Census Data of 2011: Christians in Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu has a considerable Christian population. Of the total 2.78 crore Christians counted in India in 2011, 44 lakh are in Tamil Nadu, where they form 6.12 percent of the population. Their number and share in Tamil Nadu is the highest of all major States except the adjoining Kerala. Tamil Nadu and Kerala account for more than 1 crore of Christians in the country.

Christians in Tamil Nadu are spread across nearly all the districts, but their presence is relatively higher in a few pockets, which are also spread across different parts of the State. Their highest presence is in the south, particularly in Kanniyakumari. This district alone accommodates one-fifth of all Christians in the State.

The share of Christians in the State as well as in many of the districts has been rising slowly for several decades. But their growth has been very rapid in Kanniyakumari, where their share in the population rose from 30.7 percent in 1921 to 34.7 percent in 1951 and has risen to 46.8 percent since then. There has been an accretion of 2.4 percentage points during the last decade alone.

Besides Kanniyakumari, the growth of Christians has been remarkable in Kancheepuram and Thiruvallur districts that surround Chennai city. These two earlier formed the single district of Chengalpattu; the share of Christians in the undivided Chengalpattu district has risen from 2.35 percent in 1951 to 6.35 percent in 2011.

The number and share of Muslims in Tamil Nadu is almost similar to the Christians. But they are spread even more uniformly across the State. Their highest concentration is in Ramanathapuram, where they form 15.4 percent of the population.

Tamil Nadu is one of the rare States where Christians have grown faster than the Muslims in the period following Independence. Between 1951 and 2011, the number of Christians has risen from 14.3 to 44.2 lakh, while that of Muslims has grown from 14.4 to 42.3 lakh. In the same period, the share of Muslims in the population has grown from 4.79 to 5.86 percent and of the Christians from 4.74 to 6.12 percent.

Tamil Nadu is also unusual in having several districts and many more taluks with considerable presence of both Christians and Muslims. In general, the areas of high presence of these two communities tend to be different. In conformity with that trend, the share of Muslims in Kanniyakumari—where Christians have a very high and rapidly growing presence—is low.

(The rest of the article can be read in the blog of Centre for Policy Research.) 

God and Government: Chapter 4

This chapter is written by David McIlroy, a practising barrister. It is titled " The role of government is classical Christian political thought".

One of the points the author underscores, drawn from ancient Christian thinkers, is that Government is accountable to God. And

Another point the author underscores, as the previous authors have also stated, is that Government is limited. He goes to say that "it is now almost universally recognized in Christian thought that the Church's role is not to take over or dominate government either." This I understand to be saying that Christians are not in favour of a theocratic government.

What rather surprises me is the assertion that even in ancient times, Christian theologians asserted a limited form of government. However, it seems to the present form of limited government and the ancient form of limited government could have been different.

Christian political thinkers also make a distinction between state's law and church's morality. Or rather difference between 'shallow justice' and 'deep justice. The state may legislate certain form of moral norms, but this is not necessarily going to be similar to that of the church. The church may consider certain action immoral, but this necessarily cannot be legislated as illegal. So state's law can be termed as 'shallow justice' because it does not touch upon all aspects of ethical issues; and the church's law may be termed as 'deep justice' because it goes much deeper than that of the state.

The state in its legislation must take into consideration the common good. It must see that it's resources are distributed towards meeting the need of the poor too.

God and Government: Chapter 2

This is the second chapter of God and Government. The summary of the first chapter is here. The second chapter is titled "The nature and role of government in the Bible". It is written by Julian Rivers, who is a professor of Jurisprudence at Bristol University.

The Bible is ambivalent about government. Jesus says, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's". But what is Caesar's and what is God's? The answer is not clear. But what is clear is that God is the ruler of all; and government is the product of human activity, as the previous chapter underscored. 1 Peter 2:13-17 and Rom 13:1-7 make it clear that government has legitimacy and therefore one must submit to government's authority. Of course this does not mean that the government is the ultimate authority and that whatever government says is good. There are clear examples when what government says is bad. But the point is established that government has legitimate authority upon people.

The government authority, however, is limited. It is so because there are other parallel authorities. Other authorities like the church, family and the individual's autonomy limit government's authority.

There are four areas in which the government's authority is limited. "equality, legality, diffusion and accountability". What do they mean?

Bible underscores equality of all humans. The Bible thus talks about equal distribution of land and other resources. But does it endorse an egalitarian distribution? The Bible provides a devastating critique against hoarding of material possession by the rich at the expense of the extreme poor, but does not provide answer how equal distribution could be realised. There is practical room for government not to enforce egalitarian distribution of wealth. After all such a government is not really feasibly, so to speak.

Government does not function independent of its own law. It is subject to law. This way its authority is limited.

Government also diffuse powers to local institutions. This limits government's authority. Israel was a tribal federation, not an absolute monarchy. The prophets were able to critique the king because they were not co-opted into the king's court though there were prophets who are patronised by the king. Too much of centralisation of power should be limited.

Government should be accountable. This is to be achieved by different departments being accountable to one another. Judiciary, executive and so on should be able accountable to one another.

God and Government: Chapter 1

This is a summary of the book God and Government, edited by Nick Spencer and Jonathan Chaplin and published by SPCK in 2009. I shall try to summarise the chapters as the author underscores in the text. And then whenever possible, I shall give my own comment.

The first chapter is titled " Government as an ambiguous power" written by Nigel Wright, who served as the Principal of Spurgeon College, London.

The author argues that the Church should maintain a critical distance from political institutions. This way the church would be able to critique the institution whenever required. However, an individual Christian must be part of the political institution as he or she feels called. Elijah was a prophet who maintained a critical distance from the political office of the day, and he spoke the voice of the one in heaven. He carried the 'official' voice from God. However, Obadiah was an individual who worked as part of the institution in the king's court. By working this way, he was able to secure a safe place for so many faithful folks. As led by the Spirit and one's conscience, Christian must find one's place.

God created the world and the humans. Since these are God's creations, they are good. However, something has gone wrong. It is important to bear this tension in mind as one looks at human institutions. Whether it is government or institutions, they are the product of human activities. Given that humans bear the tension of being good and bad, the product of human imaginations and activities will bear this tension. Through human cooperation, laws and agencies to foster human well-being arise. They are there to pursue human well-being. But because humans bear the tension of being good and bad, as an individual and as a collective body, our activities -- individual or collective, will not necessarily always be bad or good. On one hand government will be good; on the other hand government need not be good. The tendency to work for the enrichment of those in power, not taking into the interest of all the members of the society will surface over and over again. This is where the Church has a critical role to play.

The Church has a redeeming role to play. The government has a role to maintain stability and order. The government may advance criminal justice by using coercion and also develop institutions for promoting peace. This is essential. However, this aspect of preserving the order cannot redeem humans. But what this allows is that it gives the Church that peaceful environment to proclaim Christ and his redemptive work. This also serves as an important point in the separation of church and state. The church is free from the clutch of the state, and it is free to maintain a critical distance. At the same time, the Church does not have a grip over the function of the state though it may influence. The Church also does not seek any special privilege that people of other religions do not enjoy. This is about loving the neighbours!

Muhammed Ali is Dead

Muhammed Ali, perhaps the greatest boxer is no more. Whether you are the greatest boxer or an amateur boxer, you are going to die, and so am I. Great boxer, small boxer, death equalises all. Death is truly a great leveller of all players. Sad as it may be when dead occurs to our beloved ones, it is an event that we all must face. No one can bluff death.  

Ali became a Muslim at one point of his life. His daughter says that he did try to convert people to Islam when situation allowed him.  This is not surprising because Islam is a monotheistic religion, like Judaism and Christianity. A monotheistic religion will teach that there is only one God, and all other gods are not worthy of worship. And therefore a monotheistic religion will invite all other people to come to worship this one true living God. When Ali tried to share about Islam, he did what he thought was the right thing to do.

Now the question is: Is this the one being called the true living God truly the true living God? How does one come to know of this truth?

Islam relies on the testimony of prophet Muhammed that the Allah as the Quran underscores is that true living God. If this testimony is untrue, then the whole belief will collapse. Christianity has a different take on the matter. Christianity relies on the testimony of the disciples of Jesus Christ. Mathew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter and others. So Islam relies on one testimony and Christianity relies on the testimonies of more number of people. The testimonies of the disciples say that they saw Jesus being raised from the dead. And being raised from the dead, Jesus is the Lord of all; Jesus is the one true God who deserves our worship.

Well, given that the testimonies are based on the account of so many people, I would say that Christianity is more reliable than Islam.

All of us will die eventually. If there is life beyond this world, how important it is to listen to the reliable testimonies and make decisions wisely. Even if one believes that there is no life beyond this life, it is wise to listen to the testimonies of those who say that there is more than this life here on this earth. After all, if there is indeed more than this life, and one has not taken due effort to listen to the testimonies and so one has missed out this fact of life, then it is indeed a great loss. The testimonies of the disciples of Jesus are to me very convincing. Now one may say such testimonies are generally nonsense. Well, just try... just read the testimonies of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.   

Some Facts About Christianity in India and Beyond

1. Do Christians have a holy city? 

Ans: No. Christians have no holy city. Muslims may consider Mecca a holy city, but Christians have no such city. 

2. Do Christians have a sacred language?

Ans: No. Hindus have Sanskrit and Muslims have Arabic but Christians have no such language. Jesus spoke Aramaic, but the New Testament was written common Greek. Bible is translated in different languages. There is no language that is more special than other languages. 

3.  Do Christians have a particular way to name the children? 

Ans: No. Christians from Africa can have African names; while those from Japan will have Japanese name and so on. Muslims may carry "Mohammed" and other similar names to every culture Islam is planted, but Christians have no such theological reason to do so. 

4. Do Christians have some outward cultural signatures for others to identity?

Ans: Not really. For example, if you are a Sikh, you may cover your head or you may be unshaved. Or if you are a Muslim, you may keep a beard. Christians have no such cultural signatures with which others can identify. 

5. Do Christians have a particular food culture? 

Ans: Not really. A Muslim will refuse to eat pork; a pious Hindu will refuse to beef. Christians have no theological reason to refuse this or that. It is for the individual to choose. 

6. Then what is it to be a Christian? 

Ans: To follow Jesus as Lord and God. 

7. Do Christians pay money to the tribals to convert? 

Ans: Two questions: First, are you willing to shell out money to convert Bangladeshis/Bhutanese to your religion? Hmm...Well, if one is a "common man" one would rather save up money to buy a house or a car or go on a holiday than pay money to others to convert. Second, would you change your religion if you are offered money? Hmmm... I guess many might say no...but if the amount of money is extremely big or one's need is extremely urgent, then one might. But how much money would be required to make you change your religion? 

Now ask your self whether Christians have that much money to distribute to the people... Of course not. 

Conversion is about a person choosing to follow Jesus. Christians are exhorted to share this message, but using money to 'buy' people or forcefully converting people is absolute no no. 

7. But don't Christians help the poor tribals? 

Ans: Yes, that happens. Imagine a parent that has two kids. One is ill and the other is well. Would you give the same amount of care to the sick and the healthy? Or will the sick one get more attention? The poor members of any given society are like the sick child. Any society that refuses to care for its 'sick' members has some problem. Christians care for the poor because they are poor and they need help. 

If you also join in in serving the poor, that would be wonderful! 

8. Why do Christians propagate their religion? 

Ans: Jesus says he is the Lord of all, and there is no other person like him. Because he is the Lord of all, he invites all people to him. This is demonstrated by his resurrection from the dead; the only person who has ever conquered dead. This happens in human history. All other great religious figures are dead and gone. Jesus is risen from the dead. If Jesus is the Lord of all, then all those who worship someone else must stop doing that and begin to worship Jesus. Propagation of religion is just about telling people that Jesus is the only one Lord. Take it or leave it. That's about it.