Terror Attacks and Attacks

1) What are the main arguments of the author?
The main arguments of the author are that Pentecostal Christians are the victims of violent attacks in India at a rate that is inordinately high. Yet the subject receives little attention either in the mainstream press or in the Indian media. It appears that there is a cultural hostility directed towards Christians in general in India and towards Pentecostalism in particular. The book’s intention is to shed light on this phenomenon by highlighting the details of the Pentecostals in India, their relationship to anti-Christian violence and what can be learned from the examination.
The author seeks to apply an “everyday” lens to the work and show that the violence against this Christian group is “routinized” and “entrenched as one relatively regular form…of communication between Hindus and Christians.”[footnoteRef:1] He also seeks to show that the mainstream Catholic and Protestant churches are not the targets of violence but rather that the missionary and especially the Pentecostal churches are the ones that are routinely targeted. The author’s main argument is that there is an organization in Hindu society in India that seeks to divide the Pentecostal community and drive it away from Indian society. This group is national rather than local and the attacks are often perpetrated by members of this organization rather than by locals with direct contact or association with the Pentecostal community. In other words, the violence is not organic but rather systematic and part of an evidently pre-planned purge that has been designed and put into practice in India.
2) What can one learn from this? [1: Chad Bauman, Pentecostals, Proselytization, and Anti-Christian Violence in Contemporary India; Oxford University Press: 2015, p. 3.]
One can learn from this that in any society there are cultural institutions that will clash with other and cause friction to develop. The institutions will operate on an ideological level and will override communal concerns because they will not see the other as human beings but rather as obstacles or enemies of their own ideological aims and ideals. In this case, the Hindu Organization (RSS) antagonizes the Pentecostal churches wherever they are found in India. The need for better understanding and dialogue among these groups is apparent—but arriving at a place where such an exchange can even begin is difficult because as Bauman shows, the RSS is focused on attacking the group and not on understanding the group.
Independent Evangelicals, Pentecostals and Charismatic churches are victimized particularly because their views and approaches to religion are so different from other forms, even other Christian forms. Bauman notes that it is the common open air practice of Evangelists, for instance, that some find so provocative and antagonizing in its own right. The story of the young Evangelical preacher who was assaulted by the RSS while the RSS invoked the Goddess Ganga and threw away all the books of the preacher is one instance of this titanic struggle between two opposing worldviews and perspectives on God.[footnoteRef:2] Understanding how this violent clash can be resolved is not simple but it is clear that the climate of tension has to be defused in some way.
3) What do most readers find interesting? [2: Chad Bauman, Pentecostals, Proselytization, and Anti-Christian Violence in Contemporary India; Oxford University Press: 2015, p. 9.]
The fact that there is disagreement about how the Christian missionaries, Evangelists, Pentecostals and Charismatics should integrate themselves into Indian society is interesting. First, it shows that the culture of India is not exactly the same as in Western cultures where the fringe Protestant groups would normally find more tolerance and acceptance. These groups have methods of reaching out to the community and of practicing their religions that is at odds with the RSS in particular and with the way that other leaders feel religion should be demonstrated in public.
The ostensible assignation of the anti-Christian violence by both Hindu and Christian observers to “simple, passionate, and unrestrained nature of India’s rural low-caste and tribal peoples” is interesting as well.[footnoteRef:3] It locates part of the problem in the very social structure or fabric of Indian society—the caste system. There is no doubt anger and resentment within the lower castes of this system that stems from the fact that they are stuck and cannot better their own lives in any way because of an arbitrary class structure that will not allow them out of it. This resentment surely boils over into anger and violence at others who are outsiders or who are Indians like them who attempt to escape this system or antagonize it by preaching in the streets or adopting a charismatic attitude. This most likely unnerves some people and places a finger on a sore spot. The reaction of irrational violence that follows is such that it can only be explained by understanding the generational pain and traditional attitudes that have been cemented in place over time in the minds of many Indians of the lower castes in the rural villages. When the Charismatics arrive, for instance, it is like pouring new wine into old wineskins. It does not compute—and the end result is a blow-up.
4) What areas of the book are difficult to understand? [3: Chad Bauman, Pentecostals, Proselytization, and Anti-Christian Violence in Contemporary India; Oxford University Press: 2015, p. 182.]

In some places the author seems unwilling to address the idea that Pentecostals could be inviting their own victimization by simply engaging in a religious practice that is very unappealing to some people—and especially to Hindu nationalists like in the RSS. “Do they bear some responsibility for the violence they and other Christians experience?” asks Bauman.[footnoteRef:4] The question is very interesting because it really gets to the heart of the conflict—of all conflict really—because it does take two to tango. However, it is not an easy question to answer. Assigning blame and placing blame on one side or the other for anything is actually not really any different from making judgments—and judging others can, itself, lead to a host of problems—especially where bias and self-delusion are concerned. In short it is not a simple matter of identifying where one group is offensive to another—and yet, at the same time, it seems like it should be and can be that simple. This is what is most difficult to understand about this book: it represents the issues very clearly but at the same time presents them in a manner that makes the mystery of iniquity seem like an impenetrable fog that really cannot be understood by our human faculties. Why is there so much violence and hatred? Why does one side provoke the other? What forces really are at work here? Are their forces that go about unseen? These questions make the reading daunting in ways and can overwhelm the reader because there seems to be no resolution.
5) What arguments and disagreements can be made with the author? [4: Chad Bauman, Pentecostals, Proselytization, and Anti-Christian Violence in Contemporary India; Oxford University Press: 2015, p. 183.]

The main argument that could be made with the reader is his reluctance to lay blame at the feet of the Pentecostals and other groups that are viewed by the Hindu nationalists as provocative and un-Indian. While I understand his reluctance, as I stated in the previous question, I also feel that at some point these groups have to take responsibility for their actions and accept the fact that their religious views and practices are going to be attacked. At least that is one argument that could be made. However, it is not an argument that is full of conviction, because it means that essentially the Pentecostals and other groups are literally asking to be harassed—and surely this is not the case.
What I would like to see, however, is the author at least attempt to answer the question, because it is so problematic. Instead, he chooses to avoid the question, as he himself states, justifying this avoidance by pointing out that he is not Indian and therefore is really an outsider to what goes on. I don’t disagree with this but I do not think it is a condition that prohibits his offering an assessment of the facts on the ground. Yes, a solution would be complex, but when one presents a problem, shouldn’t one also attempt to identify a solution—even if it is not the best possible one? At least some recommendation? That is the one argument that could be made with the author—yet, I understand his position and his reluctance to comment on the problem. He wants to present the issue to the world and see if anyone else has any thoughts or solutions. That is fair—but still I would like to see him engaging in a type of problem-solving as well at some level. I feel that that is the only solid thing missing from this book—a discussion of whether the violent attacks upon the Pentecostals and Charismatics and Evangelists can be considered as partly to be blamed on these groups’ own approaches in India.
Bibliography
Bauman, Chad. Pentecostals, Proselytization, and Anti-Christian Violence in
Contemporary India. UK: Oxford University Press: 2015.