AN UNHOLY TRINITY:
MIXING RELIGION, SOCIETY AND POLITICS:

- Haulianlal Guite, IAS

We highlanders are a strange lot.
We steal, we loot, we gamble, we cheat, we hoard, we bribe and take bribes – and then liberally donate this illegal money to our churches, who gladly accept and bless them. All of us are guilty in this practice – politicians, officers, officials, churchmen, preachers, staffs, businessmen, sellers and buyers, everyone. We also drink like kings, eat like pigs, lie like con artists, do drugs, have unprotected and illicit sex, and curse like the devil – and yet with the same body and senses, shout praises to the Lord like the good sheep we pretend to be on Sunday mornings. Again, every social group is just as guilty as the next.
Our society is, for example, the proud number 1 or 2 in the percentage of drug and alcohol abusers in India, among other sterling records. In the very same vein, we proudly declare ourselves to be Christians, with many of these same vile practitioners ready – like Peter – to draw the sword to “defend” the name of Christ. Again, a hymnal or two will always be heard in our social functions, a pastor will invariably come to bless the gathering, the Lord’s name will be piously uttered in the same breadth, so much so that one confuses whether he is attending a social or a religious function.
I do not know what outsiders will think on seeing such apparent contradictions, but I for one wishes to remove what I see to be a particularly malevolent practice that has been increasingly invading our society, namely: the church invasion of our social organizations. It is this pernicious, cancerous disease which I intend to address here.

What the Issue Is

Insofar as I understand it (correct me if I’m wrong), our social and philanthropic organizations, such as the Zomi Council (and its associated branches like the ZSF or the ZYA), the SSPP, YPA, and our other social festivals like Zomi Namni, are worldly, even nationalistic, concerns, that attempt to correct the political and social ills our highlands is beset with. These are not religious bodies in the sense that they do not belong to any particular religion or denomination, and in the sense that they do not propagate the doctrines and practices of any particular faith. They are civic bodies pure and simple, and they belong to highlanders regardless of what faith or doctrine or denomination or even religion a highlander professes.
In other words, a Baptist, a Presbyterian, a Sabbatarian, an Adventist, a Catholic, a member of the Church of Christ, even people of other faiths, such as being a Jew or a Hindu, so long as they are highlanders (like being a Hindu Zomi for example), can be a member of the Zomi Council or of its associated institutions. Precisely because these organizations have nothing to do with what one religiously believes – but rather everything to do with the fact that we are highlanders borne from the same blood, regardless of the faith we profess.

And yet, I have witnessed that these social organizations are increasingly caught in the denominational wave that catapulted particularly since 2009 when the centennial arrival of Christianity was celebrated. Our social functions organized by these civic bodies, even our festivals like Zomi Namni and Kut, and the World Zomi Conferences, are now so integrated with religious practices that there are times when I wonder whether the function I am attending is a religious or a social one.
Take a look at the 3rd World Zomi Convention for example. With due respect to the organizers, I think they will agree with me that the conference attempts to address a purely political (or broadly social) concern rather than a religious one.
The conference addresses the need for political freedom and autonomy rather than religious freedom (which we are already guaranteed under the Constitution of India anyway). Yet, while being a social function, as I look at the missives, I was shocked to find an entire “worship department” being part of the conference. Apparently our leaders find it most fitting to include religion within our politics.

Should this really be the case? There are two points to consider.

First, highlanders like you and me are similar in that we have the same blood, but I guarantee that most readers of this article will belong to all types of faiths believing all types of things.
I am a member of the Church of Christ having my own unique set of beliefs and practices that may contrast greatly with yours; a fellow may be a Baptist, again with his own doctrines and values; another may be a Catholic who bows before Mary, prays to the saints and rejects every non-Catholic as heretics; another still may be a Sabbatarian who worships on the Sabbath and thinks everyone who worship on Sunday will be damned; and yet still, another will be an atheist, an agnostic, or simply irreligious. Given our population explosion and our diversification into the cities and to all kinds of places around the globe, pursuing all manner of jobs, it is entirely possible a Zomi may be someone of another faith too – like a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindu, a Buddhist, or even a Confucian.
Therefore, the only thing we have in common is not our faith, for we have so many faiths; but rather, our highland blood. The fact that we are all tribesmen, descendants of Zo.

Because of such multitudinous varieties that together make up our highland society, it is entirely possible that our social organizations are peopled by individuals belonging to such different faiths. The President may be a Baptist, the General Secretary a Catholic, the finance secretary a Jew, and so on. Given this, is it really a wise matter to include religious practices in our functions and as part of our organizational set up? For once we decide to include religion, many uncomfortable questions will rise. Whose religious practices should we include anyway, and whose must we exclude? Won’t the inclusion of some practices mean the exclusion of others?
When a Christian song is sung in social functions for example, a Jew among us will automatically not like it. Why should he, he does not belong to that faith after all? He will, indeed, oppose it will the full force of his heart and soul. But is this SSPP (for example) a Christian organization? When a Christian song is sung with instrumental music in such functions, members of the Church of Christ cannot participate in it. Why? Because it is against their faith. But is this ZYA (for example) a Baptist organization, so that spiritual songs have to be sung with instruments? When a Presbyterian pastor prays, a Catholic cannot say “amen” to it. Reason? Because to him the pastor is a heretic. But is this a Presbyterian organization, where a Presbyterian needs to pray? And if a Unitarian attends a Baptist function where the function is blessed “in the name of the father, of the son, and of the holy spirit”, the Unitarian cannot accept it. So why include such blessing then, since after all the YPA (for example) has nothing to do with Pentecostalism? And so on.

The point of pointing out our contradicting differences in religious doctrines and practices is to show that if religion is included in our social organizations, the religious minorities will inevitably find themselves sidestepped and sidelined, someone’s sentiments will invariably be offended, and the function will exclude some practice or the other. Not that the leaders of the civic bodies are to be blamed, but the system itself, for allowing some religious practices in the first place. We will object, would we not, if the Deputy Commissioner unfurls the national flag on 15th August by uttering the name of Ram or of Krishna?
We object, do we not, against the attempts by some to enforce a uniform civil code on us. And why? Because we wish the Indian Government to keep religion separated from our socio-political life.

So why must we adopt a double standard when it comes to our own festivals, functions, and bodies?
Does the Baptist church or the Church of Christ, or any religious body for that matter, any role to play in such worldly institutions like the Zomi Council? Is not the business of the church to attend to our spiritual needs rather than address our political worries? Did not Christ himself separated the church from the state when he said, “give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s”? (Mark 12:17).

None of what I say should be interpreted as criticisms of any particular church (I do that in other contexts; not here). All we are saying here is that no church (be it the Baptist, the Presbyterian, the Catholic, the Pentecostal, the Adventist, the Church of Christ, or some other) has any role to play in these social organizations, because these are not church organizations that belong to a particular faith, but rather to highlanders of all faiths regardless of their faith (and even to the faithless).  
All denominations and religions will best equally be treated by our organizations if no church (no matter how big or how small) is given any role to play in our social functions. If the Baptist church or any other wishes to do something, let them do it in their own churches, or let them organize their own functions where they can preach and sing whatever they choose to.

Second point to note is that everything has their own place and time, even as the author of Ecclesiastes himself notes. Is a social function like the Zomi Nami Celebrations, really the place to sing “Amazing Grace”? Must we not sing patriotic, nationalistic songs instead – unless we are saying the Zomis as a nation are being saved by Christ? But has the kingdom of Christ anything to do with earthly nations anymore? Did not the apostle Paul write to the Colossians, “Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all” (Colossians 3:11). Did Christ save you because you are a Zomi – or because you are a sinner in need of a redeemer? How then can nations at all be relevant to Christ? Nations belong to the world, to Caesar, and must be given over to the authorities of the world – not to Christ. Because the kingdom of Christ shares nothing in common with the kingdom of men. The two should not be mixed.

In any case, if our social functions are to be dominated by religious songs, where must social songs be sung? Where must one sing “Siamsa, Piaksa, Luahsa” or “Maisantui”? In the churches? God forbid! Are not social functions the forum for our patriotic artists to present their songs? Must not religious songs be sung in religious places? If the church (and which church?) were to encroach on secular, civic territory, where will our non-religious songs be performed? Would not other churches with whom it disagree, feel outcast?

Remember that the purpose of such social gatherings is for us to fulfill our social duties – whether to inspire us to patriotism, to call upon us to do our civic duties, to make us aware of the political and social realities of the world, etc. These social gatherings are used for all kinds of things except one – the religious purpose. They are decidedly not religious gatherings; therefore, the churches do not have any role to play here. For religious gatherings, we already have so many chapels anyway, so many religious seminars and crusades without number.

What we are saying, in short, is that social functions are not the appropriate places for denominations and religions. The author of Ecclesiastes himself noted that “everything has its own place and time” (Ecclesiastes 3:1ff; paraphrased). There are places where one can preach their own versions of the gospels, their own doctrinally-inspired songs, their own customs and doctrinal values. Functions like the Zomi Namni Festival and the SSPP Meet or the Kut festival are not such places.
Such places are meant for social matters, not doctrinal ones. As I like to often say, a pastor blessing a social function is no different from someone playing football with a tuxedo on, and singing a gospel song in such places is no less different from singing it in a laboratory experimenting on mice. None of them are bad or evil on their own, but mixing them together in such ways in such places are less than appropriate, that is all.

What The Solutions Are

Because of the two aforementioned reasons, in all our social gatherings like SSPP meetings and meets, what if we outlaw the following practices from such events:

1. We must no longer say the Lord’s Prayer (some denominations endorse it, others don’t, but the organizations are not religious organizations);
2. We must no longer sing Christian songs ever again (there may be Jews or people of other faith in our midst, so their religious views must be respected – unless we claim YPA or SSPP is an exclusively Christian rather than an exclusively highland organization);
3. We must no longer ask a church pastor or preacher to bless these gatherings;
4. We must no longer allow artists to sing gospel songs, but sing rather other songs appropriate to each gathering;
5. We must not allow any religious officials (anyone employed by the churches, including pastors and preachers) to sit as board members in any of our social organizations in order to level the playing field for all faiths;
6. We must remove every reference to religion and doctrinally-inspired religious ideals in the constitutions, notifications and circulars of our social organizations, and replace it, insofar as possible, with the word “secular” and the promotion of secular ideals (neutrality and non-interference in all religious affairs);
7. We must no longer mix our own brand of religion or denomination and our own pet doctrines and practices with any social organization at all. Never again.

The proposals here do not contradict any article of any sect or faith. It is in full accord with the Baptist creed, it does not violate any Presbyterian doctrine, it does not go against the teachings of the Church of Christ, or of any other denomination or religion for that matter. It is the full practice of secularism in the social sphere, pure and simple. As I will demonstrate in another article, such secularism is inherent in the teachings of Christ himself, and forms one of the bases of New Testament Christianity.

For now, all we have to know is this: our social organizations are not religious organizations and our social functions are not religious functions, so no church has any place in either, therefore all religious themes must be outlawed from them. Not to do so would be to give to God the things that are Caesar’s – something that directly contradicts a basic tenet of our Lord Jesus Christ.