QUESTION : Sinoj Joseph
- In the modern era, the Church in India can be truly authentic, relevant, and effective only if it is deeply ingrained in Indian society and culture. What do “contextualisation” and “inculturation” mean in the context of the Indian Church today?
ANSWER : Jacob Parappally MSFS
The early Church lived its faith in Jesus Christ and proclaimed it within the concrete context of its life. Although the Gospel is one, it has been handed down to us through four distinct accounts: according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Each evangelist presents the meaning of Jesus Christ and the experience of liberation, salvation, or wholeness in a manner that is meaningful and intelligible to the community addressed, responding to the needs of its particular context.
The Gospel according to Mark presents Jesus Christ as the crucified Messiah to the persecuted Christians of Rome. Matthew presents Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies concerning the Messiah, addressing Christians of Jewish origin and helping them understand that Jesus has come not only for the Jewish people but for all humanity. Luke, writing for Christians of Gentile origin, presents Jesus Christ as the one endowed with royal dignity, the liberator and saviour. John, on the other hand, presents Jesus Christ as the saviour of the world, light, truth, and life because the world is mired in darkness, falsehood, and death. Thus, the Gospels are written with a clear recognition of the needs of their respective communities, and the evangelists take the context of their addressees seriously.
Regrettably, all three ritual Churches in India today show a tendency to return to pre-Vatican II practices, celebrating the liturgy occasionally or even regularly in Syriac or Latin. Such attitudes often stem from the mistaken belief that identity can be preserved only in opposition to others rather than in relationship with them.
The Church, as the sacrament of Christ in the world, has received the missionary mandate (Matt 28:18–20) to go forth and proclaim the Gospel to the whole world. This proclamation takes place through word and sacrament. St Paul writes: “All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation… So we are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us; we entreat you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God” (2 Cor 5:18, 20). The reconciliation of God and humanity accomplished in Jesus Christ must be experienced and communicated within the concrete context of life. Such context includes culture, language, worldview, the presence of other religions, and socio-political and economic realities.
St Paul further explains this contextual sensitivity when he says: “To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews… To those outside the law I became as one outside the law… I do it all for the sake of the Gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings” (1 Cor 9:20–23). The Church, therefore, must enter into dialogue with all aspects of human context in order to proclaim the life-giving Gospel of Christ. Like God who became human and assumed everything that is authentically human, the Church must incarnate itself in every context.
In the contemporary Indian context, the Church can be truly authentic, relevant, and effective only if it is deeply rooted in the life, struggles, symbols, and aspirations of the people of India. It should not remain a community standing outside society, merely reaching out to those who struggle to live a dignified human life, but should become an integral part of their struggles. As the Pastoral Constitution of the Second Vatican Council affirms: “The joys and the hopes, the griefs and the anxieties of the people of this age, especially those who are poor or in any way afflicted, these too are the joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties of the followers of Christ. Indeed, nothing genuinely human fails to raise an echo in their hearts” (Gaudium et Spes, no. 1). This conviction points to the twin processes of contextualisation and inculturation, which are not optional strategies but essential dimensions of the Church’s mission in India today.
Church in India after Vatican II
For the Church in India, the Second Vatican Council was like a second spring that brought renewed life and a deeper understanding of its mission in the world. According to Francis D’Sa SJ, “The Council was a spring in two senses: it watered its Indianness, and it was the right season to make it germinate.” The essential contribution of Vatican II lay in the vision it projected, a vision that the Church in India urgently needed. Brought up on a largely Europeanized theological and pastoral framework, the Council opened up new possibilities for spiritual nourishment and new ways of being Church in India. Not surprisingly, the Church in India was fired with an enthusiasm never before seen in its chequered history.
For centuries, the Church in India was generally regarded as a “mission Church.” Vatican II brought a decisive shift in consciousness, enabling it to recognize itself as a local Church, the Church in India. Fresh winds from the Council began to fertilize all spheres of Christian life: biblical, spiritual, theological (Christological, ecclesiological, sacramental, and missiological), liturgical, moral, pastoral, and ecumenical.
Why a distinctively Indian Church did not emerge following the apostolic preaching of St Thomas is a question that requires serious reflection. The three ritual Churches present in India today were brought from outside, and each generally tends to resist theological contextualisation and liturgical inculturation for fear of losing its so-called identity.
This conciliar impetus was further translated into concrete action through the epoch-making All India Seminar on “The Church in India Today”, held at Dharmaram College, Bangalore in 1969. Prepared through nationwide seminars and consultations, the ten-day national seminar marked, in the words of Cardinal Gracias, “a veritable second spring.” Since it concerned the renewal of the whole Church in India, representatives of all sections, bishops, priests, religious men and women, and laity, participated. Workshops addressed themes such as spirituality, liturgy and Catechetics, evangelization, dialogue with other religions, Indian culture, education, socio-economic activities, civic and political life, social communications, leadership, family, labour, ecumenism, health, social services, and pastoral life. These deliberations significantly influenced subsequent generations. The strong conviction of the participants, and of the Church in India as a whole was that contextualisation and inculturation were essential for fulfilling the mission entrusted by Jesus Christ.
Need for Contextualisation
Contextualisation refers to the way the Gospel is understood, expressed, and lived in dialogue with the concrete historical, social, political, economic, and religious realities of a particular context. In India, this means that Christian faith and theology must seriously engage the lived experiences of the people: poverty and inequality, caste oppression, gender injustice, religious fundamentalism, communal tensions, ecological crisis, and the quest for dignity and liberation. Contextualisation asks not merely how to preach the Gospel in India, but how the Gospel speaks from within the Indian situation. It challenges the Church to read the “signs of the times” attentively and to articulate faith responses that address people’s real-life concerns. An Indian contextual theology, therefore, does not import ready-made answers from elsewhere but allows the Gospel to be reinterpreted through the questions, symbols, and struggles of Indian society.
St Paul reminds us that “the word of God is not bound” (2 Timothy 2:9). God’s Word is not confined to any single culture. It is not the Jewish culture in which God became human that must be uncritically accepted by all who follow Jesus Christ. Nor should European culture, which historically accompanied the proclamation of the Gospel in Asia and Africa, be considered normative for Christian faith and practice in these regions. People in different cultural contexts experience the mirabilia Dei, the wonderful works of God in Jesus Christ, and must express this experience in the language, thought categories, and symbols of their own contexts.
After the apostolic period, several local Churches emerged that were deeply rooted in their own cultures, languages, and social worlds, often referred to as the apostolic or ancient Churches. These Churches did not develop as cultural replicas of Jerusalem or Rome but as inculturated expressions of the one Christian faith: for example, the Antiochene, Alexandrian, Persian, Syrian, and Armenian Churches. Why a distinctively Indian Church did not emerge following the apostolic preaching of St Thomas is a question that requires serious reflection. The three ritual Churches present in India today were brought from outside, and each generally tends to resist theological contextualisation and liturgical inculturation for fear of losing its so-called identity. As long as such attitudes persist and God’s Word remains “bound,” Christianity in India risks remaining a foreign body within Indian culture and will lack effectiveness in proclaiming the liberating message of Christ.
The Challenge of Inculturation
Closely related to contextualisation, inculturation refers to the process by which the Gospel takes flesh within a particular culture, transforming it from within while also being enriched by it. In the Indian Church, inculturation must go beyond superficial adaptations such as Indian music, dress, gestures, or ritual forms in worship. At a deeper level, it involves entering into the soul of Indian culture, its spirituality, sense of the sacred, respect for harmony, community-oriented worldview, contemplative traditions, and openness to transcendence. Just as the Word became flesh in a specific historical and cultural context in Jesus of Nazareth, so too the Gospel must become genuinely “Indian” without ceasing to be authentically Christian.
Some significant efforts were made to inculturate the liturgy in the Latin rite by incorporating Indian symbols, music, gestures, and ritual forms to express the Christian mystery in ways resonant with Indian sensibilities. Pioneers such as D. S. Amalorpavadass argued that authentic worship must arise from the lived experience of the people and draw upon India’s rich spiritual heritage. However, inculturation has also generated controversy. Fears of syncretism, doctrinal ambiguity, and threats to ecclesial unity led to resistance and, in some cases, the reversal of inculturated practices.
In the Indian Church, inculturation must go beyond superficial adaptations such as Indian music, dress, gestures, or ritual forms in worship. At a deeper level, it involves entering into the soul of Indian culture, its spirituality, sense of the sacred, respect for harmony, community-oriented worldview, contemplative traditions, and openness to transcendence. Just as the Word became flesh in a specific historical and cultural context in Jesus of Nazareth, so too the Gospel must become genuinely “Indian” without ceasing to be authentically Christian.
Today, most inculturation efforts in the Latin rite have been abandoned or reduced to minimal forms, even in places where the so-called Indian Rite Mass was once celebrated with enthusiasm. One major criticism was that these efforts relied predominantly on Brahminic or Sanskritic symbols, neglecting the symbols of Dalits, tribals, and other oppressed communities. Moreover, it is misleading to speak of a single “Indian Rite,” since India is not a monolithic culture but a mosaic of diverse cultures. Additionally, only a limited number of bishops actively supported inculturation, while Rome often viewed such initiatives with suspicion. Regrettably, all three ritual Churches in India today show a tendency to return to pre-Vatican II practices, celebrating the liturgy occasionally or even regularly in Syriac or Latin. Such attitudes often stem from the mistaken belief that identity can be preserved only in opposition to others rather than in relationship with them.
Authentic inculturation finds its deepest foundation in the incarnation of the Logos. Every culture must incarnate Christ so that he may be encountered meaningfully by those who belong to that culture. At the same time, inculturation demands discernment. Not everything in culture can be uncritically absorbed; dehumanizing elements such as caste discrimination and patriarchy must be challenged and transformed in the light of the Gospel. Yet genuine inculturation also recognizes that God is already at work within Indian religious traditions and cultural wisdom. In a pluralistic society like India, this recognition fosters dialogue, mutual respect, and learning rather than fear or isolation.
Together, contextualisation and inculturation ensure that the Church in India is not perceived as a foreign transplant or an enclave detached from the nation’s life. A Church that truly shares the joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties of its people, especially the poor and marginalized needs to shed its foreign face to become effective witness of the gospel. Such a Church speaks an Indian language, not merely linguistically, but spiritually, socially, and prophetically. Only then will its witness be credible, its mission life-giving, and its proclamation of Christ genuinely good news for India today.
