In an opinion piece that slams Pico Iyer for sloppy thinking and misinformed judgments ('Pico Iyer makes an ass of himself", #288) it is lamentable that Kunal falls into the same trap of slapdash sociology. When Lama writes 'Christianity...is a recent import largely spread by unspiritual promises of economic advancement.' I wonder what evidence supports his assertion. Never mind that there was a viable indigenous Christian community in Kathmandu valley in the late Malla period whose descendants still live in Bihar. This might be considered an historical anomaly that had little long-term impact on Nepali culture and society. It is Lama's comment on how (evangelical Protestant) Christianity has spread that is, to borrow his vocabulary, clich?d and specious.

As a religious ethnographer with some research experience in this area, I find that a more common reason Nepalis are initially attracted to Christianity is the promise or claim of miraculous physical healing. Regrettably, from a theological perspective, a faith based on enthusiasm for such events can run perilously close to magical thinking. I suspect some are attracted to churches because Christianity represents for them a religion that is somehow more modern and international. The judgment that converts are primarily low-caste would be an off-the-mark truism in Nepal. There are large numbers of Brahmin and Chettri converts. Nonetheless, there are certainly some Dalits and Janajatis who embrace Christianity to signal a definitive break with what they perceive as an oppressive cultural and religious system. Dr Ambedkar's Buddhists did the same. Socio-economic factors clearly play a role in this. But for Lama to equate this motivation with a venal desire for economic advancement is demeaning to a significant number of the countrymen whose praises he otherwise rightly sings.

Gregory Sharkey,
SJ Thamel