{
  "bookName": "History of Christianity in India: Source Materials",
  "authorName": "M. K. Kuriakose",
  "publisherName": "Indian Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge",
  "publicationYear": 2011,
  "chapterNumber": 110,
  "chapterName": "1859. Kaye on the Causes of the Uprising of 1857, and Proposed Remedial Religious Policy",
  "pageFrom": 178,
  "pageTo": 183,
  "pages": [
    {
      "pageNumber": 178,
      "ocrText": "178\nHISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY IN INDIA\nRam Chandra Mitter, Head-\nmaster of the American Presby-\nterian Mission school, been\nmurdered at or near Futtehpur.\nJiwan Masih, Catechist.\nSupposed to have been killed\nnear Delamow.\nSri Nath Bhose, formerly\nCatechist and Teacher, his\nwife and children. All supposed\nto have been murdered in Oudh.\nRaphael, Catechist of the\nChurch Mission, Goruckpore.\nDied from wounds inflicted by\nthe rebels, and from anxiety and\nsickness, during the troubles in\nGoruckpore.\nof\nThere is a name left which\nshould live in the memories of\nGod's people. Chaman Lal,\nSub-Assistant Surgeon\nDelhi was massacred by the\nmu mutineers in his own house in\nDelhi. He was a man of exemp-\nplary piety and was thoroughly\nin earnest in his Christian life\nChristian life\nand profession. The native\nchurch has lost in him one of its\nbrightest ornaments.\nTo these must be added the\nnames of confessors, or others\nsuch as the Rev. Gopeenath\nNundi, his wife and child,\nAllahabad.\n110. KAYE ON THE CAUSES OF THE UPRISING OF 1857,\nAND PROPOSED REMEDIAL RELIGIOUS POLICY\n(1859 A.D.)\nJ. W. Kaye's analysis of the causes of the Uprising of 1857 and\nevaluation of the proposals made for a more aggresive religious policy\nsubsequently represent a moderate approach not always evident in\nEuropean writers of the times. He strongly supports the spirit of\nthe Queen's Proclamation of 1 November 1858, the relevant portions\nof which are quoted. Selections from J. W. Kaye, Christianity in India:\nan Historical Narrative, pp. 485-496.\nThe great rebellion of 1857 has, however, brought all this\ngood work to a fearful stand-still, and it now only remains for us to\nconsider how far the great question of the diffusion of the Gospel\nin India is affected by recent calamitous events.\nThe first point that suggests itself for inquiry is, to what extent,\nif to any, have those calamities resulted from the measures, related\nor glanced at in the preceding chapters, for the religious enlighten-\nment or the social improvement of the people. To the solution\nof this, and of almost every other question connected with the great\nsubject of Christianity in India, the most extreme opinions have been\nbrought. On one side it has been declared that the mutiny has\nresulted from the religious apprehensions of the people, excited by\nthe continued innovations of the English, threatening their ancestral",
      "status": "completed"
    },
    {
      "pageNumber": 179,
      "ocrText": "SOURCE MATERIALS\n179\nfaiths and their time-honoured social usages: and on the other side,\nit has been asserted with equal confidence that God has visited us\nwith this affliction as a signal mark of his displeasure on account of\nour national remissness in the great work of upholding His Kingdom\nand diffusing His word. The truth will be found somewhere at a\nconsiderable distance from either of these extremes; but the latter\nhypothesis is infinitely more unreasonable than the former. What-\never our national remissness-how little soever may have been the\nall that we have done to establish Christ's kingdom among the\nGentiles of the Eastern world, we were never striving more earnestly\nor more successfully to build up that kingdom, than at the very\nmoment when the great chastisement overtook us.\nAnd, on that account, did it overtake us? Not wholly on that\naccount; but partly on that account. It would be as uncandid to\ndeny that the religious and social innovations of the English in\nIndia had anything to do with the outbreak, as it would be unjust\nto assert that they were the sole causes of it. There is nothing\nmore difficult than to determine the extent to which the feeling of\ninsecurity engendered by these innovations found its way to the\ninner heart of society. It has been said, in language of exultation,\nthat the whole land has been shaken by Missions to its innermost\ncentre; and that Hindoos and Mahomedans alike are trembling\nfor their religions. This language may be exaggerated; but,\nalthough the effect produced upon the great mass of the people\nmay have been far more superficial than is here supposed, I cannot\ndoubt that the fears of the priesthood have been largely excited.\nThey have trembled for their offices; trembled for their gains;\ntrembled for the exclusiveness, which made them sovereigns among\nthe people. And we may be sure that they did their best, in a\nconjecture of circumstances favourable in the extreme to their\ndesigns, to alarm and to irritate the public mind by propagating\nreports of the intention of the British Government forcibly to\nconvert the people to Christianity. Preposterous as is this idea of\nforcible conversion, it has often taken possession of the minds\neven of the more educated classes and in the astute hands of\nPandits and Moulavees no more formidable weapon can be\nconvinced. The delusion once propagated, the hostile chiefs\nknew how to turn it to account; and they invariably charged their\nproclamations with appeals to the religious feelings of the people,\nwho were incited to make common cause against the encroaching\nFeringhee.\nThat this apprehension of the destruction of the ancient religions\nof the people was but one of many concurrent sources of irritation\nis certain; but it is equally certain that it was one. I have endea-\nvoured, in the most impartial spirit, to ascertain whether any special\nanimosity against missionaries and missionary establishments has",
      "status": "completed"
    },
    {
      "pageNumber": 180,
      "ocrText": "180\nHISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY IN INDIA\nbeen exhibited by the insurgents, but there has been too much\ninconsistency in their conduct to admit of any general inferences\nbeing fairly deduced from it. It is certain, however, that native\nChristians were assailed with as much bitterness as Europeans ;\nbut this may have been, not so much on account of their faith, as\nbecause of their steadfast adherence to the British. In many cases,\nEnglish scholars that is, Hindoo or Mahomedan readers and\nwriters of the English language were special objects of popular\nindignation. It is true that, in some places, the Christian Sabbath\nwas fixed upon as the appointed day of insurrection, and the first\nattack made upon the Christian Church. But this seems rather\nto have been a point of convenience than of fanaticism; the great\naim of the mutineers, an indiscriminate massacre of the Europeans,\nbeing greatly facilitated by their assemblage under a common\nroof, and the absorption of their minds by a common object. All\nsymptoms, indeed, fairly considered, it does not appear that the\nanger of the insurgents was especially directed against the Christi-\nanity of their victims. The apostacy of all the Christians in the\ncountry would not have stayed the insurrection, nor do I believe\nthat it would have even mitigated its fury.\nI do not perceive anything, therefore, in these recent calamitous\nevents to induce us to retrace any of the steps which we have taken ;\nbut, assuredly, greater caution during the next few years is rather\nto be counselled than less. The religious neutrality of the British\nGovernment in India has been proclaimed by the Queen in Council,\nand must ever be a substantive article of our political faith. One\nof the prime objects-nay the prime object (for we can do nothing\nwithout it) of all our efforts, as a Government and as individuals,\nduring the first years succeeding the suppression of the mutiny, is\nthe tranquilization of the public mind. Such a conflict must\nnecessarily leave behind it an irritable condition of the whole frame\nof society, demanding from us the application of the most soothing\nremedies. Until we have restored the national confidence in the\nnon-aggressive spirit of the British Government, all that we do will\nbe regarded with suspicion, and, perhaps, repelled with aversion.\nI cannot think, therefore, that the present time is one either for the\nverbal enunciation, or for the practical demonstration, of what is\ncalled a bolder Christian policy. I cannot think, as many\nexcellent people think, that this is the time to 'strike'. Let the\nState proclaim its own religion as manfully as it will; but in what\nrelates to the religion of others, it cannot be too quiescent.\nIt is not, perhaps, sufficient to speak out on such a subject in\nmere generalities. An appeal has been made to the public mind on\ncertain specific points of practice, and it may not be unprofitable\nbriefly to consider them. One leading feature of the Christian\nscheme of some religious reformers is the abolition of all endow-",
      "status": "completed"
    },
    {
      "pageNumber": 181,
      "ocrText": "SOURCE MATERIALS\n181\nments granted by the State to the religions of the country. This\nquestion has as already been discussed. To advocate such a measure\nis to advocate such a discreditable breach of faith; and so long as\nChristianity is endowed from the revenues of India, such a proposal\nstrikes at the very root of the neutrality which is professedly the\nprinciple and practice of the British Government. It is not necessary\nto repeat what has been said on this subject in a preceding chapter.\nThen it is recommended, by some able and excellent men, that\nChristianity should be openly taught in our Government schools;\nthat the formation of Bible classes of an improved character in as\nmany schools as possible should be a recognised branch of the\neducational department', and that 'inspectors should endeavour\nto establish them in the same way as they originate improvements\nof any other kind.' This doctrine is supported by the high authority\nof Sir John Lawrence and Colonel Herbert Edwardes. The objec-\ntion is of a kindred character to that which applies to the proposal\nfor the abolition of religious endowments. How can we, in accor-\ndance with any system of religious neutrality, apply the revenues\nof India to the instruction of the people in the tenets of Christianity,\nwithout, at the same time, instructing in their own national religions?\nIf Christianity is to be taught in the schools, supported by the\npublic purse, or, in other words, by the labour of the people-\nHinduism and Mahomedanism must also be taught, or there can\nbe no such thing as neutrality. But if we were to set out from a\nnew starting-point and to ignore the neutrality principle altogether,\nwhat then? The evangelization of the people is the great object to\nbe attained; and I have a profound conviction that that object will\nnot be promoted by a measure, the effect of which, in all probability,\nwould be to empty th the Government schools. It is now answered\nto this, that the the missionary schools in which Christianity is openly\ntaught, are well attended by heathen children. The people asso-\nciate the idea of missionary teaching with that of argument and\npersuasion; but all Government measures are identified in their\nminds with authority and coercion. However repugnant to reason\nmay be the idea of forcible conversion to Christianity, it is a disturb-\ning fact in the minds of the people. Send, as is proposed, chaplains,\nor missionaries, or ordained schoolmasters, or other competent\nreligious instructors, into the Government schools, and a notion,\nhowever preposterous, of this forcible conversion will immediately\ntake possession of the public mind. In the neutrality of the Govern-\nment lies the hope of the missionaries. It is the basis of all evangeli-\ncal success. To depart from it will not be to promote, but to\nobstruct the progress of Christianity; and, therefore, I devoutly\nhope that the principle will be maintained.\nMoreover, it is proposed that whilst we are doing everything\nthat we can do to demonstrate the vitality of the Christian religion,",
      "status": "completed"
    },
    {
      "pageNumber": 182,
      "ocrText": "182\nHISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY IN INDIA\nthe British Government should check the demonstrativeness of the\nreligions of the country. Hindoo and Mahomedan processions\nare abominations in the eyes of Christian men; and, therefore, it\nis said that a Christian Government should not be satisfied with\nwithdrawing from all constructive sanction and support of these\nobstrusive ceremonials, but should actively suppress them by the\nstrong hand of the law. All religious processions, it is said, might\nbe abolished, 'not on religious ground '-that is, not professedly\non religious grounds, but simply as a police measure.' How would\nthis affect the question of religious neutrality? By prohibiting all\nreligious processions, it is said, we should prohibit those of the\nChristian religion. Now Romanism, it is true, delights in these\nprocessions, and in India fairly competes with Mahomedanism or\nHindooism in its external displays. But Protestantism does not\ndelight in processions, and Protestantism is the religion of the State.\nAn Act therefore, prohibiting religious processions in the public\nstreets, would affect all creeds but that of the Government passing\nthe Act. It is not, therefore, very apparent that, give it what\ngloss you may, such a measure would be in conformity with our\navowed principles of neutrality and toleration\nBut the ability of the British Government to suppress these\nreligious processions may be fairly doubted. It is difficult to\nimagine anything more fatally calculated to exasperate both\nHindoos and Mahomedans, and to incite them to violent resistance.\nThe prohibitions of religious processions (including, I presume,\nmarriage processions-events of daily occurrence,) can only be\nenforced at bayonet's point; and at a time when every effort should\nbe directed to the tranquilization of the public mind, I can imagine\nnothing more pernicious-but for the high character of those from\nwhom the proposal emanates, I should say anything more insane-\nthan to provoke desparate collisions between Fanaticism and\nAuthority. The natives of India would, not unreasonably, regard\nthe suppression of their external ceremonies as an act of religious\npersecution to be speedily followed by the demolition of their\nmosques and pagodas; and we should soon be in the midst of all\nthe horrors of another rebellion not to be trodden out as speedily\nas the last.\nThe disallowance of native holidays is another measure of\nreform which has recently been advocated. At the period of certain\nnative holidays there is a suspension of public business. Govern-\nment recognises these festivals by the temporary closing of its\noffices; and private establishments, dependent upon native agency,\nfollow the example. Now, it is perfectly clear that we have no\nmore right to compel the official attendance of Hindoos at the time\nof the Doorgah Poojah, than of Christian underlings on Good\nFriday or Christmas-day. But it is not equally plain that, therefore,",
      "status": "completed"
    },
    {
      "pageNumber": 183,
      "ocrText": "SOURCE MATERIALS\n183\nthe state is bound to recognise these festivals by closing the public\noffices. It would be sufficient, for all purpose of toleration, to\ngrant leave or absence to every public servant applying for permis-\nsion to absent himself, in order that he may perform the service of\nhis religion. There are in every Government office men of various\ncreeds, and there will at the time of any particular festival, be a\nsufficient number of servants not called away to take part in it,\nto perform the current duties of the department. The middle\ncourse here recommended will answer all purposes; it will continue\nto the natives of the country the privilege which they which they have heretofore\nenjoyed, and which, indeed, they have a right to expect; and it will\nrelease the Government from the necessity of a general observance\nof the native holidays in a manner calculated to impress the people\nwith the belief that their festivals are approved by the State.\nAnother suggestion is, that Christianity should be encouraged\nand supported by a more liberal extension of State patronage to\nChristian converts. There would seem to be an impression on the\npublic mind in England that native Christians are, somehow or\nother, excluded from public employment. There can be no greater\nmistake. There is no law or regulation prohibiting their appoint-\nment to any office under the State, and if practically there is is any\nexclusion, it must be of a local and accidental character. I never\nheard that Government, as a Government, had any objection to\nthe employment of native Christians. If, however, the number\nof these converts employed throughout India in the public service\ndoes not bear a just proportion to the number of Hindoos and\nMahomedans so employed, and if they be equally well qualified\nfor office, there is a reasonable presumption that personal prejudices\nhave operated to the disadvantage of the class. The only way to\nremedy the evil is to remove those prejudices. Any open and\nsystematic encouragement to Christian converts of the nature\nproposed, is to be depreciated. Firstly, because we cannot, without\noffence to Christianity itself, bribe people to embrace it. And,\nsecondly, because any special indulgence to Christians, on the score\nof their religion, would be an injustice to the people of other\nreligious persuasions, and a departure from our avowed principles\nof neutrality and toleration. Any exclusion from office or any\ndisproportionate preferment, on the score of religion, would be\nequally unjust.\nSuch are the special questions of a purely religious character\nwhich have recently been brought to the notice of the English\npeople, in connection with the momentous subject of the future\ncareer of Christianity in India. So far, then, as by a bolder\nChristian policy', it is meant to signify increased aggressiveness\nagainst the religions of the country, the recommendation, from\nwhatsoever quarter it may proceed, must be rejected by the Imperial",
      "status": "completed"
    }
  ]
}