The just concluded visit of Pope John Paul II to India ( November
5-8,1999 ) passed off peacefully without any untoward incident, but the on going debate on
the controversy of conversion continues to haunt the political scene of the country. The
heat generated during the visit may require an objective self appraisal by those who were
responsible for the controversy. The Government of India, the Church leaders, the alleged
"Hindu fundamentalists", "secularists" and the media might have their
own compulsions or responsibility but the dust raised by them on this issue has disturbed
a large number of people in the country. Even a year-old statement of the Prime Minister,
Vajpayee on the need for a dialogue or debate on the issue of conversions was resurrected
and misinterpreted in this controversy.
Indian scriptures are so clear on the issue of faith that there
should not be any confusion in the mind of a Christian if he is truly converted to
Christianity or a Hindu if he is truly committed to his faith. " Ekam sat-viprah
bahudha vadanti " ( He is one but the wise-men call Him by different names ) are
the key words of Upanishad to remove confusion if any, on the issue of faith. But if the
inter-religious groups try to impose their religious hegemony over each other, they cannot
claim themselves to be faithful towards their respective religions. The Pope, after
offering floral tributes at the samadhi of the father of the nation on November 7 rightly
wrote in the guest book of the memorial that, "A culture cannot survive if it
attempts to be exclusive." This quote borrowed from Mahatma Gandhi, was signed
by him as Johannes Paulus II. It is not clear whether it was written in his individual
capacity or as spiritual head of Christian community but it was certainly an effort to
assure his opponents that the institution of Pope was not in favour of imposing its
culture on another. His subsequent statement during the Papal High Mass on November 8'
1999- " The first millennium saw the cross planted in the soil of Europe, and the
second in America and Africa. May the Third Christian Millennium witness a great harvest
of faith on this vast and vital continent " gave an opportunity to his critics to
interpret it as a "secret agenda" of the Christian world for aggressive
evangelization by the church.
If the following reports that appeared in a section of press are
authentic, they may seemingly substantiate the apprehension raised by anti conversion
forces that "the hidden agenda of Pope’s visit to India was to boost the
determined efforts of the Christian missionaries to spread their faith among the
illiterate, innocent and poor people in India."
i. " The Baptist Church in U.S. called for bringing out the
Hindus from the darkness of Hinduism."
ii. " According to Mr. John Stock, New Delhi correspondent
of the British paper The Daily Telegraph, the Indian subcontinent has become the principal
target for a wide range of western Christian missions which are determined to spread the
gospel to India’s unreached people before the year 2000 "
iii. "Mr. Stock quoted a statement from a Colorado-based
Group of Worldwide Christian Missions calling itself AD 2000 and beyond as saying "
‘Flashes of light’ seen all around the North India-Hindu belt,
particularly among the tribal groups, are encouraging us to believe that the Sun of
righteousness is indeed ready to rise upon these unreached peoples.
iv. "One Rev.R.V.Paricha has been described as having
authored a plan, on behalf of 94 Christian organisations, to target Orissa for conversion
efforts, on the grounds that the caste structure of Orissa lacks the polarisation of the
high and low caste characteristics of South India."
v. "Tribals of East Timor were converted into Christianity
and they got encouraged by Church for their secession from Indonesia."
Legal position: -
According to Article 25 of the Indian constitution all persons
are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess,
practice and propagate, but the Supreme Court in Stainislaus’s case in January 1977
said that right to propagate would not include the right to convert another, because each
person has the same freedom of conscience guaranteed by those very provisions of Article
25. The case was filed by a Christian father, who sought to invalidate a Madhya Pradesh
Act which made it a penal offence to convert or attempt to convert a person by means of
force, fraud or allurement. Orissa had also passed a similar act and its constitutionality
was challenged by several members of the Christian community. Both the Acts were taken up
together by the Supreme Court and the contention of the Christian community was rejected.
Stand of anti conversion forces: -
The innocent and illiterate tribals living in remote places were
easily converted to Christianity by the missionaries during British colonial rule because
of direct or indirect patronage to such conversion by the then foreign power. The Hindu
revivalists involved in freedom movement always had reservations against conversion. Even
Mahatma Gandhi was reportedly exercised over the conversion of poor and illiterate people,
but the issue was not in the priority list of the then Indian leaders for obvious reasons.
After independence, when some of the Hindu organisations particularly the Sangh Parivar
raised their voice of protest against conversion, it led to ideological confrontation
between the leaders of the two communities. When Vanvasi Kalyan Kendra, an outfit of
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh opened its units in tribal regions where Christian
Missionaries were already present, a confrontation started between the Christian
missionaries and Sangh Parivar.
Even during the first visit of Pope John Paul II in India in
February 1986, the leaders of Sangh Parivar expressed their misgivings that the agenda of
Pope’s visit to India was to promote conversion. This year also, when Pope’s
visit to India was known, the Sangh Parivar as well as other Hindu organisations like Arya
Pratinidhi Sabha, Anand Marg, as also Shankaracharya of different Hindu Peethas (thrones)
expressed their reservations against the visit. Though, all these organisations and
individual leaders were not against his visit as such, they wanted his categorical
statement that the Church would not indulge in conversions.
The Vishwa Hindu Parishad and its wing Sanskriti Raksha
Manch initially decided to organise a march from Goa to Delhi demanding an apology from
Pope for the atrocities committed on Hindus as well as Syrian Christians by the Portuguese
in the16th Century for converting them to the Catholic faith. Later they dropped their
programmed march but maintained "we are not against him or Christians but we are
against the policies of Churches." In a statement, they said that they were not
against the visit of Pope to India as a State guest but demanded that the Pope should make
it clear that his visit is not for the spread of Christianity in India.
Professor Rajendra Singh, the Chief of Rashtriya Swayamsevak
Sangh (RSS) wanted the Pope to declare that all religions lead to truth and are
equally effective paths to salvation. He said that the Church should not insist that
Christ can only take a man to heaven and Christianity is the only path of salvation.
Balraj Madhok on behalf of Arya Pratinidhi Sabha said
"to extend the honour of state guest to Pope is unconstitutional as his visit is not
for any political reason." He criticised it as an appeasement policy of the
Government.
Swamy Dayanand Saraswathi of Arsha Vidya Gurukulam,
in a press briefing urged the Pope to announce "freeze on conversion." He also
asked the Government to clarify whether the Pope’s visit was official or religious.
Claiming that "all conversions were forced conversions," he said that both
Christianity and Islam being aggressive religions in their attempts on conversion provoke
the nonviolent to become violent.
Sankaracharya of Puri who opposed the visit of Pope alleged that
it was part of "an international conspiracy to make India a Christian country.
The Delhi Branch of Anand Marg took the position that the
Christian missionaries had been adopting "deceitful" method to convert innocent
people to Christianity.
As expected the VHP leaders reacted strongly against the
statements of the Pope during the Papal Mass and its General Secretary, Acharya Giriraj
Kishore said, "when the Pope says he will be spreading Christianity in Asia, he must
not forget that even the Muslims tried to convert people in this part of the world but
they did not succeed in Bharat. In the same way the people of Bharat will fight tooth and
nail against this attempt also." Sankaracharya of Prayag Math expressed his
strong reservations against the Pope’s statements and said "we are not objecting
to the Pope’s views but suggesting that the focus should be on the victory of
universal truth and not on a particular faith spread by a particular sect or
individuals."
Stand of the Church:
Though the Church leaders in India tried to include some Indian
elements like lighting of lamps during the service, they created consternation when a
Christian institution "Satya Manthan"circulated a 42-page document entitled
"the real face of Christian" that highlighted that Christianity came to India in
52 AD when Islam, Wahai or Sikh were not even born. Similarly during a press briefing on
November 3 the Catholic Church in Delhi circulated a release from an organisation known as
Bahujana Swayam Sevak Sangh (BSS) in which abusive language was used against caste Hindus.
When questioned by press men, whether the Church stood by the "abusive release,"
the Catholic leader said, "the press release contains the views of the BSS."
Same day a Protestant church leader however, in an interfaith meeting said,
"we do not support the views contained in the release."
The stand of the Government:
The ministry of External Affairs, Government of India in its
press conference (New Delhi October 30, 1999) made its stand clear that since the
establishment of diplomatic ties between India and Vatican in 1948, both have been
enjoying very cordial relations and accordingly the Pope as head of Vatican state would be
accorded all courtesies and honour befitting a State guest.
There were press reports that the Pope had initially a plan to
address a Synod of Asian Bishops in China but the Chinese did not accord permission. Even
Taiwan and Sri Lanka did not let Pope address such religious gatherings in their
countries. The Government of India had to face criticism from a number of Hindu
organisations for according state protocol to a religious head whose main purpose was to
address the religious functions of Roman Catholics. According to them it was against the
secular character of Indian constitution. One Mrs.Radha S.Ranjan, Joint Secretary of
VIGIL, a public forum challenged this decision of the government in Chennai High Court.
Though, the court refused to interfere with the decision of the Union Government, it said
that the Government would have considered the factors raised in the petition. The court
also noted that there was little time for getting the facts and hence it was not inclined
to interfere with a policy decision of the Government.
Criticised both by the opposition and the fringe groups within
the ruling the party, the government took a correct position and ensured that the visit
went off peacefully. For this they deserve credit. But it is time that government
encourages an interreligious dialogue to remove irritants if any, particularly in areas
where both Christian missionaries and Hindu organisations work side by side.
R.UPADHYAY
15.11.99
