M.M. Thomas’ A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology
September
2016
Presenter:
Laldanmawia
__________________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
M.
M. Thomas’ book A Diaconal Approach to
Indian Ecclesiology is published by Centre for Indian and Inter-religious
Studies (CIIS) and Christava Sahitya Samithy (CSS) in 1995. The contents of the
book are divided into six chapters, compiled in 87 pages. The booklet is a
compilation of his lectures in memory of Kuriakose Elias Chavara[1]
(1805-1871) in Rome. This presentation is a critical reading on the book,
highlighting important points from each chapter.
1. The Purpose for
Writing this Book
The
promise of the process of modernization seemed to be bringing richer and fuller
life for all peoples. But in reality, its betrayal against the promise is
commonly known. The enquiry into those conditions is M.M. Thomas’ central of
theological-ideological-religious enquiry for some years. And he claimed that
this booklet can be called “Salvation and Humanization Revisited after
Twenty-five Years.” The effects and consequences of modernization,
globalization and communalism to the Indian situation compelled him to revisit
on old issues in new ways. Then he wrote this book with a purpose to enquire
about structuring the church of Christ in modern religiously and ideologically
pluralistic India and to provide a diaconal approach to Indian ecclesiology in
the midst of pluralism.
2. Towards an Ecclesiology
in Context
This
chapter starts with his effort for choosing the title of the book. In using the
word Diakonia, while it generally means charitable services,
Thomas wants to extend its meaning to emphasis the church’s action to change
the structure of society in direction of justice.[2]
Then what must be the reason for using Diakonia
as the starting point for Indian Ecclesiology? He sees that Indian churches
emphasize preaching and sacrament in its order of the fellowship, but the diakonia of the church to the society
and culture is neglected very often. That is why he uses Diakonia.
He
hoped that understanding the church as koinonia
in Christ and committed to diakonia to
the larger community could make a very important contribution in the dialogue
with people of other faiths. Some theologians might oppose using the word koinonia outside the church context. But
he stood on the possibility in the light of Jesus Christ as a movement of the
Holy Spirit.[3]
Humanization
is one of the aspects of modernization. However, Thomas was curious to see the
negative impact, which is dehumanization, which he thought we need to provide a
post-modern alternative in world-wide, as well as India. Modern world is
created by three forces; the emergence of scientific rationality and the
revolution of technology, the awakening of the individual and the suppressed
groups, and the break-up of the traditional institutional integration and
secularization. However the 20th Century encountered the betrayal of
modernization of its promises like the eradication of mass poverty, peace of
the world, equality, keeping ecological balances, etc.[4]
To
him, Christianity and Modernity cannot be separated as he said, “Modernity
arose within the western Christendom and from the culture it had created or at
least moulded.”[5]
But it developed without the discipline of the gospel. The churches (Catholic
and Protestant) left the interpretation and direction of the forces of
modernity to the rationalism of enlightenment without much involving in it. Different
attempts had been made to seek to humanize the modernity through hope in the
divine gift of the Kingdom in Jesus Christ. If it happens, it would be based on
post-modern sensibility.[6]
So,
we can know that all the promises of modernization can be fulfilled in India if
the Indian churches actively participate and function on the basis of diakonia. As the modernity cannot be
separated from Christianity, it is necessary to revise the church’s function
from “fellowship to service.” Active fellowship of the church members within
the church boundaries is not enough for encountering the forces of
modernization and its effects. In that situation Thomas’s alternative is a diaconal approach that will serve the
society.
3. Modernization:
Promise and Betrayal
This
chapter deals with the dialectics of modernization and its impact on India and
the church’s diakonia in relation to
them. From the time of Vasco da Gama, European colonial powers including
Christian missionaries entered into the process of making India into
modernization, along with the introduction its natures. However if we examine
carefully, while development had taken placed, no much development for poor
masses of India was there. He said, “The grim fact seems to be that the more
modernization takes place; India seems more and more inclined to abdicate its
original commitment to the human social and cultural objectives.”[7] It
seems that India had greater humanity and reverence for life in the traditional
societies and cultures than the modern. That is why there is an ongoing search
for establishing traditional human values sometimes somewhere through militantly,
but mainly through social activists who search for new paradigm of modernity
and development with more people oriented.
The
economic objectives along with the modern development are likely to be a
betrayal. Instead of eradicating poverty, unemployment and poverty increase,
many indigenous private small-scale industries are destroyed, the land and the
traditional values of Dalits, Tribals, and other lower caste communities are
exploited.[8]
Every corner of India, there are unequal development and unjust sharing, which
automatically bring a people’s movements in different states.
In
that situation, Thomas raises two questions for the church’s diakonia. He says,
One, regarding the church’s
attitude to and solidarity with these and similar people’s struggles for
justice; and two, the possibility of the church exploring and projecting the
vision of an alternative paradigm of economic development, which subordinates
economic growth to economic welfare and social justice for the people.[9]
As
God did in transforming a slave mass into the people of Israel and in creating
the church, and as God does in Christ taking no-people and making them a
people, the people of God, the church also must work in converting a community
from being mere objects of development into a people who are subjects of their
own development. Harvey Perkins, who works for ecumenical development in Asia,
rightly presents in his book called “Reflections on the Gospel and the Churches
Task in Re-peopling the De-peopled.”[10]
If
we look the history of modern mission in India, there had been missionary
involvements in this kind of peopling the poor, humanizing the dehumanized. Today,
the same must be the church movements in redeeming the betrayal of modernization.
Development cannot simply focus to economic development, but it must focus
larger human development that will cover all kinds of people. That points to
the holistic character of the alternative paradigm of modern development.
4. An Alternative Paradigm
of Modernization
The
first alternative paradigm would be reorganizing the priority of development. The
World Consultation under the WCC which met in Montreau discussed the meaning
and priority of development. They put social justice first, followed by
self-reliance and then economic growth in reverse to the traditional order.
This encourages a participation in the development putting social justice first
priority. In this context, S. L. Parmar speaks of people-oriented technology as
basic to a people-oriented economy in India, saying the need is to evolve and
rebuild technologies primarily based on natural, human and renewable local
resources, which will enhance people’s participation in the production.[11]
Gandhi,
Ambedkar and Lohia are sources of creative ideas in an exploration of post
modern pattern of integral human development. They emphasize principle of
subsidiarity and human ecology in response to the independence and
inter-relation between modern class and traditional caste, tribal and gender
sources of oppression in contemporary Indian society. The challenges in the
primal, ecological and feminist movements are similar, because their concept of
society is holistic in nature.[12]
Another
paradigm of development under modernization is about human dignity of women,
dalits and tribals in their struggle for social and eco-justice. The
contribution of Christian mission in this process is worth. Even though
negative approach to their traditional cultures is developed among the
converted people under the influenced of Western Christian mission, the coming
movements of indigenization and contextualization of Christianity helped the
church to open themselves to the traditional cultures.[13]
If
the paradigm of the development is shifted from economic development to social
development along with social justice, there will be more involvement of people
in the development process, that will automatically bring equal development
under modernization.
5. Search for a
Spiritual Reinforcement of Secularism in India
Secularism
in India arose during the Indian peoples’ struggle for in dependence from
British colonialism under the Indian National Congress. Its ideology in the 19th
Century was Liberal Nationalism which demanded more participation of Indians in
the government. But in the coming 20th Century, the ideology moved
to militant nationalism based on Hindu religious and cultural revivalism. This
brought insecurity to non-Hindu and minorities as they saw no significance of
political independence for cultural and social justice. However Gandhi, Nehru
and other leaders saw the necessity of having Secular Democratic State, and
moved the ideology to Secular Nationalism again.[14]
However
the Open Secularism was threatened by the partition of Indian subcontinent into
Muslim and Hindu, as well as by the raising of Hindutva ideology with RSS. Secularism
and Communalism in religious pluralistic India have specific meanings. The
former is openness and cooperation among religious communities to promote
freedom and justice in common life, and the latter is the organization of a
religious community to compete with other religious communities to advance its
own self interest.[15]
According
to S. Gopal, the shift to communalism came with European colonialism that based
their ideology on ethnic purity and single language. Other ideologists of
secularism advocated the total privatization of religion. But Gopal argues that
it leads to the same Communalist reaction. Not only Hinduism, Christianity and
all other religions are also condemned as responsible for communalization of
traditional religions. So there is a need for a new dimension of Secularism
which does not ignore the religious dimension of corporate human existence in
politics, economics and society.[16]
Communalism
in India has been a constant challenge to the church as a minority community to
serve in the name of Christ all peoples of the pluralistic nation. If the
churches in India continue to be static community that concerns its own
self-interest, it will violate the true calling of the church to be a body to
fill the entire society, across boundaries of caste, class, language and race.
That is why, the open church is emphasized with flexible structures,
boundaries, rules and rituals, which is in dialectical and dialogical
relationship with religions, ideologies and cultures towards movements for
justice in the society.[17]
After
Indian independence, secularism shifted its meaning and emphasis due to
religious fanaticism. It needs to be reinforced with an open secularism that
will open gates for religious, ideological and cultural movements for justice
in the society.
6. India as a Community
of Diverse Peoples
Thomas
describes India as a community of diverse people with the notion of holism,
which concerns for building India a community of peoples with parity given to
their respective cultures. The cultures are interacting culture as they are
community of diverse brought by cultural self-identities of peoples. Many
people in India are under cultural colonization which has been part of
modernization. When alien cultures come into contact with the existing
cultures, cultural renaissance, cultural reintegration, creativity of new life,
etc come on one hand, but on the other hand cultural displacement and
dislocation also come.[18]
In
the Northeast India also, changes in traditional cultures are brought by forces
of modernization. But many changes are in terms of adaptation and
transformation. That means the integral self-identity as a people is not
completely diminished. Tribal Christian leaders of India had met in Shillong on
a theme Rediscovery of the Tribal Personality in the Context of Church and
Nation, in which they addressed the relation of politics, economics, society
and religion to the cultural destabilization of tribal peoples and
reintegration within the context of the nation understood as the community of
peoples with diverse cultures.[19] So
it is necessary for tribals to receive the development along the line of their
own tradition and genius.
The
Constitution of India acknowledge the diversity of cultures in a way in which
the nation-state is conceived as a federation of linguistic states, which
maintain the concept of India as a land of diverse peoples with many national
language and regional languages. It is not advisable that the state support to
permanent isolation of any cultural group leading to ethnic cleansing. That is
why dialogue with other cultures in the local as well as the wider setting is
essential. An important aspect of the present situation is reinterpretation of
both traditional and the modern culture. In that situation, the Indian church’s
diaconal role has been building the church as fellowship of peoples with
diverse cultural traditions.[20]
The
present Hindutva movement for making India one culture and one religion ruins
the unity in diversity. As this chapter deals the diversity of people in a
community, Indian community is at its best with this pluralistic nature. It is
the situation where peoples of different religions need to work together for
common hope and motif of justice in the society.
7. Faiths in Dialogue
on the Spirituality of Suffering Servanthood
This
chapter deals with the need of interfaith dialogue on a spirituality which can
keep the struggles within the framework of the ultimate goals of the whole
community of life on the earth. It also looks for the specific contribution of
the church as koinonia in Christ to
this spirituality.
According
to Thomas, there are three types of spirituality in India- the primal cosmic,
the mystic acosmic and the historical messianic. The primal vision of
spirituality is characterized by the spiritual unity of human, animals, nature,
spirits, gods and high gods. This spirituality is usually represented in the
practical ways of community living. The mystic spiritual vision realizes itself
in the experience of undifferentiated unity of human self with the Universal
Self. Historic mesianism finds human self-fulfilment in participating in the
ultimate purpose at work in human history moving to an ultimate community of
freedom and love.[21]
Two
types of Messianism have been mentioned which have been found in Christianity,
Islam and other secular humanist ideology. One is the Nationalist Messianism of
the Conquering King, and another is the Universalist Messianism of the
Suffering Servant.[22] Many
theologians/writers see the appropriateness of Messianism of Suffering Servant
in the liberation of primal people in India.
The
modern ecumenical movement has been involved in the evolution of a spirituality
to motivate and guide the church in its diaconal
ministry in the modern world. Thomas regards the earlier theological
explorations need to be updated with the new insights regarding the
significance of the web of cosmic relations and interfaith cooperation in
building the community life. Then the new explorations will aim at making the
web of cosmic relations integral to Christian spirituality. In line with that,
K. C. Abraham sees the necessity of paradigm shift in theology from earlier
Christo-centricism to Christ-in-relation to affirm God’s transforming work.[23]
That means instead of a transcendent Christ, Christ the first born; our brother
of the cosmic and human family will be quite meaningful and relevant in the
reality of life.
The
church in India is then called to proclaim the gospel of the Crucified and
Risen Christ as the source of redemption of all spiritualities, and to
demonstrate the koinonia in Christ
uniting peoples of diverse religions, ideologies and cultures as well as cosmos
with its bio-diversity. It is called for an active dialogue with other faiths
to build up syncretism of spiritualities based on the Messianism of the
Suffering Servant, which is symbolized by the centrality of the Crucified
Christ and the prophetic diakonia of
the church. Even though Thomas sees the occurring different emphasis of
syncretism of spiritualities in other faiths, as long as the spirit of
suffering Servanthood is shared in a real sense, he hopes that there is a basis
for dialogical and dialectical cooperation among faiths to build a more human
and eco-friendly alternative pattern of modernization.[24]
The
Messianism of the Conquering King represents the Lordship and Kingship of
Christ. This kind of spirituality brought conflicts and wars in the history of
Christianity. Looking Indian pluralistic situation, if the churches present the
spirit of Christ Kingship and Lordship, the writer of the book sees no
conformity for the welfare of the society. That is the reason why he proposes
the Suffering Servanthood of Christ in dialogue with other faiths. However it
is difficult to see how far it will be successful particularly in the Indian
present context, in which the spirit of Nationalist Messianism of the
Conquering King under National movements of Hindutva and RSS can be seen.
Concluding Remarks
Diverse
Peoples of India are modernized and enter into the world of dependent and
inter-relate community. Interaction of different religions, ideologies and
cultures is unavoidable. In that context, M.M. Thomas sees the necessity of reexamining
Indian Ecclesiology. Then he proposes diaconal approach to Indian Ecclesiology
with having koinonia in Christ in the
process of building a more human and eco-friendly alternative pattern of
modernization in India. If we examine the Indian context today,
Can
a diaconal approach be meaningful in Indian Ecclesiology in the pluralistic
context? Let us examine the contemporary situation:
Firstly, Indian
churches need a paradigm shift in its ecclesiology, from its traditions which
emphasis the ordering of the fellowship centred on preaching and sacraments to diakonia (service to the world of
society and culture). Many Indian churches are hiding from social actions in
building an open secular koinonia
with justice in the society, particularly in collaboration with other faiths.
The presenter agrees with M. M. Thomas’ diaconal approach in this area.
Secondly,
mission of the churches in India today is mainly liberating the people from the
state of marginalization, poverty, alienation, intolerance towards other
faiths, etc. Whereas, the mission of the Evangelical churches of N.E India is
on the basis of Christian population expansion through preaching the gospel. In
the midst of these mission understandings, diaconal approach is suited to have
dialogue with people of other faiths. Diakonia
is nowhere in opposition to the church and Christian activities.
Thirdly, the
pluralistic context of India is enforced by modernization with all kinds of
development. Along with development, people encounter dehumanization in various
forms. But, Indian church’s diakonia
does not move away all the walls that block humanization. That is why we can say
that it is not yet successful enough. Among the elements (preaching, teaching,
fellowship and service), the churches of India must give more emphasis in the diakonia (service).
[1] Kuriakose Elias Chavara was the
founder of the Carmelites of Mary Immaculate (CMI) of Kerala.
[2] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology
(Rome and Tiruvalla: Centre for Indian and Inter-religious Studies and Christava
Sahitya Samithy, 1995), 9.
[3] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology,
13.
[4] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 15-16.
[5] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 16.
[6] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 17-18.
[7] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 22.
[8] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 25.
[9] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 27.
[10] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 29.
[11] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 31-32.
[12] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 33-35.
[13] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology,
38-40.
[14] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 42.
[15] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 46.
[16] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 49-50.
[17] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology,
55.
[18] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 57.
[19] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 60.
[20] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 62-65.
[21] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 71.
[22] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 72.
[23] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 81.
[24] M. M. Thomas, A Diaconal Approach to Indian Ecclesiology, 82.
No comments:
Post a Comment