CASTES, CONVERSIONS AND INDIAN CHRISTIANITY
By G. Anilkumar*
In India every debate on conversion to Christianity ends with Hindu society's
caste-based "poison of divisions". Missionaries and their supporters present
conversion as the only "antidote" available. And missionaries are "doctors,"
hell bent on administering that antidote! And our "secularists" have been
repeating it. "Caste" was an old weapon of missionaries who established the
conversion business in India. Anti-Brahminism, "Dravidianism," conversion as
"the solution" to caste and the Aryan-Dravidian divide were effectively
introduced as stratagems for conversion by Bishop Robert Caldwell. In his book
"Christianity explained to Hindus: Christianity and Hinduism compared" (1893),
he wrote that caste first arose from difference of race; people with black skin
were "original inhabitants of India" (p. 20). "On the other hand", he wrote,
"Christianity teaches that God gave us life and continually preserves us. He is
therefore our Father in heaven… The Brotherhood of man follows Fatherhood of
God… But Hinduism makes life a curse instead of a blessing" (p. 20-21).
Caldwell's arguments are well known. His "Dravidian Grammar" was a
trend-setter. But why did he painstakingly write so many books? If we read his
lecture, "Progress of Christianity in India" we get the answer. He says, "an
encouraging amount of interest in the progress of Christianity has now at last
been awakened, and a demand for information has been excited: it is now felt
that a great door and effectual has been opened to us in India, and that the
conversion of India to Christ is one of the greatest works, if not the great
work, to which the Church and nation of England are called" (Lectures on the
Tinnevelly Missions, 1857, p. 4). For sheer audacity and bigotry, Caldwell
could today be called a "cultural terrorist". Yet his views are endorsed by a
section of India's "secular" intelligentsia! They were reiterated in
Karnataka's recent public debate on conversion. The debate on conversion was
launched by the oldest Kannada daily, Samyukta Karnataka, with some
well-researched articles by selected writers and scholars (my own essay has
appeared in Karmaveera, a weekly of the same group). Taking the cue, the
largest circulated Kannada daily, Vijay Karnataka, provided a platform for a
bare-all debate. Noted Kannada novelist Dr. S.L. Bhyrappa started with a big
bang with his one-and-a half-page article. Every small and big, famous and
notorious person in Karnataka has presented his or her opinion on the subject.
Professional missionaries kept silent; our secularists did all the batting on
their behalf! Once again, leftists are proving that they are "more Christian"
than the original faith-sellers. First of all, is it good to debate conversion
as suggested by some political leaders time and again? Should anybody debate
conversion with anybody else out on the street? Would one debate it with
professional missionaries, who have taken a vow, or money, to compulsively meet
a number of people everyday just to persuade them to embrace Christianity?
Should we organize an open debate at an open forum where anybody, from a
scholar to a street vendor, from a professional gangster to a professional
pimp, could come and vent his "thoughts"?
I do not suggest we should shy away from such debates. While they do not solve
any religious problem, they bring pertinent questions into the open. Let people
be aware of everything vis-à-vis conversion and Christianity, and about castes.
Hindus should not hesitate to debate caste as they have nothing to hide. But
they should understand what Christianity is all about. They should study and
debate its history and methods of expansion, its "spiritualism" and
"brotherhood." They should ask missionaries why casteless societies were
converted to Christianity throughout the ages and throughout the world.
Missionaries' typical answers are well known. In India, "conversion is the best
solution for caste-based differences within Hindu society;" in America,
"barbaric tribes had to be civilized and spiritualized." They always proffer
local issues to justify conversions. In India's case, most proponents of
Christianity's "monolithic unity" and Hinduism's "caste- based divisions"
invoke B.R. Ambedkar to remain politically correct while attacking the faith!
But all fail to explain why Ambedkar did not convert to Caldwell's "great
brotherhood" called Christianity. In fact, Ambedkar wanted to send a strong
message through his religious conversion. After examining Christianity, he
wrote in 1938: "caste governs the life of Christians as much as it does the
life of the Hindus. There are Brahmin Christians and non-Brahmin Christians.
Among non-Brahmin Christians there are Maratha Christians, Mahar Christians,
Mang Christians and Bhangi Christians. Similarly in the south there are Pariah
Christians, Malla Christians and Madiga Christians. They would not inter-marry.
They would not inter-dine" (Selected Speeches and Writings, Vol. 5, Government
of Maharashtra, 1989, p. 445-78). Ambedkar converted to Buddhism as it was a
"part and parcel of Bharatiya culture." He said: "I have taken care that my
conversion will not harm the tradition of the culture and the history of this
land" (Quoted in 'Ambedkar', by Dhananjay Keer, p. 498). The hard truth is that
even Buddhism is not a monolithic unity! It has different schools of thought
and different traditional streams. For that matter where do we find the most
unified, rock-solid group on earth? Is Islam one single entity? Is Christianity
a superb monolith? If so, since when? Since its inception or through
"spiritualism"? Since the First Council of Nicaea, when Emperor Constantine
decided, at sword-point, what should and should not be the tenets of 'official'
Christianity? Or since the Second Vatican Council, when it was decided to
establish the supremacy of Catholicism once again? Let us examine the facts;
consult their own sources. Christians are not one; they are divided into
separate churches and traditions. Over the centuries, Christianity has divided
into numerous denominations. Each denomination has its own distinctive beliefs
or practices, yet we hold them to be branches of the same religion. But when it
comes to Hindu society, every Tom, Dick or Harry talks about caste and asks us
"where is the common unity?" as if there is no common thread of beliefs among
Hindus! Although missionaries never talk about their internal divisions openly,
conversion always happens to a particular denomination, to a particular church.
One can never get converted to "Christianity". He or she can only become a
member of a particular church. When former British Prime Minister Tony Blair
converted to the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican community and its church
vehemently protested. Why do street missionaries never talk about their
internal divisions? This is an age-old strategy. The famous Christian
apologist, C.S. Lewis, who wrote Mere Christianity, in 1940s, reminded
believers about this strategy: "our divisions should never be discussed except
in the presence of those who have already come to believe that there is one God
and that Jesus Christ is his only Son"! Let us move on to the denominations. In
1985, it was estimated that there were 22,000 Christian denominations with 5
new ones being formed each week! There are nearly 34,000 (probably more)
Christian and Messianic denominations and churches in the world now. These may
be broken down to six different main blocks:
1] Independents 220002] Protestants 90003] 'Marginals' 1600 4]
Orthodox 781 5] Roman Catholics 242 6] Anglicans 168
Total 33791(Source: World Christian Encyclopedia, by Barrett,
Kurian, Johnson; Oxford Univ. Press, 2nd edition, 2001, Vol. 1, p.16-18). What
are denominations? The encyclopedia explains: "a denomination is defined in
this Encyclopedia as an organized aggregate of worship centers or congregations
of similar ecclesiastical tradition within a specific country; i.e. as an
organized Christian church or tradition or religious group or community of
believers, within a specific country, whose component congregations and members
are called by the same denominational name in different areas, regarding
themselves as one autonomous Christian church distinct from other
denominations, churches and traditions. As defined here, world Christianity
consists of 6 major ecclesiastico-cultural blocs, divided into 300 major
ecclesiastical traditions, composed of over 33,000 distinct denominations in
238 countries, these denominations themselves being composed of over 3,400,000
worship centers, churches or congregations" (Barrett et al, Vol. 1, page 16,
Table 1-5). Pope John Paul II once called Protestant missionaries "rapacious
wolves" for converting Catholics! So much for "monolithic unity"! In the second
week of August 2007, Roman Catholics, Protestants, Methodists, Pentecostals,
Orthodox, Evangelicals (sounds like caste names!) gathered to map a "common
religious conversion code" in France. The code, which has to be finalized in a
year or two, was named "Ethical Conversion Code". "Conversion is a
controversial issue not only in inter-religious relations, but in
intra-Christian relations as well," admitted Dr. Hans Ucko, World Council of
Churches programme executive and one of the organizers of the meeting. So much
for "monolithic unity" and "great brotherhood"! The author is a columnist and
Supplement Editor of the Kannada daily, Samyukta Karnataka
