Arun Shourie
The findings of the Justice Wadhwa Commission of Inquiry
On the face of it, the report of the Wadhwa Commission on the murder of the Australian missionary Graham Staines and his two sons should have been very welcome to our secular friends. Justice Wadhwa has concluded that the main person who organised the attack was Rabindra Kumar Pal alias Dara Singh, and that his motive in doing so was "misplaced fundamentalism", namely his conviction that conversions by missionaries were threatening Hinduism. He also records evidence to the effect that Dara Singh had been involved in an activity which, in the eyes of secularists, is as deplorable as an activity can get: protection of cows from slaughter.
But no, the secularists are all in rage. "A stained report," "A whitewash," "A politically tutored report" -- they have been shouting. Justice Wadhwa has failed the litmus test: if only he had included a sentence -- a single sentence! -- imputing -- howsoever obliquely -- that Dara Singh was in some way affiliated to some organization that can be linked to the RSS or the BJP, what applause would have greeted the Report!
But the Judge has stuck to evidence. Hence the fury! For our friends, a Commission of Inquiry is credible only if it is useful!
In fact, the Report is instructive on many counts. Not to heed them is to condemn the country to further problems.
The first to draw a lesson should be the press. In Chapter 10, Justice Wadhwa takes up "Other Proximate Incidents." The first of these is the alleged rape of Sister Jacqueline Mary on 3 February, 1999. "Orissa nun raped in moving car," the headlines declared, Justice Wadhwa records. "Orissa's second stain: nun raped," shouted the Indian Express, "Nun gangraped by men in sari in Orissa," hollered The Telegraph. The village "has become the rallying point of Christians of the area," the papers proclaimed. "The press, on the basis of some statement made by the pastor of the Church highlighted the role of some Hindu fundamentalist organizations," writes Justice Wadhwa. "....It was termed as a planned attack on the Church. It was said that there was a role of communal forces.... Electronic media was not far behind. It was highlighted as an anti-Christian attack." "Do not treat this as an isolated incident," the papers quoted teachers of a Christian convent school saying, "A communal conspiracy is suspected to be behind the rape."
There indeed was a conspiracy, and a communal one at that. The whole thing was a concoction -- by those whose agenda it is to paint Hindus as communalists on the rampage, and the RSS, BJP etc. as organizations which are orchestrating a "pogrom". "Investigations, however, revealed that what Sister Mary said in the FIR was not true," records Justice Wadhwa. "It was a made up story. Investigations found that there was in fact no rape of Sister Mary.... B. B. Panda, D(irector) G(eneral) (of) P(olice) stated that the 'rape of the nun' case was projected and highlighted all over the world and was also projected as an attack on Christians when in fact it was not true, and the case turned out to be false."
The second incident occurred on 7 February, 1999. Two children, aged 10 and 19, were found murdered, a third had sustained injuries. "This incident again attracted a great deal of publicity in the media, including electronic media," writes Justice Wadhwa. "Newspapers came up with the headings, 'Two Christians killed, one injured in Orissa,' '2 tribal Christians done to death in Kandhamal,' and 'Orissa hunts for Christians' killer'. Additional D. G. P. John Nayak reportedly said that the communal angle to the attempted rape and murder could not be ruled out...." "A certain political party even blamed the State and Central Governments," Justice Wadhwa recalls, "and stated that the inaction of the State Government in the Manoharpur missionary killing incident (the killing of Staines and his sons) and the alleged rape of the nun in Baripada encouraged miscreants to commit yet another crime in Kandhamal." "In short," he concludes, "as per various reports that appeared in the newspapers, the incident was taken as an attack on the Christians."
And what turned out to be the truth? "Ultimately investigation revealed that the crime was committed by a relative of the victims who was also a Christian," the Commission notes.
I'll come to the third incident in a moment, for it concerns an institution other than the press. The fourth incident occurred on 8 December, 1998. Tribals attacked the police station at Udaygiri, stormed the jail, dragged two undertrial prisoners out, and lynched them to death in front of the police station. After that, they burnt houses belonging to members of a particular caste, Pana. The incident too was projected as a Hindu-Christian encounter. It was nothing of the kind. The tribals were being harassed by criminals who happened to be from the Pana caste. The police had been doing nothing. One day the criminals robbed tribals of all their cash as they were proceeding to seek employment. That ignited the flash. But a Hindu-Christian clash it became!
That is one lesson, and Justice Wadhwa draws special attention to it: the press should not rush to conclusions before it has investigated the facts. The facts he has recorded urge that the caution be made specific: the press should be particularly wary of going by allegations of communalism-mongers.
The second institution which comes out most poorly is the Minorities Commission. For quite some time now, this Commission has been putting out patently partisan reports, reports so partisan as to appear to be designed to inflame. It is all too the good, therefore, that in the course of his inquiries into the incidents, Justice Wadhwa has given us a glimpse into the way it goes about its work. The incident I postponed mentioning is typical.
In it, in mid-March, 1999, Hindus -- a minority in the village -- were pictured as having sparked off Hindu-Christian clashes in village Ranalai. Christians painted a large Cross on a hillock. Some Hindus transfigured it into a Trishul. A peace committee consisting of representatives from both communities decided that there would be neither a Cross nor a Trishul. Next day, Hindus went and erased the sign. Christians alleged that while returning, Hindus shouted slogans proclaiming victory. Tension mounted. While trying to control the situation, a Circle Inspector of the police was manhandled by Christians. He registered an FIR against three of them. Houses of Christians were said to have been burned down. Cross-complaints were filed by Hindus and Christians -- each side accusing the other.
The Minorities Commission sent a team, and declared that the genesis of the trouble lay in BJP men inflaming feelings of the local Hindus and instructing them to convert the Cross into a Trishul. As for the incidents and tension, it came to the conclusion it always does: the Hindus had created the trouble.
Justice Wadhwa observes, "These findings are without examining any person on oath or receiving evidence on affidavits." The Minorities Commission had also stigmatized the State Government for inaction. Justice Wadhwa writes, "When the members of the Minorities Commission visited the village [within a fortnight of the supposed incidents], normalcy prevailed. Cases had already been registered against members of both the groups...." Justice Wadhwa shows that the Minorities Commission proceeded in a manner that is in manifest violation of its own statute.
And he quotes the account that The Economic Times correspondent filed after visiting the village. The 22 March, 1999 issue of the paper reported, Justice Wadhwa writes, "that roots of the Ranalai village incident in Gajapati district of Orissa in which houses of Christian families were burnt down by Hindu tribals of nearby villages lie in the economic disparities prevailing between the two communities. The report further said that tension had been building up since the night of February 9, when 23 houses of Hindu families were burnt down by criminals belonging to the Christian community of the nearby Jhami Gaon.... The report further stated that 'The unfortunate incident was largely unreported and totally ignored by national and international media'."
The constructions of the Minorities Commission on the Staines' murder turn out to be designed to colour that crime in the same hue. To take one example, Staines and his family were not involved in preaching of Christianity for the previous 10 years leading to conversion in Manoharpur, the Minorities Commission said in the report it sent to Justice Wadhwa. In fact, associates of Staines himself told the Wadhwa Commission that Staines used to conduct "Bible classes" at "Jungle camps." One of his oldest acquaintances told the Commission that Staines had been totally secretive about both the "Jungle camps" and the accounts etc. of the Leprosy House he ran. While some witnesses maintained that he never even attended baptisms, some reported that he did, that he provided vehicles for marriages and baptism functions. More telling is something of an order altogether different from the oral testimony of witnesses.
It turns out that Staines and his wife, Gladys, regularly filed despatches for a journal in Australia, Tidings. This journal is run by the missionary organization in Australia which financed Staines and his activities in Manoharpur. When the Commission learned about the despatches, it requested the concerned persons for copies of the journal. None were supplied! The Commission had to obtain these from other sources. Justice Wadhwa reproduces several extracts from the despatches.
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 25 April, 1997: The first jungle camp in Ramchandrapur was a fruitful time and the Spirit of God worked among the people. About 100 attended and some were baptized at the camp. At present Misayel and some of the Church leaders are touring a number of places where people are asking for baptism. Five were baptized at Bigonbadi. Pray for the Etani Trust in which the Mission properties are vested. One man managed by underhand means to get parts of the property in his own name and a number of nominal Christians of the Baripada Church are also trying to get some of this valuable property for themselves. The Trust is having to take legal action to rectify this."
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 23 July, 1997: Praise God for answered prayer in the recent Jagannath car festival at Baripada. A good team of preachers came from the village churches and four OM workers helped in the second part of the festival. There were record book sales, so a lot of literature has gone into the people's hand...." (Incidentally, "OM" is a carefully chosen acronym: the organization it signifies is actually one of the largest publishers and distributors of missionary literature!)
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 19 September, 1997: Praise God we now have the Ho New Testament in Oriya script and many copies are now in the hands of the Ho people. Pray to God that it will be used of God to speak to many as they read his word in their own language...."
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 11 February, 1998: Jungle camp means four days of Bible teaching, prayer and fellowship of Christians living together. It enables believers from other churches to meet with local Christians to discuss experiences and encourage one another.... The camp also can create hunger in the hearts of those who come just to observe. Each camp has a bookstall, which for many is the only chance to buy Christian literature.... It was also encouraging to see so many Ho people following the references in the Ho New Testament during the messages at Sarat Jungle camp. We sold all the New Testaments we took there...."
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 20 March, 1998: "....Over the next two months there will be a programme of baptism in nearby villages for those asking for them. These are times for witness to non-Christians too...."
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 19 May, 1998: There are many new believers in the Manoharpur Church and the work is growing. The devil is now finding opportunity to hinder the work of God. There is disagreement between the young people and the older men of the Church. A problem arose about the land on which the Church is built and the planned Vacation Bible School had to be canceled. Last year more than 100 children attended this programme. The translation of Daily Life into Oriya is complete...."
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 19 June, 1998: In many churches here Sunday schools have ceased to function. I have been advocating these and at a recent Church leaders meeting I heard that some have re-started this work.... The Vacation Bible School that was to be held at Manoharpur was canceled because of problems in the Church there. Two hundred and eight children registered for the one at Raika.... It was an excellent time and some young people who teach in VBS are being trained and encouraged for children's work and Sunday school."
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 21 August, 1998: ....There are still divisions in the Church at Manoharpur and the churches at Durakuntia and Burudi are very weak. It is wonderful to see the little girls being cared for in the Rairangpur hostel. They have a wonderful opportunity to learn to read and learn of the Lord...."
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 18 September, 1998: Four men visited Manoharpur Church to discuss the problems there and much was sorted out. A man who wants to be the head of the Church wants to bring in or join with two other groups who do not teach and walk according to the scriptures...."
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 19 December, 1998: It is encouraging to hear of some improvement in the Church at Manoharpur and that they are preparing for the jungle camp. Misayel, Paul and Nehemiah visited Patana in early December but, as many were away rice harvesting, they could meet only with a few. They were able to encourage a new believer who had been a priest of the Sana Dhoram, an animist sect. The village people pleaded with him not to become a Christian saying, 'How can we continue our worship if you leave us?' 'You can do as you like, but I am following Christ,' he said. Continue to pray. God is working."
The typical concerns of a typical missionary -- harvesting souls for the Church. The prejudices of a missionary -- Sanatana Dharma, an animist sect! While his wife and some others denied this, one of his close associates spoke of his "hatred" for other religions. This associate reported -- and even Gladys, Staines' wife, acknowledged -- that, if he happened to be at any non-Christian function, Graham Staines would never take prasad, as, Mrs. Staines claimed, doing so is prohibited in the Bible....
After reviewing the evidence, the Wadhwa Commission, therefore, concludes, "Besides his involvement with Leprosy House, Staines was also involved in missionary work. The missionary work of Staines has come to light from the various despatches sent by him to Australia, which are published in the newsletter, 'Tidings'. Staines also used to take part in baptism ceremonies although he may not have necessarily carried out the baptism himself. Paul Murmu says that Staines attended baptism ceremonies and marriage ceremonies of Christian families whenever he was available. However, it is the despatches sent by Staines to Australia in the newsletter 'Tidings' that make it clear that Staines was also involved in active propagation of his religion apart from his social work. It is also clear from the said despatches that conversions were taking place in jungle camps. The missionary work of Staines obviously included organizing and conducting jungle camps, translating the Bible in tribal languages, preaching of Bible to the tribals. It is obvious, therefore, that Staines was both a social worker engaged in the treatment and eradication of leprosy amongst the poorest of the poor and also a missionary driven by a deep commitment to his religion and the belief that he should spread its tenets amongst the people in the area. His missionary activities did lead to conversions of tribals to his faith."
But as far as the Minorities Commission is concerned, supresso veri, and pronounce! Even such misrepresentations by bodies such as the Minorities Commission are lessons in themselves. But, as we shall see, these are minor ones compared to other lessons which the Wadhwa Commission's Report holds out.
Having asserted that Graham Staines had not been involved in missionary work, the Minorities Commission asserted that cordial relations existed between Hindus and Christians, that there were no ill-feelings among them. The two assertions together set the stage for the main theme the Commission pressed: the murders were lightning out of the blue, they were the handiwork of Dara Singh, and Dara Singh in turn was affiliated to the Bajrang Dal.
While a number of Christian witnesses as well as some policemen told the Justice Wadhwa Commission that there was no communal tension in the area, others testified to the contrary. There had been tensions between the communities for seven years, they told the Commission. And for one reason.
The Australian missionary organization which was financing Staines had set up 20-25 churches in Mayurbhanj and Keonjhar districts, a linguist working with the Indian Evangelical Mission told the Commission. Jungle camps were used for baptizing persons, witnesses told the Commission. B. B. Panda, who was Director General of Police, Orissa from October, 1997 to March, 1999, stated in a report to the State Government that "Mr. Staines was attending Jungle Mela in Manoharpur for the last more than 20 years. Majority of the local Adivasi Christians had been converted to Christianity through his efforts." S. C. Bala, the Superintendent of Police of the Crime Branch, who investigated the case, was asked by the Wadhwa Commission about his assessment regarding the likely motive for the murders. He told the Commission that the motive "appeared to be that non-Christian people were aggrieved on the ground that Christian fathers/missionaries are converting the people to Christianity in a deceitful manner by giving allurements."
More telling are the despatches of Staines and his wife in Tidings, the newsletter of the Australian missionary organization. They themselves wrote about these tensions repeatedly.
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 19 September, 1997: ....The Ho believers in Thakurmunda still face persecution. From time to time the village people have beaten them up, broken their bicycles and not allowed them to worship in their own Church building. Three people came to Baripada to meet district officials and petition for justice. Pray that action will be taken to allow freedom to worship."
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 22 February, 1998: We have just arrived home from the Baliposi camp a day early. Some people from a Hindu militant group who are persecuting the Christians came to the camp but were not able to disturb the meetings. On the last day the police came and told us to stop the meeting and leave, as they would not be able to protect us...." -- election-related requirements left no men to spare.
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 20 March, 1998: Six men came to Baripada to speak with officials in the intelligence department regarding the tension in the Thakurmunda area...."
"Graham and Gladys Staines, Mayurbhanj, 19 May, 1998: ....We have been told that a militant Hindu group plans to concentrate on Mayurbhanj and Keonjhar districts to turn Christians back to Hinduism...."
In a word: conversions were taking place; this had caused tensions; so much so that a Hindu group had decided to try and get them back into Hinduism. But for our Minorities Commission, all was peace and harmony!
The First Information Report on the Staines' murder was filed by the pastor of the Manoharpur Church. He turns out to be a good candidate for some of our secularist organizations. The assailants shouted "Jai Bajrang Dal," he said in the FIR. Witness after Christian witness testified that what the assailants shouted was "Jai Bajrang Bali." The assailants set fire to the Church, he said. The Church turned out to not have been harmed. On count after count -- what he saw, what he heard, the persons he named as having committed the crime -- the pastor's statements turned out to be contradictory. On count after count he disowned them himself. After narrating these somersaults, Justice Wadhwa remarks, "It is, thus, clear that the FIR was drawn up only after the Chief Minister had left Manoharpur. From all angles, it is a doctored FIR, a large part of which has been disowned by the informant himself and also has been shown to be false." But it is this FIR which became the basis for imaginative journalism.
B. B. Panda, who was then Director General of Police, Orissa, told the Commission that the New Indian Express -- that is, the southern editions of the Indian Express -- of 25 January, 1999, quoted him as saying, "over 50 people suspected to be activists of the Bajrang Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad were involved in the incident, and so far 47 persons have been arrested." He told the Commission that as he had not said this, he sent the paper a contradiction. The paper did not publish the contradiction.
By that figure of 47-50 arrests hangs another lesson also.
One result of the gruesome nature of the murders, of the fact that even the little sons had been done to death, of the fact that the State Government had to show to the Congress leadership in Delhi that it was acting energetically, and also of the glare the media had brought to bear on the case was that the police felt it just had to show something. The consequence? "The police went berserk," observes Justice Wadhwa. It picked up anyone who in its imagination could somehow or the other be linked with the Bajrang Dal. Fifty one persons were thrown into jail. The Crime Branch found that there was absolutely no case against them. All of them had to be released. Justice Wadhwa observes, "It would thus appear that 51 persons underwent the agony of going into judicial custody for two months or more. Though initially the State Government took a great deal of pride that police arrested as many as 51 accused showing the efficiency and promptness of the police, but ultimately subsequent events showed that in the State of Orissa, as far as these 51 persons are concerned, there was no rule of law. Prakash Mehra (DIG) in his supervision note had stated that there was no evidence in respect of all the five FIR named accused persons or the 51 persons arrested by the local police."
"The question then arises in view of the contradictions which make the FIR a false document, what was the motivating force behind it?," asks Justice Wadhwa. "And why as many as 51 innocent persons were arrested between 23rd to 28th January, 1999?" "Answers to these questions are not far to seek," he concludes. "The State Government was rattled by the gravity of the crime. To divert attention from its own failure to maintain law and order and to protect the innocent and then show 'speedy and decisive' action, a false picture is presented."
And as for the involvement of the Bajrang Dal etc., the Commission concludes, "The Commission has scrutinized the evidence before it and especially the evidence of the associates of Dara Singh who were involved in the carnage at Manoharpur. There is no evidence to suggest that any of the persons involved in the crime was in fact a member of either the Bajrang Dal or BJP or any organization. There is nothing to suggest in the evidence before the Commission, or in the investigation conducted by the Crime Branch and the CBI thus far that there is involvement of any organization, even that of Bajrang Dal, in the planning and the execution of the crime."
Several witnesses testified to Dara Singh's involvement in the crime -- in preparing for it, in executing it. Justice Wadhwa is in doubt that Dara Singh was the prime mover. To fly off in rage at Dara Singh, and feel that one has done one's duty is to miss the point.
There are several important pointers. Several witnesses testified that Dara Singh had been engaged in rescuing cows that were being transported for slaughter. He had been trying to get the State to enforce the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals laws. This activity was taken, even by the police, to be "anti-Muslim" activity. Dara Singh was accordingly implicated in cases filed by persons engaged in transporting and selling cows for slaughter. That is as far as the consequences for Dara Singh under the law are concerned. The effect on the people was the exact opposite. Witness-29, who testified that he had been asked by Dara Singh to accompany him to Manoharpur, told the Commission, "Dara Singh is a very popular figure in the village as he forcibly frees cows from the people who take them for selling. After freeing the cows, Dara Singh distributes the cows among the villagers...."
Cows are revered by Hindus. The man trying to save them becomes an outlaw in the eyes of the police, and a hero in the eyes of the people. Two lessons in that.
On the other hand, Staines and his associates are left free to go on converting Hindus to Christianity. There is no evidence that Staines himself resorted to fraud, force or allurement. Even so, tensions mount because of conversions. Staines' own despatches testify to this. But our institutions -- the Minorities Commission and the police being representative in this regard -- even in retrospect assert the fiction that there was no tension between Christians and non-Christians.
The second clue is provided by the evidence of a key witness, one whose testimony contributes most to nailing the involvement of Dara Singh. He is one Dipu Das. He was a close associate of Dara Singh. He revealed to the Commission that "youth from Gayalmunda and Bhalughera had approached Dara Singh sometime in August 1998 to stop the Christians from converting Hindus to Christianity...."
That is the key lesson: if the State is going to persist with double-standards in regard to the sentiments of Hindus and non-Hindus on the one hand, and with a deliberate shutting of eyes on the other, it is paving the way for such crimes.
That lesson is brought home most forcefully by Justice Wadhwa's findings in regard to the Orissa law that bears on conversions. As has been noted earlier, Orissa passed a law in 1967 to regulate conversions. It is known as the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act. Its constitutionality -- as well as that of the allied law in Madhya Pradesh -- has been upheld by a five judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Rev. Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh [AIR 1977 SC 908]. Among other things, the law provides, "No person shall convert or attempt to convert, either directly or otherwise, any person from one religious faith to another by use of force or by inducement or by any fraudulent means, nor shall any person abet such conversion." Anyone doing so, the Act provides, shall be punished by imprisonment of up to one year and/or a fine of Rs. 5,000. In case the offence relates to a minor, a woman or a person belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Tribes, the punishment shall be double.
To prevent misuse, the Act provides that the offence shall not be investigated by an officer below the rank of an Inspector of Police, and that no prosecution shall be instituted without the sanction of the Magistrate of the District or an equivalent authority.
The Act was passed in 1967. Rules under it were not framed till November, 1989, Justice Wadhwa notes. The Rules are salutary, and will repay a moment's attention:
"3(i) Each District Magistrate shall maintain a list of religious institutions or organizations propagating religious faith in his district and that of persons directly or indirectly engaged for propagation of religious faith in the district.
"(ii) The District Magistrate, if he thinks fit, may call for a list of persons with the religious faith, receiving benefits either in cash or in kind from the religious organizations or institutions or from any person connected therewith.
"4. Any person intending to convert his religion shall give a declaration before a Magistrate, 1st Class, having jurisdiction prior to such conversion that he intends to convert his religion on his own will.
"5(i) The concerned religious priest shall intimate the date, time and place of the ceremony in which conversion shall be made along with the names and addresses of the persons to be converted to the concerned District Magistrate before fifteen days of the said ceremony.
"(ii) The intimation shall be in Form A and shall be delivered either personally by the Priest to the concerned District Magistrate or sent to him by registered post with acknowledgment due.
"6. The District Magistrate on receiving the intimation from the priest shall sign thereon stating the date on which and the hour at which the intimation has been delivered to him or received by him, and shall forthwith acknowledge the receipt thereof in Form B.
"7. The District Magistrate shall maintain a register of conversion in Form C and shall cover therein particulars of the intimation received by him.
"8. Any person who contravenes the provisions of Rule 5 or 6 shall be liable to a fine of Rupees one thousand.
"9. The District Magistrate shall by the 10th of each month send to the State Government a report of intimations received by him during the preceding month in Form D."
That is the law. And what is the reality? Justice Wadhwa reports:
"No one was aware of the Freedom of Religion Act or the Rules framed thereunder in the State at least in the districts of Mayurbhanj and Keonjhar. These provisions of law were lying dormant and [had] never [been] put into operation for the last many years. Admittedly, there were conversions to Christianity in these two districts. No person intending to convert his religion ever gave a declaration before a Magistrate prior to such conversion of his intent to convert his religion on his own will which was the requirement of Rule 4. Similarly also the religious priest did not give intimation of such conversion as per Form A under the Rules. District Magistrate did not maintain a register of conversion as per Form prescribed. Since they did not make any record of conversions, they did not send any report of conversion to the State Government.
"Mr. Balakrishnan, District Magistrate, Mayurbhanj and Mr. Saurabh Garg, District Magistrate, Keonjhar were examined to know if any action [had been] taken under the Freedom of Religion Act and the Rules framed thereunder. They expressed ignorance of the provisions of the law relating to conversion and said they had become aware of these only after the incident at Manoharpur on the night of 22 / 23-1-1999. To me, it appears that even now they do not understand the full scope and intent of the provisions of the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act and the Rules. These are salutary provisions and prohibit conversion from one religion to another by the use of force, inducement or by any fraudulent means. Even any abetment to such conversion has been made an offence. If these provisions of law, in my view, are strictly followed no one can have any grievance to contend that gullible and innocent tribals are being converted."
The Commission asked the Advocate General for a report on prosecutions under the Act. From 1967 to 1990, the Advocate General informed the Commission, the Act was not enforced as its constitutional vires had been challenged. Since then -- that is, in nine years -- 10 cases had been registered. In one case the accused had been discharged. In one case he had been acquitted. In regard to two the Final Report had been submitted. And six were pending trial.
The lesson -- a cruel one -- shouts at us: as this is the attitude of the State machinery to law, the Dara Singhs will continue to become heroes with the local population.
Showing posts with label missioneries. Show all posts
Showing posts with label missioneries. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
The "Roman Brahmin"
Arun Shourie
"Zee News at 9.40 p.m. on Saturday (August 21) showed clipping of Vajpayee addressing an election rally at Thiruvananthapuram," declared the spokesman of the Congress (I) in a written statement on 24 August.
"He declared that the building of Ram Mandir, abrogation of Article 370 and bringing in the uniform civil code were an intrinsic part of the BJP's manifesto."
In fact, Vajpayee had addressed no public meeting at Thiruvananthapuram at all. But hardly one to be deterred by facts, the Congress (I) went on to describe Vajpayee as "a habitual liar," as one who was making a "completely ridiculous" statement when he expressed surprise at what Govindacharya, a General Secretary of the BJP was reported to have said.
In fact, the answer Govindacharya had given to a journalist's question had been twisted, and words had been put in his mouth in the first place.
A day had not passed, and The Indian Express made out that the BJP's candidate for New Delhi, Vijay Kumar Malhotra had said that Dr Manmohan Singh should take off his turban so that people could see whether he was a Sikh. In fact, Malhotra had said nothing of the kind. He tried repeatedly to contact the paper to have it correct the concoction, to no avail. He sent a strong denunciation of the report, his contradiction was not published.
The concoction was picked up. It became the ground for much moral-breast beating by the Congress (I), and by secularist newsmen. The latter were led by the very editor who had done most to invent "atrocities on Christians". The damage done, after three days The Indian Express put out the truth -- but as Malhotra's version!
Such lies have by now become a hallmark of campaigns of the Congress(I). One day it is "Rs. 50,000 crore loss because of the telecom scam," the next it is some other concoction about purchases of telephone exchanges.... The amounts involved being so huge, the least you would expect is that they would follow up their allegations, that they would produce at least an iota of proof. None has been produced on any allegation. Just "spit and run."
And so confident are they that no one else will examine their allegations that they do not bother to check even the basic facts before hurling the accusation -- as in that concoction about the Prime Minister addressing a public meeting at Thiruvananthapuram. The Prime Minister and his family being involved in the purchase of telephone exchanges? I checked. The purchases are handled entirely by the Telecom Commission. The head of the Commission told me that files concerning purchases do not come even to him, that these are handled entirely by two subordinate members of the Commission, that the file on them just never goes to the PM's office. But what concern is that of the Congress' Spit-squad?
The other feature of the Congress (I) campaign has been, "No to this, No to that, No to everything." Pokharan-II, Lahore, economic revival, communal harmony, Kargil -- "No, No, No." No, even when the step is one that their own governments had been trying to take.
Recall what had been declared as far back as 1991, "We are deeply concerned that Pakistan is developing nuclear weapons. It is hoped that they will desist from this disastrous path. They have already inflicted four wars upon India. In case Pakistan persists in the development and deployment of nuclear weapons, India will be constrained to review her policy to meet the threat." And which party had said this in its 1991 manifesto? The Congress(I)!
Pakistan certainly persisted in its clandestine programme to develop and deploy nuclear weapons. Congress(I) governments scheduled nuclear tests in 1983, and again in 1995. On both occasions, western powers got to know of the preparations. They brought pressure to bear. And Congress (I) governments cancelled the tests. By contrast, Vajpayee's government successfully carried through the tests.
Buddha's tradition abandoned, Ashoka's tradition abandoned, Gandhiji's non-violence abandoned, shouted spokesmen of the Congress (I). When the backlash of popular sentiment hit them, their Working Committee turned turtle: we congratulate the scientists, it said in its Resolution, but the government is yet to go in for nuclear weaponization!
When the weapons were developed, the party was back at shouting, "This government has plunged the sub-continent into an arms race"! And the latest, "No, whatever its merits, why did they release the nuclear doctrine paper at this time?" That is always a favourite: when you can't find fault with something on merits, demand, "But why now?"!
But what could be a better time for releasing the paper? Elections are supposed to be a time when different parties acquaint the people with their views on issues. Here is an issue central to our future. An expert group has prepared a formulation about what our stance to nuclear weapons should be. In the main, the government agrees with the formulation. What better time than elections could there be for circulating the proposed doctrine among the people? It really would be good, wouldn't it, to hear the great thoughts of Sonia Gandhi on the nuclear doctrine?
Moreover, the paper is a reminder that the country is now a nuclear power. The person who becomes prime minister shall have his or her finger on the nuclear trigger. In whose hands they want to place that trigger is surely something people should reflect upon. But as that reminder is ever-so-inconvenient for the Congress (I), they cry, "But why now?"
The third feature of their campaign has been a peculiar species of logic. Who is to be given credit for the 1971 victory? Indira Gandhi, of course. Who is to be given credit for the Kargil victory? The army alone!
For the victory, the credit goes to the army. But if some section of Military Intelligence did not detect the intruders in time, the Prime Minister is personally responsible!
If intelligence was not collected in time, it is the failure of the Prime Minister personally. On the other hand, for the Harshad Mehta bank scam, neither the then Congress (I) Finance Minister nor the then Congress (I) government is to be considered responsible. That was a "systemic failure"!
The lies, the casuistry, the foreign-ness put me in mind of days long past. "Through Madura there ran one day a striking piece of news," writes J. N. Ogilvie in his work, Apostles of India. "It was told how a strange ascetic from some far land had arrived, drawn to the holy city by its great repute, and that he had taken up his abode in the Brahman quarter of the city. Soon visitors flocked to the house of the holy man to see what they should see, but only to find that the Brahman's servants would not permit their entrance. 'The master,' they said, 'is meditating upon God. He may not be disturbed.' This merely helped to whet the people's desire and increase the fame of the recluse. The privacy was relaxed, and daily audiences were granted to a privileged few."
The account is about that great Italian hoax, Father Robert de Nobili. A missionary, De Nobili came to India in 1608. In Church lore, he is credited with having secured among the largest harvest of converts for Jesus. What a current ring accounts about de Nobili have! The personage in seclusion, and then, ever so carefully, "The privacy was relaxed, and daily audiences were granted to a privileged few."
Mosheim in his Ecclesiastical History described the key insight of this fake: "....Considering, on the one hand, that the Indians beheld with an eye of prejudice and aversion all the Europeans, and on the other, that they held in the highest veneration the order of Brachmans (sic) as descended from the gods; and that, impatient of other rulers, they paid an implicit and unlimited obedience to them alone, he assumed the appearance and title of a Brachman, that had come from a far country, and by besmearing his countenance and imitating that most austere and painful method of living that the Sanyasis or penitents observe, he at length persuaded the credulous people that he was in reality a member of that venerable order. By this stratagem, he gained over to Christianity twelve eminent Brachmans" -- does the Working Committee of the Congress too consist of twelve members?! -- "whose example and influence engaged a prodigious number of people to hear the instructions, and to receive the doctrine of the famous Missionary...."
De Nobili put out the fiction that he was a "Roman Brahmin" -- Romaca Brahmana was the title he gave out. Francis Ellis, in his contribution to the 1822 Transactions of the Asiatic Society, explained, "Nobili, who was looked upon by the Jesuits as the chief apostle of the Indians after Francois Xavier, took incredible pains to acquire a knowledge of the religion, customs, and language of Madura, sufficient for the purposes of his ministry. But this was not all: for to stop the mouths of his opposers and particularly of those who treated his character of Brachman as an imposture, he produced an old, dirty parchment in which he had forged, in the ancient Indian characters, a deed, showing that the Brachmans of Rome were of much older date than those of India and that the Jesuits of Rome descended, in a direct line from the god Brama. Nay, Father Jouvence, a learned Jesuit, tells us, in the history of his order, something yet more remarkable; even that Robert De Nobili, when the authenticity of his smoky parchment was called in question by some Indian unbelievers, declared, upon oath, before the assembly of the Brachmans of Madura, that he (Nobili) derived really and truly his origin from the god Brama. Is it not astonishing that this Reverend Father should acknowledge, is it not monstrous that he should applaud as a piece of pious ingenuity this detestable instance of perjury and fraud?"
It turns out that forgery was a regular industry with de Nobili. He produced a "fifth Veda" into which he had smuggled notions which would help inveigle people into Christianity. Ellis found the original forgery in the possession of Catholic missionaries in Pondicherry. He found that our artful missionary had similarly produced versions -- with convenient alterations and interpolations -- of the Rig, Sama, and Atharva Vedas too. And several other "scriptures"!
To deceive people into conversion, de Nobili not only altered his own appearance, he disguised rites such as baptism, the service etc. And he asked his disciples as well as the new converts to retain Indian appearances: "....His converts retained the 'Shendi' or tuft of hair which marked the caste Hindu," Ogilvie writes, "they wore a sacred cord indistinguishable from that of their Hindu neighbours, and they bore an oval caste mark on their brow, the paste composing or being made of the ashes of sandalwood instead of as formerly the ashes of cow dung."
When his rivals in the Church charged de Nobili with dissimulation, he argued that what he was doing was in accord with the prescription of Saint Paul: for had Paul not advised missionaries to be sure that they became "all to all"?
But one problem continued to dog our benefactors. In spite of all that dissimulation, the wretched natives never quite got over the foreign-ness of de Nobili and his associates. In his Annual Letter of 1651, Father Antony Proenca pleaded with his readers, "Among my readers, there will surely be some who could procure for us some lotion or ointment which could change the colour of our skin so that just as we have changed our dress, language, food and customs, we may also change our complexion and become like those around us with whom we live, thus making ourselves 'all to all', Omnia Omnibus factus. It is not necessary that the colour should be very dark; the most suitable would be something between black and red or tawny. It would not matter if it could not be removed when once applied; we would willingly remain all our lives the 'negroes' of Jesus Christ, A.M.D.G. [to the greater glory of God]."
After his death, de Nobili's mission went through many vicissitudes. But the techniques -- that of deceiving people into believing that they were "Roman Brahmins," the show of austerities -- remained the ones he had pioneered. Mosheim recorded of de Nobili's successors, "These fictitious Brachmans, who boldly deny their being Europeans or Franks, and only give themselves out for inhabitants of the northern regions, are said to have converted a prodigious number of Indians to Christianity; and if common report may be trusted to, the congregations they have already founded in those countries grow large and more numerous from year to year. Nor indeed, do these accounts appear, in the main, unworthy of credit, though we must not be too ready to receive, as authentic and well attested, the narrations that have been given of the intolerable hardships and sufferings that have been sustained by these Jesuit-Brachmans in the cause of Christ. Many imagine, and not without good foundation, that their austerities are, generally speaking, more dreadful in appearance than in reality; and that, while they outwardly affect an extraordinary degree of self-denial, they indulge themselves privately, in a free and even luxurious use of the creatures, have their tables delicately served, and their cellars exquisitely furnished, in order to refresh themselves after their labors."
The dissimulation is on display on the public platform every day. In the beginning, the recluse. Then the carefully planned public exposure. The daily audiences to the privileged few. The central claim of being the "Roman Brahmin". The stout denial to being European. The falsehoods which are put out on behalf of, and for the advancement of the Romaca Brahamana.... Alas! The "lotion or ointment" is still not at hand...
"Zee News at 9.40 p.m. on Saturday (August 21) showed clipping of Vajpayee addressing an election rally at Thiruvananthapuram," declared the spokesman of the Congress (I) in a written statement on 24 August.
"He declared that the building of Ram Mandir, abrogation of Article 370 and bringing in the uniform civil code were an intrinsic part of the BJP's manifesto."
In fact, Vajpayee had addressed no public meeting at Thiruvananthapuram at all. But hardly one to be deterred by facts, the Congress (I) went on to describe Vajpayee as "a habitual liar," as one who was making a "completely ridiculous" statement when he expressed surprise at what Govindacharya, a General Secretary of the BJP was reported to have said.
In fact, the answer Govindacharya had given to a journalist's question had been twisted, and words had been put in his mouth in the first place.
A day had not passed, and The Indian Express made out that the BJP's candidate for New Delhi, Vijay Kumar Malhotra had said that Dr Manmohan Singh should take off his turban so that people could see whether he was a Sikh. In fact, Malhotra had said nothing of the kind. He tried repeatedly to contact the paper to have it correct the concoction, to no avail. He sent a strong denunciation of the report, his contradiction was not published.
The concoction was picked up. It became the ground for much moral-breast beating by the Congress (I), and by secularist newsmen. The latter were led by the very editor who had done most to invent "atrocities on Christians". The damage done, after three days The Indian Express put out the truth -- but as Malhotra's version!
Such lies have by now become a hallmark of campaigns of the Congress(I). One day it is "Rs. 50,000 crore loss because of the telecom scam," the next it is some other concoction about purchases of telephone exchanges.... The amounts involved being so huge, the least you would expect is that they would follow up their allegations, that they would produce at least an iota of proof. None has been produced on any allegation. Just "spit and run."
And so confident are they that no one else will examine their allegations that they do not bother to check even the basic facts before hurling the accusation -- as in that concoction about the Prime Minister addressing a public meeting at Thiruvananthapuram. The Prime Minister and his family being involved in the purchase of telephone exchanges? I checked. The purchases are handled entirely by the Telecom Commission. The head of the Commission told me that files concerning purchases do not come even to him, that these are handled entirely by two subordinate members of the Commission, that the file on them just never goes to the PM's office. But what concern is that of the Congress' Spit-squad?
The other feature of the Congress (I) campaign has been, "No to this, No to that, No to everything." Pokharan-II, Lahore, economic revival, communal harmony, Kargil -- "No, No, No." No, even when the step is one that their own governments had been trying to take.
Recall what had been declared as far back as 1991, "We are deeply concerned that Pakistan is developing nuclear weapons. It is hoped that they will desist from this disastrous path. They have already inflicted four wars upon India. In case Pakistan persists in the development and deployment of nuclear weapons, India will be constrained to review her policy to meet the threat." And which party had said this in its 1991 manifesto? The Congress(I)!
Pakistan certainly persisted in its clandestine programme to develop and deploy nuclear weapons. Congress(I) governments scheduled nuclear tests in 1983, and again in 1995. On both occasions, western powers got to know of the preparations. They brought pressure to bear. And Congress (I) governments cancelled the tests. By contrast, Vajpayee's government successfully carried through the tests.
Buddha's tradition abandoned, Ashoka's tradition abandoned, Gandhiji's non-violence abandoned, shouted spokesmen of the Congress (I). When the backlash of popular sentiment hit them, their Working Committee turned turtle: we congratulate the scientists, it said in its Resolution, but the government is yet to go in for nuclear weaponization!
When the weapons were developed, the party was back at shouting, "This government has plunged the sub-continent into an arms race"! And the latest, "No, whatever its merits, why did they release the nuclear doctrine paper at this time?" That is always a favourite: when you can't find fault with something on merits, demand, "But why now?"!
But what could be a better time for releasing the paper? Elections are supposed to be a time when different parties acquaint the people with their views on issues. Here is an issue central to our future. An expert group has prepared a formulation about what our stance to nuclear weapons should be. In the main, the government agrees with the formulation. What better time than elections could there be for circulating the proposed doctrine among the people? It really would be good, wouldn't it, to hear the great thoughts of Sonia Gandhi on the nuclear doctrine?
Moreover, the paper is a reminder that the country is now a nuclear power. The person who becomes prime minister shall have his or her finger on the nuclear trigger. In whose hands they want to place that trigger is surely something people should reflect upon. But as that reminder is ever-so-inconvenient for the Congress (I), they cry, "But why now?"
The third feature of their campaign has been a peculiar species of logic. Who is to be given credit for the 1971 victory? Indira Gandhi, of course. Who is to be given credit for the Kargil victory? The army alone!
For the victory, the credit goes to the army. But if some section of Military Intelligence did not detect the intruders in time, the Prime Minister is personally responsible!
If intelligence was not collected in time, it is the failure of the Prime Minister personally. On the other hand, for the Harshad Mehta bank scam, neither the then Congress (I) Finance Minister nor the then Congress (I) government is to be considered responsible. That was a "systemic failure"!
The lies, the casuistry, the foreign-ness put me in mind of days long past. "Through Madura there ran one day a striking piece of news," writes J. N. Ogilvie in his work, Apostles of India. "It was told how a strange ascetic from some far land had arrived, drawn to the holy city by its great repute, and that he had taken up his abode in the Brahman quarter of the city. Soon visitors flocked to the house of the holy man to see what they should see, but only to find that the Brahman's servants would not permit their entrance. 'The master,' they said, 'is meditating upon God. He may not be disturbed.' This merely helped to whet the people's desire and increase the fame of the recluse. The privacy was relaxed, and daily audiences were granted to a privileged few."
The account is about that great Italian hoax, Father Robert de Nobili. A missionary, De Nobili came to India in 1608. In Church lore, he is credited with having secured among the largest harvest of converts for Jesus. What a current ring accounts about de Nobili have! The personage in seclusion, and then, ever so carefully, "The privacy was relaxed, and daily audiences were granted to a privileged few."
Mosheim in his Ecclesiastical History described the key insight of this fake: "....Considering, on the one hand, that the Indians beheld with an eye of prejudice and aversion all the Europeans, and on the other, that they held in the highest veneration the order of Brachmans (sic) as descended from the gods; and that, impatient of other rulers, they paid an implicit and unlimited obedience to them alone, he assumed the appearance and title of a Brachman, that had come from a far country, and by besmearing his countenance and imitating that most austere and painful method of living that the Sanyasis or penitents observe, he at length persuaded the credulous people that he was in reality a member of that venerable order. By this stratagem, he gained over to Christianity twelve eminent Brachmans" -- does the Working Committee of the Congress too consist of twelve members?! -- "whose example and influence engaged a prodigious number of people to hear the instructions, and to receive the doctrine of the famous Missionary...."
De Nobili put out the fiction that he was a "Roman Brahmin" -- Romaca Brahmana was the title he gave out. Francis Ellis, in his contribution to the 1822 Transactions of the Asiatic Society, explained, "Nobili, who was looked upon by the Jesuits as the chief apostle of the Indians after Francois Xavier, took incredible pains to acquire a knowledge of the religion, customs, and language of Madura, sufficient for the purposes of his ministry. But this was not all: for to stop the mouths of his opposers and particularly of those who treated his character of Brachman as an imposture, he produced an old, dirty parchment in which he had forged, in the ancient Indian characters, a deed, showing that the Brachmans of Rome were of much older date than those of India and that the Jesuits of Rome descended, in a direct line from the god Brama. Nay, Father Jouvence, a learned Jesuit, tells us, in the history of his order, something yet more remarkable; even that Robert De Nobili, when the authenticity of his smoky parchment was called in question by some Indian unbelievers, declared, upon oath, before the assembly of the Brachmans of Madura, that he (Nobili) derived really and truly his origin from the god Brama. Is it not astonishing that this Reverend Father should acknowledge, is it not monstrous that he should applaud as a piece of pious ingenuity this detestable instance of perjury and fraud?"
It turns out that forgery was a regular industry with de Nobili. He produced a "fifth Veda" into which he had smuggled notions which would help inveigle people into Christianity. Ellis found the original forgery in the possession of Catholic missionaries in Pondicherry. He found that our artful missionary had similarly produced versions -- with convenient alterations and interpolations -- of the Rig, Sama, and Atharva Vedas too. And several other "scriptures"!
To deceive people into conversion, de Nobili not only altered his own appearance, he disguised rites such as baptism, the service etc. And he asked his disciples as well as the new converts to retain Indian appearances: "....His converts retained the 'Shendi' or tuft of hair which marked the caste Hindu," Ogilvie writes, "they wore a sacred cord indistinguishable from that of their Hindu neighbours, and they bore an oval caste mark on their brow, the paste composing or being made of the ashes of sandalwood instead of as formerly the ashes of cow dung."
When his rivals in the Church charged de Nobili with dissimulation, he argued that what he was doing was in accord with the prescription of Saint Paul: for had Paul not advised missionaries to be sure that they became "all to all"?
But one problem continued to dog our benefactors. In spite of all that dissimulation, the wretched natives never quite got over the foreign-ness of de Nobili and his associates. In his Annual Letter of 1651, Father Antony Proenca pleaded with his readers, "Among my readers, there will surely be some who could procure for us some lotion or ointment which could change the colour of our skin so that just as we have changed our dress, language, food and customs, we may also change our complexion and become like those around us with whom we live, thus making ourselves 'all to all', Omnia Omnibus factus. It is not necessary that the colour should be very dark; the most suitable would be something between black and red or tawny. It would not matter if it could not be removed when once applied; we would willingly remain all our lives the 'negroes' of Jesus Christ, A.M.D.G. [to the greater glory of God]."
After his death, de Nobili's mission went through many vicissitudes. But the techniques -- that of deceiving people into believing that they were "Roman Brahmins," the show of austerities -- remained the ones he had pioneered. Mosheim recorded of de Nobili's successors, "These fictitious Brachmans, who boldly deny their being Europeans or Franks, and only give themselves out for inhabitants of the northern regions, are said to have converted a prodigious number of Indians to Christianity; and if common report may be trusted to, the congregations they have already founded in those countries grow large and more numerous from year to year. Nor indeed, do these accounts appear, in the main, unworthy of credit, though we must not be too ready to receive, as authentic and well attested, the narrations that have been given of the intolerable hardships and sufferings that have been sustained by these Jesuit-Brachmans in the cause of Christ. Many imagine, and not without good foundation, that their austerities are, generally speaking, more dreadful in appearance than in reality; and that, while they outwardly affect an extraordinary degree of self-denial, they indulge themselves privately, in a free and even luxurious use of the creatures, have their tables delicately served, and their cellars exquisitely furnished, in order to refresh themselves after their labors."
The dissimulation is on display on the public platform every day. In the beginning, the recluse. Then the carefully planned public exposure. The daily audiences to the privileged few. The central claim of being the "Roman Brahmin". The stout denial to being European. The falsehoods which are put out on behalf of, and for the advancement of the Romaca Brahamana.... Alas! The "lotion or ointment" is still not at hand...
"But how can we disobey the command of our Lord?"
Arun Shourie
It isn't just that it is our right, it is our duty. For our Lord, Jesus Christ, has commanded us to go to all the nations of the world, and spread his message and baptize", the missionaries say, and even lay Christians. "How can we disobey his command and still claim to be Christians?"
The point apart that the claim cannot stand in law, how much weight can one attach to the claim itself? What exactly is Jesus supposed to have said? How do we know he said that?
Answers to these questions are vital in themselves - they are central to believing the claim or setting it aside. They are doubly important because they lead us to a fundamental point, indeed to what is the fundamental fraud in missionary activity. But first the answers themselves.
The bare sequence is as follows. Jesus has been nailed to the Cross. He dies. His body is interred. A large stone is placed to close the tomb. Devotees visit the tomb. The body is missing. Jesus appears to disciples. He speaks to them.
Now, let us take the sequence step by step. As everyone knows, there are four Gospels - by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. In the eyes of the Church each is a saint. Every word of each Gospel is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Who goes to the tomb ? For what purpose ? "Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre", says St. Luke [288.1]. "Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome," says St. Mark, as they "had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him" [16.1]. "Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them", says St. Luke, "bringing the spices which they had prepared" [24.1, 11]. St. John reports Mary Magdalene alone as having gone to the tomb [20.1]. Thus : from Mary Magdalene alone to her and the other Mary, to the two of them and Salome, to the two of them and Joanna plus the other women who were with them. Similarly, whoever went, the purpose was either to "see the sepulchre" or to anoint the body. For the latter they were carrying sweet spices which they had either bought or prepared themselves.
What happened when, whoever went, arrived at the tomb? "And, behold, there was a great earthquake," says St. Mathew, "for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it" [28.2]. St. Mark mentions no earthquake, no angel descending; instead he says that, while on their way the women had been asking each other "who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?," when they arrived they saw that the stone had already been rolled away [16.3-4]. St. Luke too does not report any earthquake, he too says that when the women arrived they found the stone to have been rolled away [24.2]. According to St. John, Mary Magdalene alone had gone. He too mentions neither an earthquake, nor any angel descending. But he too reports that she found the stone to have been rolled away already [20.1].
Upon reaching the tomb, upon seeing the stone rolled away, whom do they encounter ? An angel, says St. Mathew, sitting on the stone he has rolled away, "his countenance was like lightening, and his raiment white as snow", and so awesome was his presence that "and for fear of him the keepers [that is, the guards] did shake, and became as dead men" [28.2-4]. Not an angel, but "a young man", sitting, not on the stone outside the entrance to the tomb, but "on the right side" inside the sepulchre [the women see him after entering the sepulchre]. The young man is "clothed in a long white garment" -- not dazzling like lightening, just ordinary white. And upon encountering a young man unexpectedly inside the tomb, the ones who are "affrighted" are the women -- there is no mention of guards. St. Luke reports no angel, nor does he report one young man. According to him the women encountered "two men.... in shining garments" [24.4]. St. John has Mary Magdalene going alone, she encounters no one [20.1-2]. Thus, from "an angel" to "one young man" to "two men" to no one.
One woman, two sets of three women, or more than three women have reached the tomb. They have encountered an angel, one young man, or two, or none. The women see that the body of Jesus is missing. What happens next?
Do not be afraid, the angel told them. St. Mathew says. You are looking for the Jesus who was crucified. He is not here, for he is risen. "Go quickly and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him." The women depart quickly "with fear and great joy", and run to the disciples. But on the way, Jesus meets them. "All hail", he says. They fall at his feet, they hold his feet, they worship him. "Be not afraid", Jesus says, "Go tell my brethern that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me" [28.7-10].
According to St. Mark, neither the angel at the bomb nor Jesus on the way asked them to give that message to the disciples. That one young man did so -- at the tomb itself [16.7].
According to St. Luke the conversation takes place with the two men at the tomb. Not only are the words that are exchanged different. No one - not the angel, not one man, not Jesus, not either of the two men - asks the women to tell the disciples that Jesus is going to Galilee ahead of them and that they will see him there [24.5-7].
According to St. John, what transpired was altogether different. Mary Magdalene goes alone. She sees that the stone has been removed, and the body is missing. She runs "to Simon Peter and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved", and informs them that the body is missing. Simon Peter and the other disciple run to the sepulchre. They see for themselves, and return home. Mary, on the other hand continues to stand outside, weeping. She looks into the sepulchre and sees two angels "in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain". And then Jesus himself appears to her. Jesus appears to her - as in Mathew. But there are three differences. In Mathew Jesus appears to the two Marys, in John he appears to Mary Magdalene alone. In Mathew he appears as the two Marys are rushing to the disciples, in John he appears when Mary Magdalene, having informed two of the disciples, returns with them to the sepulchre. And, third, in Mathew, Mary Magdalene and Mary, the mother of James, at once recognise him, they fall at his feet, they hold his feet, and worship him [28.9]. But in John, even when she sees Jesus standing in front of her, she does not recognise him. Instead, she takes him to be the gardener [20.14-15].
Jesus speaks to her in John, as Jesus does in Mathew -- though in the latter to two Marys, not one; though on their way to the disciples, and not at the tomb when one of them has returned with the disciples. But what he says is altogether different. In Mathew he says, "Be not afraid : go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there they shall see me." In John, Jesus tells Mary Magdalene, "Touch me not [in Mathew, the two Marys hold him by the feet]; for I am not yet ascended to my Father : but go to my brethern, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God" [20.17]. Not a word about going to Galilee !
To proceed. The women have seen that the body is missing. They have or have not been told by an angel, by one man, by two men or by Jesus to tell the disciples one thing or something altogether different. Whom do they go and tell ?
In Mathew, they run to get the message to the disciples -- that they get to the disciples can only be inferred. For the account is overtaken by other happenings. First, as we have seen, Jesus himself appears to them. Second,the Gospel diverts to narrate a conspiracy of the Jews -- one which none of the other three Gospels mentions : noticing that the body is missing, the guards go to the chief priests who are at that time in assembly with the elders; there a conspiracy is hatched : to deny that Jesus has risen, the guards are to say that they had fallen asleep and, as they slept, the followers of Jesus whisked away his body. The guards are paid, and guaranteed protection. And on this basis the Jews get a concoction to deny the Resurrection unto this day [28.11-15].
In Mark, the women tell no one : after the conversation with the youngman, Mark informs us, "they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed : neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid" [16.8]. It is in what is acknowledged even in the printed Bibles to be one of three different endings to the Gospel of St. Mark that we are told that the women went to "Peter and his friends" and conveyed what they had been told [third alternate, 16.9-10 in The Good News Bible].
In Luke, the women convey the message to "the eleven disciples and all the rest" [24.8].
In John, Mary Magdalene, who alone has gone to the tomb, goes and tells not, for instance, "the eleven disciples and all the rest", she tells "Simon Peter and the other disciple, whom Jesus loved" [20.2].
But, of course, as she has not encountered anyone at the tomb at this state, she has no message to convey -- neither about going to Galilee nor about Jesus ascending to the Father. All she conveys is that the body is missing.
Informed or not, having received only the news of the missing body or having received that as well as a message, having received one message or an entirely different one, which of the disciples goes to the tomb?
In Mathew no one goes to the sepulchre. The eleven disciples proceed to Galilee [28.16].
In Mark, no one goes to tell the disciples that the body is missing -- the women having been struck dumb by fear. So, no occasion arises for the disciples to go to the sepulchre. Subsequently, Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene. She tells them. But "they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not" [16.11]. In any event, no one goes to the sepulchre.
In Luke, the women narrate everything to the apostles. But, "their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not" [24.11]. Peter alone gets up and rushes to the sepulchre [24.12]. Though later on, when they are talking to the resurrected Jesus, whom they take to be a stranger, two disciples speak of "certain of them which were with us" having gone to the sepulchre" [24.24].
In John, the information is conveyed not to all the apostles, Mary Magdalene informs only two - "Simon Peter and the other disciple, whom Jesus loved". And the two of them rush to the sepulchre [20.2-4].
The body, having disappeared, Jesus appears. To whom ?
In Mathew he first appears to the two Marys when they are rushing to the disciples [28.9]. Subsequently, as he had promised, he appears to the eleven disciples at Galilee [28.16].
In Mark he appears first to Mary Magdalene alone -- the occasion is neither at the tomb, nor on the way to the disciples, but an altogether different, sui generis one [16.9]. After that he appears "in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country" [16.12]. And finally he appears "unto the eleven as they sat at meat" [16.14] - where the conversation, to which we shall just return, takes place.
In Luke he appears first to two of the disciples as they are on their way to a village called Emmaus "which was from Jerusalem about three-score furlongs." Jesus walks with them, he talks with them. But they do not recognise him for the longest time - it is only later after he vanishes that, seeing how their hearts burned as the stranger talked with them, that they realise who he was [24.13-32].
They go to tell the eleven. Who says that he has appeared to Simon [24.34]. And as they are talking "Jesus himself stood in the midst of them." Jesus talks to them at length [24.36-50].
In John, Jesus first appears to Mary Magdalene -- outside the sepulchre when she has returned with two of the disciples. She takes him to be the gardener, as we have seen, till he addresses her by her name [20.14 - 17].
He next appears to the disciples as they have assembled behind shut doors "for fear of the Jews" [20.19 - 23].
He appears again to the disciples eight days later - this time doubting Thomas too is present [20.26 - 29].
He appears a third time to his disciples at "the sea of Tiberias" [21.1 - 22]. Extensive exchanges take place between Jesus and the disciples on this - the last -- occasion.
By this uncertain route we reach the exhortation to carry the message to all nations. But what precisely does Jesus say on the subject ?
In Mathew, after telling his disciples that all power has been given to him in heaven and in earth, Jesus says, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost : teaching them to observe all thing whatsoever I have commanded you : and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen" [28.18 - 20].
In Mark, he upbraids them for "their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he had risen." And then come the words relevant to our concern : "And he said unto them Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" [16.15 - 16]. Notice that here Jesus is asking the disciples to go "and preach the gospel to every creature" -- he is not asking them to baptize and convert the people they encounter. What he does is to forecast a future for those who believe and have been baptized, and for those who do not believe.
Incidentally, after this Jesus tells them : "And these signs shall follow them that believe; in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues, they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hand on the sick, and they shall recover" [16.17 - 18]. Are the missionaries able to take up serpents? Are they immune to poison ? Do the sick recover as they touch them ? Are there devils which missionaries drive away ?
Thus, in a word, while in Mathew what Jesus says about baptism is an exhortation, in Mark it is an adjective. The even more consequential fact in this context is that the earlier manuscripts of the Gospel of St. Mark end at the 8th para of this chapter. Paras 9 to 20 - of which paras 15 to 18 which contain the exhortation form a part -- are acknowledged, even in the printed versions of the Bible today, to be later add-ons.
In Luke, Jesus is at pains to convince the disciples that what has been visited upon him is in accord with what had been written in the scriptures. Luke adds, "And he said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day," "And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem" [24.44-47]. Notice that here also Jesus is not asking them to convert and baptize, he is merely asking them to preach in his name -- indeed, what he asks them to preach is also limited to "repentance and remission of sins".
John also reports at length the exchanges which Jesus has with his disciples when he reappears to them. There is not a word in these passages about going out, converting and baptising, or even preaching to the others.
Would a claim based on so tenuous a foundation survive in any court assessing evidence?
It isn't just that it is our right, it is our duty. For our Lord, Jesus Christ, has commanded us to go to all the nations of the world, and spread his message and baptize", the missionaries say, and even lay Christians. "How can we disobey his command and still claim to be Christians?"
The point apart that the claim cannot stand in law, how much weight can one attach to the claim itself? What exactly is Jesus supposed to have said? How do we know he said that?
Answers to these questions are vital in themselves - they are central to believing the claim or setting it aside. They are doubly important because they lead us to a fundamental point, indeed to what is the fundamental fraud in missionary activity. But first the answers themselves.
The bare sequence is as follows. Jesus has been nailed to the Cross. He dies. His body is interred. A large stone is placed to close the tomb. Devotees visit the tomb. The body is missing. Jesus appears to disciples. He speaks to them.
Now, let us take the sequence step by step. As everyone knows, there are four Gospels - by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. In the eyes of the Church each is a saint. Every word of each Gospel is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Who goes to the tomb ? For what purpose ? "Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre", says St. Luke [288.1]. "Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome," says St. Mark, as they "had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him" [16.1]. "Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them", says St. Luke, "bringing the spices which they had prepared" [24.1, 11]. St. John reports Mary Magdalene alone as having gone to the tomb [20.1]. Thus : from Mary Magdalene alone to her and the other Mary, to the two of them and Salome, to the two of them and Joanna plus the other women who were with them. Similarly, whoever went, the purpose was either to "see the sepulchre" or to anoint the body. For the latter they were carrying sweet spices which they had either bought or prepared themselves.
What happened when, whoever went, arrived at the tomb? "And, behold, there was a great earthquake," says St. Mathew, "for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it" [28.2]. St. Mark mentions no earthquake, no angel descending; instead he says that, while on their way the women had been asking each other "who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?," when they arrived they saw that the stone had already been rolled away [16.3-4]. St. Luke too does not report any earthquake, he too says that when the women arrived they found the stone to have been rolled away [24.2]. According to St. John, Mary Magdalene alone had gone. He too mentions neither an earthquake, nor any angel descending. But he too reports that she found the stone to have been rolled away already [20.1].
Upon reaching the tomb, upon seeing the stone rolled away, whom do they encounter ? An angel, says St. Mathew, sitting on the stone he has rolled away, "his countenance was like lightening, and his raiment white as snow", and so awesome was his presence that "and for fear of him the keepers [that is, the guards] did shake, and became as dead men" [28.2-4]. Not an angel, but "a young man", sitting, not on the stone outside the entrance to the tomb, but "on the right side" inside the sepulchre [the women see him after entering the sepulchre]. The young man is "clothed in a long white garment" -- not dazzling like lightening, just ordinary white. And upon encountering a young man unexpectedly inside the tomb, the ones who are "affrighted" are the women -- there is no mention of guards. St. Luke reports no angel, nor does he report one young man. According to him the women encountered "two men.... in shining garments" [24.4]. St. John has Mary Magdalene going alone, she encounters no one [20.1-2]. Thus, from "an angel" to "one young man" to "two men" to no one.
One woman, two sets of three women, or more than three women have reached the tomb. They have encountered an angel, one young man, or two, or none. The women see that the body of Jesus is missing. What happens next?
Do not be afraid, the angel told them. St. Mathew says. You are looking for the Jesus who was crucified. He is not here, for he is risen. "Go quickly and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him." The women depart quickly "with fear and great joy", and run to the disciples. But on the way, Jesus meets them. "All hail", he says. They fall at his feet, they hold his feet, they worship him. "Be not afraid", Jesus says, "Go tell my brethern that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me" [28.7-10].
According to St. Mark, neither the angel at the bomb nor Jesus on the way asked them to give that message to the disciples. That one young man did so -- at the tomb itself [16.7].
According to St. Luke the conversation takes place with the two men at the tomb. Not only are the words that are exchanged different. No one - not the angel, not one man, not Jesus, not either of the two men - asks the women to tell the disciples that Jesus is going to Galilee ahead of them and that they will see him there [24.5-7].
According to St. John, what transpired was altogether different. Mary Magdalene goes alone. She sees that the stone has been removed, and the body is missing. She runs "to Simon Peter and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved", and informs them that the body is missing. Simon Peter and the other disciple run to the sepulchre. They see for themselves, and return home. Mary, on the other hand continues to stand outside, weeping. She looks into the sepulchre and sees two angels "in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain". And then Jesus himself appears to her. Jesus appears to her - as in Mathew. But there are three differences. In Mathew Jesus appears to the two Marys, in John he appears to Mary Magdalene alone. In Mathew he appears as the two Marys are rushing to the disciples, in John he appears when Mary Magdalene, having informed two of the disciples, returns with them to the sepulchre. And, third, in Mathew, Mary Magdalene and Mary, the mother of James, at once recognise him, they fall at his feet, they hold his feet, and worship him [28.9]. But in John, even when she sees Jesus standing in front of her, she does not recognise him. Instead, she takes him to be the gardener [20.14-15].
Jesus speaks to her in John, as Jesus does in Mathew -- though in the latter to two Marys, not one; though on their way to the disciples, and not at the tomb when one of them has returned with the disciples. But what he says is altogether different. In Mathew he says, "Be not afraid : go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there they shall see me." In John, Jesus tells Mary Magdalene, "Touch me not [in Mathew, the two Marys hold him by the feet]; for I am not yet ascended to my Father : but go to my brethern, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God" [20.17]. Not a word about going to Galilee !
To proceed. The women have seen that the body is missing. They have or have not been told by an angel, by one man, by two men or by Jesus to tell the disciples one thing or something altogether different. Whom do they go and tell ?
In Mathew, they run to get the message to the disciples -- that they get to the disciples can only be inferred. For the account is overtaken by other happenings. First, as we have seen, Jesus himself appears to them. Second,the Gospel diverts to narrate a conspiracy of the Jews -- one which none of the other three Gospels mentions : noticing that the body is missing, the guards go to the chief priests who are at that time in assembly with the elders; there a conspiracy is hatched : to deny that Jesus has risen, the guards are to say that they had fallen asleep and, as they slept, the followers of Jesus whisked away his body. The guards are paid, and guaranteed protection. And on this basis the Jews get a concoction to deny the Resurrection unto this day [28.11-15].
In Mark, the women tell no one : after the conversation with the youngman, Mark informs us, "they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed : neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid" [16.8]. It is in what is acknowledged even in the printed Bibles to be one of three different endings to the Gospel of St. Mark that we are told that the women went to "Peter and his friends" and conveyed what they had been told [third alternate, 16.9-10 in The Good News Bible].
In Luke, the women convey the message to "the eleven disciples and all the rest" [24.8].
In John, Mary Magdalene, who alone has gone to the tomb, goes and tells not, for instance, "the eleven disciples and all the rest", she tells "Simon Peter and the other disciple, whom Jesus loved" [20.2].
But, of course, as she has not encountered anyone at the tomb at this state, she has no message to convey -- neither about going to Galilee nor about Jesus ascending to the Father. All she conveys is that the body is missing.
Informed or not, having received only the news of the missing body or having received that as well as a message, having received one message or an entirely different one, which of the disciples goes to the tomb?
In Mathew no one goes to the sepulchre. The eleven disciples proceed to Galilee [28.16].
In Mark, no one goes to tell the disciples that the body is missing -- the women having been struck dumb by fear. So, no occasion arises for the disciples to go to the sepulchre. Subsequently, Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene. She tells them. But "they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not" [16.11]. In any event, no one goes to the sepulchre.
In Luke, the women narrate everything to the apostles. But, "their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not" [24.11]. Peter alone gets up and rushes to the sepulchre [24.12]. Though later on, when they are talking to the resurrected Jesus, whom they take to be a stranger, two disciples speak of "certain of them which were with us" having gone to the sepulchre" [24.24].
In John, the information is conveyed not to all the apostles, Mary Magdalene informs only two - "Simon Peter and the other disciple, whom Jesus loved". And the two of them rush to the sepulchre [20.2-4].
The body, having disappeared, Jesus appears. To whom ?
In Mathew he first appears to the two Marys when they are rushing to the disciples [28.9]. Subsequently, as he had promised, he appears to the eleven disciples at Galilee [28.16].
In Mark he appears first to Mary Magdalene alone -- the occasion is neither at the tomb, nor on the way to the disciples, but an altogether different, sui generis one [16.9]. After that he appears "in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country" [16.12]. And finally he appears "unto the eleven as they sat at meat" [16.14] - where the conversation, to which we shall just return, takes place.
In Luke he appears first to two of the disciples as they are on their way to a village called Emmaus "which was from Jerusalem about three-score furlongs." Jesus walks with them, he talks with them. But they do not recognise him for the longest time - it is only later after he vanishes that, seeing how their hearts burned as the stranger talked with them, that they realise who he was [24.13-32].
They go to tell the eleven. Who says that he has appeared to Simon [24.34]. And as they are talking "Jesus himself stood in the midst of them." Jesus talks to them at length [24.36-50].
In John, Jesus first appears to Mary Magdalene -- outside the sepulchre when she has returned with two of the disciples. She takes him to be the gardener, as we have seen, till he addresses her by her name [20.14 - 17].
He next appears to the disciples as they have assembled behind shut doors "for fear of the Jews" [20.19 - 23].
He appears again to the disciples eight days later - this time doubting Thomas too is present [20.26 - 29].
He appears a third time to his disciples at "the sea of Tiberias" [21.1 - 22]. Extensive exchanges take place between Jesus and the disciples on this - the last -- occasion.
By this uncertain route we reach the exhortation to carry the message to all nations. But what precisely does Jesus say on the subject ?
In Mathew, after telling his disciples that all power has been given to him in heaven and in earth, Jesus says, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost : teaching them to observe all thing whatsoever I have commanded you : and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen" [28.18 - 20].
In Mark, he upbraids them for "their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he had risen." And then come the words relevant to our concern : "And he said unto them Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" [16.15 - 16]. Notice that here Jesus is asking the disciples to go "and preach the gospel to every creature" -- he is not asking them to baptize and convert the people they encounter. What he does is to forecast a future for those who believe and have been baptized, and for those who do not believe.
Incidentally, after this Jesus tells them : "And these signs shall follow them that believe; in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues, they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hand on the sick, and they shall recover" [16.17 - 18]. Are the missionaries able to take up serpents? Are they immune to poison ? Do the sick recover as they touch them ? Are there devils which missionaries drive away ?
Thus, in a word, while in Mathew what Jesus says about baptism is an exhortation, in Mark it is an adjective. The even more consequential fact in this context is that the earlier manuscripts of the Gospel of St. Mark end at the 8th para of this chapter. Paras 9 to 20 - of which paras 15 to 18 which contain the exhortation form a part -- are acknowledged, even in the printed versions of the Bible today, to be later add-ons.
In Luke, Jesus is at pains to convince the disciples that what has been visited upon him is in accord with what had been written in the scriptures. Luke adds, "And he said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day," "And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem" [24.44-47]. Notice that here also Jesus is not asking them to convert and baptize, he is merely asking them to preach in his name -- indeed, what he asks them to preach is also limited to "repentance and remission of sins".
John also reports at length the exchanges which Jesus has with his disciples when he reappears to them. There is not a word in these passages about going out, converting and baptising, or even preaching to the others.
Would a claim based on so tenuous a foundation survive in any court assessing evidence?
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Body-Counts Have Become Big, Compelling Business
Arun Shourie
The Church had but to get established and it became obsessed with numbers -- with the number of souls it had, to use the term so favoured by churchmen, "harvested" for Jesus. Numbers remain its singular obsession today. The impulse is not just its own history in this regard. The impulse is not just its character -- it is, after all, primarily an organization, and therefore like all organizations it is obsessed with its market-share.
To a very large extent, the impulse is commercial. The Church is big business. Evangelization is big business. And this business depends on that "harvesting" of souls. You just have to scan American church publications, or those of Europe, to see that one of the main grounds on which believers are induced to donate funds to the church is that the money is needed for the harvesting work. But even in that there is now a problem.
In Europe as well as in the US, the Church is in serious trouble. Attendance in Rome itself has fallen to just three per cent of the number of nominal believers -- in Rome, the very seat of the Vatican. With this shriveling, has come another problem : the church has been having greater and greater difficulties in recruiting priests, nuns, and others to man the churches. The need for focusing on countries such as India has therefore tripled.
Missionary publications bear ample testimony to this focus : they are full of targets, of detailed plans, of marketing strategies by which the harvest here is to be multiplied : a church to be "planted" in every village, a Bible to be placed in every pair of hands, lists and characteristics of "people-groups" which are to be targetted -- women, scheduled castes, and, most of all, tribals; the beliefs and characteristics of each target-group which can be used to enter the group, the beliefs which are liable to be hindrances and how these may be transformed into aids.
"The majority Meiti are Hindu," notes Operation World, and points to what may be used to wean them away : "nationalism is lowering commitment to Hinduism". As a rule, evangelists denounce nationalism, how are they looking hopefully at nationalism among the Meiti?, you may wonder -- that is because, in this instance, by "nationalism" they mean feeling for the tribal identity as against their focusing on what they share with the rest of the country! Meghalaya : already 57 per cent Christian, focus has now to be on "the less reached" -- "Some of the smaller tribes -- notably the Hajong, Mikir and others -- have been less responsive and remain entrenched in their animism. The Hindu minority has been little affected by the gospel." Mizoram : already 85 per cent Christian; focus has to be on "the less reached" -- and there is a sign of hope, "The Buddhist Chakmas are being intensively evangelised by Mizo, and churches are multiplying," followed by the next target-group in bold type, "The Bangladeshi refugees and the Hindu population are needy." The beam of hope from Nagaland : "Missionary vision blossomed as a result of revival. Christians made a solemn covenant in 1980 to live for, and further, world evangelization. They are trusting God that 10,000 missionaries will be sent from Nagaland...." A minor footnote : Operation World is published by one of the most active missionary publication houses -- its name? Om Publishing, Carlisle, UK!
That name tells a larger tale. Missionary publications set out how the dress of the clergy, how the ambiance in churches, how Christian ritual are to be "indigenised" so that people do not continue to look upon the church as foreign. Stating that the Cardinal President of the Consilium, His Eminence Benno Cardinal Gut, has accepted the proposals of the Catholic Bishop's Conference of India, a circular of Archbishop D. Simon Lourdusamy informed churches in the country,
"(1) The posture during Mass, both for priests and the faithful may be adapted to local usage, that is sitting on the floor, standing and the like; footwear may also be removed.
(2) Genuflections may be replaced by the profound bow with the anjali hasta.
(3) A panchanga pranam by both priests and faithful can take place before the liturgy of the Word, as part of the Penitential rite, and at the conclusion of the Anaphora.
(4) Kissing of objects may be adapted to local customs, that is touching the object with one's fingers or palm of one's hand and bringing the hands to one's eyes or forehead.
(5) The kiss of peace could be given by the exchange of anjali hasta and/or the placing of the hands of the giver between the hands of the recipient.
(6) Incense could be made use of in liturgical services. The receptacle could be the simple incense bowl with handle.
(7) The vestments could be simplified. A single tunic-type chasuble with a stole (angavastra) could replace the traditional vestments of the Roman rite....
(8) The corporal could be replaced by a tray (thali or thamboola thattu)....
(9) Oil lamps could be used instead of candles.
(10) The preparatory rite of the Mass may include : ....(b) the welcome of the celebrant in the Indian way, e.g. with a single arati, washing of hands etc.; (c) lighting of the lamp....
(11) In the Offertory rite and at the conclusion of the Anaphora the Indian form of worship may be integrated, that is, double or triple arati of flowers, and/or incense, and/or light...."
An evangelical Internet site exults in how that ministry consciously avoids overturning the beliefs and practices of the target-peoples, how instead it ensures "deculturisation" over an extended period by introducing into their awareness what it terms "functional substitutes" for those beliefs and practices. So much so that it commends its own logo too on this ground! We have not replaced the lotus, "which is supposed to be the seat of the Indian gods," it reports, we have entrenched the Cross in it! While addressing the ignorant and illiterate in India this ministry will point to the lotus, while addressing the potential donor its selling-point is the opposite : "The inference is," the site informs that donor, "that the historical Christ and the Cross must ultimately take the seat of these mythological deities and thereby Christianity should become deeply rooted in the culture of India."
Even minor outfits garner literally millions through this harvesting business. Taken as a whole the enterprise is being conducted on a scale we just cannot imagine. As the late Ram Swarup had pointed out, even fifteen years ago, the Mission Handbook, North American Ministries Overseas had put the number of missionaries raking in the harvest at around a quarter million. Even then it had put the expenditure on such activity at around one and a half billion dollars. Of course, it had exhorted the faithful to dole out much more : "it costs money to stay in business," it had said with fetching frankness! One of the ways for these missionaries to get their flock to cough up money has been to paint our people and country in gory colours -- this has not changed one bit since the 19th century. Starving, sunk in superstition, crushed under the heels of high-caste Hindus, in the grip of Satan himself -- hence the urgent duty to save them, and for that send your donation to.... "The Indian sub-continent, with one billion people, is a living example of what happens when Satan rules the entire culture," Ram Swarup quoted from the Texas-based Gospel for Asia. "India is one vast purgatory in which millions of people.... are literally living a cosmic lie. Could Satan have devised a more perfect system for causing misery?"
Nothing gets the faithful to dip into their pockets as atrocity stories. Missionary publications and Internet sites are predictably full of these : "Christian suffering in India is the worst in India in 50 years," a site informed potential donors through the Internet in a dispatch by the Editors of Religion Today, dated 30 November, 1998 -- that is, even before the current series of fabrications began to be put out. "Mobs of religious fanatics have attacked churches and Christian schools, dispersed outdoor gospel meetings, and beaten evangelists in dozens of incidents this year," it proclaimed. "Oppression is widespread," it said, sourcing it to "a person with contacts." Churches have been burned, an orthodox school attacked for not teaching Sanskrit, tractors and crowbars used in attack.... Government deliberately taking no action.... Hence "the workers pray God for their protection. They 'take the threats before the Lord in fasting prayer and ask Him to protect them.' Christians have been beaten, tortured with razor blades, and thrown from a speeding train, and 6 to 12 per year are martyred, he said." Who said? The very same propagandist-editor who has been in the forefront of spreading concoctions like "Jhabua re-enacted in Jhajjar".
But not just atrocity stories -- if they were all, they could well drain potential donors of enthusiasm, "What's the use?," they could conclude. And so, triumph-in-face-of-atrocity, atrocity-as-a-reflection-of-triumph stories too : the same site, in the same story, "....Hundreds of tribal people in a section of northern India are becoming Christians through the efforts of evangelists" -- notice the unverifiable locale : "a section of northern India"! Next, "The area is known for violent tribal clashes" -- that to redouble the admiration for the evangelists : they are doing the Lord's work in spite of the risks the area poses. "'It is the greatest revival we know of at this time,' he said. 'You don't get this kind of revival without persecution, and bloodshed, and martyrdom. One comes with the other.'"
Conclusion : give because India is in the grip of Satan; give because with its billion people India represents such a vast opportunity to save souls for the Lord; give because Christians are being cut up with razor blades there; give because in spite of this, in fact because of this bloodshed, the harvest is multiplying by the hour.... And as in every advertising campaign, a certificate from a satisfied consumer! "Dr. Donald McGavran made the following observation about the ECI [the Evangelical Church of India]," notes a related site on Internet. "'The fascinating story of the unique church planting ministry of ECI in India must be told everywhere in the pessimistic missionary world. What Dr Sargunam and his colleagues have achieved during the last two decades affirms that the Lord of the harvest is at work in several parts of India. I have been in a few of these churches and watched the number of baptisms. I commend Christians everywhere to support and claim a share in this tremendous victory and help many more thousands to be discipled and Churches multiplied until Christ returns.'"
The site of AD2000 Mission informs donors, Vasanthraj Albert of the Church Growth Research Center in Madras, states, 'I believe that India today is on the map for the global church.' And Peter Wagner, coordinator for the AD2000 United Prayer Mobilization Network observes, 'Of all the nations in the world, India has the highest potential of fruitful investment of evangelistic effort at this time. It is the place to invest time, energy and resources.'"
Organizations upon organizations. Targets upon targets : for "200 people-groups", for "50 languages", for "50 urban areas", for "200 geographical districts." How their mouths water at the sight of "unreached peoples" : "Remarkably this [the unreached of India] is 30% of the world's unreached peoples. The goal is to plant churches in all the remaining 500,000 villages and several thousand unevangelised segments of the 300 largest cities in India. To achieve these goals, delegates have agreed to cooperate with the India Mission Association, which networks to place an evangelist in every postal code area."
"Calcutta is an amazing testimony to the power of prayer," the site of the AD2000 movement reports. An estimated 35 million focused on Calcutta one day, it says. This was followed by a month of on-site prayer. "That month of prayer enhanced the Mission Calcutta 2000 Network, whose aim is to establish a church in every one of the city's 93 postal zones by the end of the year 2000. Great progress has been made. Thirty zones that did not have a church now have one. Today only 30 other zones remain untouched."
And Calcutta isn't the only target, it says. "Varanasi in the state of Uttar Pradesh is Hinduism's holiest city, with thousands of temples centering on the worship of Shiva, an idol whose symbol is the phallus. Many consider this city the very seat of Satan. Hindus believe that bathing in the Ganges at Varanasi washes away all sins. A number of Christian workers took up the burden of prayer for this city and in prayer-walks boldly declared before the idols, 'You are not a living god.' One year later it was discovered that church planting works had opened up in sixty villages around Varanasi over that past year, with 300 baptisms reported." "An intensive training program has been implemented to teach people to practice intercession for the target units," it records. "An experienced prayer warrior from Africa, Dr Zachariah Fomum, has played a key role in this training for prayer.... India is ready and waiting."
One of the difficulties has been that India is "like an intricate mosaic," the site says. At last the barrier is being breached. "Much progress has been made in the last few years to 'spy out the land and its inhabitants' and to give an accurate and up-to-date picture of the challenges and the opportunities," it reports. "The Indian Missions Association, in partnership with Gospel for Asia, has researched and published very informative and accurate books on what has been done so far and the work yet to be done to complete the task of evangelization within India. They have defined the work according to language groups, PIN (Zip) codes, and unreached-people groups in the country...." The work of others is contributing to the same cause -- hence, the Anthropological Survey of India is completing and publishing its "People of India Project". Invaluably helpful data....
And that too testifies to God's plan! "Perhaps never before has this kind of information on India been so carefully surveyed, prepared, well-published and distributed. In this the North India-Hindi Belt is unique. We do not believe it is accidental. God is allowing us to 'spy out the land' that we might go in and claim both it and its inhabitants for Him."
A dozen things can be said of this nonsense. For the moment ponder just two :
* How does all this feverish harvesting compare with what the Supreme Court has laid down as the law of the country ?
* When the Church sets out to convert on such a scale, when its little agents go about "boldly declaring before the idols" their calumnies, is it at all possible that the targeted society will not react?
This obsession with body-counts is ruinous -- not the least for the church itself : it has already drained it of all spirituality, exactly as Gandhiji had warned it would. And even by itself it is bound to ignite a mighty reaction. But there is another feature which is even more certain to stoke reaction, an even mightier reaction than this obsession -- it is to this feature that we shall turn.
India Connect
March 16, 1999
The Church had but to get established and it became obsessed with numbers -- with the number of souls it had, to use the term so favoured by churchmen, "harvested" for Jesus. Numbers remain its singular obsession today. The impulse is not just its own history in this regard. The impulse is not just its character -- it is, after all, primarily an organization, and therefore like all organizations it is obsessed with its market-share.
To a very large extent, the impulse is commercial. The Church is big business. Evangelization is big business. And this business depends on that "harvesting" of souls. You just have to scan American church publications, or those of Europe, to see that one of the main grounds on which believers are induced to donate funds to the church is that the money is needed for the harvesting work. But even in that there is now a problem.
In Europe as well as in the US, the Church is in serious trouble. Attendance in Rome itself has fallen to just three per cent of the number of nominal believers -- in Rome, the very seat of the Vatican. With this shriveling, has come another problem : the church has been having greater and greater difficulties in recruiting priests, nuns, and others to man the churches. The need for focusing on countries such as India has therefore tripled.
Missionary publications bear ample testimony to this focus : they are full of targets, of detailed plans, of marketing strategies by which the harvest here is to be multiplied : a church to be "planted" in every village, a Bible to be placed in every pair of hands, lists and characteristics of "people-groups" which are to be targetted -- women, scheduled castes, and, most of all, tribals; the beliefs and characteristics of each target-group which can be used to enter the group, the beliefs which are liable to be hindrances and how these may be transformed into aids.
"The majority Meiti are Hindu," notes Operation World, and points to what may be used to wean them away : "nationalism is lowering commitment to Hinduism". As a rule, evangelists denounce nationalism, how are they looking hopefully at nationalism among the Meiti?, you may wonder -- that is because, in this instance, by "nationalism" they mean feeling for the tribal identity as against their focusing on what they share with the rest of the country! Meghalaya : already 57 per cent Christian, focus has now to be on "the less reached" -- "Some of the smaller tribes -- notably the Hajong, Mikir and others -- have been less responsive and remain entrenched in their animism. The Hindu minority has been little affected by the gospel." Mizoram : already 85 per cent Christian; focus has to be on "the less reached" -- and there is a sign of hope, "The Buddhist Chakmas are being intensively evangelised by Mizo, and churches are multiplying," followed by the next target-group in bold type, "The Bangladeshi refugees and the Hindu population are needy." The beam of hope from Nagaland : "Missionary vision blossomed as a result of revival. Christians made a solemn covenant in 1980 to live for, and further, world evangelization. They are trusting God that 10,000 missionaries will be sent from Nagaland...." A minor footnote : Operation World is published by one of the most active missionary publication houses -- its name? Om Publishing, Carlisle, UK!
That name tells a larger tale. Missionary publications set out how the dress of the clergy, how the ambiance in churches, how Christian ritual are to be "indigenised" so that people do not continue to look upon the church as foreign. Stating that the Cardinal President of the Consilium, His Eminence Benno Cardinal Gut, has accepted the proposals of the Catholic Bishop's Conference of India, a circular of Archbishop D. Simon Lourdusamy informed churches in the country,
"(1) The posture during Mass, both for priests and the faithful may be adapted to local usage, that is sitting on the floor, standing and the like; footwear may also be removed.
(2) Genuflections may be replaced by the profound bow with the anjali hasta.
(3) A panchanga pranam by both priests and faithful can take place before the liturgy of the Word, as part of the Penitential rite, and at the conclusion of the Anaphora.
(4) Kissing of objects may be adapted to local customs, that is touching the object with one's fingers or palm of one's hand and bringing the hands to one's eyes or forehead.
(5) The kiss of peace could be given by the exchange of anjali hasta and/or the placing of the hands of the giver between the hands of the recipient.
(6) Incense could be made use of in liturgical services. The receptacle could be the simple incense bowl with handle.
(7) The vestments could be simplified. A single tunic-type chasuble with a stole (angavastra) could replace the traditional vestments of the Roman rite....
(8) The corporal could be replaced by a tray (thali or thamboola thattu)....
(9) Oil lamps could be used instead of candles.
(10) The preparatory rite of the Mass may include : ....(b) the welcome of the celebrant in the Indian way, e.g. with a single arati, washing of hands etc.; (c) lighting of the lamp....
(11) In the Offertory rite and at the conclusion of the Anaphora the Indian form of worship may be integrated, that is, double or triple arati of flowers, and/or incense, and/or light...."
An evangelical Internet site exults in how that ministry consciously avoids overturning the beliefs and practices of the target-peoples, how instead it ensures "deculturisation" over an extended period by introducing into their awareness what it terms "functional substitutes" for those beliefs and practices. So much so that it commends its own logo too on this ground! We have not replaced the lotus, "which is supposed to be the seat of the Indian gods," it reports, we have entrenched the Cross in it! While addressing the ignorant and illiterate in India this ministry will point to the lotus, while addressing the potential donor its selling-point is the opposite : "The inference is," the site informs that donor, "that the historical Christ and the Cross must ultimately take the seat of these mythological deities and thereby Christianity should become deeply rooted in the culture of India."
Even minor outfits garner literally millions through this harvesting business. Taken as a whole the enterprise is being conducted on a scale we just cannot imagine. As the late Ram Swarup had pointed out, even fifteen years ago, the Mission Handbook, North American Ministries Overseas had put the number of missionaries raking in the harvest at around a quarter million. Even then it had put the expenditure on such activity at around one and a half billion dollars. Of course, it had exhorted the faithful to dole out much more : "it costs money to stay in business," it had said with fetching frankness! One of the ways for these missionaries to get their flock to cough up money has been to paint our people and country in gory colours -- this has not changed one bit since the 19th century. Starving, sunk in superstition, crushed under the heels of high-caste Hindus, in the grip of Satan himself -- hence the urgent duty to save them, and for that send your donation to.... "The Indian sub-continent, with one billion people, is a living example of what happens when Satan rules the entire culture," Ram Swarup quoted from the Texas-based Gospel for Asia. "India is one vast purgatory in which millions of people.... are literally living a cosmic lie. Could Satan have devised a more perfect system for causing misery?"
Nothing gets the faithful to dip into their pockets as atrocity stories. Missionary publications and Internet sites are predictably full of these : "Christian suffering in India is the worst in India in 50 years," a site informed potential donors through the Internet in a dispatch by the Editors of Religion Today, dated 30 November, 1998 -- that is, even before the current series of fabrications began to be put out. "Mobs of religious fanatics have attacked churches and Christian schools, dispersed outdoor gospel meetings, and beaten evangelists in dozens of incidents this year," it proclaimed. "Oppression is widespread," it said, sourcing it to "a person with contacts." Churches have been burned, an orthodox school attacked for not teaching Sanskrit, tractors and crowbars used in attack.... Government deliberately taking no action.... Hence "the workers pray God for their protection. They 'take the threats before the Lord in fasting prayer and ask Him to protect them.' Christians have been beaten, tortured with razor blades, and thrown from a speeding train, and 6 to 12 per year are martyred, he said." Who said? The very same propagandist-editor who has been in the forefront of spreading concoctions like "Jhabua re-enacted in Jhajjar".
But not just atrocity stories -- if they were all, they could well drain potential donors of enthusiasm, "What's the use?," they could conclude. And so, triumph-in-face-of-atrocity, atrocity-as-a-reflection-of-triumph stories too : the same site, in the same story, "....Hundreds of tribal people in a section of northern India are becoming Christians through the efforts of evangelists" -- notice the unverifiable locale : "a section of northern India"! Next, "The area is known for violent tribal clashes" -- that to redouble the admiration for the evangelists : they are doing the Lord's work in spite of the risks the area poses. "'It is the greatest revival we know of at this time,' he said. 'You don't get this kind of revival without persecution, and bloodshed, and martyrdom. One comes with the other.'"
Conclusion : give because India is in the grip of Satan; give because with its billion people India represents such a vast opportunity to save souls for the Lord; give because Christians are being cut up with razor blades there; give because in spite of this, in fact because of this bloodshed, the harvest is multiplying by the hour.... And as in every advertising campaign, a certificate from a satisfied consumer! "Dr. Donald McGavran made the following observation about the ECI [the Evangelical Church of India]," notes a related site on Internet. "'The fascinating story of the unique church planting ministry of ECI in India must be told everywhere in the pessimistic missionary world. What Dr Sargunam and his colleagues have achieved during the last two decades affirms that the Lord of the harvest is at work in several parts of India. I have been in a few of these churches and watched the number of baptisms. I commend Christians everywhere to support and claim a share in this tremendous victory and help many more thousands to be discipled and Churches multiplied until Christ returns.'"
The site of AD2000 Mission informs donors, Vasanthraj Albert of the Church Growth Research Center in Madras, states, 'I believe that India today is on the map for the global church.' And Peter Wagner, coordinator for the AD2000 United Prayer Mobilization Network observes, 'Of all the nations in the world, India has the highest potential of fruitful investment of evangelistic effort at this time. It is the place to invest time, energy and resources.'"
Organizations upon organizations. Targets upon targets : for "200 people-groups", for "50 languages", for "50 urban areas", for "200 geographical districts." How their mouths water at the sight of "unreached peoples" : "Remarkably this [the unreached of India] is 30% of the world's unreached peoples. The goal is to plant churches in all the remaining 500,000 villages and several thousand unevangelised segments of the 300 largest cities in India. To achieve these goals, delegates have agreed to cooperate with the India Mission Association, which networks to place an evangelist in every postal code area."
"Calcutta is an amazing testimony to the power of prayer," the site of the AD2000 movement reports. An estimated 35 million focused on Calcutta one day, it says. This was followed by a month of on-site prayer. "That month of prayer enhanced the Mission Calcutta 2000 Network, whose aim is to establish a church in every one of the city's 93 postal zones by the end of the year 2000. Great progress has been made. Thirty zones that did not have a church now have one. Today only 30 other zones remain untouched."
And Calcutta isn't the only target, it says. "Varanasi in the state of Uttar Pradesh is Hinduism's holiest city, with thousands of temples centering on the worship of Shiva, an idol whose symbol is the phallus. Many consider this city the very seat of Satan. Hindus believe that bathing in the Ganges at Varanasi washes away all sins. A number of Christian workers took up the burden of prayer for this city and in prayer-walks boldly declared before the idols, 'You are not a living god.' One year later it was discovered that church planting works had opened up in sixty villages around Varanasi over that past year, with 300 baptisms reported." "An intensive training program has been implemented to teach people to practice intercession for the target units," it records. "An experienced prayer warrior from Africa, Dr Zachariah Fomum, has played a key role in this training for prayer.... India is ready and waiting."
One of the difficulties has been that India is "like an intricate mosaic," the site says. At last the barrier is being breached. "Much progress has been made in the last few years to 'spy out the land and its inhabitants' and to give an accurate and up-to-date picture of the challenges and the opportunities," it reports. "The Indian Missions Association, in partnership with Gospel for Asia, has researched and published very informative and accurate books on what has been done so far and the work yet to be done to complete the task of evangelization within India. They have defined the work according to language groups, PIN (Zip) codes, and unreached-people groups in the country...." The work of others is contributing to the same cause -- hence, the Anthropological Survey of India is completing and publishing its "People of India Project". Invaluably helpful data....
And that too testifies to God's plan! "Perhaps never before has this kind of information on India been so carefully surveyed, prepared, well-published and distributed. In this the North India-Hindi Belt is unique. We do not believe it is accidental. God is allowing us to 'spy out the land' that we might go in and claim both it and its inhabitants for Him."
A dozen things can be said of this nonsense. For the moment ponder just two :
* How does all this feverish harvesting compare with what the Supreme Court has laid down as the law of the country ?
* When the Church sets out to convert on such a scale, when its little agents go about "boldly declaring before the idols" their calumnies, is it at all possible that the targeted society will not react?
This obsession with body-counts is ruinous -- not the least for the church itself : it has already drained it of all spirituality, exactly as Gandhiji had warned it would. And even by itself it is bound to ignite a mighty reaction. But there is another feature which is even more certain to stoke reaction, an even mightier reaction than this obsession -- it is to this feature that we shall turn.
India Connect
March 16, 1999
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)