Postcolonial Constructions of Colonialism: The Xtianizing Myth and the Erasure of Indian Christian Histories

This paper interrogates how the postcolonial period has witnessed the reframing of colonialism as a primarily Christianizing project, despite substantial historical evidence that challenges this construction. Through an analysis of contemporary legal cases—such as the denial of burial rights to Ramesh Baghel, a Christian Adivasi (Indigenous person) in Chhattisgarh, and the conviction of Pastor Jose Pappachan and his wife Sheeja Pappachan under Uttar Pradesh’s anti-conversion law—the paper argues that nationalist and political discourses have weaponized the idea of Christianity as inherently colonial.

Drawing from historical case studies of the Thomas Christians (TCs) of India, who trace their origins to St. Thomas the Apostle in 52 CE, the paper challenges the binary of Christian colonizers versus non-Christian colonized. It engages with decolonial theorists such as Achille Mbembe, Aníbal Quijano, and Boaventura de Sousa Santos to critique how postcolonial anti-Christian rhetoric has mirrored colonial strategies of exclusion. Additionally, it employs Gloria Anzaldúa’s border thinking to conceptualize how Indigenous Christian communities exist in a liminal space—both Indian and Christian—offering a pluriversal approach that moves beyond simplistic return-to-precolonial-purity models of decolonization.

Colonialism as a “Christianizing” Force: A Postcolonial Myth?

The idea that European colonialism in South Asia was primarily a Christianizing force is not a neutral historical fact but rather a postcolonial construction. Precolonial and colonial historical records illustrate that European colonial powers were often more invested in economic exploitation and political domination than in widespread religious conversion. While missionary activity was certainly part of colonial expansion, it was often contested, resisted, or even sidelined by colonial administrations themselves.

For example, the British East India Company, which ruled large parts of India before the British Crown assumed control in 1858, was initially reluctant to support missionary work, fearing it would disrupt economic stability and provoke local resistance. Even under British colonial rule, Christianization was never a widespread state policy; rather, missionary efforts were largely independent and met with resistance from both colonial administrators and indigenous elites.

In the postcolonial era, nationalist and decolonial narratives have portrayed colonialism as a fiercely Christianizing force. This view sidelines indigenous Christian communities that existed before European rule. It serves two main purposes. Postcolonial states use this view to justify discrimination against Christian minorities by calling Christianity foreign, and it erases indigenous Christian histories, like the Thomas Christians, by linking Christianity only to European colonization.

The Thomas Christians as a Challenge to Colonial-Christianity Narratives

The Thomas Christians (TCs) of India provide a counterexample to the postcolonial myth that Christianity is inherently colonial. Tracing their roots to St. Thomas the Apostle in 52 CE, the Thomas Christians existed over a millennium before Portuguese, Dutch, or British colonial powers arrived.

The Thomas Christians historically integrated with local communities, adopted Dravidian cultural practices, and maintained relationships with non-Christian rulers, including Hindu, Muslim, and Buddhist elites. Their liturgical traditions, which belong to the East Syrian Rite, connect them to Mesopotamian Christian traditions rather than to European Catholicism or Protestantism. The Portuguese colonizers attempted to Latinize the Thomas Christians in the 16th century, leading to resistance movements such as the Coonan Cross Oath (1653), where Thomas Christian leaders explicitly rejected European religious control.

The case of the Thomas Christians demonstrates that Christianity in South Asia is not necessarily a colonial import but rather a historically rooted and complex tradition that predated and resisted colonialism. However, the postcolonial nation-state’s framework—which constructs Christianity as foreign—has contributed to their increasing marginalization, grouping them with later colonial missionary efforts despite their distinct precolonial history.

Decolonial Theories and the Weaponization of Postcolonial Christian Exclusions

This paper engages with contemporary decolonial thought to critique how anti-Christian rhetoric has been mobilized within nationalist discourses.

Achille Mbembe’s necropolitics helps frame the denial of burial rights to Ramesh Baghel, a Christian Adivasi in Chhattisgarh, as an act of postcolonial exclusion, where nationalist hierarchies regulate life, death, and belonging.

Aníbal Quijano’s coloniality of power demonstrates how postcolonial nation-states, rather than merely resisting colonialism, have continued colonial exclusions by imposing rigid religious and racial boundaries.

Boaventura de Sousa Santos’ epistemologies of the South challenge the way postcolonial states privilege hegemonic, Brahmanical forms of indigeneity while erasing subaltern Christian knowledge systems.

Additionally, Tuck and Yang’s critique of “decolonization as metaphor” highlights the dangers of framing decolonization as a return to an imagined pre-colonial purity—a framework that excludes indigenous Christian identities and histories.

Finally, Gloria Anzaldúa’s border thinking provides a pluriversal approach to understanding the liminality of Christian Indigenous communities like the Thomas Christians, who exist both inside and outside dominant religious and national narratives.

Legal and Social Implications of the “Xtianizing” Myth in Postcolonial India

The erasure of indigenous Christian histories has material consequences in contemporary South Asia, particularly in the legal and political persecution of Christian communities.

1. The Case of Ramesh Baghel (Chhattisgarh) -- As a Christian Adivasi, Baghel was denied burial rights in his ancestral village, reflecting how nationalist policies have framed Christianity as foreign to indigeneity. This exclusion reinforces a coloniality of power, where religious identity determines one’s access to land, belonging, and dignity in death.
2. The Conviction of Pastor Jose Pappachan and His Wife -- Under Uttar Pradesh’s anti-conversion laws, Pappachan and his wife were convicted for allegedly converting Adivasi peoples to Christianity. These laws, while framed as protecting indigenous traditions, selectively target Christian conversions while permitting Hindu nationalist proselytization.

Conclusion: Toward a More Inclusive Decolonial Framework

This paper ultimately argues that postcolonial South Asia has woken up to a “fact”—the idea that colonialism was primarily a Christianizing force—when, in reality, this perception is itself a colonial construct.

By revisiting archival records, legal cases, and decolonial critiques, this paper challenges the nationalist erasure of indigenous Christian histories and proposes an alternative reading of South Asian Christianity—one that moves beyond ideological exclusions toward a more inclusive and complex decolonial framework.

This alternative framework recognizes pluriversality, allowing for a non-hierarchical, non-exclusionary understanding of indigeneity, religion, and colonial legacies that neither romanticizes precolonial traditions nor reproduces colonial exclusions in the postcolonial era.