The Bulletin of the Conference on the Theological Task in India

Editors: Mr. C.S. Paul, Rev. A.G. Hort

Volume	Date	Originally
1	February 1943	vol. 1, #1

Editorial

Why This Bulletin ?

In sending out this first issue of the Bulletin of the Theological Conference in India, sponsored by the N. C.C., we owe it to our readers to make a statement regarding the origin, reasons and aims of this Bulletin, which, we hope, comes to meet a real and widely felt need. An account of the Conference itself will be given by Rev. W. Stewart and Dr. B.B. Manikam. Our statement will be confined to the Bulletin, which is an outcome of that conference.

The Bulletin finds its origin in the conference, which met on the 17th, 18th and 19th of December 1942 at the C. P. S. S., Ashram in Poona, consisting of 23 members, unofficially representing the important schools of theology, institutions and denominations in India. Emerging from their discussion and commission findings, the members felt that to conserve what was achieved, to maintain cohesion among the members, to stimulate further study and thought to serve as a medium of expression, to act as a link between one conference and another and finally, to give wider publicity to the efforts made through study, thought and writing by the members and others in sympathy with; our main object, a Bulletin was a desideratum. Hence, the Bulletin.

There may be many theological journals of a denominational character; but this one, we presume, is the first of its kind on a non-denominational and all-India basis. Nothing less than that can hope to mobilise all our available resources and talents to face effectively the Theological Task in India.

In undertaking the publication of the Bulletin, we feel, we are making a humble but hopeful contribution to the Indian Christianity of the present and the future. It is our sincere hope that this Bulletin from its modest beginnings Will grow, as the years roll on, into an organ of increasing usefulness and effectiveness, preparing it for that time of testing, which may not be long deferred. When such times come, Indian Christianity should not be caught napping or found unequal to the task. We should wake up in time and make real to ourselves the rich Christian heritage and experience and enter into our own full status, as a part of the world Christianity, through facing the Theological Task in our day and generation.

It might be suggested that theology is the result of a mature and rich religious experience, and as Christianity in India is still an infant it cannot undertake a theological task. You cannot expect it to walk before it has learnt to crawl. Even so, we must maintain that the characteristics of an infant are two and not one. The infant may be helpless and dependent, but it should also show signs of growth towards maturity and independence. A child that continues to be dependent and shows no signs of growth towards independence is unhealthy. We venture to suggest that the century old ‘infant’ Christianity in India is healthy; is alive and kicking and, therefore, should go about setting its own house in order and seek to express itself, in relation to its environment, in forms and language that will be intelligible to that environment, without sacrificing its central truths. Even a child should appropriate things, provided for it, through its own efforts. If it would not do it, it will die and nothing in the world can save it. We cannot expect the law of survival to be different for Indian Christianity. The growth towards religious maturity and experience and the interpretation of that experience (theology) should move Pari Passu. It is with that clear vision and seriousness of purpose that the conference faced its theological task and the contents of this Bulletin will, we believe, bear out that statement.

Let us also remind ourselves that Indian Christians had a century in which to grow and are numerically the largest single group outside of Europe and America. Indian Christians are about 8 millions and compared with China and Japan are at least three times more than either of them taken singly and double their combined strength. Therein lies the challenge, the task and our opportunity. Are we equal to it? Or are we, at least, setting ourselves on the way to it?

On the other hand, let us think of 8 million Christians in a land of 400 million, mainly non-Christian population. Instead of depressing us, this disproportion in numbers ought to spur us on to greater effort and sustained activity. In matters of the spirit, it is a truism to say that number is not the decisive factor. A little leaven can leaven the whole lump, if only we are true to the faith we profess and besides out-living and out-dying the non-Christians, learn in time to out-think them. The Bulletin is a partial answer to such doubts and questions. Through it, we can ‘attempt great things for God and expect great things from God’.

A few comments on the programme of the Conference and the papers published in this issue will not be out of place here. Under the main theme ‘Theological Task in India’, the working out of an Indian Christian ‘apologetics’, in relation to the regnant non-Christian religions of the land, naturally became the dominant aim. But such an apologetics raises the previous questions concerning authority and tradition in religion and the place and value of experience in religion. The published gist of the papers in this issue will reveal how complex and involved are these questions and how each age and country should strive anew to rediscover their true significance. They form a valuable propaedeutic to the specific theological task in India, viz., the Apologetics. Reserving further comment, on these subjects, we may say that the Conference boldly faced the issues; reverently and thoughtfully considered their deep implications, broke new ground and, in the confident hope of stimulating further study and thought along these lines, it is making them available to a wider circle through this Bulletin. Neither the Conference nor the Bulletin can presume to have said the last word on these subjects. The Bulletin is a record not so much of achievements as of a hopeful beginning under God’s guidance.

In conclusion, while thankfully acknowledging our indebtedness to and support and inspiration from the N.C.C., we wish to make it clear that their connection with the Bulletin is only indirect and that it is published under a separate Board of Management formed by the conference. In the first instance, the Bulletin will appear twice a year, and we take this opportunity of commending it to the sympathetic consideration, support and co-operation of all those who are interested in the Theological Task in India. May their number grow.

C.S. PAUL. Editor

We would also like to put on record our thanks to Rev. W. Stewart, for yeoman service rendered to the Conference, as the recording secretary and also for preparing the report for the Bulletin. (Editor)

Conference on Christian Theology in India

Poona, Dec. 17.19, 1942.

A conference on Christian Theology in India was convened by the Secretaries of the National Christian Council, and, by invitation of Father Bill Lash, was held in the Christa Prema Seva Sangha Ashram; Poona, from December 17th to 19th, 1942.

The following members were present: Chairman: Rev. Father Bill Lash, Poona.

Secretaries: Dr. R.B. Manikam, Nagpur. Rev. F. Whittaker, Nagpur.

Recording Secretary: Rev. W. Stewart, Wardha.

Members: List of those who attended the Poona Conference

Rev. Dr. M. Adiseshiah, Madras Xian College, Tambaram, Chingleput District S.I.
Rev. Dr. A.J. Appasamy, Manorama, Palamcottah, S. India.
Rev. R.C. Das, United City Mission, Bamkatora, Benares Cantonment, United Provinces.
Mr. Thomas David, Karunalayam, Quilon, Travancore, South India.
Dr. P.D. Devanandann, U.T. College, 17 Miller Road, Bangalore, S. India.
Mr. V.E. Devadutt, Serampore College, Serampore, Bengal.
Sister Gertrude, Oxford Mission, Behala, 24 Paraganas, Bengal.
Dr. M.H. Harper. Leonard Theological College, Jabalpur, C.P.
Dr. M.H. Harrison, V.I. College, 17 Miller Road, Bangalore, S. India.
Rev. A.G. Hort, Cambridge Mission, Delhi.
Rev. Fr. Bill Lash, Christa, Prema Seva Sangha Ashram, Poona.
Dr. R.B. Manikam, Secretary, N.C.C., Nagpur, Central Provinces.
Rev. Fr. G.X. Martyn, St. James’ Church, 167 Lower Circular Road, Calcutta.
Rev. H.V. Martyn, District Minister, London Mission, Anantapur, S. India.
Rev. Er. H.O. Mascarenhas, St. John Baptist’s Church, Thana, G.I.P.
Dr. Miss V. Paranjothi, Isabella Thoburn College, Lucknow, U.P.
Mr. O.S. Paul, Andhra Xian. College, Guntur; S. India.
Rev. E. Sambayya, Bishop’s College, Khatauli; Muzafarnagar, U.P.
Rev. M. Sanjeeva Rao, Basel Evangelical Mission, Bijapur, Bombay Presidency.
Rev. S.W. Savarimuthu, Lutheran Seminary, Palladam, Coimbatore, S. India.
Rev. W. Stewart, Paunar Road, Wardha, C.P.
Rev. J.W. Sweetman, Henry Martyn School; Aligarh, U.P.
Rt. Rev. S.N. Talib-ud-din, N. India U.I. College Saharanpur, U.P.
Rev. A. Marcus Ward, U.I. College, 17 Miller Road, Bangalore, S. India.
Rev. F. Whittaker, Secretary, N.C.C., Nagpur, Central Provinces.

The following sent letter of apology for absence:

The Bishop of Dornakal.
Rev. E.O. Dewick.
The Bishop of Tinnevelly.
Rev. Fr. Katells.
Bishop Mar Themotheos.
Mr. D.G. Moses.
Rev. C.B. Abraham.
Rev. I. Narasimha.
Rev. Dr. O.H.G. Angus.
Rev. Leslie Newbigin.
Rev. H.C. Balasundaram.
Mr. A.N. Sudarisanana.
Mr. P. Chenchiah.

The Conference opened with a devotional period led by Rev. M. Sanjiva Rao.

The Rev. Brother Bill Lash welcomed the members and set out the purpose of the Conference as the discussion of Christian Theology in the Indian setting. He analysed the tasks that lay ahead into three sections:

The need for training in Theology for purposes other than pastoral, especially for those who must work among the educated;
The need for theological research in India, for which there is at present no provision;
The need to develop Theology in the Indian setting, that the Message be presented in language understandable by the people to whom it is given, and because the Christian Gospel should be thought through over against the great religions of India.

The Theological Task in India

The Rev. A.M. Ward presided over a discussion of the Theological Task in India. He referred to the recently published pamphlet, “God’s Will in our Time”, and agreed with its thesis that while the essential content of the Gospel is the same for all times and places, its expression must vary. This gives the two-fold task, to study and lay hold on the “essential content”, and then to examine the emphasis required in our own time and situation in India today.

A paper was read by Dr. P.D. Devanandan. He maintained that Christianity is related to life in an “other-worldly” and a “this-worldly” way. It is absolute in that there is an underived giveness, for it is rooted in the coming of God into history, in Jesus Christ. But this event set afoot a redemption movement, a process which still goes on, and our understanding of the work of Christ will be conditioned by our environment and special problems. Life in India demands a Christian interpretation, and leads us to a main stress on two things (a) the significance of personality, and the value of the social order in God’s redemptive scheme, and (b) the significance of history. The meaning of life is found in moral decision, and history which is the cumulative expression of decisions is the citadel of theism. Quotations from modern Hindu leaders show them laying hold of this conception. It is recognised that personal decisions lie at the very heart of history.

The idea of personality was the gift of Christianity to Greek thought, and a similar gift is needed for Indian thought. Modern Hinduism is making claims on life that cannot be supplied by anything in Hinduism, for what is demanded is a conviction that at the heart of all is a Reality to whom personality is dear. This conviction has ever been central in Christianity. This conception of man as a personality at once means that he is seen as bound up with an outer world of persons. God does not enter into relation with an isolated individual, but only as he is in relation to others. The evangelist must therefore not shrink from political and economic thought, for the religious and the social life must form a realised whole, while guarding against the danger in India of an undue individualism in religion.

For this task, a mere reaffirmation of dogma will be futile; instead we must learn to test all in the light of the persistent facts of our experience. May not the Church in India enshrine the Protestant principle of freedom? Our task is conditioned by our non-Christian environment. In it today we find a tendency towards theism, and it would be foolish in such an hour to obscure our message by talking an alien language.

A paper was read by Rev. E. Sambayya. He emphasised that the theologian has no independent existence without the Church. The permanent task of Theology is to help the Churches to be the Church, the truly divine Society.

This means helping the Christian to understand what it means to be “in Christ”, which means an increasing need for instruction, for the publication of “little books on great themes”, to check disintegration and to increase the Church-sense of the ordinary Christian. The Church in India has a divided heritage, but the ordinary man should be helped to see the significance even of divisions, and to strive for unity through study and prayer. This requires increased study of Church History, and there is need for competent instructors to help the ordinary layman to grasp what is being done, for example, in the South India Union Scheme. Also, the centrality of worship, and the evangelical significance of the liturgies need to be emphasised, for the various “experiments in worship” of which we hear show there has been failure here. Thus, Theology must labour to strengthen the inner life of the Church till it is strong and unafraid either of the vastness of Hinduism or the toughness of Islam.
The Church must be helped to face the evangelistic task, where the question is not whether we should act, but how. There has been a set-back in evangelism, marked by events like the publication of the “Laymen’s Report”, but we must hold to the truth that even to the greatest souls comes the message “repent and believe”. We must look for a “preparatio evangelica” in India, yet there is much to be said for emphasis on the essential “otherness” of the Gospel, confronting a comfortable Hinduism. Here the inalienable Semitic background keeps its vital position. There is an offence of the Gospel for the Hindu, in the historicity, particularity, and finality of Christ.
1. The Hindu sees history as unreal, Christianity is rooted in history;
2. Hinduism’s age-long quest is contradicted if God is revealed in a particular place at a particular time;
3. The finality of Christ contradicts the belief in frequent descents by God. The Cross remains the greatest offence of all. Newness need not mean obscurity, and we should seek a language which is understood. We must beware of Syncretism, though European Christianity too is syncretistic, e.g. in the Christian Platonists. There must be study of the leading concepts of the Vedanta and Bhakti schools. It is unlikely that these will beat the Christian message, yet we must learn and use them. The “Gita” is an example of this apologetic method. The method, illustrated in the “Crown of Hinduism”, wins sympathisers, but hardly converts. Our task in this regard is thus (1) to acquire a full knowledge of biblical Theology, and (2) to master words and ideas, Christian and Hindu.

Theology also has an immediate task in the present political situation, where the ministry of reconciliation is to be based on a full recognition of the facts. The basic problem of unity can be solved only as men become brothers through their baptism into the household of God. This with its message “repent and believe”, is to be proclaimed fearlessly to all, including Christians. The present crisis is part of God’s judgement on all, and we must not be tempted by the desire to appear “reasonable”. If the Church is to be the salt of the earth, it must demonstrate the paradox of living by dying. There is also an immediate task because of the end of the era of “foreign” missions. The young Church will be tempted to compromise and to apostasy, meeting anew problems of the early Church. It is theology’s task to study anew books like “Hebrews”, “Revelation”, and other early Church literature. It must strengthen the Church for the battle that lies ahead.

A paper was read by Sister Gertrude. With the help of a vivid parable of a man facing first the setting sun and then the same sun rising in the east she stressed that the Truth that is in Christ is the same for all, and there is no question of devising a new system of truth. Similarly, whether our outlook is to the East or to the West, there is a continuity with the past which cannot be ignored, for it is the same Church of which today we are members. We enter a heritage of long centuries of rich experience, and are as bound to the Church as the individual man is bound to the Fall and its consequences. The Task of Theology is

To grasp and interpret the Christian message for this land and age, and
To study and re-interpret non-Christian thought, much of the meaning of which it will discover for the first time.

The study of Scripture is basic, but there are two dangers:

The danger of making this study without reference to Christian corporate experience as a whole, which leads to lack of perspective, and encourages what is really the Muslim view of Scripture;
The danger of undervaluing the importance of the Bible and failing to take it as an organic whole.

Both dangers spring from the ignoring of the organic relationship between the Bible and the Church. We dare not neglect the formative period of Christianity, and would do well to make particular study of the 2nd to the 5th centuries. The conditions then in which Christianity was being thought through were much closer to Indian conditions today than the conditions of the modern Protestant period in Europe which is the background of so much of our study.

It is the period before the distinction between the Eastern and Western Church, the period when the Church was yet undivided, and more truly “Catholic” than it has ever been since.
The problems of that time are far more like those of today, with Christianity minority religion in the midst of strongly entrenched older religions in the land.
The period takes us behind the later divergences of Catholic and Protestant, giving a background for a study of theological developments. Western theologians are involved in the divisions, but they also have the background of a common tradition, while Indian theology is apt to lack root.
We have been apt to neglect the Patristic writings as dead, but they are full of wisdom for a Church in a situation like that described in (2) above.

India needs a study of the Fathers, (not only through European commentators) but also at first-hand. This means the work of research students who will produce editions of, and selections from the works of the Fathers for Indian readers.

A paper sent by Mr. P. Chenchiah was read by the Chairman. He contended that the primary task is the realisation of Christ in experience. Intellectual formulation is the outcome of new life, not the creator of it, and Religion is primarily new life, not mere expression. For the full entering into such experience, this means that Christian Yoga must be an integral part of theology, while worship, as such, is not. What is wanted is a primary and immediate experience of Christ, which the Scriptures cannot give, and there is the problem of “Changing gear” into this experience in India, and till that is accomplished India can only adopt foreign theology. The instrument for this is the Holy Spirit, not the Bible and not the Church, hence India will give a central place to the Holy Spirit. Western Christianity has centred round the Cross. The Indian Christian sees the Cross as the penultimate chapter in the Gospel story, the final being the Resurrection, which must be the cornerstone of Indian Christianity. For the life of Christ beyond the Resurrection, neither the Church nor the Bible can help us. There are riches in Christianity which have still to be grasped, for example the Johannine expression, ‘we in Christ’, “Christ in us”, which have never been explored. We may not ignore Western theology, which, with its practical bent, has achieved much, but this is the scaffolding, not the building. Indian Theology will develop in the midst of other religions, and will discover much common ground as well as the differentia. There must be a bridge over which Hindu, Christian, and Muslim will be able to pass into each other’s territory. Theology in India will be taken out of the hands of the Church and the clergy, for it is unlikely that the Theological Colleges will show initiative. The call is to venture out into the deep, with Christ. Tradition has burdened Hinduism, and we must beware lest the same fate befall Christianity in India. Certainly there must be study of western theology, but the main call is to study God’s action now, not to worship the God of the past. Looking forward we see three possible developments, as there is contact with Hinduism, Islam, or the faith of the forest tribes. We see hope in modern developments in the Brahmo-Samaj. Unless we believe that God spoke only through one people, we shall recognise that the experience of all peoples is needed for fullness. Therefore, we cannot eschew Hindu experience, in understanding Christ. Theology will begin in English, and end in Sanskrit, after maturing in the vernaculars. As an agency in promoting study, a primary place must be given to Ashrams, which may become centres of theological learning, and places of meeting and liaison between Hindu and Christian. These points are summed up in the following suggestions for study:

The Significance of the Holy Spirit,
Christian Yoga,
The Significance of the Resurrection,
Experience of Sufism and Hinduism,
Ashrams in which men of all religions may meet,
The present action of God, as against tradition,
The aim of theological training to achieve a sensitive soul rather than an informed mind.

Regret was expressed that the author of this paper was not present to elucidate some of his points more fully in reply to questions, and to enter into the discussions.

A discussion followed in which regard was paid to the double task of the theologian, to serve and strengthen the Church, and to present the Gospel for the non-Christian. From the first point of view, Dr. Appasamy referred to the divergent traditions to which the Church in India is heir, and urged that its task is to bring these elements together, and fuse them in a new harmony. Others agreed, and stress was laid on the need for the study of the Christian classics, while Father Martyn pled for greater regard for the contribution of the Greek Church, particularly along some of the lines for which Mr. Chenchiah had made his plea. Dr. Manikam referring to the Church’s heritage, thought that we could profit both by the good things in Western theology, and also by noting its errors, and as an example he quoted certain aspects of Barthian teaching. On the wider question Mr. Sweetman felt the danger in the lack of a precise definition of Theology, and in this Mr. Martin also urged the need of definition. He claimed that Theology is essentially the exposition of the Christian revelation, and urged that only after that is clear can we speak of its relation to the Indian situation. Lack of clarity on this might, warned Mr. Sweetman, lead to a confusion of what is the apparatus of preaching the message, with the message itself. Mr. Devadutt quoted Hindu opinion of a form in which Christian doctrine might be presented which would be acceptable to Hindu thinkers, but the consensus of opinion was strongly that there can be no modifying of the Gospel itself to suit the wishes of anyone however eminent. Dr. Adiseshich stressed the uncompromising nature of the central facts of the Gospel, the centrality of the Incarnation, and Mr. Sanjiva Bao held that what matters in Christianity is the Fact of Christ, and His call to us to enter into the full “Guru-shishyo” relationship with Him; knowing that He is the only Guru.

On the other hand, while not disputing the central, uncompromising givenness of the facts of the Gospel, others pointed out that there is also a relative aspect when we consider its presentation. Mr. Thomas David pointed out that Christ did not come into a vacuum, and that into the Christian message as we have it, enter the Hebrew, Greek and other contributions. The Indian environment must have its place in this relative aspect. Mr. Das doubted whether it was as hard as some thought it might be to find a language common to Hindu and Muslim, and while accepting that there is a central deposit of the faith, he claimed, that this acquires meaning only by passing through our mind and experience. As elucidated through that Indian experience, it can be set forth in a language understandable in India. Mr. Paul pointed out also that there can be no theology without experience. Mr. Talib-ud-din analysed five lines along which the Theological Task might be followed, as these had come to light in the course of the discussions. After further discussion in committee and in the full Conference, the Conference adopted certain Findings

(See. No. 1 Findings).

The Rev. Father Martyn presided over a discussion of “The Place of Authority and Tradition”.

A paper was read by the Rev. A.G. Hort.

Theology being less our thought and speech about God, than the setting forth of God’s Word to men, theologians are not primarily people with something of their own to say, but those whose perilous call it is to help men realise that God is speaking to them in Jesus Christ. Christianity is not our ideas about God; it is primarily God’s revelation of Himself to men. Theology starts with the Gospel, given to men in certain events, and in their apprehension by faith.
This Gospel comes to us with the authority of God, for in Christ we hear God Himself speaking to men. Christ is our “Authority”, One Who is utterly trustworthy. “He taught as one that had authority …”. Here is the self-authenticating authority of the Truth, working not by compulsion but by obligation, compelling not men’s acceptance, but their attention, and demanding their decision. The prophets “Thus, saith the Lord”, is transcended by Jesus “But I say unto you”. Here is very God addressing Himself to man’s mind and will and conscience. The authority of the Gospel is that of Christ to Whom all authority in heaven and on earth is given. With that authority He commissions, His Church “Go ye therefore into all nations …”.
The Church, commissioned by Christ as the authoritative bearer of God’s revelation, derives its authority from the Gospel which is its raison d’etre. That Gospel must be preached with authority that men may hear it “not as the word of man, but as it is in truth, the Word of God”. It comes to us not individually or independently but through the mediation of the Church. It cannot be other than what the Church declares it to be; we may accept it or reject it: we may not change it into something else. The Church because divinely authorised to bear the Gospel to the world, has a duty to protect Christians and non-Christians alike from ideas which would distort or deny the Gospel, that is to say, from heresy: The Church must therefore distinguish what is of the essence of the Faith from what is essentially a perversion of it.
This task has been fulfilled in, a number of ways, most significantly in the formation of the Canon and the Creeds. The Councils which gave us these were truly dogmatic and authoritative in what they said, not “This is what we say you must believe. Believe it or burn!”, but rather “This is, as a matter of fact, what the Church has always believed and still believes. Disbelieve it at your own peril!” Thus, the Creeds are not so much a set of philosophical propositions to which the orthodox must give intellectual assent, as a confession of facts, by faith in which the Church lives.
Insuperable difficulties attach to all attempts to isolate any one element in the Church’s life; whether ecumenical Councils, inerrant Scripture, or infallible Pope, and to make that the independent seat of authority. They are all parts of the living tradition of the Church, through which the Holy Spirit guides us into all truth. The root meaning of Tradition is not handing down or along, but handing over, delivering the goods (cf. Prestiges: “Fathers and Heretics” Chap. 1). Tradition does not add to the content of the Gospel. The Holy Spirit guides us into all Truth, because He takes of Christ and declares it unto us. The Truth does not grow with the Church’s growing experience; it has been fully revealed. “The Truth does not grow, we grow into it.”
The Theologian must therefore be not primarily the master and expounder of spiritual experience but the spokesman and servant of the Word of God and of the Catholic Church, of the Gospel which comes to us through the life of the Church. (cf. St. John’s Gospel, the “we” passages at the beginning and end.) “If ye abide in my word then are ye truly my disciples; and ye shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall make you free.” The freedom of the theologian is found only in his abiding in and obedience to, the Church’s Gospel, the truth of God whose service is perfect freedom. Only under that authority are we free both from subservience to other men’s opinions and from the tyranny of our own prejudices, obsessions, and partial experience, for only then do we share in the glorious liberty of the sons of God.

A paper was read by Mr. S.W. Savarimuthu. He referred to the authoritative element in religion, things which have been asserted by an infallible Voice from the other world. A religion claiming an authoritative Scripture tends also to claim an authoritative tradition. It is noteworthy that those who challenge the tradition tend to do so in the name of a purer tradition, as the Reformers did. Thus, the early Christians claimed to have reasserted the tried tradition of Israel, as against the Jews. Philosophy is committed to the conception of private judgement, while religion is committed to authority. Thus, philosophy is essentially Protestant while religion is essentially Catholic. The theologian claims to be already in possession of a truth which simply needs to be expressed. This is the stumbling block for the philosopher; but on the other hand the pure individualist is in two dangers (1) of saying that his religion is fundamentally his own business, and (2) of arguing that all other people would say the same as he, if only they were quite honest. But there are honest differences. No positive religion can admit to being mere opinion and this raises the problem of the seat of the authority by which error is corrected. There are things in Scripture “hard to understand”. The Roman Catholic finds authority in the Church, the Protestant refers to the conscience of the Christian man. There is also the reference to tradition. As early as 424 the authority of the Church was corrected by reference to Scripture, and it was recognised that it is the function of the Church not to add, but to expound and interpret what has been said. There is this reference to Scripture, but wherein lies its authority? Verbal Inspiration doctrines point to bibliolatry. Luther did not teach these, but found the authority of the Bible in its witness to the revelation in Christ. The problem is easier, if we distinguish between authority and inerrancy. The Reformers did not oppose to the infallibility of the Church, the infallibility of the Bible. What we received must ever be translated with spiritual insight. The question is “How does the Word become authoritative for me?” The response must ever lie in me, so that in morals and religion no purely objective rule can ever be final. A.E. Taylor, has pointed out the right demand of the intellect for freedom, and the equally right demand of religion for authority. We need docility and adventurousness. This is illustrated in the teaching of St. Paul, who often refers to the “Tradition” in language which seems to imply a regular formula, especially regarding Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. This might be from the Creed of the Damascus Church. Even St. Paul thus requires tradition, but tradition need not stifle the freedom of the intellect. He who receives the tradition must “hold it fast, keep what is given, and pass it on”. This must be accepted, but one can be at the same time docile and adventurous. The opposing principles of authority and freedom are correlated in personality.

A paper sent by the Rev. E.C. Dewick was read by Dr. Manikam. He referred to the perils of dogmatism, and noted a tendency today to lay stress on dogma. Up to a point this is valuable, but reason must have its place in all religious decisions. The New orthodoxy of today has failed to recognise this enough, and resents the question “Why?”. This smacks dangerously of the Hitlerian principle that a thing need but be asserted loudly and long enough to be accepted. A man like Davies says it is useless to appeal to anything in human nature as it is, and describes Jesus as simply an eruption into history. Such an approach makes nonsense of the attempt to present the Gospel to Indian thought, but it is the tendency today. A refusal to examine the reasonableness of the Faith is dangerous in meeting Hindus. We are likely to be faced with the challenge to explain why, if Christianity really is unique, Christians are so like other people. It is useless to say we preach Christ and not Christians, unless men can see that Christ has an effect in ordinary living. This sets us two questions: (1) Can we re-establish the reasonable basis of our faith? (2) Ought we not to concentrate more on the uplift of the life and character of the Christian Church?

Discussion followed, in which Mr. Paul expressed agreement with Mr. Dewick’s warning, and urged the need of liberty, Dr. Devanandann also contended that India insists on liberty, and that the only authority is the authority of Life. On the other hand it was pointed out that granting a place for Dogma does not exclude the use of reason. Mr. Sweetman illustrated how reason is used for reasonable presentation of the facts of the faith, which may however come to us as “given”, and we cannot arbitrarily exalt our reason to the position of final and sole authority to the exclusion of the function of revelation. Mr. Martin holding that Mr. Dewick had implied a false antithesis, said there is a place for reason in expounding the Faith. It was generally accepted that there is a “given” element in religion, but the question is that of the authority by which we receive it, and specifically the authority to be accepted in Indian Theology. Mr. Hort had referred to the living tradition of the Church, and authority expressed in the Bible, the Creeds, the Sacraments, and the Ministry, but Mr. Devadutt referred to the position of the Quakers and others, and asked for a statement of the minimum of agreement. Mr. Whittaker, on the other hand, called attention to the richness of the living tradition of the universal Church to which we are heirs, and deprecated the use of the word “minimum” as we look forward to the new day for the Church in India. Mr. Martin stressed that God is the only absolute Authority, and that He comes to us, as individuals, through His Word. This comes down upon us from above, which we do not accept because it is proved, but in faith, making a decision in which our whole self is involved. The Church is the gathering of those who know that they are called to and involved in this decision. Granted this absolute authority; we can discuss subsidiary authorities. Mr. Ward, referring to authority in conscience, urged the distinction between conscience as private judgement, and conscience in him who has experienced Christ as His Lord. Miss Paranjothi thought there was a danger in Mr. Martin’s position becoming solipsism.

After further discussion, the Conference adopted certain Findings, (See Findings No. 2).

The Right Rev. S.N. Talib-ud-din presided over a discussion on “The Place of Experience”.

A paper was read by the Rev. H.V. Martin. He contended that Experience has no place at all in Christian Theology. The present stress on it is mainly due to Schleiermacher whose influence is still great in the English speaking theological world. But he is really a theological heretic who turned Christian theology away from its rightful task of being a Theology of revelation to being a Theology of experience. Actually experience has no rightful place in Christian Theology.

Christian Experience This in different people is varied and ambiguous, and its study is a matter for Christian Psychology rather than Theology. We mean rather God-consciousness, arising in the soul from contact and communion with God.
1. Experience has no place in Christian Theology as a basis for faith and doctrine. Experience comes of faith, but not faith of experience. Schleiermacher and others have confused the task of Christian Theology with the science of religion. Its proper task is to set forth the relevance and meaning of the Christian revelation. Religious experience cannot test the reality of that revelation, for everything human is relative and ambiguous. Attempts to build Theology on experience in India will therefore lead to syncretism with other religions.
2. Experience has no place at all in Christian Theology as a limiting factor in the content of the Faith: - Experience as basis and criterion of faith would limit its contents to what we experience. This would exclude large sections of Theology, making faith a kind of inferential knowledge based on experience, the rest of it based on vague hope and pious speculation, which is, not the Biblical conception of faith.
3. Experience has no place in Christian Theology as a confirmation of Christian faith: - A faith requiring confirmation in experience is not Christian faith, which flies in the face of experience, defies it, and ventures all existentially on the Word of God. To require confirmation by experience is to destroy the tension of faith and unbelief in which the Christian life must be lived.
Non-Christian religious experience: - Without abolishing the finality and uniqueness of the Christian revelation, a Theology of experience cannot say what validity is to be given to the experience of God claimed by non-Christians. A Theology of revelation, rightly understood can distinguish between natural religious experience and Christian religious experience.
1. The validity of non-Christian religious experience can be admitted within natural theology. But it brings only a negative knowledge of the true God, knowledge of the Godhead as the Limit of human thought and natural experience. Knowledge of God’s Being, Nature and Purpose is revealed only in Christ. Apart from him, human thought and feeling is bent up against the Unknown God as Limit, and reflected in religious and natural religious experience.
2. Christian religious experience is derived from God’s approach to man in His Word through Christ. Its validity is not a matter of demonstration but of faith. True faith carries with it absolute certitude to the individual, for God’s revelation in His Word, through the Spirit, to which faith corresponds, is automatic, i.e., carries its own verification.
3. The general experience of 1900 years under the impact, of Christianity is sometimes used to argue for the truth of the Christian revelation, but proves nothing. If it did, 20th century people should be more convinced than previous generations of the truth of Christianity. The reverse is true. As the proof supposedly increases in cogency, fewer and fewer people are convinced.

A paper was read by the Rev. A.J. Appasamy. He stated that an emphasis on experience does not mean an under stress on the human side, for experience does not mean unaided human effort. We can understand God only as He comes into contact with us, and we receive not all He offers, but what is within the capacity of our spiritual stature. Experience shapes Theology, when, as in Pentecost, there occurs an unprecedented experience of which Theology must take account. Then Theology, noting that such experiences occur, sets patterns for experience, and thus in turn shapes experience. Even as a painter studies the Old Masters, so we must know what went before; such study is part of the preparation for what God may do to us. But God may create new patterns. He is not bound by the past, but may use it and bring newness into it.

We are called to the study of the past, and must remember the vast and significant treasure-house of religious experience in India itself. Thus, we must study the experience of outstanding Christians in India, Pandita Rama Bai, N.V. Tilak, Sadhu Sunder Singh and others. There is also the record of much Hindu experience, and in estimating its value we remember three points:
1. Every genuine experience of thirst for God, realisation of His presence, forgiveness of sin, is God-given.
2. The test “By their fruits ye shall know them”, must be applied to those who claim such experiences, and there are thousands who have stood this test.
3. There are phases in such experience, as idolatry, advocacy of caste, with which we as Christians can have no sympathy, but whatever is in harmony with the mind of Christ we can make ours.
Religious experience in India mainly emphasises communion with God as the fundamental business of religion. Mystical experience counts for much in Hinduism. Other types of religion have stressed other things, such as the achievement of character, the holding of correct belief, loyalty to the Church, or the search for social reconstruction. The mystical type of religion stands out beside these others, and is typical of India. For the Christian such religion can never mean the loss of human personality in the Divine, but all attempts to reach a sense of personal fellowship with the Eternal God are close to the heart of Christianity.
This has an obvious bearing on Theology,
1. For the doctrine of God, the question of God as personal is vital for there can be no communion with the impersonal. Nor can there be communion with the wholly Transcendent, or with a God bound as in the law of Karma. The attraction of the doctrine of immanence is obvious, but Christianity shows its limitation.
2. For the doctrine of man and sin, sin must be recognised as primarily a personal responsibility, and a barrier to communion with God.
3. Prayer will be seen as not primarily intercession, but fellowship with God. Theology has always dwelt on these things, but India will be drawn more to them, more to a study of the inner life of Christ than the outer life, more to the Fourth Gospel than to the Synoptics, more to St. Paul’s doctrine of the indwelling Christ than to his other teachings.

Discussion followed, in which several members disagreed with the uncompromising position taken up by Mr. Martin, Mr. Devadutt feared that a total denial of all place to experience would come dangerously near the position of some schools of Hindu thought, which stressed transcendence so much as to deny that human experience could have any contact with the Divine. Mr. David recalled that the Gospel begins with the testimony of Bible writers to what they have “see en and handled”, and Mr. Whittaker asked if it were not historically true that such doctrines as those of the Trinity and the Holy Spirit had been developed in recognition of the facts of Christian experience. Several members stressed that Christian experience is rooted in the prior act of God, and, in reply to a question by Mr. Sweetman, Dr. Appasamy stated that the criterion of validity in experience must be Christ Himself, but Dr. Manikam pointed out that while this is true, revelation to be received must be experienced, and while Mr. Martin had insisted on the stark individuality of a person’s contact with God, Dr. Harper pointed out that there is an experience of the Church, as well as of the individual. On the other hand, Father Mascurnus underlined the truth that the facts of what God has done, are not dependent for their truth on human experience, and that subjective experience, which might be a hallucination, cannot affect the truth that we are. Also, Mr. Savarimuthu, recalling the fact of the exceeding sinfulness of man, pointed out that it is true to man’s experience of grace, that when he is saved he recognises that he is entirely a debtor, owing his salvation entirely to God. Our experience gives us nothing of which to boast.

The Conference adopted certain Findings. (See Findings No. 3).

The proceedings of the second day opened with a devotional period led by Mr. Thomas David.

Dr. M.H. Harrison presided over a discussion on “A Modern Apologetic for India.”

A paper with particular reference to Hinduism, was read by the Rev. R.C. Das.

He first stressed that Hinduism is not a mere heterodox jumble of ideas, but has a real unity, and develops certain fundamental teachings. It is rooted in the Vedas from which it develops its doctrines, and is today not decadent but very much alive. It is a naturalistic system, not holding to a clear revelation. It is spiritually comprehensive, but practically and socially exclusive, with caste for a divine social order. It teaches Karma as a divine moral order, and has developed an ornate and richly ritualistic, idolatrous and polytheistic worship. It bids man, the seeker, realise his identity with Brahman, absolute reality, and holds in the Vedanta the profoundest philosophy the human mind has ever woven.
Our own situation:
1. Free thinking is essential in the Indian Church. This implies toleration and sympathy for heresies for an excess of caution will inhibit dynamic thought.
2. We cannot hope that the present Church and Mission policies will ever induce the growth of creative thought, or encourage experiments in Christian living.
3. An emphasis on the organised institutional aspect of the Church will impede the spontaneous development of the right kind of Apologetics.
4. There is more hope for success for individuals and groups, not necessarily unorthodox or disloyal, but free from Church authorities. Given that freedom, Christian Ashrams and educational centres, as well as centres for Hindu learning will give the atmosphere for creative thinking and dynamic living. The authorities should support the pioneers and experimenters, or at least leave them undisturbed. There is nothing unchristian in the expectation of fresh experience to be added to the heritage of the universal church.
5. The rise of a sound apologetic is thus vitally dependent on the attainment of true autonomy by the Church in India. A church dependent and a Christianity, intellectually and spiritually pauperised, cannot produce an apologetics to meet the high demands of Hindu India.
The Nature and Content of the Apologetic:
1. The prerequisite, for the necessary development, is a fully Indian Christian life of meditation, love and service.
2. There is needed a full knowledge of the Bible, preferably in the original, and an equally thorough knowledge of Sanskrit and the Indian languages.
3. There is needed a spirit of broad nationalism, nourished on knowledge of Indian History, literature, philosophy, religion, culture and civilisation.
4. There is little place for Western Christian Theology, an overdose of which may actually be an inhibiting factor, for originality comes only from originals.
5. It is futile to attack Hinduism from without; the Christian leaven should work from within. If this is done Hindu institutions and organisations will die, while the true treasures of Hinduism will live within the church.
6. The Hindu mind hungers for spiritual food, and should be given a full presentation of the revelation of God in Christ, especially the grace and power of the Cross and the Resurrection.
7. Emphasise the spiritual value of Christianity, and present the moral excellence in Christ’s personality which, captures men,
8. Do not confuse the historical Church with the Kingdom, recognise its failures, and see it as the instrument, not the end.
9. Use Hindu terminology without fear. No human word can convey the full Christian meaning and so no Hindu word can, but some Hindu terms help greatly.
10. We can lay hold of central Hindu ideas, and build a Christian philosophy with them. Thus, baptism can be linked to washing in sacred waters. We may not utterly discard the idea of sacrifice, else we can never expound the Atonement. Even the idea behind idolatry, longing for familiarity with the Divine, may be used. Such study as is advocated is needed not only for evangelism, but for enriching the church itself.

A paper with particular reference to Neo-Hinduism was read by Mr. C.S. Paul. He discussed the teachings of Sir Radhakrishnan, pointing out, that he now advocates Hinduism as a missionary religion. Life is out of joint, but this need not cause despair, for men’s need of religion to deliver them from the pain and cruelty of the world will bring them to the religion of Ahimsa. Radhakrishnan examines the Christian contribution, traversing the whole range of Christian Theology.

He contends that organised Christianity is not the simple religion of Jesus, but a structure on Greek, Hebrew, and other foundations, containing even an Indian element, found chiefly in the Gnostic development.
Organised Christianity may be said to have failed.
Christian Theology speaks with a divided voice.

The way out for man is not to be found in a choice among religions, but unity will be found in mysticism, where India is at home. Mysticism is a transforming experience, rather than a notion of God. We are saved not by Creed but by Dhyana, a kind of spiritual apprehension; much richer than “Knowledge”. God, for Mysticism, is not a logical concept but a living presence. Christianity is a real religion which says “take it or leave it”. Within Hinduism there may be a dispute regarding the extent of the identity of spirits, but “Brahman” is the spiritual reality in the world. The doctrine of “Maya”, which should not be translated “Illusion” does not mean that the world is unreal, but that it is phenomenal. Even Sankara gives a place to the present natural world, but will not regard it as final. The world is not separate from God, but is a self-expression of God. Hinduism supplies in Yoga a technique whereby mysticism is achieved.

In considering such criticisms of Hinduism as Schweitzer’s Radhakrishnan objects to his distinction between “World-affirming”, and “World-denying” religions, contending that all religions are both this worldly and otherworldly.
He discusses the Hindu social organisation urging that actually people are at different levels and must be met at these levels. Thus, we must not readily condemn idolatry. The Hindu does not necessarily believe even in God, but does believe in the supremacy of the spiritual world. He cannot accept conversion as warranted, but holds to the “Blood and Soil” conception of religion. As regards the methods of Christian Missions, he regards the “Either-or” of the Dialectic Theology as opposed to the genius of India, and sympathises with the attitude behind the “Laymen’s Report”. This exposition of Hinduism constitutes a challenge to the Christian thinker to meet Radhakrishnan on his own level. We are called to an intensive and sympathetic study of Hinduism itself, and to drink deep of Christian Theology, Christian tradition, and Christian experience.

A paper with particular reference to Islam was read by Mr. Sweetman. He refuted the frequent assertion that all religions are equally good, by asserting that just as the intellect may be perverted, so may the religious faculty, and that in actual fact there are some very bad religions. It may then be asked why where there is faith in God, there should be any concern with comparative religions. Yet there must be such study, when we are meeting those who profess other religions. Theology is strictly “The Word of God” and Christianity is the human custody of that Word. But we are faced with the challenge that outside Christianity, there is presented in Islam a counter interpretation. The Muslim thinks the Christian has many superstitions. Islam might be regarded as a Christian heresy, but this is mistaken. It might be taken as a protest against Christian doctrine, but is not that, for the central Christian doctrines are here - the Unity of God, the Creator, the forgiveness of sins Providence, the work of a Mediator, Atonement. The doctrines are there, yet there is a protest, not against Doctrine, but against Dogma. Islam denies the fundamental Data of Christianity. It presents us with a regrouping of doctrines round other data, it builds on another foundation. We must therefore recognise that it is not ideas but facts that are important, and Dogma is central. In meeting Islam there are certain things to be noted, Islamic systematisation of doctrine was produced under the influence of Christianity in the first period, and in the second period it has a Scholasticism which shows a marked affinity with Christian Scholasticism in method and topic. A comparative study of these gives us a clue to what is distinctive in Christian doctrine-the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Atonement of Christ. The mediaeval method helps in mutual intelligibility in discussing difficult doctrines. Methods and topics are here presented, and these should be used for a clearer proclamation of Christian Dogma, the facts on which we build, with no hesitation and no compromise. It is dangerous to meet Islam with an individualistic interpretation of Christianity. The individual is apt to go too far to accommodate his hearer, and to give the impression that Christianity has no assured doctrine. The unity of the Church is vital to confront the authoritarianism of Islam. There is a great lack of proper literature for meeting Islam. In the Tambaram exhibition of such literature, one saw no manual of Theology, and no translation of the Christian classics for Muslims. It is vital that all that is good whether from the West or not, should be made available. The Christian heritage is not sufficiently known in the East.

A paper with particular reference to Secularism was read by Mr. Devadutt. He reminded the Conference of other Indian religions which had not been mentioned. He described Secularism as the organising of life apart from God, on the assumption that any reference to an other-worldly order is valueless and uncertain. The secularist would achieve the advance of human welfare by material means alone. There is much in common with Humanism, but Humanism has a God-Humanity itself. Many of the educated youth of India today are secularist, this being the dominant tone of the universities. Hinduism has not satisfied educated youth, failing to give sufficient place to ethics, so that those who give primary place to ethics must seek satisfaction outside religion. Again, youth urges that religion has failed to work out a social Gospel, quotes Christianity as having failed, and refers to the reported success of Communism. Finally, there is a belief that the sciences have opened up a self-sufficient world. Granted that human motivation plays a part in the world, it is yet claimed that human motivation can be changed. There are different possible approaches for an apologetics,

An Ethical Approach: The secularist normally has an ethical idealism to which the Christian can appeal with the social Gospel. The attempt at this in the early 20th century was largely amateurish, but today the problems are better understood. It calls for thorough study, demanding the service of experts.
A Theological and Philosophical Approach: The homelessness of the ethical ideal without religion can be demonstrated. Ideals are worthless things without permanency.

The longing for justice can be met only if it is not subjective merely, but rooted in the eternal. Thus, we are raised above the human realm into the transcendent realm of purposes and ends. Again the secularist errs in his interpretation of history, whether he adopts the materialistic Marxian view, or admits the place of human motivation. He tends to believe in revolution as the only way of advance. The old idea of inevitable progress has certainly gone, but while human motivation has its place we cannot redeem history by perfecting it, for we cannot perfect human motivation. We are driven back to the dialectical view, to recognise in man the seeds of corruption, and also the immanent spirit of God redeeming man. The striving will go on, with an increasing measure of redemption of history. We should therefore assure the secularist of the reality of history, but point out that this is finite, and there is no place for unbounded optimism. The Cross and the Resurrection give us room for a modified optimism for history, but history is not the be-all and the end-all of existence. We look to Eternity.

General discussion followed. Dr. Manikum described three possible approaches to the non-Christian:

The method of confronting with an absolute, on the assumption that there is no common ground,
The method of the “Crown of Hinduism” presenting Christianity as the fulfilment of other religions, and
The method which involves sympathetic study of other religions, as holding partial truth, but presents Christ as the fulfilment and finds in Him the Judge: Assuming the third approach, will the method be
1. A reasoned apologetics,
2. A re-interpretation of non-Christian thought, or
3. Pure proclamation of the Gospel?

Mr. Sweetman pointed out that a “reasoned statement” does not imply the attempt to find an infallible logic, and Sister Gertrude suggested that the method might include all three elements. It was generally held that Christ must be the criterion of all teaching, and that He is to be set forth as at once the Fulfiller and the Judge, but Father Martyn amplified this by pointing out that while the Person of Christ may be the criterion, an apologetics based solely on the personality of Jesus, is inadequate, as it ignores the Old Testament, and much of the history of the Church. Dr. Adiseshich stressed the fact that we dare not modify the actual content of the Gospel to satisfy anyone, and while this was generally agreed, others stressed the need for presenting the Gospel in an idiom which will be understood. Dr. Appasamy felt it was tragic that many Christians, including leaders, were not in touch with what is going on in India, and urged the need for entering into the Indian heritage, that the Gospel might be presented without its foreign appearance. He thought it likely there might be not one but several schools of Christian Theology in India, but did not deplore this. Father Martyn also appealed for or the Indianisation of Christian practice, and Dr. Devanandann wondered if sympathy and the use of the right terminology would build the needed bridge. Dr. Adiseshiah felt that Christians might share more in tackling the social problems of the day, and thus come into relationship with the secularist. Dr. Harper urged the need for an Apologetics for Christians as well as others and the need for a statement of the faith to challenge the attention and allegiance of Christian youth. Mr. David deprecated the use of the word apologetics, and Mr. Stewart urged that we need not be intimidated by the apparent strength of Hindu and other forces, for in Christ we have the highest ground there is. He suggested that though variations in apologetics are called for by varying places, the basic presentation of the Gospel is the same for all men, for they are sinners in need of salvation to whom we preach a Saviour. Mr. Sanjiva Rao emphasised the personal relationship with Christ into which men, as men, are called, and stated that as He comes to them, it is Hindus, not Hinduism, who are vitalised.

The Conference adopted certain Findings: (See Findings No. 4).

Before the Conference proceeded to discuss practical questions, the Chairman read a paper sent by Father Estella. He conceived the Task of Theology in India to be that of understanding India’s approach to God, and God’s approach in Christ to India; that the Word be Indian flesh, living in India, full of grace and truth, incarnate in Indian persons. We approach non-Christian religions in a sympathetically positive way, for Christ is not come to destroy but to fulfil. The place of Tradition and Authority must be paramount, for teaching, which depends on fact, cannot be at the mercy of any changing life and language. God must certainly have given a permanent authority and Christian Theology must stand resolutely in what is given in Christ. We are faced with the alternative of accepting a God-given authority, or meeting disintegration. For the task of preparing a Modern Apologetics the first step should be the preparation of a bibliography of what has already been done. The other steps are:

Let the lives of converts in India be studied, and the common findings analysed;
We must be frank in recognising differences in Christian sects and bodies in India, without any weak-spined assumption that all are equal. Yet with that there is a paramount need of charity, and the assumption that our brother is in earnest and in good faith;
We must face Indian culture and thought, with the desire to reconstruct what is good from within

It was resolved to send a message of thanks to the writer for his paper, which should be included in the record of the Conference.

The Conference took up various practical proposals. These discussions extended to the third day of the Conference, on which day also the findings on the various sections were presented and adopted in their final form. The proceedings of the third day opened with a devotional period led by the Rev. Dr. Adiseshiah.

Continuation Committee: - Resolved to set up a Continuation Committee to consist of the following members:
Further Conference: - Resolved to record the desire of the members that another such Conference should be convened if possible in one year’s time.
Proceedings of the Conference: - Resolved to prepare an account:of the proceedings of the Conference, and to print 150 copies of this for private circulation among those who had been present, and such others as might seem good to the Secretaries. Resolved further that the “Proceedings” should consist of a precis of the various papers read, together with a summary of the discussions, to be prepared by the recording secretary. Resolved further that editors of journals might print any of the papers in full, with the consent of their writers, and accounts of the Conference might be published if approved by the secretaries.
Publication of a Bulletin: - Resolved
1. To publish a Bulletin to promote further study along the lines of the Conference,
2. To appoint Mr. C.S. Paul and the Rev. A.G. Hort as Editors,
3. To approve that the Bulletin be financed by subscriptions of Rs. 5 yearly for members with salaries of Rs. 250 or over, subscriptions of Rs. 3 yearly from others, and if required, a subsidy from the N.C.C.,
4. During 1943 to print two issues only, the first to consist solely of the Proceedings of the Conference,
5. To request Dr. Manikam to be responsible for the publication of the first number, in consultation with Mr. Stewart, and to request the N. C. C. if necessary to advance the necessary capital to produce this, and
6. To appoint the Continuation Committee to be responsible for the publication of future numbers, to foster further study of subjects dealt with at the conference to carry out practical proposals, to arrange for another conference next year, if possible and to initiate any measure necessary.
Libraries of Theology: - Resolved to ask the Continuation Committee to prepare lists of libraries of Theology in India, with the terms of loan on which books are available.
Literature of Theology: - There was a discussion on the need for improving the amount of good theological literature available in. India. Information was given on what is already being done, and it was Resolved to ask the Continuation Committee to study the kind of literature required and give recommendations to the proper agencies.
Summer Schools and Extension Courses: - Reference was made to the value of Summer Schools and Extension Courses, especially for reaching a wider public, and information was given on what is being done in this direction. Resolved to ask the Continuation Committee to investigate the question and report to the next Conference.

Members of the Continuation Committee.
1. Dr. B.B. Manikam (convener),
2. Dr. A.J. Appasamy,
3. Rev. J.W. Wheelman,
4. Rev. H.V. Martin,
5. Dr. P.D. Devanandann,
6. Sister Gertrude
7. Mr. E.V. Devadutt, corresponding member, Rev. Fr. Estella.
8. Life and Work Committee: - Dr. Adiseshiah urged the necessity of a more vital contact with efforts to face the urgent social and practical problems of the day. Resolved to set up a special committee to keep in touch with action along this line, and make proposals. The following, with powers to coopt, were appointed to form this Committee:
9. Rev. Dr. Adigeshiah (convener)
10. V.E. Devadutt,
11. Rev. F.V. Martin,
12. Dr. M.I. Harrison.
13. Further Questions: - Resolved to remit all other questions for further consideration to the next Conference.
14. Thanks to the N.C.C.: - On the motion of the Chairman, the Conference adopted with acclamation, the following Resolution “Resolved that the members of this Conference warmly appreciate the enterprise of the N. C. C. in initiating and organising this Conference on Theology in India, believe it to have proved itself abundantly worthwhile, and trust that it will mark the beginning of greater coordination between workers in this field, and a more fruitful development of Theology suited to the needs of the country.”
15. Thanks to the C.P.S.S. Ashram: - The Conference passed with acclamation a Resolution of cordial thanks to Father Bill Lash and the C.P.S.S. Ashram, Poona, for their hospitality, and the ideal arrangements they had made for the Conference.

The Conference adjourned to the Ashram Chapel, where a short period of worship, led by the Chairman, brought the proceedings to a close.

WILLIAM STEWART, Recording Secretary.

Note on the Findings: - The Conference took note of the fact that in adopting resolutions on the various subject brought forward it was not necessarily committed to any exact formula as final, but was rather seeking to indicate lines of future study. It was further noted that inevitably the ground covered by the various resolutions must overlap to some extent.

Findings No. 1

The Theological Task in India Findings

We affirm as a guiding principle that the essential content of the Christian Faith is the same for all times, places, and circumstances, but that in different times, places, and circumstances the expression, interpretation, and application must both grow out of, and meet the actual situation, making such particular emphases as are called for.

Hence, within Theology, the primary term covering the whole, we distinguish two elements, each of which has its own specific task:

The absolute element - the central core - the word of God-DOGMA.
The relative element the expression, interpretation, application-DOCTRINE.

(A)

The characteristic differentia of Christian Dogma is the fundamental assumption that God, the ground and source of all reality, has revealed Himself in an Act-in Jesus Christ our Lord-by which the world has been redeemed. Here our terms are provided primarily from the Bible. There are many terms accumulated from elsewhere during 19 centuries, and more may yet be gathered in India, but Christian Dogma, everywhere and always, stands or falls with the Bible. Here we must begin. We take the Bible as the permanent and final witness to the Being and Nature of God, and His relations with men, as disclosed by Him in His dealings with the people whose history is there recorded and interpreted. Hence, it is our first task to ask and grapple with, if happily we may answer, three questions:

What is the Word of God witnessed to in the Bible?
What is the Good News proclaimed by the Church?
What is the Faith professed by Christians?

It may be that when we know that the answers all mean the same thing, we have completed this first part of our task; but, in any case, we cannot attend to the second part until we are certain that there is no dispute about the essential content of the Gospel. Although our creed has to take the form of statements, we do not claim that any language of ours can ever be fully adequate to this task. Moreover, we do not merely assent to propositions; we confess the saving Name of the Person who is one with His Gospel.

(B)

All living Christian Doctrine grows out of, reflects, and cannot be understood apart from the worshipping Christian community. And both Doctrine and worship presuppose Christian experience, i.e., the corporate conviction of heart and mind that a great event has happened. Here it is our task to interpret the great Act of God in all its bearings; to build implications of the Revelation in Christ into a system of thought-reasonable, not in the sense of being demonstrable by argument, but in that it, as does nothing else, makes sense of all the facts.

This involves clear discernment of our actual situation, as Christians both within the Church and facing the needs and circumstances of India.

Each age has its own problems, and in different ages men have, arisen who have so handled the needs and forces of their own time as to create a living synthesis, which has not only satisfied contemporary requirements but, when the conditions which produced it are no more, still remains a classic expression from which succeeding generations may learn: We shall do well to remember that such an inheritance is part of our actual situation. Although we have to consider the Dogma in the setting of our own world, yet we may seek guidance from those who, facing similar tasks in their own generation, have so carried out the work of an interpretation as to do justice to the real issues.

In brief therefore, we see it our task:

To appropriate Dogma, that given permanent living core, which must determine the characteristic shape of any expression or application which is to be recognisably Christian.
To explicate Doctrine-on the one hand for building up Christians and on the other for presenting the Gospel to others. Here we would stress our opinion that the “Indianisation” of Christianity refers only to such changes in external forms and terms as will make the unchanging Gospel intelligible in India.

This means study:

Of the Bible.
Of the Patristic Age, for methods of interpreting Christian Dogma in the context of a non-Christian environment.
Of Church History with a view to understanding our Christian Heritage.
Of Indian non-Christian religious thought with a view to understanding our non-Christian Heritage and re-interpreting it in the light of Christ.
Of contemporary life and thought, particularly in India, with a view to indicating the relevance to our age of the Christian doctrine of man; the Christian interpretation of history; and the Christian ideal of society.

We suggest as methods of such study:

Research.
Conference and Seminar.
Writing.

Finally - Realising that this is a vast task which can only be achieved step by step, we deprecate any tendency to “seek quick results, or to make premature syntheses.

Findings No. 2

Findings on the Place of Authority and Tradition in Christian Theology in India

The Theology of the Church in India as elsewhere is based upon the Gospel which comes to us with the authority of God in Christ. This given Gospel is mediated to us by the Holy Spirit through the living tradition of the Universal Church (East and West). The authority of the Church is based, not upon the Church’s infallibility, but upon the promised guidance of the Holy Spirit, the Church’s infallible Guide.

The Word of God speaks to us with authority through the Bible, by which the Church is bound, the Creeds, which are the Church’s Confession of faith, and the Church’s Ministry of Word and Sacraments through which the Word of God is proclaimed and received. These are the trustworthy vehicles through which is communicated to us the given content of the Gospel.

There is a necessary distinction to be drawn here between dogma, the facts by faith in which the Church lives, and doctrine, which interprets and seeks to bring home the meaning of these facts to men in every realm of life and thought. To the content of God’s revelation no one may add, and from it no one may take away; to do that is what is meant by heresy. The Church has a duty to protect its members from anything which is a distortion or perversion of the revealed truth of God.

So the theologian, standing within the living tradition of the Universal Church, has need for both humility and boldness. While the content of the Gospel may not be changed, in the field of doctrine there in room for freedom of interpretation in commending that Gospel to the reason and conscience of all men. It is here that the Church in India will make its own contribution to the thought and life of the Universal Church by a fuller apprehension of the unsearchable riches of Christ, and by setting forth the eternal Gospel in a way which will be truly Indian.

There is therefore a two-fold task for the theologian in India: one is to study, understand, and enter into the heritage of all Christendom, the other is to enrich that tradition by India’s contribution:

Findings No. 3

Note on Findings No. 3: - The Conference, in adopting the following Findings on the place of Experience, does not commit itself to the definition of Theology given in the first part, but regards this question as one calling for further study.

The Place of Experience

From the point of view of Experience, Christian Theology aims at giving systematic expression to the Christian doctrines about God, man, the world, and their relations, growing out of God’s historic revelation in Christ, and verifying them progressively in Christian experience, which together make up the Christian conception of life. Christian Theology, then, might be called the philosophy of the Christian life, for it deals with truths which are not merely theoretical propositions gained through abstract reasoning, but religious convictions, which bear directly on the conduct of one who holds them.

We recognise, however; that an over-emphasis on religious experience should be carefully guarded against. Christian experience is not self-created, but grows primarily out of faith in Christ. Nevertheless, it is true that from the very outset Christian Theology has been demonstrated and confirmed by Christian experience. One of the factors in the Apologetics of the Apostles was personal experience. “That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us and truly our fellowship is with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ.” Throughout the centuries since the Apostolic Age one of the most effective arguments for the claims of Jesus has been the testimony of Christian experience. Christian theology and Christian experience Have all along acted and re-acted on each other. It would be impossible to have Christian experience in its fullest and richest form without Christian theology, which is but a systematic expression of God’s revelation of Himself to man. And it would have been equally impossible to apprehend Divine revelation had God not made it possible for man to experience it.
There is a marked difference between Christian religious experience and non-Christian religious experience, for Christian experience is based on God’s self-revelation in Jesus Christ, and is definitely Christo-centric.
While the content of the Christian message has remained unchanged throughout the ages its presentation has been influenced by the religious background of the people to whom it has been given. When presenting Christian doctrines to the mind and soul of India, Christian Theology must take cognisance of India’s spiritual background.

Some of the salient points in the religious experience of Hindu India may be stated as follows: - Communion with God, an innate desire to believe in an immanent Deity, an age-long quest for salvation, the dominance of religion over all aspects of human life, an unlimited capacity for sacrifice in the cause of religion, a sacramental view of life, and the spirit of other-worldliness. Similarly, the salient points in the religious experience of Muslim India may be stated to be a passionate adherence to the unity of God, adoration of Him and obedience to His will, the sense of brotherhood among believers, and the zeal for spreading Islam. The Christian thinker must pay special heed to these aspects of India’s religions experience in the presentation of the Gospel to the people of this land. He should also study the religious experiences of devout Hindus and Mohammedans and those of other Faiths as expressed in their hymns, poems, prayers, biographies and other writings.
A further task will be to build up the Christian life and experience of the Indian Church. This may be achieved, in part, by
1. The study of the religious experience of notable Indian Christians.
2. The preparation of treatises in popular language on the doctrines of the Christian Faith.

Findings No. 4

The Findings of the Committee on the Presentation of Christianity to Followers of Other Faiths

Having the Gospel given us by God and realising the urgency of the need for this Gospel which we have the command of Jesus to preach, we consider it our primary aim, to proclaim the faith, safeguarding what God has committed to His Church. In order to further this object in India we make the following recommendations:

A. The Study of Theology

We must first give ourselves more diligently to the study of theology, in order that there may be no uncertainty concerning the faith which we proclaim.

B. The Study of Other Religions

Furthermore, in order to achieve intelligibility for our message we must study more intensively the religious systems of India, including those which have not yet been thoroughly examined, as, for instance, the animistic faiths of the Indian villages, such systems as have their literature largely in the vernaculars, and South Indian Islam. We would stress the need for a continuous supply in the Indian Church of scholars in this sphere who would know these faiths not only through, books but through personal intercourse, and therefore urge that this study should be carried on both in fellowship with other Christian students and with members of non-Christian faiths.
We call attention, to the growing problem of secularism in India, and desire that a special study of the form and causes of this tendency of contemporary life be made.

C. The Relation of Christianity to Other Faiths

With regard to the attitude of Christianity to other religions we note the existence of the following views:

The view that other religions are altogether evil and are, therefore to be met with uncompromising rejection and hostility.
The view that Christianity is the fulfilment of other religions in the sense that the tendencies found in them work themselves out to find their completion in Christianity.
The view that the contrast is one which may be variously expressed as that between aspiration and satisfaction, the natural and the supernatural, human construction and divine impartment, religions and religion sui generis.
The view that there has been a genuine movement from God to man outside the Hebrew-Christian tradition, but that this movement of God has been completed and perfected in Christ.

This Findings Committee cannot specifically endorse any one of these views as expressing its united mind. It notes, further, that the different non-Christian religions do not all stand in the same relation to Christianity; thus, for example, the case of Islam is in some ways exceptional, But they would affirm that our Lord Jesus Christ is the norm of truth and the standard of life by which all religions are judged.

D. The Method

In the task of presenting the gospel we find that there is need for the proclamation of the content of the Christian revelation, for reasoned argument in its behalf, and for the reinterpretation of concepts and practices coming from non-Christian faiths, each of these complementary methods to be employed in its due place. We would give primary importance to the first. The presentation of the gospel must be free from admixture with elements irreconcilable with itself, and from any compromise or diminution of its essentials.
We call attention to the importance of the task of constructing and bringing into use a theological vocabulary which will serve to make the gospel intelligible to those who come from non-Christian backgrounds, and which, at the same time, when words are adequately defined in a Christian sense, will be reconcilable with the tradition of the Church throughout the world. It is important that the vocabulary adopted, in presenting the gospel to anyone, of the religious groups of India should be such as not to complicate unduly the task of reaching those of other religious communities.
In our thought concerning the presentation of Christianity to those of other religions we urge that wherever possible words which suggest a warfare or debate between religions, such as strategy, apologetics, etc., be avoided. Conflict for the purposes of safeguarding truth and overcoming false statements and evil practices is sometimes unavoidable, but the spirit in which our work is often best carried on is that of friendship, co-operation, and sympathetic understanding.
In determining our methods for presenting the Christian faith, we should be controlled not merely by the criterion of practical effectiveness, but by that of conformity to truth and to the Christian spirit. At the same time, we would take advantage of every means of commending our gospel noting where Christ meets felt needs, and making use of the results of modern psychology in the service of our faith.
In meeting the problem which secularism presents, not only in non-Christian groups, but also within the Christian community, and in particular within our schools and colleges, we would stress the importance of giving careful thought to the bearing of Christian theology on social and political problems. We would also urge that wherever possible Christian people should unite with others in dealing with such problems where they affect all.
Finally, we would urge upon the attention of the Christian Church the great importance of this evangelism in all its aspects. It is a task which is to be done for India, and the initiative and responsibility for carrying it out must rest primarily with the Church in India. At the same time, inasmuch as India is a testing ground where Christianity is meeting in intimate contact some of the chief religions of the world, the results of our work are of the utmost importance to the Christian. Church throughout the whole world.

Appendix

(The following resolution deals with a subject specially referred by the Conference to this Findings Committee.)

This conference, concerned with the necessity for the production of Christian Theology for the Church in India, urges upon the Central Board of Christian Higher Education, the Committee on High School Education, and the Committee on Theological Education, the necessity for encouraging study by Christian students with a view to later specialisation in the Indian vernaculars and in the classical religious languages, viz., Sanskrit, Arabic, and Persian.

The Significance of the Conference

By REV. A.G. HORT

“The significance of the Conference lies not in what it achieved but in what it initiated”. So the Editorial of the N.C.C. Review for February 1943 introduces the theological conference, of which the report is given above, and of which this Bulletin is the offspring. And it may, perhaps help to carry on what that conference began, if an attempt is here made to crystallise something of the experience of our first meeting and the convictions engendered there, and to enumerate some of the lines for further thought and study which that meeting showed to be needed.

One of the chief impressions made by our first gathering at least on a comparatively new recruit to theology and to India - was the sense that the Church in India is only at the very beginning of its pilgrimage in the land of Christian thought. In Sister Gertrude’s telling metaphor, “When I think of the Theological Task in India today, I see a man standing with his back to the west greeting the rising sun,” Indian Christian theology is only now opening its eyes to the glory of its coming day and the greatness of its future task. That may cause some of us surprise and impatience. How is it that Christianity, which has been in India as long, if not, longer than in most European countries, has so far produced so little truly creative thought? That is a question to which we should give careful attention. But more important than analysing the failure in the past is to view the road which lies ahead, as it becomes clearer in the growing light, with deep realism and full humility. It was one of the many inspirations of our first meeting that we found each other taking the Theological Task in India - though not, we hope, the theologians!-so seriously and humbly. From this sense of the greatness of our task two deep convictions were born. First, that individual, isolated efforts are not enough to meet the demands of our time. We need to work out together very carefully a concerted plan of advance. And above all, we need each other for advice for criticism and for co-operation, And second, that the task to which we believe we have been called is one where the measure of final achievement depends very largely on the original spade-work, the quiet, thorough, hidden workings which may never see the light of day. We must dig deep before we begin to build. Let us remember the words of the Rock, in T.S. Eliot’s pageant of Church-building,

"I say: take no thought of the harvest,
But only of proper sowing.".

Another reassuring sign that the Church in India has set its hand to the theological plough is the growing unity: of conviction among us that there is at the heart of Christianity, constant for all times, places and circumstances, what we variously described as “a central core”, “the given content of the Gospel”, “the facts by faith in which the Church lives”. We have not yet gone very far in defining what that something is; but there is a common recognition that it is there we must take our stand, if we are to stand together, and if we are to have our feet on the rock from which alone the Church can withstand the angry shock” of hostile attack or the “shifting sands” of passing thought forms and changing circumstances. This absolute, given element in Christianity is distinguishable though inseparable from its expression, interpretation and application, which “must both grow out of and meet the actual situation”, in which the Church finds itself. Thus, “the theologian standing within the living tradition of the Universal Church has need for both humility and boldness. While the content of the Gospel may not be changed, in the field of doctrine there is room for freedom of interpretation in commending that Gospel to the reason and conscience of all men. It is here that the Church in India will make its own contribution to the thought and life of the Universal Church by a fuller apprehension of the unsearchable riches of Christ and by setting forth the eternal Gospel in a way which will be truly Indian?

A third, and no less important, conviction impressed, upon us by our meeting together is that the Church in India has to hammer out its theology in many differing situations and to meet many conflicting points of view. We have to set forth the Gospel in terms of Islam as well as Hinduism, and of western secularism as well as eastern religion. For the Gospel is God’s Word, to the Mussulman as well as to the Hindu, to the disciple of H.G. Wells or Karl Marx as well to the disciple of Radhakrishnan. Nor may we lose sight of the fact that the Church in N. India faces a very different world from that in the South. This means that the Church must not commit herself finally to any one technique, which might prejudice its success on some other front, Nor must we ever speak too glibly of relating the Gospel to “the Indian heritage”, as though the latter were a single, homogeneous, simple tradition of life and thought, and not rather itself a confluence of many currents of belief and ways of life. And so, if all India is to find in the Christian Faith the fulfilment - in its true, Biblical sense - of its past search for God, then Christian theology must do again what it did for the Church and the world of the first centuries A. D., and forge its message to meet and satisfy all comers, all our modern Indian equivalents to Jewish law or Greek philosophy or eastern mystery-religions or Roman “social gospel”. Seeing that Jews ask for signs, and Greeks seek after wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, unto Jews a stumbling-block, and unto Gentiles foolishness; but unto them that are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God”.

It is not for any one individual, to map out the course which theology must take in any given age or situation. Living theology is not made that way; nor is truly creative thought the product of committees. What follows is only an attempt to sketch some of the things which the experience of our first meeting suggests should be tackled. We need to work on two levels. The first and in many ways the most important, is what I have called “digging”, the work whereby alone sound and solid foundations may be laid. For theology there is of course only one true foundation, the renewed and patient study of the Scriptures. Many questions here suggest themselves as being particularly pertinent to our condition; such as, What is the real relation between the Old and New Testaments? What is the full New Testament teaching on the way in which the Gospel fulfils the Law? Does this have anything to teach us of the right relation between Christian theology and non-Christian system of thought? Or again, What is the distinction if any, between the Pauline and the Johannine understanding of the Christian Gospel, and what are the real grounds, if any, for supposing that the latter provides a more suitable approach than the former for the Indian disciple? Then again there is the whole question of inspiration, which is crucial for our work with Islam These are but a few of the issues which demand much more thorough attention. And then beyond the Bible lies the almost wholly neglected work of the Patristic period and of the Eastern Church. We have here a treasure-house of wisdom and experience on which we have hardly drawn at all. As Prof. J. Foster has brought home to us in his recent book, Then and Now, “the Younger Churches are the Early Church of our day”. Clement and Origen of Alexandria, Irenaeus and Augustine speak to us not as voices from a dead past, but as comrades and champions of the fray today. Their problems are our problems, and while we need not accept uncritically their admittedly partial solutions, yet we have no right to expect the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the future when we neglect His evident inspiration in the writings of the Fathers which the Church has preserved for our benefit. But besides digging such foundations and learning from the past, there is also other spade-work to be done, the making of good materials for future building. Any presentation of Christian truth whether to Islam or to Hinduism demands a common medium of thought and expression. We must learn the mental association of particular words and ideas in the minds of those with whom we deal. In the past too much has been left to the limited knowledge and experience of individual workers. Words have been used to convey Christian truth which can do nothing but confound it. Much still remains to be done in the realm of patient study of terms and ideas in other religions, so that we may, find at least a vocabulary which will not wholly obscure our meaning. Only so will we provide future generations with the bricks wherewith to build.

Alongside the spade-work there must go the planning of the Indian house of faith. Here again, we must not be too ambitious or eager for quick results. We must first consider our resources and our essential needs. After all the job of a theologian is to ask questions as much as to, answer them. To know what is the real question is half the answer. The following very tentative suggestions are examples of the sort of question which should first engage our attention, because they seem to the writer to be the real questions which lie behind the difficulties and differences which we encountered at our first meeting. If we do not face these we shall not be intelligible to one another. One group of questions centres on the obvious problem, What is Theology? What is the given element in Christianity, and what is the relation of the theologian to it? Granted it is true that “any stigma is good enough to beat a dogma”, what is dogma and need we be dogmatic about it? What is its relation to the Word of God, the Gospel, and what is its relation to doctrine and systematic theology? Is theology the exposition of dogma or the analysis of experience or both or neither? A second group of fundamental questions are those which give rise to our differing views of the relation between the Christian revelation and other religions. It is the old problem of Grace and Nature. Is the Christian message in non-Christian world simply a “stone of stumbling and a rock of offence”? Does sin deface or destroy the image of God in man? What, if anything, are general revelation and natural theology, and what in their relation, if any, to the Truth of God revealed in Christ and to Christian theology?

It will be seen that both these sets of questions lie in the field of Prolegomena. But that surely is where we must begin. We have first to view the Task of Theology in India as a whole into which our own small contributions must severally be brought. Only when we have some idea of the ground-plan shall we begin to see where our particular piece of work fits in and how best it may be done. Others may be able to suggest different and more important issues on which we should begin to work. Let us know them, That is what this Bulletin is for.

ULCM Power Press, Guntur

Jesus Bhakti in Hindu Communities

Autobiographical Writings

Missions

Sri Hriday Gita

The Seeker

The Church of Christ