Covenanter Witness Vol. 53 - Rparchives.org

to take over. Besides, how qualified is a governmentofficial to decide whether there are Indian workerscapable, prepared and willing to do the job? On whatbasis would he decide?Evangelistic missionaries have been under special attack. This is more because the Hindus resentevangelism as a sort of "proselytism" than becausethey think it should be done by Indians. To emphasize this point some officials have accused the mismaterial inducements to Indianssionaries of offeringto become Christians. By Indian standards the missionary is wealthy. If he is also compassionate, it isall too easy to presume that his charities have muchto do with his conversions. Sometimes the peoplethemselves pretend conversion in the hope of gettingaid.Recently the attacks have centered on conversions from among "the poor illiterate people livingin the hills." It is easy to see the reason. These tribeshave been an especially fruitful field for Christianmissions. The idea suggested by the accusers thatthese people are defenseless, childlike creatures,easily led astray by the representatives of a higher'culture, is pure nonsense. It would be more accurateto say that they were despised, sometimes feared,and often victimized by their more cultured Indianuntil the Christian missionaries came toneighbors,show them love and to help them rise above theirmiserable state. Let converted head-hunters speakout, let young tribesmen who owe their higherstandards and better education to the missionstestify whether Christianity has meant to them imposition or liberation.Other accusations have also been made. Themissionaries have not taught loyalty to the government. They have even advocated the return of British rule. They look down on the Indian people as"heathen,"etc. The accusations are all general. Wehave heard of no concrete case backed up by clearevidence.Instead, it is a war of propaganda. And thestrength of the anti-mission propaganda is perhapsgreater than we in the United States have realized.Vague general accusations are made against the missionaries in high government circles. The accusations are spread abroad in the press. Governmentofficials solemnly assert that they are going to makean invetigation into the mission situation, implyingthat there must be something seriously wrong. Andthere it rests, while anti-mission feeling rises.Meantime, new and returning missionaries arerefused visas to enter the country. Sometimes a missionary leaving for furlough will seek to get a permit to reenter before he leaves. Such permits are notgiven automatically. It is not even enough that thereis nothing against the record of the missionary.Sometimes he has been told to swear that he hasnever tried to win anyone to his faith in India, before the permit would be granted. And the situationis not getting better.What should be our attitude toward this opposition and what action should we take?1. We should recognize that opposition is to beexpected. As Christians we do not deliberately seekit nor stir it up ; but it should never surprise us. It isnot to be expected that those who oppose the Christian message will favor its proclamation. Real Chris-September 1, 1954tianity is always profoundly disturbing. If it is vitalit calls for changes changes in hearts and lives,changes in social relationships as well as worship. Soit cannot avoid opposition.2. We should realize that opposition may accomplish some good ends. For example, the reduction inmissionaries from abroad may awaken the IndianChurch to take on greater responsibility for thework in its own land. After all, there are reportedto be more than eight million professing Christiansin India.And the missionaries, too, are being stirred upto take more definite and urgent steps for thestrengthening of Indian leadership in the churches.They cannot count on a leisurely development overseveral generations, with the missionary holding thereins until he thinks the nationals are fully ready totake over. He is forced to realize that a missionary'sjob is by its very nature temporary.3. We should try to understand the government's point of view and its situation. We need toremember that Christian missions came into Indiaunder the shadow of European government foreigngovernment. When at length India became free offoreign rule, it is not surprising that some objectedto the continued presence of the missionaries. Theyconsidered them to be accessories of foreign rule. Itis to their credit that not all share this radical view.We ought to notice that the issue at presentdeals mostly with missionaries from the UnitedStates. India is still in the Commonwealth, so Britishmissionaries do not need visas. Besides, only theUnited States has had the means to start new missions in India.The United States was not closely identifiedwith the older imperialism in India. But today it isheld guilty of a "new imperialism." It is economicimperialism, the imperialism of money. India is poor,it is true. But it is jealous of its newly won independence. It is not ready to sell its independencefor a mess of pottage. Instead, it may at times oppose the United States just to assert that independence.4. Although we try to understand these things,we would do wrong to compromise our Christian position. We are wrong to use schools, hospitals andother social services simply as bait to attract converts; but we are just as wrong to try to divorcethem from the Christian message, as some wouldhave us do. They are a necessary expression of thelife of Christ that is in us and the concern He hasgiven us for suffering humanity. To separate themfrom any reference to Him or our faith in Him issheer misrepresentation. It is to deny the One whogave them birth.It is right for us to co-operate with the government in all its just aims to establish a stable government in the country. It is equally right to lay claimto the religious liberty it has professed to recognizein the constitution. That liberty does not involve theentrance of all the foreigners who may want to go toIndia. But it does mean that foreigners as well asIndians may propagate their faith. And it does imply that the Indian Church shall not be prohibitedfrom enjoying help from abroad purely on religiousgrounds.In a practical way, the best thing we can do ispray. Prayer shows a deep and continuing interest.133