T.S. VINAY KUMAR writes an open letter to Cardinal Dias, the Bombay-born head of the Congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples at the Vatican on his explanation of Pope Benedict’s statement on conversions in India.
***
Dear Cardinal Dias
I would like to bring to your kind attention the various anomalies that lie within your statement.
First of all, the Pope has absolutely no right to comment on what a sovereign nation does in its own land. India neither reports to the Vatican nor has the Vatican any say in India’s Constitution.
Nowhere does the Indian Constitution say that the Vatican’s permission is required before any constitutional amendments are made—particularly with respect to religion. Still, I would be happy if you would ponder the points noted below before you conclude that your Pope is right.
You have said that the religious conversion of man is strictly between man and the god. If so, why do you need missionaries? God can himself come and propagate your religion.
Let’s assume, as you contend, that god has indeed appointed your missionaries to go and spread the gospel of truth. Does it mean that they can come and coerce people to join your community?
Yes, the matter is entirely different if a person converts on his own—without any coercion from missionaries. In that case, I am in agreement with your statement. But with missionaries playing a major part in this dirty drama, it makes me wonder about their sinister role in the conversion of faiths.
Let us face the stark facts. Even if you say that missionaries are really required to spread the gospel of truth, why is it that these missionaries always target the poor and the illiterate?
If you take a census across the country on the number of people who have converted or I would say, coerced to convert, you will find that the vast majority of people are from the poor and weaker sections of society who are uneducated. I have myself come across one such case.
These are the targets that can easily get influenced because missionaries can provide a lot of monetary support—which is an essential ingredient for any human being in the times of distress.
What does god have to do with conversions in such cases?
Yet, for countering the misdeeds of missionaries, if any local government brings in legislation, you brand it as obstruction of religious freedom. For a moment, please consider how justified you are in your argument.
Conversion leads to erosion of local culture. One classic example is of Nagaland. Being a totally backward state and only with tribes/aborigines, the majority of the people are converts there (around 90%). English has become the official language in that state. However, it is still an economically backward state where tribal people are forced to learn English. What is your take on this?
I am deeply appreciative of the services that are provided by the Catholic community, but that does not mean that you can brand Christianity as a religion superior to others. It is required that every person appreciates the other religion with equal respect.
If missionaries in India do not go on propaganda, it will do a lot of good for the country and stop the many educated and uneducated fanatics who are causing trouble for Christians (which is a matter of national shame). Can you please ponder for a moment, why is this happening?
Dear Cardinal, there can be no smoke without fire. The insecurity amongst the majority community on the coercive methods adopted by missionaries to convert people is inciting these fanatics resulting in the kind of violence you have mentioned.
I feel, indeed, that it is the missionaries in India who are fanning and contributing their mite to this kind of religious fundamentalism.
It should be noted by Vatican that the bill on ban for religious conversions is not aimed at people converting faiths on their own but to prevent the missionaries or anyone of similar kind from coercing people to change their faith through inducement.
Therefore, dear Cardinal, please take this in your stride, accept the facts and allow our beloved motherland to follow the wishes of our own law.
Are we not making an assumption that in matters of religion, the ‘poor and the weaker sections’ are mere goats shephereded by the emmisary of the Good Lord? If the ‘poor and the weak’ had the backing of the religion that they supposedly belong to, why would they turn to another one? Is it not true that the poor and the weak in our country are as much non-Hindus to the extent of deriving any benefits by being part of the order?
Being an atheist, I find organised religion a complete sham, all of them. But this is a personal choice. But if I did want to believe in a God, or the force which will come and uplift me out of ‘poverty and weakness’, would I not make a choice from among the religions which benefit me most?
Before the majority in this country succumbs to paranoia, it might do us well, to take a good hard look at why this phenomena occurs in the first place and to solve the problem there. No point in eliminating competition in a free market.
Well written letter. Also heard that conversions are taking place near Tirupathi. And that the Christians are trying to find a place on the hills in order to spread their religion. Is Rajashekara Reddy, a converted Christian, behind this? God knows!!
there is so much crying about people converting to christianity. Let me ask everyone of you there what are you doing to assist these people in their poverty? this is not about any religion. the rich do not need money, they have it, the middle-class dont need money. the only people that need money are the poor who do not have money to buy one-time meal. if the convert to chritianity what is the crying about, arent there chrisitians converting to hinduism or for that matter to other religions, so where is the tear shedding. fine these crying people come forward rather sit on your sofas and say why, who, how, NO and help these poor people on mountains or on the streets.
Hey Creative Joseph Muthuvel,
You moron.
hang it up!
mixing charity with convertion you wont make a duet!
But you said it right, when the Government is of little help to certain sections of society, the vultures take the toll.
convert all beggers shud not be persued by any religion.
Given KP’s own past with Sonia’s pet magazine, it was surprising that this post was put up at all. I agree with Vinay. Imagine if India were to be 80 per cent Islamic instead of being Hindu would we have all this ‘secular’ talk. This would have been an islamic nation…While religion is truly a matter of individual choice even non admirers of god’s own party (like me) will agree that the their complaint that the current setup is skewed towards minortyism is true.
I agree with Jerry Rao when he says in his Indian Express column that we should let this also be a free market. If all religions vie for the poor man’s profession of that faith, at the least he will be monetarily better off. Why don’t we Hindus who spend billions every year for Pujas divert some of that money for Hindu missionary activities instead of feigning moral superiority that we don’t try to convert other people?
I think one has to be very clear about conversion. Missionaries do not work only among the poor. There are many Hindus from high income group and education who felt transformed by the message they heard and became Christians. The fact that it is the Christian missionaries who are working selflessly in remote parts of the nation as well as in cities. Which are the the best schools, colleges and hospitals in the nation? And who benefit from these and who form the majority of the staff? It is very easy to just say convert and escape. As citizens what do we do for betterment of fellow individuals? Let us ask ourselves about what we do before we label missionaries and cry loud about so called conversions.
Simon ji,
I understand your opposition to the blog. However, is it not true that missionaries go around distributing Bible across the country when they visit houses? If someone dares enough to tell them about Hinduism and request them to accept Bhagavadgita, they run away. Probably, they are afraid of the consequences that might turn out!! Who knows, in all probability, they themselves might get converted from Christianity!!
C’mon sir, let us understand this – how many educated or literate people have changed their religion in the past 10 years or so? Take a census across the country and you will be amazed to find that most of them come from poor background mainly because of inducement. There is no problem if someone converts on his own – but the problem lies in converting people with coercive methods. That is what I think is unethical.
Another point about the ‘best schools, colleges and hospitals’ mentioned by you. We all know how much preference is given to other communities. It is only a very small percentage compared to Christians joining the institutions; similarly with hospitals. There is a lot of discount for Christians in hospitals, whereas higher amount is charged for other patients. In toto, these hospitals, though they provide good service are subsidizing their community at the cost of others. Do you call this as service? This is fleecing of people and nothing else.