Naga ancestors were animist. American Baptist Missionaries proselytized those animists to Christians in nineteenth century. Since then, Nagas accepted Christianity as their avowed religion and possessively guarded it. Apart from political reason, that was one reason modern Nagas vehemently opposed grouping together with Hindus and Muslims. Therefore, at the time of creating Nagaland State, the Indian government promised special constitutional provision in the form of Article 371A to safeguard our religion. In recent years, the BJP government dishonored Christian cultures like Christmas Day and Good Friday. All Christians across India deplored the fundamentalist’s agenda. In the face of such threat even in our State, the question that arises is, “Who should safeguard our religion from the threat of fundamentalists”? Should it be the church and church-based organizations or the lawmakers of Nagaland Legislative Assembly?
Article 371A Clause (1), (a) (i) of the constitution of India read, “Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, no Act of Parliament in respect of RELIGIOUS and social practices of the Nagas shall apply to the State of Nagaland unless the Legislative Assembly of Nagaland by a resolution so decides”. This constitutional provision is unique in that, it is exclusive for the State of Nagaland. It is more or less ‘veto power’ vested in NLA over Indian parliament. Constitutionally speaking, this unambiguously made it clear that the onus to protect our religion is directly on the Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) of Nagaland and not necessarily on the church and the church-based organizations. Based on this constitutional power, a one-line resolution by the Nagaland Legislative Assembly was enough to reject Good Governance Day on Christmas Day. Did our representatives do it? The church leaders could advice, or even direct, the MLAs (their own church members) to do what was required and demanded of them. Did they do it? Honestly, all failed in their own ways. Article 371A provided weapon and ammunitions to mandated leaders. If people holding the weapon have no courage to fire, whom should the Nagas blame?
It is unchristian for Christians to have direct confrontation with other religions. It is undesirable for the church-based organizations to attack any political party openly. That is a political role best left to politicians and political parties. The church leaders may do well to caution Naga politicians and political parties to refrain from playing vote bank politics on sensitive issue like religion during elections. The church should not be carried away by rhetoric of actors trying to take holier-than-thou-art role for electoral mileage.
As it is today, Christian Nagas have much more to worry for multitudes of pagan objects/idols surrounding us. Nagas are not idol worshippers but money has become our idol. We have become mammon worshippers. This is the greatest threat to our religion in our own homeland. Pagan cultures connected with idol worships are taking deep roots in our land dedicated to eternal God (read as Nagaland for Christ). This should make Christian Nagas uneasy but it is not. Are we afraid of RSS because Nagaland has become so unchristian? Why are these pagan objects and cultures not ringing alarm bell?
If the church leaders feel that there is threat to our religion, they should question the custodians of law in responsible places for not doing enough. They should boldly speak out the truth to make sure that safeguard law on our religion enshrined in Article 371A is in safe hands. The church can play pivotal role to ensure that, men and women who have deep love for their own God-given land and people enter people’s house. Then those responsible parliamentarians will do the rest inside the house. There is no point crying over spilled milk after elections.
Our rights, including religious right, were not conferred rights but inherent rights defended with Naga blood, sweat and tears. Leaders should be prepared at all times to safeguard them for us. India has constitutional obligation to honor her promise, a promise turning out to be untrustworthy. Nonetheless, if India continues to violate her own words, the mandated Naga parliamentarians have the onus to tell India to leave us alone. We need courageous leaders inside the house to do that. Statehood was not a gift by India. It was annexation by political scheming. We should always remember our own history of independence and be proud of it.
