In the Shadow of the Mahatma: Bishop V

In the Shadow of the Mahatma: Bishop V. S Azariah and the Travails of Christianity in British India. By Susan Billington Harper. Grand Rapids, Michigan and Cambridge, UK: William B Eerdmans and Curzon Press, 2000. 462 pp.

Harper's book, published in the 'Studies in the History of Christian Missions' series, is based on her Oxford doctoral thesis. She evaluates the legacy of a neglected figure, Bishop Azarariah (1874 - 1945), India's first Anglican prelate. As her title suggests, Azariah's role in colonial India was always in the 'shadow' of Mahatma Gandhi's. Azariah's main interest was spiritual nurture and evangelism, so any comparison with Gandhi, a major political actor, is problematic. Azariah's political activism was less central to his lifelong project, to make India Christian and Christian India more Indian! This review can not do justice to Azariah's achievements. Not only was he the sole Indian on the Synod of Bishops from his consecration in 1912 until his death, he also attended and participated in significant international meetings and presided over the National Christian Council (from 1928). He hated denominationalism, since 'different caste groups were baptized into different denominations' (p 235).

Politics and church-state relations surface at several points in this excellent and detailed monograph. Azariah's consecration raised at least two political issues. First, the government, which had to ratify episcopal appointments and the creation of new dioceses, did not want the proliferation of either. More bishops would compromise the official policy of non-interference in religious affairs (p 125). Second, at this time, Indians were rarely allowed power over British personnel. Azariah's diocese, however, would contain missionaries and colonial officials, over whom he would exercise some authority (spiritual if not administrative in the latter case) (p 127). Harper suggests that the Anglicans in India found establishment more a hindrance than help in pursuing their agenda. They often circumvented legalities to achieve their goals. Azariah's own appointment was irregular - legally an assistant bishop - he was given full diocesan responsibilities and a vote in the Synod (p 115; p 125). His consecration 'opened up rifts within the established church, within the British, Indian and Madras governments, and within … Indian Christianity (p 137). At disestablishment (1930), Azariah's position was regularized.

In the wider political arena, Azariah was once Gandhi's ally, once his 'enemy number one' (attributed to Gandhi, p 7). In opposing separate electorates for Christians and other minorities, Azariah joined Gandhi. Christians would gain nothing from stressing difference from fellow Indians, or by becoming a 'communal body with self-centred, inward-focused political ambitions' (p 303). Azariah, like Gandhi, detested the perpetuation of communal rivalry. He wanted a 'unified, though culturally pluralistic, Indian nation'. It was on the issue of conversion that he clashed with Gandhi, who disliked the targeting of scheduled castes, which he believed de-nationalized them. Azariah, who did much to promote indiginization in his Dornakal Diocese, argued that Indian Christians were no less Indian than other Indians were (p 339). Here, Harper tends to echo Azariah's complacency. Christians in India are still accused of being de-Indianized, of pro-Western sympathies and of causing political dissension among targeted 'people groups' in certain areas where separatist movements are demanding independence. Azariah championed 'people group' evangelism (p 281f). Conversion, too, remains a very contentious issue in contemporary India. Azariah, though, tried to develop an authentically Indian Christianity while always 'defending a universal Christian vision' (p 241). Some Indians see the latter as part of a political program, to eventually undermine India's cultural and religious heritage. Harper may be too pro-Azariah here to fully critique this aspect of his legacy.

Clinton Bennett,