| In this dissertation I have attempted to construct an Ecclesiology for the present Indian context. I have used two main principles in guiding my constructive work. First, I have tried to argue that the church should be a multi-ecclesia rather than a mono-ecclesia. In other words, I have argued that the church needs to have plurality or multi-dimensional nature within its very essence, rather than a single homogenous nature. Everything that the church in India says or does should reflect this plurality. This principle of plurality is fundamental because the context of India is plural. If the church needs to be truly relevant to the diverse Indian context, it must re-conceptualize itself as a God ordained entity whose foundation is laid on the principle of multi-ecclesia.;The second principle that I have employed is the perspective of the margins. I have therefore titled this work as the Ecclesia of the Margins. It is my firm conviction that the marginalized in India provide us with the critical standard against whom we must test our conceptions of ecclesiology. An ecclesiological elaboration which has little to no relevance to the marginalized should be rejected and urgently reformed. An ecclesiology, true to its name, cannot help ignore the numerous marginalized people in the Indian context. The poor, dalits, tribals, outcaste, and women all comprise a huge section of the population of India which has been pushed to margins of society. An ecclesiology for India must ensure that the voice and experience of the marginalized are the pillars of the church.;In terms of a building analogy, while plurality or multi-dimension is the foundation of the church, the marginalized are the pillars, which uphold the church. It is only then that the four walls of the church can be built so that it becomes a place for all people- rich and poor, men and women, elite and common masses to come together for the purposes of God.;In order to construct this ecclesiology, I have used the work of three great thinkers- Panikkar, Gandhi and Thomas. In using their work, I have been aware of both the strengths and the weaknesses of their work in constructing an Indian ecclesiology. In spite of the fact that these thinkers may not have directly addressed the issue of ecclesiology, I have used their ideas because they have highlighted critical insights about the Indian context and have suggested ways to live in the Indian context. I believe these insights and suggestions can and should be incorporated in an understanding of ecclesiology which wants to be true to the Indian context.;In summary, in this research I argue that the broad themes of Harmonization, Harijanization and Humanization have considerable potential to motivate, encourage and intensify the transformative actions of the church, and this should happen soon if the church is to be a relevant force in India. In this process of engagement, insights that already exist among the marginalized groups should continually be identified and built upon. This, in turn, should help to give firmer root to ecclesiology, to enlarge upon and propagate the ideas, which derive from it, creating in the end a practical theology of liberation with the scope and capacity to engage all groups. |
