Columns: The Usual Suspects

Columns

India Today, February 1, 1999
Feb 1, 1999

THE USUAL SUSPECTS
Debating Faith

Balance religious rights with national obligations.

By Swapan Dasgupta

Now that 100 "intellectuals" of Delhi have, quite predictably, rebuffed the idea and the disgraceful burning of Christian prayer halls in the Dangs district of Gujarat has stopped, the atmosphere may be conducive for a dispassionate exploration of the prime minister's suggestion of a national debate on conversions. The issue is more political than theological. Following the Congress Working Committee's me-too identification of "Hinduism as the most effective guarantor of secularism", it would seem that the BJP and the Supreme Court are not alone in linking the soul of India to Hindutva. After more than a decade of turmoil, the political class has arrived at two important conclusions -- that religion and modernity are not incompatible, and that decency and tolerance in public life is impossible without the sanction of the majority.

To those bent on sensationalising recent happenings for the New York Times, "what we are witnessing in India is the growth of a sort of Hindu Taliban movement". It's a preposterous suggestion. If the fanatical elements in the VHP have been forced to retreat, it is not on account of the concern expressed by the US and German ambassadors and the British foreign secretary. The most effective moral pressure has come from ordinary Hindus who find attacks on churches reprehensible. The notion of a "jealous god" runs contrary to all Indian traditions.

Yet, it would be imprudent to equate this disapproval of religious extremism with indifference to matters of faith. Hinduism may not be a religion in the conventional sense of the term but the absence of an organised church does not negate the reality of a loose Hindu solidarity. Religious conversions have offended that solidarity. There is genuine disquiet, sometimes bordering on anger, that Hindu tolerance is taken for granted. If there was ungrudging admiration for those Irish Jesuits who combined scholastic passion and piety with their faith in Christ, there is absolute contempt for those evangelists who utilise generous foreign funding for offensive proselytisation. The Texas-based Gospel for Asia order describes Hindus in Gujarat as "still living in the bondage of Satan" and the Global Prayer Digest charges Bhils with "appeasing false gods". Dubious faith healers like the California-based Roger Houtsma, whose preachings created tensions in Punjab and Gujarat last year, openly invite minimum donations of $25 for "church plants" in India: "The harvest is ripe now, and now is the time to put in the sickle and reap by establishing new believers in churches ..."

These are random examples of insensitivity. But it is fundamentalist groups like these who provide ammunition to the Hindu extremists for their campaign of hate. If tensions are to be defused, it is obligatory for responsible Christian organisations to intervene. From Nagaland to Kerala, the various churches have emulated the VHP and the Akal Takht in consistently playing politics. They attacked the nuclear tests in Pokhran for promoting Indian hegemonism and organised strikes against the Gujarat incidents. These are rights guaranteed by the Constitution. But rights can be meaningful if balanced by social obligations. Rather than confining themselves to battling the RSS and the A.B. Vajpayee Government in a shrill fashion, it is important the vocal Christian activists also address real anxieties over the activities of a dangerous fringe. Selective indignation may be politically rewarding but is inimical to social harmony.

Issue Contents | Write to us | Subscriptions | Syndication