No other kurfuffle in my career had me more twisted up than the time I found myself defending Ghandi a few years ago. In fact, I wasn't even really defending him. I weighed in on a debate between a group of Christian teenagers as to whether or not Ghandi was in heaven or not. I took what I thought was the rather orthodox position that it wasn't up to us (or our theological systems) to decide such things, that it was rather arrogant and presumptuous of us, that it was Christ who made those decisions.
Today's (trial) feast in the Episcopal Church remembers the first native Bishop of India, + Vedanayagam Samuel Azariah. Among many things, he was known for his passion for promoting the Christian faith in predominantly Hindu India, for which he got himself in his own kerfuffle with Ghandi, who didn't care much for Azariah inviting Hindus to convert to the Christian life. But it is important to note that chief among Azariah's reasons for promoting Christ's teaching was the barbaric caste systems that was intrinsic to Hindusim. Ghandi knew that Hinduism needed reforming, but didn't see the introduction of Christianity as an Indian solution.
I think one of the primary challenges for any of us is to try and name the core values in our lives and systems that give health and foster redemtpion. Ultimately, that is what God wants from any of the world-views we kick around in. God wants glory, but glory that is intrinsic to the care and love of human beings. And it is all the more reason why I work to ensure that the Christian framework I play a small part in cultivating maintains healthy ideas.
Ghandi was a good human being, who was in a position to point out the unquestionable abuse and harm of English colonialism. But like all of us, he had a culturally embedded blind spot. If Ghandi had one, then how much more must I? As I approach the Epiphany of our Lord, I only hope I will be able to see myself and my world views with greater clarity, for the glory of God and the welfare of all people.
Comments