Chapter VII - Search for New Pastures

Avoid, as you would the plague, a clergyman who is also a man of business.

St Jerome

1. Qumranian heritage

We may now sum up: research by scholars following the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has shown the official Church version of the history of Christianity to be built up of a massive body of fabrications that cannot withstand scientific scrutiny or historical analysis. Leaving aside such irrational claims as redemption through Faith in Jesus, and the stories of the Gospels represented as true happenings, the Dead Sea Scrolls show that Christianity owes almost everything to an extremist Jewish sect of messianic beliefs based in the Qumran region of Palestine; the sect itself was in existence at least a century before the birth of Jesus. The evidence for the historicity of Jesus is at best neutral. Thus, there is not a trace of originality or much truth in the Church version of Christianity. History does not furnish another example of falsehood, plagiarism and fabrication on such a scale.

In the light of all this, the claim of Pope John Paul" that Jesus (and Christianity) is 'totally unique' is seen to be totally groundless. And the claim for the historicity of Jesus is not significantly stronger. Our focus therefore shifts to what the early sources - especially the Scrolls - have to say about the origins and the growth of Christianity.

Upon examining the early sources alongside the Qumran texts, it is possible to discern three distinct strands - a trinity, in a manner of speaking - in this two thousand year long fabrication exercise by Christian scholars and scribes. Firstly, erasing its Qumranian origins. Secondly, reducing the importance of James along with the elevation of Jesus - whether real or fictional - to the status of the Only Son of God. Thirdly the appropriation of the Doctrine of the Faith from Qumranian sources, to be later turned by St Paul into the centrepiece of Pauline Christianity by cutting it loose from the Law of Moses. We may next review each one of these in brief.

The Qumranian origins of Christianity are clear and unmistakable. The early Church of Jerusalem was a Qumranian institution. The Gospels themselves owe everything - their contents, style and imagery - to Qumran texts; and this indebtedness includes such crucial passages as the Sermon on the Mount. The central idea of the Davidic Messiah or Christ - the Righteous Teacher - his persecution, torture and execution are all found in Qumranian sources going back at least a century before the date assigned to the birth of Jesus. So also are titles like 'Son of the Most High', 'Son of God' and others found in the Gospels. One recently released Qumran text specifically refers to a Davidic Messiah as the 'Son of God' who was persecuted and killed - the Gospel story in prototype told at least a century before the date assigned to the birth of Jesus. (See chapter 8.)

Nor is this the whole story: many of the attributes of Jesus, as well as the story of his persecution and death are found also in another early text known as the Book of Enoch - a text that at one time formed part of the Bible. It was removed from the canon and all copies of it destroyed in an effort to eliminate every trace of Christianity's Qumranian heritage. The Book of Enoch is mentioned as a sacred text in the Acts as also in some Qumran texts. This is another example telling us that early Christianity is inseparably linked to Qumran and its inhabitants.

While there are no reliable references to Jesus in any early sources outside the New Testament, there are several authentic references to James in both Christian and non-Christian sources where he appears as 'James the Righteous'. In these, James is invariably depicted as the leader of the early Christians and the early Church - which was of Course an ultra-orthodox Jewish sect. All sources are unanimous in stating that he was a leader of the Qumranian Jews and was martyred by a band of rebels - led possibly by St Paul who was his adversary. This finds mention not only in non-Christian sources, but also in the Bible itself - in the Acts, where it is depicted as the martyrdom of Stephen. The Qumran text known as the Habakkuk Commentary also echoes the episode as do others. There is now overwhelming evidence indicating that the Habakkuk Commentary was a major source for Christian scriptures including the Gospels.

In the propagation of Pauline Christianity, following the destruction of both the early Church and the early Christians in the Jewish Wars, a systematic campaign was mounted to reduce the importance of James the Righteous by turning him into James the Lord's Brother. As part of this effort, a man called Jesus - either fictional, or an unimportant brother of James - was elevated by the New Testament authors to the role of the founder of a new faith called Christianity. The real founder of this brand of Christianity was St Paul whose ideas were diametrically opposed to those of James and the early Christians. Jesus was at best the figurehead used in Paul's propaganda.[1]

A basic fact of history that has been deliberately obscured by the Church is that the so-called 'early Christianity' and the 'early Church' of which the leader was James, were Qumranian institutions that had little to do with Christianity as we understand it today which is the creation of Paul; if anything, the two Churches - the Jamesian and the Pauline - were mutually hostile. The early Church was founded by an extremist Jewish sect that arose in reaction to the secularising influences of the Graeco-Roman world. The conflict between Rome and the extremist Jewish sects (Zealots) culminated in the Jewish Wars of AD 66-74 and AD 132-5; both the early Christians and the Church they founded perished in these wars. With this, the field was left free for the advocates of Pauline Christianity to expand their theocracy which eventually went on to subvert Rome itself. The transformation was complete when Theodosius banned all forms of public worship other than the Christian on November 8, AD 392. The secular and pluralistic Roman Empire became the theocratic Holy Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire was the first vehicle - or rather, the first bandwagon of Christian expansion.

Rivalry between Paul and James was part of the larger conflict between Rome and the Zealots with Paul representing the interests of Rome. Paul engineered a split within the early Church by introducing a crucial change in the Doctrine of the Faith: its message was distorted by cutting it loose from the Law of Moses to help in Paul's propaganda campaign. This seemingly small change was to have catastrophic consequences for the world over the next two thousand years.

The elimination by Paul - of the Law - from the Qumranian version of the Doctrine of the Faith essentially freed the Christian clergy from any accountability. Where in Judaism, even the highest authority was subject to the Law, in Christianity, Popes and other high priests have been a law unto themselves in the name of God. Among other things, this has allowed their leaders to accept money and honours from drug dealers, tyrannical dictators and worse by claiming "I am accountable only to God," as Mother Teresa for one has always done. As we saw in Chapter I, the Church has never felt bound by any rules that stood in its way. This unlimited license is a Pauline legacy. It is unrealistic in the extreme for the rest of the world to expect the Church to reform itself by giving up its two thousand year habit - a highly advantageous one at that. It will change its external behavior only in response to changed circumstances, but will continue to do whatever it can get away with. The strange conduct of Vatican officials in the days following the death of Albino Luciani (Pope John Paull) is sufficient testimony to the fact.

The revelations of the Dead Sea Scrolls could hardly have come at a worse time for the Church; for, it is also clear from our study that the Church is an institution mired in crisis. Superficially, the crisis has been brought on by a precipitous decline in the number of followers in Europe and America, accompanied by even more dramatic losses in the priestly professions. It is this phenomenon - the decline in its worldly goods and subjects - that is being seen by the Church as its real problem. As a political and economic institution that has never been a spiritual entity, the Church cannot now be expected to produce a message or messengers who can address the deep spiritual problems that afflict the world today - especially in the West; spirituality lies wholly outside its comprehension. As the Belgian scholar Koenraad Elst tells us:

The point simply is that we, European Christians of many generations have simply outgrown Christianity.

Most people who have left the Church have found that they are not missing anything, and that the beliefs which once provided a framework for interpreting and shaping life, were but a bizarre and unnecessary construction after all. We now know that Jesus was not God's Only-begotten Son, that he did not save humanity from eternal sin, and that our happiness in this world or the next does not depend on believing these or any other dogmas.

(Elst, pp. vii-viii)

This is like customers telling IBM that its computers do not compute or telling General Motors that its cars have no engines. The Church's predicament is not notably different. The main result of this realization is that the Church, in its search for fresh pastures has begun to cast its eyes towards the east. Upon finding their products to be no longer in demand in the West, many multinational corporations (like tobacco companies) have been forced to look to the countries of the Third World for new markets; the Church now finds itself in the same position and is following a similar course. It too has descended on India and other Third World countries looking for new customers. And here lurks danger, for the exclusivist doctrine of Christianity does not allow it to coexist with a pluralistic system. It may bide its time, but like every predator it will eventually consume its prey.

What does the future hold? It is hardly to be expected that the Church will stand idly by and allow its empire to be eroded. We can hopefully learn from its history and see where it may be headed in its search for new pastures. For this we need to understand the 'spiritual' dimension of theocracy. This will enable us to anticipate how a theocratic institution might react when it sees its existence being threatened. This was recognized thousands of years ago by the ancient sage Veda Vyasa as we shall soon see.                .

2. The Spirit of Theocracy

At its heart, the crisis of the Church is a crisis of vision. It must now choose between providing spiritual guidance to a troubled world and secular expansion. As a theocratic institution, throughout its history, the Church has invariably sought secular expansion at the cost of spiritual guidance. Even more, spiritual guidance has been a ruse - no more than the currency to be used for secular expansion. This gets to the heart of theocracy - as corruption of the spirit - which the ancient sage Veda Vyasa saw as the greatest evil of all.[2]

Of corruptions moral, mental, physical

There's none so deep as corruption spiritual.

So did Vyasa write thousands of years ago - long before there was Christianity or any other theocracy. He must have seen the signs, for he warned of the approaching Age of Kali - our own age according to his cosmology - when the spirit itself would be corrupted for material gain. He saw Kali as the genius of the Age of Theocracy. Kali's unique gift - as Vyasa saw it - was the capacity to present the pursuit of economic and political goals as a religious quest. This he saw as the ultimate evil. He also told us what to look for in the Age of Kali:

Doctrines false of greed and power,

As Sacred Truth to be proclaimed anon;

With knave and fanatic posing as seer,

To preach his privileged path to heaven.

When he wrote these terrible lines, Vyasa had just witnessed the destruction of many ancient dynasties and ruling houses in a holocaust known as the Mahabharata War. This had left a deep scar on his psyche. One need not fully share his gloomy view of the world. One can however learn from his insight and see how a supposedly religious institution is corrupted when the spirit is subordinated to material gain, or, in another of Vyasa's magnificent lines: Spirit and soul yoked to ambition's drive.

This gives us the clue to the possible future course of the Church by studying its recent past while learning from the key insight of Vyasa: the genius of Kali, as he tells us, is to present material pursuit as a spiritual quest. We may therefore expect some changes in language, strategy and tactics - some new and high-sounding doctrines like 'Liberation theology' - but still having "Spirit and soul yoked to ambition's drive.” And its theology will remain "Doctrines false of greed and power, as Sacred Truths to be proclaimed anon.”

This is what history also tells us: the more things change, the more they remain the same. To see the future course of the Church, we must study its past, at a time when it was faced with a similar crisis. Essentially, the Church has always jumped on the bandwagon of an expanding secular power - first the Roman Empire, then European colonialism. Recognizing this can help us get an idea of what might be in store in its search for new pastures. It needs a new bandwagon - a secular one, but one that allows it to expand.

3. Search for a new bandwagon

The present crisis of the Church has a historical parallel. About five hundred years ago, the Church was heading for a crisis in Europe brought on by the Reformation and the Renaissance soon to be followed by the Enlightenment. However, the growth of European imperialism in the wake of Christopher Columbus' voyages of discovery allowed the Church to combine forces with the emerging colonial institutions and extend its reach across the globe. In a letter to his friend Dona Juana de Torres written in October 1500, Columbus summarised his own achievement as follows:[3]

I should be judged as a captain who went from Spain to the Indies to conquer a people numerous and warlike, whose manner and religion are very different from ours, who live in sierras and mountains, without fixed settlements, and where by divine will I have placed under the sovereignty of the King and Queen our Lords, an Other World, whereby Spain, which was reckoned poor, is become the richest of countries.

Columbus was doing it all in the name of Christ. As he himself wrote to his sovereigns - 'Their Christian Majesties' Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain: Your Highnesses have an Other World here by which our holy faith can be so greatly advanced and from which such great wealth can be drawn. (Letter to Ferdinand and Isabella, Oct. 18,1498)

He saw his 'holy faith' as the instrument to be used in drawing 'great wealth'. This is entirely in the Spirit of Kali which Vyasa saw and warned the world against. In another letter written on November 27, 1492 Columbus clearly laid down the principles under which Christianity was to be the main vehicle of colonial expansion and exploitation:

And I say that Your Highnesses ought not to consent that any foreigner does business or sets foot here [in America], except Christian Catholics, since this was the end and the beginning of the enterprise, that it should be for the enhancement and glory of Christian religion, nor should anyone who is not a good Christian come to these parts.

(Emphasis added.)

Professor Samuel Eliot Morrison who edited the writings of Columbus goes on to observe: "Here may be found the first suggestion of the exclusive colonial policy that Spain and other nations followed.» What one finds particularly striking is the attitude displayed by Columbus in all this: regarding business and colonial expansion as a natural extension of Christianity - again in the Spirit of Kali foreseen by Vyasa. Also worth noting is his view of foreigners as all those who are not 'Christian Catholics' - regardless of nationality as we understand the term today. The Church was and remains a transnational entity. (Columbus was himself not a Spaniard but an Italian from Genoa.)

Columbus and other colonisers were soon to be followed by Jesuit missionaries, each more rapacious than the other. Missions and missionaries became outposts of the imperial powers. This allowed the Church to survive the crisis brought on by the Reformation in Europe by expanding into new lands; what had been a European institution soon became a world empire. As we saw in an earlier chapter, the Americas were not only plundered in the name of Christ, several ancient American civilizations were annihilated by Soldiers of the Cross. Amerigo Vespucci wrote in 1503:

Those new regions [America] which we found and explored with the fleet ...We may rightly call a New World...A continent more densely populated and abounding in animals than our Europe or Asia or Africa, and, in addition, a climate milder than any other region known to us.

But this idyllic New World which Vespucci saw could not withstand the rapacity of the Spanish and Portuguese Conquistadors and the no less rapacious priests. Even today, most countries of South and Central America show the scars of the ravages inflicted by these marauders in the name of Christ. (In the previous chapter I gave some details of the scale of destruction wrought in the colonization of America, especially as witnessed by Bartolome de Las Casas.) More to the point, Christianity, which was gradually losing its hold over the people and institutions of Europe, obtained a new lease of life by joining hands with the forces of European imperialism. In return, Christianity provided a moral justification for European colonialism and its exploitation of the natives as a mission to civilize the heathen world. The Anglo-Indian writer Rudyard Kipling called it the 'White Man's Burden'. In truth, colonialism served as Christianity's bandwagon.

Such pursuit of secular goals in the guise of religion was not limited to Catholic Spain. The staunchly Protestant David Livingston, regarded a 'great missionary' and humanitarian, let out the truth when he wrote in secret to a friend: “All this machinery had for its ostensible object the development of African trade and the promotion of civilization; but what I can tell to none but such as you, in whom I have confidence, is that I hope it may result in an English colony in the healthy high lands of Central Africa."

This practice of advancing commercial and imperial interests in the name of Christ is by no means a thing of past centuries. Mahatma Gandhi quotes one Reverend Macarish, a leading missionary of the American Presbyterian Church who confessed:

"One cry in this country [America]," Gandhi wrote quoting Macarish, "had long been markets, wider markets. ...If the farmers and manufacturers desire to create a market, they would do well to get in touch with foreign missions, and we are assured that it would not be long till they received their money back with liberal interest.”

Although the missionary went to the foreign fields to win souls for Jesus, the results of his labours also meant the extension of commerce. Trade would follow the banner of the Cross, as readily as it would the Union Jack, the Stars and Stripes...

Recently a bill has been introduced in the United States Congress to permit the Central Intelligence Agency to employ missionaries as spies, a practice that had been banned for twenty years. During the Cold War many Christian missionaries all over the world were actually in the service of the CIA. There is also no assurance that the practice of spying by missionaries was not covertly carried out despite the twenty-year ban. Many in countries like India and Sri Lanka have long charged that missionaries have worked also as foreign agents. This now stands confirmed.

As related in Chapter I, Cardinal Posadas Ocampo of Mexico was acting as an agent of the Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar when he was assassinated in Guadalajara, Mexico. International drug cartels, like the one headed by Escobar, are States within States which have employed missionaries as agents. The Church has long been involved in drug-related money laundering operations through men like Calvi, Sindona, Marcinkus and Gelli. These developments suggest that the international drug trade may be serving as another bandwagon for the Church.

This scenario is not very different from what happened during the era of European colonialism and the Industrial Revolution. It was recognized that conversion was good for commerce. As far back as 1905, it was stated by the Boston Advertiser - "The Christian man is our customer. The heathen has, as a rule, few wants. It is only when man is changed that there comes this desire for the manifold articles that belongs to the Christian man ... The missionary is everywhere and is always the pioneer in trade. "[4]

It may not be stated so openly today, but the business imperatives have not changed; if anything, the situation has grown more urgent for the Church faced with imminent collapse in the West. One should not be surprised to see a new initiative on the part of the Church to serve commerce in the name of serving Jesus. There are already noises being made by some Church leaders in India claiming that the service of religion must include economic service also. So we may soon see a Christian Stockbroker Service to match Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network.

This idea is not far-fetched. As we saw in Chapter I, Vatican, Inc. already has several such in operation bearing names like the 'Fabric of St Peter's Apostle', the 'Institute for Religious Works' (lOR) and so forth. Internal documents of the Catholic Church and other Christian organizations make no secret of this desire to combine business with evangelisation. To take just one example, the relatively recent (1980) 'Thailand Report on Hindus' (cited in Chapter I) observes:[5]

The reaching of the Hindu is one of the greatest challenges to the people of God in this generation. To this end we call for:

(i) Personal and corporate intercession for the evangelisation of Hindu people groups all over the world.

(ii) Personal and corporate sacrificial giving to support this evangelisation.

It is scarcely to be expected that 'corporate giving' and 'corporate intercession' would be done on purely altruistic grounds, or that the Church is ignorant of the fact. All this carries a special warning for the world today when there is much talk of 'economic globalisation'. The Church has always tried to get on the bandwagon of an expanding secular power: first the Roman Empire, and then European colonisation; economic globalisation is its latest bandwagon. One must be aware of the possibility that the increasingly desperate Church may try to sustain itself by becoming partners with multinational companies (including drug traffickers) by placing at their service its vast missionary apparatus. Like the multinationals, the Church is also looking at countries of the Third World - at India in particular - as a highly lucrative new market.

India has a special role to play in stemming the unrestrained growth of materialism in the guise of saving souls. Other countries of Asia have neither the experience nor the spiritual-historical roots, nor the resources in terms of sheer numbers of committed scholars to meet this latest threat to freedom. If India gives way to Christianity with its materialistic ideology, and ruthless business practices, there is little hope for the rest of the world. Ecological catastrophe and social chaos become all but inevitable. One has only to look at the scene in Mexico and Central America to get a foretaste. This will be magnified a hundredfold.

In the light of this, the growth of Christianity on the coattails of European colonial expansion is an analogy worth studying in our own time. The growth of multinationals in the name of 'globalisation' is being seen in some quarters as a similar opportunity for the Church. As we saw in Chapter I, the Church has not fought shy of becoming partners with arms and drug dealers like Gelli, Calvi and Sindona. In recent years, Christian missionaries have been caught smuggling arms into India and Sri Lanka - and no doubt other countries as well.

We are already familiar with Mother Teresa using the worst sections of Calcutta as a backdrop in order to project herself as a saviour of the uncared for, but more importantly, as a catalyst in her fund-raising campaign in the West; the West may not have much use for Christianity, but it still has people with money and compassion easily moved by the sight of misery. The average Westerner has not been able to shake off the wholly unfounded belief that Christianity is somehow a civilising influence which the heathens need, even if they have themselves outgrown it (and have become pagans again). And these Mother Teresa has tapped with skill. Being accountable only to God, the Reverend Mother does not tell us what percentage of her collection goes to help the needy in Calcutta and how much of the rest goes to fill the coffers of the multinational corporation called Vatican Inc.

This is not a minor issue. It is known, for instance, that Mother Teresa's hospitals in Calcutta have been lavishly funded for at least the past thirty years. But as I noted in the last chapter, visitors have found them to be substantially below the standards expected today. The question then is: where does the money raised in their names go? There are many other charities in India, as elsewhere in the world that are doing outstanding work, without of course the publicity and propaganda that invariably accompanies her activities.[6]

Nor is this by any means an isolated instance, or even limited to the Catholic Church. One of the most influential politicians in America is the 'tele-evangelist' (television preacher) Pat Robertson - the founder of the so-called Christian Broadcasting Network. He was a candidate for the US presidency in 1988 and is likely to run again. He has openly expressed his wish to eliminate 'heathen' Hinduism by bringing forth the message of Christ. But more immediately to the point - like the Vatican and Mother Teresa - he has shown a capacity for moral obtuseness in the name of God by willingly associating himself with ruthless dictators like President Mobutu of Zaire. Mobutu, whose record as a bloodthirsty tyrant greatly surpasses that of Mummar Qaddafi of Libya, was highly recommended by Robertson as guest of honour for the 50th anniversary of the United Nations. (He was not invited.) It was recently reported by James Adams of The Sunday Times:[7]

To millions of Americans, Robertson is known as the avuncular silver-haired 'tele-evangelist' who uses his own broadcasting network for good works. He is also one of America's most successful businessmen, with a prosperous commercial empire whose tentacles reach into every corner of the Globe - including Zaire, where he reaps rich rewards from diamond and gold mines and thousands of acres of rain forest...

There is much at stake for Mr Robertson, 67, who has long yearned for political power. He ran unsuccessfully as a presidential candidate in the 1988 election and then founded the Christian Coalition, a conservative lobbying group that will have a critical role in the next year's [1996] presidential election...

Shades of Veda Vyasa again and his warning against the Kali Age - with 'spirit and soul yoked to ambition's drive.' One can easily imagine how business, politics and 'religion' could be combined in Robertson's vision of the world. It is not hard to see that if he should get elected president, he will not hesitate to unleash forces of business and political power on the world in the name of spreading the message of Christ. We should remember that it is a firm belief among many businessmen that Christianising the world increases demand for their products. This is exactly what many of them call the 'spread of civilization'. To such minds, the more one spends on consumer goods, the more 'civilised' one becomes. Robertson's is not exactly a new doctrine. His view of the world is no different from what was expressed by Pope Boniface VIII seven hundred years ago:

Both swords, the spiritual and the material, are in the power of the Church. The spiritual is wielded by the Church; the material for the Church. The one by the hand of the priest; the other by the hands of kings and knights at the will and sufferance of the priest.

(de Rosa, p.109)

Robertson would go one further - be king, priest and trader: he would transform Boniface's theory of the two swords into a new theory of three swords - a new trinity. Like everything arising from Christianity, this would be entirely a secular movement carried out in the name of God. Did St Paul not free such men from all accountability with his Doctrine of the Faith? This is now combined with the Doctrine of Greed. It is this combination that allows Robertson to loot the rainforests of Africa and also allows Mother Teresa to collect funds from crooks, military dictators and tyrants. With Faith in Jesus, they are accountable only to God.

This being the case, we should anticipate that the Church will undergo some external changes in the name of 'reform' and pay lip service to the 'great and ancient spiritual heritage of India' - as Raimundo Panikkar for one is fond of doing. History tells us, however, that Church reforms are always power shifts accompanied by changes in strategy. Being an institution wedded to an exclusivist doctrine, it is futile to expect the Church to change fundamentally and embrace pluralism. Its expressed hostility to the practice of Yoga, as well as the Pope's recent criticism of Buddhism bear testimony to the fact that the Church remains as exclusivist as ever.

One should, however, expect new public postures, and new and more covert strategies: Raimundo Panikkar's effort to subvert Hinduism in the name of Hindu-Christian synthesis may be seen as an example of this. Its expansion in Asia - in India in particular - is the new imperative for the Church; for without substantial progress along this front the Church is doomed. Leaders like John Paul II know that his institution needs new pastures following its defeat in the West. It also needs a new bandwagon.

With this history as background, it is not hard to see that Christianity, in its present state of crisis may try to get on the bandwagon of multinationals just as it did four hundred years ago by joining the piracy known as European imperialism. Fortunately, there already exists a secular prototype that allows us to foresee how the Church might operate in the global economy while holding on to its Doctrine of the Faith. This secular institution is the World Bank. It is worth taking a brief look at this extraordinary quasi-religious institution, which greatly resembles the Church as Susan George and Fabrizio Sabelli point out in their interesting if tautologically titled book Faith and Credit.[8]

4. The Church and the Bank

The World Bank is also a highly successful secular economic entity like the Church, but the comparison does not stop there. Just as the Church has its Doctrine of the Faith, the World Bank too has a dogma: it is called the Doctrine of Development. It is never questioned and is held to be beyond debate. As George and Sabelli note:

But the World Bank is at once a bank with a small b, specialising in commercial loans to sovereign governments, and a development institution whose philosophy, choices and actions now affect huge numbers of people. It is the only bank that claims not merely an economic function but a humanitarian purpose as well.

(pp. 4-5, emphasis added.)

. ..although it makes massive profits (in recent years well over a billion dollars annually), it acts in the name of values higher and nobler than those of a mere profit-making enterprise.

(ibid.)

This brings us again to Mother Teresa - who has not been shy of accepting money and decorations in the name of God from criminal tycoons, drug lords, dictators and mass murderers. (Pat Robertson is less self-righteous, only more offensive.) The World Bank is not guilty of such practices though it has on occasion loaned money to countries ruled by dictators. I have not taken the trouble to find out if the World Bank has ever loaned money to Haiti, ruled by the Duvaliers ('Papa Doc' and 'Baby Doc') - among Mother Teresa's benefactors - who looted their country and organized mass executions. If it did, it would prove to be an unconventional source for her activities - the World Bank itself via a circuitous route running through Haiti of the Duvaliers.

It is therefore not altogether fair to compare the World Bank to even the modern Vatican, for the World Bank has no criminal record (though it has had at least one disastrously incompetent chief executive in Robert McNamara of Vietnam War fame). Nor has the Bank served as a front for drug-money laundering by Mafia figures like Sindona and Calvi with their connections to the Vatican Bank. And yet its dogma of development and its enormous economic power have led the Bank to impose its projects on small nations against their own interests. And what remains unmentioned in all this is that for its employees the World Bank is a very lucrative career while maintaining its self-righteous humanitarian posture. Naturally enough this has led to a reaction with some critics seeing nothing but hypocrisy and evil in the Bank. As George and Sabelli observe:

Some critics have approached the Bank as a kind of quintessential Evil Empire, imposing its projects in the teeth of public opinion, the local inhabitants' wishes and, sometimes, the Banks own experts' advice. At one time or another, all these things have occurred. But if one tries, rather, to understand why it should upon occasion behave in such way, one is struck by an inescapable though perhaps irreverent analogy: this supranational, non-democratic institution functions very much like the Church, in fact the medieval Church. It has a doctrine, a rigidly structured hierarchy preaching and imposing this doctrine and a quasi-religious mode of self-justification.

(ibid., original emphasis.)

Actually, this is not that far removed from the Church even today; one needs only to hear Mother Teresa justifying her financial and political deals to be convinced of this. The authors seem to have overestimated the depth of reform in the Church since the Middle Ages. It has not brought any more accountability, only better public relations - the difference we saw between its handling of Galileo and Allegro. (Incidentally, Mother Teresa, in a recent interview defended the Church's persecution of Galileo. No one apparently bothered to ask her if she also supported Giordano Bruno's burning at the stake.) The authors go on to compare it to another secular institution:

Or, to borrow from a wholly different tradition, the Bank is reminiscent of a centralized political party characterized by opacity, authoritarianism and successive party lines. Could the World Bank be the last of the Leninists [organization]?           (ibid.)

Is it any wonder that Bertrand Russell called Communism a Christian heresy? And the comparisons are indeed far-reaching as the authors go on to observe:

Although such comparisons may offend believers and non-believers alike, a Church or a monolithic organization is an entity which may well resort to public relations; but which at bottom brooks no opposition or contradiction and which claims a monopoly on Truth. To be sole guardian of the Truth imposes a sacred duty in whose name inquisitions, purges, large-scale loss of livelihood or the forced displacement of hundreds of thousands from their homes can all be legitimized in the name of the greater good which shall come to pass at some future time. [Sic: or in another world.]

(ibid.)

I have quoted extensively from George and Sabelli's book because they bring into focus the remarkable parallels that exist between the Church and the Bank. With the globalization of world economy, and with increased focus on developing countries like India, the possibility is very real that the Church may place its vast network of missions at the service of multinationals - for a price of course. That the Church sees business as a partner in evangelizing countries like India is no secret as we have already seen.

In this game, the Church may emerge as a competitor to the World Bank, or, possibly, co-operate with it. But one thing is certain: the Church will do everything possible to extend its reach in the Third World and extend its hold in the name of saving souls. Its survival depends on it. This is something that countries like India should be aware of. The operations of the World Bank offer a useful parallel well worth study. But more importantly, one must be on the look-out for entrepreneurs in the guise of religious figures bent on using the global economy as the latest bandwagon in campaigns of expansion in the guise of 'serving Jesus'. The old bandwagon - of Columbus and the Conquistadors - may be long gone, but their spirit lives on in men like Pat Robertson.

5. Tolerance and truth

The lessons for countries of Asia like India are clear: the Church must be treated strictly as a business empire and/or a political entity interested in the growth of its secular power in the name of God. It has created markets, looted countries and financed wars in the name of Christ. It will do all these again if given the chance, for the Church's method can be summarized by the simple adage of 'the end justifies the means'. It has never backed away from a profitable venture on moral grounds. Its theology, based on the Doctrine of the Faith, frees its followers from all accountability. It has not hesitated to murder its own leaders including Popes when its secular interests were threatened. It will stop at nothing in its struggle for survival. It would be a very great mistake to continue to regard it as a religious institution. Westerners have by and large seen through the mask; it is time that others did too.

India, along with other parts of the world, made this mistake with Islam before. A thousand years ago, when Islam was knocking on the doors of India in the name of God, Indian thinkers failed to subject its exclusivist doctrine to an intellectual analysis and see it as an imperialist ideology in the guise of religion. They accepted its claim as a true religion and paid a heavy price. But thanks to the heroism and sacrifices of countless men and women, the pluralistic Hindu civilization survived - though greatly reduced in scope; the great Persian civilization and the Hindu-Buddhist Afghanistan and much of Central Asia were not so fortunate. This was to be repeated five hundred years later in the Americas at the hands of post-Reformation Christianity. It is time now to recognize that the increasingly desperate Church may well try to use economic globalization the same way it used the Spanish and the Portuguese empires - to extend its reach.

Pluralistic civilizations like those of India and ancient Greece are vulnerable to the forces of theocracy - or aggressive political ideologies marching in the name of God. Theocracy is nothing but the pursuit of secular goals in the name of God - with appeals to God serving to free the aggressor from any accountability. This has been the history of both Christianity and Islam. Such an approach lies outside the pale of pluralistic thought and experience; it requires a special intellectual effort on the part of a pluralist to comprehend exclusivism and its offshoot of theocracy. And this is exactly where theocracy has the advantage: it catches its prey off guard.[9]

But ultimately, the Church's foundation, its vaunted Doctrine of the Faith must be seen and exposed as an exclusivist, and therefore an intolerant political ideology masquerading as religious belief. The issue is not one of personal belief: no one has the right to object to another's belief in this or any other doctrine; but its use as an instrument of political and economic expansion cannot be accepted as an expression of the will of God to be undertaken by His self-appointed agents. This was the mistake that Medieval India made with regard to Islam: it mistook an imperialist ideology for a new religious movement like Buddhism. For this monumental intellectual failure, not only India but much of Asia are still paying the price. For this reason, Indian intellectuals have a special responsibility to take the lead in safeguarding pluralism in Asia. They have the necessary intellectual tools and the historical experience.

A basic problem appears to be that Western educated Hindus have a great weakness for flattery: they like to be known as tolerant people. Whether this is really sincere or merely a cathartic response growing out of a thousand-year long struggle for survival against forces of theocracy is a different issue that need not concern us here. One suspects it is the latter, for most of them do not know the difference between their own pluralistic heritage and the exclusivism inherent in Islam and Christianity. For this reason, they attribute intolerance to individuals rather than the exclusivist ideologies that underlie these creeds.

Both the Christian missionary and the Muslim mullah see Hindu tolerance not as a virtue to be emulated, but as a weakness to be taken advantage of. Each tells the Hindu to be tolerant, while not feeling any obligation to reciprocate in kind. They berate the Hindu for not being true to the tolerance of his religion when an incident like the Ayodhya demolition takes place, but say not a word when temples are destroyed en masse in Kashmir, Pakistan and Bangladesh. The next time a mullah or a bishop lectures to a Hindu on tolerance, the Hindu would not be amiss to tell him to stop lecturing and show by example. At the very least, they should be asked to give the same lecture to their own people - a somewhat risky proposition for Muslims at least. There is no need to preach tolerance to the tolerant.

This is not to suggest that the world should become intolerant: the point is only that those who themselves use intolerance as the centrepiece of their theology and politics - Pat Robertson is a prime example, with the present Pope not far behind - have no right to appeal to the tolerance of others. Pluralism entails mutual tolerance - not freedom to practice intolerance at the expense of others. Christianity and Islam - both exclusivist - have never shown any tolerance towards others when they were not forced to, i.e., when they could get away with intolerance.

There is an episode in the Indian epic Mahabharata in which Duryodhana, having failed to defeat his cousins the Pandavas by every means fair and foul, appeals to their chief Yudhisthira in the name of fair play - or dharma. Yudhisthira tells him:

Everyone wants to examine the rules of dharma when they find themselves in difficulty.

As Yudhisthira saw, Duryodhana's appeal was sheer opportunism, buying some time until a better opportunity presented itself when the whole mischief could begin again. This is how one should view appeals to 'Hindu tolerance' by Islamic and Christian leaders.

Then there is also the question of allowing a creed like Christianity with its awesome record of falsehood and fabrication to impose its irrational belief on others. Koenraad Elst has this advice for Hindus:[10]

What Hindus who have been trapped in a sentimental glorification of Jesus and other prophets will have to learn, is that the essence of Hindu Dharma is not "tolerance", or "equal respect for all religions", but Satya, truth. The problem with Christianity and Islam is superficially their intolerance and fanaticism. But this intolerance is a consequence of these religions' untruthfulness: if your belief system is based on delusions [sic: and/or fabrications], you have to pre-empt rational inquiry into it and shield it from contact with more sustainable thought systems.

A remarkable insight indeed, and sound advice not just for Hindus but for everyone interested in preserving freedom and pluralism in the world - especially the United States which seems to think it can 'finesse' the fundamentalist threat by setting up puppet regimes. And this is vindicated by the dilemma of Christianity in the wake of the revelations of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Protecting falsehood is precisely what Christianity and Islam have both done - through blasphemy laws, the Inquisition and a host of others meant to suppress freedom of thought and enforce uniformity of belief. Let us recall what Thomas Jefferson had to say about exclusivism, though expressed in the specific context of Christianity:

Millions of innocent men, women and children since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned - yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools the other half hypocrites.

Exponents of these - no matter if it is done in the name of a high-sounding doctrine - are the last people on earth who should be lecturing to others on tolerance and salvation. Tolerance does not mean tolerance of intolerance and untruth, but only of freedom of thought and conscience. Anything that seeks to crush the freedom of others deserves no tolerance. Freedom of thought is the antidote to fanaticism, and this is the great fear of the guardians of every irrational belief system.

And this, ultimately, is the fear of Christianity today - and also its Achilles Heel. The Dead Sea Scrolls are only a sign in the sky - at most a warning, a bolt from the blue perhaps, but still only a warning - telling the Church to focus its attention, more on the problems of the spirit and less on secular enrichment. Unfortunately, spirituality lies outside its tradition and heritage. Its methods and means have always been secular: use of power and money to defeat its adversaries. Since the Church can no longer suppress freedom of thought, it has sought to suppress the Dead Sea Scrolls. Now this too has run its course. Its search for new pastures has taken the Church to Asia where the population is large, and a ready-to-use bandwagon exists in the form of multinationals in search of new markets. This is where India and her thinkers have a special responsibility to defend pluralism. It is the only society that has withstood the assault of exclusivist forces marching in the name of God, and lived to tell the story. It is a propitious time now to put this knowledge and experience to work.