Faith, Superstition and Credulity

Recently I read an article about the arrest of a Pentecostal Christian preacher in Coimbatore. The preacher in question had not committed any theft, murder or any of the crimes that one might imagine. Rather he was found praying. Praying with his wife and four children by his side. Nothing unusual there, one would think. Except that this man and his family were praying next to the highly decomposed body of Charles’ brother Selvakumar read of the Pentecostal Christian preacher Charles, in Coimbatore who was arrested by the police as he, his wife and four children knelt in prayer by the highly decomposed body of his brother Selvakumar, who had committed suicide more than two months ago. They were praying fervently for his “resurrection” oblivious of the fact that the body was rapidly and steadily decomposing and the neighbors, unable to bear the stink called in the police.

Now if one is a atheist, and there is no place for the supernatural in one’s life, the actions of Charles are those of some one in serious need of a psychiatric evaluation at worst and a big joke at the best. But what of those who believe? What of those who have faith in God and believe that He is active in day to day life, that prayers and intercession do make a difference and that the spiritual dimension of life is an important piece in the mosaic of life? When Charles the preacher and his family was praying for his brother who had been dead 55 days to be raised from the dead when the police broke in, was he demonstrating faith or was he being superstitious ? What is faith and what is superstition? Where do one end and the other begin?

Faith is often described as the sum of things that are unseen. Given this definition, it becomes difficult to draw lines within the realm of the unseen as to what is faith and what is blind, obscurantist faith. If prayers can heal a person who is sick and make him well and that is the sum and substance of a lot of the prayers that are offered in countless temples, mosques, churches and shrines, then who is to say that prayers offered on behalf of a dead person will not raise him from the dead ? where do we get our bearings regarding what kind of prayers have some underpinning and which ones are mere exercises in delusion and the pursuit of them will only lead to disillusionment and disappointment ? That is a tough call indeed.

Of one thing I am convinced though. That while faith rejuvenates and provides direction in life, superstitions’ only purpose is to hold you back in shackles and toss you back into the embrace of fear and uncertainty. Faith may not be seen but it can be felt and experienced and its end product is hope – of a kind that does not disappoint. Superstition leaves you clinging wide eyes with fear and a sense of dejected hesitancy that leaves you with more doubts than assurance and more problems than solutions and in the eyes of the watching world, more credulous than credible. As with preacher Charles’s case—he set out to set his dead brother “free” but finds himself in jail instead. an unfortunate object of ridicule no rather than reverence

The Power of Religious Figures

When recently a denominational Bishop as the chairman of the governing body of a prestigious college, decided practically overnight the manner in which the college should be run and who should and should not be admitted it got me thinking about the power that religious leaders wield. It made me think and reflect a lot more on how religious leaders function and govern and how they ought to be chosen. It is surprising that in such a sensitive subject as this, where in even fully state funded institutions, like the IITs and IIMs, the government has been treading cautiously, a decision was made practically overnight with out any visible effort to build consensus or consult any one. Not so much the decision, but the manner it was arrived at too led to a volley of criticism that is hardly likely to add any allure to the name of the institution.

The position of religious leaders in a secular state is ambiguous. At one level, they are no more than private citizens; at another level , as the recent controversy surrounding the head of the Dera Saccha Sauda indicates, religious leaders have a lot of clout and influence … possibly in many instances they have more authority than political leaders. In most instances, the leaders are unelected. In case of the older institutions like the various mutts, the leadership is inherited but more common these days are the god men who seem to have sprung up and acquired a following almost overnight. Many of the religious heads in the country head huge empires worth cores, many of them by virtue of their office alone and not because of any management merit they might possess. Most religious leaders in India hold office at the tip of a very narrow support base and yet their decisions and actions be it Baba Ram Rahim Singh dressing up and aping Guru Gobind Singh or A Bishop suddenly dispensing wisdom on reservation and quotas.

Mahants and Bishops and Imams and the like may preside over the fortunes of prestigious institutions set up by religious trusts only because of the religious office they hold. In case of the educational institutions, the religious clergy may preside over the fortunes of institutions into which they might themselves be unfit to gain admission had they been in the positions of students in these institutions. The clergy preside over several institutions and their valuable properties and make key policy decisions, often without any demonstrable skills or training to do so Unelected leaders, be it in religion or politics are a bane. But typically political despots are more easily overthrown than religious leaders who wield a more mystic and other worldly grip on their followers.

The Christian reformation in Europe happened for similar reasons. In most situations, there is little that can be done. It is indeed a pity that Institutions and ashrams and establishments that most professionally managed set ups would hire experienced managers to run are managed by religious figure heads that may be well versed in rites and rituals but know little else. In India often , politics and religion seem to be the last refuge of the scoundrel and the ones who fit nowhere are the ones often the most blinded like in Hans Christian Anderson’s “ The Emperor’s new Clothes” be it cloaked in dummy robes of a Guru or a Bishop carrying a miter and cassock. However the role of church leaders and other religious figures is not ambiguous in the bible, even though a secular state may feel constrained in prescribing roles for the clergy. In biblical literature, the role of a leader Vis a Vis his flock is often likened to that of a shepherd and his sheep.

In Psalm 23, David is likening God to a shepherd. Indeed, he is saying that God is his shepherd. He also leads him beside the still waters. So, here the shepherd is supplying the basic needs of the sheep. Of all the images in the Bible, the story of the Good Shepherd is one of the most popular. In this story, Jesus draws a sharp distinction between his way of being a shepherd, and the way 'the hired help' exercises his responsibility. The Good Shepherd is constantly on the alert, but more than that, in the face of danger he is ready to give his life for the sake of the sheep. The hired hand has no real care for the sheep, and in the face of danger takes the easy way out, and the leaves the sheep in peril. Those who would follow the Good Shepherd are prepared to risk all, in order to fulfill their calling.

Throughout their history the people of Israel had been shepherded by various weak or faithless kings and religious leaders, and Jesus words would have struck a heavy chord in the leaders of his own day whom he openly challenged and criticized.It is rather hard for many people today to relate to the shepherd comparison, so what does the metaphor shepherd mean to us today? We hear a lot about the word servant leadership these days. This is more than just semantics, words have power. What we call each other says a great deal about how we view each other. Recognizing the things we do as ministries - however great or small-invites us to see them in a new way. When we begin to think about our lives in devotion to ministry, then we can begin to understand this shepherd Jesus who calls us to follow him.

We claim to be followers that means to follow is to know the Jesus who welcomed children, read in the synagogue, provided wine at a wedding, washed people’s feet, presided at table, told stories, cooked breakfast, practiced first aid and took advantage of numerous opportunities to do whatever would make someone feel a little better about life. That’s is the call we answer when we hear the shepherd calling us to green pastures, by still waters, restoring our souls, this is the life we are called to follow, ministry. Let is the kind of leader we need to be leading the sheep. And that is also the kind of shepherds we need to be if we happen to be leaders.

Minority Institutions in India

Over the last months, there has been a lot of debate about the role and rights of minority institutions, particularly the Christian institutions. But in all of this debate, I have read seen or read little that has helped to unpack the concept of the minority institution and why they exist in the constitutional framework. When the constitution guaranteed the minorities the right to start and manage their own institutions, they were not handing out freebies. The liberal climate that prevailed when the constitution was being drafted had the vision of a welfare state. They wanted the constitution to lay the foundation of a secular state where all sections of society would live with their identity and culture intact. It was such a benevolent gesture that made them reserve two seats in parliament for members of the Anglo Indian community, a practice that continues to this day, though the population of Anglo Indians might number in their thousands. Probably the two Anglo Indian members of Parliament represent their constituency more effectively than the elected members if the ratios and the representation formulae are taken into consideration.

The Minority institutions that were typically envisaged to enjoy the state’s protection were those which would actually serve to preserve minority languages, customs and traditions. The feeling was that minorities could get overwhelmed by the sheer mass of the majority community surrounding them and their culture and unique identity could just get subsumed into one large anonymous melting pot. So they needed a helping hand and the benign protection of the state. In this understanding of the concept, if a minority institution is not doing its job of preserving the ethos and culture and traditions and identity of a community, it is not really doing its job. A bunch of Muslims or Christians or Sikhs could get together and run a secretarial institute or a typing college or even a degree college running conventional BA and B.com courses. Would such institutes qualify to be a minority institute? Not really in the spirit of the constitution.

The ChristianMedicalCollege, Vellore has put it well. When asked to explain why it should reserve so many seats for Christians when it was just another medical college, it replied that it wasn’t just another medical college. It put forward the very correct argument that running hospitals and clinics and providing affordable health care to the poor was an important function of the church from its earliest history in India and Vellore was training doctors to continue and preserve that tradition of the church. It was not another commercial minded, doctor generating machine but an instrument to preserve the identity of the Christian community in India which has always been associated with a spirit of service and especially so in the fields of health and education.

But not every institution is CMC Velour’s know of many several church run institutions- (and this is very likely true in the in instances of other communities as well) where there is very little of Christ or His teaching to be seen or heard. What makes it a minority institution is that the Board of Management is headed by some Bishop or Priest or church official. The Bible is seldom referred to or opened, students go to tepid moral science classes and the morning assembly is anemic. When the church is persecuted from time to time, it is common to hear that many eminent people attended such and such Christian school.

Well they might have done so but the moot question is whether they were exposed to the teachings of Jesus in their student days or it just happened that the school happened to be run by some religious order or denomination but beyond these legal niceties, it ran as any secular institution would do. The plumb line to determine if any institution is a minority institution – be it linguistic or religious or ethnic is to examine what minority values and cultures are being imparted there. If after studying in a Christian school for ten years or more, a child comes out with negligible knowledge of the church, its contribution to nation building and the Bible then in what way is the establishment representative of the Christians They are no more than secular institutes which just happen to be run by a group of people who speak a particular language or profess a particular religion. This is what the Bible has to say:

“Give ear, O my people, to my law; Incline your ears to the words of my mouth. I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings of old, Which we have heard and known, And our fathers have told us. We will not hide them from their children, Telling to the generation to come the praises of the Lord, And His strength and His wonderful works that He has done. For He established a testimony in Jacob, And appointed a law in Israel, Which He commanded our fathers, That they should make them known to their children; That the generation to come might know them, The children who would be born, That they may arise and declare them to their children, That they may set their hope in God, And not forget the works of God, But keep His commandments” Psalm 78:1-7

The role of minority institutions, particularly Christian Minority Institutions is not to not to provide a safe haven for Christian students to get into institutions through sanitized seats reserved for them where they have less competition to deal with. That if any thing is a minor role. The role that the Bible lays down is that Christian institutions fundamentally exist to transmit the word and teaching of the Lord Jesus and His example to the next generation. Some where in this debate, this aspect has been forgotten and needs to be revived

An Upside Down Power

Too many people spend all of their allotted time on this earth trying to become rich and famous or rich and powerful or maybe just rich or maybe just influential. Reality says that only a few people get to any of these slots. The lot for all the rest might be to envy them. But Jesus tells us not to envy because God will judge by different rules. One’s possessions or position do not count.

What matters is what we give of ourselves. God encourages people to give the most of themselves. God’s plan does not honor the people who wield power, but people who love their neighbors and help those in need. It is how we use that power. God won't reward the people with great talent only, but He will remember the people with great hearts. It is how we use that talent. How does God defines greatness ? His definition has nothing to do with points on a scoreboard. It is all about how we live our lives. Perhaps we think we have never lived near human greatness—but maybe we just haven’t thought of it in this light.James and John ask Jesus for permission to sit with him at the head table when he comes into his kingdom…one at Jesus right hand and the other at his left hand. In most meetings, the boss sits at the end or like the Prime Minister in a Cabinet meeting—he sits in the middle.

In any event, the most trusted or senior members of the team are closest to the head person and this allows them to prompt the boss discreetly as needed. People of lesser rank perhaps do not sit at the table but are placed around the outside wall. The boss is front and center in any arrangement and the trick for everyone else is to get as close as possible.James and John thought that Jesus would become king once they reached Jerusalem…and they wanted the two most honored seats. Jesus, you will recall, had already chosen three disciples as favorites and the three included James and John.

Peter was the third. Since James and John were brothers, it was easy for them to bond. In this case Peter was the outsider and he was being pushed to the side. "Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?" Translated, he was asking James and John if they were able to share his fate. Imagining Jesus at the head of the table, they assured him they were able. Jesus then told them that they would share his fate, but he couldn't promise them the seats at his right and left.But when Jesus was actually lifted up it was on a cross and there was a thief at his right hand and a thief at his left hand. That was one of God's ways of warning us to expect some surprises in his kingdom. In God's kingdom, the old rules –– the world's rules –– won't apply. We will have to learn a whole new set of rules. God gives all of us a glimpse into His kingdom. Jesus explains the new rules. He begins by talking about the rulers with whom James and John are familiar.

Those rulers lord it over people. The ones whom people usually count as great are really only tyrants –– oppressors –– people who exercise power cruelly and unjustly. Jesus tells James and John –– and us –– that the kingdom of God isn't like that. So who will be the great people in God’s kingdom? There are people here on earth whom most of us might not consider as great and most importantly, they don't think of themselves as great. Not many people know their names, but God knows their names. These people show all of us the way. They give themselves in quiet service to our church or our children. They are here at church whenever there is a need at here or in the community. There will be a look of surprise on their face when Jesus says, "Come and sit with me.""Whoever wishes to become great among you must be your servant,and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave of all."

On Eagle's Wings

Two of my favorite modern Christian songs are sung by the artiste Josh Groban. One of the is titled” On Eagle's Wings” and another is titled” You lift me up”. Both these songs have lifted up my spirits on many a depressing day. The old prophet Isiah's lines promising that "they shall mount up with wings like eagles" (v. 31) are so memorable.... Sorting through my various memories I remembered first a time when I sat on top of a cliff and watched a motionless raven riding an unseen wind, occasionally folding up his wings and dropping breathlessly before extending them again to soar.

Then I thought of a time when I took a s short holiday in Goa , watching seabirds get waddling starts before a breeze would lift them gently above my head. Finally I considered a family of sparrows that once nested outside my window of my 8th floor office in Delhi's Nehru Place, occasionally breaking into the silence of my room with a salutary song. None of these light and dreamy images worked with me, however. Not this week.As a pacifist, I have struggled a great deal with my own feelings about the violent turns being taken in our country , some more graphic than others. One illustration that I recently read about and that horrified me was the thought of Phulpur in Uttar Pradesh that once returned Jawaharlal Nehru to Parliament , now being represented by a mafia don. . Sometimes I am quite guilty of reading the morning newspaper and taking it to heart, making it personal.

As I read all that I do , I also sad realize that I have very little power to counter the ominous movements around me. Some times, I feel tired and angry and sad and confused, I walk on the frightening border of hopelessness at times.So some airy notions of birds taking flight are sometimes hard to embrace as I feel more the albatross of cynicism growing heavier around my neck, worrying less about my own ability to fly and fretting more honestly that I might instead just sink like a stone. And in a rather uncommon way as I read Josh Groban's songs based on Isaiah , I felt that someone from a very long time ago was saying something to me, pleading desperately that I not lose heart. All I can say is that I want very much to hear those words and to believe in them.

The words that seem to be speaking so deeply are drawn from Isaiah 40, an entire chapter that is made of the dialog between hope and doubt before it ends on a note that asks us each to remain engaged in the struggle. It was written ages ago to a people that had been living in exile and, during that time, found themselves in the tension between their own hopes and doubts, the promises of their faith and the sad social context in which they lived. This is the audience that the author of Isaiah 40 is addressing, and it is to a tired and skeptical people that he offers his word. Some of his chapters intended to comfort a weary people by reminding them of an old vision and singing of a new empowerment. There are some hopeful words here, if not any easy words, and perhaps that is why they can still speak as strongly in the present as they did in that long ago past.

So to an exiled people the prophet begins to speak or maybe even to anybody who has ever felt like a wanderer, caught in the troubles of this world and its sorrows, feeling the bitterness between what we dream and what we have got.It seems to me that the prophet knows the feeling all too well, because his opening lines, which read very much like poetry, acknowledge under their surface that things are not yet as they should be. "A voice cries out," he writes, "In the wilderness prepare the way, make straight in the desert a highway [so] every valley shall be lifted up, and every mountain and hill be made low; the uneven ground shall become level, and the rough places a plain." (v. 3-4) The voice crying out is really the voice of the old writer, who is beginning to offer an image of a time just around some corner when things might be transformed.

While the author understands that the current context is oftentimes a painful one, he wants to say and so he does say that the future is open. Using his words to invite us into this beautiful vision, the author paints what is uncertain in the colors of a thousand possibilities.Unafraid to voice his dreams the prophet writes, "Then the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all people shall see it together," (v. 5) which is another way of saying that the manifestation of the divine shall be everywhere and the love of God shall be shared by everyone. This is a very beautiful sentiment and, as it imagines what the world might become, it is directed rather pointedly at everyone who has, for one reason or another, stopped imagining their own hopes for the future.

The Book of Isaiah has perhaps the highest hopes of all, for its pages tell that lions and lambs could one day find rest together, swords might be refashioned into ploughshares, and hospitality shall be shown to the stranger and the outcast. And the comfort that the prophet means to offer here can be found in the universality of his statement. Not only will the people wither and fade but so will the nations and the rulers, all who act oppressively on the earth and live in violence towards it, they¹ll go too, for they are no more than "dust on the scales" (v. 15). While this may strike some as the most morbid form of encouragement, the old writer is trying to affirm that there is something more transcendent than the power structures currently in place and the systems that seem to surround us.

While surely we are participants in those systems, the prophet wants to remind us that we might also become participants in something much greater, something that he would call a divine purpose. Because what won¹t fade, the old book tells, is the very word from God. And it is that word that has always issued an invitation for us to make justice and love through our living, in the hope that we are joining in something sacred as we do it. Isaiah 40 goes on to tell of the wonder of the divine, conjuring up majestic images of God, but throughout it is still possible to hear that there is a dispirited audience listening in.

It seems to me that the writer never really loses sight of this, since he concludes his magnificent descriptions by saying rather plainly that God "does not faint or grow weary." (v. 28) At the end of it the prophet will say something like, "Every one of you is tired, I know. But maybe one day we¹ll reach the end of all our waiting, maybe one day we¹ll see that our efforts have made at least a part of this dream into reality. And maybe on a day like that we really might feel light as eagles carried by the wind's current. Who knows?" So as Isiah understands and acknowledges the reservations of his hearers, he still speaks strongly against the cynicism of inaction and asks us each to take the risks of responding in faith. Perhaps the aforementioned eagles might serve as an interesting example. In our lives we may not always be able to soar gracefully but we can take the first small steps and leave the nest to trust in what cannot always be seen but can be hoped in and worked for and maybe even lived out if we feel as risky as the young bird who paces and yearns for the sky.

Orphans of Our Time

Caring for orphans has been a time-honored work of the voluntary sector, especially religious institutions. The Christian church itself runs number of children’s homes and orphanages in the country. Orphans brought up in these institutions have been brought up to live fruitful and productive lives. But a new strain of orphans is emerging that may challenge all the established paradigms and processes of orphan care. Caring for widows and orphans is not an option; it is a duty The Old Testament often witnesses to the fact that children in need, most especially orphans, are the subjects of God's special, loving care. This is why his covenant with Israel required that families and the whole society take care of widows and orphans.Jesus himself held children dear to his heart. Think for a moment of the time he reprimanded those who were keeping children away from him, and said, "Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these." The Gospel of Mark says that, "he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them." (Mk 10:14b, 16).

So important were children to Jesus that he said, "Whoever receives one child...in my name, receives me; and whoever receives me, receives not me but the one who sent me" (Mk 9:36-37). Jesus is very clear. We love God through our love for children. By caring for these little ones, we show our faith in the risen Lord.The ministry of health and family welfare says that 1, 67,078 cases of AIDS have been reported from 1986 to March 31st this year. However, this is considered to be an estimate on the lower side as probably only about 10 per cent of the infected are aware of their status. Many of the children born to these HIV positive people are themselves infected and at some point many of them become orphans as one or more of their parents possibly are chronically sick or die.

In what ways are India’s AIDS orphans challenging the traditional norms of orphan care? Well for one, firstly consider the sheer numbers. India today is home to the largest number of AIDS orphans in the world. The odds against AIDS-orphaned children are staggering. These children are vulnerable to a number of risks ranging from social exclusion and economic deprivation to illiteracy, malnutrition and exploitation. They are also at increased risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases, abuse and drug use, with many young girls turning to prostitution in order to survive. AIDS orphans are often shunned by their communities; many are denied property rights and rights to inheritance. Those who cannot be taken in by their relatives end up living on the streets.With numbers such as these, typical responses will not work. An AIDS orphan apart from being an orphan has all the attendant disadvantages described above and then is at the receiving end of discrimination in society for no fault of his own. Now orphan children can be both simply affected or infected as well, in that case, they will need additional skills in coping and self care.

The knee jerk response of society to pack these children into orphanages will not work because of two reasons—a typical child care worker often will not have the skills to handle children who need this level of intense care and support. Secondly we will not have enough institutions to admit all of these children and then maintain them, as the cost of that will be huge. This will necessitate some form of prioritization regarding who goes into institutions and what happens to those who don’t get in. Now in India, while the institutionalization set-up is well established and the adoption mechanism is also well established, there is nothing in between these two options.With orphanages and institutions untenable for such large numbers of children and adoption too not viable for legal or social reasons (for instance in India, as of now only Hindus can legally adopt), foster care, which is widely used elsewhere but rarely practiced in India is worth exploring and trying.

Unlike adoption, which is irrevocable and permanent, in foster care, a child goes and stays with another family which wants him and cares for him, but stays in touch with his natural family and the stay for foster care is temporary and for a fixed number of years. With many of the AIDS orphans staying in single parent households headed possibly by grand parents or a widowed mother, the emotional bonds in such families is strong even though economic constraints often make it difficult or impossible for the child to be given the care, support and education that one needs.However, what will delay or hinder the foster parent concept idea from taking root in India apart from cultural prejudices and stigma is the absence of a legal framework. With child protection increasingly becoming an issue and child abuse now a proven fact even in a supposedly conservative society like India, some guidelines are a must. However, with all the red tape associated with law making and policy formulation in India – foster care is an idea whose time has surely come

A time to think and act …….

For much of the twentieth century, evangelical involvement in social and political issues has been stymied by the never ending debate on what was the more important task – populating heaven with the souls of those who accept Jesus as their lord and savior or make life better on earth by imbibing it with the spirit and fragrance of the coming kingdom of God- by living holier and purposeful lives singly as well as collectively.

However it was not always this way. As far back as in the Old Testament , after Jerusalem was sacked and its people carried away into exile, the Jewish people sat lamenting and singing dirges about how life was back in Jerusalem and the memories they had of worshiping their god the temple that Solomon had built and that now lay desecrated.

Into that mournful congregation of exiled people Jeremiah preached. He asked them to be mindful of the place they were exiled to; he urged them not to lead detached, indifferent, anemic lives, mourning the past or longing for a restoration to come in the future in the great messianic hope. Jeremiah exhorted the despondent, discouraged people of the time to pray and involve themselves in the welfare of the place and people among whom they were placed for in their welfare lay their welfare.

The Jewish were exiled among a people whom they despised and considered unclean, yet Jeremiah urged them to be mindful of their needs and concerns and pray for them. Many made an effort to do this. This was not just in response to Jeremiah’s call but even before that and included Joseph, Daniel and Nehemiah. They contributed to the times and societies in such a significant manner that history as well as scripture records their efforts and contribution with appreciation.

Christians have their citizenship in heaven. This the Bible declares emphatically. We are called strangers and wanderers on this earth, people who are always on the move, as they look to their eventual home in heaven in the presence of the lord. Our status here on earth is that of resident aliens- people who live here and yet do not fully belong here.

In the bible, God shares his dream with us. His dream of how life on earth should look like. Not once or twice but in innumerable books, he shares his dream, so passionate is He about this dream. In this dream, we get a picture of what life would have been like if there was no fall, no sin and its consequences- death, disease and destruction that we see every where, every day on our television screens, in our newspapers, on our internet browser.

Daniel, Isaiah, Zechariah share this dream among others. They talk longingly of the dream that God shares through their lips of the vision of a new earth. Here are some of the verses – Zechariah---, Isaiah ---, Daniel….., Amos. God’s vision for this earth that he so lovingly created is big and broad. He loves people. He loves families. He loves communities and he has big dreams and visions for all of them.. In a fallen world, God’s perfect vision will never be fulfilled. Our labor will be incomplete; the results of our sweat and labor will be less than optimal. our efforts will be often frustrated.

William Wilberforce, the man on whose efforts to abolish slavery in British Empire, the movie “Amazing Grace” has been recently made had to made innumerable efforts to make an impact. His bill to abolish slavery was defeated in the House of Commons year after but he never gave up his efforts and the bill was finally passed months before his death as he lay in his sick bed. The same exercise when attempted across the Atlantic in the United States, led to a civil war.

William Carey is known in evangelical circles as the “Father of Modern Missions” and is revered under that definition. His secular legacy which is equally impressive is also more varied. During his lifetime, Carey was a: Missionary, Social Reformer, Educationist, Linguist, Author, Publisher and Botanist. William Carey was the founder of:


• The BMS (Baptist Missionary Society) -1792
• The Baptist Mission at Serampore -1800
• The Baptist Mission Press at Serampore -1800
• The Serampore Botanical Gardens -1800
• The Serampore College -1818
• The Agricultural Society of India -1820

From 1796 - 1829, he translated the New Testament into Bengali, The old Testament 8 years later, and parts of the bible into Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, Urdu and many other dialects. Carey also wrote dictionaries and grammars in Sanskrit, Marathi, Punjabi and Telugu. He was also the father of vernacular journalism in India Carey’s philosophy of life was formed largely by the written works of his predecessors and contemporaries. Specifically, Jonathan Edwards, John Bunyan, Jeremy Taylor, Captain James Cook, and Robert Hall, among others, clearly affected his outlook on theology, missions, Bible translation, ecumenism, and a host of related topics. Writings by Cook opened Carey's eyes to distant people, whom he evaluated in the light of his journalistically influenced theology. Consequently, Carey became concerned about the spiritual and moral state of the world abroad. His concern found expression in the Enquiry – a polemic for missionary work – and ultimately led him to Bengal, where his own attempts to influence people through journalism expanded. Can one many really do these things, of such a varied nature? Why did he do these things? Why should a missionary set up a botanical garden or an Agricultural Society? And if a man did have such gifts from God, why did he not do all he could to plant more churches and evangelize more and more people? Was it not the reason, why he left England in the first place?


William Carey combined a passionate desire to preach the good news of Jesus Christ, for which he had essentially come with an intelligent and equally passionate involvement with the social and political life of the country. Carey and his companions arrived in India in 1793 and settled in the Danish colony of Serampore because contrary to popular perception, the British East India Company in its early years , had political and commercial interests in mind and not religious.

It took Carey and his team of missionaries, which included a school teacher and a printer about 7 years to see the first fruits of their ministry. Almost immediately, they had to take cognizance of the first social reality deeply rooted in India- caste. 122. The conversion of Hindus to Christianity posed a new question for the missionaries concerning whether it was appropriate for converts to retain their caste. In 1802, the daughter of Krishna Pal, a Dalit, married a Brahmin. This wedding was a public demonstration that the church repudiated the caste. The matter Carey dealt with more than 200 years ago has still not been resolved satisfactorily in the church till today,

But Carey's ministry was not only about evangelism. He was confronted with harsh social realities of that day and along with his associates, fondly called the Serampore trio, engaged himself in the social and political milieu of the day with the motive of helping shape society in a manner that best demonstrated the character of the God they preached about.

For political as well as pragmatic reasons, Carey was on good terms with the East India Company governor general. In 1801 when the British founded Fort William, a college designed to educate civil servants of the East India Company (the 18thcentury version of the IAS and the Lal Bahadur Shastri Academy in Mussoorie). Once the college was established, William Carey was invited there as faculty in the capacity of Professor of Bengali. His colleagues on the faculty included many of the Hindu, Bengali elite of the time whom he befriended to gain insights into Hindu life and society. And he also use his access to the budding civil servants and the British political elite to help put a stop to the practices of infant sacrifice and Sati, after consulting with the pundits and determining that they had no basis in the Hindu sacred writings (although the latter would not be abolished until 1829).

The Serampore missionaries were the first to use the media for propagating their view of life, which was of course, the Biblical world view. One of the Serampore trios, Marshman was a printer. In April 1818, Marshman, together with his father Joshua, launched the first monthly magazine in Bangla, Digdarshan, which focused on educative information for the youth, and very shortly thereafter the weekly news magazine Samachar Darpan which was one of the two first Bengali newspapers. Subsequently the Serampore Mission also launched the Friend of India weekly in 1821, which became so popular that Serampore was synonymous with the Friend of India in European minds for much of the 19th century. The printing operations were so successful that they acquired their own substantial buildings by the river just north of the Mission Chapel. In 1875 the Friend of India amalgamated with another paper The Englishman, becoming The Statesman which remains one of India's leading English-language dailies. Marshman was also a devoted student of Indian history and he wrote what was for many years the only history of Bengal. He was also long engaged on the writing of the history of India; his reading was very wide and he was a distinguished Oriental scholar.

Tracing William Carey's history further back, it is noteworthy that Carey's voyage to India was because of missions. In the church circles of the time, the prevalent theology was Calvinist which believed that for people to believe or not believe in the gospel was pre-ordained. Carey raised the question of whether it was the duty of all Christians to spread the Gospel throughout the world and was told by a Baptist elder "Young man, sit down; when God pleases to convert the heathen, he will do it without your aid and mine." it is interesting that with this sort of background as the driving force of missions in the life of Carey, he got involved in the life of Indians and its concerns in the manner that he did.

I have gone into the life and ministry of William Carey in some detail for a reason. He is the one who is recognized in many circles as the Father of Modern Missions and therefore it is worth talking about what the definition of missions was in his life and in the lives of his equally illustrious colleagues. If Carey's legacy is to be analyzed today , close to 200 years after hi death , it is not really in terms of the numbers of churches that he planted which were not many or the fruits of his evangelism in Bengal which are few. His legacy will be that even as he was in the business of evangelism, he believed that a Christian response to the world he lived in was a fitting and apt response to play for a missionary. His role in the abolition of Sati along with like minded Indians like the illustrious Raja Ram Mohan Roy and the British Governor General William Bentick are what he is remembered for. Standing in the initial decade of the twenty first century, when the occasional case of Sati is looked upon with loathing, it may be difficult to accept that it was a common place act in the late eighteenth century. 954

Going beyond Carey, the work of 18thand19th century missionaries (if not earlier) includes a contribution to the fight against small pox, malaria and leprosy; the provision of clean water; the extension of primary education; the protection of native peoples against exploitation and injustice; the defense of human rights. Opposition to foot binding and the exposure of girl babies in China; opposition to widow-burning and infanticide and temple prostitution in India; and much, much more. If in the twentieth century, Christian mission has got fragmented moving away from the holistic way in which their predecessors saw the world, there has to be a reason.

John Stott has identified five reasons for this shift:

1) A reaction against theological liberalism, which became popular at the start of the century. Faced by challenges to the long cherished basic doctrines they retreated into the defense of historic biblical Christianity and lost much of their cutting edge
.
2) A reaction against what was called the social gospel. Many of the advocates of this had ministered in areas of severe poverty and deprivation and they had tried to develop a theology which seemed relevant to these experiences. This thinking was based upon the idea of human perfectibility this side of heaven. Life should be transformed here on earth before we get to the Kingdom of God. Evangelicals of the day reacted badly to this.

3) Thirdly, the effect of World War I which engendered widespread disillusionment among evangelicals. The enormity of original sin and human evilness was brought to the fore like never before and Christian appeared to be overcome by it. They retreated into a feeling of social pessimism.

4)Fourthly, Christian’s were encouraged, through a variety of sources, to take the view that whatever reform attempts were made, evil would continue to flourish and the condition of society would continue to deteriorate until Jesus second coming. Some Christian was criticized for getting involved in social action because by improving society they may delay the return of Christ!

5) Lastly, some sociologists have suggested that Evangelicals have become alienated form social concern because of the spread of Christianity among the middle classes, who tend to be more conservative and concerned to preserve the status quo. It was basically a move towards self centered Christianity, saving your own soul.

Looking at the historical precedent and looking at the Bible , particularly the writings of the Old Testament prophets and the words of Jesus, we believe that Christians have a duty to be concerned about what goes on around them. The affirmation of God’s universal lordship is the theological foundation of Christians’ duty to be involved, in appropriate ways, in political reflection and action. God has revealed Himself as Lord of all aspects of life, public as well as private.

God is present and acts in all aspects of life—in our own personal lives, in the dealings between persons, in the community, in the nation, in the church, and in the universe, in economics, in politics, and in culture—to ensure that His holy purposes would prevail. God is present and acts through various ways, including through the belief and practice of Christians, to bring about the salvation of human beings of good will and of all creation. The correct understanding of the salvation that God offers is the fullness of all life blessings, both spiritual and material, partly in this present mortal life, and completely and definitively in the unending life of the world to come. Jesus Christ, in whom God the Son took human nature, was born, ministered, suffered, died, rose to triumphant new life, to manifest to us, by example and by teaching, two fundamental realities which in a sense comprise the Gospel or Good News.

These include macroeconomic, political, and cultural structures and questions, more so because macroeconomic, political, and cultural situations have a profound effect, for better or for worse, on the access of the members of society to the life blessings necessary for the true happiness of human beings. Therefore the mission of the church is not confined to the family, the home, the churches, the church-run schools and even the community of believers. Because God is Lord of all things, authentic Christian faith has a public or societal character, and the work of evangelization has public or societal scope.

In the subsequent chapters of the book, the authors have tried to hold a mirror to the society we live in today and explore the issues that we see around us. We may come across them in the morning new paper or as we browse the net or as we sit in our living rooms, lounging around our television sets. Some stories disturb, some numb us , some touch us in our hearts but leave us puzzled about what we can do, attempt to do and possibly fail in the process. As the authors pick up issues from the morning papers and look at it from the world view of the Bible, it is their hope without making any claims to be the prophets of yore; their writings will prove to be some what disturbing and soul stirring

Humility Today

In our contemporary culture, Humility is a value that many people must find extremely hard to understand. Humility, by its nature, is silent. Indeed, these days, the word “meek”, the word with which “humble” is associated in The Magnificat, is now almost a pejorative term. To be meek today is somehow seen a failing of character and resilience. To be humble is no longer a state of being; the word is invariably used as a verb, usually in the passive voice, something that someone has done to them in the overthrow of a public reputation. In a newspaper scandal, public figures are “humbled”, or face “humiliation”. It is a word usually uttered with glee, with sense of just deserts being served. Our culture thrills to the first part of those lines of the Magnficat, “He has put down the mighty from their seats”, but glosses over the second, “and exalted the humble and meek

Paul, explains at different points in his letters what it means to be humble and, in doing so, he picks apart a series of inherent contradictions in the way we conduct ourselves. Paul sets up the value of “association” with others as a key to humility and sets association against the very precise charge of “competitiveness”. In his letter to the Romans, he tells us to “live in harmony with one and other, not to be haughty but to associate with the lowly,” and pits that type of self-effacing encounter against, what he describes in Galatians as Conceit – “competing against one another”. In Philippians he defines the opposite to conceit or competitiveness as “regarding others as better than yourselves”. If you regard others as better than you are, it follows that you cannot be competitive with them. But, in his first Letter to the Corinthians, Paul, I think, goes further and identifies humility as the preparedness to appear foolish - a virtue that shows up the shortcomings of conventional wisdom. He argues it in this way: “For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, God decided through the foolishness of our proclamation, to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks desire wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles.” Freedom to follow Christ depends not just in denying competitiveness, but upon one’s preparedness to look past the confidence of those who believe that truth can be established through winning an argument. There can appear no more foolish an argument, Paul implies, than to look for salvation to a crucified God, but if you do, and face down that judgement of your foolishness, then, in his words, you will “discern all things”, and in so doing, he says “be subject to no one else’s scrutiny.”It follows that all those rhetorical tricks of cut and thrust debate, and that articulate arrogance of competitive wisdom that we display in order to prove that we are right, are overthrown by an inarticulacy that is at the centre of true Belief.

The First Letter to the Corinthians may contain some of the most flamboyantly rhetorical of Paul’s writings but his argument is really for the virtue of inarticulacy. “I came to you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling. My speech and proclamation were not with plausible words of wisdom, but with the demonstration of the Spirit and of Power.” Power here is turned upside down by Paul and used as the consequence of diffidence and self effacing trust in God. Today’s fashionable virtue is, by contrast, is not humility but “self esteem”. At work, people who would once have been described as “meek” are encouraged to go on “assertiveness training” courses. For, in an ever more competitive world, where the idioms of corporate culture demand certain types of behaviour, so there is less room and less time and less tolerance to appreciate the quieter virtues of those who work alongside one. Today’s belief in building self esteem recognises the damage we do to each other in the day to day business of working and living and seeks to offer to the person potentially hurt by the encounter a breastplate of assertiveness with which to hold their ground. But this is not Humility.Humility, in the Christian life, is ultimately the state whereby one can approach a right relationship with God.

But, since such a relationship can only be approached through seeking some rightness in our relationship with our fellow men and women, Humility, it seems to me, inherently rests on the manner in which we make contact with others, not just how we see other people, but how we see ourselves seeing them. Invariably, when we meet someone, we deliberately set up our own sense of self to get in the way of our encounter with another person’s life. It gives us a sense of security to know where we ourselves stand in relationship to someone else. In pondering what is the right relationship to one’s fellow human beings, I have found myself asking the question in a more particular form: how do we fully engage with the narratives of other people’s lives and connect them into our own. Paul enjoys the paradox, those who think they shape the world - the wise, the scribe the debaters of our age - can only understand the narratives they wish to frame when they are forced to confront that which they cannot make fit into them. At that moment, we are challenged to stop; to stop thinking, stop talking, stop opining. You have to stop shaping the story you are making to recognise that the meaning of it lies outside what you can do with it and you cannot enclose it in your own. But the Grace of God lies in his allowing us foolishly to blunder into those confrontations with the lowly and meek, and, in those encounters, we can, in the shock of understanding, recognise the grace of Humility which is all God requires us of if we are to seek a relationship with Him.

As Paul puts it “God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not, to reduce to nothing things that are, so that no-one might boast in the presence of God”.

On Eagle's Wings

Two of my favorite modern Christian songs are sung by th artiste Josh Groban. One of the is titled” On Eagle's Wings” and another is titled” You lift me up”. Both these songs have lifted up my spirits on many a depressing day. The old prophet Isiah's lines promising that "they shall mount up with wings like eagles" (v. 31) are so memorable.... Sorting through my various memories I remembered first a time when I sat on top of a cliff and watched a motionless raven riding an unseen wind, occasionally folding up his wings and dropping breathlessly before extending them again to soar. Then I thought of a time when I took a s short holiday in Goa , watching seabirds get waddling starts before a breeze would lift them gently above my head.

Finally I considered a family of sparrows that once nested outside my window of my 8th floor office in Delhi's Nehru Place, occasionally breaking into the silence of my room with a salutary song. None of these light and dreamy images worked with me, however. Not this week.
As a pacifist, I have struggled a great deal with my own feelings about the violent turns being taken in our country , some more graphic than others. One illustration that I recently read about and that horrified me was the thought of Phulpur in Uttar Pradesh that once returned Jawaharlal Nehru to Parliament , now being represented by a mafia don. . Sometimes I am quite guilty of reading the morning newspaper and taking it to heart, making it personal. As i read all that i do , I also sad realize that I have very little power to counter the ominous movements around me. Some times, I feel tired and angry and sad and confused, I walk on the frightening border of hopelessness at times.

So some airy notions of birds taking flight are sometimes hard to embrace as I feel more the albatross of cynicism growing heavier around my neck, worrying less about my own ability to fly and fretting more honestly that I might instead just sink like a stone. And in a rather uncommon way as I read Josh Groban's songs based on Isaiah , I felt that someone from a very long time ago was saying something to me, pleading desperately that I not lose heart. All I can say is that I want very much to hear those words and to believe in them.

The words that seem to be speaking so deeply are drawn from Isaiah 40, an entire chapter that is made of the dialog between hope and doubt before it ends on a note that asks us each to remain engaged in the struggle. It was written ages ago to a people that had been living in exile and, during that time, found themselves in the tension between their own hopes and doubts, the promises of their faith and the sad social context in which they lived. This is the audience that the author of Isaiah 40 is addressing, and it is to a tired and skeptical people that he offers his word. Some of his chapters intended to comfort a weary people by reminding them of an old vision and singing of a new empowerment. There are some hopeful words here, if not any easy words, and perhaps that is why they can still speak as strongly in the present as they did in that long ago past. So to an exiled people the prophet begins to speak or maybe even to anybody who has ever felt like a wanderer, caught in the troubles of this world and its sorrows, feeling the bitterness between what we dream and what we have got.

It seems to me that the prophet knows the feeling all too well, because his opening lines, which read very much like poetry, acknowledge under their surface that things are not yet as they should be. "A voice cries out," he writes, "In the wilderness prepare the way, make straight in the desert a highway [so] every valley shall be lifted up, and every mountain and hill be made low; the uneven ground shall become level, and the rough places a plain." (v. 3-4) The voice crying out is really the voice of the old writer, who is beginning to offer an image of a time just around some corner when things might be transformed. While the author understands that the current context is oftentimes a painful one, he wants to say and so he does say that the future is open. Using his words to invite us into this beautiful vision, the author paints what is uncertain in the colors of a thousand possibilities.

Unafraid to voice his dreams the prophet writes, "Then the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all people shall see it together," (v. 5) which is another way of saying that the manifestation of the divine shall be everywhere and the love of God shall be shared by everyone. This is a very beautiful sentiment and, as it imagines what the world might become, it is directed rather pointedly at everyone who has, for one reason or another, stopped imagining their own hopes for the future. The Book of Isaiah has perhaps the highest hopes of all, for its pages tell that lions and lambs could one day find rest together, swords might be refashioned into ploughshares, and hospitality shall be shown to the stranger and the outcast.

And the comfort that the prophet means to offer here can be found in the universality of his statement. Not only will the people wither and fade but so will the nations and the rulers, all who act oppressively on the earth and live in violence towards it, they¹ll go too, for they are no more than "dust on the scales" (v. 15). While this may strike some as the most morbid form of encouragement, the old writer is trying to affirm that there is something more transcendent than the power structures currently in place and the systems that seem to surround us. While surely we are participants in those systems, the prophet wants to remind us that we might also become participants in something much greater, something that he would call a divine purpose. Because what won¹t fade, the old book tells, is the very word from God.

And it is that word that has always issued an invitation for us to make justice and love through our living, in the hope that we are joining in something sacred as we do it. Isaiah 40 goes on to tell of the wonder of the divine, conjuring up majestic images of God, but throughout it is still possible to hear that there is a dispirited audience listening in. It seems to me that the writer never really loses sight of this, since he concludes his magnificent descriptions by saying rather plainly that God "does not faint or grow weary." (v. 28) At the end of it the prophet will say something like, "Every one of you is tired, I know.

But maybe one day we¹ll reach the end of all our waiting, maybe one day we¹ll see that our efforts have made at least a part of this dream into reality. And maybe on a day like that we really might feel light as eagles carried by the wind¹s current. Who knows?" So as Isiah understands and acknowledges the reservations of his hearers, he still speaks strongly against the cynicism of inaction and asks us each to take the risks of responding in faith. Perhaps the aforementioned eagles might serve as an interesting example. In our lives we may not always be able to soar gracefully but we can take the first small steps and leave the nest to trust in what cannot always be seen but can be hoped in and worked for and maybe even lived out if we feel as risky as the young bird who paces and yearns for the sky.

Advocating for Dalit Christians

The term 'Dalit' has come to mean things or persons who are cut, split, broken or torn asunder, scattered or crushed and destroyed. By coincidence, there is in Hebrew a root 'dal' meaning low, weak, poor. In the Bible, different forms of this term have been used to describe people who have been reduced to nothingness or helplessness. However, the present usage of the term Dalit goes back to the nineteenth century, when a Marathi social reformer and revolutionary, Mahatma Jyotirao Phule (1826-1890), used it to describe the outcastes and untouchables as the oppressed and the broken victims of our caste-ridden society. Dalit communities are those who are oppressed by the caste system in India. They account for about 16% of the total population; they are discriminated against for being polluting or untouchable and are relegated to performing occupations such as leather tanning, scavenging, weaving, and fishing, professions that are considered defiling and polluting and are largely understood to have their origins in the Chaturvarna system of Indian social classification sanctioned by the Hindu law giver Manu. However, Dalits are outside the pale of the caste system and its defined social and occupational hierarchy.

Among 30 million Christians, at least twenty millions are considered to be Dalits. Most of them live in extreme poverty and desperation. A survey undertaken by Jesuits in Tamil Nadu revealed that 79.6% of the Dalit Christians are landless, that their illiteracy rate is 65%, and that their average annual income is no more than 25 dollars. The Christian community in India also is too are divided into a number of castes with the previously Brahmin castes at the top and untouchables at the bottom. Though Christianity also does not recognize caste system, there are upper and lower caste among Christians. In Goa, for example, there are upper caste Catholic Brahmins who do not marry Christians belonging to the lower castes. In many churches, the low caste Christians have to sit apart from the high caste Christians. In Andhra Pradesh, there are Christian Dalit, Christian Malas, Christian Reddys, Christian Kammas, etc. In Tamil Nadu, converts to Christianity form Scheduled Castes - Latin Catholics, Christian Shanars, and Christian Gramani are in the list of Scheduled Castes. Such instances are many and vary from region to region.

Logically, the term ‘Dalit Christians’ is self-contradictory. How can a person be a ‘Dalit’ when he is a Christian; for Christianity does not recognize the caste system which is an evil prevalent only in the Hindu society? When a person gets converted, he is no longer a Hindu and thus does not fall into any category of the caste hierarchy. But unfortunately, in India we do have this category of people who got converted to Christianity in the vain hope of leading a respectable life. Conversion to Christianity has only added to the misery of the Dalits. Many Dalit Christian leaders refer to the twice-alienated situation of the Dalit Christians in India, namely, discrimination within the Church and discrimination by the State as they are denied Scheduled Caste status in the Constitution, and the related privileges which come with that status.
This is because the external forms of untouchability and their practice still exist among Christians, within the Church, in the graveyard, in the festivals, in marriage alliances, etc. The most unfortunate thing is that the caste Christians, practicing these inhuman acts are often supported by their own caste-priests and nuns, who even encourage them to attack Dalit Christians. That is the main reason for caste-practice continuing in the Church.

The same rules of Hindu caste system govern them, and they are known by their caste names --- Christian Nayars, Christian Paraya etc. Hardly any lower castes are allowed to be appointed as priest. Untouchables have separate graveyards and churches. So entrenched is the system that if a Christian upper caste cannot find a suitable caste Christian to marry, then a Hindu of the same caste will be selected rather than another Christian of lower caste.

The Dalits who converted to Christianity possibly gained a new sense of self-respect, but the gains were wiped out by the fact that upper caste Christians from whose ranks their religious superiors come still treated them as untouchables. There have been recorded instances of priests refusing to enter the houses of their Dalit congregation; the mission schools have separate arrangements for Dalits and other castes. In some Protestant churches, there were separate cups for the Dalits at the Eucharistic celebration. In the Catholic churches, there were separate communion rails, nor did their relationship with Hindu castes change in any way. So, many Dalit Christians have either started new churches themselves or reconverted back to Hinduism.

Little did they know that conversion to Christianity would not redeem them from social discrimination and untouchability, because though Jesus never advocated the caste system, Christianity in India was not free from the caste bias. Christian outfits which criticized Hinduism for its caste system, practiced discrimination based on castes in their Churches. In spite of the fact that around 75% of the Christians are ‘Dalits’ who got converted to Christianity to lose their caste or ‘outcaste’ tag, Dalit Christians within the Church were discriminated against and were denied powers within the ecclesiastical structure.

Today, the Dalit movement is a growing movement both within and outside the church, working for the liberation of Dalits from caste oppression — stigma, discrimination — political, economic, social, and religious. Dalit theology is an emerging discipline that is taking shape against much resistance both from both the dominant groups and from some Dalits themselves, who are still conscious of their status as Dalits and the social ramifications of embracing their Dalit identity. The situation Christian Dalits face is even more oppressive, as the general miserable living conditions characterizing the situation of Dalits are compounded by the denial of affirmative action by the state. Those who become Christians today usually cannot hope for material rewards.

One of the reasons for this is the fact that church development co-operation does not distinguish between Christians and non-Christians. Instead Christians must rather expect to be penalized; they lose their entitlement to state support in the form of allowances for school fees, grants, the right to jobs in public service etc. Actually this situation has recently led to quite a few Dalit Christians giving up their Christian faith because of their miserable living conditions, hoping to improve them through state support. On top of this enormous pressure is being exerted on Christians by Hindu groups and massive re-conversion campaigns waged among Dalits and Adivasis, - „indigenous peoples", as Indian tribal people nowadays call themselves. These campaigns often do not differ at all from „forced conversions" and otherwise bear all the hallmarks of what Christian mission is accused of.

The truth behind the debate becomes even more evident if one bears in mind that the conversions of those sections of the population who are discriminated against and marginalized in many respects is not a phenomenon exclusive to Christian mission. Attention must be drawn, above all, to the attitude of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, who - an „Untouchable" himself - rose to the position of a spokesman for the „Untouchables" in the thirties and later as an architect of the Indian Constitution and India’s first Minister of Justice did a lot to promote the Dalits. Unlike Gandhi, who tried to improve the living conditions of the Harijans mainly by appealing to the higher caste Hindus and quite often showed a paternalistic attitude towards the Harijans, Ambedkar held the view that the Dalits must speak for and fight to achieve justice for themselves. For him the issue of „Untouchability" was inextricably linked with Hinduism itself, which he rejected as his religious home as early as 1936. As the caste system and „Untouchability" were connected with Hinduism for him and he saw no possibility of achieving justice within the Hinduistic system, he converted to Buddhism in 1956 in a dramatic act along with hundreds of thousands of his followers. Conversion had thus become a form of social and political protest.

Because the state policy of affirmative action has been unable to overcome discrimination against Dalits to the present day, the living conditions of many of them are now worse than they used to be, and above all because their stigmatization as „Untouchables" persists, the ideas of Ambedkar have received renewed attention over the past two decades and have become the ideological ferment of a broad social movement for the emancipation of Dalits and the cultural self-assertion of the Adivasis, the Indian indigenous people. The fact that the Church today - not least of all due to Dalit theology which is aimed at liberating the Dalits - is part of this social movement is what is really behind the controversies over conversions. It challenges the Indian social system, which insists on privileges based on caste hierarchies, and champions another model of society. Even as agitations go on against the prevailing attitude of the government towards the Dalit Christians it is important to note that it is not as though the problems of Dalit Christians have not received attention from the government. Several commissions appointed by the government have referred to the disabilities Dalits suffered in Christian society.

Kaka Kalelkar, chairman of the Backward Classes Commission of 1955, said, “We discovered with deep pain and sorrow that untouchability did obtain in the extreme south among Indian Christians, and Indian Christians were prepared in many places to assert that they were still guided by caste, not only in the matter of untouchability, but in social hierarchy of high and low. While the Harijans among the Hindus, classified as scheduled castes, stand a fair chance of bettering their condition under the Indian government’s reservation policy, their Christian counterparts stand twice discriminated.”

Two more reports that came a decade later found that the status of Dalits in the Christian society remained the same as it was in 1955 when the Kalelkar Commission was appointed. First, the Chidambaram Committee report of 1975 said, “Casteism is practiced widely among the members of the Christian fold as judged by the characteristic of the caste system and going by the economic status of the Harijan Christians. It is evident that they are poverty-stricken lot.” The infamous Mandal Commission report conceded the reality of caste among Indian Christians as in any other community. The commission cited the example of the Christian community in Kerala, which, according to its report, is not only divided into various denominations on the basis of beliefs and rituals but also into various ethnic groups on the basis of their caste background.

The emerging Dalit and liberation theologies are today propelling significant sections within the Indian Church towards the path of radical social activism by challenging structures of oppression—religious, cultural, economic and political. Contemporary Dalit and liberation theologians see Jesus himself as a revolutionary, a central concern of whose mission was to oppose the hegemony of the ruling establishment and to crusade for a radically new social order. This new commitment to a socially engaged, radical Christianity is today inspiring many Christian priests, more so Catholics than Protestants, to engage themselves in the struggles of the poor, particularly the Dalits and the tribals.

Even as we lobby for reservation in government jobs and educational institutions for our Dalit brethren, there is a lot of house cleaning that needs to be done in the church itself.
A good question to ponder is how well represented are the Dalits in the leadership of the churches and other Christian institutions. Even as we vociferously argue for reservations, there is a need to evaluate the institutionalized caste system amidst our own establishments. There is also the fact that apart from overt instances of separate pews, graveyards and such external manifestations, often there exists a much more subtle, overt separation – in terms of insulting and patronizing attitudes. We should be asking that as even as we point fingers at the state, are we within the church also stained with the same blood of violating the fundamental rights of the Dalit Christians, not just as citizens of secular India but also as citizens of the Kingdom of God, where there is no Jew and no Greek, no free and no slave. The apostle Paul said “a good while ago, God chose among us many who heard the gospel and believed. God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the Dalits who came to the Christian fold?

The test of adequacy of service or of a servant leader is this: Do those who are served grow as persons, become wiser, just, and more likely themselves to become servants? Jesus’ disciples became better people in every conceivable way after they met him and committed themselves as servants for the transformation of the world. The effectiveness of churches’ programmes of liberation and justice should be assessed on the basis of resultant transformation among the Dalits. The humiliation and crucifixion of Jesus was a degrading and cruel event. Those who were crucified were labeled as God-forsaken or cursed by God. But God "exalted" Jesus, gave him the name above all names, Lord, and made every knee to bend, in acknowledgment of his lordship and acceptance of the new norms of the new community. Hope was given the oppressed that victory would follow humiliation and God’s glory would ultimately prevail and transform the world

The lure and oppressive bid for power, which ultimately oppression is all about leads us to deal with sin in our lives. We have sinned against God by making our human distinctions. It’s time for us to repent and to confess our sin to the one, true and living God who revealed Himself in creation to all and in a very special way through His Word, the Bible and His Son the Lord Jesus Christ. Every human being is important as God gave His Son, out of love, for man. The Bible says: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16).

Because Jesus emptied himself, God has exalted him (Phil. 2:9), made him sit at the right hand of God the Father. The ascended Lord is not resting but is involved in a struggle to put down all his enemies under his foot. The exalted Lord inspires us in our struggle. Christians are not to compromise with evils that alienate and exclude others, such as casteism, racism, sexism, etc. It will be a poor state of affairs if our witness through our lives and relationships is in no way better than the witnesses given by those who practice and perpetrate these demonic structures and cultures.

So to stress again, Christianity does not preach inequality in any form and caste distinctions are anathema to the Bible and its teachings. “There is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to call upon Him (Romans 10: 12).” If you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as law breakers (Jas 2:9). Paul clearly taught that differential treatment against those of a different economic or social background should be avoided at all costs in our churches. Instead, he tells us in Romans 12:3,” Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment.” Every one of us has been bought with grace through the shed blood of Christ. Partiality in the church indicates the loss of saving grace. God does not want us to base our judgment on the criteria of the world.

How can we forget that the word of God urges us to love others by accepting them as they are and seeing them as individuals for whom Christ gave His life? We are not to judge others or look down on them. Preferring the rich to the poor, or the higher caste to the lower caste, is a terrible sin, for Christ became poor that we might be rich in Him. When a former low caste person comes into the Christian congregation, he is to be received in love and shown just as much grace as a former high caste person. The man of the world may look on outward appearance and the circumstances of our birth, but God sees the heart and we should do the same. By refusing to receive those who in our imagination are beneath us because of their ancestry, we are dishonoring the Lord and the ones who He loves.

A Christian’s identity is in Christ – not in his past. All of us are complete in Christ. Consequently , caste can have no place in the church of god. The name of our loving , creator God and Lord is blasphemed when we continue with our caste prejudices within the church. How He must grieve when he sees set aside His commandment to love and think of us more highly than we ought to, and follow the rest of society in dehumanizing those whom He has created.
We live in a time when the world has recognized the Biblical principle that all human beings are created equal and must be treated with respect. This principle has even been incorporated into our laws and is consequently a right capable of being protected by the force of law. When we break the law, as we do when we practice discrimination against former Dalits, we invite legal action and incur God’s wrath. Our churches should learn from history and the trends of society and stop perpetuating a shameful legacy.

It is unfortunate that casteisn has crept into Indian Christianity and thrived. This belies the gospel. It should have no place in churches. The “Dalit” meaning broken, people of our country have been subjected to cruelty and disrespect for centuries. Our task as the church should be to rub salve and not salt , into the many lives, wounded by the cruelties of caste that have come to Christ. We must help them forget their past as “Dalits”. We need to remember and help each other to remember who we all, without exception are in Christ. Even as we stand shoulder to shoulder with our Dalit brothers and sisters in their fight for their legal rights, our ultimate aim should be to take the phrase ”Dalit Christians”, out of the nation’s political vocabulary. In god’s kingdom, we are all his children. We should endeavor to make this equality a mark of the church as well. May we be known for our love, as Jesus desired and not for upholding time worn prejudices.

Thus far we have not taken seriously the words and example of our Lord Jesus Christ who, when he came to earth and walked the villages, the Bible says: “When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. (Matthew 9:36). Where is our compassion? Let us follow the model and the mandate of Jesus who described his Spirit-anointing for mission with the words:” “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” (Luke 4:18-19). Are the Dalits not the poor, the prisoners and the oppressed of our day? The very term: “Dalits, means oppressed.” Why have we waited so long? Now is the time, now is the opportunity. Let us come together as one to ask the God of the universe to free the oppressed. Is this not what Jesus, our Master, would do? Christian mission -- however it is understood and whatever form it may take -- must not adopt the ideology of the colonialists, as the Hindu nationalists have done. It will be most true to its Lord by proclaiming the gospel confidently, but in a way that respects the human right to be religiously different

The cross at the core of our faith

Many of us come to church from time to time wondering really if God really exists -- and if God does exist, does he, she, it really care about us and about this world of ours. When we learn of some utterly senseless human event through our newspapers or the television, do we wonder if God is really good, if love in this creation does bear the last word? Or do we live in the shadow of some relationship, broken, grieved, a wound we just cannot seem to shake? Indeed, when we come to church, do we ask the question deep down, does anybody -- anyone -- really give damn? For me? For this world? And if they really knew me, could they possibly love me?
Those kinds of questions plagued the members of that church of the Hebrews week after week, year after year as they gathered for worship and service. The promises of God seemed down the drain. As time went on, and as they looked out on and experienced an unfriendly and largely uncharitable world, increasing numbers of them concluded: God is dead; Divine love is a hoax; hope is no more than wishful thinking. And their church began to disband.

"Hold it!" pleads our author to the Hebrews. "Wait a second! There is something you have to remember in this troubled world. Before you give up, before you let cynicism rule the roost, before you go away spiritually fatigued, religiously abandoned - listen to this!" And in those verses we read a moment ago, our preacher tells us the cross of Jesus Christ provides the decisive clue to resolving the doubts dogging us. Here, at the cross of Christ, writes our preacher, "through the offering of the body of church once and for all" we see joined and aimed at us like a laser beam the core of our faith, the shape of our love, the power of our hope.

The cross? The core of our faith, you say? How so? And just what is the core of our faith? O friends, listen: in face of wars and rumors of war; in face of a troubled, often heartless, merciless, dog-eat-dog world, in face of cancer, AIDS, the senseless slaughter of children by children; in face of our living precariously with the misunderstandings and self-deception, malice and conflict souring our lives together; in face of a world where our best intentions get turned inside-out, upside-down and used against us, where our boldest and most generous dreams can collapse and inflict injury; in face of cold, unheeding forces so often swirling about us, we confess our faith in a God who, through all life can dish out, loves us, hangs on to us and will never let us go.

Now that is our faith. And faith -- faith! -- It is. In many ways the observable, the objective facts of our lives deny a God who loves, refute a God who is good, and dismiss a God who gives a single whit for us. Indeed, the bare fact of the cross of Jesus itself denies a loving God. If ever we see a place where mercy fails, where human and divine abandonment evidence themselves; if ever there exists an occasion where goodness loses, where innocence gets trampled, where the worst human beings can do to one another happens, it happens at the cross. For anyone to say, in face of the hard, cold facts of the cross, that we are loved by the creator of the universe is an act of faith -- a decision for trusting love at the heart of the universe when the facts belie it.

So why, then, why is this our faith? What do we see here at the cross of Christ enabling us to trust in a loving and gracious God when much in the world says "no" to this conviction? Listen carefully: at the cross of Christ we confess the lengths to which Love will go to restore wholeness to those for whom Love feels most tenderly. We confess here the risk Love takes when it seeks its wandering, lost, cantankerous, yea rebellious children -- when it seeks us. In the cross of Christ we encounter, and are ourselves embraced by, Divine grace itself risking death to restore a broken relationship, to heal a gaping wound, to weave together again a harmony so that our scrapping, tangling fighting human race might become, in truth, a family of God.

We know that love does not calculate the cost when it goes after someone. You know love is a spendthrift in pursuit of those it will not give up. We know the pain, the anger, the humiliation involved when someone betrays us, slander us, misread our motives, walk out on you, and turn your heaven into hell. What can restore the relationship? What can straighten things out? What can make for healing? Revenge? Are you kidding? Revenge brings satisfaction, sometimes a smug narcissistic glee, but healing? Never. Is it requital? Will that bind a broken relationship? It surely makes for a quid pro quo and maybe something that passes for justice -- but healing? No way! What brings healing we can only describe as grace, as forgiveness: The risk love takes, though it may be battered and bruised, the risk for reconciliation claiming everything we have -- a reaching out that can be difficult and very painful.

Some of us, perhaps, know a mother, a father, a spouse who walked with us through some wounding, grievous, shameful episode. We know they passed through it as if they owned it. We sensed they cried "No," grasped for our shirttails, dug in their heels, yet, knowing the worst, trudged almost step by step with us to the very gates of the hell we prepared for ourselves and virtually camped outside, broken-hearted and grieving until we came out. They put themselves in our place; they stood in our shoes, they accepted they shared; they bore the shame we engendered. They forgave us -- but tears wore furrows in their cheeks and inside hearts bled wildly in our behalf. This is forgiveness. It always includes self offering; it evokes identification with the other. Those who give forgiveness give themselves. Love is ready to pay whatever personal cost to bridge the gulf, to heal the wound.

So here at the cross we trust God's love. But more: like that early Hebrew congregation we need desperately to be claimed by hope; to know, as our preacher puts it, the one we trust "sits at the right hand of God," and over time, "his enemies will be made a footstool for his feet." And just as this cross invites our faith, and bears God's love, so here at the foot of the cross, in this most hopeless situation, Hope is most powerfully at work.

How could this be? How does the cross provide hope in this world where hope seems so precarious -- hope in this bloodiest of centuries -- a label haunting us even as we meet here this morning? How does the cross proclaim hope in a world where we see children murdered in their own school yards, enlisted for genocidal Rwandan assaults, wasting away in inner city tenements taking their own lives; indeed, hope, where tragedy riddles much of our existence and death terminates it? Is there any hope? Is there truly a new future for us?

As we look at the cross of Christ, we see in the cross our hope. This vast cross hanging before us is empty. As powerful a reminder as the crucifix may be of our faith in the costly love of God, this empty cross, hanging here in the heart of our nave, confronts us with power taking the worst we can do to one another -- indeed, power taking death itself and forging through it a new creation. I cannot explain it to you, I can only testify to this enthralling paradox: but an empty cross means that the power -- the power of God -- lies not in preventing hopeless situations; it means the power of God lies not in preventing the likes of crucifixion, not in intervening to stop the Darfur tragedies, the unending tragedies, senseless perversities and utter stupidities in this world. Our hope lies not in some cheap cinematic miracle. Hardly.

The ground of our hope can be seen in the empty cross as it points to the power of God in taking the body of the crucified Christ and transforming it into new being. There we see power alive and at work amid the most desperate situation, bearing with us, submitting to the worst; yet while participating with us in what may appear hopeless, working to bring triumph out of tragedy, promise out of peril, life out of death. Our hope can be seen in the empty cross because there, uniquely in our history, amid what appears to be the door slammed on the future -- there we witness the future most radically opened up. A radical choice confronts us. Again, God, that they can be nailed to wooden beams and still win! -- wiped out and they will come back! -- buried, only to break death itself wide open." In a bloody cross: Hope? By God, yes! And so we ask again: Are you looking for God? In a troubled and frequently sorrowing world, do you wonder if God is really good, if love does indeed bear the last word, if anyone finally cares about you -- us?

Is it Foolish to be Wealthy ?

The word "fool" appears two times in the four gospels. Once in Matthew, where Jesus tells people not to call other people "a fool." And then in the text that I am about to read to you. Why does Jesus call the rich farmer in this parable a fool? Not because money is inherently bad, but because becoming pre-occupied with it can block us from the quality of life that comes by focusing our attention on God.

As we read Luke Chapter 12, verses 13-21.it is important to understand what the audience's understanding of wealth and the use of wealth would have been like in the 1st century. Here we are talking about an agrarian society. In the mind of the people who first heard the beginning of this story, their attitude toward wealth was that it should be shared. Riches posed a problem and a rich man has a difficult, but not impossible task. The purpose of wealth is acts of charity and alms giving. In fact, in the Book of Acts we see that very clearly when people would from time to time sell lands and houses and give to the church and the church would in turn distribute it to the needy. So, in a limited good society, hoarding was frowned upon.

It was condemned because the public need was great. The man's land was richly abundant and he thought to himself, "What shall I do? I have no place to store my crops." Now that's a strange question. Why doesn't he have any place to store his crops? He's rich. He must have huge granaries and barns. An alert listener hearing that text would say, "Now exactly how big was this bumper crop?" How much did it produce for him to say that? One commentator on the parables said that often running through the parables are muted miracles, things we don't pick up very quickly, or right away at first reading. Here's a muted miracle.

An incredible blessing of God. (Another theme of the parable is kind of an all or nothing attitude like the pearl of great price; we sell everything to buy the pearl.) Now this man, instead of adding to his barns, says, "I will tear them down to build larger granaries. And there I will store all my grains and my goods." So the parable really could be renamed from the parable of the rich fool to the parable of the man who mismanaged a miracle. He mismanaged a miraculous blessing of God.

Now Jesus' listeners at this point, before we go any further in the parable, are probably thinking of two Old Testament images.. What story is equated with granaries in the Old Testament? In the end of Genesis, Joseph, builds huge granaries. In Exodus, what's the common story or the primary story of God's feeding God's people? How did God provide food? By the Manna. And in both accounts, there was a time of plenty and a time of want. Because with the manna they said on the Sabbath day, there won't be any so collect double so that you will have enough for two days. The miraculous harvest leads Jesus' hearers to anticipate something. This miracle places demands upon the rich man so that by the end of verse 18, they're expected response is, "Oh, this man's intention is to be like Joseph. He's going to tear down his barns and build bigger ones and be socially responsible and bless the community, for the less fortunate and the needy."

But always in Jesus' parables there is a hook. An unexpected thing. And that comes in verse 19. I am sure to the shock of those who first heard this story. "And I will say to myself," notice how the language shifts. This man takes center stage. It doesn't say that he said to himself, it says "I'll say to myself, you have plenty of good things laid up for many years. Take life easy. Eat, drink and be merry." He almost echoes this famous statement from Epicures, a Greek philosopher, "Eat, drink and be merry for..." "for tomorrow we die." He knew it too, but he didn't say it.

Death's inevitability should prompt a very different response. And so verse 19 goes on to paint a picture of a rich man hoarding a miracle of a fantastic blessing from God for his own pleasure. And he refuses to share it. He mismanages a miracle. Is his chief sin greed? No, verse 20 tells us what his chief sin is: It's spiritual stupidity. It's spiritual thickness, because God says to him, "You fool!" Did you know that this is the only parable that Jesus taught where God intervenes? And the reason for that is it that the man has taken center stage, thinking that the spotlight is on him, and the harvest, and his attitude, and the needs of the community, all create an impression that God is standing outside in the wings. And God is going to take center stage and correct what's being done here, and intervene and restore the balance. He says, "You fool, this very night your life will be demanded from you, then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?" Jesus' listeners knew the answer.

The people, for whom they should be prepared, the community in need. This mans chief sin is not greed, it is idolatry. He worshiped the blessings of God, the gifts of God, more than God. He thought he had many years, he had one night. He believed he had many things stored, but he was going to lose the one thing that really mattered. He thought he could ward off the threat of death by his own management, he is dead wrong. In fact, he will die in his sleep. And so Jesus teaches something in a very sober manner to those who would dwell in God's kingdom. That we are to be people who manage God's gifts for the benefit of others, and not just for ourselves. One of the first things to think about when God has blessed us and pours out his blessings upon us is to think "How can I share this blessing with others?" The parable is less about greed and more about the correct use of wealth. The bottom line is "How are you managing God's miracles?"
Even for those of us who would say, "Well I'm not wealthy," we know that when we compare ourselves to the rest of the world, that that's not so. But it's my contention that many times we don't give, not because we are greedy but because we are fearful that if we distribute more than we think we can that we won't have enough. And it's not that we worship the dollar, it's just that we don't worship God enough. And we withhold not because we are greedy, but because we are insecure.

Paul says in an incredibly beautiful passage in 1 Timothy, Chapter 6, (and actually there are a couple of other verses and there is the passage from which the famous verse comes, "for the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil.") We can see from those verses that it's not wrong to be rich. It isn't sinful to provide to provide for the future. In fact, the scriptures are very clear. Parents ought to lay up for their children. Proverbs says, "A good man leaves an inheritance." What would have happened to Israel if Joseph hadn't had the forethought to store grain in the barns? So, God wants us to enjoy life and its blessings. And it says that God gives us all things richly to enjoy, just as we want our children to enjoy the things that we provide for them. But God does not want us to depend on those things, but upon Him. So again it is worry and insecurity that sometimes freeze our fingers and often causes us to pursue the wrong goals.

One more verse from Luke, Chapter 12 and it's important to read this parable in it's context because Jesus goes on to talk about how we should not worry and to consider the birds of the air and the lilies of the field. In verse 32 of Luke 12 he says, "Do not be afraid, little flock. For your father has been pleased to give you the kingdom." A Middle Eastern sheik could be a shepherd, a father, and a king all at one time. And so, as a believer in Jesus, we are sheep of God's flock, we are children in God's family, and we are citizens of God's kingdom. If this is so, what do we need to fear? When God blesses you and me with good things, with wealth, with other miracles, and with money, make them our servant, not our master. We can keep in mind what St. John Chrysotom, church father of the 4th century in preaching on this text said. He said that "the stomachs of the poor are the safe barns of our wealth