British attempt to convert India to Christianity?

Inspired by the Brunei thread...

In general, colonial empires were pretty religiously tolerant places, and tended not to repress those of differing religions to the colonial masters. My question is, what if colonialists, in this case the British in India, had decided it was worthwhile to put serious efforts into Christianising the peoples of the subcontinent?

I'm guessing that a programme of Christianising would be a difficult one, but history does record conversions happening from a small, foreign elite downwards- notably in the Islamic world in the eighth and ninth centuries, so for this reason, I don't think it's an entirely ASB idea for it to be pulled off. Whether the British would want to try is quite another matter though, I guess...

So, three questions. Why would the British want to do it, how and when would they do it (financial incentives, as in the Islamic world, perhaps?), and how long would it take?

Answers on a postcard...
 
It will never work. Islam had been present in India for centuries, yet it remained the religion of the elite outside of a handful of areas. Hinduism is too deeply ingrained. You might see Christianity become a notable minority but its only real power will be directly tied to the British government.
 

mowque

Banned
My question is, what if colonialists, in this case the British in India, had decided it was worthwhile to put serious efforts into Christianising the peoples of the subcontinent?

They did. At least in smaller places like Burma. Just sparked a Buddhist reaction movement.
 
You might convert the lower castes to Christianity, maybe but you'll end up pissing everyone else off. It was not in Britain's interest to convert them. Just exploit them.

Unlike the Spanish method of converting them, and then still exploit them.
 
I thought a major reason for the Indian Mutany was the perception that the British were trying to convert people to Christianity.

I think that we would see a large number of uprisings along the lines of the Mutany.
 
We were milking the caste system for all it was worth, to say nothing of religious divides, so to start with you need some reason for us not to be pursuing a strategy of divide and rule. That requires changing the nature of British imperialism.

But it's not impossible when the motive is there: consider Portugal and all the Indian Catholics. Took a bit of burning people at the stake and wasn't total or widespread, but there it is.

Mebbe something with the Civil War and subsequent Indian rivalries? England/Britain as one of only several powers controlling bits of India and very strictly Presbyterian, or else Independent but making acceptance of puritanical Christianity the way to the top of the native administrative ladder?
 
Keep in mind racism and the caste systems. The Portuegese were ruthless against the Chrsitains who had been along far longer than the second Pope, while also refusing people from Brahmin backgrounds to enter a convent. They also viewed marriage or children with Indians with intensive loathing, with people straight from Portugal always being the first choice. There is aso the issue of how even the Christian groups in India with official hierachies have the untouchables at the bottom rung away from them. Think of how the Salvation Army made their own church because the Anglicans were horribly snobbish and insulting to the poor and rehabiliated that they were spreading the Gospel to. Oh, and the riots from the Skeleton Army, police, and politicians to try to stomp out said charity organization. The British were one of th emore Christian of countries, but certainly not a large chunk of them.
 
We were milking the caste system for all it was worth, to say nothing of religious divides, so to start with you need some reason for us not to be pursuing a strategy of divide and rule. That requires changing the nature of British imperialism.

I would argue the missionary impulse was there in OTL. As Macauley observed, "No Hindu, who has received an English education, ever remains sincerely attached to who religion." After 1813 missionaries could travel throughout the EIC's territories so long as they had a licenses. Which led to some interesting results, in the form of the Sepoy Mutiny.
 
More Indian Christians, less British rule.

Eventually native religious war?

Inspired by the Brunei thread...

In general, colonial empires were pretty religiously tolerant places, and tended not to repress those of differing religions to the colonial masters. My question is, what if colonialists, in this case the British in India, had decided it was worthwhile to put serious efforts into Christianising the peoples of the subcontinent?

I'm guessing that a programme of Christianising would be a difficult one, but history does record conversions happening from a small, foreign elite downwards- notably in the Islamic world in the eighth and ninth centuries, so for this reason, I don't think it's an entirely ASB idea for it to be pulled off. Whether the British would want to try is quite another matter though, I guess...

So, three questions. Why would the British want to do it, how and when would they do it (financial incentives, as in the Islamic world, perhaps?), and how long would it take?

Answers on a postcard...
 
balls, my reply got lost somewhere, darn internet.

To get Britain to try and convert India the key lies in changing things in the UK, not India. You really need to do some major changes to have Britain be a far more devout, religiously united, and proselytising place. Which...is quite the challenge in itself what with the conflict between the two official churches in the UK, not to mention the general religious freedom of the place which led to all sorts of sects popping up (usually the ones who were big on preaching overseas).

They did. At least in smaller places like Burma. Just sparked a Buddhist reaction movement.

Some people did, it wasn't a government organised movement though. The UK's relationship with missionaries was very up and down, they had to be allowed to be free to do their thing, but they were often more trouble than they were worth.
 
Last edited:
Top