The parliamentary election held last March in India, the world’s largest democracy, was significant. It broke the monopoly the Congress party had held for the thirty years of the nation’s independence. The people asserted their sovereignty and freed themselves from Indira Gandhi’s semi-dictatorial rule. Their vote destroyed the extra-constitutional power centers and suddenly arrested the processes through which fundamental rights of citizens were being subtly set aside, the rule of law endangered, and the judiciary made a servant of the ruling powers. They showed that the minor benefits of the Emergency declared in June 1975 were not worth the sacrifice of freedom. They displayed faith in basic democratic values and in the Constitution.
The Janata Party ushered in not merely political change, but an era. Some of the old guard like J. P. Narayan and Moraiji Desai took a new lease on life. The dramatic freedom struggle almost equaled a second “independence.”
The hope of people has been revived in these first few months under the new government. But they have learned not to be uncritically enthusiastic about any government. The problems the country faces are serious, complex, and numerous. There is no wonder drug to cure the ills of India. But there is a fresh breeze of optimism that “both bread and liberty” may still be a possibility.
Where was the church when these decisively significant changes took place? Silent and uncritical, going along with the status quo. Except for some isolated cases, the church in India supported the ruling Congress and Indira’s Emergency. Overnight they welcomed the new Janata Government with the same passive loyalty. To make broad statements regarding the attitude of the entire diverse Christian community regarding politics may seem unfair, but certain observations are valid.
Christians are conditioned to play a safe game in socio-political matters. Their attitude is not mere neutrality, because silence in the face of unjust and false practices implies support of them. This soft politics is due rather to a lack of courage to relate Christian convictions to burning issues. The few times the church spoke up were to protect its own interest. Christians are also often obsessed with a minority complex. They are only two-and-a-half per cent of the population and divided into many factions and denominations with no united voice.
Another hindrance to a significant role for the church is its Western image. Too many Christians seem deculturalized and isolated by Western thinking and lifestyle. Most Christian institutions, buildings, and property were gifts from the West and even today carry on with Western subsidy.
In recent months, however, there has been growing awareness by many Christians that it is not only their privilege but their Christian duty to be witnesses for Christ in socio-political affairs. Any indifference to such critical issues as social justice is in effect a denial of Christ’s total claim upon them. Current discussion on what the nature of Christian involvement should be in the new socio-political scene of India is stirring up many concerns. Three of them are noted briefly here.
The Church and Political Options
Despite the efforts of the previous governments, the basic problems of poverty, injustice, illiteracy, and ill health remain about the same as they were thirty years ago. Adjustments in policies and five-year-development schemes have made only marginal differences. Radical change seems the only answer. Who will bring it and how?
Extreme rightists such as the JanaSangh, whose ideologies are based on renascent Hinduism, are popular with deeply rooted religious segments of the country. Of course, the battered Congress may succeed in overhauling itself and maintain some significance in India’s future. But the options before India today seem to be either Communism or Gandhian Socialism.
So far the Indian masses, steeped in Hindu thinking, have not taken to Communism. It remains alien in spite of its long history in India. Also, Indian Communists are split into at least three major factions. But Gandhian Socialism has suddenly come into focus with the new government. It differs radically from Marxian Socialism in its opposition to class conflict and bloody revolution, in its emphasis on personal and spiritual values, and in its democratic framework. Gandhi knew and loved the villages where 75 per cent of the people still live. His emphasis on developing rural areas through intermediate technologies and spiritual resources is back in style. The simple, the small, is beautiful. If these two ideologies further polarize there is no doubt where the church will find its closest affinity. The Role of Christian Service Agencies
In the past, most schools, hospitals, orphanages, and homes for the destitute have been developed and operated by the Christian Church. The poor and outcast have benefited greatly. The church is nationally recognized for being the vanguard in providing the best educational and medical facilities in the country. But now the government and other agencies have taken up many such programs and are often doing a better job. The church, to maintain these institutions, depends largely on outside funds; thus they have somewhat of an alien character, and show no particular sacrifice or love. And what is even sadder, some have very little of anything Christian left in them. The church needs to radically rethink the role of its service agencies, and redisover their place in rural India where other agencies are reluctant to go. They should also pioneer new areas of ministry. But the church should play a key role in a more central task, which leads us to our next point.
The Church and Peoples’ Movements
The people of India are the 80 per cent of the population that constitute the under-privileged masses, or have-nots. What the people ask is not for a few meager benefits. They want social justice and basic rights and privileges. Through organized strikes and confrontations they are emerging as a powerful force. They are no longer willing to be exploited.
What is the church’s responsibility in this? It should make people aware of their value, dignity, and rights, and stand with them in their struggle for justice. The church should be the conscience of the nation, have courage to speak clearly against untruth and injustice. In its unique role, the church will identify with the “janata” (the people), not with any political party.
The church’s past preoccupation with charitable activities may: have dealt more with symptoms than with the basic underlying diseases in India’s society. Now the church is searching its soul for an answer to the question as to whether it is willing to leave its shell of non-involvement and security and become a vital part of the struggle of the seemingly powerless masses.
Any movement indifferent or opposed to religion cannot succeed in today’s India. Understanding this truth was the genius of Gandhiji. The heritage he left India is the waging of war by soul power with spiritual resources. What would living this heritage mean for Indian Christians as they put into action their basic Christ-given convictions? Herein lies the challenge facing the Indian church today.
SAPHIR P. ATHYAL
