From De Nobili to Clooney - The Christian methods of Inculturation
vedamved...@yahoo.com
– The Christian Methods of Inculturation (Summary)
K. V. Ramakrishna Rao B.sc., M.A., A.M.I.E., C.Eng(I)., B.L.,
A paper to be presented during the 12th session of Tamilnadu History
Congress to be held at Mayildathurai on 30th September to 2nd October
2005.
Introduction: Inculturation, as propounded by the Vatican Council II
Documents1, is the plan of Christians being within the folds of
culture, tradition and heritage of any people, posing as faithful
devoutees and declare the “hidden Christ” at right moment, so that
they (dubbed as heathens, infidels, unbelievers) become
“Christians”. Till such time, they have to adapt and adopt their
culture and related customs, practices and manners. They even build
Temple-like Churches, use Hindu symbols and paraphernalia extensively
and the Christian priests roam as Hindu Sanyasis and Sadhus2. By the
Vatican Directive Prot. N. 802/69 dated April 25, 1969, Twelve Points
of Inculturation were permitted in India. So far, the
“Inculturation” activities carried out by the Christian
missionaries among the Saivites have been the topical discussed in
selected fora and published in books also3. Perhaps, for the first
time, the authors have come across a Jesuit, who has been carrying out
his activities among the Srivaisnavas, nearly more than 30 years. He is
Professor Francis X. Clooney from Harvard University, following the
steps of Roberto de Nobili4.
It is well known as to how Roberto de Nobili, a Jesuit came from Italy
claiming as a “Roma Brahmin”, donned ochre robes, learned Indian
languages, forged “Yasur Veda”, was tried by the Eccelestical Court
and finally declared dead in Chennai itself without any news.
Roberto de Nobili as a Role Model: In 2000, after the Pope’s
condemnation of practice of Yoga and other Eastern Meditation methods
by the Catholic priests and others, some Christians have also started
criticizing the inculturation-programs5. However, the ongoing
activities by the inculturation and Inter-religious / Faith groups /
programs clearly prove that they are pursued vigorously with the same
old plans6.
Though, Fr. Bede Griffiths has not openly recorded in his writings,
Jesuits like Ignatitius Hrudhayam, Francis X. Clooney, Anand Amaladas
and others have revealed that they follow Roberto de Nobili as their
role model. Thus, the succeeding Jesuits in India have taken his method
of “Inculturation” as a “role model” overtly and covertly. The
mushrooming Catholic Ashrams and increasing ochre rob clad Christian
priests and preachers amply prove their game-plan.
Gullible Hindus Helping Inculturation: Invariably, Hindus directly or
indirectly, knowingly or unknowingly help the Christians involved in
such “Inculturation” activities.
They simply think that these Christians want to know Hinduism;
They are happy that the white skinned foreigners too want to follow
their religious practices;
They appreciate that they follow sincerely, when their fellow
Hindus do not do so.
Thus, they fall prey and help them in all aspects, even giving place in
their own homes, treating them as their family members. As Sivadharma
helped Roberto de Nobili, there have been many Vaishnavites, who have
helped and still been helping Clooney. To quote himself in this regard7
–
“Of my guides in India, a few come to the fore; Professor A.
Thiruvengadanathan, with whom I read commentaries for the first time in
the summer and fall of 1983; Professor M. A. Venkatakrishnan, who
helped me obtain necessary texts and with whom I read during
1992-93;…………..Mr. M. V. Mohanarangan, a friend who graciously
assisted me on where to go, whom to meet, which books to buy; in
Mylapore, K. Ramadurai Bhattacharya of the Matava Perumal temple and
Sri Satakopacharya of the Kesava Perumal temple, who welcomed me into
daily life and great festivals at those temples; Sri Anaviar
Srinivasan, a friend and guide to all things Vaishnava, who invited me
to Alvartirunagari in January, 1993 and welcomed me into his home, so
that I could share the winter festival in celebration of Tiruvaymoli
and, for once, seem to stand almost inside tradition I was studying;
Sri Kumaravati Ramanujacharya, who graciously allowed me to join his
weekly circle of students in studyting the commentaries on Tituvaymoli,
and who helped me to understand both the meanings of the texts and what
it means to live a life infused with their vitality; and most
especially, Professor T. E. Sampath Kumaran, retired professor of
philosophy from Vivekananda College, who generously shared with me
endless amounts of his time, his insight, and his love of the songs –
day after day- helping me to see the brilliance and depth of
Nampillai’s Itu, as well as what it is like to sit with a true
acharya.”
Thus, it is evident that he has learned everything from Hindus as a
“Karna”. However, his recent book8, “Divine Mother, Blessed
Mother” has made them awakened and storm is brewing among the
involved faithful believers.
“Hindu Goddesses and the Virgin Mary”: This is the subtitle of the
recent book of Clooney mentioned above, which has been dissented,
refuted and disapproved by the involved Vaishnavites. They have been
totally dejected and dismayed, the way in which he collected the inner
information from them and now using, rather misusing in different way.
Under the guise of “Comparative Theology”, he has tried to compare
certain Hindu Goddesses with the Mary taking the following six works:
Title of the work Author / Composer Period / date Language
Sri Guru Ratna Kosa (Auspicious Treasury of the Jewels That Are Sri’s
Quality) Parasara Pattar 12th century CE Sanskrit
Saundarya Lahiri (Wave of Beauty) Attributed to Sankara 10th cent. or
before. Sanskrit
Apirami Antati (Linked verses for Apirami – the Beautiful
One) Apirami Bhattar 18th cent. Tamil
Akathistos (Sing while Notseated) Not mentioned 6th cent. Greek
Stabat Mater Do 13th cent. Latin
Mataracamman Antati [Antati verses in Honour of the Queen among women
– the Goddess (of Mylapore)] Do 19th cent. Tamil
Here, the important differences are tabulated as follows:
Hindu tradition Christian tradition
1. Godhead has been accepted both as Male and Female. 1. Godhead is
always considered as Male.
2. “Mother / Female Goddess” concept is perceived, conceived and
applied in all aspects.
2. “Mother / Female Goddess” concept is anathema to the “Father
/ Male God”. Even, Mary is considered as only “Mother of God”.
3. It is very common that God can be imagined with female and male
characteristics – individually, separately and in combine also. 3. In
Christian or Semitic theology, God cannot be imagined with female and
as well as male characteristics.
4. Brahma-Saraswati, Viushnu-Lakshmi, Siva-Parvati etc., have
Male-Female representation with Father-Mother Status. 4. In attempted
comparison, Male Jesus is placed with Female Mary, who are repeatedly
mentioned as Son (the only Son) and Mother (the Virgin Mary).
5. The above Male-Female combinations have been very common since time
immemorial in all forms and representations. 5. Holy Spirit-Mary,
Joseph-Mary, etc., are unthinkable and forbidden making the researchers
in dilemma. Of course, the pundits and experts of “Comparative
Theology” tactfully avoid and explain away.
6. The Vedic scriptures have been dated to c. 5500 to 2500 BCE. 6. The
Biblical scriptures are dated to first centuries of the Current /
Common Era (CE).
Clooney’s Claim of Understanding of Hindu Goddesses through Mother
Mary: The following description has been faithfully taken from his
recent work without changing crucial words.
Hindus Goddesses have fascinated Clooney for many years since
1973.He has approached his counterpart-theology as a Christian, as a
Roman Catholic and a Jesuit priest encountering the faith and cult of
goddess tradition.
He claims that he has himself translated and read the Hindu works
of hymns quoted closely in light of their traditional commentaries.
However, he admits that it is no small matter to recommend that
Christian theologians take Hindu Goddesses seriously and study the
goddess hymns with theological care, as Christian theology is rooted in
biblical tradition deeply dedicated to the one true God and also,
seems, to dismissal of the idea of goddess.
He also confesses that although Christian tradition does include
instances of reflection of God as mother, their implications are
minimally developed.
With all the prohibitions of Christian dogma, he notes that several
books have helped him understand that the rich and unsettling
possibilities of the cult of Mary, and to see how Mary, the one who
helps Christians to understand Sri, Devi and Apirami.
Here, he reveals his real intention to elevate Mary and degrade
Hindu Goddesses.
Realizing his theological attack now on their Goddesses,
Vaishnavites condemn his prejudiced convictions, professional bias and
unethical professional handling of “Comparative Theology” coupled
with religious superiority, theological arrogance, holy imperialism,
all definitely leading to fundamentalism and terrorism.
The traditional and modern Vaishnavite scholars have also surprised to
note and doubt as to whether a mischievous religious fundamentalist and
communalist had hidden under the veil of professorship, that too,
coming from big Universities to make such comparison and
representation. The inter-religious dialogue should be frank and
mutual, giving equal rspect to the respective beliefs dealt with. The
“believers” with whom Clooney had such “dialogues” should have
been informed about his motive, norms and standards. But, he did not
so. He approached them as a researcher, posing as devout person to
understand Hindu Goddesses, made close friendship with temple priests,
entered temples and mutts, observed rituals and rites (liturgy),
learned the nuances of Vaishnavite theology and finally tried to
denigrate and disparage with his sophisticated language, professional
bias and scholarly colonialism. He cannot have any standards to measure
the divinity of Mother Goddesses, when he cannot accept to have any
“Mother” equal to his “Mother Mary”. He cannot coolly claim
that Mary helped to understand Hindu Goddesses, when he has cheated
genuine and honest believers, in fact, who have helped him. Thus, it is
really, theological fraud, religious deceit and (un)faithful sham
inflicted on Hindus under the guise of Inter-religious dialogue and
inculturation, which will have serious consequences in Indian society.
Historical Mother Goddess, Hindu Goddesses and Christian Mary: The
Mother Goddess concept, worship and their archaeological evidences have
been abundant in ancient civilizations, thousands of years before the
advent of Christianity and elevation of Mary, though not as an
independent Goddess, but as “Mother of God”, as Jesus was the
“Only Son of God”. Scholars9 have also pointed out the development
of Virgin goddess myth from the Zodiac, the Black Virgin / Goddess,
Ishtar, Isis, Mayadevi, Devaki and others. For example, the Black
Virgin depicted in four scenes on the inner walls of the Temple of
Luxor inscribed by King Amenhotep III is dated to 1538-1501 BCE. The
cult of Virgin Mary, thus developed out of such images and in later
times, was overlaid the cult of Jesus and its adoption led to the issue
of Mother and Woman. However, Christian clergy have never wanted to
place Mary above Jesus Christ. Of course, surprisingly, for Joseph,
there is no place here. There is no such problem of Immaculate
Conception, Virgin Birth etc., in Indian context. Perhaps, that is why
Pius IX decreed in 1854 that Mary was free from original sin “in the
first instant of her conception”. As pointed out Hindu Goddesses can
exist independently or with their counterparts. Son-god is always
placed below Mother-god in the divine pedestal, whereas, in
Christianity, there has been a lot of theological controversy and
dogmatic debate about such exigency. The name “Mary” is considered
to have been derived from different myths10 –
Mirium, a name already existing among the Jews and Gentiles;
Myrrha, mother of Adonis in Syrian cult;
Maira, mother of Hermes in Greek mythology;
Maia, daughter of atlas;
Maya, mother of Buddha.
Merris, the Egyptian princess who found the babe Moses.
Meri, one of the daughters of Ramses II.
But, Sri, Devi or Apirami has no such confused mythical development.
Their origin is traced back to Vedic and pre-Christian periods. Thus,
they have clear independent concept, worship and religious
incorporation. In fact, the male-female rivalry noticed in Puranas have
been settled through Artha-narishwara concept (Male-Female Combined
Godhead or to show that God is neither Male nor Female at higher /
divine level and stressing gender equality a lower / human level). Why
Clooney has not touched upon such concept is not known. Moreover, as he
has taken three Hindu hymns depicting three different Hindu Goddesses,
he could have taken three Christian Goddesses for comparison or better
understanding.
Thus, if he could understand Hindu Goddesses through Mary, being “a
scholar, professor and member of the academic community”, ignoring
other aspects, it is not known as to how his study could have been
objective, reasonable and comparative so that he could “welcome his
fellow scholars for their reactions”, as he has offered in his
Preface (Nearer the Goddess). As a scholar, he must have recorded the
historical background of Mary also for understanding of Christian and
Hindu Goddesses in his Comparative theology.
Conclusion: In view of the above discussion, it is evident that the
Christian missionaries and Jesuits have not been honest enough to have
fair, just and reasonable in having “dialogue” with Hindus. It is
unfortunate that they simply discuss with Hindus as foreigners,
strangers, “friends”, professors and so on, but later record such
acquaintances as full-fledged dialogues. A dialogue cannot be dialogue,
if the persons with whom the person has dialogued do not know about
such dialogue. Thus, in such a one-sided “dialogue”, if the
Christian priests, that too, being Jesuits indulge in unbecoming acts
clearly with intention to hurt the religious feelings, it is evident
that they have only religious motives and not research or scholarly
pursuits.
If believers of Gods abuse Gods, seekers of Gods destroy Gods, faithful
followers of one religion question the faith of others and, against all
moral and ethical codes and Universal principles, conduct
pseudo-spiritual and psychological-religious warfare against one
religion, then these activities are not “inculturation” but
“outculturation”, as religion and culture are inseparable for
Hindus.
Theocentric and theocratic eclectics are dangerous as nuclear, chemical
and other warheads. The concept of “My God is your God, but your Gods
is No God” does not foster understanding, co-operation and goodwill.
The concept should be changed to “Your God is my God and my God is
your God” and accepted by all religions.
This is the only way for humanity today. Super God Rivalry, religious
superiority, racial / arrogant theology, theocratic world domination
and neo-spiritual globalism cannot make “believers” live in
peaceful existence. Therefore, the behaviour, attitude and psyche of
the inter-religious theologists should change making “dialogue” a
“dialogue” but not a secret “monologue” to undermine, disparage
and denigrate other Gods, scriptures and religions. Historical facts,
established parallels after borrowals and chronological developments
and changes should be mentioned clearly. They should clearly spell out
their purpose of dialogue and standards before initiating dialogues.
Notes and References
The authors, G. P. Srinivasan and K. V. Ramakrishna Rao have been
studying this issue for the last 25 years. The latter has meetings and
correspondence with Fr. Bede Griffiths, Ignatitius Hrudhayam, Swamy
Kulandai Swamy (Fr. Victor J. F. Kulanday), Hans Staffner, Fr. Francis
X. Clooney and others. There has been a lot of correspondence appeared
in Indian Express (Madras edition), Catholic journals (Laity etc)
during 1987-89 on this subject, later published in the form of books.
1. Vatican II Documents, St. Paul Publications, Bombay.
Report of the General Meeting of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of
India.
2. Bede Griffiths, Return to the Centre, UK, 1986. See the website on
him.
3. Christian priests and researchers have infiltrated many Saivite
temples, mutts and religious places, collected valuable manuscripts and
tried to interpret that Christianity is the reason for the development
of Saiva religion and Saiva Siddhanta philosophy itself.
4. About the complete bio-data of Francis X. Clooney, see the website:
http://www2.bc.edu/~clooney/cv.html (1 to 19 pages). For his complete
activities see the following websites:
http://www.americanmagazine.org/gettext.cfm?articleTypeID=&text
http://www.scu.edu/bannancenter/publications/explore/spring05/upload/exploreSpring05
http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/dialogue/links.html
http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/dialogue/documents/documents.html
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc-con_cfaith_doc2
5. Sita Ram Goel, Catholic Ashrams – Sanyasins or Swindlers, Voice of
India, New Delhi, 1988.
For Christian view, see the following:
Swami Kulandaisami (VictorJ. F. Kulandai), The Paganization of the
Chuch in India, “Galilee”, 6, Nimmo Road, San thome, Madras, 1988.
6. ……………………., History of Hindu-Christian Encounters,
Voice of India, New Delhi, 1989 and other editions.
7. Francis X. Clooney, S.J, Seeing Through Texts – Doing Theology
among the Srivaisnavas of South India, State University of New York
Press, Preface, pp.xx-xxi, 1996.
8. ………………………, Divine Mother, Blessed Mother – Hindu
Goddesses and the Virgin May, Oxford University Press, USA, 2005.
9. Edward Carpenter, Pagan and Christian Creeds, Harcourt, Brace and
Co., New York, 1920, pp.32-33.
John M. Robertson, Hindu Mythology and Christianity, Swati
Publications, New Delhi, 1989.
C. F. Volney, The Ruins, or Meditation on the Revolutions of Empires
and the Law of Nature, Truth Seeker Co., New York, 1890.
10. John M. Robertson, opt.cit, pp.319-320.
GP Srinivasan
vivek
vivek
vivel
vedamved...@yahoo.com
Brahmallahchrist
and then cry fowl.
When Cloney came to Madras or wherever, he started his activities, why
he was allowed to indulge in such activities?
Why the so called Vaishnavites allow?
Reading the links on the topic clearly prove that Hindud are helpless,
as even "frontline" of "The Hindu" does not help them.
I suggest to include Francis Clooney in this group, so that the facts
could be found out.
Bragmallahchrist.
M. Palaniappan
Hindu swami. But his name is Victor J. F. Kulanday.
Surprisingly, he was against inculturation and he wrote a book "The
Paganization of the Church in India", but in that book, he took every
opportunity to denigrate Hindu religion under the guise of opposing
inculturation. Therefore, this type of double-game of the Christians
should be studied carefully and recorded.
Under the banner of All India Laity Congress, he used to oppose
inculturation and write letters in Indian Express.