Gospel Praxis for Poumai town churches

Gospel praxis for PNBA’s town churches!

Perhaps as the most brilliant thinker the Church has ever seen, apostle Paul, with degrees, they say, equal to our three Ph.Ds set out as a missionary to the Gentiles, the untouchables for the Jews. His harvest among the Gentiles was critiqued by some Jewish Christians as having compromised the sanctity of the right belief. Even in the face of Peter’s withdrawal for a while, Paul stood his ground because he firmly believed that Jesus Christ as the Lord of all is drawing people from every tribe and tongue to Himself and to each other. Later on wrting to the Christians at Ephesus, Paul underscores that through the cross one new humanity was created with both Jews and non-Jews. Racial inclusivenss in the church was controversial, yet so rooted in Pauline theology that the first Church Council at Jerusalem ( Acts 15) was a deliberation on the subject matter.

Throughout centuries missionaries sailed for months to reach the unreached with the Gospel because they believe that Jesus is the Lord of all. Whether it was William Carey or William Pettigrew the message of the cross was that which propelled them to move out of their comfort zone: the food habit, the language, the people, etc. Had their love not go beyong their own tribe, We Poumai Nagas would still be pagans. Had they waited all their own tribe members to convert first they would have never moved out to come to India or Manipur. Had Paul waited for all Jews to first turn to Christ, Asia or Europe would not have church then. However, now that the world is connected better by roads or air, it’s not just the missionaries who moved beyond their own tribe members; ideas as well as people travel far and wide. It is for such reason Poumais and other tribe members establish church even beyond their villages.

Poumai theologians as well as church leaders need to re-examine the Gospel praxis with regard to establishing town churches exclusively for the Poumais. Town and cities generally have different ethnic groups. Some groups profess to worship Christ, whereas others may worship someone else or even none. For example, in Imphal there are Meeteis and Kukis and others. Does not the Gospel praxis demand that Christians, or at least the Baptist, from different tongues and tribes worship together just like the Jews-Romans-Greeks worship together in Rome in the first century? The very definition of church is at stake if it is not a place where expression of reconcilliation between man and God, and man and man is not visible. After all Christ, the cornerstone of the churh, came to bridge the gap between God and man, and man and man. Moreover, churches established on racial lines do not provide adequate mechanism for evangelism to unreached ethnic groups. In Imphal whether it’s the Baptist churches of Poumais or Tangkhul, hardly anyone evangelises the Meeteis. It’s those who belong to Gospel for Asia or Laymen who reach out to the Meeteis. But why should Poumai churches and others withhold the message of the cross from the Meeteis? Can a church that registers membership only to one ethnic group be truly called a church? It’s not sufficient to say the church is open to all; a church must actively work to bring in all, making institutional reformation wherever necessary to bring others in.

Chrsitians are not born, but made. Each generation will give birth to non-Christians, who will then need to be brought to Christ individually. Even if all the Poumais ministers serve only the Poumais, it will be unending. For example, the Jacobites of Kerala as a church have been working among the Keralites for almost two thousand years, but it is still an inward looking church, with no mission engagement outside of the Keralites. Poumai churches can also be inward looking for centuries if we think of transforming the Poumai first. Poumai town churches must be broad enough to simultaneously work among its own members as well as others.