Can Secularism Build a Civilization?

Can Secularism Build a Civilization? By CP Op-Ed Contributor Joseph D'Souza| Tue 26 Jun 2018 7:21 EDT Dr. Joseph D'Souza is the Moderating Bishop of the Good Shepherd Church and Associated Ministries of India. Last week, I attended the 2018 Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) in Jerusalem. Around 2,000 archbishops, bishops and Anglican church leaders from North and South America, Europe, Africa, Asia and Australia came together to pray and consider the future of the global Anglican church. It was the largest international gathering of Anglican leaders in over 50 years — yet there was one conspicuous absence: the 105th archbishop of Canterbury, Most Rev. Justin Welby. Welby's absence is the result of the Anglican church's struggle with an issue that has become the leading cause for disagreement in Christianity: same-sex marriage. It's the reason why hundreds of Anglican bishops in the southern hemisphere — who hold on to the traditional biblical view of marriage — have strongly differed with many of their more liberal counterparts in the West. Still, as important as it might be, the issue of same-sex marriage is only the tip of the iceberg. At heart, the real question Christians all over the world must answer today is whether or not they will hold on to the authority of Scripture and the gospel the church has historically believed in. As an outsider, I've observed how the West — and America specifically — has been steadily inching toward secularism, which is the absence of God in life. The meteoric rise of the religiously unaffiliated over the past few decades combined with social changes such as the legalization of same-sex marriage across all 50 states and the emergence of forced tolerance have augured the end of a "Christian" America. Though it might still be some time away, the American church is now facing the crude reality many Christians across the southern hemisphere know well: becoming a minority religion. Here's the thing though — this is nothing new for Christians. From the very beginning, Christianity has been well acquainted with being a minority. Jesus gave the first believers — about 120 disciples — the job of changing the world. This small community believed Jesus and took him at his word, which was no easy task. The cultural problems and challenges they confronted were similar, if not greater, to ours. They had to contend with the widespread breakdown of the family structure, serious moral decline, a hedonistic lifestyle and religious fundamentalism of its day. If you want to see what real moral decline looks like, open a book on first-century Rome and read about the unbridled paganism, rampant sexual immorality, infanticide and slavery of the Roman Empire. Yet, even when facing such overwhelming odds, the early church did not lose their vision of the Kingdom of God. The early Christians painstakingly developed a counterculture within a hostile environment dominated by despotic Roman emperors such as Nero, who was bent on eradicating this start-up religious movement. No matter who was Caesar in Rome, they honored Jesus Christ as Lord of all. They believed in the resurrection, and in his second coming. And no matter what the culture around them said, they remained committed to the truth in the God-inspired Scriptures, especially when it pertained to issues such as the biblical definition of marriage. They believed the Kingdom of God that Jesus had inaugurated was Spirit-empowered. So, when people accused the early Christians of turning the world upside down, it wasn't a cliché. They were living upside-down lives in a society that was putting immense pressure on them to conform to the culture. Contrary to the short-sightedness that plagues many Western churches today, the early Christians had a long view of the Kingdom of God, and a holistic understanding of Christian discipleship. Their obedience literally changed the world and the flow of history. Coming from a region in the world where Christians face dire persecution, I am disheartened to see such a large group of Christians in the West passively accept the decline of the church and its life-changing impact on society. I find it puzzling when the concept of a post-Christian Europe or United States is stated as an inevitable reality, when history knows that by and large Christianity built the modern West and paved the way for the individual democratic rights they enjoy today. Yes, secularism might be the new religion on the block, but we can't forget it hasn't proved it can build a civilization or a culture capable of holding society together over generations. This is because secularism neither cares for the family unity nor the divine. The civilizations that have survived over millennia — from China to India, the Middle East and the Judeo-Christian world — hold a strong belief in God, no matter which deity they believe in. They know meeting the need of the spiritual is a given factor of life. And these cultures by the same token believe in the traditional family unit as the foundation of society. The tragedy of the Western world is thinking it can survive without its Judeo-Christian foundation, without a commitment to God or the traditional family unit. So, what's the answer for Christians in the West today? It's simple: get back to your roots. Get back to your roots in the timeless gospel of Jesus. Cultural movements come and go. The Kingdom of God will continue forever. Be compassionate to those struggling with same-sex attraction and reject homophobia; Jesus loves them intensely and knows how to minister to them. But stay true to the radical, holistic calling of following Jesus. Jesus' time-tested formula for finding life and happiness is to lose it all for him. It has delivered throughout the centuries more than any other formula, and still delivers today. Most Rev. Joseph D'Souza is the archbishop of the Anglican Good Shepherd Church and Associated Ministries of India. He also serves as the president of the All India Christian Council. He is the recipient of numerous awards and accolades for his work as a human rights activist.

Christian Council Appeals for Peace and Harmony among the Communities in Shillong

Christian Council Appeals for Peace and Harmony among the Communities in Shillong Hyderabad, 7 June, 2018 The All India Christian Council expresses its heartfelt pain and anguish on the recent events and violence in Shillong. Christian Council urges the Christian community in Meghalaya as well as other communities to find solutions to the problems and issues through peaceful dialogue rather than resort to violence. Violence only begets more violence. Opponents of the Church in India are already misusing these incidents for propaganda as a case of Christian majority community attacking Dalit Sikhs. The Church across India is deeply in solidarity with all marginalized groups including Dalit Sikhs. As the nation is being actively polarized based on caste, religions, and tribes it is important that Christians everywhere demonstrate that they resort to peaceful methods of resolving complex social problems. The All India Christian Council at numerous occasions worked to find peaceful solutions in the midst of social conflict and will work with all parties to bring peace in the region. The All India Christian Council is a registered inter-denominational body of over 2,000 member groups working with local, state and the national government in the areas of development, protection, and education of the girl child, anti-human trafficking, and religious freedom and protection for people of all faiths. The All India Christian Council takes initiative in communal peacemaking and reconciliation. It has associate members who are leaders of other faiths. The All India Christian Council works to uphold the integrity and unity of India and its Constitution. Released by: Bishop Paothang Haokip North East India Coordinator – All India Christian Council (9440061775) Rev. Madhu Chandra Singh Administrator – All India Christian Council (9100952490)

INDIA: Acquittal of Pramod Muthalik and others is a shocking travesty of justice

A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission INDIA: Acquittal of Pramod Muthalik and others is a shocking travesty of justice On March 13 2018, the Third Judicial Magistrate at the First Class Court in Mangalore acquitted Pramod Muthalik, and 25 other members of the Sri Rama Sene of the 2009 assault of several women in a Amnesia, a Mangalore pub. The Sri Ram Sene is a right-wing Hindutva group that has previously been involved in incidents of moral policing in Mangalore. The incident, which took place on January 24, 2009, involved women being slapped and dragged out from the pub by their hair; the assailants, who were allegedly members of the group, also verbally abused the women as “loose”. The assault was captured on camera, and the existence of video evidence was considered as irrefutable proof of the accused’s guilt. Yet, over nine years after the incident, and after Muthalik publicly admitted to it being a “big mistake”, he and his henchmen have been absolved of guilt in the case. The failure to convict cannot be laid solely at the feet of the prosecutor or the Magistrate; instead, it can be attributed to the scare tactics used to dissuade witnesses from testifying, and the lack of protection for the victims of the assault. None of the victims of the assault testified in the case, with sources claiming that they were too afraid to testify against their attackers. While 30 men were involved in the attack, only 26 were actually in court during the trial; two were deceased, while the other two were absconding. Muthalik, in the meantime, launched the Karnataka Unit of the Shiv Sena in January this year, aiming to contest about 50 seats in the upcoming State elections. This move has attracted suspicion as convicted persons are not permitted to stand for election under the Representation of People Act. A large part of Muthalik’s acquittal was the presumably, the exclusion of the video from admissible evidence; since the judgment passed by the Magistrate is presently unavailable, one can only speculate as to why the video was deemed inadmissible. The likely reason is that, while videos are admissible as “electronic evidence” under Section 65 of the Evidence Act, their authenticity must be proven by a competent witness, preferably the maker of the video [Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer, AIR 2015 SC180]. By creating an extra-legal and extra-judicial culture of fear, Muthalik and his followers were able to subvert the legal system, ensuring that witnesses were too afraid to authenticate the contents of the video while validating hooliganism and assault in the name of ‘culture’. While the two main factors in his acquittal were the inadmissibility of the video, and the refusal of witnesses to testify, the latter could be due to the political power and fear that Muthalik and his men command in the area, along with the stigma and fear that victims of violence internalise. Prior to his founding of the Ram Sene, Muthalik worked closely with the Bajrang Dal and the Shiv Sena; in the aftermath of the 2009 attack, Muthalik’s group did not lay low, instead threatening to attack unmarried couples on Valentine’s Day. While incidents of moral policing are not uncommon in India, this acquittal has only emboldened fundamentalists to indulge in violence against citizens, particularly women. It must be noted that in the aftermath of the attack, Muthalik was given patronage by the BJP in 2014, only being dropped after the national leadership objected. The lackadaisical investigation into the attacks, and the rise in such attacks across the country, shows that the government is not interested in combating violence against women, moral policing, or religious fundamentalism. Nor has any political party actively evinced an interest in this; while the BJP was in power during the attack, the Congress Party formed a government in the state soon after, and, has been in power for the pendency of the trial. This case puts the spotlight back on the crumbling and ineffective system of public prosecution in India. The great power wielded by the prosecutor to prove a case is usually destroyed by ineffective investigation and corruption by the police. Many a time, the police and prosecution are in collusion with each other to ensure that the accused persons is acquitted or conversely, an innocent person is framed and found guilty. Majoritarian and populist demands are essentialised by the police and the prosecution resulting in insufficient evidence and the failure to prove a case. In cases of sexual assault and gender-based violence, these majoritarian demands take the form of existing patriarchal norms and structures, internalised by law enforcement officials and the prosecution as well as defence lawyers. The Supreme Court of India in the judgment in Justice K.S. Puttusamy & Anr. v. UOI. & Ors ruled that the right to privacy is a fundamental right. The right to privacy is the right to bodily integrity and human dignity and therefore in its basic form it is the right against moral policing, the right to partake in ‘wine culture’ and behave with ‘loose morals’ if one so wishes. The likes of the Sri Ram Sene and Pramod Muthalik must be prevented from threatening and attacking hapless individuals, usually women, going about their lives, and attempting to live with the freedom they are entitled to, as human beings. The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) stands in solidarity with the victims of moral policing, and with everyone who is demanding that the verdict is appealed by the State Government. The judgment of the trial court must be swiftly appealed and if a higher court finds that the prosecution, the police and lower judiciary failed in its duty by bypassing due process, they must be duly penalised. The acquittal of Muthalik and his men is an unfortunate validation of a violent patriarchy that is so endemic in India and every effort must be expended to cull it. # # # The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) works towards the radical rethinking and fundamental redesigning of justice institutions in order to protect and promote human rights in Asia. Established in 1984, the Hong Kong based organisation is a Laureate of the Right Livelihood Award, 2014. Read this Statement online