Sudheendra Kulkarni has put it extremely well in this article. There is more to what happening in Orissa. Debating the right to convert Churches vandalised. Innocent Christians attacked. This recent spurt in communal violence cannot be condoned or justified by any right-thinking Indian. There can be no place for vandalism and violenceespecially violence fuelled by religious hatredin a law-governed society. The guilty must be punished. However, there is something disturbing and disquieting about the media coverage (both in India and abroad) and the one-sided response to this episode from the secular intellectual-political establishment. There is grossly inadequate focus on the underlying causal factor behind this developmentthe incessant, persistent and systematic campaign of religious conversion undertaken by foreign-funded Christian evangelical groups. Those Hindus who are seriously concerned about their conversion agenda (let me emphasise that not all Christian churches follow this agenda) are either unable to articulate themselves effectively or are underrepresented in the mainstream media. In todays distorted discourse on secularism, the Hindu viewpoint is axiomatically treated as communal in much of the mainstream media. As a result, even those Hindu commentators who have questions to ask and solid arguments to present are made to feel apologetic about doing so.
It is my firm view that we must make a clear distinction between the campaign against Christians and the campaign against conversions. The former must be condemned and put down. The latter deserves to be debated freely and frankly because it concerns an issue of grave import to Indias future. Let us recognise some basic facts. Indias secular Constitution guarantees freedom of faith. The source of religious freedom in India is our civilisational and social ethos, which has respected and tolerated pluralism in matters of faith since time immemorial. Our ancient rishis said: Ekam sat, viprah bahudha vadanti (Truth is one, the wise interpret it differently.) Our Constitution-makers did not import the concept of religious freedom from Western democracies. They could not have, for the simple reason that the dominant religious establishments in these Western democraciesbe it Britain, France, Spain, Portugal or Hollandhad a scandalous record of respecting and guaranteeing the religious freedom of the peoples they colonised in Asia, Africa and America. How the church became an active accomplice in establishing the Wests imperialist rule in these three continents and, how, in the name of civilising the heathen races, millions were killed and untold atrocities committed to erase their indigenous spiritual and cultural heritage is a part of the dark history of mankind. Freedom of faith includes not only freedom to practice ones faith but also to preach it to others. If a person freely chooses to change his or her faith, this too is guaranteed by our Constitution. However, our Constitution-makers could not visualise what would happen decades later in the name of the right to convert. They cannot be faulted for this. But why cannot we debate the questions that are staring us in our faces today? For example, does my personal right to convert to another faith also mean that I should have the freedom to convert others? In large numbers? In an organised manner by making it my mission? By using foreign funds, coming from sources whose hiddenor not-so-hiddenpurpose is to ensure a significant change in the religious demography of India, to begin with in some states, some districts? Should I have the untrammeled freedom to use these funds to start anti-poverty projects in poor areas and make the seva so rendered the core of my conversion appeal to the needy beneficiaries? By telling them that you cannot be saved but by joining my faith? Another important question. Does my religious freedom also mean that I should have the freedom to belittle or denigrate other faiths, their puja paddhatis and their devi-devatas, as New Life, an evangelical organisation in Karnataka, had been doing? One of New Lifes publications, Satya Darshini, says: Urvashi, the daughter of Lord Vishnu, is a prostitute. Vashitha is the son of this prostitute. He in turn married his own mother. Such a degraded person is the Guru of the Hindu God Rama. When Krishna himself is wallowing in darkness of hell, how can he enlighten others? When the Trinity of Hinduism (Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva) are consumed by lust and anger, how can they liberate others? Their projection as Gods is nothing but a joke. Isnt this kind of profanity provocative? True, not many evangelical groups engaged in social service amongst the poor conduct their mission so crudely. Nevertheless, their propaganda literature is replete with distorted and prejudiced references to the Hindu caste system and to the condition of the Scheduled Castes and Tribes. The not-so-subtle message to the target audiences is thus clear: You can enjoy justice, equality and dignity only if you leave the Hindu fold. The Hindu mind is troubled by another peculiar aspect of conversion: Why dont Christian missionaries preach gospel to Muslims? Why dont church organisations work amongst poor Muslims? Is it because Muslims are not in need of their educational and health services? Or is it because of the fear of a severe backlash? If the Government reveals comparative information about religious conversion in India, the asymmetry would be shocking. The number of Hindu converts to Christianity in recent decades runs into millions, many of them closet Christians who do not wish to forgo reservation benefits by declaring their converted status. On the other hand, not a single Muslim in India will come forward and say that he/she exercised the Constitutionally guaranteed freedom of faith and converted to Christianity. Whenever foreign-funded Christian missionaries have tried to proseletise in Muslim-majority countries like Indonesia, Egypt and Afghanistan, the result has been murderous. This is because Islam does not permit a Muslim to go out of its fold, and the punishment for those who defy could be death. Doesnt this mean that the Hindu tolerance for religious plurality is being exploited by externally supported Christian missionaries? Next week: What the Home Ministry reveals about foreign funding to Christian organisations. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/debating-the-right-to-convert/369524/0 http://www.newlifeorissa.org//index_files/page0044.htm
