This article was downloaded by: [Amalendu MISRA]On: 08 December 2011, At: 13:21Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Nationalism and Ethnic PoliticsPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fnep20

The Missionary Position: Christianity andPolitics of Religious Conversion in IndiaAmalendu Misra aa Department of Politics, Philosophy, & Religion, LancasterUniversity, United Kingdom

Available online: 01 Dec 2011

To cite this article: Amalendu Misra (2011): The Missionary Position: Christianity and Politics ofReligious Conversion in India, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 17:4, 361-381

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13537113.2011.622635

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 17:361–381, 2011Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1353-7113 print / 1557-2986 onlineDOI: 10.1080/13537113.2011.622635

The Missionary Position: Christianityand Politics of Religious Conversion in India

AMALENDU MISRALancaster University

The purpose of this article is to critically examine the politics of re-ligious conversion in India. Since Christianity is the main religionespousing and conducting conversion in ever-larger numbers inIndia, my focus, in the following pages, is to interrogate the debatesurrounding this particular undertaking and the attendant con-flict dynamics. This study is organized according to the followingframework. First, it situates religious conversion in the context ofradical Hindu nationalism. Second, it explores the issue of religiousconversion in the theories of identity and globalization. Third, itprobes the specifics of Christian conversion in India and investigatesthe issue within the framework of identity politics and secularism.Fourth, it examines the response and reaction of the radical Hindunationalists towards religious conversion in general and Christianconversion in particular from the perspective of ethno-religious na-tionalism. Fifth and finally, it evaluates the dimensions of conflictbetween Christians and Hindus and how they are played out in theshared social arena.

In conclusion, this article stresses that religious conversion inIndia is a form of a socioeconomic emancipatory undertaking.Those who feel stifled by the discriminatory caste order prevalentwithin Hinduism and live a marginal existence embrace this newidentity. In the same breath it argues that Christianity in general,and Christian missionaries in particular, have courted criticism,opposition, and violence from radical Hindus, informed citizenry,and the institution of the state, as they are considered an “externalother”—accused of undermining the complex sociopolitical orderin the country.

Address correspondence to Amalendu Misra, Department of Politics, Philosophy & Re-ligion, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YL, United Kingdom. E-mail: a.misra@lancaster.ac.uk

361

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

362 A. Misra

INTRODUCTION

Although a secular state, religion is one of the key characters that defineIndia. Thanks to the pervasiveness of religion in public life the mainstreampolitics in India is heavily dominated by the discourses surrounding religionand a particularized version of religious nationalism. This is most prominentin the context of radical Hindu nationalism. While postindependent Indiaalways had a Hindu nationalist

Fringe, it is much more entrenched now than before. Whereas in thepast, Islam was the key raison d’etre of this brand of nationalism, in recentyears other faiths like Christianity have been brought into the mainstreamdiscourse to consolidate Hindu nationalism. The abiding theme that is used tomake a case against Christianity concerns the latter’s overall role surroundingconversion into its fold.1

Radical Hindu nationalism that seeks to problematize the issue of Chris-tian religious conversion in India is conditioned by what one might regardas the exigencies of politics. In the context of Christianity, this particularradical constituency has gained significant popular mileage by crudely sug-gesting that (a) the Christian conversion project is a grave threat to nationalsecurity; (b) that it undermines mainstream identity; and (c) it jeopardizesintercommunal relations. As we shall see during the subsequent discussion,by underscoring the cultural, economic, and political motivations behindthis conversion project the radical Hindu elements have created a consensusagainst Christianity in general and conversion to Christianity in particularacross India.

RELIGIOUS CONVERSION IN PERSPECTIVE

Religious conversion is an extremely sensitive topic both in secular as wellas nonsecular societies.2 It raises passionate debates, in equal measures,between those in favor of it and those who are against it.3 To the liberals,religious conversion is a fundamental human right and therefore needs tobe protected by all available means.4 Those opposing conversion, however,take an entirely different view. According to them, conversion from onereligion to another is essentially wrong, such acts cannot be sanctified eitherin the realms of law or within any scriptural or religious ruling.

Given this polar opposite understanding, unsurprisingly, in some soci-eties, religious conversion has created intense rifts and regularly contributesto intergroup antagonism and violence.5 India is such a case. It sits next toLatin America in terms of registering the highest and fastest rate of growthin religious conversion.6 In the past two decades alone, it has witnessed asurge of conversion from Hinduism to other religions and consequently anexponential growth in interreligious clashes.7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

The Missionary Position 363

According to one comprehensive study, “Indian Religionists (i.e. reli-gions that emerged in the Indian subcontinent such as Buddhism, Hinduism,Jainism and Sikhism and several smaller groups, some of whom, like Parsisand Jews, may not be of Indian origin) suffered a loss of more than 11 per-centage points between 1881 and 1991 in India as a whole, to other religions(i.e. Christianity and Islam) which constitutes a drastic change in the religiousprofile of a compact geographical region like India.”8

Interestingly, while in 1881, after about a century of British rule, Chris-tians were just beginning to make their presence felt in India and constitutedabout 0.7% of the total population, currently they number around 2.3% ofthe total population. It is not easy to establish what percentage of thesefigures is actually due to conversion and what percentage owes its basis tobirthrate. However, in provinces such as Arunachal Pradesh, there has beguna large scale Christianization (through conversion) only in the last 25 years.Its Christian share in the population has risen to more than 10% starting froman almost negligible presence.9 Similarly, in the southern province of Kerala,for instance, Hindus have lost about six percentage points to Christians since1901 and are steadily losing their ground.10

The challenge for Hindus and other Indian religions to maintain theirdemographic advantage is even more acute in other parts of the country suchas Manipur. While in 1951 only about 12% of the population of Manipur wasChristianized, by 1991, the proportion of Christians had risen to 34%.11 In thecentral and eastern Indian provinces of Chhatisgarh, Orissa, and Jharkhand,there is now an intense conversion drive by various Christian missionariesto convert the local indigenous tribal and lower caste Hindus leading torecurring communal riots.

This trend obviously throws up a complex set of questions. In thefirst place, one wonders, what are the push factors that motivate people toabandon their original faith in favor of a new one? Secondly, what are thekey pull factors offered within specific religions that attract new converts?Third, and most fundamental of all, why do such changes of faith lead tointerreligious and intergroup conflict?

Most modern religions accept new converts into their fold. In somecases they even actively seek out new faithful.12 While a common prac-tice among most religions this particular enterprise is best organized andprominent in the context of Christianity.13 Thanks to its conversion strate-gies, in the underdeveloped and developing half of the world, Christian-ity is the fastest growing religion. According to some scholars, “the grow-ing attention to religious conversion is in part, a response to the growthof evangelical Christian conversion drive which has had a significant im-pact on religious demographics as well as politics in the Americas, Africa,Asia and in former Soviet Republics.”14 Given this rapid growth, Christian-ity’s conversion methods and practices have come under closer scrutiny ofobservers.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

364 A. Misra

As stated earlier, conversion is natural to most contemporary religions.However, it is while examining the rigorous expansionist trend in Christian-ity that some critics have been forced to argue, “conversion ranks among themost destabilizing activities in modern society, altering not only demographicpatterns but also the characterization of belief as communally sanctioned as-sent of religious ideology.”15 Put simply, it has the power to generate intenserifts between groups and communities and its destabilizing impact is acutelyfelt in various deeply divided societies. In fact, in most developing non-Western societies, religious conversion and communal conflict exist parallelto each other.

Given the prevalence of religious conversion across the ages, owingto the sensitivity surrounding the issue of conversion, and finally due tothe conflict-generating capacity of religious conversion, there have beennumerous attempts to address it in the study of nationalism, political theory,public policy, and as well as within the realms of international law.16

According to liberalism, religious conversion operates along the exitprinciple. It broadly suggests, “if a person wishes to convert to anotherreligion, as a matter of individual choice or freedom of conscience, there isno ambiguity that one has such a right.”17 It also presupposes the fact thatwhile embracing another religion the person concerned was exercising hisor her fundamental rights and was fully entitled to exit from the identityframework or marker to which he or she originally belonged.18

A holistic and universal interpretation of religious conversion can befound in the preamble of the UN-sponsored Universal Declaration of HumanRights (UDHR). It defines religious conversion as a human right. Article 18of its Charter UDHR posits, “everyone has the right to freedom of thought,conscience and religion; that right includes freedom to change his religionor belief.”19 Similarly Paragraph 1 of Article 18 recommends, “everyone shallhave a right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. This right shallinclude freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.”20

Such universal legal guarantees and protection of an individual’s rightto religious conversion would appear to presuppose that “it is fundamen-tally anti-democratic to force people to retain any identity against their will,especially one assumed by the very act of being born—nationality, caste,religion or even sex.”21 However, the UDHR having provided the guaranteesto an individual’s need for change of religion is also mindful of the fact thatsome individuals or groups may be forced to embrace a new religion. Toprevent this practice the document also stipulates, “no one shall be subjectto coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion orbelief of his choice.”22 Put simply, in a liberal political framework, “religiousconversion is permissible if it is genuine, and not brought about by fraud,deceit and worse still coercion.”23

While there exists a universally agreed guideline on this issue, to someobservers, the very enterprise of religious conversion is deeply problematic

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

The Missionary Position 365

—especially in the non-Western contexts.24 For, they posit, conversion insuch settings is generally an external imposition, which is often masqueradedas individual choice.25 Such criticism gains credence in those contexts whereconverting people into another religion (say Christianity) assumes the natureof a zealous personal goal by individuals intent upon achieving a fixed target.In their enthusiasm to achieve targets, more often than not, such religiouszealots may force their faith upon others, establish the superiority of theirown religion and engage in converting vulnerable groups and individualsby promise as well as delivery of economic benefit and other forms ofinducement.26 When such arguments gain currency, rather than being amatter of individual choice, religious conversion is discredited, put in thedock and attacked by those against it.

METHODOLOGY AND CONTEXT

The aim of this research undertaking was to examine the impact that Chris-tian religious conversion is having on intercommunal relations in parts ofEastern India in general and its contribution to the shaping of right-wingHindu nationalist ideology in particular. Primary research on which this ar-ticle is based was conducted in the summer of 2009 and Easter 2010. Theresearch involved the participant observation method. The three Eastern In-dian provinces (Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, and Orissa) that provide thebackdrop for this study were chosen (a) for having registered a higher levelof Christian missionary activities compared to rest of India and (b) owing tosporadic Christian-Hindu communal riots in recent years.

As participant-observer, the author was present in a few church-conducted conversion ceremonies. The author was also present on one oc-casion when radical Hindu priests and Hindu nationalists were engaged inconducting a counterreconversion suddhi ceremony in order to bring backinto Hinduism some recent Christian converts in the district of Kandhamalin Orissa. Information on conversion and various methods surrounding itwas obtained by first-hand observation and through talking to both Christianand Hindu spiritual leaders as well as those who had undergone religiousconversion in one form or another. The conflict dynamics on the groundwere observed and assessed first-hand, following two separate trips to theriot-prone area.

The interviews were conducted in semi-structured settings—very oftenat the location of the subject’s choosing. At the outset of every interview,each participant was informed that the data produced would be utilizedfor the study specified. The interaction between the interviewer and theinterviewee was always cordial. Altogether 33 interviews were conducted inthe previously mentioned provinces. In line with the ethical requirementsthe process was assessed in terms of anonymity, confidentiality, and data

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

366 A. Misra

protection. The nature of questions that were presented to the intervieweeswas set and specific. It inquired:

1. What are your views on conversion to Christianity?2. How do you perceive Christian missionary activities?3. The contribution/impact of Christianity to the overall sociopolitical atmo-

sphere.4. What is the basis of right-wing Hindu anti-Christian rhetoric and activism?5. Should converts (to Christianity) be provided more institutional protection?6. What is the basis of the radical Hindu reconversion drive?

Given that these set questions were asked to a cross-section of the populacebelonging to various backgrounds (converts to Christianity, Hindu nation-alists, Christian Missionaries, tribals, lower-caste converts, the violated, theviolator, social activists, law enforcement officers, and a few nonpartisan lo-cals), the information received was very diverse, rich, and dynamic indeed.Overall the interviews provided a vast amount of unique information andinsight, which was both relevant and important to the development of thisstudy.

Needless to add the research is also heavily informed by secondarysources, which are duly referenced. The Nuffield Foundation made fundingfor this research available.

IDENTITY THEORY

Religion is one of the key defining markers in an individual’s identity. Tradi-tionally it has played a crucial role in supporting national, regional, and classidentities.27 In a footloose world of melange cosmopolitanism, for some, it isthe only true marker enabling the self-identification process that allows theindividual to differentiate himself/herself from another fellow human being.To a large extent it both defines and recognizes the singularity of an individ-ual’s place in the world. Therefore, it could be construed as the most potentof all identity markers.

The issue of identity is also fundamental to both discourse and the pro-cess of conversion. Explained in the context of identity theory, conversionwould appear to provide a framework within which to understand an in-dividual’s overall location in the wider society. Religious conversion in itsoverall manifestation would imply both spiritual transformation and identitytransformation for the individual undergoing the change of faith. It is basedon the premise that the person undertaking this step would have a solidknowledge of his or her previous religion as well as of the one to whichhe or she aspires to convert. Hence, “genuine religious conversion,” as onecritic has stressed, “is understood to involve the spiritual transformation of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

The Missionary Position 367

an individual on the basis of ‘knowledge’, both of the person’s ‘own’ religionas well as of the one to which he/she converts.”28

Consequently, an individual’s ascription of a new identity throughchange of religion can have two sets of meanings. First, conversion may beundertaken in order to realize a new personal sacred quest and therefore toenable that particular individual a new spiritual self-identity. Second, conver-sion is very much a cultural process.29 Following conversion, the converteenot only assumes a new religious profile but also this ascribed identity alsoallows one a new cultural mooring—a brand new reference point to relateto.

While the above two are generally the common identity markers, insome societies, conversion may have another added, that is, third dimension.This is usually linked to the realm of the political. In religiously chargedcontexts, conversion is often explained and negotiated within the milieu ofthe political.30 Conversion, in some societies, assumes the form of a score-settling endeavor organized and undertaken in order to establish new formsof empowerment vis-a-vis the culture, the religion, and those earlier identitymarkers that the convertee has now abandoned.31 This invariably politicizesthe space, which until now was exclusively religious and cultural.

In India, where religious conversion is primarily undertaken as a formof social revolt (against Hindu caste hierarchy), the convertee apart fromassuming the two standard identity markers belonging to the spiritual andthe cultural also finds himself/herself in the midst of a third narrative linkedto the political.32 For an act of conversion not only challenges the stabilityand constitution of interreligious harmony in a general sense but such actsunsettle the idea of national unity and the secular fabric that the state triesto uphold.33 Thus, what should have been strictly an individual choice andtherefore private is brought (often violently) into the public arena and lacedwith the political.

GLOBALIZATION THEORY

Contemporary religious conversion is a two-way process. It is very mucha procedural affair. While at one end of this procedure sits the would-beconvertee and at the other end stand the instrument, mechanism, ideas, andthe individuals who spearhead it all. In order for this process or conversionto materialize, these two agents or actors need to come together. This leadsus to three sets of questions. If conversion is a collaborative process howis it mediated? What is the modus operandi? What are the methods andinstruments that enable these two constituencies to come together?

Rapid social change and the onset of modernity, it is generally ar-gued, remove individuals from their inherited and preexisting religiousties.34 Furthermore, modernity and the accompanying ideal of cosmopolitan

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

368 A. Misra

citizenship in the modern state induces individuals and groups to abandontheir narrow religious, sectarian, and faith-based belief system and conditionsthem to adopt and embrace a new secular identity.

While this is generally true, modernity can also be a harbinger of re-ligious revival. As one recent study has convincingly argued, rapid socialchange and modernity can in fact lead to certain religious revivalism insome societies.35 In those societies where there are competing ethnicitiesand religions, “individuals may shift from an unthinking and passive accep-tance of religion to one where there is a tendency to search for a religionregarded as systematic, logical and relevant.”36

While forces of modernity have facilitated outmigration of people fromone region to another, it is the globalization of ideas that has facilitated themovement and penetration of new ideas and institutions in hitherto closedregions and religions. Globalization with its new tools of mass communica-tion, it is argued, has facilitated the desires and yearnings of people whoare dispossessed and marginalized and seeking new options to exit from thestatus quo.37

Analyzed within this framework one could appreciate why the clamorfor embracing an alternative religion is so high in India. Religious conversionfrom Hinduism to other religions, therefore, can be understood in the contextof the push and pull forces made available with the onset of globalization.Clearly, those bringing the new religion to the new converts use the instru-ments of globalization to reach out to their potential convert. Conversely, thewould-be convert and the convertee’s transformative decision-making pro-cess has come to hinge upon the new choices that globalization has madeavailable.

FRAMING THE DEBATE

If religious conversion were to be interpreted as a form of outmigration fromone religion to another, then, in India, Hinduism would constitute the keyreligion from which almost all outmigration takes place. For over millennia,Indians (read Hindus) have embraced one faith or the other by leaving theirinherited religious identity. This is amply evident in terms of the presenceof almost every existing faith from every part of the world—from Baha’i toZoroastrianism in India (whose adherents mostly but not exclusively comefrom the Hindu fold).38 If this is so, it is worth asking why is conversionsuch a sensitive topic in India today? More specifically, why has conversionto Christianity aroused such degrees of passion among both radical Hindusand the so-called secularists in India?

This inquiry and the debate surrounding Christian conversion need tobe situated within three different contexts: (a) theological, (b) economic,and (c) power. These three are catalysts in the overall narrative of religiousconversion and conflict in India.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

The Missionary Position 369

Of the reason and rationale behind conversion to Christianity, its sup-porters argue, it has its basis in a theological context. Christian missionarieshave long argued that people belonging to other faiths (read Hindus) havebeen embracing Christianity owing to (a) the superior message of Chris-tianity and (b) to escape from the stifling and intensely discriminatory castestructure of Hinduism.

The yearlong fieldwork conducted among various converted tribal andlower caste people in Eastern and Southern India (regions where conversionto Christianity and Christian conversion drive is rife) revealed the follow-ing narrative. It was evident that the message of Christianity (as is broadlypropagated by various churches within this religion) has proved to be bothpopular and powerful among a section of India’s lower caste people (oftenostracized by orthodox Hinduism).39 New and many would-be converts flockto it for Christianity’s message of equality and its supposed healing/miracle-producing effects.

On matters of equality, those lower caste Hindus and tribals who hadembraced Christianity could find access to the same church, could takepart in the same congregation, could celebrate religious festivals togetherand could identify themselves as a singular united community that was notaffected by any division based on that particular individual’s lineage.

While this message and practice of equality acted as a powerful pull-factor, the Christian missionaries also propagated their faith by offeringwould-be converts tangible benefits that bordered on miracle.40 Stories andparticipant’s observation of events where handing down simple white pow-ders to the ailing to represent Hinduism and providing allopathic medicineto combat an illness to the same sufferer to represent the curative/healingpower of Christianity abound among the rural and tribal pockets throughoutthe region under examination.

While the missionaries’ assertion that people (belonging to the lowercaste and tribal population) embrace Christianity is a credible one, the over-all question of true motivation behind conversion (among the lower casteHindus and tribals) is very complex indeed. The counterargument (oftenvociferously chorused by those opposing it in the area of our study) is thatsuch identity-changing moves on part of the convertee have their basis notin some deep spiritual urge, owing to Christianity’s promise of equality, orits curative power as the missionaries would have us believe, but due toeconomic inducements and manipulative techniques used by the church. Isthere any basis to such claims? How credible are such accusations?

For decades various studies have underscored that potential converts areseduced by offers of money and other forms of patronage from the Christianmissionaries.41 Such arguments find their manifestation when one studies thecommunities concerned up close. In many inaccessible villages in the targetarea, Christianity appeared to have been characterized almost as a “cargocult.” Money plays such an important role in the conversion politics that

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

370 A. Misra

several converted Christians interviewed for this study contended that themissionaries have been dishonest in their economic dealings. “They collectmoney in our name and line their own pockets” was one of the familiar andoft-repeated allegations.

Eight out of 10 of those converted to Christianity who participated in thefield survey admitted to the fact that they had embraced Christianity becauseof immediate material benefits. Several of the interviewees also admitted tothe fact that they have been following this faith and identify themselves asChristian, as the missionaries and their church have been faithfully providingthem promised monthly stipends. The monthly stipendiary amount variedfrom Rs. 300 (£5) to Rs. 900 (£12), depending on the status, social positionof the concerned individual, and subject to his or her regular attendance ofchurch services.

Similarly, an examination and assessment of the lives of the convertedand the unconverted also revealed some startling and painful pictures. Poordestitute parents (for whom selling children for survival was once an ac-cepted practice) gave away their children to missionaries to be brought upas Christians. Families also appeared to have embraced Christianity en massein order to escape the grinding poverty and utter destituteness that is apermanent affliction for many in southwestern Orissa and eastern AndhraPradesh.

That there is a triadic relationship between poverty, material security,and ascription of new faith has a long-established history. While the mission-aries deny such inducement tactics in order to win converts, it is impossibleto dissociate the material aspect from the overall conversion debate.42 Unsur-prisingly, according to its critics, people are simply duped into this religion43

by a heavy dosage of economic inducements. Because of this skewed un-dertaking, such conversions, for those who oppose it, are devoid of any truemoral, ethical, or religious standing.

On balance it would appear this mismatched theological and economicundertakings to win new converts has patently discredited Christianity ingeneral and the missionary activities in particular. Equally importantly, it hasmuddied the water and foreclosed any reasonable debate on religious con-version. Thanks also to the complex maneuvers on the part of missionaries,a simple issue such as an individual’s right to profess any chosen belief isdefined in the context of power, authority, and eventually violence.

That a poor, poverty-stricken, backward people would flock to anymessage that promises and provides them with immediate material bene-fit was realized early on by several provincial governments in the region.The Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967, for example, stipulates that noperson shall “convert or attempt to convert, either directly or otherwise,any person from one religious faith to another by the use of force or byinducement or by any fraudulent means.”44 While this sits directly in contra-vention of the secular character of Indian constitution and challenges Article

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

The Missionary Position 371

25 (1) Freedom of Religion clause, many other provinces including Mad-hya Pradesh (1968), Arunachal Pradesh (1978), Gujarat (2003), Chhattisgarh(2003), Rajasthan (2005), Himachal Pradesh (2006), and Tamil Nadu (a lawwas enacted in 2002, but repealed in 2004) have used this law to restrictmissionary activities.45

Yet, given the poverty-conversion nexus highlighted earlier, such legalrestrictions on religious conversion have not been effective in preventingpoor and destitute citizenry (in these remote underdeveloped regions) fromflocking to Christianity. Suffice to say, this prevailing situation has angeredmany radical Hindus and other critics of Christianity. Their opposition tothe Christian missionaries and their outrage against the conversion drive hasstrained interreligious relations. Consequently, Christianity is now patentlydiscredited as an alien external faith, those professing it are called fifthcolumnists, and those who have embraced it are branded as traitors.

RELIGIOUS CONVERSION AND VIOLENCE

Over the last decade, in the West, East, and South of the country, there havebeen frequent Christian-Hindu communal riots of varying intensity, averagingabout two events a year. There is now a concerted attempt by the radicalHindus to (a) discredit Christianity and its conversion undertakings, (b) toattack its institutions and its votaries, and (c) to create a general sense offear among Christians. In many instances, the institutions of the state haveprovided the necessary conditions for waging such attacks.

The anticonversion drive and consequently targeting Christian minoritieshave their basis in three sets of anxieties. The first one relates to Christianmissionaries’ attempts to discredit, to denigrate, and to destroy Hinduism.The second anxiety relates to the argument that minority religions especiallyChristianity are growing at an exponential rate not through high birthrate butowing to the recruitment of fresh converts from Hinduism. The third widelyshared concern relates to a sense of impotency on the part of Hindu radicalsthat their old established religion, that is, Hinduism, is losing out to an alienfaith.

Let us interrogate the first claim that “Christian missionaries are grosslyinvolved in denigrating Hinduism.” As is generally accepted, at the heart ofIndia’s constitutionally approved cherished secularism—and indeed at thecore of Hinduism—lies a deep respect for other people’s religions, their cul-ture, and their way of life (which has enabled India to retain its multireligiousidentity). Many Christian missionaries in India, however, regularly engage inpractices amounting to open hostility and a form of modern-day crusadesagainst Hinduism: both at the spiritual as well as cultural level. As onecritic put it some 10 years ago, “there is little doubt that the anti-Christianatmosphere in parts of India would not be so serious if foreign-funded

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

372 A. Misra

missionaries had been content in giving Indians the choice of Christianityand left it at that. Instead many of them have declared war against Hinduismin their desire to convert the nation to Christianity.”46

The “Great Commission” that many Christian missionaries in India holdas their ultimate sacred objective, in truth, relates to converting the largestpossible number of Hindus to Christianity. This becomes amply clear if onesimply examines the mission statement of some of the proselytizing Christianmissionaries. The Gospel Missions of India, in Michigan, for instance, talksof “winning India for Christ.” The Washington-based Mission of Joy, whichclaims to have helped more than 13,000 Hindus and Muslims commit toChrist, maintains, “India is ripe for harvest.” “Evangelizing India for Christ,”in South Carolina says it all in its name.47

RADICAL MAJORITARIAN NATIONALISM

On the face of it, that there is a deep sense of anxiety towards the Christianconversion drive on part of a constituency in India cannot be ignored. Suchunease and consequent resistance is amply evident in the general main-stream discourse on Christianity. Let us dwell on the following statementthat highlights the Hindu hardline opposition to religious conversion andhow skillfully it makes a case against one particular conversion drive (thatis, Christianity) and leaves out others. In 2006, the then leader of the Hindunationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) stated:

We strongly condemn the campaign of proselytisation, which poses agrave threat to Hindu society and to the national integration as well. Wedemand stern action against those who indulge in such activities. . . . Itis bad enough that religious conversions are conducted in a systematicmanner through inducements and coercions. But such activities acquirean extra edge of ominousness when they are facilitated by foreign fundedorganisations ostensibly under the garb of social service for poor andunder-privileged families.48

There are two key points to the argument above. The first one is that Christianproselytization poses a grave threat to the numerical superiority of Hindus.49

This is a familiar argument undertaken often by a radical and recalcitrantmajority. As one critic points out, “as abstractions produced by census tech-niques and liberal proceduralism, majorities can always be mobilized to thinkthat they are in danger of becoming minority (culturally or numerically) andto create fear that minorities, conversely can easily become majority.”50 Thesecond point in Advani’s comment refers to him specifically suggesting thatChristianity is the culprit in this conversion debate. The truth, however, isthat all non-Hindu religions in India (bar Judaism and Zoroastrianism) have

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

The Missionary Position 373

been regularly engaged in their own forms of a proselytization undertaking.So why make Christianity the scapegoat?

In many ways, Advani was giving voice to that hardline Hindu con-stituency that would like to equate Christian proselytization as an alienthreat—a form of conquest and a security threat.51 Viewed within that con-text, such alien enterprise is something that not only needs to be feared butalso needs to be opposed. The spread of Christianity, therefore, is not onlya moral and political failing on the part of the Hindu but, as an early 20th-century Indian nationalist put it, a “last act of surrender to the foreigner.”52

Linking religious conversion to national security has always been a pol-icy posture of the Hindu right. One of the early votaries of Hindu nationalism,M. S. Golwalker, strongly advocated against proselytization in the preinde-pendence period. According to Golwalker, “conversion of Hindus into otherreligions [read Christianity] is dangerous to the security of the nation andthe country. Such undertakings consolidate the position of non-Hindu mi-norities [who are fifth columnists]. Therefore, it is in the national interestthat we [read Hindus] need to put a stop to it.”53 While the ideas expressedby this early nationalist ideologue are nearly seven decades old, Golwalker’sideological successors have revived it with earnest in the context of Christianproselytization.

On the surface, the argument about threat from the minorities to nationalsecurity would appear a gross exaggeration. However, the triumph of thislopsided assumption that Christian proselytization is a threat to national secu-rity can be explained within the framework of minority homogeneity versusmajority heterogeneity.54 It is now clearly established by various studies thatminority groups typically display in-group homogeneity.55 This default unityof the minority consequently creates uneasiness among the majority. This isparticularly evident in non-Western states with plurality of religion, race, andethnicity. And especially in societies where there is gross imbalance in suchprofiles marked by an overwhelming majority and one or several minorities.

India is a typical example of such a society. Although Hindus are amajority, they are not a homogenous group. There have been multitudes ofdivisions among them along the fault lines of sect, region, language, andso on.56 The non-Hindu minorities, by contrast, have consciously tried toavoid such in-group divisions. Since they are a minority (overwhelmed bya massive Hindu majority), they have always displayed their homogeneityon the face of majoritarian hegemony.57 This “strength in numbers” attitudeby the minorities in most instances is displayed as a form of solidarity, anidentity marker, and form of in-group cohesion. But it is scarcely used as atool to fight against the majority or to undermine the national state.

However, in the face of India’s perpetual confrontation with a multitudeof internal ethno-religious challenges, the radical Hindu nationalists havefound a natural arena to conflate minority homogeneity with that of minoritythreat (to the nation). This supposed unity when viewed alongside the spatial

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

374 A. Misra

expansion of Christian missionaries makes a bad situation worse. It vilifiesthe Christians and consolidates the radical religious nationalism of the Hinduright.

FAITH, COMPETITION, AND POWER

In contemporary India, the Christian missionaries’ undertakings (in the spir-itual as well as material realm) could be interpreted as a form of “religiousterritorialization.”58 Aggressive and relentless in its pursuits and successful inits endeavors, the missionaries have come to be associated with a form ofcolonialism of the past. According to this thesis, missionary activities includ-ing conversion to Christianity were a fait accompli in the preindependencecolonial period. Going by this particular thesis, territorialization should havecome to an end following the country’s independence.

However, if one were to make an assessment of Christian missionaryexpansionism in the postindependence period, they would appear to begoing from strength to strength. Instead of reduction of religious space, themissionaries appear to have acquired new territories.59 A substantial rise inlower caste Hindu and indigenous peoples’ conversion to Christianity inrecent years is often highlighted to make a point about this expansionist un-dertaking. Christian missionaries’ acquisition of substantial prime propertiesin important urban areas and the purchase of vast tracts of rural land havegiven credence to arguments about Christian territorialization.

Acquisition of such spaces is made possible owing to several underly-ing causes. Thanks to the presence of large pools of poor, destitute, andstigmatized populace struggling to escape the oppressive caste system, thereis no such place as India, so far as proselytization goes. According to itscritics, Christian missionary activity is a big business in India. It is almosta competitive market with various denominations of Christianity and theirchurches vying with each other to convert these people. In the last fewdecades alone, there has been a surge of various churches and their partic-ular brand of Christianity in all those areas where Christian proselytizationis taking place. Although there is a long-established presence of the RomanCatholic Church in Chhatisgarh, Jharkhand, and Orissa, other denomina-tions, such as Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, Pentecost, Seventh Day Adven-tist, Southern Baptist, and so on, have flocked to the region in ever greaternumbers.

For all these spiritual fortune seekers, the inaccessible tribal and lowercaste-dominated mountainous region of Eastern India is Klondike country.This cowboy spiritualism has unsurprisingly led to massive social upheaval.Christianity’s rude entry into many hitherto settled cultural communities, itsdetractors argue, has severely restricted the traditional societal values andmores and has led to the “reduction of spiritual, material and physical space”of the non-Christians.60

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

The Missionary Position 375

As one of the interviewees in this study put it, “thanks to their eco-nomic power they [the Christian missionaries and their local associates] havesuffocated the traditional lifestyle of several indigenous groups and in turncreated a two-tier system of existence of haves and have-nots.” Faced withthis challenge, the choice of many of these people has been to face perpet-ual marginalization or abandonment of their culture, faith, and way of life inlieu of a better standard of living and adoption of an alien God.

FRAYING SECULARISM

The issue of Christian conversion, which until recently was a preserve ofthe Hindu radicals, has now come to dominate the middle ground of Indianpolitical discourse. A hitherto unbiased intelligentsia is now of the opinionthat it is the nature of Indian secularism that has been instrumental in al-lowing Christian missionaries to exploit the vulnerable. According to thisconstituency, “India’s secularism is not functioning; not because it has notgone far enough because it has gone too far.”61 While some others havesuggested given the minority appropriation of majority space and disruptionof their worldview, one needs to revisit the issue of secularism and inquireif secularism itself is an incompatible idea unsuited to a country like India.62

Interestingly, it is this growing disillusionment with secularism that hasoverseen the emergence of majoritarian radical impulse.63 Religious radical-ism, it is suggested, “tends to result, not in the definition of space dedicatedto the official religion and its adherents, but the establishment of uneasy andcompeting zones marked by different religions.”64 Therefore, it is the trans-formation of Shibu to Steven and Nitei to Nicholas and Sita to Susana andPriti to Patricia made possible by the ambit of secularism that has enabledan antisecularist Hindu radical drive against Christian proselytization.

This turning away from secularism would appear to be in direct contrastwith the ideals of the greatest purveyor of Indian secularism, that is, Jawa-harlal Nehru. According to Nehru, “we have got to deal with the minoritiesin a civilized manner, we must give them security and the rights of citizensin a democratic state. If we fail to do so, we shall have a festering sorewhich will eventually poison the whole body politic and probably destroyit.”65 Why this U-turn?

Focusing on Christianity in general and Christians in particular, the an-tisecularist sentiment of the radical right is much clearer. In their view, sinceChristian missionaries openly criticize Hindu Gods, chastise its traditions andundermine the cultural values in order to project the superiority of Christian-ity and win converts from the Hindu fold they should be treated with utmostreproach. This sentiment, which was once the sole preserve of Hindu rad-icals, has slowly affected the secular agencies of the state. It would not bean exaggeration to suggest that there is an institutional indifference towards

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

376 A. Misra

official secularism as witnessed during anti-Christian communal riots thatperpetually affect the area of our focus.

Reports of police inaction against rioters, apathy of law enforcementagents who refuse to prosecute the guilty, and an overall callousness to-wards the plight of the minorities during communal clashes are becomingever more common in India.66 While reflecting on this attitude some crit-ics have even gone to the extent of describing it as “institutionalized riotsystem.”67 This perplexing as well as paradoxical behavior, however, begsa simple question: That is, what makes the supposed guardians of secular-ism assume the position of bystanders rather than positive interveners incharge of maintaining law, order, and peace in communal conflicts, riots,and pogroms?

A sustained interrogation of many of these agents reveals a deeply unset-tling portrait. It would appear that many of the agents remained uncommittedto their call of duty when approached by a threatened fleeing Christian, notbecause they were callous and bigots who did not respect the value of hu-man life but because they were expressing their anger over the official policyof secularism. Some of the respondents were of the opinion that taking ad-vantage of Indian secularism the Christian missionaries flagrantly violated theexisting sociocultural space and contributed towards intercommunal disunityand disharmony.

Their inaction, therefore, could be argued as a protest against “secu-larism gone too far.”68 Very often, according to many of these agents, theChristian was “an outsider” who belonged to “the other” category and thusdid not deserve the protection of the law. And since the Christian facing aHindu mob was a convertee, he or she carried a double castigation (a) forbeing a Christian and (b) a traitor who deserted Hinduism and thus forfeitedall manners of safeguard.69

INTRAMURAL STRUGGLE

When an individual leaves a community, it triggers an intense soul-searchingwithin the community that the person has just left behind. This move, bya solitary individual or a group, forces the community as a whole to askin the first instance why such a thing took place? Many liberal and self-assured societies would consider this question with utmost ease: that theperson left the faith as he or she found some higher spiritual realization.However, in those contexts where the nation is new, the nation has a historyof uneasy interreligious relationship, and the society itself is dominated byone particular cultural/religious community any such crossover could provedeeply unsettling for those belonging to the dominant faith from which thismigration takes place.

It is not the first time that such outmigration from Hinduism to an-other religion is taking place in India. Thanks to their numerical supremacy

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

The Missionary Position 377

and Hinduism being the original religion of the land, Hindus in the pasthad by and large managed to counter the major advancement of any newreligions. Interestingly, it is the dawn of a new pattern in the conversionpolitics that is proving too much for some Hindus. The radical Hindus areincensed by the reckoning that Hinduism, which was capable of withstand-ing the onslaught of other religions in the past, is failing to do so in thecurrent context—especially in the face of Christianity’s sustained conversiondrive.

Viewed alongside Christianity and its conversion success, however, theHindus would appear to encounter some form of crises of faith. The oppo-sition to conversion, therefore, can be seen as an intramural struggle takingplace among Hindus in general and its self-appointed guardians in particular.Those opposing conversion from within its fold are unable to comprehendas to how a “superior” and old established religion “with a genius to bringtogether elements from a federation of cultures” could lose out to externalfaiths?70 As one critic put it, the opposition to Christian conversion stemsfrom a particular Hindu worldview: “To a Hindu, his religion is pure, andholy and admirable. Defecting from it, one becomes impure and polluted,and defiled. Hindus perceive Christianity as a religion of lower moral andethical standards. For them to become Christian means coming down froma higher to a lower moral standard.”71

While a lot of Hindus are happy to hold this worldview, there is, how-ever, no attempt to reflect on the maladies existing within their religion. Aswe discussed earlier, the loss of religious space by Hinduism to other reli-gions may have something to do with Hinduism itself. Traditional Hinduismdoes not offer any room for the reform of an unjust society characterized by adark hierarchy.72 Thanks to its rigid caste system and a religiously sanctionedsociocultural order, those at the bottom of it have always felt victimized.73

But more crucially, since there is no mobility clause between various strataof that hierarchy, some of those who are at the bottom of that division haveopted for an exit option rather than continue living an existence of perpetualservitude and pass on that overall condition to their children and the nextgeneration.

In the past this exit option was not widely available to those whowished to exercise it. Thanks to globalization and identity politics, as high-lighted earlier, the possibility of an exit option to those who feel victimizedhave assumed reality. In this context, the loud proclamation of Christianmissionaries that there exists “injustice, corruption, violence and other uglysides to Hinduism”74 against its own followers has received wide currency.

Caught between these two push-and-pull forces, i.e. the rigidity andconservatism of one religion and accessibility and equality of another, andunable to thwart either, many self-styled guardians of Hinduism have turnedviolent. Their bottled up anger is often channeled against the convertee andthe converter.75

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

378 A. Misra

CONCLUSION

The question of conversion to Christianity, its opposition by Hindu national-ists, and the overall framework of violence, which has manifested itself in thecontext of conversion, cannot be studied without dwelling on the question ofethnicity and nationalism. The presence of non-Hindu minorities has alwaysbeen a challenge to the Hindutva ideology of one people/one nation.76 Thisconservative understanding of cultural and religious exclusivity has broughtHindu nationalists into conflict with the nation’s minorities and their specificreligions.77

For the Hindu nationalist, the issue of religious conversion and the ac-companying crisis is primarily a crisis of confidence. Hindu radicals opposingconversion are both baffled and anxious when they are confronted with thisphenomenon. However, instead of self-introspection about the Hindu soci-ety that is responsible for pushing a constituency away from its folds, theyseek relief in invented imaginaries and hunting scapegoats.

In the context of India, conversion to Christianity is best understood as areaction against the deep-seated stifling hierarchy existing within the Hindusocial order. It is the message of equality propounded by Christianity—asagainst the exploitative face of the Hindu caste system—that has provedirresistible to many new converts to Christianity. Yet, on balance, it mustbe stressed that many of those who have embraced Christianity have doneso not because of some deep theological quest but very often to alter theireconomic standing for the better.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I gratefully acknowledge the help received from Nuffield Foundation toundertake this study. My thanks are also due to Adrian Guelke, JessicaBlomkvist, and three anonymous referees for their useful comments andsuggestions on an earlier draft of this article. The helpful conversations onthis topic I had with Justin J. S. G. Richards and Swetaketu Misra have beeninvaluable.

NOTES

1. Almost all existing denominations within Christianity can be found in India. To a large extentmost of these denominations are involved in religious conversion programs. While there exist deeptheological and ecumenical division and divide among these denominations, in this study, I examinetheir conversion practices as a whole under one common umbrella.

2. Rudolf C. Heredia, Changing Gods: Rethinking Conversion in India (New Delhi: Penguin,2007).

3. See, for example, Norman Lewis’s passionate portrayal in Norman Lewis, The Missionaries:God against the Indians (London: Arena, 1989). For a specific area-focused discussion, also see, NormanLewis, The World, The World (London: Picador, 1997).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

The Missionary Position 379

4. An engaging debate on this could be found in Anthony Gill’s Political Origins of ReligiousLiberty (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).

5. This is a live contentious issue in Malaysia, Nigeria, and Pakistan.6. See the survey report of The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, 2007. Also, see “The List:

World’s Fastest Growing Religions,” Foreign Policy 35(2); 11–17.7. For an exhaustive discussion, see Sebastian C. H. Kim, In Search of Identity – Debates on

Religious Conversion in India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003). Also, see Heredia, ChangingGods, 13.

8. A. P. Joshi, M. D. Srinivas, and J. K. Bajaj, Religious Demography of India (Chennai: Centre forPolicy Studies, 2003), 22.

9. Ibid., 21.10. Ibid., 20.11. Ibid., 21.12. A seminal and profound explorative examination of the very issue of conversation can be

found in Rodney Stark and Roger Finke, Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion (Berkeley:University of California Press, 2000). Similarly, for a psycho-social exploration of the individual decisionto convert, see Henri Gooren, Religion Conversion and Disaffiliation: Tracing Patterns of Change in FaithPractices (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).

13. Since this study purports to examine the debate on religious conversion in India, which isoverwhelmingly alert to Christianity and its conversion drive, my primary focus is the latter and itsundertakings in this particular arena.

14. Laura Dudley Jenkins, “Real Limits on Religious Conversion in India,” Law & ContemporaryProblems 71(2): 112 (2008).

15. Gauri Viswanathan, Outside the Fold: Conversion, Modernity, and Belief (Princeton, NJ: Prince-ton University Press, 1998), xvi.

16. For a detailed survey of the politics of conversion and surrounding public policy under-taking across the contemporary international society see, Robert Barro, Jason Hwang, and Rachel Mc-Clearly, “Religious Conversion in 40 Countries,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 49(1): 15–36(2010).

17. Irfan Engineer, “Freedom of Conscience, Conversions and Law,” Combat Law 1(6): 3 (2003).18. For a persuasive debate, see, Gill, Political Origins, 1–23.19. See, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article 18. http://www.un.org/en/

documents/udhr/ (accessed 12 May 2010).20. For a detailed discussion, see Ibid., Paragraph 1.21. Nivedita Menon, “The Right to Conversion,” The Telegraph, 07 May 2004, 1.22. UDHR, Universal Declaration, Paragraph 2, Article 18.23. Menon, The Right to Conversion, 2.24. See, for instance, Jonathan Fox’s seminal study on the religion and state dataset in which

he highlights the government involvement in religion, treatment of minorities, and politics of conver-sion; Jonathan Fox, A World Survey of Religion and the State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2008).

25. Lewis, The Missionaries, 17; Jon Stock, “Christian Provocation,” The Spectator, 6 Feb. 2009, 23.26. Engineer, “Freedom of Conscience,” 3.27. Bryan S. Turner, “Religion,” Theory, Culture, & Society 23(2–3): 440 (2006).28. Menon, The Right to Conversion, 1.29. Lewis R. Rambo, Understanding Religious Conversion (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,

1993).30. Timothy J. Steigenga and Edward L. Cleary, Conversion of a Continent: Contemporary Religious

Change in Latin America (New Jersey, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2008).31. See, for instance, this study by Paul Freston, Evangelicals and Politics in Asia, Africa and Latin

America (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008).32. These two studies highlight this point succinctly, see, Viswanathan, Outside the Fold, i–xvi,

and Sebastian C. H. Kim, In Search of Identity—Debates on Religious Conversion in India (New Delhi:Oxford University Press, 2003).

33. Jennifer Coleman, “Authoring (In)Authenticity, Regulating Religious Tolerance: The Implica-tions of Anti-Conversion Legislation for Indian Secularism,” Cultural Dynamics 20(3): 272 (2008).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

380 A. Misra

34. Yves Lambert, “Religion in Modernity as a New Axial Age: Secularization or New ReligiousForms?,” Sociology of Religion 60(3): 307 (1999).

35. See, Fox, A World Survey, 33.36. Tong Chee Kiong, Rationalizing Religion: Religious Conversion, Revivalism and Competition

in Singapore (Amsterdam: EJ Brill, 2007), 4.37. Lewis R. Rambo, “Theories of Conversion: Understanding and Interpreting Religious Change,”

Social Compass 46(3): 262 (1999).38. For an engaging discussion see, Chapter 5, of Shashi Tharoor’s, India: From Midnight to the

Millennium and Beyond (New Delhi: Penguin, 2007).39. Gauri Viswanathan, Outside the Fold: Conversion, Modernity, and Belief (Princeton, NJ: Prince-

ton University Press, 1998); Rowena Robinson, Christians of India (New Delhi: Sage, 2003).40. For a contemporary discussion on the Protestant Christian missionary medicinal practices in

the period between 1880–1964, see, David Hardiman, Missionaries and Their Medicine: A ChristianModernity for Tribal India (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2008).

41. Robinson, Christians of India; and also, see Ram Puniyani, ed., Religion, Power and Violence:Expression of Politics in Contemporary Times (New Delhi: Sage, 2005).

42. For an interesting and exhaustive discussion, see Jebens Holger, ed., Cargo, Cult, and CultureCritique (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2004).

43. According to one observer, converts are usually treated as victims by those opposing it, thusthey are often depicted as passive dupes of the machinations of active converters. For a detailed discus-sion, see Laura Dudley Jenkins, “Legal Limits on Religious Conversion in India,” Law & ContemporaryProblems 71(2): 109–27 (2008).

44. Legislature of the State of Orissa, Republic of India, “Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967.”http://indianchristians.in/news/images/resources/pdf/orissa freedom of religion act-text only.pdf (ac-cessed 1 Sep. 2011).

45. V. Venkatesan, “The Conversion Debate,” The Frontline 25(19): 12 (2008).46. Stock, “Christian Provocation,” 17.47. Ibid., 16. Also, for mission statements see Gospel Missions of India, at, http://www.

gospelmi.org/; Mission of Joy, at, http://www.missionofjoy.org/; and Evangelizing India forChrist, at http://www.charityblossom.org/nonprofit/evangelizing-India-for-christ-inc-fort-mill-sc-29715-570968150/.

48. L. K. Advani, “Advani for Legislation to Ban Conversion,” The Hindustan Times, 17 April 2006,3.

49. In spite of the commotion surrounding Christian proselytization drive; the reality is that Chris-tians in modern India are a numerically insignificant minority. Constituting 2.3% of the national population,they are “dwarfed” by the Hindus (nearly 78%) and Muslims (around 15%) of the total population.

50. Arjun Appaddurai, Fear of Small Numbers: An Essay on the Geography of Anger (Durham, NC:Duke University Press, 2006), 83.

51. For conquest, in a much broader context, can imply a form of subjugation, which is facilitatedby the process of conversion into an alien faith and culture. See Octavio Paz, The Labyrinth of Solitude(New York: Grove Press,1990), 361.

52. M. S. S. Pandian, “Nation as Nostalgia: Ambiguous Spiritual Journeys of Vengal Chakikarai,”Economic and Political Weekly 38(51/52): 5357 (2004).

53. M. S. Golwalker, A Bunch of Thoughts (Bangalore: Verma Prakashana, 1966).54. True there exists caste and sectarian division among Indian Muslims and Christians. However,

in spite of caste affiliations and denominational differences when it comes to political Islam or politicalChristianity, both groups have faced the challenges coming from their detractor(s) as a united whole.That explains the arguments about minority homogeneity.

55. Donald L. Horowitz, Ethnic Groups in Conflict (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press,1985); Rupert Brown, Prejudice: Its Social Psychology (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000).

56. According to one critic, the “the laxness at the heart of the practice of Hinduism, this failureto require conformity, troubles many Hindus today.” Tharoor, India: From Midnight, 116.

57. Interestingly minority homogeneity is a product of a default double-bind situation, that is, theyare united owing to their small numbers and also forced to stand united owing to the threat from theradical Hindu right.

58. Seen in the wider context of radical Hindu opposition to external cultures and practices theargument against Christianity can be framed along these lines: “Don’t make outside cultures your own. . ..

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11

The Missionary Position 381

When foreign influences become implanted in the minds and practices of the nation’s citizens, turningthem into something new and provocative, into internal aliens thus impurities in their own city andcommunity—does that influence pose a threat.” I am paraphrasing Thomas Blom Hansen’s reflectionson Hindu right-wing Shiv Sena ideology in this context. For details see, Thomas Blom Hansen, Wages ofViolence: Naming and Identity in Post-Colonial Bombay (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press), 215.

59. See, the overall religious demographic projection in Joshi et al., Religious Demography, 21–23.60. For a forceful discussion, see Lewis, The Missionaries.61. Ashutosh Varshney, Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus and Muslims in India (New Haven,

CT: Yale University Press, 2003), 76.62. Ashish Nandy, “The Politics of Secularism and the Recovery of Religious Tolerance,” in Rajeev

Bhargava, ed., Secularism and Its Critics (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998), 334.63. Some scholars interrogating the process of religious conversion within secularism posit “it is

still an evolving concept” in India and a much contested one at that. See, for instance, Rudolf C. Heredia,Changing Gods: Rethinking Conversion in India (New Delhi: Penguin, 2007).

64. Robbie G. H. Goh, “Religious Sites,” Theory, Culture & Society 23(2 & 3): 451 (2006).65. Jawaharlal Nehru, Discovery of India (New Delhi: Publications Division. 1990), 76.66. This aspect is passionately interrogated in Suketu Mehta, Maximum City: Bombay Lost and

Found (London: Headline, 2005); Martha Nussbaum, The Clash Within: Democracy Religious Violenceand India’s Future (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007).

67. Paul R. Brass, Forms of Collective Violence: Riots, Pogroms and Genocide in Modern India (NewDelhi: Thee Essays, 2006).

68. For a forceful discussion, see Ashutosh Varshney, Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus andMuslims in India (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003).

69. Note, for instance, the traditional view of a deserter from Hinduism as a traitor/person oflow-moral standing and thus by default one who forfeits all manners of protection.

70. Ninian Smart, The Long Search (London: British Broadcasting Service 1977), 48.71. Atul Y. Aghamkar, “Traditional Hindu Views and Attitudes Towards Christianity,” Global Mis-

siology English 2(5): 11 (2008).72. Smart, The Long Search, 46.73. Many Hindu thinkers and reformists from 18th century onwards entertained this question and

tried to bring about reform within Hinduism (precisely to prevent large-scale conversion of Hindus intoother religious folds).

74. Interview with Pastor Samuel Mohanty in Cuttack, Orissa, July 2009.75. Note, for instance, the slow consolidation of an anti-Christian mainstream discourse and the

frequency of deadly attacks against the community across India over past decade, attracting widespreadcondemnation from the Pope to the European Union and the US Senate.

76. For a detailed discussion, see Amalendu Misra, Identity & Religion: Foundations of Anti-Islamism in India (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2004).

77. There exists a wealth of literature on this dating back to the precolonial period. For importantfoundational discussions on India’s claim to an exclusive Hindu identity and consequently a Hindu nation,see, V. D. Savarkar, Hindutva—Who Is A Hindu? (Poona: SR Date, 1942); M. S. Golwalker, Bunch ofThoughts (Bangalore: Verma Prakashan, 1966). For an exhaustive contemporary overview, see ChristopheJaffrelot, Hindu Nationalist Movement in India (London: Hurst, 1998).

Amalendu Misra is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Politics, Philosophy, &Religion, Lancaster University, United Kingdom. He is the author of Politics of CivilWar (Routledge, 2008), Identity & Religion (Sage, 2004), and Afghanistan—TheLabyrinth of Violence (Polity, 2004).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Am

alen

du M

ISR

A]

at 1

3:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

11