There doesn't need to be a commentary on the problem of corruption in India. It is widespread and infecting every nerve and cell of the governmental administrative system. It's important to ax the tree at the root in order to destroy it.
ROOTS
The problem is systemic. One who gets into it usually ends up practicing it not just because others are practicing it, but because he might have got into the system through a corrupt mechanism of bribery on one hand. On the other, it may also mean that there are people out there who are willing to keep the mechanism going for their own benefit, meting injustice to the poor, and, perhaps, avoiding it would mean a loss of job or favor.
CHALLENGES
The challenge is not to uproot the wheat with the weed. There are many still in the system who are right, while the judicial system that relies mainly on evidences would fail to find some to condemn the corrupt. There is also the danger that the just ones are falsely condemned in place of or with the corrupt. The challenge is not chiefly for retributive justice, but for corrective justice.
SOLUTIONS
Plato compared the State to the human body. Administration of proper drugs can weed out diseases and allow natural healing to take place. Truth is the best drug. Justice is the result of it. To a great extent, entertainment media and traditional cultures foster false world-views and expectations that provide real space for corruption as a quick alternative. These have to be adequately and properly countered by truth.
Minimum doses of Truth will not work. Since the disease is heavy, the doses need to be heavy and voluminous. Information has power. Hitler knew that and the Nazi government thrived on a system of heavy propaganda. The propaganda was false, therefore the results were disastrous. The modern world doesn't have time for truth. It wants anything that could bring fast wealth, prosperity, and materialist meaning in life. This is submission of spirit to brute forces. It is only when matter fails that people realize they need to halt and seek spiritual wisdom. Those who realize experience a gradual but happy convalescence. In order to bring healing to the nation, we need more ambassadors of truth who will stand for it, in their own little corners, bringing light to the darkest sections of our community.
Truth is Victorious. Truth Prevails. But, it can't without its ambassadors. Candles need to be burnt, lanterns need to be taken out in the open. Who will do it? Not those who are enslaved; only those who are free.
PS:
Corruption and GovernmentCorruption is a governmental problem, basically speaking. If there weren't government, "corruption" as such wouldn't exist. But, throwing the baby with the bath water is not a solution. It has been said well, "That government is best that governs the least". There are more instances of corruption in states under dictatorship than under any other form of government. Corruption exists where governmental hold exists, but in weakness. The government is not omnipresent and omniscient, and so cracks start up and grow large, allowing injustice, disorder, and lust to corrupt the governmental rule. There is always hope as long as the ship hasn't violated the law of buoyancy; however, once the shipwreck has occurred, the only salvation remains in abandoning the ship and getting into some safe place (if it exists....). But there is always hope as long as there is life (Eccl. 9:4). The body will only survive if the members don't turn on each other to consume them; but, will work in harmony and mutual construction. Those in authority must remember that authority or power is a huge responsibility. The "rulers" are responsible to keep the head in its proper place. The failure of the head leads to self-destruction in every way possible. The wise man keeps his eyes on his head. Those who have lost the ability to see cannot oversee. The kind of leadership and the choice of the right leadership is pivotal to the health and life of the nation.
Becoming Corruption-Free
A corruption free government is itself a law. It's like the law of gravity or the law of aerodynamics. It is the way it functions. The functioning creates the experience of Justice, Liberty, and Equality. The letter of the Law is not the chief point of focus. The spirit of the Law is important; and, the spirit of the Law is Justice, Liberty, and Equality.
A corrupt government curtails Moral Justice, Moral Liberty, and Moral Equality. It is immoral in essence. It is immoral because it is essentially lawless. It may have written, verbal laws. But, it lacks the spirit of the Law of human community function. A corrupt government is also a law: a law of disease and death.
The Essence of A Healthy Nation
The essence of morality is Love. "Love your neighbor as yourself" is the sum of all law. Love is what integrates a person into a healthy living. Love is what integrates a nation into healthy living. Therefore, any law that discourages the principle of "Love your neighbor as yourself" is immoral and devoid of the spirit of Justice, Liberty, and Equality.
Love is not just an emotional game. Love is the act that flows from a recognition of the dignity of the human individual, the human person. Love is not mere idealistic. It is personal.
A corrupt government leads the nation into:1. Distrust of governmental justice
2. Bribery, aristocracy, and marginalization
3. Terror. The government is looked at as a monster. It has weapons. It has forces. It has power. It rules by force and not by honor and love.
Citizen's role in creating corrupt government:1. Desire to escape justice and personal responsibility. (If you wish justice done to you, then you must also be willing to fully suffer for the injustice you have done to others; or else, you're partner with injustice.)
2. Love of money and wealth to the extent that the dignity of a human as human loses value.
3. Selfishness. Lack of love for one's fellow man/woman, whoever it is, is the first act of murder.
4. Cherishing inequality by allowing religion, anti-religion, communalism, cultural nationalism, sexism, racism, etc to dictate feelings of inequality. Cultism.
5. Pride. Crave for power through despotic thinking: desiring everyone to believe what you believe and think as you think. Such things are usually not possible even in families. Disagreements do occur, since diversity is the rule of community.
6. Rational blindness, and non-scientific temper, even in the name of science. Fanaticism that is not open to rational verification.
7. Tolerating injustice. Allowing violence to dampen the voice of reason and truth.
8. False hope that ultimately everything will be alright without us doing anything.
Citizen's role in creating corruption-free government:
1. Articulate absolute aversion to corruption.
2. Unite against all practices of corruption.
3. Challenge laws that promote corruption.
4. Instill in children hatred against bribery and immoral practices.
5. Be an example to children and youth of true patriotism, integrity of character, purity in love towards fellow-citizens, and moral responsibility.
6. Strip the esteem of money-mongering culture; repudiate greed and avarice; exalt the virtue of social responsibility.
7. Find out NGOs, Media workers, etc who are committed to a corruption-free government and inform them of any instance of corruption anywhere.
8. Believe in God, the True Judge of the Universe. He will give justice.
Quotes about Corruption from the Bible (NLT)
Proverbs 28:1-28(1) The wicked run away when no one is chasing them, but the godly are as bold as lions.
(2) When there is moral rot within a nation, its government topples easily. But with wise and knowledgeable leaders, there is stability.
(3) A poor person who oppresses the poor is like a pounding rain that destroys the crops.
(4) To reject the law is to praise the wicked; to obey the law is to fight them.
(5) Evil people don't understand justice, but those who follow the LORD understand completely.
(6) It is better to be poor and honest than rich and crooked.
(7) Young people who obey the law are wise; those who seek out worthless companions bring shame to their parents.
(8) A person who makes money by charging interest will lose it. It will end up in the hands of someone who is kind to the poor.
(9) The prayers of a person who ignores the law are despised.
(10) Those who lead the upright into sin will fall into their own trap, but the honest will inherit good things.
(11) Rich people picture themselves as wise, but their real poverty is evident to the poor.
(12) When the godly succeed, everyone is glad. When the wicked take charge, people go into hiding.
(13) People who cover over their sins will not prosper. But if they confess and forsake them, they will receive mercy.
(14) Blessed are those who have a tender conscience, but the stubborn are headed for serious trouble.
(15) A wicked ruler is as dangerous to the poor as a lion or bear attacking them.
(16) Only a stupid prince will oppress his people, but a king will have a long reign if he hates dishonesty and bribes.
(17) A murderer's tormented conscience will drive him into the grave. Don't protect him!
(18) The honest will be rescued from harm, but those who are crooked will be destroyed.
(19) Hard workers have plenty of food; playing around brings poverty.
(20) The trustworthy will get a rich reward. But the person who wants to get rich quick will only get into trouble.
(21) Showing partiality is never good, yet some will do wrong for something as small as a piece of bread.
(22) A greedy person tries to get rich quick, but it only leads to poverty.
(23) In the end, people appreciate frankness more than flattery.
(24) Robbing your parents and then saying, "What's wrong with that?" is as serious as committing murder.
(25) Greed causes fighting; trusting the LORD leads to prosperity.
(26) Trusting oneself is foolish, but those who walk in wisdom are safe.
(27) Whoever gives to the poor will lack nothing. But a curse will come upon those who close their eyes to poverty.
(28) When the wicked take charge, people hide. When the wicked meet disaster, the godly multiply.
Internet Resources
CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX MAP
External Links
Corruption in India according to Transparency InternationalIndia Against Corruption.
From Secularism in India: A Historical Analysis (2010), pp. 54-64
THE earlier attitude of the British Government towards Missions was one of skepticism and vehement opposition. The British believed that if Protestant Missions were allowed in India that would only lead to tension and aggression among its Indian supporters and produce instability of governance. Therefore, in the beginning, the British followed the policy of supporting and patronizing the native religions as the earlier rulers had done. They undertook the management and patronage of a large number of temples, paid the salaries of temple officials, and sponsored the Hindu festivals and sacrifices. A pilgrim-tax was imposed to pay for all this. The British also refused permission to any missionary to settle in their territory. They also refused to employ native Christians and prevented by force any native soldier employed from becoming a Christian.[1] Vishal points out that while the Christian Missions received no money from the Company or the Government, until 1858, at least 26,589 Hindu temples were receiving financial support from the Company in the Bombay Presidency alone.[2] It was only through the long and toilsome struggle of reformers in England and India that this political patronage of superstitious idolatry was finally put down.[3]
Two Englishmen who played a pivotal role towards granting permission for Missions to work in Indiawere Charles Grant and William Wilberforce. Charles Grant began his campaign for Missions in 1786-87. Grant observed that India was worse under the then British rule than it had been under the Mughal rule and tried to influence Christians in England to understand their moral responsibility for India’s welfare; this, so that they would endeavor to produce in India class of persons who would be able to govern India after the pattern of Britain after Independence.[4] He believed that the problem of India was more a religious and a cultural one than anything else. He proposed religious conversion as the only solution for the Indian predicament.[5]
Grant’s strive for getting official permission for missionary work in India had also in perspective the necessity of a political assurance of religious freedom to Indians so that they could evaluate their own beliefs and the beliefs of other faiths and, so, come to a rational conclusion as to which religion they should choose. Unless the Government back home, in England, guaranteed religious freedom and required the East India Company to enforce the same, there always lurked the danger of the Company’s turning against the Missions in face of political and economical threat from the Hindus.[6] In fact, when the Vellore Mutiny broke out in 1806 and was erroneously attributed to missionary propaganda, Sir George Barlow prohibited the Serampore missionaries from leaving Serampore, from preaching openly in the bazaar, and the native converts from preaching unless they were sent forth as emissaries from Serampore.[7]
By an Act of Parliament in 1813, missionaries were permitted to land and work in India. Thus began an era of missionary enterprise in Indiawhen missionaries from Europeand Americaentered Indiain large numbers and began preaching the Gospel in unreached areas.[8]
Missions not only showed and proclaimed to the Indians the religion of the ruling Englishmen, who impressed them greatly,[9] but also prepared Indians to develop ideas of individualism, democracy, human dignity, human rights, equality, justice, etc, through their ecclesiastical, social, and educational programs. Following are some of the ways in which Missions made a secular impact on the Indian scenario:
i. Evangelism that Respected Freedom of Choice: Promotion of the Ideas of Religious Freedom. The evangelistic methods of Christian missionaries in India were based on the Biblical principles of individual human choice and responsibility. Their objective was not religious conversions but human transformation. Based on the ethic of love and respect for all, they worked passionately to communicate the power and truth of Gospel. Laxminarayan Gupta writes that an attitude of tolerance was the reason why the missionaries did not attempt forced conversions as the earlier Muslims had done despite the fact that the British had been powerful in India for three centuries.[10] The missionaries had deep respect for the human right to freedom of thought and religion. To the missionaries, conversion to religion had to be based on individual choice and decision.
ii. Morality Based on Humanism: Promotion of the Ideas of Human Dignity, Worth, and Freedom. Men like Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Mahatma Gandhi were greatly impressed by the moral teachings of Jesus. Roy’s The Precepts of Jesus- the Guide to Peace and Happiness was an expression of his indebtedness to Christ for the humanist moral ideas he had learnt from Him. Though traces of humanism can be found in both Buddhism and Jainism, the value of being human in both religions is obscured by the doctrines of karma, samsara, dukkha, maya, and punarjanma. In both the religions, man is caught up in a vicious cycle of births and rebirths of which he is unable to come out. Man and animals differed only externally. In fact, a man could become a dog in his next birth. The world, according to Hinduism, was illusory and the human predicament (caste, gender, and then colonial rule) was a fate determined by karma. Such concepts in the Indian religions could not stir Indians towards either independence or rational and humanist moral acts. What it means to be man was meaningless in a world-view where even animals and trees were worshipped as deities. However, the Christian concept of morality - of truth, patience, love, kindness, compassion, equal treatment, and justice - being built on a surer foundation of the doctrine of God, creation, man, salvation history, and the Church began to gradually spread over India through means of evangelism, education, social work, and the free press. Soon, a class of Indians emerged who, though they might not admit their indebtedness to Christian humanist morality, reflected Christian ideals of the good.
There were others, however, who based on secular revolutionary ideas from France, Germany, and Russia, began to fight for Indian independence through guerrilla warfare and terrorism.[11] Western education was also introducing the youth of India to the radical nationalist thoughts of the West and stirring up a militant form of nationalism.[12] The Congress, instead, under the leadership of Gandhi waged a non-violent battle for the freedom ofIndia.
Thus, the moral ideals of Christian humanism contributed towards the secular battle for national independence and the formation of a secular nation.
iii. Modernization of Education: Promotion of Secular Knowledge. Education was one of the best contributions of Missions to India. In fact, Christian Missions initiated educational programs in India long before the Government even thought of doing so. European missionaries opened 17 schools in 1725.[13] The London Missionary Society opened schools, first, in south India, and then in Bengal. These schools provided free education and the native Hindus sent their children to study for service in the Company. William Carey came to India in 1792 and spearheaded in Bengal the establishment of several schools that imparted modern education. The subjects that these schools taught were English, Mathematics, Geography, and Science. Carey translated the Bible into Bengali, and then along with his associates translated it into several of the Indian languages. The printing press that the Serampore missionaries brought to India contributed greatly towards the cause of education. The American Missionary Society was the first in the history of India to open a native girls’ school in Bombay in 1824. In 1826, the Church Missionary Society established the first female school. With the conviction that only the English language could be the best medium for communication of modern education in India, the Scottish missionary, Alexander Duff opened a school for instruction in English at Calcutta.[14] His success in such venture later helped Lord Bentick to decide in favour of English language.
Christian missionaries also contributed greatly towards the development of the vernacular languages. For instance, Bengali in the past was considered a language ‘fit only for women and demons.’[15] Therefore, Carey had to be invited from Serampore to Calcutta to teach Bengali. Modern Bengali literature was introduced and developed by the Serampore missionaries and by the Fort William College.[16]
The influence of the missionaries’ works in education was widespread. By the strenuous efforts of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, a supporter of English education who opposed the opening of a SanskritCollege, the HinduCollegewas opened in 1820 in Calcuttafor education in the modern arts and sciences.[17] The Hunter Report of 1882 brings out well the facts of missionary contributions towards the modernization and propagation of education in India.[18]
Thus, Christian Missions, by first initiating modern education and influencing the British Government towards the same, played an important role in the modernization of education inIndia. An age of Indian Renaissance dawned on the sub-continent as a result, and several reforms and rethinking were sparked in the field of science, society, religion, education, economics, and culture.
iv. Social Work: Application of the Ideas of Human Dignity, Equality, and Worth. The social works that the Christian missionaries did in India presented a living and visible example of their view of human dignity and equality. In addition to educational Missions that gave an occasion for all to study (irrespective of caste, race, or gender, the very first time in India), medical Missions brought ‘help to the millions of the common people of India, for whom no skilled assistance in the time of trouble and death was available.’[19] MedicalMission also introduced women missionaries into the Indian sub-continent to minister unto the suffering women ofIndia.
Orphanages, widows’ homes, and hospitals were started at different places of India. Leprosy mission in Indiaowes its origin to the Christian missionaries. Hostels for non-Christians were built in considerable numbers and managed by Christian Missions. The results were so impressive that demand for the extension of the hostel system throughout the country increased. Missions also reached the youth of Indian society, irrespective of caste or creed, by the Young Men’s Christian Association, which also played an important role in the development of democratic orientations among them.[20] The concept of social work, irrespective of caste, creed, or gender, evolved out of the example that the missionaries set in India. William Carey’s campaign against Sati in 1806, though motivated by his Christian attitude, could not have been successful on the basis of only biblical arguments. His campaign, together with that of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, with support from Lord Wellesley and Lord William Bentick, was right in a context that favoured humanist ethics in independence from religion. Some reformers, who had come to believe in the rationality of humanist ethics through English education and contact with the missionaries, traced these principles to their own religion than accepting it as particular only to Christianity. Thus, Missions inIndia influenced Indians to develop a humanist approach to culture, society, and religion and, in this way, contributed towards the development of a humanist kind of secularism inIndia.
v. Freedom of Press: Promotion of Free, Proven, and Unbiased Criticism of Politics. The beginning of the modern Indian secular press can be traced to the launching of Friend of India in English, Samachar Darpan in Bengali, and Dig Darshan in Hindi at the Serampore Mission in 1818.[21] The Indian type was first founded and used in the Serampore Mission’s printing press.[22] Earlier on, Hicky had started The Bengal Gazette as a weekly in 1780. However, its vociferous criticism of Warren Hastings’ policies led to the arrest of Hicky and the termination of the journal in 1782.[23]
Under the Governor-Generalship of Lord Wellesley, censorship was established over all the newspapers that were published in the country in 1799. Consequentially, the editor of the Bengal Kirkaru, Charles Maclean was deported to England for censuring by the means of print a public officer 'for acts done in his official capacity.'[24] However, Maclean didn’t stay silent inEngland but continued his agitation against power abuse inIndia, which ultimately led to the resignation of Lord Wellesley.
Lord Hastings (1813-1823) believed in the importance of an independent press in the formation of public opinion and good governance. Therefore, he slightly modified the regulations regarding censorship in 1813. In 1818, he abolished the post of Censor and, thus, began an era of free press. Immediately, new journals sprouted out. However, there continued conflicts between the press and the Government. The Government of India deputed Sir Thomas Munro to investigate and report on this problem. In accordance with the recommendations that Munro made, the Government placed new regulations before the Supreme Court in March 1823 that provided that no press was to be established nor any paper or book printed without prior licence from the Government. Indians like Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Dwarka Nath Tagore protested against those regulations. Finally, with the assistance of Lord Macaulay, Law Member of the Government of India, Sir Charles Metcalfe cancelled these regulations in 1835. As a result, the Indian press became as free as its counterpart in Englandwas.[25]
Earlier on in 1830, William Carey had written in the Serampore journal Friend of India that the most gratifying of the many indications of the extension of freedom in the 19th century was the establishment in India of a periodical press by whose potency the tyrannical dynasties of ages were crumbling rapidly away. He noted that it was the power of the press that had brought such a fast change in the Indian mind from superstition to rational thinking.[26]
During the Sepoy Mutiny in 1857, temporary restrictions were placed on the press but were soon withdrawn after the Mutiny. The Act of 1867 that is still in force aimed at the regulation of the printing presses and newspapers. In 1878, the Vernacular Press Act was passed that made regulations to make sure that the press does not misuse their freedom to incite feelings of disaffection towards the Government or to incite communal feelings. Also nicknamed as 'The Gagging Act,' this Act was condemned by the Indians all over the country.[27]Subsequent conflicts between the press and the Government went on.
The concept of free press that the Indians were conceiving and for which they were contending was not originally Indian. It came from the West and was popularised by the Serampore missionaries, despite the fact that the Government was quite opposed to it. They used the press to confront the Government. Prof. Tripti Chaudhari writes:
The British officials and trading groups were completely indifferent to their misery and the rising Bengali Intelligentsia, with a few exceptions, were struggling for their own recognition in the field of education and administrative sphere in the colonial set up. In this background only the Protestant missionaries in Bengal in the late nineteenth century came forward to voice the grievances of this [i.e., the peasants] class. It is hardly an exaggeration to state that they became almost the sole spokesmen of the ryots tied to the iniquitous land system.[28]
Thus, Missions inIndiaplayed an important role in the initiation of printing press inIndiaand the development of the concept of free press. Later laws and regulations that saw the modern freedom of press were built upon the earlier work of the missionaries. The foundation of free press inIndiathat the Missions and the British Government laid was constituted after the principles of secularism that discouraged any abuse of the press for breeding communal ill feelings. The laws and regulations made were, consequentially, in line with those principles of factuality, rationality, fraternity, and humanism, unclouded by any religious fundamentalist zeal.
It has thus been seen that the Colonial rule in Indiaplayed a very important role in the promotion of secularism in India. Renaissance humanism, building on to cultural and social secularism, and Reformation religious privacy, developing on to political secularism, entered India with the Colonial conquest. Earlier on, the Government employed a non-interference policy towards Indian religions, but was soon awakened by the Evangelicals to its task of introducing reforms for the good of Indians.[29] All through, however, the steps taken were to be in line with humanist reason and non-interfering as far as privacy of religion was concerned. However, where religious practices conflicted with humanist principles, laws were prescribed. The unification ofIndia under one British rule helped the spread of cultural, social, and political secularism even faster. Industrialists started industries to the cities leading on to mass migrations to them from the villages. This led to the beginning of the breaking of the traditional families as secularism began to invade social life through its economic impact.
The English law was adapted to the pluralist context ofIndia, though in accordance with the principles of secularism. People of all religious backgrounds fared well during this time. The Crown’s declaration in 1858 further assured secular policy and relieved Indians of any fears. Meanwhile, inter-communal suspicions and doubts intensified. The pluralist Hindus could not understand the fundamentalist Muslims. The Muslims, on the other hand, doubted if their future was safe in case the secular British departed and the Hindus got the country’s reins. Various levels of responses came out as a result. Some Indian reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Mahatma Gandhi resorted to pluralistic religious perspectives. Others like Sir Syed Ahmad Khan contended for a rational view of life. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, on the other hand, fought for the emancipation of the oppressed dalits; the ideological influence behind the fight was the Western concept of human equality and rational existence. All these people were greatly impressed by Western culture and philosophy. In addition, the Governmental reforms also brought out in theIndiaa consciousness and realization of the possibility of change, reformation, and upliftment.
Missions played an important role in both the ideological and political development of secularism inIndia. Their ideological impact in the field of religion came in through their emphasis on rationality of religion and condemnation of superstition. Education played an important role in bringing out this ideological change. Idolatry, caste system, and inhumane practices that were endorsed by religion came under severe rational criticism. The printing press that the Serampore missionaries popularised became a great tool in the hands of the reformers who used it to circulate journals and pamphlets to awaken their countrymen to a modern and rational way of thinking that was free from religious domination. Missionaries played an important role in the Indian Renaissance and the secularization of culture and society. Mahajan says about the Christian missionaries:
… They spread not only Christianity but also education in the country. They opened schools and colleges and set up printing presses in the country. They opened hospitals and started other works of public charity. As a result of their activities, there spread a lot of skepticism among the Indians….[30]
[1] J.N. Farquhar, Modern Religious Movements in India, pp. 9, 10.
[2] Vishal Mangalwadi, Missionary Conspiracy, p. 137.
[3] Farquhar, Modern Religious Movements in India, p. 9.
[4] Vishal Mangalwadi, Missionary Conspiracy, pp. 138, 145.
[5] Ibid, p. 149.
[6] Ibid, p. 150.
[7] D.C. Ahir (ed.), Ambedkar on Christianity in India (New Delhi: Blumoon Books,1995), pp. 51-52.
[8] J.N. Farquhar, Modern Religious Movements in India, p. 10.
[9] Aleyamma Zachariah, Modern Religious and Secular Movements in India, p.20.
[10] Laxminarayan Gupta, History of Modern Indian Culture, p.218.
[11] Aleyamma Zachariah, Modern Religious and Secular Movements in India, p. 204.
[12] Krishna Reddy, Indian History, p. C149.
[13] Laxminarayan Gupta, History of Modern Indian Culture, p. 221.
[14] Aleyamma Zachariah, Modern Religious and Secular Movements in India, pp. 18, 19.
[15] Vishal Mangalwadi, India: The Grand Experiment, p. 171.
[16] K. Krishna Reddy, Indian History (New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., Ltd., 2003), p. C86.
[17] Laxminarayan Gupta, History of Modern Indian Culture, p. 227.
[18] Pages 8-16 as excerpted in Vishal Mangalwadi’s, Missionary Conspiracy, pp. 360-373.
[19] J.N. Farquhar, Modern Religious Movements in India, p. 20.
[20] Ibid, p. 25.
[21] Vishal Mangalwadi, India: The Grand Experiment, p. 186 & Krishna Reddy, Indian History, p. C86.
[22] Farquhar, Modern Religious Movements in India, p. 14.
[23] V.D. Mahajan, Modern Indian History, p. 487.
[24] Ibid, pp. 487-88.
[25] Ibid, pp. 488-89.
[26] Vishal Mangalwadi, India: The Grand Experiment, pp. 190-1.
[27] V.D. Mahajan, Modern Indian History , p. 489.
[28] As cited by Vishal Mangalwadi, India: The Grand Experiment, p. 196 [Author's Parenthesis and Emphasis].
[29] Vishal Mangalwadi, India: The Grand Experiment, p. 83 & Missionary Conspiracy, pp. 168-69.
[30] V. D. Mahajan, Modern Indian History, p. 645.
© Domenic Marbaniang, 2005, 2010
"not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing" (1 Cor.2:6).
When Paul was writing his epistle to the Corinthians (around AD 57), Nero, "the emperor who fiddled while (later) Rome burned", held the reins of the Great Roman Empire. He was forced to commit suicide on June 7, AD 68. A few days before his arrival at Corinth (sometime between 50-52), Paul had been at Athens, the ancient capital of philosophy, and had talks with the Stoics and the Epicureans. They had taken him to Mar's Hill from where he preached his famous sermon on "The God of the Altar to the Unknown God". Only a few responded positively, while the rest ruled him away, because they thought it was silly and unscientific to have mentioned the resurrection of the Christ. Well had Paul begun, when he writes this epistle, that "the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing" (1Cor.1:18), and that "since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe" (v.21).
Paul chose not to imitate the method of the world, whose cup of wisdom and scepter of power would soon fall and crash with the tides of time, and then finally extinguish before the majesty and might of the eternal Word of God. He writes: "my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power" (2:4). But, that doesn't mean that the message didn't contain wisdom, for can wisdom lie anywhere than in the message of God: "we speak wisdom among those who are mature," he writes "yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing" (v6).
The glaze and the glory of this world is short-lived. Blessed is he who has apprehended the wisdom and the might of God and the age to come!
In around 260 BC, King Ashoka of the Mauryan Empire invaded the Republic of Kalinga, now in modern day Orissa, engaging in a bloody battle that within a short period of time caused such massive destruction that it appalled the chronicles of time. It was the first and the only battle that Ashoka is said to have fought, following which he encountered a profound change of heart and gave up violence. The conquest did make Ashoka an absolute monarch over a great part of the Indian sub-continent; the change of heart, however, stripped him of any desire for further military conquests. The massive loss of life and suffering caused by this war weighed heavily on the mind of the King and plunged him into deep remorse. On the 13th of his 14 Major Rock Edicts, he inscribes:
On conquering Kalinga the Beloved of the Gods felt remorse, for, when an independent country is conquered, the slaughter, death and deportation of the people is extremely grievous to the Beloved of the Gods and weighs heavily on his mind... Even those who are fortunate to have escaped, and whose love is undiminished, suffer from the misfortunes of their friends, acquaintances, colleagues and relatives..."Herein lies the greatness of Ashoka," writes R.K. Mookerji, "... at least no victorious monarch in the history of the world is known to have ever given expression to anything like it" [Ibid]. The conversion was total and it unleashed a rare time in the history of India known as the Golden Age of Indian history.
This inscription of dhamma has been engraved so that any sons or great-grandsons that I may have should not think of gaining new conquests, and in whatever victories they may gain should be satisfied with patience and light punishment. They should only consider conquest by dhamma to be a true conquest, and delight in dhamma should be their whole delight, for this is of value in both this world and the next. [as quoted by John Keay, India: A History, 92-93]
The presence of a non-violent religious conscience was strongly felt throughout the Golden reign of Ashoka. It's absence was horrifically sensed in the modern fascist regimes rooted in the dehumanizing roots of Darwinism. Darwinism accomplished the reduction of man to a mere biological being. Spirituality was stripped of any significance. Two powerful ideologies, viz. Fascism and Marxism, that plunged the world into horrific crimes against humanity ensued from its principles. These philosophies stood strongly opposed against virtues of the religious conscience. In his book The Antichrist, Nietzsche blatantly expressed the logical political ethics of Darwinian ideology, ideas that went into shaping the fascist regimes of the 1930s. Not surprisingly, influenced by the Darwinian principles of natural selection, struggle for existence, and survival of the fittest, his doctrine of will to power stood ferociously opposed to the virtues of love and compassion. He wrote:
What is good?--Whatever augments the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself, in man.Shortly after writing this book, Nietzsche suffered nervous breakdown and ended in an asylum where he soon died. But, his megalomaniac philosophy became the fuel of Fascism and Nazism. Both Mussolini and Hitler were influenced by Nietzsche’s vision of the Superman, the Overman (in Thus Spake Zarathustra), which they further interpreted along their socio-historical experiences. The fascist ideas did spread to as far as Japan and the century saw one of the most brutal and violent histories of all time plunging the world into a global Kalinga of World War II. The difference: "Supermen" didn't have the means of remorse this time. They either committed suicide or were executed by those that defeated them and saved the world from self-destruction. There are instances of crimes against humanity that send a shiver along our spine. The concentration camps of Hitler and the Nanking massacre to mention two. Though opposed to fascism, Communism also viewed man with the anti-spiritual spectacles of naturalism that dehumanized the individual, but with a Hegelian tint to its philosophy of history. Pity was substituted with brutality, where the enemy was not just destroyed, but his humanhood was stripped off. Man, in the age of technology, with advanced weapons, was back to barbarianism. The religious conscience was annihilated.
What is evil?--Whatever springs from weakness.
What is happiness?--The feeling that power increases--that resistance is overcome.
Not contentment, but more power; not peace at any price, but war; not virtue, but efficiency (virtue in the Renaissance sense, virtue, virtue free of moral acid).
The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it.
What is more harmful than any vice?--Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak...
I call an animal, a species, an individual corrupt, when it loses its instincts, when it chooses, when it prefers, what is injurious to it. A history of the "higher feelings," the "ideals of humanity"--and it is possible that I'll have to write it--would almost explain why man is so degenerate. Life itself appears to me as an instinct for growth, for survival, for the accumulation of forces, for power: whenever the will to power fails there is disaster. My contention is that all the highest values of humanity have been emptied of this will--that the values of decadence, of nihilism, now prevail under the holiest names...
Pity stands in opposition to all the tonic passions that augment the energy of the feeling of aliveness: it is a depressant. A man loses power when he pities. Through pity that drain upon strength which suffering works is multiplied a thousandfold....
Among those who did speak of a religious conscience but perpetrated crimes against humanity, their violence was sanctioned by their religious authority, sectarian view of humanity (that dehumanized other people groups), quest for political supremacy, racism, and/or a history of hatred, revenge, and anger.
From this time forth till the Independence of the nation, three major influences could be felt throughout the land: British Evangelicalism, Italian and German Fascism, and Russian Communism. While people like Gandhi and Tagore were influenced by British Evangelicalism, Golwalkar and Hedgewar (RSS) were influenced by Fascism, and Bhagat Singh was influenced by Communism (though these influences had a unique blend with the Indian socio-historical experience). The non-violent and peaceful protest methods that Gandhi upheld had an immense impact on the conscience of the nation. Certainly, as Bertrand Russell noted (and his statement hangs emblazoned in Mahatma Gandhi's home in Ahmedabad), "It is doubtful that the method of Mahatma Gandhi would have succeeded except that he was appealing to the conscience of a Christianized people." One wonders if Gandhi's methods would have had any success in Hitler's Germany or in the Ottoman Empire. In addition, we do understand the importance of a military to defend the nation.
However, it is the quality of the religious spirit that fosters a sense of humaneness even at times of war. It teaches one the principle of treating ones neighbour as one would have treated oneself. "Love your neighbour as yourself," said Jesus and, in addition, "whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them" - the Golden Rule of ethics. The Divine Spirit of Grace works within the human heart against the animal instincts of unrestrained passion for power and pleasure. One can either succumb to the base forces and enter a world of meaningless void and striving with the wind, or submit to Divine Grace and become a beloved of God, Devampriya (a title of Ashoka). Leaders can either destroy or build the nation. History tells us who built and who destroyed. Let us dare to follow the truth!
Sources:
John Keay, India: A History, Harper Perennial, 2004
Kalinga War
Kalinga War
Ashoka
Superman
Social Darwinism
John Allen Tucker, Tokugawa Intellectual History and Prewar Ideology.
Fascism in Japan
Causes of World War II
Crimes against Humanity
The Nanking Massacre
Communism and Crimes against Humanity
Fascism in India
To everyone an answer: Essays in honor of Norman L. Geisler
© Domenic Marbaniang, Saturday, 26 November 2010
1. Population. It's estimated that the population will hit 1.4 billion by 2021. That's hot multiplication. This gives rise to several problems in governance. The main one is economic. There needs to be proper production and distribution of resources to meet the basic needs. With more people in the land, there are more individuals with rights that correlate duties by the government. Educational and employment opportunities must also be provided. Then, there are health concerns that the government must address.
2. Pollution, Scenic, and Culture Problems. This is a grave problem for sure. Somehow, once the giant is aroused and set to go about, it's difficult to stop him. But, hopefully, the introduction of CNG et al. may bring some relief. Smoke, dust, drainage, plastic bags, and a myriad such issues await solutions, yet. We still have dirty railway platforms, bus stations, government offices, damaged roads, and ponds that the government cares less about. These are far from any aesthetic adoration. We shouldn't try to compare, but it's still very easy to spit wherever one wants in India. The same Indian, when he goes out of the country, will have begun to learn that this is not right, and he wouldn't feel to do the same in that kind of a surrounding. The government must learn to create a culture that favors cleanliness.
3. Moral Development & Corruption Issues. The government has failed to be a moral example to the people. Certainly, we learn of moral lessons in the schools; but, go to any usual government office or police station (or try a train travel), corruption is almost ubiquitous. The khadi is now despised as polluted by the police and the politician. Also, liquor is licensed, ruining families. However, thanks for several rights movements and noble men in the government as well who have brought significant reforms to a great extent. Now, ragging is banned; so, are several other social evils that had invaded the cultural fabric. Something more significant is to be done to put an end to human rights violations in red light areas, foot paths, railway platforms, and work places. Also, the censorship board seems to have changed its opinion in the past one decade. One wonders what change it's going to have in the next decade. Does it seem to accept that there are no moral absolutes and that the West in more moral than the East, as far as the Screen is concerned, and that we are still behind in Screen culture???
Other issues stand as well. But, following the Lao Tzu method, it's the leadership that is to blame for most of the issues. History teaches us that one leader can lead the whole nation to hell (e.g. King Manasseh, Adolf Hitler). History also teaches us that one leader can lead the whole nation into a brave world. The leaders must learn to lead and not just manage the status quo. It's not economic strength that determines the strength of the nation, it is conscience and the commitment to truth and love. Each individual of the nation is a leader in his/her own sphere. Please step to be an example, play your role right, and start the transformation of the nation. But, remember, leaders never quit - they lead us to the destiny, they carry the banner to the pinnacle.
In his book, India: A History, John Keay unravels recent historical discoveries regarding the Aryans of India. The previously held theories of Aryans as being invaders and destroyers of the original and primal cultures has been challenged by twentieth century scholarship. Keay does leave room for the assumption that the arya migrated into India and agrees that the "names of their gods predate arrival in India, many (e.g. Indra, Agni, Varuna) being almost synonymous with their counterparts in Persian, Greek, and Latin mythology." The linguistic resemblances certainly cannot be overlooked: Agni (Fire god) looks similar to the Greek Ignus (from which derives the word ignition), Varuna (God of heaven) corresponds to Ouranos (Greek for "heaven"), and Mithra means "friend" in both Sanskrit and Persian. Factually, recognition of linguistic resemblance did play an important role in the development of the "Indo-Aryan" theory. In 1788, Sir William Jones had proposed that "some common source" may be believed to be the origin of all these languages. However, he didn't push the search for that "common source" any further. Later scholars found the idea of dating texts by means of identifying linguistic development (of the forms of words and grammar) to be as rewarding as archaeology and so, using and developing this new discipline of philology, they "at first called the elusive 'common source' language (and the family of languages which derived from it) 'Indo-Germanic' or 'Indo-European'. This changed to 'Indo-Aryan', or simply 'Aryan', after it was realised that the ancient Persians had indeed used their arya word in an ethnic sense; they called themselves the 'Ariana' (whence derives the modern 'Iran')."[p.21] Keay continues to point out that numerous writers had challenged this assumption that a "shared language necessarily meant a shared ethnicity". "Yet, the idea of a single race sowing seeds of civilisation from Bengal to Donegal" he says "proved intensely exciting, and ultimately irresistible". [p.21]
Next, followed the search for an Aryan homeland and most scholars favored the steppes of southern Russia and the Ukraine, or the shores of the Caspian from where the Aryans were thought to have migrated with their language, their gods, their horses and their herds to Iran and Syria, Anatolia and Greece, eastern Europe and northern India. These Aryans were assumed to be very combative tribes that ruthlessly displaced the aborigines of India by either exterminating them or driving them off into the jungles and farther into the south. The aborigines were contrasted from the Aryans by physical structure, facial features, and complexion. They were "dark, flat-nosed, uncouth, incomprehensible and generally inferior. The Aryans, on the other hand, were finer-featured, fairer, taller, favoured above others in the excellence of their gods, their horses and their ritual magic, and altogether a very superior people." [pp.21-22]
Keay felt that this theory of Aryan supremacy aided the Colonialist complex of superiority as the "neo-Aryans" who, in the nick of time, out of the west, came and salvaged the diluted and degenerated people of India into industry, morality, and into a new and golden age. But, this illusion, he says, was rudely shattered in the 1930s through the Nazi propaganda in Europe and the recent archaeological discoveries at Mohenjo-daro and elsewhere in India. It seemed that the Harappan civilisation predated the Aryan 'invasions'. Yet, the Aryan "myth" was not immediately dumped, even by Harappanists. Sir Mortimer Wheeler proposed that if the Aryans could not possibly have created the Harappan cities, they might have been responsible for destroying them. In 1964, however, the American George F. Dales investigated the skeletons (that were thought to be evidence of "massacres") found scattered at both Harappa and Mohenjo-daro sites and concluded:
There is no destruction level covering the latest period of the city [Mohenjo-daro], no sign of extensive burning, no bodies of warriors clad in armour and surrounded by the weapons of war, [and] the citadel, the only fortified part of the city, yielded no evidence of a final defence.[G.F. Dales, "The Mythical Massacre at Mohenjo Daro", repr. in Possehl, G.L. (ed.), Ancient Cities of the Indus, p.293, quoted by Keay, p.23].Keay expresses doubt if the "Aryan chariots and catapults could have made much impression on Harappan walls thirteen metres thick, according to the archaeologists, and every bit as high". However, that the Harappans and the Aryans had contact, could not be ruled away. Such contacts may have mutually benefited the both. It may be inferred from the more recent discoveries that the Aryans were a semi-nomadic pastoral people who migrated to the Panjab in search of pasture and may have lived an itinerant outdoor life. Later, they may have formed their first temporary settlements, and then through further migrations have built cities and founded states in India. It is not clear when the Aryans might have entered India, but it seems that they came between 1500 BC and 1300 BC. In fact, there may have been several waves of migration rather than a single mass movement. Aryanisation (through spread of Sanskrit, Brahmanism, and Caste) might have been gradual and not through migration or coercion. The Aryan "myth" may, therefore, be the myth of Aryan invasion: Aryan migration, however, is readily assumed, though it is unclear where they migrated from. Of course, there are many other questions that still remain unanswered. Perhaps, the world awaits the deciphering of the Harappan script that may throw some further light on the ancient history of India.
References
Keay, John. India: A History, London: Harper Perennial, 2004.
At Google Books At Flipkart
Domenic Marbaniang, August 2010.
"The king who judges the poor with truth, his throne will be established forever" (Prov. 29:14).
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE POOR IS THE GOVERNMENT THAT'LL ENDURE.
The Government that protects the poor, fights for their cause, gives them justice (economic, social,and political) is the Government that is functioning right; the Government that is functioning right is the Government that is healthy; the Government that is healthy is the Government that lives and thrives on.
There are various reasons advanced for separate states. Whether such bifurcation of states is commendable or not is a matter of administrative judgment. Even the human cells bifurcate (mitosis) while the human body grows. Well, that doesn't mean that such divisions should regularly occur in the nation; for that would leave the whole as composed of city states. Yet, where the rationale is proper administration and healthy supply in the system, one must always remember that the soundness of the State is the goal, and such soundness can only be a reality when each member of this massive organism has the means and opportunity to exercise his or her fullest potential. This also means, accepting our differences; yet, preserving the feelings of love and unselfish generosity towards our neighbors. What about the migrants? Don't they serve as the blood vessels that link the whole nation through interspersing of cultural values and riches of our heritage? What about the wicked and corrupt, the pests of society, some of whom also serve in the administrative system? I believe that if the cells, molecules, and organs in the body preserve their integrity and immunity, the whole system will automatically be disease free. It first starts with spiritual renewal and faith in God, who gives the transcendental meaning in the life of each individual.
From the book Secularism in India: A Historical Outline (2005)
The religious policies of Ashoka grew out of his concept of religion and its role in human society. Ashoka’s practice of the principle of non-violence, after becoming a Buddhist, led him to ban animal sacrifices to the great chagrin of the Brahmins. The principle of universality and inclusivism kept Ashoka from all forms of communalism that the caste-Hindus were so fond of. Ashoka’s religion contained gleanings from all religions.[3] Ashoka followed the policy of religious tolerance and made a law that prohibited anyone from any act or word against any religion.
According to Jawaid Quddus, during the reign of Ashoka, diverse religious sects, such as the Brahamas, Sramanas, Nirganthas, Ajivakas, etc., bore great hostility and sectarian rancor against one another. Quddus quotes from the ' Studies in Ancient India' by Provatansu Maiti, (1969 edition) following of the directives of Ashoka that aimed at religious tolerance and mutual respect among the various sects:
1.All sects must dwell at all places so that they could know one another and develop tolerance for each other.
2.All sects must observe restraint of speech and purification of heart when they deal with each other.
3.The exaltation of one's own religion and condemnation of others' creed is not permitted.
4.Different sects should study of the scripture of other sects and develop concord among themselves.
5.All people must practice Ahimsa (non- violence) towards each other and towards animals.
6.Ashoka renounced the policy of conquest by sword and urged people to adopt the policy of conquest by law.[4]
Although Ashoka’s policy of religious tolerance seems quite conforming to the principles of secularism, his declaration of Buddhism as the state-religion doesn’t apparently do so. Ashoka considered religion as the foundation of a stable state. By religion, Ashoka meant Dhamma, the principle of right duty and obligation. Though this Dhamma was much influence by Buddhism, it was not separated from reason but based on reason.[5]
Ashoka sent Buddhist missionaries to foreign kingdoms and he also undertook religious journeys to inspire his people towards religiosity. He established a department of religion that was responsible for measuring the religious level of the people and also teaching them the principles of Dhamma. He used to organize religious discourses and shows for the education of the masses.[6] The various pillars and inscriptions dating from the time of Ashoka point to the seriousness with which he understood the inter-relationship between religion and the state. The goal was to instil in the people the knowledge of what is right and what is wrong and awake and motivate them towards right thinking and right action. No doubt, Ashoka succeeded in doing so.
Thus, though Ashoka’s religious policies cannot be called as purely secular-oriented, they do resemble secularism in practice in their laws of religious freedom, religious tolerance, and respect for all religions. To be sure, Ashoka’s religious policies were oriented to the well being of all people in the present, despite race, colour, language, creed, or gender.
_______________
[1] As cited by Ratibhanu Singh Nahar, Prachin Bharat Ka Rajnitik Aur Sanskritik Itihaas (Allahabad: Kitab Mahal, 1956), p. 238.
[2] Romila Thapar, ‘Ashoka’, Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia (Microsoft Corporation: 2001).
[3] Ratibhanu Singh Nahar, Prachin Bharat Ka Rajnitik Aur Sanskritik Itihaas (Allahabad: Kitab Mahal, 1956), p.245.
[4] http://www.truthindia.com
[5] Ibid, pp. 244-246.
[6] Ibid, p. 247.
© Domenic Marbaniang, 2005, 2010
_______________________________________
The word secularism comes from the Latin saeculum, meaning ‘a generation or this age,’ and corresponds to the Greek aeon. Its meaning extends on to connote also this ‘wordly;’ thus, its Lower Latin form saecularis means ‘worldly.’ Basically, secularism is the ideology that facilitates practice without reference to religion of any kind. When applied to politics, it is the state policy of being indifferent to political theologies, the policy of keeping politics free from religious interferences.
In his book, The Secular City, Harvey Cox differentiates secularization from secularism. According to Cox, secularization ‘implies a historical process, almost certainly irreversible, in which society and culture are delivered from tutelage to religious control and closed metaphysical world views.’ Quoting the German theologian Friedrich Gogarten, Cox announces secularization as the legitimate consequence of the impact of biblical faith on history. It is not untrue that biblical faith has had a powerful impact in the reformation of cultures world-wide and the shaping of modern history. According to Cox, the biblical doctrine of Creation is the ground of freedom from animism, totemism, pantheism, and magic. This has led to the development of natural science. Today, sacrifices to wind, rain, and sun are laughed to scorn as science and religion are separated from each other. Further, the Exodus narrative is seen as the desacralization of politics. It signifies insurrection against a duly constituted monarch who claimed divine rights to governance. This not only frees politics from priest-craft but has also become the basis for modern political liberation movements and revolutions. Cox further contends that with the Sinai Covenant and its prohibition of idols, values are deconsecrated. The devaluation of idols is the precursor to the devaluation of absolutes. With the revelation of idols as mere projections of human mind, their absolute value is broken down. Thus historical relativism is considered to be the end product of secularization. Consequently, traditional values are no longer regarded as absolute. This emancipatory impact of biblical faith, according to Cox, is irreversible and must not be feared since it emancipates man for a proper relationship with nature, state, and society. It is, however, the ideology of secularism that needs to be checked for secularism, in contrast to the process of secularization, is an ideology that is atheistic; thus limiting the individual’s mind to the natural alone.
But when viewed in the political context of religious pluralism, political secularism can be an aspired policy of the state. Evidently, religious politics of any kind can be destructive to religious freedom. The history of Christianity is proof enough of the atrocities committed by Christian rulers against Christians who were considered to be heretics because of their liberal or reformative views. Religious freedom can only be realized in a truly secular state. But, as Cox notes, a secular state itself can become guilty of imposing secularism as an ideology on its citizens; for instance, when it declares practice of religion as anti-scientific or criminal. This kind of approach has been observed in hard secular atheist states were communism has held power. Total indifference towards religion, however, is impossible since man is not just a political animal; he is also a religious being. Yet, it is within politically sanctioned freedom of religious practice that religion itself can find true realization.
There are at least two things to note about the development of secular politics in relation to the Kingdom of Christ:
1. Political Irreligiosity
2. Religious Individualism
Political Irreligiosity
Modern secularism has dethroned the gods from the realm of politics. The dethronement of the divine from the human hemisphere was a gradual process appearing first in Classical Greek philosophy. Thales (5th Century B.C.) is considered to be the first who ‘shifted the basis of thought from a mythological base to one of scientific inquiry.’ The first philosophers, known as sophos, challenged the mythological and superstitious assumptions of traditionalism, thus unshackling philosophy from the control of religion. The impact of the rational and secular spirit of Classical philosophy, however, could be seen in the development of city-states that de-emphasized the role of gods in politics and separated government from religion, magic, and superstition. With the fall of Greece, however, this secular influence over politics disappeared. Roman politics was highly coloured by religious sentiments and beliefs.
Secularism resurfaced during the Renaissance (A.D. 1359-1600) as humanism and individualism gathered momentum. However, it was during the Protestant Reformation that the theory of the separation of church and state took root. Religious persecution under Papal political influence led Reformation thinkers to denounce the authority of the Church over political matters. In 1523, Martin Luther published his “On Temporal Authority,” in which he argued for the division of the church and the state. Luther specified two distinct realms or powers: weltliches Regiment (German word for ‘the kingdom of the world,’ ‘the State’) and geistliches Regiment (German word for ‘the kingdom of God,’ ‘the Church’). The state was connected with God’s continual work of creation and the Church with God’s continual work of redemption. God, Luther stated, is the head of both the kingdoms. Therefore, subjection to the ruler’s edict was only necessary as long as the edict conformed to God’s divine will as shown in the scriptures.
With the American and the French Revolutions, the idea of human rights gained ascendancy. The first amendment of the American constitution declared that ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.’ The American and British constitutions had a great impact on the development of constitutions like that of India. The secularization of politics meant the dethronement of the gods from politics. There are still elements that try to disrupt the secularity of politics through religious provocations; however, secularized society finds such religious provocations as quaint. Yet, the Nazi style of breeding ethnic or communal animosity on non-religious basis does have powerful effect on the masses. This, nevertheless, shows that it is not the gods but communal sentiments that are behind them.
Religious Individualism
The secularity of politics is based upon the recognition of man’s fundamental right to freedom of conscience and religion. Article 25 of the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion. Freedom of religion is a right recognized by the Bible. It is based upon the biblical doctrine of human liberty. Therefore, the Bible never teaches forced conversion.
The Bible emphasizes truthfulness and spirituality of worship as acceptable before God (Jn. 4: 23). Sure, religion was more a social phenomena in the Old Testament; however, the individuality of spirituality was always highlighted (Gen. 4: 7; 6: 8; Ex. 32: 10; Ps. 51: 6-17). Similarly, one finds in the New Testament that God is individually concerned about His children (Lk. 15). Religious individualism, however, is not the same as religious privatism. Religious privatism does respect the freedom of conscience; however, it regards religion to have nothing to do with public life, often to the extent that talk of religion at public places or by means of public media seems disgusting. Unfortunately, religious privatism is one of the byproducts of social secularization. Religious individualism, on the other hand, respects both the freedom of conscience and the freedom to religious speech or religious preaching.
The individualization of religion must be seen as the effect of the Gospel of the kingdom of God. It is based upon the preaching of individual responsibility for salvation through personal commitment to Christ. It is religious individualism that makes religious reformation possible and assists the true development of the spirit of religion. True secular politics does not judge one’s national allegiance by means of one’s religious allegiance. Thus, though one may be a Hindu or a Christian in heart, he could still be a true Indian at the same time. This could only happen when the socialist nature of religion is replaced by an individualist one and the strength of the nation is measured, not by religious plurality, but by political stability, law and order, and economic growth of all classes. The kingdom of God operates individualistically and transcending all national barriers since God is primarily concerned with the individual person and not the nation to which that person belongs. Therefore, individual freedom of conscience and religion must be seen as in tune with the dynamics of the kingdom of God. It is the preaching of the kingdom that holds people individually responsible before God.
However, both the above facets of political secularism must only be seen as having pre-judgment significance. At the second advent of Christ, all acts of freedom will be judged. Secular politics will cease to exist since all knee will bow before Christ and all tongue will confess that He is Lord (Phil. 2: 10, 11). That Christocratic rule will not be enforced by might of sword but by the final revelation of God. The final judgment will separate the people of the world from the people of God. It will mean the salvation of the believers and the condemnation of unbelievers. This eschatological perspective is significant since one is not entitled to judge anyone before the Day of Judgment. In other words, religion now is an individual issue. No human is judge in religious matters pertaining to the conscience (cf. 1 Cor. 10: 28). A believer stands or falls before his God (Rom. 14: 1-10). Thus, in the modern scheme of things the secularist promotion of religious individualism must be seen as veritably biblical.
In summary, social secularization is seen as the emancipation of politics and society from religious dictatorship. Political secularism not only frees politics from domination of religion but also promotes religious freedom. Social secularization is individualistically liberating, as Cox saw it. This is clearly evident in the modern secular city where a person enjoys more individual freedom than in the villages or even towns. The social adhesive provided by religion and tradition is weak in the cities. This is all the result of freeing society from dominance of religion. This, however, does not mean that social relationships have come to an end. It only means that they have taken newer forms and meanings. Also, instances of religious fundamentalism or even atheistic fundamentalism must be seen as anachronistic. They look odd amidst the secularized status quo. The extent of such secularalization must not be regarded as anti-Christian, but as assisting the cause of Christ’s kingdom by giving the Church an opportunity to reach individuals with the Gospel with the result that individuals are now freer to make a rational commitment to Christ.
References
Cox, Harvey. The Secular City, New York: Macmillan Pub. Co. Inc., 1975.
Perry, Marvin. Western Civilization, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2001, 4th edn.
Thompson, Bard. Humanists and Reformers, Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman's, 1981.
Zacharias, Ravi. Deliver Us From Evil, USA: Wpublishing Group, 1997.
Published in Basileia (Itarsi: CITS, Oct, 08). Copyright © 2008 by Domenic Marbaniang
Basically, there are two kinds of government or rules: the rule of people and the rule of law
The rule of people is manifest in democracy (mobocracy) where majority rule or in dictatorship where the whim of a single man pilots the state. Obviously, the rule of law is preferred above the rule of the mob. However, the appropriateness of the laws is an important question to tackle.
As far as best governance is concerned, the best government is considered to be that which has the least control. In other words, if you have to monitor every act of your subjects you are not a good administrator. For the goal of administration in a healthy setting is freedom, justice, fraternity, and equality.
This also means that the laws of the state do not specifically interfere with every minute detail of the subject’s life so as to keep him in constant terror, insecurity, and uncertainty.
As far as the nature of the laws is concerned, there are two opinions: one group argues that the best laws are those that have the best consequences and these we call the consequentialists; the other group contends that laws reflect the fundamental recognition of the essentially good or evil, and these we call the absolutists.
Obviously, the laws governing any body, be it a great nation or a small organization, cannot be consequentialist; for then, law would become arbitrary. Therefore, a rational recognition of laws becomes important. Thus, the role of a legislator is prominent in administrative settings. The legislator is in reality the governor or leader of the state or organization.
Classically, there are three divisions made of human society: (1) Those governed by reason – they should be leaders (2) those governed by passion – auxiliary and warriors (3) those governed by desire – workers and traders.
The qualities of the leaders – they are the mind of the society, the lawmakers, men in ultimate authority, the rulers. They know the absolutes on basis of which relatives are arbitrated. They are those whose passion and desire is governed by principles and laws. (Josh.1.8; Pr.31.4; Tit.2.6; 1Pt. 1.13; ‘sober’ – ‘be in right mind’ ‘watchful’). Do not lose yourself in the market of common jesting and pleasure.
The qualities of the auxiliary – passionate and zealous; defy death and danger; positive minded, victory oriented, depend on the interpreters of law, the legislators.
The qualities of workers, traders – desire and mood is predominant, fluctuating decisions, money makers, fund-raisers; since mood changes, are easily led away by circumstances, orators, etc.
Domenic Marbaniang, 2007