Missionaries
and Mahatma Gandhi
By Kanchan Gupta
"Extraordinary casuist".
"Dangerous phenomenon".
"Unscrupulous and irresponsible demagogue". "Pernicious".
"An anarchist at heart". "Prone to mental confusion".
- That Is What Christian Missionaries Had To Say About
Gandhi!
He is an "extraordinary casuist". Unless stopped, his views will become a
"dangerous phenomenon of present day politics in India.
" His teachings can lead to "chaos and anarchy only". His politics will
lead to "mischievous consequences".
All this could well have been the secularist brigade's criticism of Shri Ashok
Singhal or Acharya Giriraj Kishore of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad.
Or Congress president Sonia Gandhi berating leaders of the Sangh Parivar. Indeed, the
outpouring of self-righteous indignation that we read in newspapers and hear on television
today, the overflowing indignation of the Church and its newly sprung "human
rights" activists, is replete with such words and phrases.
But these words have been taken from history. From cold print. From journals published by
Christian missionaries. Journals that still exist as evidence of missionaries, especially
of the Protestant variety, willingly allowing themselves to be used as instruments of
British rule in India. And the man referred to is Mahatma Gandhi, that great apostle of
peace and practitioner of Sanatan Dharma whose 50th death anniversary is being observed
today.
Gandhi's arrival on the scene had greatly charged the nationalist movement and expanded
the spread and scope of the struggle against British colonial rule. Gandhi's philosophy of
peaceful resistance to colonial rule had found expression in the non-cooperation
agitation. This in turn set alarm bells ringing - the colonial establishment, including
the Church, was quick to realise Gandhi's potential. It retaliated in full force, using
its arsenal, including missionaries and their publications.
In September 1919, the Christian Missionary Review fired the first salvo. A
year later, the Christian Missionary Review dropped all niceties and described Gandhi as
an "extraordinary casuist", an "unscrupulous and irresponsible
demagogue" responsible for the disturbances in Punjab the previous year. Urging
India's colonial masters to "adequately" deal with Gandhi's "egotistical
mysticism," the Christian Missionary Review said that unless putdown, Gandhi and his
nationalism would emerge as "one of the dangerous phenomena of present day politics
in India."
In fact, the murderous attitude of the British in Punjab and the terrible fallout of the
Rowlatt Act, found ample support among the missionaries. Bishop Henry Whitehead not only
supported the Act but went on to denigrate the nationalist agitation against the Act as a
"striking illustration of the incapacity of a large section of Indian politicians to
face facts and realities, or to understand the first principles of civilised
government." We all know of the action of the "civilised Government" so
ardently backed by the missionaries - the massacre at Jallianwala Bag.
Indeed, Ms Marcella Sherwood, speaking on behalf of the Church of England Zenana
Missionary Society and Rev Canon Guildford, speaking on behalf of the Church Missionary
Society, lauded Gen Dyer's brutality, saying it was "justified by its results".
The Christian Missionary Review, describing Gen Dyer as a "brave man", said,
absurdly though, that his action was "the only means of saving life".Another
missonary publication, rather disingenuously named The Young Men of India, heaped praise
on Sir Michael O'Dwyer, the Lt Governor of Punjab during those terrible days of bloodshed
and brutality by a ruthless colonial administration, saying that he was "the
strongest and best ruler the country has had in modern times." The Harvest Field,
also a missionary journal, was quick to point out that during the nationalist uprising
against the Rowlatt Act, Indian Christians were not found "wanting in loyalty to the
(British) Government." The International Review of Missions was clear in its
pronouncement that the means and methods adopted by the British to put down the uprising
in Punjab were neither un-Christian nor a blot on British rule.
It is
important that we understand the import of the missionaries' view of the nationalist
uprising against the Rowlatt Act, their justification of the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh,
their unrestrained praise for Gen Dyer. Those who saw nothing wrong with drenching the
ground of Jallianwala Bagh with the blood of Indian nationalists, those who saw nothing
"un-Christian" about the bloodshed, those who found "loyalty to the
British" in the cowardice of Indian Christians, could not but have derided Gandhi and
his non-violence.
For, Gandhi's unique contribution to India's freedom movement, as also to freedom
struggles in oppressed nations across the world, Satyagraha, was considered
"un-Christian" by a majority of Protestant missionaries. The Christian
Missionary Review describing Gandhi's agenda as dangerous, predicted that it would lead to
violence, chaos and anarchy.
This view was seconded by The Young Men of India. Commenting on Gandhi's freedom campaign
fashioned around the philosophy of Satyagraha, in March 1920, The Young Men of India
wrote: "Though Mr Gandhi may have satisfied his conscience as to its morality, to
plain common sense it means playing with fire, with the certainty that if used with masses
of Indian people, the fire will become a conflagration?" . The Harvest Field, yet
another missionary journal, in its May 1921 issue, put on record its belief that "Mr
Gandhi's teachings" would result in "chaos and anarchy only." Gandhi, it
said, had brought a "sword to his beloved land." "We have no animus against
the man," said the Madras Christian College Magazine in October, 1921 - the best way
to rubbish a person, to inflict the most grievous wound, is to preface the attack with
"we have nothing against the man" - "but we have always regarded the
doctrines he has been preaching and the policy he has advocated as pernicious." The
Magazine, of course, had a pious purpose behind its attack: to save India from the
mischievous consequences that must follow from their (Gandhi's doctrines) adoption."
Such concern! Such piety!
But that was not all. The Madras Christian College Magazine went on to offer a homily. All
those who want "peace and sobriety of life and progress," it urged, should
reject the "sophistry of non-violence". Let us recall these words when the
current president of the Congress today pays tribute to Gandhi as an apostle of
non-violence.
By 1922, the Madras Christian College Magazine had dropped all pretensions. It declared
that there was nothing "positive or
constructive" about Gandhi's programme of Satyagraha and that his role till then had
been "negative throughout". Gandhi, the Madras Christian College Magazine added
with a sweeping flourish, was "an anarchist at heart? prone to mental
confusion."
In
her book, The Attitude of British Protestant
Missionaries Towards Nationalism in India, Elizabeth Susan Alexander, offers an explanation
for such vile diatribe against Gandhi as articulated by the missionary publications:
"British officials came to accept missionaries as partners in the 'noble' task of
shouldering the 'white man's burden.' British officials defended their support of
Christian missionaries as being in the interest of their rule, for missionaries were used
as instruments of their policies of reform? Missionary activities were seen to have
lucrative results for British commercial interests."
On the 50th anniversary of the Mahatma's martyrdom, let us not be overwhelmed by the
fulsome tribute that will be offered by our secular politicians who have ediscovered
electoral merit in closing ranks with present day Christian missionaries.
Let us remember the ignominy that was heaped on Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the grievous
wounds that were inflicted on the Mahatma, by the partners of British colonial rule.
India's colonial rulers have long departed. Their partners remain in business.
This article appeared in The Observer of Business and Politics, published from New Delhi
and Mumbai, on January 30, 1999, the 50th anniversary of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi's
assassination
|