2 of 5

What was most significant to you about your visit to Gudiyatham?

This community has lived with child labor for generations. It was the norm. Yet we saw a community for whom that same, age-old practice is now seen as a violation of their rights. That is a huge transformation. And it happened in less than ten years.

The credit for that certainly doesn't go entirely to World Vision and other NGOs. The government plays an important role by giving us legal backing, even if the implementation is inconsistent at times. But what I heard yesterday was not mostly about the government or World Vision—they used the word we. "We released seven children from bonded labor last month." Not "World Vision released." Not "the government." We released them. That word we represents a huge success story.

And they have begun to be committed to education—not just for boys, but also for girls. That's a rare thing, for a community that until very recently was struggling with bonded labor to say girls and boys both deserve education and opportunity.

That must be related to the women's involvement in self-help groups.

The women we spoke with very clearly communicated this: "We used to be afraid to walk into a bank. Now we can walk into any office—the collector's office, the police station, the bank. Now no one can stop us!" So the linkages are there with the government, and they can be sustained. Good development is about creating sustainable linkages. We have that in place. Now it is nearly time for World Vision to withdraw from this area.

They are all so confident and enthusiastic. That sense of hope is such a contrast from the last time I visited, many years ago. The situation has been turned around, and truly by God's grace, I think. And did you notice that they were thanking God for their liberation from bondage? It was not simply because of some good strategy or some good program. God's role in their lives was very evident. I was really grateful to God that they saw God's hand in it.

This is not a model of development where God is absent, but one where God is involved. It is not making a hero out of men or women. They were still God-dependent. For an Indian, that is natural. You don't need to introduce God to an Indian community. They will naturally speak about God.

But was seeing God in their liberation a theological shift for these Hindus?

I don't think it's a theological shift for the average Hindu Indian. For Indians, God is more involved in day-to-day life than most Western Christians' theology would allow. The average Hindu need not be introduced to God in that sense. They need to be introduced to the name of that God—Jesus. I've said many times that we do not need to break our heads in India convincing any Indian about the existence of God. The challenge is, "What is the name of this God who is involved with the poor?" That's where Christian distinctiveness—and divisiveness—is felt. Our privilege in World Vision is being able to call attention to the name of God as Jesus through our lives, relationships, and actions, not in a divisive manner, but in a distinctive manner.

Is there suspicion that your development work is a subtext for proselytizing?

There is suspicion in certain quarters. But we insist that in World Vision India, we do not trade our God for development. We do not trade our God to buy relationships. He is too precious for us to be bargaining with, too precious to be bargained for. He is not for sale.

So proselytizing, conversion through coercive means, is a non-issue for us. Not just because we respect the people we serve. That's one part of the story. But also because we value the God we worship.

next page... |  2 of 5

share this page

September 2007, Vol. 51, No. 9