The future of religious life in India would seem bright and secure if we look at its current situation. For a Catholic population of about 15 million there are about 15,000 religious priests, 2,000 religious brothers and nearly 80,000 women religious. The numbers are still growing and vocations seem plentiful. New Congregations and new Indian implantations of Congregations of foreign origin are on the increase. More and more Indian religious are going for work abroad, including to countries in Europe. The service of the Religious in the educational, medical and social field are recognized and appreciated for their quality even by members of other religions. Experiments in more inculturated forms of religious life like ashrams (Indian contemplative communities or centres) are taking place. There are about 60 of these in the different areas of the country.
A closer look however will make us raise questions about this rosy picture. While the vocations to the religious life in the country, on the whole, are constant, the sources of these vocations have been shifting. There are less vocations from urban and economically better off groups and more from poorer and rural areas. An increasingly secularized, consumer culture and a greater variety of opportunities for growing young people in urban areas may be one of the reasons. The decreasing birthrate resulting in one-child or two-children families among the middle and the upper classes is certainly another. As more of the poor Catholics emerge into the middle class, thanks partly to Catholic schools and projects to help the poor, and as more regions of the country are urbanized the vocations to religious life will certainly start decreasing. The style of religious life and the kind of work the religious do may also change.
How will these trends affect religious life in the country? Even if the flow of vocations tapers off slowly the young people who are joining now will live and serve for another 40 years, at least. I do not think that the mass exodus that Congregations in Europe and America witnessed after the Second Vatican Council will happen in India. Economic, cultural and religious conditions in India are different. Unemployment is high. The cultures in India seem less prone to massive secularization. The Religious still have a high status in society. Young people continue to be generous. A certain radicalism among the youth, evident in the 1970’s, is also disappearing. A religio-cultural ‘earthquake’ is always possible. It does not seem probable at the moment. Therefore religious life in India will not be facing a crisis of numbers in the near future. We need not speculate about the distant future. History is moving too fast for that. Our reflection on the future of religious life in India, therefore, will have to focus on its relevance and quality.
Religious Life as Relevant
Before we take up more concrete issues it may be good to raise a preliminary question concerning the general relevance of religious life itself as an element of Christian life. There is an element of hope here. I think that religious life as a symbolic and prophetic affirmation of and witness to the Kingdom of God will continue to be relevant in the world. The early Christian communities described in Acts 2 lived like religious communities. The people sold all that they had, put every thing in common and shared it each according to her/his need. But as the Christian communities grew and spread and become less fervent, the hermits, the virgins and the monastic communities tried to live a life more in conformity with the Gospel. They offered models of a contrast society that prophetically challenged existing ways of life in a community that had become largely Christian. They concretized the role of the Church as the symbol and servant of the Kingdom of God.
The Religious have continued this role throughout history. When Europe was in political turmoil, the monasteries were oases of peace and the pursuit of wisdom. The 12th and 13th centuries of the Common Era saw the rise of rich trading towns and seats of learning. Francis of Assisi lived and preached poverty, while Dominic promoted learning and preaching. The counter reform, both renewing the faith and reaching out to culture, which came as a response to Martin Luther and other reformers, was promoted by Ignatius of Loyola in the 16th century. When the industrial revolution generated new forms of poverty and marginalization in the 18th and 19th centuries, many Congregations came forward to cater to the needs of the poor, the orphans and the aged, seeing to their material, educational, and spiritual needs. It was also the period of colonial expansion. Various missionary Congregations were founded at this time to promote faith, not only trade and political domination, across the world. The 20th century has seen the rise of many Secular Institutes and secular Associates of traditional Congregations. This brief history shows us that Religious life has always responded to the signs of the times in every age, actualizing sharply the prophetic dimensions of the Church as symbol and servant of the Kingdom.
The Religious are an essential and integral face of the Church. Therefore I believe that God will continue to raise up such groups in the Church. It is not a question of numbers or particular forms. A single person can be a prophet in a community. It is a matter of a symbolic presence. The Religious will be a prophetic and counter-cultural presence in every situation. This also means that forms of Religious life that have become irrelevant in course of time will disappear. A historian of Religious life has suggested that more forms of Religious life have disappeared than those that have survived in the course of history. The future of Religious life in India is therefore linked to the future of India itself. It may be helpful therefore to reflect briefly on the future of India.
Before we do that I would like to suggest one more reason why the Religious will continue to be relevant in India. There are Hindu sannyasis (people who have renounced the world) and gurus and Buddhist bhikkus (monks) in India (and Asia). They show no signs of decline. Therefore there is a cultural and spiritual climate favourable to religious life.
The Second Vatican Council launched a movement for renewal in religious Congregations. They went back to their roots, explored the lives of their founders, and tried to recapture their vision and inspiration. Though a few groups have been tempted to go back to the past, most groups have rather focused on the present and the future and have sought to reinterpret the vision and goal of the founders in the context of the challenges of today. That is why it is necessary to focus for a moment on the kind of challenges that India presents today before I go on to spell out the future of Religious life.
The Future of India
Though it is making slow progress, India will continue to be a country with many poor people. In a population of one billion, about 25% may today be below the poverty line. The gap between the rich and the poor, however, is increasing. In spite of the economic growth the country is making, taking into consideration the growth rate of the population, the poor will be around at least for another generation or two. A good proportion of these poor people will be the Dalits or those who are at the bottom of the caste system and the tribals or indigenous people. Owing to the politics of economic globalization that leads to the destruction of small scale industries and non-mechanized agriculture, many of these poor migrate to urban slums looking for means of livelihood. They are not only economically poor, but also socially discriminated against and marginalized. The social inequalities of the caste system is still very strong and pervasive. India has withstood the impact of Western culture and has guarded its religo-cultural identity during the centuries of colonial rule. But like other people elsewhere the Indians have to face the inroads of scientific and technological modernization and cultural globalization brought on by the mass media of communication. This leads, on the one hand, to a certain secularization of social and public life and, on the other, to materialistic consumerism. Threatened by these developments, religions become fundamentalist in self defense. They are used as elements of personal and group (cultural) identity. As such they are also abused as tools in economic and political battles. A growing self-awareness of the majority population as Hindu, culturally and religiously, is leading to a progressive alienation of the minorities, especially Christians and Muslims. Incidents of Hindu-Muslim conflicts have always been there. Now we also have instances of Hindu-Christian conflicts.
In this context, the Church’s presence is ambiguous. It is a seen as culturally and religiously foreign. This foreign identity is further strengthened by economic, administrative and even ideological dependence on resources and power centres outside the country. At the same time the educational, medical and social institutions of the Church are also seen as purveyors of modernity. As such they are both loved and hated: loved, because they provide access to the modern world and hated, because they are seen as destructive of Indian cultural identity. Besides, a Church that is made up largely of poor people has rich and influential institutions. The challenges to the Church in this situation are obvious: How can the Church become authentically Indian? How can it struggle with the poor and the marginalized for freedom, equality and justice? How can it promote inter-religious harmony? Thirty years ago the Asian Bishops spelt out the task of evangelization in Asia as a three-fold dialogue of the Gospel with the many poor, the rich cultures and the great religions of Asia. That task is as actual and relevant as ever.
It is in this context that we have to reflect on the future of Religious life in India.
A New Ecclesial Framework
The Religious in the Church were contrast or counter-cultural communities. They did not have any trappings of economic or political power. They valued detachment and poverty and a simple life. When monasteries grew rich and adopted a worldly way of life new leaders, like Sts. Bernard and Theresa of Avila, emerged to reform them. Those that did not reform disappeared eventually. When Religious devoted themselves to social and missionary work they were supported, even financially, by the community. The community saw them as concretizing an essential dimension of their own existence as Church and was willing to support them in every way. With regard to the institutional authority in the Church they were characterized by their charismatic freedom and mobility. They were prophetic, promoting reform in the Church and in the world.
Even a cursory look at the Religious in India shows us that the Religious have wandered far away from this image. The reasons are not so much personal as historical and structural. The Religious are seen to be the most powerful group in the Church today. They control the rich institutions. They have the social and political influence that comes with those institutions. Rather than being the beneficiaries and mediators of the charity of the community they are its benefactors. Their affluence depends either on foreign funds or on the money they make through their institutions. It is significant that in many areas in India today the diocesan priests, reducing to a minimum their pastoral responsibilities, are setting up educational and social institutions, because they see in them sources of money, community patronage and social influence. The people themselves have never been taught to give and share. They still expect to receive all sorts of benefits from the Religious and the Church. This is true even of people who are economically well off. This social and ecclesial framework is detrimental to the life and mission of the Religious. I am not saying that many Religious are not doing hard and praiseworthy work. Many also lead exemplary lives. But the structural framework damages their image and the symbolic impact of their mission.
An example will make this clear. The whole world knows the life and work of Blessed Mother Theresa and the Congregation she founded. They are not the only ones who work for the poor in India. But the symbolic impact of herself and her Congregation is very different from that of other Religious in India. They lead a visibly simple life. Their institutions are not seen to be rich. They depend on resources gifted to them by people of all religions, nationally and internationally. They are not seen as making money for whatever good cause. Mother Theresa leaving the Congregation of which she was a member and the school in which she was working was a symbolic gesture.
The Christian educational, health and social institutions were started by the missionaries to care for the poor. They had also a missionary intention to witness to Jesus’s values, if not by word, at least by deed. Now most of the schools run by the Religious cater more to the middle and upper classes, though a token presence of the poor is maintained. Sometimes, side by side a school for the rich in the medium of English there will be a small school for the poor in the local language. Higher educational institutions too cater mostly to those who can afford to pay with, what are called, self-financing, job-oriented courses. A few poor may also be admitted. The institutions also admit Catholics, by preference. They have become institutions of the Christian minority, thus loosing their missionary purpose. Since education has become a lucrative project many others, individuals and organizations, run similar or even better institutions. The same will be true of hospitals. It is significant that the Medical Mission Sisters, devoted exclusively to medical work, are abandoning traditional hospitals and are starting alternate holistic health centres based on indigenous medical systems. The question then is why should the Religious be running such institutions? How much are they part of their mission? How do they affect their lives?
I am not saying that the Catholic community, especially when it is a small minority in the country, should not have its own institutions. I am not implying either that we should have second rate institutions. A good school is bound to have good, even if expensive, facilities. My question is why should the Religious be busy with it. Why cannot the community – the people – manage such institutions? If a community of Religious is attached to a rich institution, it is difficult to live a poor life. Even if the Religious do live a poor life it will not be noticed and will no longer have a symbolic, witness value. It used to be suggested that the Religious could have good and rich institutions, but must live apart from those institutions in a poor way. I do not think that it works. On the contrary, involved in well run institutions, the Religious tend to adapt their objectives and attitudes to them. That is why I think that a structural change must take place in the Church. One or other prophetic person in the past has suggested that it may be a blessing in disguise for the Church and the Religious if the country nationalizes such institutions. I do not wish to be as radical as that. I think that the Christian community has a right to have its institutions. But, under today’s circumstances, neither the Religious, nor the Clergy, should be in charge of them. At the most, the Religious should run schools for the poor or animate projects for adult or complete literacy. They should reach out to the people who are neglected by the others.
A Structural Change
I have taken the school here only as an example. What I wish to suggest is that in today’s Church in India there must be a rethinking of internal power relations between the various groups that constitute the Church. The pastors must be busy with the pastoral work. The people must be busy with the life and mission of the community. The Religious should be symbols of the Kingdom, not away from the world, but offering an alternate way of living and working in the world and reaching out to the neglected and marginalized poor. They have to rediscover their prophetic and symbolic role in the Church. They should depend on the generosity of the community, not only for their needs, but also for their work. They should keep away from any project that makes money. They should also be accountable to any funds that the community gives them for their work. This dependence on the community is a key to authentic Religious life. St. Ignatius of Loyola, one of the first to start a fully apostolic group of Religious, wanted that the communities should have no fixed income, but live and work on the alms they receive. He even required the professed members to make a special promise not to make any change in the strict rules concerning poverty, except perhaps to make them stricter. I think that it was a profound intuition. In ‘mission’ countries like India, because of colonial and mission history, the Religious have acquired a status and power that they need to renounce today in order to regain the authenticity of their proper role in the Church and in the world. Living in an institutional context may make life easy, but irrelevant. It is likely also that less institutions mean less vocations. But the fewer vocations will be more authentic. Today the Religious Congregations in India seem to satisfy the demands of a truly Religious way of life by adding on symbolically a prayer house and a few Religious or communities involved in social work with the poor and the marginalized. Often these Religious themselves also feel marginalized in the Congregation. I think that to have a relevant Religious life in the future the structures and the framework within which Religious life finds its proper role among other groups in the Church and in the world have to change. Any one can run a good school. At least some people lead exemplary lives. This does not make them Religious. Institutions, with their money and power, tend to subvert the prophetic and symbolic dimension that characterizes Religious. They also let the people escape their responsibility of supporting and financing the life and work of the Religious. People no longer look on Religious as models. They may envy and admire them. But they are not seen as prophetic challenges to their own life and work. They do not feel called to conversion. Religious life will have no future if it loses its symbolic and prophetic dimension in the Church and in the world.
In former times in Christian countries the kings and princes sponsored the good works of the Religious. The ‘princes of the Church’ too were rich enough to do so. Even the poor people financed the work of the Religious in ‘mission’ countries. Today in former mission countries like India the rich and powerful people in the Church are the Religious. Even the ‘princes of the Church’ envy their power and influence. I wonder whether Religious life can really flourish in such circumstances. Such a situation and way of life will certainly attract many ‘vocations’ especially from among the poor who see it as a means of social promotion. But they would not inspire authentic Religious life.
The Indian people of all religions have great respect for people who renounce the world for the single-minded pursuit of God or fulfillment. The Hindus have their sannyasis who leave everything and become wanderers. They live on the hospitality of the people wherever they go. The Buddhists have their bhikkus. They too renounce the world, through they live in community. They have to beg their single daily meal from the people. This is the ideal. This ideal may be compromised by some sannyasis and bhikkus today.
The social locus of the Religious in India must change, if Religious life is to be relevant. This would not be easy. But it can be done. The institutions controlled by the Religious must be handed over to independent Trusts, of which a few of them also could be members. A few Religious could continue to work in those institutions. Religious communities themselves can move out of those institutions, living a simple life. They could support themselves by the income from their work, sharing any surplus with the poor. In an increasingly secular social order the people may no longer directly support the Religious with gifts. But the Religious must be able to raise funds from the people for their works for the poor and also be accountable to them. Mother Theresa’s experience in this matter is positive. This involves an institutional revolution. I do not think that any one in India is ready for it.
In Europe and America, a similar institutional change seems to be happening. But it is less for ideological reasons than for reasons of personnel. The paucity of vocations are leading the Religious to reduce their presence in and control of educational and other institutions.
The Religious and the People
Such an institutional change could very well be accompanied by a new equation between the Religious and the people in the Church. Here too what is happening in Euro-America may give us an idea for the future. I have said earlier that the Religious embody the prophetic role of the Church in the world. Though the numbers of Religious are going down, there is as a growing interest among the people to participate in the work done by them, especially for the poor. They are the lay associates. Sometime they volunteer for a specific period. What is happening here structurally is that the group playing a prophetic and charismatic role symbolically in the Church is widening, incorporating the people with the Religious. But the Religious remain at the core of such groups, specially characterized by their total and perpetual commitment. They become animators of a movement that is larger than themselves. I suggest that the Religious in India, without waiting for their numbers to start going down, should already start projects to involve the people in their work in some committed way. This could lead to a slow transformation of the Church itself into a more prophetic and charismatic group of people, symbol and servant of the Kingdom of God. From being ‘benefactors’ to the small community of Christians, the Religious become animators of the Christians so that the whole Church becomes the servant of every one, especially of the poor and the marginalized.
While the Religious are busy with their institutions many of the social and economic problems are today addressed increasingly by other interested groups and Non-Governmental Organizations. A few Religious collaborate with these or run similar projects. I think that both the activities of such Religious and their collaboration with people of good will of other religions and ideologies must be encouraged.
I think that such a structural transformation is key to all the other changes in life and work that I am going to suggest in the remaining pages. If the structures do not change, Religious life will progressively become irrelevant. Linked to the Sacred the Religious may still inspire some respect. Their institutional power will assure them new recruits and followers. But they will no longer really be Religious in any meaningful way.
Being Counter-Cultural
We have seen briefly earlier how new Religious families responded to new situations in history. The Religious are always called to be counter-cultural in every age and in every place. Looking at the India of today and tomorrow, I can think of at least four areas in which the Religious are and will be called to be prophetic. Some of these India may share with other parts of the world, though it may have specific accents and others may be particular to India.
India is well known for its infamous caste system which organizes people in a social hierarchy based on the principle of purity-pollution. Some – about 17% of the population or 170 million people – are not only at the bottom of the social scale, but outside the social system all together. They are outcastes. Today they call themselves Dalits or crushed people. The system is very much alive in India even today. The borders between the castes are protected by a refusal to inter-dine and inter-marry. It is unfortunate and unevangelical that the Christians also practice the caste system within the Christian community, without making any serious and systematic effort to overcome it. It is even more unfortunate that the Religious too take caste differences seriously in their Congregations. Internal divisions and competitions between caste groups and political manipulations are common among them. Similar divisions in terms of language are also common. I wonder how they can be prophetic at all in such a situation. To be relevant the Religious will have to address seriously this issue in their communities and Congregations. They have to become models of social integration, respecting the dignity and equality of each person.
The second area in which Religious need to be counter-cultural is the dominant individualism of contemporary culture. In the Indian context the individualism can be collective in terms of a caste or religion or linguistic group. The Religious then have to be models of inter-being, overcoming individual and collective egoism. They must be open to the other whoever s/he may be. They must also have a concern for the community and the common good. The prevailing models of community see it as a social contract between individuals. By contrast the traditional Religious communities tend to be very structured. There is a lot of insistence on common life, living, working and praying together. Common life is structured by a multiplicity of rules. But in spite of all such structures one notices a class distinction in communities attached to big, rich institutions. The Religious with power and influence have a different style of life. An unacknowledged distinction is often made between earning and non-earning members.
Religious community however is taking new forms today. It is characterized, not by living in the same place subject to the same structures, but in fellowship and collaboration, mutual concern and solidarity. The members of the community may be scattered in various places according to the needs of the apostolate. What keeps them together is the same spirit and mutual support. At the same time there may be others who need the support of a community. A uniform norm, however, is not be necessary. The apostolic community is also getting wider to include different kinds of associates and co-workers. There will be different levels of belongingness to the community. A coordinator may be a common point of reference – and s/he need not be a Religious.
Another characteristic of modernity is consumerism. It is easy to justify the need for all kinds of gadgets and conveniences for one’s work. For people living in big institutions regular vacations, entertainment and other comforts seem normal. Religious life should always remain simple. I think that the distinction between the place of work and the place of life should become common. Even in the midst of plenty one can learn the proper use of things and give an example of a simple of life. Most Religious in India do live a simple life. But the simplicity is often hidden behind the big institutions. Simplicity itself may be external with the play of money and influence in the background.
In the early Church, the very first of examples of Religious life were hermits who lived in the desert. Monasteries and communities came afterwards. In the Indian tradition there are two sorts of sannayasis. A sannyasi is always an individual, giving a personal example of a different way of life, in which he renounces everything, living on the support of the community. Some sannyasis retire into the forest or on the mountain, pursuing their sadhana or spiritual practice with single-minded concentration. Others are wanderers, who go from place to place talking to people about dimensions of life that transcend normal life in the world and also giving an example of a simple life. I think that India can profitably have some Christian sannyasis. This is an area that the Christian Religious in India have not yet explored, since the focus has been on community, which is considered as almost essential for Religious life. I think that they should.
Becoming Indian
Jesus became human in order to transform the humans. This is the incarnational principle. Any authentic transformation is from within. If the Religious in India have to be counter-cultural prophets, they have to be part of Indian culture. Unfortunately, at the moment, the Christians are considered ‘foreigners’. Their religious culture is foreign. Their financial support is often foreign, though this may be becoming more indigeneous now. Their ideology seems inspired by foreign sources. They are dependent administratively on foreign centres of power. What is true of Christians is also true of the Religious. Most of the Congregations were founded abroad. It is true that some inculturation is taking place. Very few foreign ‘missionaries’ are justify in India. The Religious have easily adapted to Indian dress and food habits. For higher levels of formation many still go abroad. Contact with foreign cultures and peoples is a good thing. It can be enriching and challenging. But one must be rooted in one’s own culture. This is not yet happening satisfactorily. This problem is compounded by the drive of the Hindu fundamentalists who assert that India is, not merely religiously, but also culturally Hindu. Unfortunately, because of multiple dependencies, we cannot assert with righteous indignation that we are indeed Indian in every way.
We do not also distinguish between modernity and western cultures. Every culture has to come to terms with modernity. Cultures also encounter each other and get transformed in the process. But adopting European or American ways is something very different. The problem becomes complex when European ways are asserted to be Christian ways. In their spiritual practices, for instance, the Religious live in an in-between world with a mixture of Indian and European (‘Christian’) ways. For example, many Religious go to ashrams to be introduced to Indian forms of prayer. When they come back to their communities, these are treated as additions that an individual can add on in her/his personal practice side by side with traditional methods inherited from the West and considered ‘Christian’. The Religious will have no relevant future if they do not become authentically rooted in Indian culture, though open to every culture in the world.
Challenge to Become Gurus
An important element of Indian culture is its spiritual traditions. The Vedas are older than the Bible. There are various spiritual paths like the Ways of wisdom, devotion and action. There are traditions of sannyasis, gurus and ashrams (places of spiritual effort). The yoga offers a system of psychophysical self-discipline, including postures, breathing techniques and methods of concentration, that leads its practitioners to mystical states. There are methods of sadhana (spiritual effort) that focus on art, music and dance. Peace and joy based on a deep experience of the unity of all being (advaita or non-duality) is a conscious goal.
In such a spiritual context Christianity appears as a religion based on devotion and ritual in a frame work of rigid ecclesial structures. Even the Christian Religious accept that the Hindus come to them for education, medical care or concern for the poor. But if they seek spiritual guidance they would rather go to their own gurus. This is not just because they belong to different religions. They do not see the Religious and Priests as spiritual people, much less as gurus. I do not think that even Mother Theresa would have been approached for spiritual guidance, much as she was admired for her work for the poor and the abandoned.
It is to change this situation that Abbe Monchanin and Dom Henry Le Saux started an ashram in 1950 where they hoped to highlight the mystical dimensions of Christianity and dialogue with the mystical traditions of Hinduism. After more than 50 years there are about 60 Christian ashrams. People in these ashrams make an effort to live according to the Indian spiritual way. While they are making praiseworthy efforts they are not really making any great impact on the people, Christian or other. They are still living at an experimental stage. They seem to attract more foreigners than Indians. The uncertainties of their experiment can be gauged from the fact that the first Christian ashram founded in modern times became some years ago a branch of the Camaldolese congregation of the Benedictines. Some years later, another of the early ashrams became a branch of the Australian Trappists.
Oriental traditions of sadhana (spiritual practice) are popular in the West. They are not as popular in India. Religious do go to the few ashrams for introductory courses. But a real integration still eludes them. My own impression is that most are not bold enough to plunge into the Indian spiritual tradition. A few do. But the tendency is to hold on to the Western tradition and adopt a few Indian practices, which are then superimposed on the traditional practices and play a decorative role.
Here is a real challenge for the Religious of the future in India. If they do not meet this creatively, they will not play the role played by the Religious as spiritual leaders in the tradition of the Church. They will remain good social workers. For the structural reasons I have explained above it seems unlikely that the Religious would take seriously to Indian spirituality. We have a tradition of contemplative orders in the Church. They have not been successful in India. In any case they simply import foreign ways of contemplative practice. The ashrams do a half-hearted job of promoting the Indian contemplative tradition. At the same time, I do not mean to say that becoming world-renouncing sannyasis is the only way of being Indian spiritually. I think that concern and work for the poor is a new dimension that Christian Religious brought into India. But, except for Mother Theresa and a few bold Religious in many Congregations, it has taken structural and historical forms that are detrimental to the authentic charism of Religious life.
In the area of spirituality therefore the Religious in India are facing a two-fold challenge. Those who choose a contemplative way of life must be contemplative in an authentically Indian way. Those who choose to be active in serving the materially and spiritually poor must seek to combine efficiency with spirituality.
There are a number of Religious who engage in pastoral ministries. But as long as they have not developed an Indian Christian spirituality relevant to modern times, they will only strengthen the existing ecclesial and sacramental structures and practices. Faced with the egoism and consumerism of modern culture Indian spirituality will promote a discovery of the self that experiences itself as deeply related to being, seeking integration and a better quality of life. In the history of the Church it has always been the task of the Religious to be pioneers in these areas. I feel that the Religious in India are not living up to their role and commitment.
New Kinds of Ministries
I have already remarked that Christian Religious bring to India a new dimension of actively meeting the needs of the people, specially of the poor. To use the phrases of St. Ignatius of Loyola, they seek to be ‘contemplatives in action’, ‘finding God in all things’ and peoples. They are not only present in the world, but are involved in it. But the needs of the people are likely to change from time to time. That is why, to reflect on the future of Religious life in India involves some attention to the kinds of new needs that the people are likely to face in the future. These will call for new kinds of ministries. I shall mention a few of them.
The poor will always be with us – at least in India. But ministries to the poor have been changing. We cannot give up the effort to meet the personal and material needs of poor. Mother Theresa and her sisters, for instance, are doing that. Even they are focusing on abandoned children and dying old people. I think that these needs are already new in some ways, indicating the breakdown of the family both in the nuclear and the wider sense. But beyond this the focus today is on conscientizing and empowering the poor and even struggling with them when necessary. One important dimension of this will be the promotion of universal literacy and job-oriented education programmes. Internal and economic migrants, refugees, people with AIDS are new groups that call for special attention.
Along with empowering the poor, the Religious, particularly the Women Religious, need to empower the women. The oppression of women is a common phenomenon all over the world. In India it takes the particular form of the dowry system and female infanticide. The dowry system demands that the parents of a prospective bride pay as dowry money and other property and consumer objects to the prospective bridegroom. If the family of the bridegroom feels that sufficient dowry has not been given the bride is persecuted. Some times the bride kills herself. Death may also be caused by others. The girl child then is unwanted because she is ‘expensive’ for the family. Hence the practice of aborting the female fetus or of killing the female babies. It has been suggested that some religious ‘vocations’ among girls may be due to a desire to escape the evils of the dowry system or even the inability of some families to pay a proper dowry for their daughters. While the Religious have played an important role in educating the women I do not think that they have done anything to liberate the women and the Indian society itself from the evils of the dowry system and infanticide. An area of service like this is an example where voluntary Non-governmental Organizations have stepped in, while the Religious have stuck on to traditional ministries.
Another important ministry that is needed today is that of dialogue and reconciliation. Injustices between social groups have always existed. But now-a-days the oppressed groups are struggling for liberation. This has lead to widespread social violence between races, ethnic and religious groups. In such a situation we cannot promote peace, community and harmony without promoting, not only dialogue, but also forgiveness and reconciliation. I think that the Religious can play an important role in this field. We have had examples in the past of Religious who had dedicated themselves to the redemption of captives. Some, on the contrary, had preached crusades. Now they are called to promote reconciliation through acknowledgement of guilt and forgiveness in situation of conflict and violence. In a multi-religious country like India dialogue between religious groups has become urgent. People are talking about the need for building up Inter-religious Neighbourhood Communities. Groups of Religious, individually and collectively, can form the active nucleus of such Neighbourhood groups.
The Vows
The three vows of poverty, chastity and obedience constitute traditionally the three pillars of Religious life, the fourth one being the organizational structures of the community. In the beginning the Benedictines took only one vow, that of joining the monastery and being stable in it. The three vows are a later development. But the various legal structures that have been built around the vows in the background of an European society that was feudal need change. One common interpretation of poverty is the phenomenon of allegedly poor individuals in rich communities. Similarly, chastity is protected through all kinds of taboos that do not succeed in promoting true inner freedom to love and to relate to every one. The result is hidden abuses or, more often, all sorts of compensatory behaviour where people can be exploitative and unpleasant to each other. Obedience has become an exercise of control, authority and power rather than a common commitment to search and discern the will of God in every situation. New ideas of collective responsibility leave people at the mercy of a few malformed individuals. Theses legal structures need to be changed and religious life liberated. The vows should free people and not enslave them.
Members of the Society of Jesus, for instance, take a fourth vow of special obedience to the Pope in the context of mission. Other Congregations may have other similar vows and/or promises. I think that in the context of India, in which the social inequality and discrimination of the caste system is still strong, even within the Church and Religious communities, there could be a vow of community. A vow inspires commitment and offers an occasion for reflection, conscientization and discernment. It is not an automatic solution, but a constant reminder to people to act.
Conclusion
The Religious do have a future in India. Their counter-cultural witness is needed. The poor and the marginalized too demand their services. The Indian spiritual tradition encourages it. But to be authentic and relevant they have to get out of the institutional and structural bind that they have got into due to historical circumstances. They also need to become inculturated and Indian so that they can work for the transformation of Indian society and culture from within. In a fast changing world they will have to take newer forms of ministries like dialogue and reconciliation and struggle against newer forms of poverty and exclusion.
Michael Amaladoss, S.J.,
Institute of Dialogue with Cultures and Religions,
Chennai, India.