Foreword
SAHTRI’s
initiative to organize a seminar on the theological contributions of M.M. Thomas
and to publish the presentations is greatly appreciated. M.M. Thomas is one of
those thinkers and leaders who have inspired a whole generation of Indian theologians
and ecumenists, whether or not they agreed with him. His addresses, articles
and books are thought-provoking and can hardly be ignored.
After his visible
role in debates in India and outside ended, one got the impression that his
influence was fading. New concerns and developments in India and in the world and new
theological trends were determining the agenda of debates in churches, the ecumenical movement
and theological faculties and seminaries. New issues that were not at the heart
of Thomas’ reflections increasingly needed attention, for instance, the
perspectives offered by feminist and Dalit theologians, the concerns around
ecological justice and, later, increasing religious radicalism and violence.
Thomas was fully aware of the changing agendas in theological reflection and
urged younger theologians to take up these new subjects in their study.
It was felt
that with these changing agendas the
relevance of Thomas’ thinking would also diminish. This volume shows that this
is not the case. The centenary celebrations of his birthday have revived the
interest in his writings. Several platforms and institutions, including the Mar Thoma Church to which he belonged, have
felt that it is worth going back to his writings. They try to discern what his
approach to the questions and concerns of his days would mean today. SAHTRI’s choice to focus on Thomas’
contribution to reflections on theological methodologies is therefore very
timely and relevant.
However,
reading his articles and books, one hardly gets the feeling that Thomas
developed a systematic, academic theological methodology. Some remarks and
insights can be found throughout the body of his writings, but he did not bring
them together in a well-developed study on methodology. This does not mean that
he would play down the importance of a sound theological methodology. On the
contrary, his reflections on current issues in society, churches and the ecumenical movement, his Bible
studies, meditations and sermons, all witness a deep awareness that theology
implies a continuous interaction between sociology of religion and theology of
society, as he formulated in his book Man and the Universe of Faiths.
This volume
of studies on Thomas shows that his theology can rightly be called a theology
of dialogue. I would like to add a dimension to the dialogical nature of his
thinking which has often not been
highlighted. His thinking has also a ‘journey’ dimension, or as we would call
it today in the ecumenical movement, his thinking can be seen as a personal
pilgrimage of justice and peace. In his unpublished manuscript ‘Faith Seeking
Understanding and Responsibility’, he tried to write, probably challenged by
some of his friends, an autobiography. At that time his attempt was not really
a success as he more or less had brought together significant passages of his
most important articles and annotated these passages with some notes with
reference to the context in which they were written. It was never published as
a book as it would probably not have appealed to a wider audience. However,
this unpublished manuscript is of great importance for those who want to study
the development of his thinking.
The title
of this unpublished manuscript is very meaningful to understand Thomas’
personal faith journey and engagement in and understanding of socio-cultural,
economic, and political affairs. He called it ‘Faith Seeking Understanding and
Responsibility’. These four words precisely mark the key elements in his
thinking: his personal faith and spirituality, the need to analyse and
understand, and the urgency to take up responsibility. The word “seeking” forms
a crucial marker for his methodology in bringing together faith, understanding
and responsibility. For him it was a journey in which answers and solutions
were not given once and for all. Comparing his early articles and meditations
and his later books helps us to see that he has gone through a development in
his thinking which is on the one hand a continuous response to current issues
and on the other hand a growth in theological understanding of them leading to
Christian responsibility.
This methodological
approach is still very relevant. I hope that re-reading his articles and books
will help us in our own faith search for understanding and responsibility. M.M.
was a person who accompanied seeking out people with pastoral care and encouragement.
But he was also a person who liked critical dialogue challenging easy and
comfortable assumptions. I hope that this volume will help the readers to
engage with him in a heuristic conversation.
Rev. Dr Hielke Wolters
Associate General Secretary
World Council of Churches
