman known to us as Pandita Ramabai.”320

In the

words of the historian of Indian Christianity, Stephen Neill, who treats Ramabai as

one of the prominent builders of the Indian church, Pandita Ramabai “left to the

Indian Church the priceless legacy of a life poured out to the utmost in the love of

Christ.”321

Born in a Hindu Brahmin family, she learnt Sanskrit and studied the Hindu

scriptures from an early age. In search of true religion, she studied Christianity and

converted to Christianity during her three-year stay in England. After spending

another three years in America, she returned to India and established the first-ever

Widows‟ Home in India at Calcutta. She later successfully established in 1900 a

larger girls‟ home near Pune and initiated many empowerment trades for the poor

girls and widows.322

She boldly proclaimed that Hindu scriptures were essentially

anti-woman.323

6.7.2.3. Woman Who Became the “Mother” to Modern India: Mother Teresa

No other name of a woman in India would raise such deep respect, reverence

and love as that of Mother Teresa.324

She has become the epitome of compassion to

319 Dorothea Sibella Batley, Devotees of Christ: Some Women Pioneers of the Indian Church (London:

Church of England, Zenana Missionary Society, 1937),13. 320

Batley, Devotees of Christ, 14. 321

Neill, Builders of Indian Church, 133. 322

Cf. John D‟Mello, Dare to See Differently: A Feminist Point of View (Mumbai: Pauline, 2003),

105-107. 323

Pandita Ramabai, The High-Caste Hindu Woman (Bombay: Government of Maharashtra, 1982;

originally published in 1887), 29. 324

We are not unaware of the critique against her work and views. She is criticized much for her views

on artificial birth control, abortion, her uncritical support of John Paul II . Christopher Hitchens, the

British journalist has been her biggest critique. Cf. Christopher Hitchens, The Missionary Position:


the whole of India and the world. She was a woman who has managed to reach out in

compassion to the whole of India cutting across all barriers of caste and creed. All

Indians consider her a “mother” and nurture a deep respect for her. The impact that

this little woman has created in India is magnificent. Rightly so people call her “the

Angel of Calcutta,” “Champion of the Poor,” “Voice of Compassion,” “Apostle of

Peace,” “Ambassador of Charity,” “Angel of Mercy,”325

expressing their admiration

for her. In the words of Pope John Paul II, she is “universally known as the Mother of

the Poor, leaves an eloquent example for everyone, believer and non-believer.”326

In

the words of Muggeridge, the well-known journalist to make known Mother Teresa

outside India, “Mother Teresa is probably the best known and most loved woman in

the entire world.”327

She is a woman of whom every Indian woman can feel proud,

and every Christian in India can extol.

6.8. TOWARDS INCLUSIVE INDIAN FEMINIST THEOLOGY

Indian Feminism has been criticized as an exclusive discourse of the high

caste Hindu women where dalit, Adivasi and other low caste women are not

represented.328

To pursue their specific concerns, dalit women have formed their own

women‟s groups and movements.329

Dalit women‟s organisations feel that the

interests of dalit women have been neglected within the larger feminist discourse in

India. As Geetanjali suggests, the feminist discourse of dalit women links caste

relations to gender exploitation, especially sexual violence of dalit women by upper

caste men and the suffering faced by dalit women in the larger oppression of dalits in

India.330

Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice (London/New York, Vero, 1995). But we believe despite the

critique against her, she still stands a relevant and inspiring example in the context of massive

poverty and many poor in India. 325

Antony Charanghat, “A Legacy to be Lived,” The Examiner (20 Sep, 1997), 5. 326

John Paul II, “Mother Teresa Served Christ in the Poorest of the Poor,” L‟Osservatore Romano (10

September, 1997), 1. 327

Malcolm Muggeridge, A Gift for God: Mother Teresa of Calcutta (London: Harper Collins, 1975),

4. 328

Cf. M. Chudhuri, ed., Feminism in India (New Delhi: Kali for Women, 2004). See also, Radhika

Govinda, “The Politics of the Marginalised: Dalits and Women‟s Activism in India,” Gender &

Development 14:2 (2006), 188. 329

For example, All India Dalit Women Forum (1994) and National Federation of Dalit Women and

Dalit Solidarity (1995). 330

Cf. Geetanjali Gangoli, Indian Feminism: Law, Patriarchies and Violence in India (Hampshire:

Ashgate, 2007), 10-11.


The same critique can be applied to Indian feminist theology. Most feminist

theologians, especially in the Catholic church, have come mostly from the higher

castes in India. But, there is hope in the Protestant feminist theology as there have

been some voices heard from some dalit and Adivasi feminist theologians.331

On the

whole, the feminist theology in India has a very low dalit and Adivasi representation.

Even Dalit theologians and Adivasi theologians, who theologize from the context of

caste oppressions, display little sensitivity to the plight of dalit and Adivasi women.332

Mary Grey, who spent some 16 years in rural Rajasthan (India), suggests that the

strong and rich spirituality of dalit women offers a great resource for dalit feminist

theology.333

We wish to briefly depict the features of Dalit and Adivasi Feminism

here below which could serve as specific sources of an inclusive feminist theology in

India.

6.8.1. Dalit Feminism

Dalit feminism is based on the distinct experience of dalit women; and those

experiences are distinctly different from those of their male and other female

counterparts. A dalit women is often called as the “thrice-Dalit,” suffering oppression

as a dalit, as woman and as poor. The suffering-experience of dalit women is unique,

as Felix Wilfred indicates: “Though Dalit women share many discriminations like

other women, yet, the social location of Dalit women and their powerlessness make

their experience of suffering intense and unique.”334

While the feminist movements or

theories among the upper caste and middle class women do not contest and question

the caste factor in the oppression of women, “dalit feminism challenges the caste and

exposes the multiple patriarchies at work in the Indian society.”335

Thus, the feminist

movement among dalit women is not merely gender-based. As Anupama Rao

suggests, “the demands by dalit and other lower-caste women are not merely for

inclusion, but for an analysis of gender relations as they are inflected by the multiple

331 For example, Ruth Manorama.

332 Cf. Surekha Nelavala, “Smart Syrophoenician Woman: A Dalit Feminist Reading of Mark 7:24-

31,” The Expository Times 118:2 (2006), 65. 333

See Mary Grey, “Dalit Women and the Struggle for Justice in a World of Global Capitalism,”

Feminist Theology 14:1 (2005), 146-147. Mary Grey treats the subject extensively in her book The

Unheard Scream: The Struggles of Dalit Women in India (New Delhi: Centre for Dalit Studies,

2004). 334

Wilfred, Dalit Empowerment, 103. 335

Wilfred, Dalit Empowerment, 110.


overlapping patriarchies of caste communities that produce forms of vulnerability that

require analysis.”336

While dalit women are like any other women in India, there are still some

characteristic features which set them apart from women belonging to higher castes.

They display a greater resistance and toughness in comparison to other women.337

Dalit women work very hard and they stage a tireless resistance to their humiliation

and oppression.338

Wilfred makes another important observation about dalit women:

they do not “venerate their husbands” as much as women of high castes, and “rely on

their physical ability to earn and to rear their children, and are not constrained in their

choices by the opinions of others.”339

Gail Omvedt similarly indicates, in her study on

work participation of women, that dalit and Adivasi women have greater social

independence, divorce more freely, have remarriage rights, enjoy more equality with

their men, and address their husbands with familiar forms unlike the high-caste

women who address their husbands only in respectful form.340

In his study of dalit

converts called Satnami-Christians in Chhattisgarh, Chad Bauman, similarly testifies

to the greater freedom dalit women enjoyed compared to high-caste women. Satnami-

women remarried and thus sati was extremely rare, while upper-caste widows were

forbidden to remarry.341

Their agricultural work with men in rice fields “afforded

these women a certain limited physical mobility denied to secluded women” of higher

castes who did not work outside their houses.342

Eliza Kent, in her research on women

336 Anupama Rao, “Introduction,” in Anupama Rao, ed., Gender & Caste (Delhi: Kali for Women,

2005), 5. Most of the essays in this collection have emerged in the context of a renewed national

debate about the politics of caste inaugurated by the Mandal decision in 1989 – a decision that has

renewed demands for social justice by dalits and lower-castes. Dalit-bahujan feminists go beyond

arguing that Indian feminism is incomplete and exclusive and suggest that we rethink the genealogy

of Indian feminism in order to engage meaningfully with dalit women‟s “difference” from the ideal

subjects of feminist politics. 337

Katti Padma Rao, “Caste, Dalit Women - Alternative Culture,” in Prasanna Kumari, ed., Feminist

Theology: Perspectives and Praxis (Chennai: Gurukul, 1999), 57-81. 338

Gail Omvedt depicts such resistance of dalit women in her interview with a simple dalit woman. Cf.

Gail Omvedt, “The Downtrodden Among the Downtrodden. An Interview with a Dalit Agricultural

Labourer,” in Anupama Rao, ed., Gender & Caste (Delhi: Kali for Women, 2005), 310-324. 339

Wilfred, Dalit Empowerment, 98. 340

Omvedt, “Women and Rural Revolt in India,” 15. Omvedt attributes all these to the higher work

participation of dalit and Adivasi women. In 1961, work participation for the general population of

women was 27.95 per cent, for dalit women it was 35.3 per cent and for Adivasi women it was 52.0

per cent. She, however, cautions that this social independence among dalit and Adivasi women does

not mean they are free from oppression. 341

Chad M. Bauman, Christian Identity and Dalit Religion in Hindu India, 1868-1947 (Grand Rapids,

Mich./Cambridge, UK: W. B. Eerdmans, 2008), 175. 342

Bauman, Christian Identity and Dalit Religion in Hindu India, 172. Bauman also indicates here that

such physical mobility of dalit women exposed them to unrelated men, and made them more

vulnerable to sexual exploitation by higher caste men.


conversion in South India in relation to gender issues, also testifies that “seclusion of

women is a much less common practice” among the low-castes of India.343

Thus, dalit feminism can contribute a new perspective to the Indian feminist

discourse and can serve as a useful tool for the feminist theology in India. As the lives

of dalit women are more closely connected to the land and water, they manifest a

better environmental consciousness, which could be a vital source for environmental

theology and ethics.344

Rightly so, Jogdand affirms the specificity and significance of

Dalit Feminism to Indian society and Indian feminism as well to the larger dalit

discourse:

The core of dalit consciousness is made of protest against exploitation and

oppression. In short, the term dalit stands for change and revolution. By using the

term dalit women we are trying to say that if women from dalit castes and of dalit

consciousness create a space for themselves for fearless expression, i.e., if they

become subjects or agents or self, they will provide a new leadership to Indian

society in general and to the feminist and dalit movement in particular.345

6.8.2. Adivasi Feminism

Women in Northeastern Adivasi societies seem, in many ways, to be better off

than their counterparts in the rest of India. The women “enjoy a high status because

their societies are egalitarian, they have no purdah system, there is no restriction on

women‟s movements, food habits and attire and widow marriage, and when a woman

is in trouble or when she is ill-treated by her husband, she is supported by her parents,

brothers and clan members, etc.”346

Because of this, way back in the 1930s, Fürer-

Haimendorf, the anthropologist who worked much with the Adivasi groups around the

Himalayas, speaking about the Naga women observed: “Many women in more

civilized parts of India may well envy the women of the Naga Hills, their high status

and their free and happy life, and if you measure the cultural level of the people by the

social position and personal freedom of its women, you will think twice before

looking down on the Nagas as savages.”347

343 Eliza F. Kent, Converting Women: Gender and Protestant Christianity in Colonial South India

(New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 141, 157. 344

Cf. Gabriele Dietrich, “Dalit Feminism and Environment,” Religion and Society 45:4 (1998), 89-98. 345

Cf. P. G. Jogdand, ed., Dalit Women in India, Issues and Perspectives (Delhi: Gyan Publishing

House, 1992), 2. 346

Lucy Vashum Zehol, “Status of Tribal Women,” in T. B. Subha and G. C. Ghosh, eds., The

Anthropology of North-East India (New Delhi: Orient Longman, 2003), 300. 347

Christoph Von Fürer-Haimendorf, The Naked Nagas (Calcutta: Thacker Spink & Co., 1933), 96.

Fürer-Haimendorf lived and worked throughout the Himalayas from the 1930s through the 1980s.

His specific interest included the Naga ethnic groups of the North Eastern Frontier area of India and

the Sherpa ethnic group of north-eastern Nepal. His film documentation of these ethnic groups is


Adivasi women in India also have a good network of women‟s organizations.

The Naga Mothers‟ Association (NMA) exerts great influence on every aspect of

Naga life and politics. Other similar organizations can be found among other Adivasi

groups: the Arunachal Pradesh Women Welfare Society (APWWS), the Mothers‟

Union and Lympung ki synjuk Ki Seng Kynthei (Federation of Women‟s Union),

Tangkhul Shanao Long in Manipur, Mizo Hmeichee Insuikhawm Pawl (Mizoram),

etc. Though these bodies do not have direct access to political life, they have very

significant political impacts.

The Adivasi world is changing, and so does the position of women among

them. The traditional Adivasi values are changing fast through the influence of non-

Adivasi culture and the interaction of the Adivasis with the non-Adivasis. While

Adivasi women enjoy greater social freedom than non-Adivasi women in the sense of

a free unrestricted mixing of the sexes,348

their situation seems to be no different from

other women in India today. They also suffer the problems of overburdened labour,

denial of inheritance rights, domestic violence, unequal pay, etc. Thankfully, as Hnuni

reports, the ususal evils connected to women such as dowry, sati, child marriage,

female infanticide or foeticide are not prevalent among Adivasis of Northeast.349

Adivasi Feminism, in such a fast changing scenario, may have the special task

of reaffirming and restoring the egalitarian ethos of the Adivasi communities where

women were treated with greater equality. For example, the Khasi-Jaintia and Garo

Hills Adivasi are matrilineal societies and women have ancestral property rights.350

The primal visions of the Adivasis have many women-affirming features and are

generally inclusive and call for complementarity between man and woman.351

The

strong bonds of Adivasi women with nature can be very helpful in the eco-feminist

perspectives.352

Adivasi Feminism will have to arise from the Adivasi women

themselves in order to truly represent the women realities of Adivasis. Non-Adivasis

feminists may not represent the true realities of the Adivasi women.

said to be more than 100 hours, and the collection is currently at the Department of Social

Anthropology at Cambridge University. 348

R. L. Hnuni, Vision for Women in India: Perspectives from the Bible, Church and Society

(Bangalore: ATC, 2009), 141 349

Hnuni, Vision for Women in India, 73. 350

Hnuni, Vision for Women in India, 142. But the property rights do not mean the situation of women

is equal with men in their society. 351

Cf. Busi Suneel Bhanu, “Women in the Primal Vision,” in Prasanna Kumari, ed., Feminist

Theology: Perspectives and Praxis (Chennai: Gurukul, 1999), 191-197. 352

Hnuni draws insights for eco-feminism from a Mizo Adivasi story of Mauruangi. Cf. Hnuni,

Visions for Women in India, 290-304.


6.9. THE “MAGNIFICAT” AS CRY OF LIBERATION

Women‟s oppression demands that Mary should be projected by the church as

the woman of Magnificat, raising a cry of liberation for all those who are

oppressed.353

Mary‟s Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55) announces a new era for the

marginalised and powerless.354

Gispert Sauch says that feminist theology “must

express a strong commitment to the liberating action of God, as Mary‟s song does,

that action whereby the bonds that enslave the weak and oppressed are broken

away.”355

The power that comes from women‟s solidarity is in fact women‟s greatest

strength, says Astrid Lobo Gajiwala. According to her, “women‟s empowerment

involves both a struggle for power and a struggle with power. Once freed from their

shackles, their very position of disadvantage equips them to challenge the

relationships and structures that imprison their power.”356

6.10. THE RISING SUN: WOMEN RELIGIOUS IN INDIA

A specifically Indian theological reflection needs to be developed in support of

the emerging initiatives for the liberation of the Indian women.357

At this juncture, we

cannot but refer to the 90,000-strong contingent of Indian women Religious who have

dedicated their lives and all for the Kingdom of God. We have the shining example of

Mother Teresa who became the face of the Indian church.358

We cannot forget the

heroic death of Sister Maria Rani who was killed for her commitment to the poor.359

353 Cf. John Chathanatt, SJ, “The Magnificat: A Hymn of Liberation,” Vidyajyoti 56 (1992), 653-658.

354 V. Devasahayam, Biblical Perspectives on Women - Ten Bible Studies (Nagpur: AICCW, 1990),

50. 355

Gisper Sauch, “Meditation on the Bank of the Yamuna,” Jeevadhara 17 (1985), 78. 356

Astrid Lobo Gajiwala, “Power Struggles” In God‟s Image 19 (2000), 53. 357

For a comprehensive view of current women movements in India, see Radha Kumar, “From Chipko

to Sati: The Contemporary Indian Women‟s Movement,” in Amrita Basu, ed., The Challenge of

Local Feminism: Women‟s Movement in Global Perspective (New Delhi: Kali for Women, 1995),

58-86. 358

George Pattery, SJ, makes an interesting study of Mother Teresa as the one who desired to move to

the periphery, to go in search of those on the border; one who brought the periphery to the centre

and bordered the centre. See, George Pattery, SJ, “Centring the Border and Bordering the Centre,

Spirituality of Mother Teresa,” Vidyajyoti 67 (2003), 758-772. If such a spirituality is adopted by all

Women Religious in India, they could bring a sea-change not just in the Indian church but in the

whole Indian society. 359

Sr. Maria Rani, belonging to Franciscan Clarist Congregation was stabbed to death by fanatics

because of her committed service to, and solidarity with, the poor dalits and Adivasis to whom she

brought dignity and freedom. And edifying is the act of her own younger sister of the same

congregation, Sr. Mary Paul, who as a sign of forgiveness of the murderer of her sister, went to the

prison and tied a rakhi (symbolisizing brotherhood) on the hand of the convict. Here we can also

mention the protestant missionary, Mrs. Staines who courageously proclaimed her forgiveness for

the murderers who brutally burnt alive her husband Mr. Graham Staines and her two sons in Orissa.

These are but a few shining examples of the power of women Religious in India.


Though as women they too are discriminated against, they should feel challenged by

the even more appalling situation of women in the world, especially those belonging

to the poorest sections of the society, those living in the rural areas towards whom the

women Religious bear a Christian responsibility.360

Affirming the indispensability of

Religious to the cause of the poor and the oppressed, Tillard says that the Religious

“to remain faithful to their calling (they too) must take flesh in the world of the

poor.”361

He goes further in saying, “We must not beat around the bush but boldly

affirm that in the present situation, our Religious congregations will never know

renewal unless they share God‟s preference for the poor.”362

From their concrete

involvement for the cause of women and their solidarity with their condition, the

Women Religious could help to evolve a very fruitful Indian feminist theological

perspective.363

It is a task no male theologian can venture to attempt adequately.

6.11. DISCIPLESHIP OF EQUALS: A WAY OF BEING CHURCH

The oppressed situation of women in India calls for a new way of being

Church: a discipleship of equals.364

In the co-equal community established by Jesus

(Mk 10:31, 42; Mt 19:30, 20:16, 26-27; Lk 13:30, 22:24-27; Jn 13:1-17) women are

to have equal participation: the same rights and duties as men. In the social

relationships of the Jesus Movement, women are no longer trivial or peripheral.

Structures of domination will yield to solidarity through the discipleship of equals.

Jessie Tellis Nayak opines that the “discipleship of equals,” which marked the early

Church, was lost in the Church by the influence of Jewish traditions, Greek

philosophies and the incorporation of Roman hierarchical structures.365

Citing

examples in the Johannine tradition, Tillard says that “women are excluded from no

360 Thomas D‟Sa exploring the relevance of the document of the Congregation for Institutes of

Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, Starting Afresh From Christ, suggests that the

Indian “congregations in their ministry must focus on the education and uplift of the female child

and empower the people of lower classes and castes.” Thomas D‟Sa, “Contemplating the Faces of

Christ,” 677. 361



The post-Vatican II period has awakened the CRI (Conference of Religious in India) to the need for

centres which would offer basic theological formation for religious women. Mater Dei (Goa),

Sudeep (Bangalore), Jeevan Jyothi (Hyderabad), Lumen Institute (Tindivanam, TN) and various

other centres offer regular theological courses to women religious. Over the past decade or two,

many of the major seminaries have opened out to women religious for B.Th., M.Th., and Ph.D.

courses. 364

Liberation of women and their personhood within the church is undoubtedly one of the most

important agendas for the church in India. Cf. S. Arockiasamy, SJ, “The Challenges of a Divided

India to the Social Teaching of the Church,” 257. 365

Nayak, “Why this Oppression of Women?” 17.


aspect of the evangelical witness that the community is commissioned to declare.”366

The communion ecclesiology paves the way for an egalitarian and participatory model

that recovers the traditions of women‟s discipleship and leadership. Such recapturing

seeks to engender both a church-praxis that emancipates and a theology that

transforms the patriarchal ecclesial structures and culture.367

To realize the vision of a participatory church as a community of collaboration

and partnership for prophetic mission in Indian society today, an alternative model of

authority and a new understanding of ministry, that includes women, are needed.

Servant authority, as lived and taught by Jesus is transforming, integrative and

empowering. It includes reciprocal relationship, dialogue and interdependency that

would help build an inclusive community, a credible sign of communion to the

world.368

A new way of being Church calls for a new spirituality that grows in harmony

with the rhythms of the Spirit and in joyous abandonment to it. Transcending dualism

and going beyond the dominant-dependent hierarchical paradigms, feminist

spirituality perceives life in terms of relationships. Attempting to rise above

dichotomy, it weaves harmony among differences whether from gender, class, caste

or creed. Born of pain and suffering that is endured, it commits itself to the common

struggle against multi-faceted oppression. It invites us to live life intensely, deepening

the experience of the sacred in the ordinariness of everyday life. Tillard calls for a

“serious research on the status of women in the ecclesial community, a status

demanding a place and function much more significant than those granted to them.”369

7. CHURCH AS “JESUS-COMMUNITY OF THE MARGINS”

We have studied in the preceding sections the situation of dalits and women in

India at large and in the Indian church in particular. They are the “faces of the poor”

in Indian society as well as in the Indian Church. The self-understanding of the

Church in India in the context of their discrimination and oppression, calls for a

renewed ecclesiological reflection which will not only privilege the poor. In this final

section of this chapter, we plan to propose the ecclesiological paradigm of “Jesus-


367 Cf. Margaret Shanti, “Religious Women and Their Theological Education,” Jeevadhara 22 (1992),

303-307. 368

Cf. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, Discipleship of Equals: A Critical Feminist Ekklesia-logy of

Liberation (New York: Crossroad, 1993), 290-306. 369

Tillard, Church of Churches, 97.


Community of the Margins” as an ecclesiological concept that can be relevant to the

poor of India who make up about 70% of the Indian Christians. We believe that the

Church in India need to become the Church of the poor in India, a Church on the

margin, a Church of the margins.

7.1. JESUS-COMMUNITY AS A PARADIGM FOR THE CHURCH

George M. Soares-Prabhu reflects on Jesus-Community as the archetype of the

church indicating the implications of such a paradigm for the church in India.370

The

Jesus-Community is presented to us in the New Testament as a paradigm for the

Church,371

and it is not only desirable, but also indispensable that the Church in every

age remains faithful to the spirit of the Jesus-Community from which it originated.

Even if the origin of the church is located in the post-Easter experience of Pentecost,

the post-Easter Church is continuous with the Jesus-Community; it remains like a

seed for the tree; the post-Easter Church originates and develops from the Jesus-

Community. As Soares-Prabhu rightly suggests “there is a normativeness about the

Jesus-Community, which the church today (or at any time) ignores at its peril.”372

Our interest in this ecclesiological concept lies in our search for a relevant

ecclesiological concept/model for the church in India, which integrates the “primacy

of the poor” in India with the “radical equality of all human beings.” In the following

pages it is our endeavour to investigate the concept of Jesus-Community, and to

interpret it within an ecclesiological framework for the context of the poor/subalterns

in India.

7.2. JESUS-COMMUNITY IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

Soares-Prabhu holds the “radically liberative religious experience” of God as

abba by Jesus and his followers as the foundation of the Jesus-Community. The

Jesus-Community “emerged from and embodied the abba experience of Jesus.”373

This radical religious experience transforms the Jesus-Community into a community

of radical freedom, a community of radical equality, and a community of radical

370 George M. Soares-Prabhu, “Radical Beginnings: The Jesus Community as the Archetype of the

Church,” in Francis X. D‟Sa, ed., Theology of Liberation: An Indian Biblical Perspective. Collected

Writings of George M. Soares-Prabhu, S.J., Vol.4 (Pune: Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, 2000), 136-149. 371

Cf. James P. Martin, “The Church in Mathew,” in James Luther Mays, ed., Interpreting the Gospels

(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981), 97-114, specially 107-109. 372

Soares-Prabhu, “Radical Beginnings: The Jesus Community,” 138. 373

Soares-Prabhu, “Radical Beginnings: The Jesus Community,” 143.


service. Let us review briefly the five salient features of Jesus-Community as

enumerated by Soares-Prabhu.

7.2.1. A Community of Radical Freedom

The radical liberative experience of God by Jesus-Community makes it

radically free. Firstly it frees them from internal compulsions of greed and ambition.

Jesus-Community is not anxious of daily sustenance (Mt. 6:25-32), renounces

possessions (Mt. 6:24; 10:9-10; Mk. 1:18; 10:28-30), home (Mt.8:20), and family

(Mk. 1:20; 3:31-35; Lk. 14:26). Secondly, the Jesus-Community is free from external

constraints of a servile bondage to ritual and to law. They equate law and cult to love

(Mt. 22:40; Mk. 12:33) and to the human need (Mk. 2:27), and reject all laws of ritual

cleanliness (Mk. 7:15-23).374

7.2.2. A Community of Radical Equality

The radical liberative experience of God as abba makes all human beings

brothers and sisters, radically equal. Soares-Prabhu indicates two main implications of

this radical equality. Firstly, it rules out all discriminations. The Jesus-Community

transcends all distinctions of race, culture, class and gender; “there is neither Jew nor

Greek; there is neither slave nor free; there is neither male nor female, for you are all

one in Christ” (Gal. 3:28). Jesus proclaims such radical equality of all by „commuting‟

with tax collectors and sinners (Lk. 15:1-2), by the inclusion of an outcast customs

official (Mk. 2:13) and an outlaw rebel (Lk. 6:15) in his apostles, in making women

his disciples (Lk. 8:1-2; 10:38-42), and by commending the faith of the Gentiles (Mt.

8:10; Mk. 5:34) and Samaritans (Lk. 10:29-37).375

Gerhard Lohfink, the German

biblical scholar, would say that while Jesus created his community for all, rejecting all

religious and social discriminations, he created community especially for those on the

margins who were denied equality and community in his time.376

Another significant feature of this radical equality is the negation of all

assumption of titles that suggest the exercise of power: “But you are not to be called

rabbi, for you have only one teacher and you are all brethren. And call no man your

father on earth, for you have only one Father who is in heaven. Neither be called

masters, for you have only one master, the Christ” (Mt. 23:8-10). “The followers of

374 Soares-Prabhu, “Radical Beginnings: The Jesus Community,” 143-144.

375 Soares-Prabhu, “Radical Beginnings: The Jesus Community,” 145, 147.

376 Cf. Gerhard Lohfink, Jesus and Community (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 88-89; originally

published in German as Wie hat Jesus Gemeinde gowollt? (Freiburg/Basel/Vienna: Herder Verlag,

1982).


Jesus are distinguished by the quality of their love, not by their possession of different

degrees of sacral power.”377

7.2.3. A Community of Radical Sharing and Service

The Jesus-Community is a community of radical sharing. Jesus and his

disciples manifest a pattern of such radical sharing in their lives as „wandering

charismatics‟ depending for sustenance on friends and sympathizers. The radical

sharing goes beyond mere works of social relief and alms-giving (Mt. 6:2-4; Acts 6:1-

4; Rom. 15:26-27; 1 Cor. 16:1-3; 2 Cor. 8:1-15), to the “assumption of responsibility

by each member of the community for the welfare of all.”378

The Jesus-Community is also a “community of radical service” in imitation of

Jesus who came “not to be served but to serve” (Mk. 10:45). Jesus demands his

followers to become „servants‟ (Mk. 9:35; 10:43; Mt. 23:11), and serving becomes the

Christian ministry (Acts 1:17; 12:25; 21:19; Rom. 11:31; 1 Cor. 5:18; 2 Cor. 4:17; 1

Tim. 1:12). Service permeates the whole life of the Jesus-Community.379

7.3. JESUS-COMMUNITY IS A “COMMUNITY OF THE POOR”

For Soares-Prabhu the Jesus-Community consists of Jesus and his close

followers. “The new and unique religious experience of God as unutterably intimate

and close,” as abba, which Jesus communicates to his followers, forms the basis of

the Jesus-Community which reaches out to all in “universal and unconditional love”

transcending all barriers of caste, community and race.380

And this Jesus-Community

was a community made up of the poor: Jesus who made himself poor and his close

followers who were poor. Jesus not only identifies himself with the poor and the

outcasts but he himself becomes poor and outcast.381

His ministry unfurls mostly in

the poor country-side rather than in rich urban centres. “With astonishing freedom and

courage he stands up against the religious and social oppression of the poor.”382

His

proclamation has an unchanging “privilege of the Poor”383

and the “ending of poverty

377 Soares-Prabhu, “Radical Beginnings: The Jesus Community,” 144.

378 Soares-Prabhu, “Radical Beginnings: The Jesus Community,” 146.

379 Soares-Prabhu, “Radical Beginnings: The Jesus Community,” 146-147.

380 George M. Soares-Prabhu, “Jesus and the Poor,” in Collected Writings of George M. Soares-

Prabhu, Vol.4, 181. 381

Soares-Prabhu, “Jesus and the Poor,” 177. 382

Soares-Prabhu, “Jesus and the Poor,” 179. 383

George M. Soares-Prabhu, “The Bible as Magna Carta of Movements for Liberation and Human

Rights,” in Collected Writings of George M. Soares-Prabhu, Vol.4, 82.


[is] the ultimate goal of his mission.”384

Soares-Prabhu insists that the poor that Jesus

addresses are the real “sociologically poor” and not the metaphorical or religiously

poor.385

The followers of Jesus are also poor like him and are outcasts. The non-poor

followers of Jesus are very few and they are not “altogether comfortable in the Jesus

movement.”386

As Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza would say, “the scum of Palestinian

society… constituted the majority of Jesus‟ followers.”387

Thus, the Jesus-Community

was indeed a “church of the poor.”

7.4. THE “JESUS-COMMUNITY OF THE MARGINS”

The classical ecclesiologies are mostly produced and defined from reflection

and theology from the centre; the Church usually understands itself from the centre. A

freshness in ecclesiological reflection was experienced in the last century, thanks to

the ecclesiogenesis from the margins. Liberation theology facilitates a reflection and

theology from below, from the margins.388

An ecclesiological reflection from a

liberation theological perspective comes also, thus, from the margins. Ascribing to

liberation theology, our preferred theological perspective, we attempt to reflect on the

Indian Church from the margins of India. Liberation theology has produced

ecclesiology with the paradigm of the poor, thus “church of the poor.” In our project,

however, we shall attempt to use the paradigm of the margins to propose a suitable

ecclesiological reflection that is particularly relevant to the margins of India. Our

ecclesiological reflection on the “Church of the Margins” or the “Marginal Church” is

similar to the liberation theological ecclesiology to the extent that it shares the parallel

perspective of the poor, the theological reflection from below, but it is also different

to the extent that it deals with specifically Indian margins which are not merely

economical but are sociological and religious as well. The dalits, the Adivasis and the

women of India, the “triune margins” of Indian church and Indian society, share the

general plight of the poor of the world, the margins of the world, but are also

384 Soares-Prabhu, “Jesus and the Poor,” 183.

385 Soares-Prabhu, “Jesus and the Poor,” 184.

386 Saores-Prabhu, “Jesus and the Poor,” 178.

387 Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, In Memory of Her (New York: Crossroad, 1983), 129.

388 Lee thinks that even if liberation theologies have “contributed greatly to the removal of the

dominant group theological monopoly, in general such schools of thought still operate under the

auspices of the dominant groups who define and control the center” for the west seems to

monopolize the method and validity of theology. Further, Lee considers the theological approach of

marginality different from the liberation theological approach as, according to Lee, the theology of

marginality is inclusive – open towards official and traditional theology though different from it –

while liberation theologies are exclusive of, and confrontational to, traditional and official theology.

See Lee, Marginality, 65, 73.


distinctively coloured by the specific Hindu social hierarchical system which has

found its way right into the inner life of the Church in India.

7.4.1. Jesus: the Marginal Nazarene

Jesus, very soon after his birth, had to flee to the margins of the land of Israel

(Mt. 2:15). In his ministry, Jesus withdraws himself into Galilee which is not the

centre of Judaism. Bruner asserts that “Jesus worked where Judaism touched

paganism, where the Nation intersected the nations, where light met darkness. Jesus

lived among the marginal peoples, on the frontier.”389

Jesus reaches to the margins,

but is also rejected at the margins (Mt. 8:28-34). Jesus was marginalized both at the

centre and at the margins. “Jesus chose to be a stranger, to move at the margins of his

society,” not merely to acquire an outsider‟s perspective but also to become

marginalized himself.390

As Meier explains, “Jesus seemed intent on marginalizing

himself, at least from the center of power in Jerusalem, if not from more pious Jews as

well. In the end, Caiaphas and Pilate marginalized him with the shameful death of

crucifixion.”391

Jesus both embraced the marginalized and experienced marginality

alongside the marginalized. As Lee rightly puts it, “To be the son of the living God

does not mean to be centre of centrality. It means to be at the margin of marginality,

the servant of all servants.”392

Jesus being called a “Nazarene” (Mt. 2:23) itself places the figure of Jesus on

the margins. Nazareth in the time of Jesus was, as John P. Meier describes, is a village

in the hills of Lower Galilee, “so obscure that it is never mentioned in the OT,

Josephus, Philo, or the early literature of the rabbis or the OT pseudepigrapha.”393

Horsley describes Nazareth as “an inauspicious agricultural community of under 500

people.”394

Nazareth was clearly an obscure, isolated village, and there is no mention

389 Frederick Dale Bruner, The Christbook: A Historical/Theological Commentary (Waco, TX: World

Books, 1987), 119. 390

Gioacchino Campese, “Walk Humbly with Your God! Notes on a Spirituality for Missionaries,”

Missiology 25:2 (1997), 135. 391

John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. Volume 3: Companions and

Competitors (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 8. Meier indicates that “marginal Jew” is in no way

meant to deny the essential Jewishness of Jesus; he was “intensely Jewish and yet was marginalized

by or from the institutionalized centres of Jewish power.” He draws analogy with Qumran

community “which had been pushed to the margins, socially and politically, by the rulers of

Jerusalem” in one sense, and in the other “Qumranites had wilfully marginalized themselves vis-à-

vis what they saw as an apostate Israel.” 392

Lee, Marginality, 78. 393

John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, vol.1 (New York: Doubleday,

1991), 268. 394

Richard Horsley, Galilee: History, Politics, People (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International,

1995), 193.


of Nazareth or Nazarene in the Old Testament. In other words, Jesus grew up in the

“margins” of the society. Further, “Jesus the Nazarene” had overtones of contempt as

indicated in Acts 24:5, when “the Nazarene sect” is spoken of derogatorily.395

Earle

states that “Nazarene” was virtually synonymous with “despised” as indicated in John

1:45-46 when Nathaniel‟s knee jerk response to Jesus is, “Nazareth! Can anything

good come from there?”396

Thus, Mathew‟s text “He will be called a Nazarene” seems

to testify that Jesus indeed is “a man of the margins.”

Jesus also consciously resisted any processes of alienation of him and his

ministry from the margins and marginal people. James Cone, the African American

theologian, interprets the temptation story (Lk. 4:1ff; Mt. 4:1ff) as Jesus‟ rejection of

roles which attempt to separate him from the poor. The temptation story “affirms that

Jesus rejected such roles as wonder worker or political king, because they would

separate him from the suffering of the poor, the very people he had come to

liberate.”397

Lee calls Jesus the “marginal person par excellence” recounting the numerous

evidences of Jesus‟ marginality in the Gospels to justify it. Jesus was a friend of the

people on the margins: outcasts, tax collectors, Gentiles, women, the poor, and the

oppressed. He was rejected by the dominant centres, such as Pharisees, Sadducees and

the Romans, while the people of the margins accepted him. He was homeless (Mt.

8:20). And his death on the cross is the height of his marginalisation, as death is the

“absolute negation of life.”398

Lee views the mystery of incarnation as the mystery of

marginalization: “The essence of Christmas story is, then, Jesus‟ divine

marginalization: God marginalized his son to save the world.”399

7.4.2. Marginal Followers of Jesus

Most of the disciples of Jesus were fishermen. While fishermen were not

necessarily poor, the occupation of fishing was considered menial. Another disciple

was a tax collector, whose profession was treated with contempt and disdain in Jewish

395 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Mathew (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1992), 49.

396 Ralph Earle, “Mathew.” Footnotes in Kenneth Barker, ed., The NIV Study Bible (Grand Rapids, MI:

Zondervan, 1985), 1444. 397

James H. Cone, God of the Oppressed (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1997 [8th

print, 2005]), 69. 398

Lee, Marginality, 72. 399

Lee, Marginality, 80.


society. Jesus‟ disciples included also a Zealot, branded bandits in his time. 400

Most

of the people who followed Jesus were poor and outcasts. Meier suggests that while

the word “follower” (akolouthos) is not used in the NT, the word “to follow”

(akoloutheō) is used as an umbrella term for all those who follow Jesus. Thus, there

are three distinctive groups of followers in the gospels: the “crowds” found around

Jesus, the “disciples” who followed, and the Twelve who belonged to the inner

circle.401

The largest group that “followed” Jesus was the “crowds” (ochloi). “The

crowds” designates “large, undifferentiated mass of people around Jesus.” Meier

suggests that the crowd is mostly faceless and anonymous in the Gospels. Most

people in the crowds may have been poor, but cannot be equated with “sinners”

(hamartōloi); for the most part the crowds were a rather sympathetic audience than

committed adherents.402

But “the crowd” which seems to be always present around

Jesus and his ministry cannot be so insignificant in the Gospel narratives. Ahn Byung-

Mu, the Korean biblical scholar and one of the founding fathers of Minjung Theology,

argues that the word ochlos cannot be without significance since it occurs 36 times in

Mark‟s Gospel and Mark introduced it as against the more popular biblical term laos

for people.403

Surveying the use of ochlos in Mark, Byung-Mu argues against the

crowd being “faceless” and characterizes them as sinners and tax collectors who are

on the fringes of the mainstream society and political and religious powers.404

Byung-

Mu interprets the “crowd around Jesus”, the ochlos, as the minjung of the Jewish

society. He suggests, in a different perspective than Meier, that the ochlos/minjung

“are not those who appear in the background in order to reveal who Jesus was,” but

rather Jesus was “a mirror that reflected the minjung.”405

Elsewhere, he would affirm,

400 Cf. Ahn Byung-Mu, “Jesus and Ochlos in the Context of His Galilean Ministry,” in Paul S. Chung

et al, eds., Asian Contextual Theology for the Third Millennium: Theology of Minjung in Fourth-

Eye Formation, Princeton Theological Monograph Series 70 (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2007), 39-40. 401

Meier, A Marginal Jew, vol. III, 19-20. 402

Meier, A Marginal Jew, vol. III, 22-30. 403

The word laos occurs some 2000 times in Septuagint. But Mark does not use the word laos at all in

his Gospel except in a quotation from the OT in Mk.7:6. Ochlos occurs also 49 times in Mathew

and 41 times in Luke. Cf. Ahn Byung-Mu, “Jesus and the Minjung in the Gospel of Mark,” in

Commission on Theological Concerns of the Christian Conference of Asia (CTC-CCA), ed.,

Minjung Theology: People as the Subjects of History (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1983), 139. 404

Cf. Byung-Mu, “Jesus and the Minjung in the Gospel of Mark,” 140-146. 405

Byung-Mu, “Jesus and Ochlos,” 44.


“Where there is Jesus, there is the Minjung. And where there is the Minjung, there is

Jesus.”406

Not only did Jesus journey out to the margins, but the margins journeyed out

to him; large crowds from the margins follow him (Mt. 4:24-25). Early in the ministry

of Jesus in Capernaum, the centurion approaches Jesus seeking to heal his paralyzed

servant, and whose faith Jesus declares is greater than anyone else‟s in Israel (Mt. 8).

In this encounter, Jesus seems to extend the marginality as he states: “many will come

from the east and the west and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac,

and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.” (Mt. 8:11).

7.4.3. Galilee is Graceful: Grace of the Margins

“Are you from Galilee, too? Look into it and you will find that a prophet does

not come out of Galilee” (John 7:52). Galilee was at the “margins” of the Jewish

community in the time of Jesus. The Jews from Jerusalem frowned upon the Galilean

Jews due to Galilean contact with Gentile cultures.407

The Jewish community in

Jerusalem was known to be rigorous in the observation of the law and so was in

conflict with the Galilean Jews who tended to be more lenient in the observation of

the law due to their exposure to Gentiles.408

Ordinary Jews in a district such as Galilee

had no real stake in the purity system or boundary regulations. In fact, they “may have

identified with non-Jewish peasants who were in a similar situation in the social

structure over against their Jewish rulers.”409

The influx of the foreigners, in particular

Canaanites and Sidonians, created vast ethnic diversity in Galilee,410

which explains

Mathew‟s reference to “Galilee of the Gentiles” (Mt. 4:15). Galil means ring or circle;

Galil of the Gentiles likely refers to the surrounding Gentile cities.411

In many ways Mathew depicts the option of Jesus for the marginal Galilee.412

Jesus‟ family and Jesus make the marginal Galilee their home. Jesus‟ family

406 Ahn Byung-Mu, “Jesus and People (Minjung),” in R.S. Sugirtharajah, ed., Asian Faces of Jesus

(London: SCM, 1993), 167. 407

Morris, The Gospel According to Mathew, 82. 408

Horsley, Galilee: History, Politics, People, 156-157. 409

Richard Horsley, Sociology and the Jesus Movement, 2nd

ed., (New York: Continuum, 1994), 120-

121. 410

Horsley, Galilee: History, Politics, People, 41. 411

Richard Horsley, Archaeology, History, and Society in Galilee (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press

International, 1996), 17. 412

We say marginal Galilee in a religious sense; this is not to suggest that Galilee was politically and

economically bad during the time of Jesus. Meier suggests that “Galilee was relatively prosperous

and peaceful” during the time of Herod Antipas (4-39 BCE). Galilee was in turmoil in the periods

before and after the reign of Antipas. Thus, many presentations of a revolutionary and violent


“withdrew into the district of Galilee, and lived in a town called Nazareth” (Mt. 2:22-

23), and Jesus himself withdrew into Galilee (Mt. 4:16). The evangelist Mathew has

reversed the traditional association of Galilee with darkness and death, and Judean

homeland with safety and security. In Jesus, Galilee is now safe; Judea is now

dangerous.413

After being tempted in the wilderness, Mathew says, Jesus withdrew

into Galilee (Mt. 4:12) for, as Hagner suggests, Galilee provided better opportunities

of ministry for Jesus, in a more distant and tolerant atmosphere than Jerusalem,

dissociated from the centre of the Pharisees‟ authority.414

The rural setting of Galilee

functioned as a symbol of the newness of Jesus‟ mission in contrast to the established

forms of Judaism in Jesus‟ day.415

It is significant that Jesus‟ first disciples were not

called from the religious ranks of Jerusalem, but were called from their nets along the

shores at Galilee. The tension between Jesus, the marginal Galilean peasant, claiming

“charismatic religious authority outside the recognized channels,” and “the high

priestly families of Jerusalem, whose power depended on controlling the sacred centre

of Judaism” is clear from the Gospels;416

religiously, it is hostility between the

marginal Galilee and central Jerusalem of Jewish religion. As Meier beautifully

depicts, the conflict of the Jesus-Galilee-margin and the Priestly-Jerusalem-centre:

[Jesus] was a no-account Galilean in conflict with Jerusalem aristocrats; he was

(relative to his opponents) a poor peasant in conflict with the urban rich; he was a

charismatic wonderworker in conflict with priests very much concerned about

preserving the central institutions of their religion and their smooth operation; he

was an eschatological prophet promising the coming of God‟s kingdom in conflict

with Sadducean politicians having a vested interest in the status quo. But

underneath many of these conflicts lay another conflict: he was a religiously

committed layman who seemed to be threatening the power of an entrenched

group of priests.417

Galilee may be projections of the context of Galilee before or after Herod Antipas. See Meier, A

Marginal Jew, vol.1, 282-283. Horsley makes an important observation about historical narratives

of Galilee. As the illiterate peasants left no literature, we can only hear about them through the

literate elite. These rulers, however, mentioned the common Galileans only when they disrupted

established order, in outcries, protests and movements against the rulers. So, these narratives cannot

give the true image of the ordinary Galileans. Richard A. Horsley, Galilee: History, Politics, People

(Valley Forge, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International, 1995), 257. 413

As pointed out in the above footnote, Galilee was peaceful during the time of the ministry of Jesus

because of the able rule of the region by Herod Antipas. However, in a religious sense –which is

our concern here– Jesus does transform the region of Galilee in his very preferential option for the

region of Galilee as against the region of Judea. 414

Donald Hagner, World Biblical Commentary: Mathew 1-13 (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1993), 72. 415

Sean Freyne, “Galilee,” in Bruce Metzger and Michael Coogan, eds., The Orthodox Companion to

the Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 242. 416

Meier, A Marginal Jew, vol.1, 347. 417

Meier, A Marginal Jew, vol.1, 347.


In Jesus, the margins of religious power challenge the central powers of religion.

Galilee which was an obscure margin of Jewish religion until the coming of Jesus is

transformed into a significant and active space of religion in the ministry of Jesus.

Indeed, the land of darkness and death became the land of life and light. In Jesus,

Galilee becomes “graceful”; Jesus makes the “margins” graceful.

7.4.4. Salvation comes from the Margins

Jesus transformed Galilee into God‟s new centre of mission. Jerusalem crowds

journeyed to the margins at Galilee to find salvation (Mt.4:24-25). This seems to

confirm Jung Young Lee‟s argument that true liberation occurs when “the norm shifts

from the centre to the margins.” For Lee, liberation occurs when the centralists move

to the margins rather than when the marginalized move to the centre. Once everyone

becomes marginal, marginality overcomes marginality.418

For Jesus, however, the

margin never becomes a fixed centre replacing the previous centre. Jesus‟ marginality

represents mobility and flexibility. Jesus will eventually travel to the centre,

Jerusalem, and die for the world there. The centralists journey to the margins for their

salvation; likewise, the marginalized must be allowed to journey to the centre where

their mere presence awakens the centre and transforms centre-margin dynamics.

Marginality and centrality are mutually inter-dependent; one cannot exist

without the other. There cannot be a centre without the margins and there cannot be

margins without the centre.419

Pushing ourselves a little further, we can say that both

the centre and the margins will become non-existent when one or both will move

away from its location. When the margins push themselves away from marginality,

then not only will the margins disappear, but the centre as well. Some argue that when

margins aim to scrawl to the centre, then centre will be pushed to the margins, or new

margins are created. But that need not be the case; such argument may come from the

fixated margin-centre dialectic in which the centre always thinks it needs the margins.

In the church, the margins need to struggle for the salvific liberation from the

margins, while the centres need to launch into the liberative journey towards the

margins. When both the margins as well as the centres move away from their

locations, they do not relocate into each other‟s locations, the centre to the margins

and the margins to the centre, but they locate to a new reality; the salvific struggle of

418 Jung Young Lee, Marginality: The Key to Multicultural Theology (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress

Press, 1995), 151. 419

See Lee, Marginality, 30-31.


the margins and the liberative journey of the centres will merge into the new reality of

the kingdom where there is neither centre nor margin.420

Margins are the “liberative locus” for humanity; margins are the “graceful

Galilees” of salvation. Salvation comes from the margins to the marginalized as well

as to the centralized. Salvation for the centre lies in the margins for it is on the

margins they can find the Crucified Saviour who dispenses his salvation through the

marginalized of the margins. It is only on the margins that they can hear the call of the

Crucified for repentance and transformation, an evangelical call to denial of

discrimination, oppression and exploitation, a call to launch into that liberative and

transformative pilgrimage towards the margins. Salvation for the margins also lies in

the margins not so much in being oppressed and pushed to the margins by the rich and

the powerful, but in the resilient resistance that such life on margins inspires and

facilitates, a resistance that characterised the life and mission of Christ himself, and a

resistance which flows into the people of the margins from the Crucified Saviour

himself living with the marginalized on the margins.

7.4.5. Crucified Outside the Gate: Margin par excellence

The crucifixion of Jesus is the grand culmination of his marginality; the

“grand epiphany” of Jesus‟ marginalisation. The Cross is the “margin par excellence.”

“Therefore Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people by his

own blood. Let us then go to him outside the camp and bear the abuse he endured”

(Heb. 13:12-13). Jesus was killed outside the camp, outside the gate, outside the

establishment, outside the city and the bounds of village where marginal people are

forced to dwell and die. He was scourged and spat upon, slapped, mocked and abused.

He was branded a culprit and hanged as a criminal. He was forsaken by his friends

and disciples, and felt forsaken by his Father.

Crucifixion was the most cruel and inhuman form of execution meted out to

criminals and slaves. The Cross symbolized marginalization. “The cross was a means

of dividing citizens from noncitizens, the socially acceptable from the rejected. It was

the ultimate form of societal exclusion.”421

It is the hideous tool of oppression used on

420 Lee suggests that the affirmation of marginality over centrality creates a new centre, an authentic

centre that is non-oppressive. See Lee, Marginality, 31. But we defer from what Lee suggests: we

suggest that affirmation of the marginality creates a new reality which can be called neither centre

nor margin; we prefer to call it the new reality of the Kingdom of God which overcomes the centre-

margin dialectic altogether. 421

Warren Carter, Mathew and the Margins: A Socio-Political and Religious Reading (Sheffield:

Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), 243-244.


the victims of social and political oppression. As Carter would say, Jesus‟ crucifixion

was the “ultimate form of marginalization available.”422

There on that cross, the

political power and the religious power entered a most unholy alliance to rid

themselves of Jesus for their own respective reasons.

A most visible feature of the marginality of the marginal people is the loss of

freedom. Depicting the marginality of Jesus‟ crucifixion, the skandalon, C. S. Song

says that Jesus on the cross “was no longer in command of his own life. He even lost

the freedom of life. The crucifixion deprived him the freedom to be free.”423

Most

people on the margins have neither the ability nor the opportunities to free themselves

from their oppression. Similarly, Jesus who was marginalized on the cross “was not

able to free himself from the cross.” Thus, he was challenged “Come down from the

cross,” and jeered at saying “He saved others, but he cannot save himself.” Jesus on

the cross was “a scandal of a divine magnitude.”424

Kosuke Koyama, the Japanese theologian, depicts the life of Jesus as “the

centre becoming the periphery.” The life of Jesus for him is a constant journey

towards the periphery. But the journey towards the periphery ends on the cross, which

for Koyama, is the “ultimate periphery”: “His life moves towards the periphery. He

expresses his centrality in the periphery by reaching the extreme periphery. Finally on

the cross, he stops this movement. There he cannot move. He is nailed down. This is

the point of ultimate periphery.”425

Jesus reaches his ultimate margin on the cross;

Christ crucified reveals a God who pushes himself to the farthest margins of

humanity, a God who is extremely marginalised.

7.5. CHURCH OF THE MARGINS

James H. Cone says that there can exist no theology based on the Gospel

message that does not arise from the marginalized communities.426

We can add, there

can be no ecclesiology based on the Gospel that does not arise from the margins. The

radical message of the Gospel is that Jesus is in solidarity with the oppressed; he is

one with the marginalized. The Church of the margins originates from the margins of

the society where the victims of all manner of oppression live, the ones who “do not

422 Carter, Mathew and the Margins, 531.

423 C. S. Song, Jesus, the Crucified People (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 83.

424 Song, Jesus, the Crucified People, 84.

425 Kosuke Koyama, “The Crucified Christ Challenges Human Power,” in R.S. Sugirtharajah, ed.,

Asian Faces of Jesus (London: SCM, 1993), 154. 426

James H. Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1999), 5.


count,” the ones whose faces reflect the “suffering features of Christ the Lord.” Such

Church of the margins which originates from the margins will be liberative of the

margins because the marginalized know what it means to be marginalized people

attempting to survive within a social context designed to benefit the privileged few at

their expense. Cone says it best when he writes, “Only those who do not know

bondage existentially can speak of liberation „Objectively.‟ Only those who have not

been in the „valley of death‟ can sing the songs of Zion as if they are uninvolved.”427

7.5.1. Marginal People of God

The early Church was predominantly a marginal church comprising mostly the

“people of the margins.” Horsley suggests that not only has the early Church after the

death of Jesus – the Jesus Movement, as he calls it – spread mostly in the villages, but

also that the majority of these communities comprised of peasants, fishermen and

craftspeople.428

While there were surely also prominent and rich people who joined

the early Church – such as Susanna and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, etc. – these are

however, exceptions. People of the Jesus Movement in the period after the death of

Jesus were a persecuted and marginalised people.429

7.5.2. Marginal Ministries

Jesus was not born a marginal, but he made himself a marginal. Jesus was

poor, but not the “poorest of the poor.” As Meier rightly suggests: “He was indeed in

one sense poor, ... But Jesus was probably no poorer or less respectable than almost

anyone else in Nazareth, or for that matter in most of Galilee. His was not the

grinding, degrading poverty of the day labourer or the rural slave.”430

“Jesus comes

out of a peasant background, but he is not an ordinary peasant;” his literacy extended

to reading and interpreting sophisticated theological texts;431

his skills at woodwork

are not ordinary either.432

The regular disdain and provocation that Jesus‟ mixing with

the tax-collectors, sinners and outcasts depicted in the Gospels suggests that he

himself was not one of them; an outcast mixing with other outcasts is not scandalous.

Moreover, the Gospels also show Pharisees and other respectable citizens interacting

427 James H. Cone, Speaking the Truth: Ecumenism, Liberation, and Black Theology (Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis, 1999), 22. 428

Horsley, Sociology and the Jesus Movement, 121. 429

Richard A. Horsley, Jesus in Context: Power, People and Performance (Minneapolis: Fortress,

2008), 52-55. 430



Meier, A Marginal Jew, vol.1, 281.


with him, even if they differed with what he said and did; Pharisees would have

totally shunned Jesus if he was an outcast himself.433

As Meier would say, “the lines

of communications were open” between Jesus and the Pharisees, “even if they are

often red hot.”434

Jesus admonishes his followers: “whoever does not take up his cross and

follow me is not worthy of me (Mt. 10:38).” Jesus‟ words are an invitation to a

“discipleship of marginal ministries.” It is a call to choose a way of life of

marginalization, to identify with the nobodies like slaves, and with those understood

to be cursed by God.

7.5.3. Marginal Koinonia

Marginal Koinonia is a communion that has the communion of the marginal

people at the heart of its life and activity. While the marginal koinonia is an

egalitarian koinonia that rejects no one in its fold and welcomes and seeks everyone, it

nevertheless has a preferential option and orientation for the communion of the people

on the margins. The koinonia which Jesus established was indeed a marginal

koinonia, as Lohfink ascertains that Jesus “constantly established community –

precisely for those who were denied community at that time, or who were judged

inferior in respect to religion.”435

Jesus invited all into his communion, but especially

those on the margins “because it was these groups which were denied equality or even

refused community in contemporary Jewish society.”436

Jesus‟ marginal koinonia

includes an equal communion of women, the “invisible margins,” as much as the poor

and the outcast, the “visible margins.” Communities of the early church “rejected

rank, power, and prestige, valuing instead service to the community;” they perceived

themselves more as an egalitarian non-patriarchal family.437

The Eucharist, the Table-

Fellowship, which Jesus established, the Jesus-Community shared, and the early

Church communities nurtured faithfully, was a radical meal of thanksgiving, equality

and community. The koinonia of Jesus community and the early Christian

communities had a distinctive social ethics the personal dignity of all humans and an

433 Cf. James F. McGrath, “Was Jesus Illegitimate? The Evidence of His Social Interactions,” Journal

for the Study of the Historical Jesus 5:1 (2007), 94-95. 434


Lohfink, Jesus and Community, 88. 436

Lohfink, Jesus and Community, 89. 437

Horsley, Sociology and the Jesus Movement, 122-124.


equality that transcended social status (Gal. 3:28).438

The Church as koinonia is a

marginal koinonia that is in communion with the marginal people of the times:

The communion which the Church is called to be, is not a mere intra-ecclesial

reality. It is a communion with the poor to whom the Kingdom of God is

promised. Participation with the poor in their struggles is nothing but the

expression of that communion – a communion capable of eliciting creative

energies from the poor themselves for the transformation of the present order of

things.439

7.5.4. Marginally One, Holy, Apostolic and Catholic

A Marginally One Church is a community that is equitable, “one” in the real

sense of the word. It is “oneness” in which all differences of caste, colour and race are

marginalised in the communion of the believers. Marginally Holy is a community

which struggles for justice and equality. It is “holy” in its struggle to follow its

Saviour in his option for the poor. The Church is marginally Apostolic in its

manifestation of preaching the good news to the poor and liberation for the captives. It

is marginally Catholic in making the poor and the people on the periphery the centre

of its life and ministry. A “marginally one, holy, apostolic and catholic” Church is

always in solidarity with the poor. Solidarity with the poor is solidarity with Christ.

“Not to stand with the poor and the suffering is surprisingly not to stand with Jesus,”

as the discourse on the last judgement (Mt. 25:31ff.) reminds us.440

7.5.5. Marginal Church as Equitable Church

The Pentecost community reveals a new way of being community inaugurated

by the power of the Holy Spirit. The Pentecost community was gathered by God into

a new relationship “which excluded privileges and discrimination.”441

Rather than

coercing a false sense of community through domination and social control, or simply

breaking off into small enclaves of like-minded others, the new community born from

Christ‟s saving work embraces difference and strives to build bridges between

different peoples because in Christ we find an all-inclusive common ground.

The Pentecost community in Jerusalem not only shared communion through

the Eucharist but also shared their meals and property as needed (Acts. 2:44-47).

438 The sociologist Rodney Stark argues that this distinctive social ethics was a major factor in the

spread of the Christianity in the Roman Empire. Cf. Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity: A

Sociologist Reconsiders History (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1997), esp. 212. 439

Felix Wilfred, “Temptation of the Church in India Today,” Vidyajoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 47 (1983), 324. 440

Winston D. Persaud, “The Cross of Jesus Christ, the Unity of the Church, and Human Suffering,” in

Yacob Tesfai, ed., The Scandal of a Crucified World (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1994), 128. 441

Lohfink, Jesus and Community, 87.


Pentecost formed a community that broke through not just the barriers of language

and culture but also the barriers of wealth and social class. The Church in the early

centuries was an egalitarian community, striving to affirm in practice the infinite

worth of the neighbour, and an inclusive community that recognized the equality of

all before God. The children, the soldiers, sinners, foreigners and the ritually impure

were all made at home in this egalitarian community. This makes it clear that a vital

aspect for understanding Christ‟s saving work is the importance of transgressing

borders for the sake of a more equitable social order. It is not enough to self-identify

as a marginalized minority group and then unite as an isolated ethnic community for

political survival; genuine marginal identity seeks to overturn the very process of

social, political, and cultural marginalization in order to establish a society that

recognizes the full humanity of all God‟s children. Given this understanding, the

“marginalized identity” cannot be reduced to either biology or culture; rather,

“marginalized” is the embodiment of a spiritual reality –“Let the same mind be in you

that was in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 2:5). Accordingly, it is not merely a static identity but

one characterized by a concrete liberating praxis best described as the continuation of

Christ‟s saving work.

God created people equal in his sight and his love for them should be

expressed in ensuring that all have access to the abundance of the earth. His Son was

at pains to be one with those in greatest need. The Trinity is a revelation of a

community and fellowship which should be reflected amongst human beings. It

follows that, as one aspect of its obedience to the Lord, the Church should be prepared

to encourage equality. It should do so in regard to the followers of Christ and also in

regard to the world at large for Christians believe that God cares about all of his

creatures whether they acknowledge him or not. The Church should make the

proclamation of equality a significant part of its public ministry. “The proclamation of

a God who loves all human beings in equal fashion must be enfleshed, incarnated, in

history – must become history.”442

The Church cannot promote equality in the world without giving priority to

practising equality in its own ranks. At present, in many ways, instead of challenging

the inequality of the world it appears to reflect it. Inequality is visible in its leadership

as well as membership. Church life should be an expression that all kinds of people

are one in the sight of God. To counter its own inequalities and to promote the

equality of the Gospel, the Church must open its leadership to a wider range. This will

442 Gustavo Gutiérrez, The Power of the Poor in History (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1983), 19.


entail removing in-built biases towards those with the “right” background,

connections and accents. It will mean a mind-shift which accepts that the poor and the

deprived of this world have as much to teach as the powerful and mighty. There

should be equality of access to church resources; the majority of the church resources

must be shifted to its margins.

An equitable distribution of burdens and benefits is essential to living together

as a community. In living together as a tangible community of care and concern for

each other, especially for the marginalized, God is made present in human affairs. The

socioeconomic order derives its vibrancy from the dynamism of its constituent

individuals as they both contribute to and derive benefits from each other. This vital

synergy is impeded by severe inequalities within the community.

7.5.6. Marginal Church as Liberative Church

Because the Judeo-Christian faith is based on the God of Exodus who can hear

the cries for freedom from the marginalized and enters history to lead them toward

liberation, any ecclesiological reflection arising from that faith that wishes to remain

faithful to that religious tradition must remain rooted in the praxis of liberation.

Ecclesiology from the margins should struggle with the question of power and how to

crucify power and the privilege that comes with it so that justice and love can reign

instead. Ecclesiology from the margins must engage the faith community‟s struggle

with the goal of dismantling the mechanism responsible for creating the inhumanity

faced by marginalized people. The faith community‟s response to the use, misuse and

abuse of power becomes paramount to the church of the margins.

Horsley indicates that the material in the Sayings Tradition suggests that

“Jesus and/or his movement were concerned for the concrete alleviation of hunger,

debt, and other symptoms of poverty.”443

The Church of Jesus Christ is called to

identify and stand in solidarity with the marginalized and oppressed. The act of

solidarity becomes the litmus test of biblical fidelity and the paradigm used to analyze

and judge how social structures contribute to or efface the exploitation of the

marginalized. To be apart from the marginalized community of faith is to exile

oneself from the possibility of hearing and discerning the gospel message of salvation

443 Horsley, Sociology and the Jesus Movement, 124. Horsley cites some texts in support of such

suggestion: idealistic summarizing in Acts 2:44-46; 4:32, especially feeding the hungry through sale

of properties and possessions (Acts 2:45; 4:32-37); stories of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-6);

Paul‟s concrete activity to alleviate poverty among “saints” (2 Cor. 8-9).


–a salvation from the ideologies that mask power and privilege and the social

structures responsible for their maintenance.

7.5.7. Marginal Church as a Just Church

As Christians, we believe in a “God of Justice.” Justice is a central theme of

the biblical witness, which presents a distinctive account of justice as integral to the

being of God. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, justice is understood in relational

terms. It is about the proper structure of relationships between God and people, and

among human beings. The biblical understanding of justice is thus primarily and

pervasively social. Justice is not a virtue or quality which an individual can have in

isolation, as it were. It is rather a quality of relationship; it has to do with the links of

obligation, responsibility and care that bind people together in society. As Gustavo

Gutierrez states, “justice and right cannot be emptied of the content bestowed on them

by the Bible.”444

The biblical notion of the covenant, which particularly manifests the

righteousness of God, obliges the powerful to accept responsibility for the vulnerable

of the two partners. The covenant of Noah set forth the responsibility of the human to

the nonhuman creation. The Mount Sinai covenant required the Israelites to accept

responsibility for the widow, the orphan, the stranger, and the poor in their midst.

Likewise, the Jesus covenant insists on responsibility for the poor, the sick, the

hungry, the prisoner, and the stranger.

As a “people of the God of justice,” the church is called to be a “community of

justice.” The justice of God that is known and celebrated in Christian worship cannot

be confined to some ritual or sacred dimension of life, or simply a matter that

concerns the relation between God and the individual soul. People of God need to

reflect the justice of God in the quality of their dealings with their neighbours. Human

justice is the response to divine justice, and is modelled upon it. We are justified by

God, so that we respond in justice to our neighbours. James Dunn argues that the

concept of “justification by faith” is essentially social and is concerned with the

breaking down of barriers that keep people apart and hostile to one another; it erases

all presumptions of privileged status before God by virtue of race, culture, nationality,

and status.445

Justice is thus constitutive of community, and of a very special kind of

community in which pride, privilege and oppression are minimised, and in which

444 Gutierrez, Power of the Poor in History, 211.

445 See James D. G. Dunn, “The Justice of God: A Renewed Perspective on Justification by Faith,”

Journal of Theological Studies 43:1 (1992), 1-22.


there is a central stress on reconciliation.446

Within a community justice demands a

special concern for the disadvantaged and the marginalised, for the orphan, the widow

and the poor. The Church as a just community must seek strenuously to include them

fully within its life. The justice of the Kingdom of God involves breaking down the

barriers and divisions in order to establish a new and just community.

Being a “just community” or a “community of justice” would also require it to

be a community of mercy and forgiveness, for in the Christian tradition, forgiveness

and mercy are integral to divine justice. Mercy, forgiveness and reconciliation are at

the heart of God‟s justice, and they are essential components of doing justice in the

Judaeo-Christian tradition. So says Pope John Paul II: “True mercy is, so to speak, the

most profound source of justice.”447

The true test of the justice of any society or community is indeed the treatment

of the poor. The Church cannot claim to be a “community of justice” if it does not opt

for the poor. The option for the poor remains an integral part of Christian justice, as

the US bishops have very succinctly stated:

From the Scriptures and church teaching, we learn that the justice of a society is

tested by the treatment of the poor. The justice that was the sign of God‟s

covenant with Israel was measured by how the poor and unprotected … were

treated. The kingdom that Jesus proclaimed in his word and ministry excludes no

one. … As followers of Christ, we are challenged to make a fundamental “option

for the poor” –to speak for the voiceless, to defend the defenceless, to assess life

styles, policies, and social institutions in terms of their impact on the poor.448

7.6. THE SPIRITUALITY OF THE CHURCH OF THE MARGINS

7.6.1. Holiness as a Struggle for Justice

For Jesus, holiness means entering the kingdom and the dynamic thrust of its

socio-historical exigencies. The holiness to which Jesus summons his followers is not

the result of ascetic practices; it is a total openness to the demands of the mission, an

unshakeable fidelity to the task of proclaiming the good news to the oppressed. We

must shoulder as our own the evangelical project that Christ proclaimed in the

synagogue of Nazareth. We must commit ourselves to the poor and join them in their

struggle for justice. Life in the Spirit ceases to exist when it loses its dynamism and

446 See Markus Barth, “Jews and Gentiles: The Social Character of Justification in Paul,” Ecumenical

Studies 5 (1968), 241-267. 447

John Paul II, “Dives in Misericordia,” Origins 10:26 (11 Dec. 1980), 414. 448

United States Bishops Conference (USBC), Economic Justice for All, 16, in David J. O‟Brien and

Thomas A. Shannon, eds., Catholic Social Thought: The Documentary Heritage (Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis, 1992), 574-575.


fails to transform human beings. Holiness means transforming the history of injustice

and exploitation into a history of love and brotherhood. This is done from the

standpoint of the poor, the lowly, and the needy. Holiness which does not find

expression in a love that transforms the history of the forgotten people in our world is

a corruption of the Spirit‟s gifts. The New Testament idea that doing works of justice

means experiencing God (1 John 2:29) explains that the struggle for justice is indeed

the path to holiness.

This “holiness as struggle” is a “struggle on the margins.” The Struggle,

Amaladoss suggests, “situates itself dynamically between two poles: the experience of

suffering and the hope of a new world.”449

The paschal mystery –suffering, death and

resurrection of Jesus– is the privileged paradigm for the struggle.450

7.6.2. Holiness as Participation in Ethical Praxis

Christian holiness is inalienably linked to the Christian ethics. The spirituality

of the church of the margins calls for participation in ethical praxis; to be holy is to

participate in the ethical praxis of Jesus. Such participation in the ethical praxis of

Jesus will be a “process of liberation” both for the marginalized as well as the

privileged. It bestows dignity on the marginalized “non-persons” by accentuating their

worth as receptacles of the imago Dei, the very image of God, but also restores the

humanity of the privileged who falsely construct their identity through the negation of

the Other.

The ethical praxis before both those who are marginalized and those who are

privileged by the present institutionalized structures is not to reverse roles or to share

the role of the privileged at the expense of some other group. Rather, to dismantle the

very structures responsible for causing injustices along race, class, and gender lines,

regardless of the attitudes bound to those structures. Only then can all within society,

the marginalized as well as the privileged, achieve their full humanity and become

able to live the abundant life offered by Christ. The ethical praxis of the privileged

will involve a nailing and crucifying of their power and privilege to the cross so as to

become nothing (Phil. 2:6-8). John Paul II describes this in his Sollicitudo Rei Socialis

as “a commitment to the good of one‟s neighbour with readiness, in the gospel sense,

to „lose oneself‟ for the sake of the other instead of exploiting him, and to ;serve him‟

instead of oppressing him for one‟s own advantage (cf. Matt.10:40-42; 20:25; Mark

449 Michael Amaladoss, Life in Freedom: Liberation Theologies from Asia (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1997), 17. 450

Amaladoss, Life in Freedom, 18.


10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27).”451

The ethical praxis begins with self-negation and

surrender. Those who benefit from the power and privilege of social structures can

encounter the Absolute only through their own self-negation by crucifying their power

and privilege (Mk. 8:35). Such ethical praxis liberates those trapped by their race,

class, and gender privilege, so that they, in solidarity with the marginalized, can bring

about a just society based on the Gospel definition of justice.

7.6.3. Living with the Crucified on the Margins

Crucifixion is the marginality par excellence in the Jesus of the margins; the

image of the nailed, bruised, bleeding, exhausted and suffering Christ hanging

helplessly on the Cross best depicts the most extreme form of marginality in the

human history.

The real Jesus is not that cement Jesus pieta with a gold crown. The ready-made

Jesus encased in a statue, enshrined in a cathedral, endorsed by church traditions

and doctrines, is not the real Jesus. Jesus is the love of God that creates the miracle

of life in the world. Jesus is the pain of God mingled with the pain of humanity.

Jesus is the eternal life of God which people live in the midst of death. Jesus is,

lives, becomes real when God and people reach for each other to bring about a

new world out of the ruins of the old world.452

Like Christ, the marginalized of the earth die so that those with power and

privilege can have life abundantly. The centre of power can participate in all the

riches that life has to offer because those on the periphery die producing those riches.

Those suffering on the margins of society epitomize what liberation theologians call

God‟s “crucified people,” for they bear in a very real way the brunt of the sins of

today‟s oppressive social and economic structures. As a crucified people, they provide

an essential perspective on salvation. Theologians coming from the margins of power

insist that God intentionally and regularly chooses the oppressed of history, and

makes them the principal means of salvation. They maintain that this is done in the

same fashion as God chose the “suffering servant,” the crucified Christ, to bring

salvation to the world.453

The crucified Christ represents not simply one who has died as all finite beings

die, but one who has been executed by those who refuse his message, by those who

are determined to continue a system of unjust power and wealth that benefits

451 John Paul II, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 38, in O‟Brien and Shannon, eds., Catholic Social Thought,

422. 452

C. S. Song, “Oh, Jesus, Here With Us,” in R. S. Sugirtharajah, ed., Asian Faces of Jesus (London:

SCM, 1993), 146. 453

Jon Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: A Historical-Theological Reading of Jesus of Nazareth

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1993), 259-260.


themselves by impoverishing and oppressing the majority of others. This means that

those who are impoverished and oppressed today are the continuation of the

crucifixion of Christ. Their misery represents the continuation of the same will to

refuse the message of repentance and liberation which the crucified Christ preached

and continues to crucify the masses of people today. The crucified poor of history are

the “Servants of God” who testify by their misery to that same contrary will to God‟s

liberating message which crucified Christ. God in Christ continues to call us to repent

and to join in solidarity with the oppressed to complete the liberation of humanity.

The Eucharist re-presents the suffering of Jesus the Christ for the sake of the

world and simultaneously presents the world of suffering in need of healing. In

the Eucharist, the community gathered around the table lifts up its hearts in

thanksgiving for God‟s redemption. Simultaneously, Jesus Christ presents the

community with the needs of the suffering.454

7.7. JESUS-COMMUNITY OF THE MARGINS IN INDIA TODAY

Wilfred suggests that the “Indian church would be a community of the poor

who are transformed from within by making their own the experience of Jesus.”

However, this “transformation from within” is not a “de-historicised consciousness of

God”, but an inner experience whose fibres are “drawn from the historical experience

of the poor and the marginalised in their struggles.”455

The Church in India cannot be

a genuine “community of disciples of Jesus” without being in deep solidarity and

communion with the poor and the marginalised.456

7.7.1. Indian Church as an “Alien” on the Margins of India?

The engagement of the Church in India with the poor of India is centuries old.

The numerous Christian educational, medical and charitable institutions in India are

the impressive signposts of the work of the Indian Church for the poor in India.

Service of the Church to the poor in India is popularly epitomised in the life and work

of Mother Theresa. While there is no denying that the Church in India has done great

charity to the poor, one can yet perceive in the life and ministry of the Church in India

a certain “uncomfortable distance” from the poor. It works for the poor, but it is not

yet poor; it is there for the poor, but not with the poor; it seems to be for the poor, but

not of the poor. Felix Wilfred, while lamenting that church in India is alienated from

the poor although it has been engaged in charitable work to the poor, he notes that

“this ambiguity has, by and large, persisted since colonial times and no significant

454 Persaud, “The Cross, the Unity of the Church, and Human Suffering,” 128.

455 Felix Wilfred, On the Banks of the Ganges (New Delhi: ISPCK, 2002), 211-212.

456 Wilfred, On the Banks of Ganges, 214.


efforts have been made to surmount it and enter into a wholehearted commitment in

policy and in practice to the cause of the poor.”457

The Indian Church itself is deeply infected with caste discriminations within

every layer of its fabric, some of which we have tried to indicate in the beginning of

this chapter. The upper caste Christians, bishops, clergy and religious, dominate the

leadership of the church at all levels, from parish councils to national bodies, and are

unwilling, if not opposed, to share the leadership with the dalit and Adivasi Christians

of India. Upper caste Christians, especially the clergy and religious, see dalits and

Adivasi Christians only as “objects of their charity” but not as equal members of the

church, and much less capable and worthy of sharing the same leadership of the

church.458

7.7.2. Misplaced Ministries of the Indian Church for the Margins of India?

The Church in India has undoubtedly extended so much aid to the poor of

India for decades. But today when one looks at the Indian Church, it is not difficult

for one to grasp that many educational and other charitable ministries of the Church

seem to be misplaced, and the commitment of the Church to the poor is indeed

questionable today.459

A majority of the “good educational institutions” of the Church cater to the

non-poor, and a token number of “namesake educational institutions” of the Church

cater to the poor.460

It is hard to find the poor in the elite educational institutions of the

church in India. The poor Catholics of a parish do not even dare to step into the

campuses of these elite ecclesial educational institutions. In such a context, can one

affirm that the church in India is a “Church for the poor”? It is a deplorable irony that

a Catholic educational institute that celebrates a century of service in India, does not

have on record even 5% of poor Catholic students.461

Is it trying to be a “church for

the poor” or a “church for the elite”?

457 Wilfred, “Temptations of the Church in India Today,” 323.

458 Cf. Wilfred, On the Banks of Ganges, 129-131.

459 Cf. Kucheria Pathil, Trends in Indian Theology (Bangalore: ATC, 2005), 118-119.

460 Cf. Felix Wilfred, Dalit Empowerment (Bangalore: NBCLC, 2007), 152-155. “The Dalit Christians

had rare opportunity to enter into Christian institutions of higher education run by the various

religious congregations of the Roman Catholic Church. Even religious orders engaged in the field

of education for a long time, were promoting the upper castes and elites in their numerous

educational institutions, where dalits could not afford to enter.” Ibid., 155. 461

As per the statistics by All Indian Associations Forum for Christian Higher Education, there are

only 27603 (7.8%) dalit students out of the total number of 353,683 students in Church-run

colleges. Cf. S. Lourdusamy, Towards Empowerment of Dalit Christians. Equal Rights to All Dalits


What are the majority of the Religious doing in India? Where do we find today

the majority of the Religious in India? Most of them are engaged in running elite

educational institutions where the poor have no place. The late dalit bishop of Andhra,

Johannes Gorantla, rightly indicated that “the Catholic educational ministry has not

much benefited the Dalits” and that “in the last two decades most of the schools and

colleges opened by the dioceses and especially by the religious congregations are of

English medium, situated in the cities and towns, which are not affordable to the

Dalits and other subalterns.”462

John Dayal, President of the All India Christian

Council (AICC), laments “Christian schools, which are mostly located in metropolitan

cities and towns, have earned the reputation of being elite English language

institutions for the rich and powerful.”463

When most of its personnel are engaged in

running elite educational institutions, how can the Church say that it is a “Church for

the Poor?” No doubt, the Church has also some educational/charitable institutions for

the poor, but such are undoubtedly neither the best nor the most productive of its

institutes. So, does the Church in India give its “best fruits” to the rich and grant a

token “rotten fruits” to the poor? One justification for its elite institutes that the

Church in India has been parroting is that “knowledge is power” and that it is

empowering people with knowledge. Yes, it empowers the rich with the best

knowledge, and shares the scrapes of knowledge with the poor which takes them

nowhere.464

Even if there were noble intentions when such ministries began

yesteryear the church, when looking at these elite institutions today, it is hard to

believe that such “noble intentions” still hold good for their existence. They can be

regarded more easily as “profit-oriented” institutes rather than “knowledge-oriented”

institutes.

(Delhi: Centre for Dalit/Subaltern Studies, 2005), 27. We can further say that most of these 7.8%

dalit students in Church-run colleges come from better-off families among dalits rather than the

really poor dalits. A latest report of the World Bank says 48 of every 100 students in India pursuing

secondary education never go beyond that level. See http://ibnlive.in.com/news/school-shocker-48-

pc-indians-dropout-early/102833-3.html?from=tn 462

Bishop Johannes Gorantla and Anthoniraj Thumma, “Dalit Christians in the Third Millennium,” in

Thomas D‟Sa, ed., The Church in India in the Emerging Third Millennium (Bangalore: NBCLC,

2005), 156, 157. 463

Ajay Kumar Singh, “Hindu Radicals Dominate Orissa‟s Schools,” UCANEWS (25-06-2010), at

http://www.ucanews.com/2010/06/25/hindu-radicals-dominate-orissas-rural-schools (accessed on

25 June 2010). The author in this report speaks how the Hindu radical group, Rashtriya

Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has built a network of 793 schools in the rural areas of Orissa, as

against the educational ministry of Church in India. 464

As Felix Wilfred rightly says any ecclesiastical institutions that are not “seriously engaged for the

higher education of the marginalised groups such as tribals and dalits” lose their “Christian identity

and prophetism.” Felix Wilfred, The Sling of Utopia (Delhi: ISPCK, 2005), 260. See also pp. 273-

275 of the same book where he further elaborates the point.





Not many dioceses (local churches) have stated educational policies that

express their preferential option for the poor. Although some regional bishops‟

conferences in India have made some general policies in favour of the poor, 465

the

implementation of such policies has not materialised concretely in the dioceses.

Indeed, the bishops‟ conferences themselves seem satisfied just with the making of

policies in favour of the poor, but they fail to ensure the successful implementation of

them. Perhaps they are forced to make such policies because of the demands of the

social teaching of the universal church; if so, it is simply an exercise in “lip-service.”

Thus, the bishops‟ conferences‟ rationale in making these policies seems to be guided

by external pressure (of which they themselves are unconvinced) rather than internal

convictions for the welfare of the poor.

7.7.3. How will “Church become poor” and “poor become Church”?

How true Pieris sounds in the context of the Indian Church when he says that

the church in Asia is usually a rich church working for the poor! The Church in India

is a rich church working for the poor. Is the church in India poor? The people are

poor, but not the bishops, priests and religious who make a promise of voluntary

poverty! No lay member of the local community in India would ever agree that the

bishops, priests and religious in India are poor. The bishops, priests and religious

enjoy a far more comfortable and luxurious life than the many poor of the

communities they serve. It is true that bishops, priests and religious (not all though!)

in India are engaged in working for the poor, but they themselves are not poor. We are

the rich working for the poor! But such a mode of ministering –being rich and

working for the poor –is neither liberative nor salvific, neither for us nor for the poor

we serve! We need the conversion of the bishops, priests, and religious of India, a

conversion from being rich to being poor, a conversion from working for the poor to

working with the poor, being for the poor to being of the poor.

We need a radical change in our perspectives towards the poor. We always

envision the poor as “objects of compassion” and as people who are always on the

receiving end. We always are the givers. But, we need to become receivers from the

poor. We need to look at them not merely as people who need our help, but as a

“liberative locus” where we can experience salvation. When we approach them as

465 For example: “Our institutional services must cater increasingly to the poor and there must be

reservations both in admission and in employment for the Dalits and the Tribals” (CBCI Statement,

Varanasi, March 21-28, 1998); “No Catholic child Dalit/Tribal or otherwise, should be deprived of

quality education because of a lack of means” (CBCI Statement, 2006, 8.1). It is not hard for any

Indian Catholic to see how grossly these statements/policies are ignored in praxis.


receivers, then we will become capable of hearing the voice of God spoken through

the poor. As Pieris appropriately affirms,

It is not enough to consider the poor passively as the sacramental recipient of our

ministry, as if their function in life were merely to help us, the rich, to save our

souls by our retaining them as perpetual objects of our compassion. … The poor

must be seen as those through whom God shapes our salvation history.”466

So, how can the church in India become a “church of the poor”? It is not by

running numerous educational, healthcare and charitable institutions through which

the church dispenses charity to the poor; it is not by dispensing aid to the poor. The

church becomes a “church of the poor” when the poor themselves become the church

and the rich live in solidarity with the poor. We need to transform ourselves into the

poor, so that we can in turn transform the poor. As Boff claims, “poverty can be cured

by poverty.”467

When the bishops, priests and religious become poor, live in deep

solidarity with the poor, share the struggle and plight of the poor, be deeply immersed

in the lives of the poor, then the church becomes a “church of the poor.” What is

needed today is not the extensions and multiplications of the

educational/healthcare/charitable institutions of the church, but an extension and

multiplication of the efforts and willingness of the church to become poor. Until that

happens, we wonder if one can call the church in India as an authentic local church!

7.7.4. How will the “poor become theologians” and “theology become poor”?

“The theologians are not (yet) poor; and the poor are not (yet) theologians!”468

This is what Pieris calls the “Asian dilemma,” which is as well clearly also the

“Indian dilemma.” India has numerous qualified theologians, but they are not poor;

India has numerous poor, and they are not theologians. Most non-poor theologians of

India do theology that is mostly unrelated to the world of the poor, and most poor

non-theologians cannot theologize with their world because they are not theologians.

This dilemma, Pieris thinks, can be resolved only “in the grassroot

communities where the theologians and the poor become culturally reconciled

through a process of mutual evangelization” where “the theologians are awakened

into the liberative dimension of poverty and the poor are conscientized into the

liberative potentialities of their religiousness.”469

Concretely this would mean that the


467 Leonardo Boff, “Pelos pobres e contra la pobreza,” in Convergencia (May 1979), 232-237; as

quoted in Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation, 20. 468




non-poor theologians of India have to become poor (become one with the poor so that

their theology comes from the poor) and the poor have to be enabled to theologize

from their world. Such a reconciliation between the theologians and the poor will

happen only when the church in India becomes a “Church of the Poor.”

7.7.5. Theologians Listening to the Poor

The non-poor theologians of India are focused on what they can contribute

theologically to the welfare of the poor; they want the poor to listen to them so that

the poor can attain liberation. This is a poor conception of doing theology: the

theologian ought to listen to the poor and be attentive to what the poor have to say.

Hearing to the poor reminds the theologians, and the Church, the ideal mission to

which it is called and the failure of the same. The poor serve stark reminders of the

sometimes forgotten direction of mission. As Jacques Haers rightly says the

“voiceless, by way of their cry indicate, as an open wound, the non fulfilment of the

ideal and of the dream of the community that is the Church.”470

Theologians while

proclaiming that the poor are the voice of God, do not really bother to actually listen

to the poor. Most of what theologians in India say about the poor comes from their

alienated intellectual reflection and not from an engaged experience with the poor. If

only a theologian could listen to the poor, he would convert/transform himself/herself

before he/she proposes a theology for the conversion/transformation of the other or

the poor. As Sobrino succinctly puts it:

When the Church makes the decision and accepts the risk of listening to the voice

of the poor, heeding their faith and hope, and accepting the fact that it must learn

from their practice, then there will come to pass the miracle that neither

administrative rules nor sermons nor theologies can accomplish.471

When the theologians in India can listen to “the voice of God in the poor,”

they will no more excuse themselves from doing theology of the poor; they will no

more say “I do not do dalit theology because I am not a dalit,” “I do not do Adivasi

theology because I am not a Adivasi,” or “I do not do Feminist Theology because I

am not a woman.” As an Indian biblical scholar prophetically puts it:

If faith is awareness and commitment to God, then siding with the poor becomes

the inescapable imperative of faith in today‟s context: for both Yahweh of the Old

Testament and Jesus of the New Testament reveal to us a God who is defender of

the oppressed and the neglected. Having faith in Jesus is identical with having the

470 Jacques Haers, “Defensor Vinculi et Conversationis: Connectedness and Conversation as a

Challenge to Theology,” in J. Haers and P. De Mey eds., Theology and Conversation: Towards a

Relational Theology, Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, CLXXII (Leuven: Peeters,

2003), 34. 471

Sobrino, The True Church and the Poor, 103.


compassion and concern that he had for the poor. If so, the duty of the church

would be neither social analysis nor theological synthesis to be dished out in

erudite church documents, but to acquire and articulate sensitivity to the plight of

the poor. Such articulations will not be a voice of conscientization of the poor, but

the very voice itself of the poor expressing their pent-up frustrations and

energizing them to struggle and fight without collapsing.472

7.7.6. Can the Non-dalit Theologians of India not do Dalit Theology?473

Dalit Theology in India has been mostly a non-Catholic enterprise, it is done

mainly by non-Catholic theologians in India. One can find here and there some

reflections on dalits and dalit theology in the writings of Indian Catholic theologians,

but it is neither their “preferentially opted theology” nor their “passionately engaged

theology;” the hearts of the majority of the Catholic theologians in India clearly do

not lie with the world of the poor. Dalit Theology has come (and still comes) mostly

from the non-Catholic theologians in India.474

Why is that so? Why are the Catholic

theologians in India not engaging in dalit theology? The simple answer to this may be

that the Catholic theologians of India are predominantly non-dalit and non-poor and

as such are not willing to engage themselves with the world of the dalits and the poor.

Like the Indian church that is willing to be a “church for the poor” but not a “church

of the poor,” the non-poor Catholic theologians of India are willing to be “theologians

for the poor” but not “theologians of the poor.”

Should only the dalits do dalit-theology? Some dalit theologians today argue

that dalit theology can only be done by dalits as the dalit-experience is the foundation

of dalit theology, which they claim non-dalits are incapable of experiencing and

472 George Koonthanam, MCBS, “Yahweh the Defender of the Dalits: A Reflection on Isaiah 3:12-15”

in R. S. Sugirtharajah, Voices From the Margin: Interpreting the Bible in the Third World

(Maryknoll, NY/London: Orbis/SPCK, 1995), 114. 473

In speaking here of Dalit Theology, we are not underming Adivasi and Feminist Theologies in

India. We consider all three theologies equally important in India. However, our aim here is merely

to make the argument simple and focused in order to drive home the point of contention. While we

refer here to “Dalit Theology” (as that is the most visible and recognised), we mean equally

“Adivasi Theology” and “Feminist Theology.” Therefore, the question can likewise be “Can the

non-Adivasi theologians of India not do Adivasi Theology?” and “Can the Men-theologians of

India not do Feminist Theology?” In other words, our arguments and proposals in this section for

Dalit Theology hold good also for Adivasi and Feminist Theologies. 474

We are aware that there are some exceptions to this statement, but it cannot be denied that such

exceptions are very few. George Soares-Prabhu with whose theology we have engaged in this

article is clearly an example of an Indian Catholic theologian who engaged his theology very much

with the world of the poor and dalits in India. There are other Catholic theologians in India who

have similarly opted for a theology of the poor/dalits, but they are mostly themselves poor/dalits.

The non-dalit Catholic theologians of India have rarely engaged in dalit theology; the few who do

engage, do it today more for the reason of making their theology relevant than for the want of

making themselves “theologians of the poor”. It is hard to sense their “heart beating for the poor” in

their theologies for the poor. Their theologies betray their “unconvinced engagement” with the

poor/dalits.


knowing.475

But can this claim be valid? While it is true that non-dalits do not

experience the dalit-experience, it is not difficult to learn from dalits of their

experience and get a feel of what they feel by living with them and sharing their lives

and plight. We believe, for a theologian who lives an academic institute, it may be

hard to enter a dalit-experience, but for a theologian who opts to live in a poor dalit-

colony or a slum, it would not take a long time to begin feeling the reality of being

poor or being dalit. The non-dalits can also enter the experience of the dalits when

they immerse themselves fully in the lives of the dalits and become one with the

dalits. The task of an Indian theologian today demands him/her to enter into the world

of dalit-experience and theologically reflect on such experience and its

relevance/significance for the church and society. Has not the Son of God entered

deeply into humanity, and become one with humanity, to redeem humanity?

Following Jesus, the theologian in India, needs to become one with the dalits to

theologically reflect on dalits, for as Samuel Rayan insists, “commitment to the

oppressed and their struggle for freedom, justice and fellowship” is the first act of

theology.476

Church for the poor, which is only interested in offering aid to the poor,

can never enter the “dalit-experience” of the poor; but, a church of the poor will be

immersed deeply in the “dalit-experience” as it is in deep solidarity with the struggles

of the poor. So also, a “theologian for the poor” does not dare to become one with the

poor and so he cannot baptize himself with the dalit-experience, whereas a

“theologian of the poor” has already become poor and thus shares fully the plight of

the poor.

7.7.7. “Margin of the Margins”: Engendering the Margins of India

Indian women can be called the “margin of the margins” in India, for they are

marginalized not only in the larger society, but also among the margins. While

dalits/Adivasi people may be the most marginalized people in India, dalit/Adivasi

women are the “marginalized among the marginalized” of India; they suffer double

marginalization as women and as dalits/Adivasis.

In a central perspective, in which we stand at the centre and view the reality,

there is the danger of being blind to the oppression of women. A centralist perspective

takes a generalized view of marginality which misses the particular marginality of

475 Cf. Aravind P. Nirmal, ed., A Reader in Dalit Theology (Madras: Gurukul, 1991), 47, 58-59, 140-

142. 476

Samuel Rayan, “Theological Priorities in India Today,” in Virginia Fabella et al, ed., Irruption of

the Third World (New York: Orbis, 1983), 30.


women within the margins. But the marginal perspective from the margins helps us to

perceive the marginalisation of women on the margins; proximity to the margins

makes deeper revelations of marginality.

Margins manifest the oppression of women. Margins manifest the marginality

suffered by Mary. She herself is pushed to the extreme margins of society in the

process of giving the world its Saviour: she had to suffer the social stigma of

conception out of wedlock; she was pushed out of Bethlehem into the hills to give

birth in loneliness and cold; she had to flee to Egypt to save her child from Herod; and

finally, she had to be a mute-witness to the cruel death of her own son.

Margins manifest not just their oppression, but also their significance. The

very mystery of incarnation, the divine marginalization, presents the irreplaceable role

of a woman, Mary. The Margins of Galilee picture the pivotal role women played in

the ministry of Jesus to the marginalized. As Gerhard Lohfink indicates, the “five

women who followed Jesus and supported him with their possessions” are integral to

the Jesus-Community.477

Women stick with Jesus even in the extremity of the

marginality reached at the Crucifixion outside the Gate (Mt. 27:55-56), and assist in

his burial (Mt. 27:61). Women are the first and primary witnesses of Jesus‟

Resurrection where marginality triumphed (Mt. 28:1-10).

7.7.8. Pilgrim Journey to the Margins of India

Being/becoming a “Church of the Margins” is not an end in itself; it is an

“exodus pilgrimage” towards liberation. The goal/end of such a mission, the

destination of such a pilgrimage is the salvific liberation of the full humanity in

Christ. In other words, the ultimate and total realization of the kingdom of God is the

goal of the “Church of the Poor.” The poor are the “new Moses” of the “new exodus”;

the leaders who lead the “people of God” on a new and liberating journey through the

desert of poverty, injustice, inequality and sin to the promised land of the kingdom.

The poor are the “chosen people,” the “chosen Israel” who have already embarked on

this “new exodus journey” and are already marching towards the kingdom through

their “struggle for freedom” from poverty, injustice, inequality and sin: “Listen, my

dear brothers, it was those who are poor according to the world that God chose, to be

rich in faith and to be the heirs to the kingdom” (James 2:5). God calls everyone in the

Church and outside it to join the poor in the “new exodus journey,” so that all can

attain liberation and realize the kingdom. By joining the poor on this exodus journey,

477 Gerhard Lohfink, Jesus and Community, 33.


we join God himself who is deeply involved in this journey, and he guides us to

salvation. Joining the poor on this new exodus journey, we live our gift of faith, hope

and charity, we live our call to follow Christ, we become the “Church of the Poor.”

Christian spirituality is a community enterprise, as Gustavo Gutiérrez insists, “the

passage of a people through the solitude and dangers of the desert, as it [the

community] carves out its own way in the following of Jesus Christ.”478

Being church

in India is being a “Church of the Poor,” being with the poor on the “new exodus

journey.”

8. CONCLUSION

Having addressed in this chapter the “poverty of the masses”, rather the plight

of the poor dalit, Adivasi and female members of the church in India, we must say

that the story is only partially narrated for, as Aloysius Pieris says, the “many poor”

are interlinked to the “many religions.” Many Indian theologians consider the millions

of empty stomachs as the crux of the theological problem in India and in Asia at large.

Sometimes the presence of many religions in India is considered irrelevant and

sometimes a hindrance to progress. Thus, some advocate that poverty and oppression

should be at the heart of the hermeneutical process in Indian theology. But there are

theologians like Pieris who disagree with such methodologies. For Pieris the poverty

and religions in Asia are inseparable as the reality which constitutes the one source of

any theologizing in Asia. In his view, Asian Christian theology must address both

these issues together –religiousness and poverty. While maintaining that religion and

poverty are the two sides of the same reality, he insists that an authentic religious

experience is bound to lead to the question of poverty. Therefore, having treated the

issue of poverty within the Church in India, we will now launch into the religions in

India and the interaction of the church with these religions amidst which it exists. We

also propose to study the interaction and dialogue of the Church within itself, i.e., the

ecumenical communion of different churches in India, as the basis for entering into

the study of extended dialogue and communion with other religious communities in

India. We believe that ecumenism and interreligious dialogue are but different inter-

linked processes of the unified movement towards greater communion in India.

478 Gustavo Gutiérrez, We Drink from Our Own Wells: The Spiritual Journey of a People (Maryknoll:

Orbis, 1984), 137.

CHAPTER THREE

“BECOMING DIALOGICAL”

A DIALOGICAL CHURCH

1. INTRODUCTION

In a lecture delivered at the Urbanian University in Rome to commemorate the

40th

anniversary of the publication of Ad Gentes, the Vatican II decree on the

missionary activity of the Church, Archbishop Oswald Gracias of Mumbai, the

President of the Catholic Bishops Conference of India, affirms that “mission in Asia is

dialogue,” and that “there can be no mission in Asia without interreligious dialogue.”1

Dialogue, for Asian Churches, is not simply an appendix to the life and mission of the

Church. “It is a way of life; it is the means of inculturation, the means to the reign of

God, the means to harmony, and the means to understanding the will of God.”2

Dialogue is not only the mission of the Church in India, but it is a way of life.

India is a multi-religious country where people of different religions live in close

contact. People of different religions live as neighbours, as classmates in a school and

as colleagues at work. Every the sphere of daily common life in India entails the

contact of people of different religions. Such a multi-religious context is also the

ecclesial context of the Church in India. The small minority community of the Church

in India (comprising just about 3% of the total population in India), is encircled and

enveloped by various non-Christian religious communities. There is a very close

living and existential proximity between Christians and people of other faiths. Thus,

the identity and direction of living as a Christian in India will have to be defined in

relation to the people of other faiths among whom the Christian lives. Equally, the

identity of the Church in India will have to be understood in relation to and in

encounter with the people of other faiths in India. We shall, thus, make an attempt in

this chapter to understand the identity and mission of the Church in India within the

multi-religious context of India.

1 Archbishop Oswald Gracias, “Mission in Asia Today – Relations with Other Religions Existing in

Asia,” Vidyajyoti 71 (2007), 90-91. 2 Thomas C. Fox, Pentecost in Asia: A New Way of Being Church (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2003),

207-208.

256 | D i a l o g i c a l C h u r c h

We shall begin the chapter by delving into the theological controversy of

dialogue and liberation in India. This theological divide will help us to discover and

situate interreligious dialogue in Indian context. However, remaining faithful to our

methodological preferential option for the poor in this research, our orientation in this

chapter is directed by the affirmation of the perspectives of the poor in interreligious

dialogue. Thus, we argue that liberation is integral to dialogue and there cannot be an

authentic dialogue without the inclusion of the poor. We propose a “dusty dialogue”

from the perspectives of the poor where the concerns of the poor become imperative

to interreligious dialogue. Using this dialogical context as the ecclesiological context

of India, we propose, in the final section of this chapter, an ecclesiological concept

that depicts the Church as a “Dialogical Communion.” We believe that “dialogue

within the community” (ecumenical communion), “dialogue with other faith

communities” (interreligious communion) and “dialogue with nature” (ecological

communion) are integral to the Church as a Dialogical Communion in India.

2. DIALOGUE IN INDIA: A LIBERATING DIALOGUE

2.1. Theological Divide in India: Liberation Vs. Dialogue

There exist in Indian theology two significant trends –the liberationist and the

dialogist – and both seem to have progress on polarised paths since the early ages.

While the liberationist trend is more concerned with the socio-political issues and

liberation of the oppressed of India, the dialogists are concerned with dialogue with

Indian religions and their spirituality. This polarisation in Indian theology is nothing

new. The roots of such polarisation are often referred to as the two mission trends in

Indian church history: the mission that targeted the conversion of the elite of Indian

society, and the mass conversions which resulted in a flood of low-castes into the

Indian church. To put it in different words: the “mission to the rich” and the “mission

to the poor.” While the “mission to the rich” in India has tried to adapt many features

of elite Hinduism into the Christian life in India, the “mission to the poor” was geared

towards the rejection of Hinduism which was regarded as oppressive of the poor.

The theology that evolved in India after Vatican Council II, clearly trod these

two polarised paths. While some theologians were concerned about the interpretation

of the Christian faith through the Hindu symbols and the adaptation of Hindu

mysticism and spirituality into the Christian life, the others asked theological

questions about the oppression of the dalits, the tribals and the women in India, giving

a theological voice to the cries of the voiceless. These two trends were generally

D i a l o g i c a l C h u r c h | 257

called in India the “ashramite” and the “liberationist.” The ashramites criticized the

liberationists for lacking roots in Indian traditions of interiority and spirituality. The

liberationists, on the other hand, criticised the ashramites for their insensitivity to

social justice and transformation.3 The liberationists pointed out that a religion which

does not care for the fundamental needs of the people, especially of the poor and

oppressed, will work as opium for the people and will degenerate into ritualism,

fundamentalism, etc. The dialogists argued that Christians in India are just drops in

the mighty ocean of a billion people. If any worthwhile liberation of the oppressed

people is to be achieved, it has to be in dialogue and cooperation with the members of

other religions. Even if dialogists and liberationists consider themselves belonging to

differing and opposing orientations, we believe that they are indeed interlinked.

2.2. “Many Poor” and “Many Religions”: An Indissoluble Unity

Aloysius Pieris explains best the indissoluble unity of the “many poor” and the

“many religions” of Asia. Pieris affirms that “any discussion about Asian theology has

to move between two poles:” the “many poor” and the “many religions” of Asian

context. “These two inseparable realities constitute in their impenetration what might

be designated as the Asian context, the matrix of any theology truly Asian.”4 The

different theological trends in Asia deal with these realities separately:

inculturationists and interreligious dialogists deal with Asian religiousness neglecting

Asian poverty, and liberationists deal with Asian poverty disregarding Asian

religiousness. Thus, Pieris rejects the current “theologies of religion” and “theologies

of liberation” as irrelevant in Asia; the “theology of religions” which has no “radical

concern for Asia‟s poor,” and the “theology of liberation” which has “naïve disregard

for its religiousness” are both misdirected theologies.5

For Pieris, inculturation and liberation are integral to a valid Asian theology

which interacts with the “many poor” and “many religions” of Asia in a unified

manner. Religion and revolution are not divergent but are unified; religion is

revolution, and revolution is religion.6 Affirming the religiousness of Asia as being

greatly meta-theistic and the religious quest as “irresistible drive to humanize,” Pieris

3 Cf. George M. Soares-Prabhu, “From Alienation to Inculturation: Some Reflections on Doing

Theology in India Today,” in Issac Padinjarekuttu, ed., Biblical Themes for a Contextual Theology

Today: Collected Writings of George M. Soares-Prabhu, Vol.1 (Pune: JDV, 1999), 79-112, esp.

100-102. See Aloysius Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988), 38,

94. 4 Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation, 69.


6 Cf. Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation, 106-110.


suggests that liberation, the soteriological thrust of Asian religions (vimukti, moksa,

niravana), forms the basis for any interreligious encounter in Asia.7 Religions

germinate processes of revolution, and any true revolution has to be religiously

motivated.8 As a result, spirituality for Pieris must include two essential directions:

spirituality as a struggle to be poor and spirituality as a struggle for the poor.9

Integrating “many poor” and “many religions,” Pieris proposes his “Asian

theology of liberation:” it is a concern-for-humanity testifying to a God-experience; a

liberation-praxis that is at the same time immersed in the cosmic and withdrawn into

the metacosmic; a search for the Asian face of Christ “in the unfathomable abyss

where religion and poverty seem to have the same common source: God, who

declared mammon to be the enemy.”10

2.3. The “Holy Covenant” of Liberation and Dialogue

Beyond the polarisation between liberation and dialogue, built-up for decades,

we would like to affirm that liberation and dialogue are interlinked and that there is a

“holy covenant” between them which cannot be broken. It is not only that one would

not be a fruitful and meaningful process without the other, but also that they are two

integral parts of the same reality of the Indian context; the religious are also the poor,

and the poor are also the religious. Theology in India cannot deal with the poor, as

liberationists do, dissected from the religions of India; also theology in India cannot

also deal with the religions of India, as do the dialogists, alienated from the poor of

India. We could say that any meaningful dialogue has to be liberational and any

meaningful liberation has to be dialogical.

2.4. No Genuine Dialogue is Possible without Liberation

Many theologies of interreligious dialogue in India ignore the need and work

for the liberation of humanity; liberation is simply no concern or purpose of

interreligious dialogue in their view. While such orientations can be tolerated in the

theologians of the West because the face of oppression and poverty is not so

proximate in their contexts, the same theological orientations among the theologians

of the global South are abominable. Can the religions of the world have a genuine and

fruitful dialogue ignoring the issues of poverty and oppression? We would like to



9 See Chapter Three, “To Be Poor As Jesus Was Poor,” in Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation,

15-23. 10



affirm with Paul Knitter that any interreligious dialogue that ignores the issues of

poverty and oppression is not an authentic dialogue.11

Paul Knitter argues that even if the realities of pluralism and oppression are

different issues, these need to be addressed by theologians collectively.12

A

“coordinated [and] joint response” is needed to the theology of religions and the

theology of liberation.13

He believes that pluralism and oppression cannot be “evenly

and neatly balanced,” but “commitment to removing the suffering of people and

sentient beings due to oppression must have a certain priority over our concerns for

affirming and embracing religious diversity.”14

Going beyond the question of which

has priority, Knitter affirms that the concern and commitment to the poor and the

oppressed should have “a hermeneutical privilege” in interreligious dialogue.15

Dialogue and liberation are neither contrary to each other nor differing. As Knitter

strikingly expresses: “Celebrating difference” and “resisting domination” “become

integral elements in the same act of discourse; dialogue demands a commitment both

to difference and to emancipation.”16

The pilgrims-in-dialogue have to be “willing

pilgrims” with the poor and the oppressed.17

Thus, those who engage in interreligious

dialogue must also be engaged in liberation.18

Rightly so have the bishops of Asia

affirmed: “inter-religious dialogue cannot be confined to the religious sphere but must

embrace all dimensions of life: economic, socio-political, cultural and religious.”19

11 Paul F. Knitter, “Pluralism and Oppression: Dialogue between the Many Religions and the Many

Poor,” in Wayne Teasdale and George Cairns, eds., The Community of Religions: Voices and

Images of the Parliament of the World Religions (New York: Continuum, 1999), 198-208. 12

Knitter deals with the interconnectivity of interreligious dialogue and liberation at length in his two

books: Paul F. Knitter, One Earth Many Religions: Multifaith Dialogue and Global Responsibility

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1995); Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names: Christian Mission and

Global Responsibility (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1996). For a good evaluation of Knitter‟s proposals,

see Leonard Swidler and Paul Mojzes, eds., The Uniqueness of Jesus: A Dialogue with Paul Knitter

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1997) wherein many theologians, such as Jürgen Moltmann, John Hick,

John Cobb, Karl-Josef Kuschel, Clark Pinnock, John Sanders, Michael von Brück, etc., converse

with the theology of Knitter. 13

Knitter, “Pluralism and Oppression,” 198; Knitter, One Earth Many Religions, 11. 14

Knitter, “Pluralism and Oppression,” 199. 15

Knitter, One Earth Many Religions, 87-96; Knitter, “Pluralism and Oppression,” 200. 16

Knitter, “Pluralism and Oppression,” 201; Knitter, One Earth Many Religions, 87; “To delight in

difference but to be unconcerned about dignity is to be only half-human in reaching out to the

other.” Knitter, One Earth Many Religions, 86. 17

John M. Prior, “Dialogue and Culture: Reflections by a Temporary Sojourner,” EAPR 39:4 (2002),

338. 18

Knitter, One Earth Many Religions, 128; Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, 17; Knitter,

“Pluralism and Oppression,” 207. 19

FABC, “BIRA-III: Statement and Recommendations of the Third Bishops‟ Institute for

Interreligious Affairs, Madras (India), 20 November 1982,” no.7, in Gaudencio B. Rosales and C.


The oppressed and their emancipation cannot be ignored in the discourse of

interreligious dialogue. The interreligious dialogue which affirms the “otherness” of

the “religiously other” cannot fail to affirm that “the other is not only culturally,

religiously, sexually, ethically different, but also the socially and politically

excluded.”20

The “religious other” is at the same time also the “oppressed other.” The

discourse of dialogue must affirm the “freedom and dignity” of the “oppressed other”

and work to restore such freedom and dignity when it is lacking. Only then can the

“oppressed other” who are also the “religious other” become equal partners in

dialogue. A genuine dialogue can happen only among equals, “par cum pari.”21

The voice of the poor and the oppressed not only makes dialogue authentic,

but also resists the exploitation of dialogue by the powerful. “Suffering has a

universality and immediacy that makes it the ideal, and necessary, site for establishing

common ground for interreligious encounter.”22

While suffering is experienced by all

human beings at different levels, it is the poor, the oppressed and the victims who

experience it in its most radical and negative forms. As Wilfred succinctly expresses,

“[h]ope is strongest when it emanates from the depths of misery.”23

Further, the

voices of the victims can resist the dominant and sometimes exploitative voices of the

elite in the discourse of dialogue.24

Knitter suggests that much of the prevalent

dialogue today is exploited by the powerful as they avoid facing the suffering and

oppression around them and the bare fact that “religion is being used today to foster

oppression and violence.”25

In his opinion, the interreligious dialogues today take

place very often “among white, middle-class males, on the mountaintops of the

academy or monastery or ashram, far removed from the valleys of hunger and

G. Arevalo, SJ, eds., For All The Peoples of Asia: Federation of Asian Bishops‟ Conferences

Documents from 1970 to 1991 (Quenzon: Claretian, 1992), 120. 20


Cf. Decree on Ecumenism, no. 9. Swidler, in his “The Dialogue Decalogue” holds the equality

among partners in dialogue as the seventh commandment. Cf. Leonard Swidler, “Understanding

Dialogue,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 43:2 (2008), 21-22. The original version of the

“Dialogue Decalogue” was published in Leonard Swidler, “The Dialogue Decologue: Ground Rules

for Interreligious Dialogue,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 20:1 (1983), 1-4. 22


Wilfred, Asian Dreams and Christian Hope, 26. 24

For example, Panikkar explains that “universal theories of religion,” “universal theology of

religions” and the garb of “global theology” bear a kind of “Western imperialism” and “latent will

to dominate.” See Raimon Panikkar, “The Invisible Harmony: A Universal Theory of Religion or a

Cosmic Confidence in Reality?,” in Leonard Swidler, ed., Toward a Universal Theology of Religion

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1985), 136 and 120-124. 25

Paul F. Knitter, “Religion, Power, Dialogue,” Swedish Missiological Themes 93:1 (2005), 33.


oppression.”26

Such dialogue faces the danger of becoming “the opium of the

religious literati.”27

Thus, the voices of the oppressed and the victims need to be

brought to the dialogue tables and be given priority of hearing in the dialogical

discourse.

2.5. No Integral Liberation is Possible without Dialogue

Integral liberation in India is only possible within the context of interreligious

dialogue. As Pieris suggests, an Asian theology of liberation germinates within the

interreligious dialogue in Asia. The problem of poverty in Asia cannot be adequately

addressed unless it is done within the context of interreligious dialogue.28

“No true

liberation is possible unless persons are “religiously motivated” toward it.”29

Indian

non-Christian religions have the revolutionary resources for the liberation of the poor,

and it is the task of the Church in India to revoke these latent revolutionary powers in

the Indian religions for the liberation of the poor of India.

A liberation which is disengaged with the religions of India can become a very

shallow liberation. As Soares-Prabhu indicates, liberation in India cannot be

understood exclusively in socio-economic terms, as “liberation” in India is not merely

liberation from poverty or achieving societal change, but it is also liberation from

illusion, attachment and greed that issues personal self-realization.30

The danger of

liberation becoming totally materialistic is expressed very poignantly in the words of

M. M. Thomas: “all secular Messiahs tend to become conquering Messiahs replacing

the crucified Messiah.”31

The religious and spiritual dimensions of liberation found in

different religions can help liberationists to avoid the danger of holding purely

materialistic and secular views of freedom and liberation.32

Religions make the

26 Knitter, “Cosmic Confidence or Preferential Option?” 184.

27 Knitter, “Religion, Power, Dialogue,” 33.

28 Cf. Knitter, “Foreword,” in Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation, xi.


30 George M. Soares-Prabhu, “Inculturation – Liberation – Dialogue: Challenges to Christian

Theology in Asia Today,” in Issac Padinjarekuttu, ed., Biblical Themes for a Contextual Theology

Today: Collected Writings of George M. Soares-Prabhu, Vol.1 (Pune: JDV, 1999), 54-57. 31

M. M. Thomas, Religion and the Revolt of the Oppressed (Delhi: ISPCK, 1981), 68. 32

Cf. Louis Malieckal, “Liberative Visions of the Vedas: Brahmanic Ritual Vision versus

Upanishadic Spiritual Vision,” in Paul Puthanangady, ed., Towards an Indian Theology of

Liberation (Bangalore: ITA/NBCLC, 1986), 24-48.


liberation holistic and meaningful, integrating transcendence.33

Liberation in a multi-

religious society, such as India, “can only be an inter-religious project.”34

2.6. Liberating Dialogue

Felix Wilfred also suggests that “liberation” and “dialogue” are interlinked.

Not only do the religions face a common enemy of bondage and enslavement which

calls them to a collective responsibility for liberation, but also religions are held

capable of playing the much needed role of liberation. So, Wilfred calls for a

“liberating dialogue” in India among the religions of India.35

Such “liberating

dialogue” not only liberates the religions themselves, but also ensures liberation for

humanity. “Liberating dialogue” can bring about a radical transformation in the

Church in India and a new self-perception.36

Liberating dialogue in India, Wilfred

suggests, translates into three main processes:

Firstly, it is the sustaining of the Indian society in genuine pluralism against the

forces of centralization. Secondly, liberating dialogue is the mutual

interrelationship of religions oriented towards the creation of an ethic that would

safeguard the weak and the powerless. Thirdly, it is the meeting of the victims

who exercise radical critique of their religious traditions and are united in the

same hope of an alternative order of society. The victims themselves are the active

subjects of liberating dialogue.37

The project of liberation in India needs to contest and resist the processes of

“centralization,” – religious, political and economic – thereby strengthening the

pluralistic character of Indian society. The project of interreligious dialogue needs to

resist the forces of domination and oppression and ensure equality and justice to all

peoples of India.38

The forces of domination and centralization, which marginalise the

minority communities, identities and ideologues, are deeply rooted in religion in India

and feed on some fundamentalist religious orientations. For example, the source of the

centuries of inhuman oppression suffered by millions of dalits in India lies in religion.

Hindutva ideology which has entered into an unholy alliance with modern Indian

politics is a child of religion. The outbreaks of communal violence caused by conflicts

among communities are deeply religious. The Christian church in India itself has

become a shameful space of dalit discrimination. Thus, interreligious dialogue in

33 Amaladoss, A Call to Dialogue, 4.


35 Felix Wilfred, “Liberating Dialogue: An Indian Perspective,” Journal of Dharma 19 (1994), 235.

36 Felix Wilfred, On the Banks of Ganges: Doing Contextual Theology (New Delhi: ISPCK, 2002),

63. 37

Wilfred, “Liberating Dialogue,” 247. 38

Wilfred, “Liberating Dialogue,” 241-242.


India would be meaningless in such a context, when it ignores the forces of

domination within religions which oppress and marginalise the poor and the

minorities. A meaningful interreligious dialogue would evolve basically from

addressing the forces of domination and oppression within religions in India. Indeed,

it is these very religions which have the capacity to defeat such forces of domination

and to generate liberation for all communities in India.

A significant feature of liberating dialogue is the solidarity with the oppressed.

Firstly, liberating dialogue is centred on the victims and creates space for the voicing

of the perspectives of the poor and oppressed. Such voices are totally ignored in the

mainstream interreligious dialogue. Secondly, liberating dialogue takes seriously what

Wilfred calls the “critique of religions by the victims.”39

For example, dalits, tribals

and women in India critique Indian religions as well as Indian theology as sources of

their discrimination and oppression. Such critique never becomes integral to the

normal discourse of interreligious dialogue. Thirdly, liberating dialogue prefers and

employs the “hermeneutics of the victims” against the hermeneutics of the

dominant.40

Further, liberating dialogue can help avoid the danger of interreligious

dialogue becoming merely a dialogue between religious systems rather than dialogue

between religious people.41

Liberating dialogue makes interreligious dialogue very

much people-oriented.

2.7. Dialogue Overcoming Violence

The world is torn by violence and conflict around the globe. Some civil,

political and religious conflicts stretch through not just years but decades. While

violence is not always caused by religions, in recent years there has been an alarming

increase in the violence unleashed by religious motivations. Lewis Mudge, in his book

The Gift of Responsibility, describes the paradoxical situation that religions witness

today where religions are “producing both violent and peacemaking versions of

themselves” as “angry confrontation” coexisting “with deepening dialogical

relationships.” The resulting situation from this paradoxical context of religions today

is “both urgently threatening and remarkably promising.”42

While the media always

seeks the narrative of “angry confrontation” among religions, the interreligious

39 Felix Wilfred, From the Dusty Soil: Contextual Reinterpretation of Christianity (Madras:

University of Madras, 1995), 272-273. 40

Wilfred, “Liberating Dialogue,” 244-246. 41

Cf. Wilfred, On the Banks of Ganges, 64. 42

Lewis S. Mudge, The Gift of Responsibility: The Promise of Dialogue among Christians, Jews, and

Muslims (New York/London: Continuum, 2008), 1.


dialogues are working to build mutual trust among differing religious communities.43

Such efforts at interfaith peace-building need to be fortified and propagated in today‟s

world to counter the propagation of violent religious conflicts by the general mass

media. Knitter calls the religions to resist violence: “If religion is not used to oppose

violence, it will continue to be used to foment violence.”44

Such prevalence of

violence, as Hans Küng states, calls for interreligious dialogue: “There will be no

peace among nations without peace among religions. And no peace among religions

without greater dialogue among religions.”45

India has witnessed numerous and growing incidences of communal violence;

many conflicts have been religious: Hindu-Muslim, Hindu-Christian, Hindu-Sikh etc.

And there is violence caused by some revolutionary social movements such as

Maoists, Naxalites, and some fundamental Hindu and Muslim groups. All religious

communities in India are affected by the growing violence in it.46

“What I am urging

is that interreligious violence can be and must be a call to interreligious dialogue.”47

Thus, religions have a responsibility towards building peace and reconciliation among

different religious groups in India, and such responsibility calls for interreligious

dialogue. The widespread violence affecting all religious groups in India, makes the

project of working for peace and reconciliation there an interreligious project.48

In

such context of violence, “in the rising crescendo of ethnic violence and religious

clashes, when history is stained by human blood spilt in religious violence,” the

Church should become the sign and sacrament of peace and reconciliation.49

“The

Church should become the source of a new koinonia, a fellowship of all seekers after

truth.”50

2.8. Dialogue Evoking Liberation in the Religions

Pieris affirms that the religions of Asia have seeds of liberation in them, and it

is the mission of the Church in Asia to germinate life from these seeds of liberation.

43 Mudge, The Gift of Responsibility, 1-2.


45 Hans Küng, Global Responsibility: In Search of a New World Ethic (New York: Crossroad, 1991),

xv. 46

Mathai Zachariah, Inside the Indian Church (Delhi: ISPCK, 1994), 91-92. 47

Knitter, “Religion, Power, Dialogue,” 32. 48

Amaladoss, Beyond Dialogue, 3-5. 49

Jacob Kavunkal, “Church‟s Service to the World,” in Jacob Kavunkal et al, eds., Vatican II: A Gift

& A Task. International Colloquium to Mark the 40th

Anniversary of Vatican Council II (Mumbai:

St. Pauls, 2006), 123. 50

Zachariah, Inside the Indian Church, 103.


His words are forceful: “To evangelize Asia, in other words, is to evoke in the poor

this liberative dimension of Asian religiousness, Christian and non-Christian.”51

Liberation is integral to interreligious dialogue, and interreligious dialogue can evoke

the liberation inherent in all religions in India.52

Religions are capable of providing

the powerful motivation and inspiration for liberation since most religions are founded

on, and seek, the liberation of humanity. Even if the Hindu religion is culpable of the

creation and perpetuation of the caste system in India, it is not without dimensions of

liberation.53

The Bhagavadgita proposes the equality of humanity (Gita 5:18; 6:29)

and calls for welfare and social justice in lokasamgraha (Gita 3:2, 25).54

The Bhakti

tradition of Hinduism radically resisted social discrimination and propagated equality.

Buddhism itself is considered a tradition of protest.55

To this could be added also a lot

of social protest movement inspired by different religions and other peasant

movements.56

And there have been non-Christian thinkers who have made attempts at

liberative interpretations of Indian religions.57

As Amaladoss indicates “some

theologians of other religions, such as Gandhi in India and Buddhadasa in Thailand,

theologized and wrote about liberation themes long before the development of

liberation theology in Christian circles.”58

Interreligious dialogue in India has long romanced with Brahminical traditions

of Hinduism to the neglect of the liberative traditions within Hinduism as well as

other non-Hindu religious traditions of India. As such, the dialogists have been

blamed to be allies with the oppressive systems in India, and their efforts in dialogue

have been rejected as irrelevant. Their efforts in dialogue have failed to evoke any


52 Amaladoss deals extensively with the liberative perspectives in different religions in his book, Life

in Freedom: Liberation Theologies from Asia (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1997). See also Michael

Amaladoss, Beyond Dialogue: Pilgrims to the Absolute (Bangalore: ATC, 2008), 216-226. 53

Cf. FABC, “BIRA-III,” nos.11-16. 54

Sebastian Painadath, “Bhagavata Gita‟s Vision of Liberative Action,” in Paul Puthenangady, ed.,

Towards an Indian Theology of Liberation (Bangalore: ITA/NBCLC, 1986), 49-65. 55

Cf. Wilfred, From the Dusty Soil, 90-96. 56

To name a few: The Naxalbari Movement in North Bengal, the Telangana Peasant Movement, the

Virasaiva Movement, Tabligah Movement among Meos of Mewat, Santal Tribal Movements etc.

For a detailed analysis of different social protest movements in India, see M. S. A. Rao, ed., Social

Movements in India: Studies in Peasant, Backward Classes, Sectarian, Tribal and Women

Movements (New Delhi: Manohar, 2004). See also for some other protest traditions, R.

Champakalakshmi and S. Gopal, eds., Tradition, Dissent & Ideology: Essays in Honour of Romila

Thapar (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1996). 57

Periyar, Jotiba Phule, Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Vivekananda, Gandhi, B. R. Ambedkar, etc. For a

quick view of these, see Gail Omvedt, Dalit Visions: The Anti-Caste Movement and the

Construction of an Indian Identity (New Delhi: Orient Longman, 2006). 58

Amaladoss, Life in Freedom, xi.


liberative dimensions of the Indian religious traditions. Thus, a meaningful and

relevant interreligious dialogue in India needs to evoke liberation from the Indian

religious traditions for the liberation of the poor in India.

2.9. Political Dialogue

Taking a step further from the above feature of dialogue evoking liberation

among religions, Wilfred proposes that dialogue needs to be political too. He thinks

that politically-based dialogue is not only helpful but inevitable.59

For Wilfred all

religious groups are political: “Religious groups as social units wield power, and their

actions affect positively or negatively other groups and units in society. And hence

they are consciously or unconsciously, part of the political interplay.”60

Thus,

dialogue among religions would eventually also produce a political dialogue. Gandhi

was a political theologian of India who believed that being religious involved being

political:

My uniform experience has convinced me that there is no other God than Truth,

… And a man who aspires after that [Truth] cannot afford to keep out of any field

of life. That is why my devotion to Truth has drawn me into the field of politics;

and I can say without the slightest hesitation, and yet in all humility, that those

who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion

means.61

Swidler beautifully categorises the different phases or levels of dialogue as

“dialogue of the Head,” “dialogue of the Hands,” and the “dialogue of the Heart.” The

“dialogue of the Hands,” is the dialogue of action in which different religions join

together to “make the world a better place.” He says that “the world within us, and all

around us, always is in need of healing, and our deepest wounds can be healed only

together with “the other” only in dialogue.”62

While the “dialogue of the Head” is

important for interreligious dialogue, “it will prove sterile if the results do not spill

over into the other two areas of action and spirituality.”63

Similarly, the Pontifical

Council for Interreligious Dialogue, also affirms the “dialogue of action, in which

Christians and others collaborate for the integral development and liberation of

people.”64

As Kavunkal suggests, a “real concern and genuine care for the weak, the

59 Felix Wilfred, “Inter-Religious Dialogue as Political Quest,” Journal of Dharma 27:1 (2002), 18.

60 Wilfred, On the Banks of Ganges, 67.

61 M. K. Gandhi, The Story of My Experiments with Truth (Ahmedabad: Jeevan, 1966), 282-283.

62 Swidler, “Understanding Dialogue,” 10.


64 Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Dialogue and Proclamation (19 May, 1991), no.42.

The text is available in William Burrows, ed., Redemption and Dialogue (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1993), 93-118; the quote appears on 104.


poor and the oppressed cannot be achieved fully without associating ourselves with

political life. The empowerment of the weak and dispossessed cannot be attained

without political collaboration.”65

3. “DUSTY DIALOGUE” IN INDIA: DIALOGUE FROM THE POOR

Interreligious dialogue from the perspective of the poor in India can be a

“dusty dialogue.” It is “dusty” because it does not fit into the “neat and fit” paradigms

of elite theories of interreligious dialogue. It is “dusty” because it belongs to the

“dusty lives” of the poor and the oppressed of India who live their daily lives in dusty

environments. It is dusty because it walks the “dusty and dirty” lanes of the slums,

ghettos and poor colonies, rather than the “highways” of interreligious dialogue.

3.1. Thou shalt not Forget the Poor in Interreligious Dialogue

The most important commandment of the discourse of interreligious dialogue

is: “thou shalt not forget the poor in interreligious dialogue.” Leonard Swidler would

say that the interreligious dialogue must include the “persons in the pews.”66

The

bishops of India rightly remind us that the poor have much to contribute to the

interreligious dialogue:

We have to recognize the fact that the poor too contribute much to us when we are

in dialogue with them. We can learn much about their faith, hope and patience.

They challenge us to live the Gospel in its radicality relying more on God and

freeing ourselves from undue dependence on material things.67

“Pilgrim-in-dialogue lives at the frontier –socially, culturally and religiously.”68

The

frontiers or the margins are the loci of the pilgrims of dialogue. Margins and frontiers

are the loci of the poor and the oppressed as well. Thus, the pilgrims in dialogue

cannot dislocate themselves from the loci of the poor and the oppressed. Or as

Amaladoss puts it in different words, the poor and their liberation are the context in

which interreligious dialogue generates and progresses.69

Knitter would demand much

65 Kavunkal, “Church‟s Service to the World,” 123.


67 Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI), “The Church in Dialogue.” The Final Statement of

25th

General Body Meeting of the CBCI, 1-8 March, 2002, Jalandhar, Indian Theological Studies

39:3/4 (2002), 376. Though it is commendable that the CBCI has affirmed the importance of the

poor in interreligious dialogue, its understanding, however, is misleading in the final section of the

statement where it speaks of concrete ways of empowering the poor in India, but titles it “Some

Concrete Suggestions and Proposals for Dialogue outside the Church.” See CBCI, “The Church in

Dialogue,” 377-378. It is difficult to comprehend why the CBCI considers such concrete praxis of

empowerment of the poor as “dialogue outside the Church,” when the poor dalit and tribal

Christians are part of its very flesh? 68

Prior, “Dialogue and Culture,” 336. 69

Amaladoss, A Call to Dialogue, 9.


more than including the poor in dialogue; the poor should define and direct the

dialogue. “The suffering, the victims, will have to have an active part in determining

the agenda for the dialogue, the procedure, and format, yes, the place and language,

too!”70

Thus, the pilgrims in dialogue who forget the poor in their discourse deny their

very locus. The pilgrims in interreligious dialogue are those “who are in dialogue with

the most vulnerable members of their cultural domains: the poor, the discarded, the

unneeded (cf. 1 Cor. 1:26-31).”71

God‟s revelation today comes from the poor, the oppressed and the victims. In

God-made-poor, the “poor are the revelation of the Father.”72

If religions today are

coming together in dialogue to reflect on God‟s revelation in each of their traditions,

as well as God‟s revelation today to the humanity, the religions would have to listen

to the poor. As Wilfred forcefully affirms:

But, in fact, who are the ones who will be able to tell us about the true face of our

societies? Who are the ones who will expose the festering wounds of our world?

Those who are able to really tell us about the true face of our world and judge it

are the victims. In their judgement about the world, we hear God‟s own verdict.

Anyone today who would like to listen to what God thinks of the mess we have

made of our world, has to listen to the judgement the poor make about our world

through their wounds. The poor may not be articulate, but they themselves are in a

way the judgement of God.73

3.2. Oppression as the Starting Point of Dialogue

The “dusty dialogue” begins from the situation of the oppression of the poor

dalits, tribals and women in India. The primary questions in the dusty dialogue are:

“why are the dalits, tribals and women oppressed?” and “who causes the oppression?”

These questions are important in the Indian interreligious context as the horrible

oppression faced by the poor dalits and tribals and women in India is caused primarily

by the religions themselves. The caste system created and sustained by the Hindu

religion has exploited the dalits for millennia. Mainstream religions of India have

relegated the tribals to the margins of India, and promulgated theories of

subordination and suppression of women. The oppression in India is deeply rooted in

the religions and religions themselves are the oppressors. Religions, “far from being

guardians of human dignity and rights, are themselves, each one in its own way,

70 Knitter, One Earth Many Religions, 128.

71 Prior, “Dialogue and Culture,” 338.

72 Jorge Pixley and Clodovis Boff, The Bible, the Church and the Poor: Biblical, Theological and

Pastoral Aspects of the Option for the Poor. Translated by Paul Burns (Tunbridge Wells, Kent:

Burns & Oates, 1989), 110. 73

Wilfred, Asian Dreams and Christian Hope, 27.


violators of human rights.”74

As Kavunkal rightly insists, the elimination of

oppression is pivotal to the mission of the Church in India today, and that mission has

to be dialogical as the poor and the religions are interlinked in the Indian context:

Christian preoccupation is not primarily with the right religion that leads to God

but the right channels through which God reaches humans today. In the midst of

injustices and oppression, condemning millions to a dehumanized existence, God

as we have experienced in Jesus Christ, is not thinking of the embellishments of

the liturgy or the niceties of the doctrinal formulations, but the elimination of the

inhuman conditions in which the poor are entrenched.75

3.3. Critique of the Religions by the Oppressed

Self-criticism is imperative to any fruitful interreligious dialogue. “Without a

healthy self-criticism of self and tradition, there can be no dialogue – and, indeed, no

integrity.”76

Holding self-criticism of religions as a very significant basis of

interreligious dialogue, Wilfred suggests three areas of self-critique in the Indian

context: failure of religions to respond to violation of human rights, religions

themselves becoming violators of human rights, and the attitude of religions towards

the excluded of the Indian society.77

The critique of religions in India comes mainly from the marginalized of

Indian society, namely the dalits, tribals and women. No meaningful dialogue is

possible in India today without a careful hearing of the critique of Indian religious

traditions by the marginalized.78

For Christianity, the dalit theology, which has raised

a valiant critique of the discrimination of dalits in Hinduism as well as within the

Church, can serve as a very fruitful tool of self-critique. Similarly, critical theology in

each religious tradition will best serve the self-critique of religions.79

Another source of ideological critique of Indian religious traditions is found in

some revolutionary religious movements. Bhakti tradition, for example, is one such

significant religious movement within Hinduism which has challenged the

discrimination and oppression of the dalits in India.80

Let us quote a few examples of

such Bhakti critique:

74 Wilfred, “Inter-Religious Dialogue as Political Quest,” 24.




78 Wilfred, “Liberating Dialogue,” 245-246.


80 A very good analysis can be found in Gail Omvedt, “The Bhakti Radicals and Untouchability,” in

Manu Bhagavan and Anne Feldhaus, eds., Speaking Truth to Power: Religion, Caste, and the


Kanaka or Kanakadas, a sixth-century saint, asks:

They talk of kula (=caste)

times without number. …

What is the caste of God Narayana?

and Siva?

What is the caste of Atman:

and of Jiva?

Why talk of kula

when God has blessed you?81

Kalave, a Bhakti saint who lived in 12th

century contested the social hierarchy

and proclaimed the untouchables superior to the highest caste:

Those who eat cock, fish and parrot

are regarded as high caste but

those Madigas who eat beef of that

cow whose milk is offered by Brahmins to Siva,

why are they polluting?

The darbha grass Brahamins eat

is licked by dogs while the cow

Madigas eat is worshipped by Brahmins.

The Madiga is superior to the Brahmin.82

Kabir (1440-1518), a very popular Bhakti saint propagated radical equality,

questioning the caste system created by Hindu pundits:

Pandit, look in your heart for knowledge.

Tell me where untouchability

came from, since you believe in it. …

We eat by touching, we wash

by touching, from a touch

the world was born.

So who‟s untouched? asks Kabir.83

Subaltern Question in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), 11-29. She deals

especially with Tuka of the Vakari movement. 81

Translated by M. Sivaramakrishna and Sumita Roy, Poet Saints of India (New Delhi: Sterling

Paperbacks, 1998), 184. 82

Translated by Vijaya Ramaswamy, Divinity and Deviance: Women in Virasaivism (New Delhi:

Oxford University Press, 1966), 56. 83

Translated by Linda Hess and Sukhadev Singh, The Bijak of Kabir (San Francisco: North Point

Press, 1983), 17 and 55.


The dalit, tribal and feminist literary traditions which critique and condemn

the oppression of the poor by religions are yet another significant source of the

ideological critique of Indian religious traditions.84

3.4. Conversion of Religions as Interreligious Project

The “conversion of religions” to the poor, the oppressed and the suffering

forms “the starting point, the basis, the heuristic for interreligious cooperation and

conversation.”85

One of the stated objectives of interreligious dialogue is the

“common search for truth.”86

In dialogue, “truth is communicated and people are

brought to truth.”87

In their common search for truth, the religious traditions, however,

would realize that there lies within them a large scale “unfaithfulness to the truth”

which needs to be eliminated. The “unfaithfulness to the truth” is manifested in the

creation and perpetuation of false and inhuman religious ideologies or religious

systems which have oppressed millions in India for centuries.

The bishops of India have rightly acknowledged the need for repentance in

interreligious dialogue: “We have limitations and drawbacks and sinfulness for which

84 The dalit saints and sages are, for example, a great source of critique of Hindu religion and its

oppressive systems. See Eleanor Zelliot and Rohini Mokashi-Punekar, eds., Untouchable Saints: An

Indian Phenomenon (New Delhi: Manohar, 2005). This edited volume contains excellent studies on

tamil dalit saints such as Tiruppan Alvar, Nandanar, Marathi dalit saints such as Chokamela,

Soyrabai, Karmamela, Nirmala and Banka, and other dalit saints such as Raidas, Ravidas and

Rohidas.

Dalit and Tribal Literature also contains the critique by the poor. Two studies in this regard are:

Mulkraj Anand and Eleanor Zelliot, eds., An Anthology of Dalit Literature (New Delhi: Gyan

Publishing, 1992); Amar Nath Prasad and M. B. Gaijan, Dalit Literature: A Critical Exploration

(New Delhi: Sarup & Sons, 2007). See for example, Laura R. Brueck, “Mainstreaming

Marginalised Voices: The Dalit Lekhak Sangh and the Negotiations over Hindi Dalit Literature,” in

Manu Bhagavan and Anne Feldhaus, eds., Claiming Power From Below: Dalits and the Subaltern

Question in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), 151-165. See also in this same

volume, Dilip Chitre, “Namadeo Dhasal: The Maverick Dalit Poet who Changed Marathi Poetry,”

179-188. For a survey of Dalit literature in Telugu, see Thummapudi Bharathi, A History of Telugu

Dalit Literature (Delhi: Kalpaz Publications, 2008). See also M. E. Prabhakar, “The Dalit Poetry of

Poet-Laureate Joshua,” in Joseph Patmury, ed., Doing Theology with the Poetic Traditions of India:

Focus on Dalit and Tribal Poems (Bangalore: PTCA/SATHRI, 1996), 3-20. Another popular

Telugu dalit poet is C. V. Chalam: see R. S. Sudarshanam, C. V. Chalam (New Delhi: Sahitya

Academy, 2000). See in the same volume two studies on tribal poetry: Wati Longchar, “A Creation

Poem of the Ao-Naga: A Theological Exploration,” in Patmury, Doing Theology with the Poetic

Traditions of India, 114-124, and Lalmghak Thuami, “Hla Do – A Mizo Poetry: Its Implications for

a Feminist Tribal Theology,” in Patmury, Doing Theology with the Poetic Traditions of India, 125-

135. 85

Knitter, “Cosmic Confidence or Preferential Option?,” 188. Knitter cites Lonergan here in affirming

the need of religions to “common conversion.” For Lonergan, “common conversion” of religions is

a prerequisite to interreligious conversation. Cf. Bernard Lonergan, Method in Theology (New

York: Herder & Herder, 1972), 118-119 and 267-281. 86

Dialogue and Proclamation, nos. 81-86. 87

Thomas Dabre, “The Church in Dialogue: Dialogue within the Church,” Pro Dialogo 112:1 (2003),

87.


we need to repent and ask for forgiveness.”88

The call or the challenge for conversion

and reconciliation among religions, as Amaladoss indicates, “will come not from each

other‟s claims to religious truth, but from a situation of injustice in which basic human

rights are being violated.”89

The oppressed of the earth unveil in the interreligious

dialogue the unfaithfulness of the religions to the truth. As Knitter suggests, it is the

victims “who can best help a religion become aware and face the way it has abused

power or been abused by the powerful.”90

The voice of the poor in interreligious

dialogue highlights the “non-Kingdom” situations within the communities of different

religions, the discrimination and the oppression of the poor. The poor challenge the

religions of the earth to convert from a “non-Kingdom situation” to a “Kingdom

situation.”91

The faces of the poor and the oppressed evoke repentance and conversion

among the religions in the interreligious conversations. Such conversion among

religions is indeed imperative to any interreligious dialogue. As Peter Phan suggests,

Christians and non-Christians must convert “together, with one another,” towards the

kingdom of God. Conversion in Asia is “the „turning‟ of all humans, together and

with reciprocal assistance and encouragement.”92

We say that such conversion has to be interreligious for two reasons. Firstly,

all religions are in need of conversion from their unfaithfulness to truth and from

unjust oppression and exploitation of the poor. Secondly, religions need each other to

uncover the “sins” of one another. As Knitter puts it, “every religion needs “the other”

to help it identify its own weakness and vulnerabilities.”93

While the “prophetic

voices” within each religion can from time to time condemn the “sins” in their own

religious traditions and call for conversion, the process can be more effective and

meaningful when it becomes an interreligious pilgrimage. For instance, in India,

Christianity can critique the caste discriminations within the Hindu tradition, as can

the Hindu tradition critique the misplaced missions of the Church in India.

88 CBCI, “The Church in Dialogue,” 372.




92 Phan, In Our Own Tongues, 61. Phan explores here (chapter four, “Conversion and Discipleship as

Goals of the Church‟s Mission” 45-61) “the meaning of “conversion.”” He argues that conversion

does not mean converting from one religion to another, rather the whole of humanity converting

towards the kingdom. He mainly draws on Anthony Gittins and Wilbert Shenk: Anthony J. Gittins,

“Conversion,” in Karl Müller et al, eds., Dictionary of Mission: Theology, History, Perspectives

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1997), 87-89; Wilbert R. Shenk, Changing Frontiers of Mission

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1999). 93

Knitter, “Religion, Power, Dialogue,” 34.


3.5. Fighting Caste Discrimination as Interreligious Project

Interreligious dialogue is no mere “sweet-exchanges” but an honest encounter

of religions. “In dialogue then, while we learn from God‟s great deeds in each other‟s

lives and histories, we also have to be sensitive to each other‟s limitations and be

prophetic in challenging each other.”94

In interreligious dialogue “whatever is

discerned as evil and contrary to truth as known through the Gospel has to be exposed

and condemned.”95

The FABC affirms that the “dialogue of life” of the Church in

Asia “seeks the change and transformation of unjust social structures.”96

The bishops

of India call on the Church in India to “join other people of good will and work

towards the dismantling of structures like caste and class that cause and perpetuate

poverty and oppression.”97

Interreligious dialogue has to be prophetic in condemning the evils of the

society, as well as those in religions. It “should move beyond sharing experiences and

discussing theology to mutual prophecy challenging together socio-cultural and

political structures that are oppressive.”98

The most urgent prophetic dimension of

interreligious dialogue in India is the condemnation and eradication of caste

discriminations across all religious groups. Asserting and strengthening such a

prophetic dialogue against the caste system in India is the mission of the Church in

India today. “Admittedly much has been done in terms of welfare works, educational

assistance, etc. Simply increasing such measures is not really what is ultimately

required. The principal mission of the Church in the decades to come would be to cast

out the demon of casteism both within and without.”99

Wilfred regards the elimination

of caste as the “most significant contribution the Church could make to the shaping of

a new nation.”100

Jason Fernandes, a member of the Patna Collective,101

places the cause of the

ineffectiveness of interreligious dialogue in India on the “failure to develop a caste-

94 Amaladoss, A Call to Dialogue, 6-7.

95 J. Russel Chandran, “The Role of the Churches in the Multifaith Context of India,” Indian

Missiological Review 19:2 (June, 1996), 38. 96

FABC, “Evangelization in Modern Day Asia,” Statement and Recommendations of the First

Plenary Assembly, Taipei, Taiwan, 27 April, 1974, no.21, in For All the Peoples of Asia, 1:15. 97

CBCI, “The Church in Dialogue,” 376. 98

Amaladoss, A Call to Dialogue, 154. 99

Felix Wilfred, “Dalit Future: Future of the Nation,” Vidyajyoti 73 (2009), 333. 100

Wilfred, “Dalit Future: Future of the Nation,” 333-334. 101

“Patna Collective” is an association of research-activists inspired by Liberation Theologies and

committed to rethinking notions of Indian secularism.


based critique both of ourselves and of the location of the Church, as well as of Indian

nationalism to which the Catholic Church has proved itself to be an unwitting

handmaid.”102

There is in the discourse of interreligious dialogue in India, a

glorification of the Hindu ancestry and thereby the upper/dominant caste location.

Many Indian theologians who write on interreligious dialogue are concerned mainly

with dialogue with elite Hinduism, and one can detect in such discourse an

unacknowledged clinging of the authors to their Hindu caste location.103

The

dialogists in India need to move away from such an exclusive romance with elite

Hinduism and enter into a critical dialogue with all religious traditions of India.

3.6. Resisting Hindutva Ideology as Interreligious Project

The Hindutva ideology attempts to depict India as a mono-cultural entity, and

thereby calls all non-Hindu cultures and religions foreign. Hindutva ideology equates

Indian culture with Brahmanic Hinduism and Sanskritic culture. The ideology of

Hindutva implies that to be Indian is to be Hindu. Anything outside this Sanskritic

Hindu cultural orbit is denied legitimate existence in Indian society.104

Hindutva ideology weakens the unity of the poor by depicting the non-Hindu

poor as enemies. By pitting the Hindu-poor against the non-Hindu poor, the Hindutva

ideology fosters the interest of the elite and strengthens their domination over the

divided poor. In order to realize the mass mobilization of the Hindu poor, Hindutva

organisations diffuse false information about minority groups. Moved by such false

information, the poor are easily carried away by the power-seeking politicians and

become both executors and victims of communal riots. Thus, there is a need for

“radical intellectuals” among the subalterns in order to prevent themselves from being

falsely used by power-mongers to carry out their communal designs. In modern India,

the Church, together with other religions in India, needs to become an effective

radical intellectual for the subaltern groups, so that the communal designs of the

fundamentalist groups are defeated.

102 Jason Keith Fernandes, “Muslims, Caste and the Challenge before the Catholic Inter-faith

Initiative,” Vidyajyoti 73 (2009), 431. 103

Cf. Fernandes, “Muslims, Caste and Challenge,” 432-433. Fernandes refers here mainly to the

collection of articles in, Edwin, S.J. and Ed Daly, S.J., eds., Journeying Together in Faith (Anand:

Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, 2008). In this book, Edwin, for example, speaks of his family being Hindu

“temple priests” (p. 161), which would say he belongs to Brahmin caste. 104

Cf. S. M. Michael, “Culture, Nationalism and Globalization: Politics of Identity in India,” in P.G.

Jogdand and S.M. Michael, eds., Globalization and Social Movements: Struggle for a Humane

Society (Delhi: Rawat, 2003), 108-131. See also Kamala Ganesh, Culture and the Making of

Identity in Contemporary India (New Delhi: Sage, 2005).


3.6.1. Interreligious Affirmation of the Cultures and Religions of the Poor

The Church in India can resist Hindutva ideology only through the affirmation

of the cultures and ideologies of the dalits, tribals and other ethnic communities of

India. The affirmation of the cultures of dalits and tribals can be done primarily by an

“internal affirmation” within the Church. The Church in India has often ignored the

subaltern cultures of its people in its life, mission and theology. The Indian bishops

humbly regret such an ecclesiastical sin: “In a spirit of honesty, we have to admit that

we have not been open enough to appreciate the different cultures, particularly tribals,

Dalits and other ethnic and regional groups and receive the treasures in these

cultures.”105

Much of Indian theology has interacted solely with the elite Hindu

religious tradition, and inculturation in India and has mostly sought to integrate the

symbols, rituals and other elements of elite Hinduism. The religious traditions of the

poor have been totally ignored in the Indian church. Thus, such subaltern Indian

traditions of the poor have to be recognized and integrated into the inculturation,

theology and life of the Indian church.

Secondly, the affirmation of the cultures, ideologies and religions of the poor

need also to be an “external affirmation.” By this we mean that the Church in India

needs to collaborate with the secular and humanising forces of the country who are

trying to resist the monolithic national ideology of the Hindutva in India through the

affirmation of the plurality of Indian cultures and religions. The Church should

collaborate with these external forces to strengthen the secular nationalism and

pluralist fabric of the nation.

The resistance of Hindutva ideology through an affirmation and empowerment

of the cultures, religions and ideologies of the dalits and tribals will have to be

interreligious, for the poor in India are found in all religious communities. Pilgrims of

dialogue “discover the ancient rhythms of marginalized cultures and the liberative

streams of other faith communities.”106

The Church cannot solely affirm the traditions

of the Christian dalits and tribals, whilst ignoring the non-Christian dalits and tribals.

The dalits and tribals in diverse religious communities of India share the common

cultural world and voice a common ideology of liberation, equality and justice. The

project would be less than complete if one religion affirms the traditions of the poor

while other traditions marginalise the same. Any fruitful and integral affirmation of

the traditions of the poor has to be interreligious in India.


106 Prior, “Dialogue and Culture,” 339.


3.6.2. Interreligious Vision of Nationalism with the Poor

The right Christian response to Hindutva is thinking nationalism with the poor.

Wilfred would say: “The response of Christians is to be active agents in evolving a

humanistic nationalism in whose vision and scope the poor and the marginalised will

be able to identify their own concerns, hopes and aspirations.”107

But the response of

the Church to Hindutva, we believe, cannot be developed in isolation; it has to be

interreligious. Firstly, Christianity is a small minority in India and is too small to

resist with any success the forceful ideology emanating from a majority religion such

as Hinduism. Secondly, Hindutva affects and seeks to eliminate all non-Hindu

religious groups in India. Thus, the Church in India will have to bring religions

together in creating and fostering the interreligious vision of Indian nationalism with

the poor. Any vision of the Indian nation that is insensitive to the suffering and

aspirations of the poor in India will be a failed vision.108

Thus, there is an urgent need

for religions in India to imagine nationalism with the poor.

The ideologies of nationalism generated by and from the poor challenge and

resist the Hindutva ideology of nationalism by a re-definition of secularism,

democracy and human rights. The secularism for the poor is primarily anti-casteist,

putting the “accent not on the equal treatment of all religions but on the equal

treatment of every human being with dignity.”109

The democracy for the poor is one

which has its focus not on safeguarding the freedom of the individual but on

defending of the rights of the weaker sections. The human rights of life and livelihood

have precedence for the poor over other human rights.110

3.6.3. Beyond the “Hindu-Christian” Rhetoric

One is often perplexed by the orientations of the interreligious dialogue with

Indian Catholic theologians; their theologies seem to strengthen the same Hindutva

ideology they call to resist. In theologies of interreligious dialogue and inculturation,

the authors often speak of the identity of Indian Christians as “Hindu-Christian.”

Some theologians proudly call themselves “Hindu-Christians” and profess it as the

authentic way of being Christian in India. While we do not deny the necessity and

urgency of evolving an identity for Indian Christians which calls for being rooted in

the local culture, we would like to disagree that “Hindu-Christian” is the right identity


108 Wilfred, “Dalit Future: Future of the Nation,” 325.

109 Wilfred, “Dalit Future: Future of the Nation,” 327.

110 Wilfred, “Dalit Future: Future of the Nation,” 327-328.


of being Christian in India. By naming the identity of “Indian Christian” as “Hindu-

Christian” the theologians ironically profess the Hindutva dictum: Being Indian is

being Hindu. They equate “Indian” with “Hindu.” As Hindutva negates all the non-

Hindu religious and cultural identities, so does the proposal of “Hindu-Christian”

identity. “Hindu-Christian” identity negates all the other valid and authentic Indian

Christian identities, especially the identities of the poor: “Dalit-Christian” and

“Tribal-Christian.” And as Fernandes validly indicates, the “Hindu-Christian” identity

excludes the possibility of conversions from Muslims, dalits and tribals who do not

identify themselves with Hindu tradition.111

A deeper look at such proposals as “Hindu-Christian” would reveal that these

proposals and the glorification of Hindu ancestral culture come from the upper caste

Indian theologians. No dalit or tribal theologian would approve of such a proposal.

Dalit and tribal theologies of India hold the Hindu tradition as oppressive and distance

themselves from it; dalit and tribal Christians of India would never call themselves

“Hindu-Christians.” Indian theologians need to go beyond the rhetoric of naming the

Indian Christian identity as “Hindu-Christian.” Such proposal negates the plural

identities of India, especially those of dalits and tribals, and feeds the Hindutva

ideology which Indian theologians wish to resist.

4. CHURCH AS A DIALOGICAL COMMUNION

Having affirmed the need and the urgency of liberating dialogue in India from

the perspective of the poor, we would like to reflect in this section on the Church as a

dialogical communion.112

Dialogue with the cultures and the poor are integral to the

111 Fernandes, “Muslims, Caste and their Challenge,” 435.

112 We are attempting the notion of dialogical communions based on the communion ecclesiology. We

feel it opportune to make here a rather extensive note of the development of communion

ecclesiology in Roman Catholic theology. Communion ecclesiology in Roman Catholicism has a

complex history. Contemporary proponents point to a variety of nineteenth and twentieth century

origins. German Protestant theologian Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834) is said to have

provided a helpful perspective for the Roman Catholic communion ecclesiology. For him, the

Church is a voluntary association of individuals, with a corporate life in Jesus, redeemed in the

context of this fellowship. Cf. Dennis M. Doyle, “Möhler, Schleiermacher, and Roots of

Communion Ecclesiology,” Theological Studies 57 (1996), 472ff. Then, Johann Adam Möhler

(1796-1838) may be regarded as the founder of modern Roman Catholic communion ecclesiology.

For Möhler, the starting point of any reflection on the Church should not consist in an elucidation

of the juridical and structural aspects of the Church but on the Holy Spirit, who constitutes the

fundamental and dynamic “principle” underlying these structures. Cf. Johann Möhler, Unity in the

Church or the Principles of Catholicism Presented in the Spirit of the Church Fathers of the First

Three Centuries, trans. Peter C. Erb (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1996), 85,

91, 94, 166, 210. Möhler finds the Pauline metaphor of the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ

most adequate for describing the literal reality of the Church – it is an organism comprised of an

inner spiritual unity visibly expressed in the external organic unity of her life and acts. Cf. Louis


Bouyer, The Church of God: Body of Christ and Temple of the Spirit, trans. Charles Underhill

Quinn (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1982), 94-104. Later, the liturgical reforms in the Church

have contributed for the progress of communion ecclesiology. The documents that need a mention

here are: Pius X‟s motu proprio on the restoration of church music, Tra le Sollecitudini (November

22, 1903); the decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council on the frequent and daily reception

of Communion, Sacra Tridentina (December 20, 1905); the decree of the Sacred Congregation of

the Sacraments on the discipline of First Communion, Quam Singulari (August 8, 1910). The

laudable efforts of Prosper Gueranger (1805-1875), the French Benedictine and Lambert Beauduin

(1873-1960), the Belgian monk, in renewal of liturgy have helped the development of the concept.

Cf. Joseph J. Bluett, S.J., “Current Theology: The Mystical Body of Christ: 1890-1940,”

Theological Studies 3 (1942), 260-289.

Henri de Lubac (1896-1991) decisively linked the Church and the Eucharist for the twentieth

century theology. In his influential work Catholicism (1937), he expounded what came to be known

as a “eucharistic ecclesiology,” which identified the Mass as the source and highest of the life of the

Church. Cf. Edward Yarnold, “The Church as Communion,” The Tablet (12 Dec, 1992), 1564. De

Lubac discovered that before 12th

century, the word “communion” did not principally refer to the

reception of the Eucharist, but to the social reality the Eucharist creates, the „communion of the

Church.‟ Cf. de Lubac, Corpus Mysticum: L‟Eucharistie et l‟Eglise au moyen âge, 2nd

ed. (Paris:

Aubrie, 1944), 28. De Lubac says: “Christ in his Eucharist is truly the heart of the church.” Lubac,

The Splendour of the Church (London: Sheed and Ward, 1956), 110; See also Paul McPartlan, The

Eucharist Makes the Church: Henri de Lubac and John Zizioulas in Dialogue (Edinburgh: T&T

Clark, 1993), 70.

Later, Pope Pius XII‟s encyclical, Mystici Corporis (1943) set in motion the shift of emphasis from

the hierarchical to the mystical understanding of the Church. It significantly reoriented Roman

Catholic ecclesiology. Then, among the other theologians who contributed greatly to communion

ecclesiology are two Dominicans like Tillard himself: Yves Congar and his student, Jérôme Hamer.

These two theologians make the categories of communion and community central to their pre-

Vatican II ecclesiologies. Avery Dulles, S.J., chooses Congar and Hamer as representative of his

second model of the Church, “The Church as Mystical Communion,” in his book Models of the

Church (Garden City, NY: Image Books, 1987), 47-62. While most theologians writing between

Mystici Corporis and Vatican II incorporated the themes of communion and community in their

work (Rahner, Danielou, Bouyer, etc.), they do not make it as fundamentally central as Congar and

Hamer. In his Chrétiens désunis: principes d‟un oecuménisme catholique (Paris: Cerf, 1937),

Congar articulated his understanding of the Church primarily as a communion. See also Congar,

The Mystery of the Church, trans. A. V. Littledale ( Baltimore: Helicon Press, 1960 [French original

in two separate books: Esquisses du mystere de l‟Eglise and La Pentecote: Chartres, 1956 (Paris:

Cerf, 1956]), esp.128. For a good view of Congar‟s ecclesiology, see Timothy McDonald, The

Ecclesiology of Yves Congar: Foundational Themes (Lanham, MD: University Press of America,

1984), see esp. the chapter on “Church as Communion” for our emphasis; Richard McBrien,

“Church and Ministry: The Achievement of Yves Congar,” Theology Digest 32 (1985). (which

pages?) Jérôme Hamer‟s work, The Church is a Communion has a direct and significant impact on

the Council. See Jérôme Hamer, The Church is a Communion, trans. Ronald Matthews (New York:

Sheed and Ward, 1964); originally published in French under the title, L'Eglise est une communion

(Paris: Cerf, 1962). What distinguishes Hamer‟s work is his systematic investigation and grounding

the Church as a communion. Jean-Marie Roger Tillard is undoubtedly the most prominent Catholic

theologian in “communion ecclesiology.” His extensive writings on the concept of church as

“communion” remain the best of the texts in Catholic communion ecclesiology. He was a

passionate ecumenist who was involved all through his life in manifold ecumenical dialogues and

served on many ecumenical bodies. L‟Eucharistie, Pâque de l‟Eglise (Paris: Cerf, 1964); Religieux,

un chemin d‟évangile (Bruxelles: Lumen Vitae, 1975); L‟évêque de Rome (Paris: Cerf, 1982); Eglise

d‟églises: l‟ecclésiologie de communion (Paris: Cerf, 1987); Chair de l‟Eglise, Chair du Christ : aux

sources de l‟ecclesiologie de communion (Paris: Cerf, 1992); L‟Eglise locale, Ecclésiologie de

communion et catholicité (Paris, Cerf, 1995). All these titles except the last one have been translated into

English. The Eucharist: Pascha of God‟s People, trans. Dennis L. Wienk (Staten Island, NY: Alba House,

1967); A Gospel Path: The Religious Life (Brussels: Lumen Vitae, 1975); The Bishop of Rome, trans. John De

Satge (London: SPCK, 1982); Church of Churches: The Ecclesiology of Communion, trans. R.C.DePeaux

(Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1992); Flesh of the Church, Flesh of Christ: At the Source of the Ecclesiology

of Communion, trans. Medeleine Beaumont (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2001).


nature of the Church as a dialogical communion. But, as we have dealt at length in the

two previous chapters on the Indian Church‟s interaction with the cultures of India

and the poor of India, we wish to limit ourselves here to explicate the nature of the

Indian Church in three specific spheres of dialogue: the ecumenical dialogue, the

interreligious dialogue and the ecological dialogue. Even if these three dialogues are

dealt here under different headings, we believe and affirm that all these different

Although communion ecclesiology is not the ecclesiology of Vatican II, the concept of communion

is one of the key notions in interpreting the ecclesiology of Vatican II. (See. LG 4,8,13-15,18,21,24-

25; GS 32; UR 2-4, 14-15, 17-19, 22). Cf. A. Anton, “Postconciliar Ecclesiology: Expectations,

Results and Prospects for the Future,” in Vatican II Assessment and Perspectives: Twenty-five Years

After, vol.1, ed. R. Latourelle (New York: Paulist Press, 1988), 407-438. Cardinal Ratzinger also

says: “It should be recognized first of all that the word communion does not have a central position

in the Council. But if it is properly understood, it can serve as a synthesis for the essential elements

of conciliar ecclesiology.” Joseph Ratzinger, The Ecclesiology of the Constitution on the Church,

Vatican II, „Lumen Gentium,‟ a presentation made in a symposium on the reception of the Council

held in Rome in November, 2000, http://ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFECCL.HTM.

Communion ecclesiology wouldn‟t be complete without a note about the significant contributions

made by Orthodox theologians. It was Nicholas Afanassief (1893-1966) who almost ten years

before Vatican II, spoke for the first time of Eucharistic ecclesiology. Cf. Nicholas Afanassief, “The

Church Which Presides in Love,” in The Primacy of Peter: Essays in Ecclesiology and the Early

Church (Crestwood, NY: SVS Press, 1992), 91-143. McPartlan says that the term „Eucharistic

Ecclesiology” in scholarly ecclesiological research was coined by Afanassieff in 1957. Cf.

McPartlan, “Eucharistic Ecclesiology,” One in Christ 22 (1986), 324. For a brief review of the

ecclesiology of Afanassief, see Eamon McManus, “Aspects of Primacy According to Two

Orthodox Theologians,” One in Christ 36 (2000), 234-238. Though the credit goes to Afanassief for

discovering the eucharistic ecclesiology in Orthodox theology, it cannot, however, be denied that

the idea of the Church finding its full expression in eucharistic liturgy had already been articulated

by Georges Florovsky. “In the Eucharist there is unveiled, invisibly but really, the fullness of the

Church. Each liturgy is celebrated in union with the whole Church…Therefore, in each liturgy, the

whole Church is present and takes part –mysteriously but really.” Georges Florovsky, “Evkharistiya

i Sobornost,” Put‟ 19 (1929), 3-22. For a panoramic view of Florovsky‟s thought, see The Collected

Works of Georges Florovsky (Belmont: Nordland Publishing Company, 1974). Alexander

Schmemann (1921-1983) also contributed to Orthodox eucharistic ecclesiology in the context of his

liturgical theology. He sees the essential function of the liturgy as to bring the Church into being,

“to realize the church by revealing her.” Cf. Alexander Schmemann, Introduction to Liturgical

Theology (Crestwood, NY: St. Valdimir‟s Seminary Press, 1975), 142. He says that it is the

Eucharist that “generates” the Church, make her to be what she is. Cf. Schmemann,

“Ecclesiological Notes,” St. Vladimir‟s Seminary Quarterly 11:1 (1967), 35-39. John Zizioulas is

the most popular Orthodox theologian known for his eucharistic ecclesiology. Zizioulas was

memorably described by Yves Congar as “one of the most original and most profound theologians

of our age.” Cf. Yves Congar, “Bulletin d‟ecclesiologie,” Revue des Sciences Pilosophiques et

theologiques 66 (1982), 88. This Greek Orthodox theologian in his bold, imaginative and

interesting book, Being As Communion: Studies in Personhood and the Church (London: Darton

Longman & Todd, 1985), develops a Eucharistic ecclesiology of compelling consistency.

Reviewing this book, Jonathan Draper says, “Zizioulas builds his theological understanding from

stones, as it were, hewn from the diverse quarries of the Greek Fathers (especially), modern Roman

Catholic and Protestant philosophy and theology, and, of course, the Scriptures. The resultant

structure is as solid as it is erudite and complex.” Jonathan Draper, “Book Review,” Modern

Theology 5 (1988-1989), 400. Also see Zizioulas‟ doctoral dissertation, The Unity of the Church in

the Divine Eucharist and the Bishop During the First Three Centuries (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross

Orthodox Press, 2001). For a good analysis of Zizioulas‟s eucharistic ecclesiology, see McPartlan,

Eucharist Makes the Church: Henri de Lubac and John Zizioulas in Dialogue (Edinburg: T&T

Clark, 1993).

http://ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFECCL.HTM


dialogical spheres are but different threads in the tightly knitted fabric of dialogical

communion. Aspiring and achieving the true communion of humanity is indeed the

mission of the Church; it is the mission for cosmic communion to which the Church is

deeply committed.

4.1. Dialogue Among Churches: Ecumenical Communion

4.1.1. Ecumenical Relations in India

In general, ecumenism – specially the classical ecumenism – is not treated as

an issue of priority in the Church in India. Albert Z. Muthumalai rightly says in his

report on ecumenism in India: “Ecumenism is not an over-riding concern in the

debates and discussions of the hierarchy. It is practically relegated to the section of

minor matters.”113

He reports that for five years after the promulgation of the Decree

of Ecumenism, “ecumenism made much headway.” But since then, “the movement

has reached an almost passive stage.”114

In fact, even today, the CBCI (Catholic

Bishops‟ Conference of India) does not have an exclusive Commission for

ecumenism, but a joint commission with interreligious dialogue.

Christmas ecumenical celebrations,115

the Week of Prayer for Christian

Unity,116

Charismatic Prayer Gatherings,117

fighting for common causes,118

are some

113 Albert Z. Muthumalai, S.J., “Report on India” in Pedro S. De Achútegui, S.J., ed., Towards A

“Dialogue Of Life,” Ecumenism in the Asian Context, Cardinal Bea Studies IV (Manila: Cardinal

Bea Institute, Loyola School of Theology, 1976), 245. Muthumalai served as the first National

Secretary (appointed in 1965) for the Ecumenism Commission of the CBCI (Catholic Bisops‟

Conference of India). He was an Anglican who converted to Roman Catholicism at the age of 22

(1924) and later became a Jesuit priest; he was very much engaged in ecumenism all through his

life. The above report was submitted by him to the First Asian Congress of Jesuit Ecumenists, held

at Manila, June 18-23, 1975. 114

Muthumalai, “Report on India,” 245. 115

In nearly every diocese in India, and in most parishes, a joint (ecumenical) Christmas social

gathering is held which includes carrol-singing, messages by ministers of different churches, tea

party and some cultural events. Cf. Muthumalai, “Report on India,” 243. This annual event creates a

lot of rapport among the ministers of different churches. 116

The Week of Prayer for Christian Unity is not a very successful event in India. Very few parishes

celebrate it. It is celebrated in Seminaries, Formation Houses and in some urban parishes. In my

eight years of priestly service in my diocese, I never celebrated this Week for Christian Unity. And

I never heard of it being celebrated in any other parish of our diocese, except in the Cathedral

Church and at the Pastoral Centre. 117

The Charismatic Movement in India plays an important role in bringing together Christians of

different churches for prayer. Cf. Muthumalai, “Report on India,” 245. Charismatic Prayer

Gatherings are conducted by different churches at different times of the year. These prayer meetings

enjoy a good attendance from believers of all churches as well as non-Christians. Catholics attend

them when conducted by other churches and believers of other churches attend when such meetings

are conducted by Catholics. While the nature of these prayer meetings (which is very Pentecostal),

is one reason for drawing all to them, another important reason, I strongly feel, is the public space

in which they are conducted. These meetings are normally conducted in open public places, not in


occasions when ecumenism is practised or fostered in India. Among Christians in

India, hurdles of ecumenism are more organizational in nature, than doctrinal. As

Muthumalai says, for example, “the veneration of Blessed Virgin Mary does not seem

to represent an insuperable difficulty among Indians.”119

Most Christians in India

would agree with Muthumalai when he says: “The chances of coming closer to each

other are greater in the study and practice of Christian spiritual life and through the

charismatic movement than in knocking our heads against each other like two rams in

a fight.”120

4.1.2. Not Greater than my Brothers

There is a sense of greater and lesser among the churches in India. The

Catholic Church stands out in contrast to the many other churches that are

denominationally fragmented and numerically marginalized. Historically, the Catholic

Church predates the Protestant churches. The massive social, educational and medical

institutions run by the Catholic Church place it in a pre-eminent position among the

churches in India. In brief, “the Catholic Church in India quantitatively does stand as

“the Church” in relation to other churches.”121

There is still today a sense of being a “greater church” among the Catholic

clergy, religious and laity in India. No wonder many Catholics in India even today see

any church. May be the “un-walled” open space for prayers is more inviting. In the parish in India

where I worked, I organized it for two consecutive years during summer for three days in a school

ground. We had about 10,000 people daily attending these prayer gatherings from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

And almost 40% of them were either non-Catholics or non-Christians. While Catholics never attend

any service in any non-Catholic church, a good number of them attend such meetings when they are

conducted in public spaces. While few non-Catholics do attend Masses at Catholic Churches, many

of them attend the prayer meetings conducted in public spaces. Believers of any church are

normally hesitant to enter the church of another confession. It is stronger among Catholics. May be

the “walled” churches symbolize boundaries, memberships, commitments and liabilities. Thus, they

keep away the believers of other confessions. 118

Cf. Muthumalai, “Report on India,” 244. When there are atrocities on Christians, or denial of rights,

Christians of all churches come together in public protests and demonstrations. Christians express a

great solidarity when fighting for such causes. 119

Cf. Muthumalai, “Report on India,” 245. On the contrary, devotion to Mother Mary brings together

Christians of different churches and non-Christians as well. Invariably every diocese in India has

more than one Catholic Marian Shrines. More than 60% of the pilgrims at these shrines are non-

Catholics and non-Christians. Apart from regular pilgrims, a Marian shrine in our diocese, draws

for its three-day annual feast, some 1,000, 000 people (we have only about 250,000 Catholics in our

diocese and not even 30% of them can attend this feast) and almost 70% of them are non-Catholics

and non-Christians. Can veneration of Mother Mary be an ecumenical doctrinal issue in such a

context? 120

Muthumalai, “Report on India,” 245. In this context, we can say that the Unitatis Redintegratio‟s

“spiritual ecumenism” is more appealing to Christians in India. 121

J. Rosario Narchison and D. K. Kamal, “The Church and the Churches: the Ecumenical Task in

India Today,” Jeevadhara 22 (1992), 269.


the non-Catholics as believers who betrayed the Catholic Church and argue for their

return to the Catholic fold. Such an attitude may be the reason for the

negligence/absence of any ecumenism at the grassroots level in parishes in India. And

many times the Catholic clergy in India deny the invitations extended by the leaders

of other churches for any ecumenical gatherings.

J.M.R. Tillard‟s call for a change of attitude on the part of the Roman Catholic

Church needs to be affirmed greatly in the context of the Indian church. The classical

image of seeing the Roman church as “the tree whose branches have been cut off

during storms of history” should be wiped out.122

The Roman Catholic Church in

India should constantly remind itself that the Church of God is not confined to the

boundaries of the Roman Catholic Church.123

It needs more than ever to assert that the

non-Catholic Christians in India, though divided, are “still brothers and sisters in

Christ.”124

The Basel consultation on church history in ecumenical perspective pointed

out that the distinctiveness of every part of the Church must be taken seriously, which

means refusing to contrast the glories of one‟s own tradition with the blots of another

tradition but rather viewing both the lights and shadows of the past as our common

heritage.125

The Catholic Church in India has been a lonely pilgrim to the kingdom of

God. It has neglected and ignored its own kith and kin of the household, the people of

non-Catholic churches who profess the same faith in Jesus Christ. It is time to realize

that walking without its brothers it will be questioned by its Lord just as he asked

Cain: “Where is your brother?” The “father of all” would neither appreciate nor desire

the neglect and desertion of “our brothers” on our journey to Jerusalem.

122 J. –M. R. Tillard, Church of Churches: The Ecclesiology of Communion (Collegeville, Minnesota:

Liturgical Press, 1992), 44. 123

Cf. Tillard, Church of Churches, 44; also LG. 8 and UR.4. 124


Cf. Lukas Vischer, ed. Church History in an Ecumenical Perspective (Bern: Peter Lang, 1982),

107. Such a review of history and a “writing histories together” was undertaken between Reformed

Churches and the Roman Catholic Church in the second phase (1984-1990) of their bilateral

dialogue, which undertook a common reading of both histories, Reformed and Roman Catholic

(nos.12-62), published in the final report, Towards A Common Understanding of the Church

(1990).


4.1.3. Trans-ecclesial Ecumenism: Broadening the Borders of Communion

Ecumenism is a much wider term than is commonly understood.126

Ecumenism calls for a wider understanding of the church than is held at present in the

context of its mission in the contemporary world, of its unity in relation to humankind

as a whole. It calls for dialogue with other religions and spiritual traditions and

incorporates the perspectives of the poor, of women and the oppressed in its own

perspective.

Raimundo Panikkar makes an observation which is of the utmost importance

to our subject under discussion. He points out that Christian ecumenism, if it is really

to be ecumenical, cannot be reduced to settling Christian family feuds, as it were, or

healing old wounds. It has to take into account the entire world situation and try to

find the place of world religions in this Christian economy of salvation. Such an

ecumenical attitude, Panikkar suggests, “affords the best setting for the right

perspectives, even in merely Christian controversies.”127

Today there are a growing number of ecumenically committed church groups

throughout the world which are on the frontiers, struggling for the rights of the people

and social justice, engaged in interreligious dialogue and cooperation and seeking for

a genuine human community in an alienated world. Their stand goes beyond the

ecclesiological understandings of traditional churches to those deeper human realities

of sin, suffering and alienation. According to M. M. Thomas, these groups provide a

pervasive sign of hope for the community of tomorrow, and are a real – if partial –

realization of the ecumenical vision of the una sancta.128

In much the same direction,

Mary Tanner, commenting on the Canberra statement, would say, “the degree of

communion experienced by churches now, as they share in common prayer and

common witness for justice, peace and care of creation, is a foretaste of the goal of

full communion – of eschatological reality.”129

Tillard affirms that Christians “must

126 Classical meaning of ecumenism refers only to “church-unity” or “healing of the wounds of

division among the Christians.” 127

Raimundo Panikkar, “Towards Ecumenical Ecumenism,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies (1982),

784. For example, Panikkar thinks that, when Protestants and Catholics deal with the controversies

regarding the nature of the Sacraments, they would more easily discover their different contexts and

understand each other more fully, if they tried to understand also the nature of the Hindu Samskaras

(sacred rituals). 128

M. M. Thomas, “Ecumenism in Asia: An Assessment,” in Voices of Unity, ed., Ans van der Bent

(Geneva: WCC, 1981), 100. 129

Mary Tanner, “Towards Common Understanding and Vision: A Faith and Order perspective –

Common Understanding and Vision: Continuing the Discussion,” The Ecumenical Review 50

(1998), 360.


become instruments of communion and by that fact instruments for the salvation of

humanity.”130

4.2. Dialogue among Religions: Inter-Religious Communion

For the Church to be true to its identity as a community of God‟s redeemed

people and for the Church to fulfil her mission of evangelization and cooperation in

the realization of God‟s plan of salvation, the Church must be a community of

dialogue. The universal salvific will of God embraces the whole world. The Church‟s

mission of salvation is addressed to human beings endowed with mind and heart,

made in the image and likeness of God. As Tillard says, “It [church] must also remain

in communion with the story of humanity and its crying out to another world.”131

4.2.1. The Extended Communion

In the Catholic Church there has been a growing emphasis on the importance

of dialogue from the time of the Second Vatican Council.132

Vatican II was an

important landmark in the history of the Church‟s relationship with other religions.

The most important theological statement from an interreligious perspective is Nostra

Aetate, no. 2:

The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She

regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts

and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds

and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all

men…The Church therefore exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and

collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence and

love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and

promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values

found among these men.133



132 “Although Vatican II did not develop clear theological positions on other religions, it did, by

opening up the issue in the direction of interfaith dialogue, mark a new phase in the relationship of

the Roman Catholic Church, in all parts of the world, with people of other faiths.” S. Wesley

Ariarajah, “Interfaith Dialogue,” in Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement (Geneva:

WCC/Eerdmans, 2002), 314. 133

NA, no.2. Positive observations in relation to other religions can also be found in some other

documents of the Council. Consider, for example, the teaching that these religious traditions contain

“elements which are true and good” (LG, 16), “precious things, both religious and human” (GS,

92), “elements of truth and grace” (AG, 9), “seeds of the word” (AG, 11, 15), and “seeds of

contemplation” (AG, 18). Jews are the “first receivers of God‟s covenant,” Muslims are “followers

of Abraham,” Hindus and Buddhists are “advanced civilisations…with a deep religious sense” (LG,

16; NA, 2).


Pope Paul VI created the Secretariat for Non-Christian Religions in 1964,134

and a year later the encyclical Ecclesiam Suam was issued, in which the Pope

developed at length the theme of dialogue.135

Pope John Paul II‟s encyclical letter

Redemptoris Missio has been called “the most important official Catholic statement

on the world mission of the Church since the second Vatican Council.”136

According

to Redemptoris Missio:

Inter-religious dialogue is a part of the Church‟s evangelizing mission.

Understood as a method and means of mutual knowledge and enrichment,

dialogue is not in opposition to mission ad gentes; indeed it has special links with

that mission and is one of its expressions.137

When John Paul II visited India, in his speech upon his arrival at the airport in New

Delhi on February 1, 1986, he said:

My purpose in coming to India has both a religious and a human dimension. I

come to pay a pastoral visit to the Catholics of India, and I come in friendship

with a deep desire to pay honour to all people and to your different cultures. As I

begin, I take this occasion to express my sincere interest in all the religions of

India – an interest marked by a desire to promote inter-religious dialogue and

fruitful collaboration between people of different faiths.138

The Church in India opened itself to dialogue more prominently after the

developments in the Church at large. A more concrete and effective step was taken

when the Commission for Dialogue for relations with non-Christian religions was

founded in 1970, in India. More recently, in Ecclesia in Asia, Pope John Paul II has

stressed the dialogical mission of the church in Asia.139

134 As Wesley Ariarajah says, “the establishment of the Vatican Secretariat for Non-Christians and the

WCC Sub-unit on Dialogue heightened the visibility of interfaith dialogue in the life of the

churches.” Wesley Ariarajah, “Interfaith Dialogue” 314. 135

Cf. Ecclesiam Suam, n. 41, 87. 136

Cf. “Editorial” of International Bulletin of Missionary Research 15 (1991), 2. 137

Redemptoris Missio, n.55. 138

The Pope Speaks to India (Bombay: St. Paul‟s Publications, 1986), 13. 139

EA, 3, 20, 21, 29 and 31 are especially important for interreligious dialogue. For the full text of this

Apostolic Exhortation, see Origins 29 (1999), 357-384. For Asian responses to this document see,

Josef Neuner, “Proclaiming Jesus Christ: Reflections on Ecclesia in Asia,” Vidyajyoti 64 (2000),

536-543; Michael Amaladoss, “The Image of Jesus in The Church in Asia,” East Asian Pastoral

Review 37 (2000), 233-241; Edmund Chia, “Of Fork and Spoon or Fingers and Chopsticks:

Interreligious Dialogue in Ecclesia in Asia,” East Asian Pastoral Review 37 (2000), 242-255; James

H. Kroeger, “Rejoice, O Asia-Church” East Asian Pastoral Review 37 (2000), 278-285; John M.

Prior, “Unfinished Encounter: A Note on the Voice and Tone of Ecclesia in Asia” East Asian

Pastoral Review 37 (2000), 256-271; Peter C. Phan, “Ecclesia in Asia: Challenges for Asian

Christianity,” East Asian Pastoral Review 37 (2000), 215-232. For a greater comprehension of the

issues in the document, see also the different responses to the Lineamenta of the Asian Synod by

the Bishops‟ Conferences of India, Indonesia, Japan and others, published in East Asian Pastoral

Review 35 (1998), 54-129.


There is the natural question that arises in interreligious dialogue: how should

Christians look upon other religions? There is the classic categorisation of of

exclusivism,140

inclusivism141

and pluralism.142

Sometimes they are also called

Ecclesiocentrism, Christocentrism and Theocentrism. Meanwhile, many theologians

are exploring ways and means to move out of the constraints of the of exclusivism,

inclusivism and pluralism and their different variations.143

But we do not go into a

discussion of the “theology of religions” here, as that would be too extensive a subject

to deal within the scope of this research.

4.2.2. Imperative of Interreligious Dialogue

Pope John Paul II in his apostolic exhortation Ecclesia in Asia acknowledges

“the importance of dialogue as a characteristic mode of the Church‟s life in Asia”

(EA, 3). He teaches that “the Church cannot but enter into dialogue with all peoples,

in every time and place,” as she is the sacrament of the unity of all humankind. (EA,

29). The Pope notes that “contact, dialogue and cooperation with the followers of

140 The exclusivist position affirms that only in Jesus can true revelation and salvation be found, the

Christ event being constitutive of any authentic encounter with God, always and everywhere. 141

The inclusivist position affirms the uniqueness of Jesus without denying that God‟s saving presence

may also be operative in other religions. Proponents of this view, however, insist that Christ

includes other religions, either by being present in them anonymously or by fulfilling them as their

goal. Jesus remains, if not constitutive of, at least normative for, all religious experience. 142

The pluralist position affirms that Jesus is unique, but his uniqueness includes and is included by

other potentially equal religious experience, but as theocentric, that is, as universally relevant

manifestation, incarnation, and sacrament of God‟s revelation and salvation in history. John Hick

and Paul Knitter are the leading pluralist theologians. See John Hick and Paul Knitter, ed., The

Myth of Christian Uniqueness: Towards a Pluralist Theology of Religions (Maryknoll: Orbis,

1987); John Hick, The Rainbow of Faith (London: SCM, 1995); Paul Knitter, One Earth Many

Religions – Multifaith Dialogue and Global Responsibility (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1995). Hans Küng

underlines two errors inherent in this pluralist approach – first, they unrealistically require of the

non-Christian partners in the dialogue to give up from the outset their faith in the normativity of the

message and saving figures of their own particular traditions; and, secondly, they require of the

Christian partners to relegate Jesus Christ to the status of a provisional messiah against the

conviction of faith offered and demanded from the NT onwards. See Hans Küng, “Towards an

Ecumenical Theology of Religions: Some Theses for Clarification,” Concilium 183 (1986), 123. 143

It may be noted here that Jacques Dupuis, one of the most prominent theologians of religion and

interreligious dialogue, introduced the term “inclusive pluralism” in his theology. See Jacques

Dupuis, S.J., Towards a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1997). The

same he has edited into a shorter version: Christianity and the Religions: From Confrontations to

Dialogue (Maryknoll: Orbis, 2002). The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a

notification concerning Towards a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism, on February 27,

2001. For a good summary and balanced evaluation of these books of Dupuis, see Terrence

Merrigan, “Exploring the Frontiers: Jacques Dupuis and the Movement „Towards A Christian

Theology of Religious Pluralism,‟” Louvain Studies 23 (1998), 338-339; Gerald O‟Collins, S.J.,

“Jacques Dupuis‟s Contribution to Interreligious Dialogue,” Theological Studies 64 (2003), 388-

397. Dupuis himself entered into a dialogue with all the reviews of these books in his article “ „The

Truth Will Make You Free‟: The Theology of Religions Revisited,” Louvain Studies 24 (1999),

211-263.


other religions is a task which the Second Vatican Council bequeathed to the whole

Church as a duty and a challenge” (EA, 31). Though the Vatican Declaration Dominus

Iesus had numerous negative reactions, it does, however, affirm interreligious

dialogue as integral to the Church‟s evangelising mission (DI, 2).

The Catholic Bishops‟ Conference of India (CBCI) affirms that “it is

imperative for the Church to be in dialogue with the followers of other religious

traditions.”144

Rightly so Vandana Mataji says: “The most striking feature of the

Indian Christian spirituality in the coming millennium will or should be, interreligious

dialogue.”145

It is through dialogue and contemplation that the Indian Church wants to

respond to the great religions of India in a living contact with them. It is in this

approach that she professes “her deep conviction and experience that God is present

and Christ is implicitly active in other religions, and that God has given our people

several unique gifts which we have to inherit.”146

4.2.3. Need for Dialogue Is a Need for Communion

In the Christian understanding, dialogue is not between religions in the

abstract but between the believers of various religions.147

The partners of dialogue

must be rooted in their own faith and want to grow in truth, which is greater than all

perceptions.148

Interreligious dialogue is not just a congress of philosophy or a

theological symposium, but takes place among persons of living faith.149

The meeting

point of different religions must be sought not at the level of religious ideas and


145 Vandana Mataji, “Response II [to J. B. Chethimattam] from the Perspective of an Ashramite

Spirituality”, in Dominic Veliath, ed., Towards An Indian Christian Spirituality in a Pluralist

Context: Papers and Statements of the 14th

Annual Meeting of the Indian Theological Association

(Bangalore: Dharmaram, 1993), 113. 146

Anto Karokaran, “Evangelization in India Today,” Indian Missiological Review 2 (1981), 134. 147

It is not an encounter for experts and leaders only, rather it will involve the whole Catholic

communities. Cf. James Knight, SVD, “Mission and Dialogue in Asia. Can We Plumb the

Depths?,” Vidyajyoti 56 (1992), 134. 148

Puthiadam, S.J., “Education For Dialogue,” Indian Missiological Review 2 (1991), 33-47. 149

Cf. Raimon Panikkar, The Intra-Religious Dialogue (New York: St. Paul‟s Publications, 1978), 50.

Panikkar is perhaps the most prolific and successful author in the dialogue between East and West.

He has published 30 books and about 300 major articles on philosophy, comparative religions,

theology of religions and indology. His recent books include The Unknown Christ of Hinduism

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1981); Blessed Simplicity (New York: Seabury, 1982); The Silence of God

(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1989); The Cosmotheandric Experience: Emerging Religious

Consciousness (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1993); The Intrareligious Dialogue (Paulist, 1999);

Christophany: The Fullness of Man (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,2004); The Experience of God: Icons of

the Mystery (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2006); The Rhythm of Being: The Gifford Lectures (Maryknoll,

NY: Orbis, 2010).


doctrines but at the level of religious experience.150

Experience is the necessary point

of juncture in interreligious dialogue.151

Church in India has the great blessing of

living in a thriving multi-religious context which provides it a natural space for

mutual encounter of multi-religious people and features in daily life. Living with

people belonging to different religions offers the opportunity to recognize God-

experience unfolding itself in the lives and values of people of other faiths and their

dedication to duty and religious practice. Joining people of other faiths in celebrations

or conversing with them as fellow travellers on life‟s road to the divine would provide

an insight into their way of life. Such sharing brings about a greater sensitivity to all

other peoples and would bring Christians and others together for building

communities based on human values.

Dialogue of life leads one to dialogue of action. Working with others for the

realization of common values like human dignity and serving the community, in

particular the weak, the poor, the destitute and the suffering, constitute the dialogue of

action. Here, the awareness of the socio-economic and political needs of a society in

important. To provide the conditions where people can exercise their fundamental

rights and lead lives that are fruitful and fulfilling should be, in part, the purpose of

the dialogue of action. Concerns for social justice and creating structures that can

solve the problems that cause hardships to others need the combined labour of many.

The praxis of such action makes it imperative that there should be collaboration, not

competition, between Christians and people of other faiths.

As Eric J. Sharpe says, “the appropriate attitude for Christians to adopt when

approaching followers of other ways –may be styled „theological.‟ But it is not only

theological. It is practical, and therefore, open to discussion on historical and social-

scientific lines.”152

Interreligious dialogue is not only a matter of theoretical

relationships in which „Christianity‟ stands with the other religions singly or

collectively. It is also a matter of what actually happens on the human level when men

150 Aloysius Pieris says that in Asian culture “theology is not mere God-talk” and that “God-talk in

itself is sheer „nonsense‟… God-talk is made relative to God-experience.” According to Pieris “the

mutuality of praxis and theory that defines the Asian sense in theology is the missing ingredient in

the theology of religions.” Aloysius Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation (Edinburgh: T&T

Clark, 1988), 84, 85. 151

Pieris, An Asian Theology of Liberation, 84-85. And it is rightly pointed out by Augustine

Kanjamala that for the effective proclamation and sharing of the Gospel, “missionaries who have

not experienced God and are therefore unable to communicate an experience of God are not

credible. In this regard, the last chapter of Redemptoris Missio, „Missionary Spirituality‟ is

especially noteworthy.” See Augustine Kanjamala, S.V.D., “Redemptoris Missio and Mission in

India,” in William R. Burrows, ed., Redemption and Dialogue (New York: Orbis, 1993), 204. 152

Eric J. Sharpe, “Mission Between Dialogue and Proclamation,” Redemption and Dialogue, 162.


and women who confess and call themselves Christians meet other men and women

who do not.153

“In Asia, the emphasis in interreligious dialogue falls not so much on

academic or theological discussions, as on the sharing of life at all levels. „Dialogue

of life‟ is central to Asian Christians.”154

The style and attitude of the Church towards religions should reflect the Father

“who loved the world so much that He gave his only Son” (Jn. 3:16), the Son who

came to save and not to condemn the world.155

The Church understands her specific

mission to bring all people to the knowledge and fullness of the plan revealed in

Christ and thus unite the whole of humanity with God and in Christ.156

Dialogue is

very integral to the mission of the Church today.157

As John Chethimattam says,

“dialogue and mission are complementary: Dialogue asks each one: „Tell us how God

has disclosed himself to you?‟ Mission says: „This is how God has revealed himself to

us, and what he said and did may be relevant also for you.‟”158

It must be pointed out that interreligious dialogue can also be a moment of

mutual evangelisation in the sense that not only the Christian partners in dialogue

share their ideas and values with adherents of other religions but also the latter can

challenge the former to purify and correct their own beliefs and values as well as

153 Cf. Eric J. Sharpe, “The Goals of Interreligious Dialogue”, in J. Hick, ed., Truth and Dialogue in

World Religions (Philadelphia: The Westminister Press, 1974), 77-95. 154

Final Statement, Fourth Formation Institute for Inter-Religious Affairs (FIRA IV), Bishops‟

Leadership Seminar, Pattaya, Thailand, 20-25 Auust, 2001, n.5, in Franz-Josef Eilers, SVD, ed.,

For All the Peoples of Asia, vol.3, Federation of Asian Bishops‟ Conferences Documents from

1997-2001 (Quenzon City: Claretian, 2002), 140. 155

Cf. John Peter, “Evangelization and Dialogue,” Vidyajyoti 54 (1991), 401-411. 156

Cf. Eph.2:9. While speaking of interreligious dialogue, Bede Griffiths says: “We come to share one

another‟s spiritual riches. Hindus are willing to accept that. I do find in dialogue a platform for

taking some subject like salvation. You ask, „How do you, as a Christian, as a Hindu, or as a

Muslim, understand salvation?” See Bede Griffiths, “Mission is Dialogue,” Indian Missiological

Review 1 (1981), 47. 157

But then there is the danger of being suspected by people of other religions that the Christian

motive of interreligous dialogue is conversion. They sometimes feel that interreligious dialogue is a

trap for conversion by Christians. Hence they resist and suspect. See Cardinal Francis Arinze,

“Interreligious Dialogue: Problems, Prospects and Possibilities,” Bulletin 3 (1987), 260. There are

also those who fear that dialogue introduces syncretism, religious relativism and indifferentism.

Paul Knitter would say that “the eagerness [with which] one has to persuade or convert one‟s

dialogue partners has to be matched by a willingness to be converted by them.” Brennan R. Hill,

Paul Knitter and William Madges, Faith, Religion and Theology, A Contemporary Introduction

(Mystic, CT: Twentythird, 1990), 204. 158

John B. Chethimattam, “Nature and Scope of Interreligious Dialogue Today,” Jeevadhara 22

(1992), 350


enrich them with beliefs and values that may not be present in Christianity, at least not

to the same extent that they are found in other religions.159

4.2.4. Striving in Communion for a Better India

Tillard affirms that the “reconciliation of humanity” is the mission of the

church.160

The involvement of the Church in India within the civil society is an

imperative today.161

India needs a people‟s movement for liberation and the Church

can be a moving force behind these people‟s movements.162

The Church cannot really

bring about any transformation in the world without in some way getting involved,

struggling with the people.163

It should become a people‟s movement. But, in the

multi-religious context of India, one cannot think of a people‟s movement that is

exclusively Christian.164

Just as the Christians are oppressed, so are Hindus, Muslims,

Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains and others. And Christians will struggle with the others.165

The Church can play the animating role – not by being exclusive, but by facilitating

and coordinating. “Dialogue, therefore, is a fundamental part of Christian service

within community.” 166

What Dialogue and Proclamation says in this regard is so

important and so we quote it in full:

159 See Jacques Dupuis, Jesus Christ at the Encounter of World Religions (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1991),

207-229. Pierre Fallon, SJ, after his survey of Hinduism concludes: “For the church in India, a

church more and more conscious of its “Indianness” and trying to make its theology, spirituality

and liturgy more adapted to the India traditions, there is great hope that the Christian-Hindu

dialogue which is at present starting in an earnest way may enrich not only Indian Christianity but

the Christian life and thought of the whole church.” Pierre Fallon, SJ, “Dialogue with Hinduism: An

Introduction” in Towards a “Dialogue of Life,” 227. 160


Cf. Felix Wilfred, Asian Dreams and Christian Hope, 179-205. Wilfred discusses here the various

reasons why such an involvement of the christian community in India in the nation is imperative;

the conditions for such involvement; and the main areas of this involvement. 162

Michael Amaladoss, “The Future of the Church‟s Mission in India,” Jeevadhara 17 (1987), 381. 163

GS. 40 § 2: “the Church… travels the same journey as all humanity and shares the same earthly lot

with the world: she is to be leaven and, as it were, the soul of human society in its renewal by Christ

and transformation into the family of God.” But it is deplorable that the “Indian Christian

community is largely absent in the area of civil society.” Cf. S. Arulsamy, “Challenges to Christian

Community,” 17. 164

Commenting on the liberation movement in India, Felix Wilfred says: “What is particularly striking

is the fact that in the struggle inspired and supported by liberation theology, it was never Christians

alone who were the actors. From the beginning it tried to transcend religious and communal barriers

and focus attention on the oppression suffered by the poor and marginalized, with no regard to their

religious affiliation.” Felix Wilfred, Asian Dreams and Christian Hope (Delhi: ISPCK, 2003), 270.

See also Felix Wilfred, ed., Indian Paths to Human Liberation (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1993). For a

study of liberation in Vedas, Bhagavat Gita, Bhakti movement, Virasaivism, Buddhism, Indian

Renaissance and Gandhian Thought, see Paul Puthenangady, ed., Towards An Indian Theology of

Liberation (Bangalore: NBCLC, 1985). 165

Cf. CBCI, “The Church in Dialogue,” 376. 166

Guidelines on Dialogue with People of Living Faiths and Ideologies (Geneva: WCC, 1979), 10-11.


The importance of dialogue for integral development, social justice and human

liberation needs to be stressed. Local Churches are called upon, as witnesses to

Christ, to commit themselves in this respect in an unselfish and impartial manner.

There is need to stand for human rights, proclaim the demands of justice, and

denounce injustice not only when their own members are victimized, but

independently of the religious allegiance of the victims. There is need also to join

together in trying to solve the great problems facing society and the world, as well

as in education for justice and peace.167

As Bishop Thomas Dabre suggests, “the mission of the Church in India also demands

that we humbly and patiently bring to the notice of India what is not good in our

cultures and communities, though not in any self-righteous or presumptuous way.”168

4.2.5. Universal Communion of the Kingdom

Dialogue and Proclamation affirms that the members of other religious

traditions are related to the church as sacrament in which the Kingdom of God is

present.169

Tillard, in similar tone, says: “contacts with the major non-Christian

religions and the discovery of an immense crowd of men and women with an upright

heart have brought about the discovery not only of the breadth but also the depth of

this already of the Kingdom.”170

The Church is “a sacramental sign and an instrument

of intimate union with God and of unity of all humankind” (LG 1). The Church then,

as sign and instrument, must both symbolize and strive for the “unity of all

humankind” with one another and with God. Striving for communion is the primary

task of the Church as the servant of the kingdom.171

This promotion of unity, the

Council affirms, “belongs to the inmost nature of the Church” (GS 42). The mission

of the church, therefore, cannot be limited to building closed and self-satisfied

Christian communities, but must reach out to the creation of the eschatological human

community (the new heaven and new earth) which lies on the horizons of human and

cosmic history (Rev. 21:1-4).

“All men will come from east and west, and from north and south, and sit at

the table in the Kingdom of God” (Lk. 13:29). It is a universal communion of the

Kingdom. The “people of other faiths” are not unrelated to the “People of God.”172

167 Dialogue and Proclamation, 44.

168 Bishop Thomas Dabre, “Christian Influence in the Transformation of Indian Society. II. Towards an

Indian Christology,” Vidyajyoti 67 (2003) 109. 169

Dialogue and Proclamation, 35. 170


Cf. Thomas Ninan, “Emergence of Ecclesial Communities: A New Missionary Phenomenon,”

Religion and Society 54:2 (2009), 6. 172

LG. 16: “those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various

ways.”


“All nations form but one community.”173

As Tillard would say: “To assert that the

Church is the communion of communions amounts certainly to a recognition that in

the Church are assumed all the concrete spheres of solidarity by which the humanity-

willed-by-God can be realized.”174

Today, there is also great emphasis on what is called “wider-ecumenism” or “macro-

ecumenism.”175

As Philip Potter says in his first report as General Secretary to the

WCC central committee in 1973:

Even more important is a clearer understanding of “ecumenical” as referring not

only to the coming and being together of churches, but more biblically to “the

whole inhabited earth” of men and women struggling to become what they were

intended to be in the purpose of God… The ecumenical movement is thus seen to

be wherever Christians and others are one way or another seeking to work for the

unity of mankind. The churches participate in this movement in the full

knowledge that the oikoumene is the Lord‟s and that he calls us to discern what he

is doing among his creatures and in his creation on the basis and in the perspective

of what he has done in Christ who is the centre of the ecumenical movement. Thus

the search for the unity of the church is inextricably bound up with the struggle for

the unity of mankind.176

In India, the life of a Christian is not limited to the fellowship within the

Christian community. As Christians, there is a fellowship among believers, but then in

daily life we share many things in common with our neighbours of other faiths. The

realisation that the religious experience of our neighbours is related to the mysterious

plan of God will draw us even closer to them in fellowship.177

This fellowship

transcends all kinds of borders and boundaries.

4.3. Dialogue With Nature: Eco-Communion

4.3.1. Need for Eco-Communion

Some of the questions that Christians ask are important: How can people

participate with God in the universe story? How profoundly is nature interwoven with

our own story? How is our own story interwoven into other non-human stories? To

develop a new understanding of our relationship with God through our relationships

with the material world around us, we must move in an ever-expanding consciousness

of the unity that binds all of God‟s creation together. We desperately need a

173 NA. 1; Cf. GS. 40. Also Cf. Dialogue and Proclamation, 28.


175 Cf. “Towards a Common Understanding and Vision of the WCC” Policy Statement adopted by the

Central Committee of WCC, September, 1997 (Geneva: WCC, 1997), n.2.4 and 2.9. 176

Philip Potter, “Report of the General Secretary,” Ecumenical Review 25 (1973), 416-417. 177

Cf. Dialogue and Proclamation, 42, 43.


spirituality today that will restore a sense of the sacred immanence of the divine in all

of God‟s creation.178

It is a fact that the Catholic Church has been slow to recognize the gravity of

the ecological problems facing the earth. Despite its great achievement in helping to

bring the Catholic Church into the modern world, Vatican II ignored the issue of

ecology.179

“Our Churches themselves must be places where we learn anew what it

means that God‟s covenant extends to all creatures, by rediscovering the eco-centric

dimension of the Bible.”180

As Tillard rightly affirms,

The Church of God cannot be separated from the destiny of the whole universe,

precisely because the creator put his eikôn at the centre cosmos, as diakonos and

leitourgos, and made Christ Jesus, who saved humanity from its sin, Kyrios of this

universe. Christ, is not the Saviour only of the private part of human destiny. He is

also the saviour of its cosmic vocation.181

178 For theological debates about the „green credentials‟ of Christianity, see Max Oelschlaeger, Caring

for Creation: An Ecumenical Approach to the Environmental Crisis (New Heaven: Yale University

Press, 1994); Jürgen Moltmann, God in Creation: A New Theology of Creation and the Spirit of

God (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985); Wesley Granberg-Michaelson, Ecology and Life:

Accepting our Environmental Responsibility (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1988); H. Paul Santmire,

The Travail of Nature: The Ambiguous Ecological Promise of Christian Theology (Philadelphia:

Fortress Press, 1985); Lawrence Osborn, Guardians of Creation: Nature in Theology and the

Christian Life (Leicester: Apollos, 1993); Sean McDonagh, To Care for the Earth: A Call to a New

Ecology (Santa Fe, NM: Bear & Co, 1986). 179

Some quote GS. 34 in defence of ecology in Vatican II, along with LG. 36, DV. 3, and GS. 9, 12.

However, it cannot be argued that these are grounded on an ecological vision of all reality. We see

more of a „dominant‟ theology and anthropocentric bias in these instances. Though Pope John Paul

II makes references to ecology in Redemptor Hominis, nos.8, 15 and 16, it is only in Sollicitudo Rei

Socialis (1998) that he introduces papal teaching on ecology in a fairly substantial way. For a

comprehensive look at the Church‟s response to ecological issues, see Joseph Sheldon, Rediscovery

of Creation: A Bibliographical Study of the Church‟s Response to the Environmental Crisis

(Metuchen, NY: Scarecrow, Press, 1992). Among the Catholic thinkers who have helped lay the

foundations for the emerging theology of creation in the Catholic tradition, pride of place goes to

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. He brings a religious dimension to the telling of the story of the

emergent universe in his book The Phenomenon of Man (London: Fontana, 1965). See also his book

The Divine Milieu (New York: Harper, 1960). Following very much in the footsteps of Teilhard

was Thomas Berry. A selection of his writings in „Riverdale Papers‟ was published as The Dreams

of the Earth (San Francisco: Sierra Books, 1988). Then the best known and most prolific writer in

the area of creation theology is the American Dominican, Mathew Fox. In his book Original

Blessing: A Primer in Creation Spirituality (Santa Fe, NM: Bear and Company, 1983), he calls

Christians and churches back to a broader vision of „original blessing‟ as a way of empowering

people to search for a new creation. Though he was censured by ecclesiastical authorities in 1988, it

made him better known around the world. Both Berry and Fox have encouraged the development of

a Creation Theology in contrast to the Fall/Redemption Model that has prevailed in the Judaeo-

Christian tradition especially during the past five hundred years. 180

Wesley Granberg-Michaelson, A Worldly Spirituality: A Call to Redeem Life on Earth (San

Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984), 86. For a brief survey of Ecotheology, see Peter Scott, “Types of

Ecotheology,” Ecotheology 4 (1998), 8-19. 181

J. M. R. Tillard, “Communion and Salvation,” in Xavier Koodapuzha, ed., Communion of

Churches: International Theological Conference on the Communion of Churches (Vadavathoor:

Oriental Institute of Religious Studies, 1993), 16.


Felix Wilfred opines that a true Indian ecclesiology should take into account

the unity/communion of the entire reality – the divine, the human and the

cosmos/nature. He says that “we come to a fuller understanding of the mystery of the

Church when we view it as an instrument of communion also with the entire nature

and the cosmos.”182

Raimon Panikkar called this approach to reality, cosmotheandric

vision.183

For Panikkar, any reality that we think of has three dimensions: cosmic,

human and divine. These dimensions are distinct from one another but inseparable

from each other. Reality is real only when these dimensions are united, unsevered

from one another. They are in other words constitutive. This amounts to a realization

of the symbolic character of the Earth or the Cosmos. Borrowing the term

“cosmotheandric” from Panikkar, Amaladoss calls the Church “cosmotheandric

communion.” The mission of the Church today, he suggests, is “the transformation of

the cosmic community into a Cosmotheandric Communion.”184

The mission of the Church in India is closely linked with the “communion

with nature.”185

The Church in India can enter into a creative theological reflection

with the Indian traditions in their deep ecological resources.186

Indian religious traditions have long proclaimed the sacredness of nature. They

proclaim and promote a cosmic spirituality of harmony with the nature. In this

context the Church itself should manifest a deep reverence for Mother Earth and

courageously expose the fallacy of those who, for selfish ends, exploit nature at

the expense of the harmony of the cosmos, and detriment of others…It is part of

the evangelizing mission of the Church to promote a greater sense of harmony and

balance, a spirit of partnership with nature, an attitude of stewardship…To

develop and promote a holistic attitude characteristic of our Indian ethos

182 Felix Wilfred, On the Banks of Ganges, Doing Contextual Theology (Delhi: ISPCK, 2002), 216.

183 A good scholarly study of the “cosmotheandric vision” of Raimon Panikkar, see Anthony Savari

Raj, A New Hermeneutic of Reality. Raimon Panikkar‟s Cosmotheandric Vision (Bern: Peter Lang,

1998). Commenting on Panikkar‟s cosmotheandrism, Francis X. D‟Sa says “Cosmotheandrism does

away with the distinction between the secular and the sacred. For here the secular is sacred and the

sacred is secular.” Francis X. D‟Sa, “The Notion of God”, in Joseph Prabhu, ed., The Intellectual

Challenge of Raimon Panikkar (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1996), 36. 184

Amaladoss, “A New Way of Being Christian in India Today,” 141. 185

D. S. Amalorpavadass would say that theologizing in India implies that “we be in the here and now

(in the reality) one with the human community and the total environment (cosmic and

communitarian)…” D. S. Amalorpavadass, “Towards a Theology of Peace,” 198. 186

For a Hindu perspective on ecology see: David Kinsley, “Reflections on Ecological Themes in

Hinduism,” Journal of Dharma 16 (1991), 229-245; Harold Coward, “Hindu Spirituality and the

Environment,” Ecotheology 3 (1997) 50-60; Augustine Thottakara, “A Vedantic perspective of

Ecology,” Journal of Dharma 26 (2001), 9-26. For a Buddhist perspective on ecology see: Peter

Harvey, “Buddhist Attitudes to and Treatment of Non-human Nature,” Ecotheology 4 (1998), 35-

50; Corrado Pensa, “A Buddhist View of Ecology: Interdependence, Emptiness and Compassion,”

Journal of Dharma 26 (2001), 36-45. For a Jain perspective, see Vincent Shekar, “Significance of

Jain Philosophy for preserving Life and Environment,” Journal of Dharma 26 (2001), 46-59. For a

Gandhian perspective on ecology, see Simon Mason, “Gandhi‟s Spirituality in Today‟s Ecological

Crisis,” Ecotheology 5 & 6 (1998-1999), 226-238.


spirituality of communion with nature and to invite our people to live such a

spirituality of communion and to announce God‟s plan of harmony, appears an

urgent task in the mission agenda of the Church in India. Preserving and

promoting the integrity of creation is part of the Church‟s mission of living the

faith that does justice.187

Through their religious and cultural heritage, tribals and other indigenous people have

contributed a world-view of human communion with nature.188

The tribals in India

have an egalitarian ecological ethics.189

The Church in India needs to interact much

profoundly into the dalit and Adivasi cultures and religions which are deeply fused

with the care of nature and its sustainable management.

187 CBCI Commission for Proclamation and Communication, “Paths Of Mission in India Today: Our

Common Search,” n. 78. 188

“The Church in India in Search of a New Identity,” n.17, 264. Gabriele Dietrich discusses well the

links between ecological, dalit and tribal, and feminist movements. She feels that there is a

tendency in ecological movements to shun away from the social question and to leave the situation

of caste and patriarchy in their midst unanalyzed. She sees a difference between “deep ecologists”

who focus on nature and neglect social factor and “social justice oriented environmentalists” who

see nature as “environment” for human beings which needs to be cared for. She says that ecological

struggles are also struggles of the dalits and tribals; struggle for water is a struggle of the landless

poor; violence on nature is also a violence on dalits and women. She says that “the dalitization and

re-tribalization of culture has to have a definite feminist angle.” See, Gabriele Dietrich, “Patriarchy,

Caste and Class,” Journal of Dharma 23 (1998), 104-112; “The World as the Body of God:

Feminist Perspectives on Ecology and Social Justice,” Ecotheology 5 & 6 (1998-1999), 25-50. For a

variety of voices contributing to and revealing the ongoing debates surrounding “ecofeminism,” see

Elizabeth Green and Mary Grey, eds., Ecofeminism and Theology, Year Book of the European

Society of Women in Theological Research, 2 (Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1994). Ruether says that

Ecofeminism is based on the basic intuition that there is a fundamental connection between the

domination of women and domination of nature. See Rosemary Radford Ruether, “Ecofeminism:

First and Third World Women,” Ecotheology 2 (1997), 72-83. Another important work on

Ecofeminism is: Rosemary Radford Ruether, ed., Women Healing Earth: Third World Women on

Ecology, Feminism and Religion (London: SCM, 1996). This book looks not just at the traditional

association of women with the earth, but seeks to move beyond this to envisioning women as a

positive force in the healing of the earth. It examines the issue of ecofeminism from the perspective

of those women considered marginalized by race or class in addition to gender. 189

Cf. Thomas Kandankavil, “Salvation From the Dalit Perspective: Earthly or Eschatological,”

Journal of Dharma 22 (1997), 129. The tribals in India through their celebration of life through

music and dance fostered the conservation of and a symbiotic relationship with nature through their

millennia-old health practices, myths and rituals, respect for mother earth, sacredness of land, forest

and resources and ecological ethics. For an example of Indian tribal eco-religions, see Johnson

Vadakkumchery, “Religion in the Tribal Eco-System,” Journal of Dharma 17 (1992), 85-97, where

he studies the traditional religion of Madia Gond tribals in North India. These tribals see the origin

of the cosmos from a huge tree. See also by the same author, “The Earth Mother and the Indigenous

People of India,” Journal of Dharma 18 (1993), 85-97. The Indian Theological Association too

affirms the egalitarian ecological ethics of tribals in India. Cf. “Ecological Crisis: An Indian

Christian Response,” Final Statement of Indian Theological Association, 20th

Annual Meeting,

April 26-30, 1997, Aluva, Indian Theological Studies 34 (1997), 382.


4.3.2. Brother-Sun and Sister-Moon: Franciscan Perspective

St. Francis of Assisi has been called the patron saint of ecology.190

In the

western Christian tradition, he has become the archetype of an exemplary form of

brotherhood and sisterhood with nature.191

The originality of St. Francis is to be found

in the successful and happy synthesis he established between internal and external

ecology: he produced an outstanding form of cosmic mysticism.192

He felt profound

empathy with and for all creatures. He used the loving terms brother and sister to

address the moon, fire and water, and even weeds, sickness and death.193

On the basis of this mysticism of universal brotherhood and sisterhood, St.

Francis treated all things with great respect and tenderness.194

He told his associates

not to cut the trees down completely, so that they could grow again, and not to take all

the bees‟ honey, lest they starve. Tender and loving concern was his fundamental

attitude to all that was other than himself. This constituted the outward ecology of St.

Francis.

190 Pope John Paul II proclaimed Saint Francis as patron of those who promote ecology. Cf. Pope John

Paul II, “Peace with God the Creator, Peace with All Creation” Message for the World Day of

Peace 1 Jan, 1990, Origins 14 (December, 1989), 465-468. A good study of Franciscan ecology can

be found in Roger D. Sorrell, St. Francis of Assisi and Nature: Tradition and Innovation in Western

Attitudes towards the Environment (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988). The ecological mood

of the message of St. Francis has been beautifully brought out in the delightful book of Christopher

Coelho, A New Kind of Fool. Meditations with a sketchbook and a camera and in prose, poetry, and

song on Saint Francis and his vision (Secunderabad (India): Amruthavni, 1986). See also Dawn M.

Nothwehr, Franciscan Theology of the Environment: An Introductory Reader (Quincy: Franciscan,

2002). 191

Another great theologian and mystic of nature who has spoken loftily about creation is St.

Bonaventure (1217-1274), a member of the Franciscan order. B. Joseph Francis rightly indicates the

significance of monasteries for ecology. He says that the monasteries set in rural settings or in deep

forests and ravines manifest a profound respect and love for nature. And as such monks were not

running away from the world; they were seeking for God in the solitude of communion with nature,

in a symbiosis with different moods of nature. B. Joseph Francis, “Man and World or Man Within

the World?,” Indian Theological Studies 28 (1991), 153. 192

Saint Francis was a nature mystic and may have been the first nature mystic. Cf. Philibert Hoebing,

OFM, “St. Francis and the Environment” in Ann W. Astell, ed., Divine Representations,

Postmodernism & Spirituality (New York: Paulist Press, 1994), 205. St. Francis is unique in his

approach to nature, because he did not draw away from the world in order to go to God but believed

that the goodness and love of God were evident in his works. 193

Hoebing rightly concludes: “Science alone cannot solve our problems, and ethics apart from

religion has proven itself unable to offer much direction. We need a “deep ecology” and a

spirituality like that of St. Francis if we are to value properly the creatures who are no longer simply

„Other‟, but „brother‟ and „sister‟ to us. Philibert Hoebing, OFM, “St. Francis and the

Environment,” 213. 194

Cf. Hoebing, “St. Francis and the Environment,” 206. In his original and radical way Francis

perceived the connectedness of the world and, since everything came from a loving Father, he

regarded everything as part of the family of God.


St. Francis also developed inward ecology. In his writings, in his prayers, and

in his songs, we feel the lively enthusiasm the universe induced in his experience of

the world and of God. At the end of his life he composed a hymn to his brother the

sun, which is replete with the highest degree of cosmic ecstasy.195

He wrote it when

he was almost blind and very sick. He hymned the sun and the moon, the wind and

water, fire and earth, elements he did not see with his almost completely exhausted

eyes, but which were present to him inwardly and intimately as perfectly integrated

symbols and archetypes.

St. Francis also shows us that the option for the poor and the most

impoverished of all, the option which the Poverello himself made, accords with tender

love for the creation.196

That was the love he took to the lepers and to the wolf of

Gubbio, which made him embrace beggars and speak to the birds.197

A joyous and

rejoicing God is before all else the liberator of the poor.198

4.3.3. Eucharistic Ecology

The mystery unfolds: the real presence of the whole Body of Christ is

communicated to us through the transformation of the shared “fruit of the earth and

the work of human hands.” The bread we offer becomes for us “the bread of life.” The

wine we bring becomes “our spiritual drink.” In this way the Eucharist is a celebration

of both the holiness and wholeness of creation.199

Creation appears as holy in that the

195 Eric Doyle examines well the ecological significance of the Canticle of the Brother Sun in his

article “Ecology and the Canticle of Brother Sun,” New Blackfriars 55 (1974), 392-402. According

to Doyle, Francis was inspired to write the Canticle in part because of the way people misused the

world around them. Doyle, “Ecology and the Canticle of Brother Sun,” 397. 196

Cf. Andrew McMahon, “St. Francis, The Ever-Green Man,” Theology in Green 5.4 (1995), 43-46.

Leonardo Boff maintains that there can be no „environmental justice in the absence of „social

justice.‟ He believes that dignitas terrae stands and falls with the dignitas humanae. Cf. Leonardo

Boff, and Virgil Elizondo, eds., Ecology and Poverty (London: SCM, 1995). Denis Edwards

maintains that “a commitment to ecological responsibility is not opposed to, but intrinsically

connected with, the struggles for justice and for the emancipation of women.” Denis Edwards,

“Theological Foundations for Ecological Praxis”, Ecotheology 5 & 6 (1998-1999), 133. See also his

other books, Jesus and the Cosmos (New York: Paulist Press, 1991), and Jesus, the Wisdom of God:

An Ecological Theology (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1995). Celia Deane-Drummond, another eco-feminist

explores the recent ecological debates in her book Eco-Theology (London: Darton Longman-Todd,

2008). 197

One cannot separate Francis‟ love of nature from his love of Christ and his love of the leper. After

his encounter with the leper his love of Christ and nature flowered. Cf. Philibert Hoebing, OFM,

“St. Francis and the Environment,” 207-208. 198

Indian theologians see a theology beginning with the oppressed and marginalized as one that will

teach Christians once again to respect the land with its sacredness. Cf. ITA Statement, “Ecological

Crisis: An Indian Christian Response,” 388. 199

Frank Senn explores well the connection between the Eucharist and the wider industrial world. He

says: “In the presentation of bread and wine, all industry, whether of farm or factory, is dedicated to

God‟s use. We do not present just grapes and grain, but wine and bread which are a microcosm of


earthly elements that sustain our lives and communication have such a central place in

the Eucharistic gifts. Unless creation was radically from God, it could not figure so

largely in God‟s relationship to us.200

Matter, life and the human spirit are connected

in the one God-created cosmos. The fruits of nature and the work of human creativity

are integrated in the deeply cosmic sense of how God communicates himself to us in

Christ (Rom.8:19-23; Col.1:15). The Eucharist brings together all these gifts and all

these forms of giving, to draw us into a universe of grace and giving.

The eucharistic gift of Christ‟s body and blood has the effect of restoring our

sense of human selves as creatures of this earth and stewards of God‟s good creation.

To praise and thank the Creator is to cherish and care for creation.201

The most intense

moment of communion with God is at the same time an intense moment of our

communion with the earth.202

„Transubstantiated‟ in this way, the sacramental

elements anticipate the cosmic transformation that is afoot, not as something that

leaves the created cosmos behind, but as promising its healing and transformation.203

We recognize, in the Eucharist, the reality of the Incarnation itself as it makes us see

the world as the “body of God.”204

our present industrial system.” Frank Senn, The Witness of the Worshipping Community: Liturgy

and the Practice of Evangelism (New York: Paulist Press, 1993), 81. 200

Cf. Job. 12:7-9. “Ask the beasts to teach you, the birds of the air to tell you, the plants of the earth

to instruct you, the fish of the sea to inform you…who among them do not understand that behind

all life is God‟s hand?” Indian theologians call nature the “icon of God” and invite Christians to

“recognize the icon and celebrate its sacramentality.” ITA Statement, “Ecological Crisis: An Indian

Christian Response,” 386. 201

Pearson feels that there is a growing concern that Christian worship should be more inclusive, not

only of women, but also of the non-human parts of the creation. Cf. Andrew Pearson, Making

Creation Visible: God‟s Earth in Christian Worship (Cambridge: Grove Books, 1996), 5. Indian

theologians in their statement on ecology suggest “earth-friendly liturgies” and “outdoor liturgies”

to celebrate nature. Cf. ITA Statement, “Ecological Crisis: An Indian Christian Response,” 390. 202

The Indian Theological Association‟s statement on ecology expresses a similar view: “To become

aware of Christ in the Eucharist is to learn the sacredness of all matter and its potential to become a

medium of relating to the divine.” ITA Statement, “Ecological Crisis: An Indian Christian

Response”, 386. This Statement sees also the incarnation as a “creative act of God‟s will that forges

an indissoluble bond between God and creation in Jesus Christ.” And it recognizes in Jesus‟ use of

material objects in his miracles and parables (water, fish, loaves, meals, banquet) his sense of the

symbolic and revelatory power of the natural world. ITA Statement, “Ecological Crisis: An Indian

Christian Response,” 385. For a study of Jesus‟ parables from an ecological perspective, see V. J.

John, “Literary Structure of Mark and the Concerns of Ecology: Search for a Connection,” Indian

Theological Studies 40 (2003), 78-105. 203

Cf. Gustave Martelet, The Risen Christ and the Eucharist World, trans. René Hague (New York:

Crossroad, 1976). 204

Cf. Hans Urs von Balthasar, The Glory of the Lord: A Theological Aesthetics. I: Seeing the Form,

trans. E. Leiva-Merikakis, eds., J. Fessio and J. Riches (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988), 679. Sallie

McFague writes: “Within Christic framework, the body of God encompasses all of creation in a

particular salvific direction, toward the liberation, healing and fulfilment of all bodies.” Sallie

McFague, The Body of God: An Ecological Theology (London: SCM, 1993), 160. She also evolves


The vision of the “Earth as the Eucharistic Planet”205

is something we need

now for the protection of the planet. “The world of mountains and rivers, of bread and

wine, of friends and enemies, is all held and displayed in the universal monstrance,

the Showing, the phenomenalization of the Absolute.”206

Elisabeth Sahtouris,

applying the concept of Gaia,207

asserts that “the Earth is a live planet with life upon

it.”208

She calls us to understand ourselves as “living beings within a larger living

being, in the same sense that our cells are part of each of us.”209

As the source and goal of the whole life of the church, the eucharist relates us

to Christ, connects us with one another, and re-embodies us within the life of planet

Earth. This sacrament is celebrated within a field of transcendent, communal,

planetary and cosmic belonging. Our universe is being drawn into the trinitarian life,

toward that ultimate point at which “God will be all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28).

4.3.4. Earth as Ekklesia

Jürgen Moltmann says that creation is “the withdrawal of God into

himself.”210

The earth exists with God. God exists in a communion of loving and

giving. Creation also exists in community, though its relationships are both similar to

her theology around the image of the world as the “Body of God” in her book Models of God:

Theology for an Ecological Nuclear Age (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986). 205

Beatrice Bruteau perceives the Earth as a Eucharistic Planet, which is structured as mutual feeding,

as intimate self-sharing, a circulation of living energies, in which the Real Presence of the Absolute

is discerned. Cf. Beatrice Bruteau, “Eucharistic Ecology and Ecological Spirituality,” Cross

Currents 40 (1990), 501. Here, we can also note that a number of ancient traditions described the

unity of the world as the living body of a single divine person. Purusha in the Hindu Vedic

tradition, Osiris in the Egyptian, the 18,000-year-old god of Chinese myth whose head became the

sun and moon, his blood the rivers and seas, his hair the plants, his limbs the mountains, his voice

the thunder, his sweat the rain, his breath the wind. 206

Bruteau, “Eucharistic Ecology and Ecological Spirituality,” 501. 207

The Gaia Hypothesis is put forward by James Lovelock and Lynn Margolis, which presupposes that

“the entire range of living matter on Earth, from whales to viruses, and from oaks to algae, could be

regarded as constituting a single living entity, capable of manipulating the Earth‟s atmosphere to

suit its overall needs and endowed with faculties and powers far beyond those of its constituent

parts.” J. E. Lovelock, Gaia (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), 9. For a further study of

the concept of Gaia, see Rosemary Radford Ruether, Gaia & God: An Ecofeminist Theology of

Earth Healing (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1992); Loren Wilkinson, “Gaia Spirituality: A

Christian Critique,” Evangelical Review of Theology 17 (1993), 176-189. 208

Elisabeth Sahtouris, Gaia: The Human Journey from Chaos to Cosmos (New York: Pocket Books,

1989), 21. 209

Sahtouris, Gaia: The Human Journey from Chaos to Cosmos, 20. Emphasizing that community

includes all creatures and the non-living environment as well as humankind is important in current

ecotheology. Cf. Larry L. Ramussen, Earth Community Earth Ethics (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1996). 210

Jürgen Moltmann, God in Creation: A New Theology of Creation and the Spirit of God, ed. and

trans. Margaret Kohl (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), 86.


and different from those within the Godhead.211

Trinity in communion, especially in

its works in history, gives us an indispensable clue to the relationship among

creation.212

“It is exactly the Trinity that the universe images.”213

This is because

God‟s presence in creation reflects what God is. Creation lives in community.214

Nature has a communal character.215

Cosmos is communitarian.216

For Leonardo Boff,

the planet becomes “a great sacrament of God, the temple of the Spirit, the place of

creative responsibility for human beings, a dwelling place for all beings created in

love.”217

All things in heaven and earth are destined to be brought into a unity in

211 Moltmann argues that the perichoretic or mutual penetration of the Trinity also applies to the world

(Ibid., 17). We would prefer to say that it is reflected in the world in its own creaturely way. This is

an example of Moltmann‟s tendency to blur the distinctions between God and the world, since he

believes all ultimately exist in God. Moltmann associates God‟s self-limitation with creation so

closely with God‟s suffering that Colin Gunton notes: “There is a thin line between, on the one

hand, maintaining systematic links between the doctrines of creation, conservation and redemption,

and, on the other, confusing the categories.” In this argument, Gunton concludes, Moltmann comes

close to crossing this line. Colin Gunton, Christ and Creation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 85.

„Perichoresis‟ is a word used by John Damascene (675-749) to describe the being-in-one-another,

the mutual dynamic indwelling of the trinitarian persons. See John of Damascus, De Fide

Orthodoxa 1.8. It comes from perichoreo, meaning to encompass, and it describes reciprocal

relations of intimate communion. The word suggests a communion in which diversity and unity are

understood not as opposed, but as dynamically interrelated with each other. 212

Adrian Hough maintains that the current environmental crisis does not demand new theologies but

renewed appreciation of the real significance of the traditional doctrines of Trinity and Incarnation.

Cf. Adrian Hough, God is Not Green: A Re-Examination of Eco-Theology (Leominster: Gracewing,

1997). Donal O‟Mahony holds incarnation as central to any Christian understanding of ecology.

The incarnation provides a vision and mission to all Christians who are concerned with the future of

the earth. He cites Duns Scotus, Teilhard de Chardin, Karl Rahner, Dennis Edwards and Brennan R.

Hill as holding the importance of incarnation in the context of evolution. Cf. Donal O‟Mahony, “An

Emerging Christian Perspective on Ecology, As Shaped by Scripture, Cosmology, and

Contemporary Science,” Journal of Dharma 26 (2001), 105-108. 213

Beatrice Bruteau, “Eucharistic Ecology and Ecological Spirituality,” 503. She continues: the

universe “incarnates, embodies, phenomenalizes, shows forth, reveals, glorifies. The universe puts

into flesh, into matter, the Trinitarian perichoretic Life by which the nature of God is expressed.”

Cf. Jürgen Moltmann, God in Creation, 16. See also Colin E. Gunton, The One, the Three and the

Many (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); Paulos Mar Gregorios, The Human

Presence: Ecological Spirituality and the Age of the Spirit (New York: Amity House, 1987); James

A. Nash, Loving Nature: Ecological Integrity and Christian Responsibility (Nashville: Abingdon

Press, 1991). 214

Donal O‟Mahony suggests the Churches should place emphasis on the image of the world being a

single cosmic community rather than a collection of autonomous entities. Cf. Donal O‟Mahony,

“An Emerging Christian Perspective on Ecology,” 108. He explores how the sacrament of baptism

can be seen not merely as an initiation into the community of believers, but as an initiation into the

wider earth and cosmic community. Cf. Ibid., 109. 215

Scientists speak of this as the basic self-organizing capacity of the natural world, from the atom‟s

self-organization to that of the star or galaxy. Larry Ramussen calls this “autopoiesis”. Cf. Larry

Ramussen, “The Integrity of Creation”, The Annual of the Society of Christian Ethics (1995), 172. 216

Bruteau, “Eucharistic Ecology and Ecological Spirituality,” 503. 217

Leonardo Boff, “Social Ecology: Poverty and Misery”, in David G. Hallman, ed., Ecotheology:

Voices from South and North (Geneva: WCC, 1994), 245.


Christ (Eph.1:9).218

“Creation then can be understood as the overflow of divine

fecundity, the self-expression of the Trinitarian God, so that each creature is a

sacrament, a sign and mode of divine presence.”219

As Samuel Rayan says, the earth is

“God‟s creation and self-expression… The earth is where God abides and comes to

meet us. The earth is sacred.”220

5. CONCLUSION

We have begun our chapter by situating interreligious dialogue in the Indian

context. Interreligious dialogue, we have affirmed, cannot be alienated from liberation

in the context of India where millions of poor people suffer oppression, exploitation

and poverty. The poor and the religions have an indissoluble unity. No theology in

India can meaningfully interact with only one of them at the neglect of the other. A

theology that deals either only with the poor or only with religions is irrelevant; it is

half-baked theology. Thus, a meaningful and relevant interreligious dialogue in India

must be a “liberative dialogue.” As a result, we have proposed a “dusty dialogue”

from the perspectives of the poor, which is rooted in the poor and their liberation. It is

a liberative dialogue that calls the religions to inter-religiously liberate themselves

through the liberation of the poor. Liberation and Dialogue call the Church to be a

“dialogical communion.” So, we have tried to propose and explore the ecclesiological

concept of the Church as a dialogical communion. The Church in India has to become

a “dialogical communion” where different ecclesial communities and different

religious communities in India live in deep communion with one another and with the

environment.

218 Cf. K. M. Mathew, SJ, “In Search of a Theology of the Environment,” Vidyajyoti 57 (1993), 215-

222. 219

Denis Edwards, “Theological Foundations for Ecological Praxis,” 126. 220

Samuel Rayan, “The Earth is the Lord‟s” in Ecotheology: Voices from South and North, 135.

GENERAL CONCLUSION

BECOMING INDIAN: A GANDHIAN PARADIGM

Mahatma Gandhi,1 the father of the Indian nation, can provide a fitting and

relevant paradigm for the church in India in its endeavour to become Indian. Gandhi

was truly local, marginal and dialogical, and as such, his life and theology can serve

as a suitable paradigm for the Church in India which understands “becoming Indian”

as “becoming local, marginal and dialogical.” This is what we plan to explore here:

synthesise the three basic features of becoming Indian Church, which we have

explored in detail in the three chapters of our research, “becoming local,” “becoming

marginal,” and “becoming dialogical,” through the life and thought of Gandhi. We

must hasten to indicate that we do not intend here an extensive and systematic

exploration of the life and theology of Gandhi; rather, a brief exposition that will

indicate the “Gandhian paradigm” which can serve as a good hermeneutical tool for

the ecclesiological reflection for the Church in India to “become truly Indian.”

1. THE “ECCLESIAL” GANDHI

The greatness and the nobility of Gandhi is unquestionable; he was an

incredible human being.2 As Albert Einstein rightly vindicates: “Generations to come

it may be, will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked

upon the earth.”3 Gandhi is significant for theology in India not only because he is the

1 There is an ever growing literature on Gandhi and his thought. Gandhi’s complete works are

published by the Indian Government in 100 volumes: The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi

(New Delhi: Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of

India, 1958-1994). Gandhi’s journal Harijan, in which his writings originally appeared, has been

republished: Harijan (New York: Garland Press, 1979). A very good review article on the recent

Gandhian literature is: Mark Juergensmeyer, “The Gandhi Revival –A Review Article,” The

Journal of Asian Studies 43:2 (1984), 293-298. According to Juergensmeyer, the best analytical

works on Gandhi and his thought are: Joan Bondurant, Conquest of Violence (Berkeley: University

of California Press, 1967); Raghavan Iyer, Moral and Political Thought of Gandhi (New Delhi:

Oxford University Press, 1973); Erik Erikson, Gandhi’s Truth (New York: W. W. Norton, 1969). A

few of the best recent studies on Gandhi are: Margaret Chatterjee, Gandhi’s Religious Thought

(Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1984); Mark Juergensmeyer, Fighting With

Gandhi (New York and San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1984); Detlef Kantowsky, Sarvodaya: The

Other Development (Delhi: Vikas, 1980); Glyn Richards, The Philosophy of Gandhi: A Study of His

Basic Ideas (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1982); Gene Sharpe, Gandhi as a Political Strategist

(Boston: Porter Sargent, 1979). 2 There are said to be more than 400 biographies alone of Gandhi. Cf. Juergensmeyer, “The Gandhi

Revival,” 294. The best biographies on Gandhi according to Juergensmeyer are: B. R. Nanda,

Mahatma Gandhi: A Biography (London: Allen and Unwin, 1958) and Geoffrey Ashe, Gandhi

(New York: Stein and Day, 1968). 3 As quoted in George Pattery, “The Gandhian Attempt at Reconstructing India’s Past,” in Augustine

Thottakara, ed., Gandhian Spirituality (Rome/Bangalore: CIIS/Dharmaram 1992), 21.

303 | G e n e r a l C o n c l u s i o n

best embodiment of the spirit of India, but also the best embodiment in India of the

spirit of the Gospels.4 While “Gandhism” cannot be equated with Christian theology,

Gandhian thought, however, is important for Christian reflection and theology in

India. Rightly so says James W. Douglass: “While it cannot be said that to preach

Gandhism is to preach Christ, it is always necessary to preach Christ in terms of his

continuing presence in man and of the upward revolution of the Cross and open tomb;

their primary exponent in our time is Gandhi.”5 Undoubtedly, Gandhi is the best

Indian of our times who showed in daily praxis what it means to follow Christ in our

times. Christ and his message are better grasped in India, when these are seen through

the lenses of Gandhi.

1.1. Gandhi: the “Symbol” of Indianness

Gandhi stands as the epitome of Indianness; he is the “crown” of the spirit of

India; he is the embodiment of all the significant moral, spiritual and religious values

of India. Perhaps, no Indian in any generation so far has integrated in one’s life the

values of India as did Gandhi. Rightly so Maurina has said: “No single statesman,

politician and writer of recent times embodied to the same extent as Gandhi did the

soul of his country and people.”6 As Thottakara explains, “[t]he great merit of Gandhi

is that he intuitively understood these values, consciously assimilated them,

scrupulously practised them and fearlessly admonished them to the world, as the great

sages and saints of old.”7 Gandhi’s assimilation and integration of the Indian values

and ethos was neither superficial nor uncritical; he was critical of all that was

untruthful in Hinduism and the ancient wisdom of India and tried to transform such

features.8 Gandhi is truly the best “symbol” of Indianness.

1.2. Gandhi: the best Indian follower of “Jesus”

Gandhi was not a baptized Christian, but he lived a life that best exemplified

the teachings of Jesus. Stanley Jones, the American missionary who worked for a long

time in India and knew Gandhi personally, called him “one of the most Christ-like

men in history,”9 and H. Kunich considered him “a more sincere Christian than

4 Cf. Subhash Anand, “Conversion: The Gandhian Critique and Our Response,” Jnanadeepa 3:1

(2000), 121. 5 James W. Douglass, The Non-Violent Cross (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1968), 33.

6 Z. Maurina, “Gandhi: Image and Symbol of India,” in S. Radhakrishna, ed., Mahatma Gandhi 100

Years (New Delhi: Gandhi Peace Foundation, 1968), 240. 7 Cf. Augustine Thottakara, “Preface,” in Thottakara, ed., Gandhian Spirituality, 2.

8 Cf. Pattery, “The Gandhian Attempt at Reconstructing India’s Past,” 21.

9 As quoted in L. Fischer, The Life of Mahatma Gandhi (London: Jonathan Cape, 1952), 362.

G e n e r a l C o n c l u s i o n | 304

thousands in Europe.”10

R. C. Zaehner considered him the best follower of Christ:

“never in modern times had they seen any man tread more faithfully in the footsteps

of Christ.”11

The personality of Christ and his teachings made a great impact on Gandhi and

his thought. Gandhi himself has acknowledged that he drew a foundational inspiration

from many Christian thinkers such as Francis of Assisi, Leo Tolstoy and John

Ruskin,12

as well as many close Christian friends like C. F. Andrews and S. K.

George. As Gandhi himself writes in his autobiography, the Sermon on the Mount

“went straight” to his heart.13

Jesus was for Gandhi, “a perfect man,”14

a great

prophet,15

a great reformer,16

and a “prince among politicians.”17

Gandhi considered

Jesus a satyagrahi18

and the Cross of Christ as “the supreme, perfect historic

example” of satyagraha.19

Paradoxical as it is, Gandhi accepted Christ and rejected Christianity. He was

put off by the lack of real praxis of the Gospel among Christians, and so concluded,

“Christianity is good, Christians are bad.”20

Gandhi opposed vehemently the

conversion of Indians to Christianity.21

Webster would suggest that “Gandhi shared a

social stereotype of Christianity as an aggressive, alien and alienating presence, and of

10 As quoted in A. J. Appasamy, Sunder Singh (Madras: Christian Literature Society, 1966), 44.

11 R. C. Zaehner, Hinduism (London: Oxford University Press, 1962), 224.

12 Cf. Mohandas K. Gandhi, In Search of the Supreme, 3 vols. (Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1961), I:150,

II:30, II:38. Leo Tolstoy’s The Kingdom of God Is Within You and John Ruskins’ Unto This Last

impressed him much. Gandhi said, “I would say that three men have had a very great influence on

my life. Among them I give first place to the poet Raychand, the second to Tolstoy, and the third to

Ruskin.” Gandhi, The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, 37:261. 13

Mohandas K. Gandhi, An Autobiography or The Story of My Experiments with Truth (Ahmedabad:

Navajivan, 1927), 63. 14

Mohandas K. Gandhi, The Message of Jesus Christ (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1964), 13. 15

Gandhi, In Search of the Supreme, I:58. 16



Gandhi, The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, 90:129. 19

Cf. S. K. George, Gandhi’s Challenge to Christianity (Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1960), 23. See also

John S. Hoyland, “Gandhi’s Satyagraha and the Way of the Cross,” in S. Radhakirshnan, ed.,

Mahatma Gandhi: Essays and Reflections on His Life and Work (Mumbai: Jaico, 1957), 117-142. 20

Gandhi, In Search of the Supreme, III:314. 21

The two main reasons for such opposition were: Gandhi believed that all religions are equal and

that each can attain salvation through one’s own religion, and thus Indians can attain salvation

through Hinduism; Gandhi thought that the Christian missionaries were luring the depressed classes

of India into conversion to Christianity, and as such they were not genuine conversions. For an

extensive discussion on Gandhi’s stance on conversions, see: Subhash Anand, “Conversions: The

Gandhian Critique and Our Response,” Jnanadeepa 3:1 (2000), 121-140; B. Joseph Francis,

“Gandhian Methodology of Means to Achieve an Aim and its Application to Evangelization,”

Indian Theological Studies 35:3/4 (1998), 223-230.


Indian Christians as an inconsequential aberration on the Indian social scene,” which

was rooted in his childhood experiences of Christianity and has not changed in spite

of his collaboration with Indian Christians in South Africa.22

1.3. Gandhi: A Fine Fusion of Prayer and Politics

Gandhi was a “sage” and a “soldier;” he was a deeply religious man, and yet a

revolutionary politician. The very answer to the question of how Gandhi was able to

capture the imagination of the masses so immensely lies in the fusion of prayer and

politics; his life was a “perfect communion” of religion and revolution. “Gandhi was

able to fuse a traditional Hindu image of saintliness with the modern role of a political

broker.”23

Religion and politics, for Gandhi, are twins sharing the same womb; rather

than being diverse, “religions and politics had everything to do with one another.”24

Juergensmeyer beautifully summarises the extraordinary fusion of prayer and politics

in Gandhi that makes him a rare human being in generations of humanity:

Behind the hyperbole and hagiography is an image of a man of extraordinary

moral achievement, someone who lived simultaneously as an ascetic and as a

worldly crusader. Most of us find these two ways of dealing with the world to be

well-nigh irreconcilable; their opposing requirements result in a moral tension that

is felt by sensitive persons in almost every culture. Gandhi’s apparent ability to

surmount this ethical dichotomy is cause for international action. His image has

both social and personal dimensions, and its complexity and vitality guarantee that

interest in Gandhi and his ideals will continue long after the current revival of

excitement about them subsides.25

Gandhi’s Satyagraha, the non-violent resistance for independence and

transformation of India, stands as the embodiment of the Gandhian fusion of prayer

and politics. Gandhian Satyagraha, we could say, was a “spiritual path” as well as a

“political struggle.” As Pattery puts it, the “Satyagraha evolved out of Gandhi’s

religiousness” and it “made this religiousness operative at the micro and macro levels

so as to bear upon the socio-political issues of the time.”26

22 John C. B. Webster, “Gandhi and the Christians: Dialogue in the Nationalist Era,” in Harold

Coward, ed., Hindu-Christian Dialogue: Perspectives and Encounters (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis,

1989), 81. 23

Juergensmeyer, “The Gandhi Revival,” 294. The best work on such Gandhian fusion of prayer and

politics is: Lloyd I. Rudolph and Susanne Hoeber Rudolph, Gandhi: The Traditional Roots of

Charisma (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983). 24

Rynne, Gandhi and Jesus, 15. 25

Juergensmeyer, “The Gandhi Revival,” 298. 26

Pattery, “The Gandhian Attempt at Reconstructing India’s Past,” 31-32.


2. BECOMING INDIAN: A GANDHIAN PARADIGM

2.1. Becoming Local: “Local Gandhi” and “Local Church”

Gandhi was “local” in the strictest sense of the word, not just wearing an

Indian garment and being a stringent vegetarian, but was a true abode of the Indian

values and ethos. His studies and life in England and South Africa did not alienate

him from being truly Indian. Summing up the reasons which galvanized the masses to

follow Gandhi, Rynne says: “The common people took notice of Gandhi for three

main reasons: his lifestyle, which embodied basic Hindu ideals; his use of the

common words and symbols of the Hindu religion; and the fact that his politics

insisted on action, not just endless talk.”27

Being “local” would mean for Gandhi to be rooted in the local religious,

ethical, social and cultural values of India. To be “local” would imply a duty and a

responsibility of striving for the transformation of all Indians, especially the poorest of

the poor of India. Being local is best expounded in the Gandhian vision of Swadeshi.28

Swadeshi is often misunderstood as being anti-West and anti-modern. Understood

rightly, it can serve the integral and holistic transformation of the local. As Pattery

indicates, Swadeshi implies adopting a “cosmic outlook on life.” It invites us to

discover the significance of the here and now. It seeks to find answers for the

problems in the local wisdom and ways. It is holistic and ecological; it “goes beyond

ego-logical thinking to the eco-logical way of being.” It is a “theology of the

microcosm.”29

The Church in India needs to become local. In spite of its existence in India

for 2000 years it still remains very much an alienated community. As Felix Wilfred

suggests, Christianity in India is considered a foreign religion even today not because

it came from outside, but because the church in India has failed to incarnate itself into

the soil of India.

The main reason why Christianity has been viewed as alien is because the local

Churches in the countries in Asia have, by and large, kept themselves aloof from

the mainstream of the life of the people, their history, struggles and dreams. They

27 Rynne, Gandhi and Jesus, 18.

28 Of course, the vision of Swadeshi is often misrepresented today by the Hindu fundamentalists in

India as being exclusively Hindu. Gandhi would have never approved of such a fundamentalist

orientation, and much less a disregard for non-Hindu religions in India. 29

Cf. George Pattery, “Gandhian Social Vision for the Twenty-First Century,” Jnanadeepa 2:1

(1999), 42-43.


have failed to identify themselves with the people, even though in terms of charity

many praiseworthy services have been rendered.30

Through inculturation the Church in India should integrate its life and message

into the culture of India. The Church needs to engage itself in the life-realities of India

by participating in the struggles of the people for meaning and emancipation. In the

ever-changing and evolving culture of India today, affected by globalisation, mass

media, materialism, the Church needs to celebrate the life-giving values of Indian

culture and transform the values that are life-negating.31

Inculturation must pay attention to the cultural plurality of India. The Church

in India needs to overcome its mistakes in inculturation where it tried to integrate

exclusively Sanskritic Hindu ritual and symbolic and, thereby, falsely equated

inculturation with Hinduization. In a Church where 70% of its members are dalits and

tribals, it is imperative that the process of inculturation interacts primarily with the

cultures and religions of the dalits and tribals. Inculturation has to become a process

whereby the Church incarnates itself in the struggles of the dalits and the tribals of

India. The Christian commitment to equality and dignity by abolishing poverty,

ignorance, injustice, and other forms of deprivation calls for deeper and varying

methods of inculturation.

2.2. Becoming Marginal: “Marginal Gandhi” and “Marginal Church”

Gandhi was “marginal” in a very valiant and bold way. Like a monk, he took

to the practice of voluntary poverty. He was not just preaching the emancipation of

the poor, but became poor himself. As Rynne puts it, “His own lifestyle had come to

be as simple as theirs [poor of India].”32

His adoption of wearing a simple loin cloth

and simple lifestyle was a way of profound identification with the poor. Gandhi

explained the reason for wearing loin cloth, thus:

I wish to be in tune with the life of the poorest of the poor among the Indians.

I know that I can have darshan (vision) of God in no other way. I want to see Him

face to face. I have become impatient for the experience. I shall not be blessed

30 Felix Wilfred, “The Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conference (FABC): Orientations, Challenges

and Impact,” in Gaudencio Rosales and C. G. Arévalo, eds., For All Peoples of Asia, Federation of

Asian Bishops’ Conference Documents from 1970-1991, vol.1 (Quenzon City: Claretian, 1997),

xxiv. 31

Cf. S. M. Michael, “Inculturation in the Context of India,” in Clarence Srampical et al, eds., In His

Foot Steps: Together Towards the New Millennium. Divine Word Missionaries 1875-2000 (Indore:

Divine Word Missionaries, 2000), 167-173. 32

Rynne, J. Terrence, Gandhi and Jesus: The Saving Power of Nonviolence (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis),

2008.


with the vision until I have made myself the poorest of the poor. It is painful to me

to eat or dress as long as the poor do not have enough to cover their bodies with.33

He admitted an “untouchable” into his Ashram in Ahmedabad in spite of the

opposition from the members and withdrawal of support from benefactors. He even

adopted an “untouchable” girl as his own daughter.34

As Rynne says, Gandhi, “in his

own life convincingly showed us that there is a way to live in this world actively

working for the poor, taking on power structures and enduring violence without

succumbing to violence oneself.”35

He put great faith and hope in the masses, and

openly proclaimed: “My hope is more with the masses.”36

The Gandhian vision is rooted in the service of the poor. Transformation or

salvation, for Gandhi, is impossible without service to the poor: “Self-realization

I hold to be impossible without service of and identification with the poorest.”37

Service to God implies service to the poor: “I consider that real service of the country

and of God consists serving the poor humanity.”38

Gandhi criticized the Christian

missionaries in India for standing aloof from the masses: “I miss receptiveness,

humility, willingness on your part to identify yourselves with the masses of India.”39

Being marginal for Gandhi would mean serving the poor and working for their

liberation. Indeed the Church in India needs to become a marginal Church or, as

popularly spoken, the Church of the poor. More than 70% of the Christians in India

are dalits and tribals, the people who are the poorest in India. In such a context, the

priority of the Church in India should be the liberation of these people from

oppression and poverty. “In the midst of oppression, condemning millions to a

dehumanized existence, God as we have experienced in Jesus Christ, is not thinking

of the embellishments of the liturgy or the niceties of the doctrinal formulations, but

the elimination of the inhuman conditions in which the poor are entrenched.”40

33 Gandhi, The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, 24:456.

34 Cf. K. L. Seshagiri Rao, “Mahatma Gandhi: A Prophet of Pluralism,” in Paul F. Knitter, ed., The

Myth of Religious Superiority: Multifaith Explorations of Religious Pluralism (Maryknoll, NY:

Orbis, 2005), 50-51. 35

Rynne, Jesus and Gandhi, 1. 36

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, 100 vols. (Delhi: Publications

Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 1958-1994), 23:242. 37

Gandhi, The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, 31:511. See also 54:164, 195. 38

Gandhi, The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, 34:204. 39

Gandhi, In Search of the Supreme, III:329. 40

Jacob Kavunkal, “Church’s Service to the World,” in Jacob Kavunkal et al, eds., Vatican II: A Gift

& A Task. International Colloquium to Mark the 40th

Anniversary of Vatican Council II (Mumbai:

St. Pauls, 2006), 127.


Being marginal, Gandhi would say, is not just working for the poor, but

becoming one with the poor; becoming poor. The majority of Christians in India live

on the “margins,” “at the edge,” and it is in the pilgrimage to the “margins,” the

“edges” that the Church in India discovers its true identity.41

It is in living in deep

solidarity with the poor of India, in being the voice of the voiceless victims of India,

in becoming one with the marginal people of India sharing fully their plight that the

Church in India will discover its true identity as the “Church of the Margins” in India.

The Church in India needs to convert from being a “Church for the poor” to being a

“Church of the poor.” As Felix Wilfred puts it, the Church in India “needs to undergo

a baptism of immersion into the Indian reality, made up as it is of misery and

oppression, to emerge again as the Church of the poor with a new set of values and

attitudes – able to see and act from the perspectives of the poor.42

2.3. Becoming Dialogical: “Dialogical Gandhi” and “Dialogical Church”

Gandhi was “dialogical” in all spheres of his life and activity. He was a very

devout and faithful Hindu, but that did not deter him from studying and integrating all

that is good and valuable in other religions. Rynne would say: “Gandhi was a Hindu

who throughout all of his life associated with, learned from, and showed deep respect

for people who embraced the diverse religions of India.”43

“He believed that there was

good in all traditions and went straight to their best, purest, and noblest elements with

a view to benefitting from them in his own life.”44

As a searcher of truth, Gandhi was

indeed “open to all glimmers of truth wherever he could find them.”45

He worked

tirelessly for communion and harmony between different religious communities in

India. Seshagiri Rao beautifully sums up the features of the interreligious dialogue of

Gandhi:

We might list the intended and achieved results of interreligious dialogue for

Gandhi as follows: (1) mutual learning, (2) sensitive awareness of other religions,

(3) deepening of this awareness into respect, (4) a progressive reinterpretation of

one’s own life and traditions, and (5) mutual cooperation for the common

objectives of truth and justice.46

41 Cf. Thomas C. Fox, Pentecost in Asia: A New Way of Being Church (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2003),

xv. 42

Felix Wilfred, “Temptation of the Church in India Today,” Vidyajoti Journal of Theological

Reflection 47 (1983), 324. (320-333) 43


Seshagiri Rao, “Mahatma Gandhi: A Prophet of Pluralism,” 48. 45


Sheshagiri Rao, “Mahatma Gandhi: A Prophet of Pluralism,” 51.


The Ashrams that Gandhi established were great examples of interreligious

communion. He had people of all faiths in his ashrams. He encouraged and provided

space for different religious people to observe their faith and practices in his

ashrams.47

Gandhi considered all religions equal: “God’s grace and revelation are the

monopoly of no race or nation. They descend equally upon all who wait upon God.”48

He said that while it is natural for any believer to consider one’s own religion best, it

should not prevent one from respecting other religions.49

He asserts that “all religions

are equal and they are founded on the same faith;” the religions are “like leaves of the

same tree, with slight differences in shade and shapes.”50

He believed that every

religion has to be self-critical and he himself criticised all that was evil in his own

religion and others, and called for reconciliation and transformation of religions.

Gandhi’s dialogical vision was based on a constant search for the truth (satya)

and deeply rooted in the transforming active non-violence (ahimsa). The dialogical

church in India needs to be a “Satyagrahi” in India today. Satyagraha, Gandhi

explains, is “the Force which is born of Truth and Love or non-violence.”51

The

Church being a Satyagrahi, would mean two things in its dialogical life. It must

primarily be a satya-sangamam, a community of truth, and a satya-anveshi, a searcher

of truth, together with other religious communities in India.52

In such a “pilgrimage in

truth” and “pilgrimage to truth” religious communities will make the poor and

oppressed of India integral to interreligious dialogue and their concerns a priority in

their dialogical project. The search for truth necessarily implies liberation: a

“satyagrahi’s project is removing the causes of oppression and suffering.”53

The

second feature of the Church being a Satyagrahi is being an ahimsa-sangamam, a

community of non-violence. In the context of violence, religious or other, seriously

affecting the life of communities of all religions, the dialogical life of the Church in

India as well as other religious communities calls them to become communities of

non-violence. Being ahimsa-sangamam, a community of non-violence, in the

Gandhian sense, does not mean merely avoiding violence or being just peaceful, but

47 Cf. Seshagiri Rao, “Mahatma Gandhi: A Prophet of Pluralism,” 50-51.


49 Gandhi, The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, 51:316-317.



52 Truth for Gandhi was God. He says: “Truth is perhaps the most important name of God. In fact it is

more correct to say that Truth is God, than it is to say that God is Truth.” Mohandas K. Gandhi,

Satyagraha: Non-violent Resistance (Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 1951), 38. 53

Rynne, Gandhi and Jesus, 60.


being an active force of liberation and transformation.54

Ahimsa for Gandhi is not

limited to human beings, but extends to the whole of creation.55

Thus, the Church

being an ahimsa-sangamam would mean it being an ecological communion.

Gandhi’s dialogue was not confined to the spiritual, but rightly extended to the

political. He interpreted the Bhagavadgita as proclaiming “nonviolent political action

and equality of religions.”56

For Gandhi “Satyagraha was a way of life in which you

lived in such a way that those you encountered on a daily basis were affected and

maybe even transformed by the quality of your living.”57

A spirituality like the

Gandhian political spirituality58

that is modelled on the social praxis of Jesus himself

needs to be awakened among the religions of India, so that the religions will become

active players in the political life of the nation towards building an India of justice,

equality and peace. The significant feature of the Church in India being dialogical is

to animate and lead the religious communities of India towards such kingdom

koinonia.

3. CONCLUSION

We have tried to show that the life and thought of Gandhi can serve as a

suitable paradigm for the church in India to become truly Indian. The main feature of

becoming the Indian Church, as we have explored in the three chapters of this thesis,

namely, becoming local, marginal and dialogical, are very magnificently fused in the

life and thought of Gandhi. The church in India, in drawing inspiration from Gandhian

thought and taking a Gandhian path, can become a truly Indian Church: a local,

marginal and dialogical Church. As exemplified in the life and vision of Gandhi, the

harmonious fusion of being local, marginal and dialogical is imperative for the church

in India to transform into a truly Indian Church. It is only in becoming local, marginal

and dialogical, that the Church in India will become truly Indian.

We conclude our research with a very revealing and relevant quote from the

Jesuits that accentuates the unity and communion of faith, inculturation, liberation and

dialogue:

54 See Noel Sheth, “The Non-Violence of Mahatma Gandhi,” Jnanadeepa 4:1 (2001), 59-78.


56 Walter Fernandes, “A Socio-Historical Perspective for Liberation Theology in India,” in Felix

Wilfred, ed., Leave the Temple: Indian Paths to Human Liberation (Trichy: Carmel, 1996), 21. 57

Julius Lester, “God and Social Change,” Cross Currents (Fall, 2006) 305. 58

Cf. Kavunkal, “Church’s Service to the World,” 123.


Today we realise clearly:

No faith without

promotion of justice

entry into cultures

openness to other religious experiences.

No promotion of justice without

communicating faith

transforming cultures

collaboration with other traditions.

No inculturation without

communicating faith with others

dialogue with other cultures

commitment to justice.

No dialogue without

sharing faith with others

evaluating cultures

concern for justice.59

Adapting the above quote to our research, we conclude:

No Indian Church without becoming

a local church

a marginal church

a dialogical church

No local Indian church without becoming

a marginal Indian church

a dialogical Indian church

No marginal Indian church without becoming

a local Indian church

a dialogical Indian church

No dialogical Indian church without becoming

a local Indian church

a marginal Indian church.

59 34

th General Congregation of the Society of Jesus, Decree II on “Servants of Christ’s Mission,”

no.19; as quoted in Rudolf C. Hederia, “Incarnating Christ in India: Pedro Aruppe and

Inculturation,” Vidyajyoti 77 (2007), 346.