|
The Church’s Mission and Post-Modern Humanism by M. M. Thomas Dr. M.M. Thomas was one of the formost Christian leaders of the nineteenth century. He was Moderator of the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches and Governor of Nagaland. An ecumenical theologian of repute, he wrote more than sixty books on Theology and Mission, including 24 theological commentaries on the books of the bible in Malayalam (the official language of the Indian state of Kerela). This book was jointly published by Christava Sahhya Samhhi (OSS), Tiruvalla, Kerela, and The Indian Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (ISPOK), Post Box 1585, Kashmere Gate, Delhi - 110 006, in 1996. Price Rs. 60. Used by permission of the publisher. This material was prepared for Religion Online by Ted & Winnie Brock.
Chapter 21: The Church - The Fellowship of the Baptised and the Unbaptised A paper written
for the Festschrift of Dr. K.Rajaratnam "Liberating Witness” published in
August 1995. In the Light of Life Feb. 1995
(Face to Face, pp. 31-34) “An Interview with Mr.R.K.Karanjia, editor, Blitz Bombay”
has been published. In it Karanjia speaks of his experiences which helped move
him to the living reality of Jesus and the fellowship with the disciples of
Jesus as mediating God to his life. He goes on to point out how he has
been able to assimilate the new spirituality in which he continues to live. In 1989, Karanjia went to Russia to
receive the Vorvosky Award. He saw Stalin’s man who had demolished the
Christian cathedral of the Czars “down own his knees worshipping the Cross of
Jesus Christ”. Later he had a long talk with him which was “the first blow
which moved me from Karl Marx and the rest of the commies to Jesus Christ and
his disciples” and which finally led his own evolution into “a Jesus-bhakt”.
Jesus was experienced as a “helping avatar” of the Breach Candy
Hospital. It was an elderly nursing sister who had come to know Jesus through a
deep personal tragedy who helped him experience the spiritual power of physical
strength and healing in God through Jesus. After that, Karanjia says, he went
ahead experimenting with little or big miracles on behalf of himself and
others. He relates one experience where faced with the tragedy of a baby with
meningitis, he talked to the grandmother about “Jesus and his healing power,
and got her family’s consent for prayers. I spoke to a Christian group about
him and they too began to pray for his quick and complete recovery”. The baby
was cured. The interviewer asked him whether he was “converted to
Christianity” and he answered, “No. I am not converted to Christianity. I am
not a Christian. I continue to be a Zoroastrian. All I have done is to accept
Jesus Christ in my heart. Nobody has tried to persuade me into anything like a
conversion. Nobody has hinted at such an attempt.” He added, “When I first
received Jesus in my heart, as I was asked to, I felt my inside transforming
itself into the hall of the Cathedral of His Holy Name with angels singing
Hallelujah”. And his heart was filled with joy and a “stupendous faith” took
hold of him. “It was a moment when I felt as if I were overlooking and piloting
the universe.” How do we evaluate the case of Karanjia’s
conversion to faith in Christ and his fellowship with believers in Christ
without conversion from Zoroastrian to the Christian community from the point
of the theology of evangelism and ecclesiology? It reminds me of the statement from an
NCC Consultation in the sixties on “Renewal in Mission” held in Nagpur. “In the
perspective of the Bible, conversion is turning from idols to serve a living
and true God and not moving from one culture to another and from one community
to another as it is understood in the communal sense in India today”, and
further that so long as baptism remains a transference of cultural or communal
allegiance, “we cannot judge those who while confessing faith in Jesus, are
unwilling to be baptised”(Renewal in. Mission p.220). In fact, the
nature of the church as fellowship-in-Christ envisaged in this statement
transcends all religious communities including the Christian as understood in
the communal sense in India and is compatible with the membership of the
Christ-bhakt in any religious or secular communal formation. “As understood in the communal sense in
India” is crucial here. In the setting of the Indian legal system in which each
religious community is recognized as having its own personal law of civil
relations, change from one community to another is a legal act, and baptism is
a transfer from one legal community to another rather than a sacramental act
expressing personal faith. Further, since religious minorities have legal
entity in the political framework through reservations and other safeguards,
change of a person from one religious community to another is seen as enhancing
the political strength of one community and weakening of another. Therefore the
meaning of conversion gets perverted. Still further, each religion in India is
generally associated with one cultural stream. Therefore conversion to
Christianity has been seen as change from one cultural tradition to another.
Conversion to Christianity is largely seen as weakening the indigenous national
culture of the person converted. There have been many instances in modern
Indian history of people distinguishing between Christian faith from Christian
religion and religious community and of accepting the former without the
latter. Christ not Christianity or Western culture, has been the slogan of many
leaders of the Neo-Hindu movements in the 19th century, even as Christian
Missions insisted on the three as one package. Of course the approach of the
western Christian mission and national churches have changed their attitude in
this respect, though they would make a distinction between the centrality of
the person of Christ and a general devotion to the ethical teaching of Christ
in saving faith. The question is, what is the nature of the fellowship of those
who acknowledge Jesus Christ as in some sense central to and decisive in
mediating God to human persons? And what should the evangelist aim in this
respect? In a survey the Gurukul research Centre
made, it came to light that there were many persons in the city of Madras who
had accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Saviour but had chosen to continue
in their own religious cultural and caste communities without conversion to the
Christian community. Some of them maintain close spiritual fellowship with
disciples of Christ minus the sacramental aspects but others pursue their
devotion to Christ without such support. This is not a new phenomenon in India. In
the history of the modern neo-Hindu movements the person of Jesus was a strong
component as my study of The Acknowledged Christ of the Indian Renaissance had
shown. In the case of Kesub Chandra Sen and P.C.Majumdar, Jesus Christ as the
revelation of the Divine Humanity of Sonship was decisive for their faith and
ethics and sought to redefine traditional Hinduism both religion and community
in the light of Jesus. They even formed a Neo-Hindu Church of Christ with its
own sacraments of Baptism and Eucharist. In this century, O. Kandasamy Chetty
of the Madras Christian College was a disciple of Christ and kept himself in
spiritual fellowship with the fellow-disciples without joining the church by
baptism. In his personal statement to the Missionary Conference on “Why I am
not a Christian?” he said, he believed in Christ as the One Saviour of
humankind. He added, “nothing would give me deeper satisfaction than to feel
that I belong to his Body. I am not sure that I remain outside the Christian
Church. It is true that I have never felt any inward call that I could
recognize as divine in its inspiration to join the Christian Church in the
narrow sense in which some evidently use the term. Nor do I believe that while
every believer is called upon to let his light shine before all the world, he
is also called upon to join the church in the narrower sense of the term. There
is nothing essentially sinful in Hindu society any more than there is anything
essentially pure in the Christian society-for that is what the church amounts
to- so that one should hasten from the one to the other...So long as the
believer’s testimony for Christ is open and as long as his attitude towards
Hindu society in general is critical, and towards social and religious
practices inconsistent with the spirit of Christ is protestant and practically
protestant, I would allow him to struggle his way to the light with failure
here and failure there, but with progress and success on the whole. The spirit
of Christ is a peace-destroying spirit, I may assure you. If you cooperate with
that spirit, your Christian believer in Hindu society will come out all right
in the end. He may not join your church but he will prepare the way for the
movement from within Hindu society towards Christ who shall fulfill India’s
highest aspirations and impart that life of freedom for which she has been
panting for ages... “(Kaj Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity pp.
207-214). There have been Hindu groups like that of Subba Rao of
Andhra Pradesh, committed to spirituality and religious rites centred in the
Crucified Christ as Saviour and Healer but deciding to stay outside the main
stream of the church communities of the baptized believers. There were others like Manilal C. Parekh
who took baptism which he considered “ a purely spiritual sacrament signifying
the dedication of the new disciple to Christ” conferring the privilege to make
known the name of Christ. But he strongly felt that “the new disciple should
remain within his own community witnessing from there”(ed. Boyd. Manual C
Parekh p.13f). Parekh’s complaint was that “the Christian church had
become a civic community instead of a spiritual fellowship” (Carl Binslev, L.P.Larsen
p.69). The poet Narayana Vamana Tilak was
baptised and worked from within the organized Mission for a time, but in the
end “visualized an Indian pattern of discipleship of Christ and a church of
Christ transcending the community of the baptised. In 1917 he resigned from the
Missionary society to launch the movement of God’s Durbar...a brotherhood of
the baptised and the unbaptised”(Acknowledged Christ. . 1991 edition. p.
281). In view of the ambiguity of the meaning
of baptism in the Indian inter-religious and political context referred above,
the question of giving to the unbaptised Christ-bhakts in other religious
communities a sense of full belonging to the spiritual fellowship of the church
including participation in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper needs
exploration. Principal Larsen of the United Theological College, Bangalore is
reported to have invited O Kandasamy Chetty to the Lord’s Table at a conference
violating the existing rule that only baptised Christians should be so invited.
The question is whether that existing rule which the organized churches observe
has any particular theological validity. If baptism is the mark of leaving
one’s religious community to join the Christian religious community, cannot
those persons who refuse to take that step for reasons of conscience be
permitted to join the fellowship of the Lord’s Table. The Religion and Society of March
1972 has a discussion on the subject, based on a correspondence between Bishop
Newbigin and myself in which many theologians in India and abroad participated.
The Debate on Mission Issues From the Indian Context (edited by Herbert
E. Hoefer, Gurukul, Madras 1079) has a whole collection of essays discussing
“issues of Baptism in the Indian Mission Context” which carries the debate
forward (pp.403f.). T.M.Philip’s essay in it on “A History of Baptismal
Practices and Theologies” points to a wide variety of practice and understanding
that existed in the churches from NT times and says that the historical
perspective would help us “to maintain a certain flexibility and openness in
the light of the new questions and challenges presented by our present
historical situation”. He asks for a new understanding of the baptismal rite in
India today which meets the problem raised here. That problem is that “the rite
has become a legal condition of entry into the church which functions as a
religious communal group” and therefore fails to convey its full meaning and
purpose as “the expression of our solidarity to the new humanity in Christ
which transcends all communal or caste solidarities”(p.321). “A report of the
Seminar on the Relationship of the Church to Non-baptised believers in Christ”
is particularly illuminating because it took up issues raised by the unbaptised
Christ-bhaktas some of whom were present along with evangelists who were
alive to these issues in their evangelistic work. The Seminar started with three questions
which T.A.Khareem, an unbaptised Muslim believer in Christ, asked: “1. Is
baptism necessary for one’s salvation? 2. How am I to witness and minister to
my family and community if I am cut off through taking baptism? 3. Is there a
fellowship to receive me if I leave my Muslim community?”(p.398). The Seminar
also faced the challenge of the Subba Rao movement from Andhra Pradesh. Subba
Rao in his conversation with Principal Devasahayam of the Rajahmundry Institute
had claimed that “Christ has been imprisoned in the church” and his aim was to “lift
Christ, above religion and make him available to all”. For him the
traditional rites and practices of the church are “optional”. He claims that
“hundreds of caste Hindus and government officials have found Subba Rao’s
decultured approach to Christ a releasing experience; now they can ally
themselves with Christ without identifying themselves with a different social
community and way of life”(p.400). The report has many insights. Its critique
of the church of the baptised is the most crucial. It says, “In many subtle
ways Christians have communalised the gospel and Christ himself. Christians
have become, according to their practical self-understanding, a self-centred
caste among castes (or better a religious sub-caste among the castes). Many
evangelists seriously hesitate to expose their new converts to the
disappointing life of the organized church...Baptism has always been into the
fellowship of the church. Yet the church must self-critically ask itself if it
has a nurturing fellowship for converts from different castes or from Islam”.
The report ends by suggesting that keeping up intimate contacts with each other
would help lead the baptised and unbaptised “into the true repentance of
Baptism” and adds, “The Spirit of God blows where it wills. We are called to
try to keep up with Him”(pp. 402-3). |