Cornel & George, I very much agree with the both of you. So I don't have anything interesting to add by contradicting. But I would like to add to why I think Christians are more prone to evangelisation.
Right from Catechism, when we are too young to make an informed choice, we are brainwashed into thinking that our Hindu and Muslim friends are destined to hell, and we should "pray for their lost souls" and "help to save their souls". This continues in adulthood when we pray for the "pagan brothers & sisters" during the Let-us-Pray section of the mass, and the thoughts we imbibe during childhood require a certain strength to shrug off. This arrogance that Christianity is the best (and only) religion and everyone should follow it to be saved is almost inbred. Most tend to keep this thought dormant while engaging with non-christian brothers and sisters, a few reject it, and a few enlightened and pro-active ones become evangelists. Now what I find the most repulsive form of evangilisation is that practiced my a FEW missionaries. They follow the policy of 'Food in the left hand, and a Bible in the right', either both or nothing. This was confirmed during the various stories* that came out during the voluntary efforts of many groups post the Tsunami in south India. Helpless people had no choice but to convert. Jesus taught of an UNCONDITIONAL love. Yet these misguided missionaries believe they are doing the work of Jesus. To add fuel to the fire, Pope John Paul II said prior to the millenium: "just as in the first millennium the cross was planted on the soil of Europe, and in the second on that of the Americas and Africa, we can pray that in the third Christian millennium, a great harvest of faith will be reaped in this vast and vital continent of Asia." (Reference links* to this and events that followed this time are found under my sign off) Defenders argue that Evagelisation is not the same as forced/alluring conversions, and is merely a freedom to express ones thoughts about religion. While this is legally true, I still find it utterly distasteful. Now the current Pope Benedict XVI recently commented that India should not oppose conversion as every one has the fundamental right to choose his religion. Im afraid, I have to agree with him on this. But at the same time, I hate it when an attractive woman stops me in the middle of the street, and asks me for a minute of my time, and tries to convince me on how to make Jesus my best friend (on the basis of my goatie which often gives the impression that I am Muslim). Id rather she ask me for my number. Why cannot she respect that I could be a Muslim and leave me alone? Which is what brings me to the question I posed: Although we have no Legal right to oppose fundamentalism, do we have the moral right? Can we think of a way to legally suppress fundamentalism of all religions, including evangelisation. Or perhaps, as George suggests, there should be a moratorium set up in good faith. Aristo. *References to Tsunami Conversions/Pope John Pauls Comments on Evangelisation of Asia: http://in.rediff.com/news/2005/jan/24shoba.htm http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/globalpers/gp080304.htm http://in.rediff.com/news/1999/nov/06iype.htm http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_32_116/ai_57893313/print ----- Original Message ----- From: "cornel" George Thanks for your response on current evangelising activity. I happen to think it is entirely wrong in any religion. However, people should be free to join any religion voluntarily if they choose to. I would dearly like to hear an alternative to the view we two seem to share on this issue. Among others, would it be possible to get Cardinal Ivan Dias to provide us his informed view on Catholic evangelization for our benefit? Further, would our hard working Goanet moderators try to get Cardinal Ivan on line even if only for once on this issue? Cornel _____________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. Goanet mailing list (Goanet@goanet.org)