Public displays of inclusivity by BJP leaders contrast sharply with widespread, organised violence against Christians during Christmas.
The Prime Minister condemns violence selectively, remaining silent when perpetrators are Hindu groups linked to the Sangh Parivar.
Hindu majoritarian pressure, aided by political and clerical silence, undermines Christians’ right to practice their faith without fear.
In India, every festival has now become an occasion on which the double face—or perhaps the real face—of the ruling party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, reveals itself. One might also say that every festival today has turned into an opportunity to expose the duplicity, or the true character, of contemporary Hindu society as well. This, however, presupposes a certain willingness and capacity to see. This address is directed at Hindus. It needs to be said because all non-Hindus can perceive this duplicity clearly, whereas Hindus, more often than not, refuse to acknowledge it. Worse still, they are provoked by any attempt to point it out and promptly accuse those who do so of harbouring hatred towards Hindus.
Consider this year’s Christmas. On 25 December, the Prime Minister released photographs on X (formerly Twitter) of his participation in the Christmas prayer service at Delhi’s Cathedral of the Redemption. He also conveyed greetings to Christians, expressing the hope that Christmas would spread peace and love. The images of him—hands folded, jaw clenched, face set in a grave and solemn expression—were seen across the world. Members of his cabinet issued similar statements.
Quoting these images and remarks, his supporters declared that this conclusively proved that the Prime Minister believes in taking everyone along, and that the opposition’s claim that he is hostile to Christians had been exposed as a lie. If the tallest leader of Hindus today is doing this, they argued, what more proof is required of Hindu goodwill towards Christians?
Yet at precisely the moment when the Prime Minister was receiving blessings from the chief bishop inside the cathedral, the Bajrang Dal was unleashing its cadres across the country to attack churches. The very kind of prayer in which he was participating was being violently disrupted in several parts of India. Vendors selling Santa caps and costumes were assaulted, Christmas carols were attacked, and prayer meetings were forcibly halted. From Assam to Kerala, dozens of reports and images documenting anti-Christian violence circulated widely.
Many of us were deeply disturbed by these reports. The Prime Minister, however, remained entirely unfazed by this violence, serenely receiving the blessings of Jesus. This only serves to demonstrate that ignoring the violence against Christians, our Prime Minister will continue to walk the path of peace and love. You may smash Christian heads, vandalise their churches, barge into their homes and assault them—but you cannot divert the Prime Minister from walking up to them. Entirely untouched by this violence, he will continue to position himself close to Christians. What greater proof could one possibly demand of his goodwill towards them?
Last year, too, he had arrived at the same cathedral on the same occasion. That year, too, he expressed sorrow over violence. But as Aditya Pandey noted in his article published in Frontline, he did not express sorrow over the everyday violence inflicted upon Christians in India. Instead, he chose to express grief over violence that took place in Magdeburg, Germany, during Christmas. Violence against Christians in India did not strike him as worthy of attention. Does this not suggest that violence against Indian Christians is either not serious enough or not as disruptive as certain elements would have us believe?
Condemning the violence in Germany, however, served a political purpose, as there was suspicion that Muslims were involved. Such condemnation reinforces the narrative of Muslim violence. The Prime Minister will express sorrow over violence against Christians when Muslims are suspected to be responsible, but he will maintain silence when Hindus perpetrate that violence. After all, there must surely be some legitimate reason behind Hindu violence. Hindus always react; they always have a reason to. They attack in reaction to some perceived injustice done to them in the past, or they attack to preempt any injustice from being done in the future.
This year as well, the National Council of Churches in India praised Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s presence at the Cathedral of the Redemption on Christmas Day. In its statement, it said that at a time when churches and Christians are under attack across the country, the Prime Minister’s presence in a church on Christmas could reassure Christians. It could also signal that the ruling coalition stands with them. But such a signal would be meaningful only if those responsible for violence against Christians across India were punished firmly, without qualification or excuse.
I have a grievance against Christian clergy as well. It is believed that Jesus Christ, if nothing else, gives one the courage to speak the truth. Calling truth truth, lies lies, and deception deception should not be difficult for religious people. When the Prime Minister was present in the cathedral, the chief bishop could have said in his Christmas sermon that while the Prime Minister was being welcomed in that prayer service, he could not be welcomed in the same way across different states of India, because people affiliated with his own party were attacking churches and disrupting prayers. Christmas was celebrated everywhere under the shadow of fear and violence. Can Christians in India still practice their faith without anxiety?
Can ordinary Hindus participate in Christmas in the same way that the Prime Minister does? The Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) issued a statement urging Hindus to stay away from the festival. In another statement, it said that Christians should celebrate Christmas only in their churches and in their own localities—not in Hindu areas. What does this reveal? Christians do not go into Hindu localities to celebrate Christmas. They celebrate it in their homes, their churches, and among their own people. It is Hindus who go to churches to attack them. On Christmas, ISKCON members stand outside churches chanting ‘Hare Ram Hare Krishna’.
Non-Hindus remain astonished by this: why do Hindus gather in front of their places of worship, or even enter them, to raise cries of ‘Jai Shri Ram’? Have Hindus suddenly run out of temples? Put plainly, this suggests that Hindus no longer wish to allow people of other religions to practice their faith freely, or to live in peace.
Some will object that this is an oversimplification. That in such a vast country one cannot draw general conclusions about Hindus on the basis of a handful of incidents. They will also argue that it is wrong to hold the Prime Minister responsible. Has he not proven the purity of his intentions by going to a church?
But the Prime Minister’s church visit served merely as a cover for the anti-Christian hatred and violence of the BJP and the RSS. Even after the circulation of his photographs, the VHP issued yet another statement warning Christians. The Prime Minister did not even find it necessary to respond to the appeal made by those who had hosted him. After all this, anyone who insists that there is no organised intent behind the violence against Christians during Christmas is either naïve or dishonest.
(Views expressed are personal)
Apoorvanand is a teacher and a writer.
