Dear Prof Borges I am in total agreement with you when you state that casteism is practised in the Church in certain parts of India. So far as Tamil Nadu is concerned I have heard about it first hand from priests and nuns who have worked there as from the media. So far as Goa Is concerned, I admit my ignorance as I have never lived there except for short holidays but I have heard about stray cases.
In Poona where I grew up, it was non-existent. So too in Bombay where I have been living for the past 19 years. I stand by my statement that when Fr Jerome stated that Christianity does not recognize castes, he was making a factual statement. If you can show me one sentence from the Bible which shows that Christianity recognises castes, I am willing to rescind my views. One needs to make a distinction between what religion stands for and what are some deviations in the practice of the religion on the ground. Any person who has a fairly good knowledge of India's social structure will understand that it is not only hinduism that has been been plaqued by casteism. Even egalitarian religions like islam, buddhism and sikhism have been plaqued by casteism. I strongly believe that it is only with education and economic growth will casteism die out. Please also try and understand that what the christian community is fighting for is parity in economic benefits and assistance to all dalits irrespective of religion. Nowhere has it been claimed that there are castes in christianity as you have erroneously surmised. So far as the Church is concerned, it is obvious that the Church is seized of the issue and is working towards total eradication. You, yourself, have given the example of a dalit who was elevated to the position of Archbishop of Hyderabad and is doing a fairly good job. Society is always in transition and it is important to keep the momentum going in a positive direction. You have raised some interesting questions: "Was the President connected with the Constituent Assembly in any way? Was he acquainted with the sentiments expressed by the Christian members? Was he aware that the Christian members had committed the interests of their community into the hands of the majority community for being dealt fair and square? If the answer to these questions is in the affirmative, how did he forget this so soon? How did he come under the influence of hindutva elements? Does this not reflect on the wisdom of the Christian representatives? Does it not stem from the great lie that there are no castes in Christianity as propagated by the upper caste Christians for their own benefit?" To be honest, these are some of the answers that I too am seeking. I have not been able to lay my hands on any information/ document which could suggest or tell us what transpired between 26th Jan 1950 and 9th August 1950. I understand from my reading and discussions with others in the know that there was absolutely no debate, discussion, white paper, nothing to suggest what was in the offing. However, the Congress Party which was an umbrella organisation of various ideologies had a influential hindutva lobby led by Dr K M Munshi, Purshottam Das Tandon among others. I reliably understand that it was this lobby which was instrumental in pushing the Order as they did not succeed in preventing any discrimination in the Constitution. I could have a long discussion with you on this subject but it would not be fair to other Goanet readers and so if you wish we could take this offline.. So far as Articles 25 & 30 are concerned, please try to understand that they have nothing to do with reservations or benefits for dalit christians. They are as different as chalk and cheese or comparing onions with oranges. I have pointed out to you in my previous posts from the documents you attached that in fact both the Christian representatives who have been quoted in the debate while turning down communal representation in legislatures have made it a point to ask for safeguards in respect of employment and financial aid. I reproduce them once again Fr Jerome has been quoted as saying: " a man is to be assisted because he is poor, because his birth and upbringing have not given him the opportunity to make progress, socially,politically and educationally; it should not matter whether he be a Christian,or a Muslim or a Hindu or a Brahmin or non-Brahmin, or a Scheduled Caste member. Prof Mookherjee in the debate is quoted as saying: "So far as the masses are concerned my friends are united in saying that the masses do not want reservations.* *They say that they are interested in three or four things only. They want food, clothing, a shelter over their heads, medical aid and good roads. These are their demands. When they were specifically asked whether they wanted reservation, the reply in every case was as follows: "We know that we shall never enter the Legislatures; reservations do not concern or interest us.*"* There all sections of the people were at one. Then came queries addressed to the lower middle classes, people who depend upon service to earn their living. Their reaction was that if there was any kind of reservation they would like to have reservation in jobs. "So far as the idea of building up one nation is concerned I do admit that there are certain economically backward groups in every community and for them provision has been made in the directive adopted in December last. " It is therefore amply clear that they sought safeguards for the poor of all religions in employment and economic aid. Prof Mookherjee in fact refers to the Directive (Principles, I assume) which contains such safeguards. It is also clear from the Presidential Order of 1950 that in fact the Constitution adopted by the Constituent Assembly did provide for safeguards for the poor and oppressed of all religions. The Presidential Order was passed (under the influence of hindutva forces) seven months after the new Constitution came into force without discussion, debate, white paper, nothing. If dalit christians were excluded by the Constitution what was the need for this Order? By your own admission Hukam Singh fought vehemently for inclusion of certain castes in the SC list. Yet the Presidential Order excluded the sikhs and buddhists too. I am afraid neither you nor Santosh have been able to provide documentary evidence to support your contention that the Christian representatives did not press for protection of dalit christians. From all evidence so far the contrary is proved. To amplify my point further, tribal christians continue to draw all benefits and economic aid. If one were to accept your point then even christian tribals should have been debarred from being granted aid and benefits. Let us rely on official documents to form our views and not hearsay, perceptions, speculations and even Chinese Whispers. While I appreciate that you have submitted official documents to make your point, I regret that Santosh had to rely on Chinese Whispers to defend his views. Regards, Marshall
