Why no leader in India raised his voices against Mother Teresa’s blatant conversion business?
Our political netas-Champions of secularism-selectively
by Dr Mrs Hilda Raja (firstname.lastname@example.org)
‘Opposition targets government on conversion in Agra’… ‘Bid to impose Hindutva agenda”…This and more we heard and saw in Parliament on ‘ghar wapasi’. According to Mayawati, ‘Secularism is part of the Constitution-they (read RSS) are violating the basic tenets, BJP has a hand in it’. It was all pandemonium let loose in both the Houses with members dashing into the well. It seems as though some new danger has been sighted by them some danger to the Constitution and to the secular fabric of India.
Suddenly the MPs have become sensitive to upholding the Constitution when they do not even uphold the oath they take to function without fear or favor…. It seems that at least occasionally the MPs are conscious that we have a Constitution. When the UPA government was in power the Constitution was eroded and every tenet of it dented and over ridden. But what I cannot understand is the fact that conversions have been always forced. This was the strategy from time immemorial. Not only in India but the world over
But let us focus on India alone now. It has been a continuous conversion business. The invaders who came to India did not just stop with plundering the country and becoming rulers but they brought along their missionaries and their churches. First it was the Dutch, then the Portuguese then the French and finally the English. All these indulged in ruthless conversion through force and whatever methods possible. The poor Indians had no other option but bend to the powerful.
This is relevant to realize that all Indians-have their ancestry in Hinduism. St Francis Xavier used every force-fraud and even the Inquisition to convert Hindus. Those who did not fall in line had to flee or were tortured and killed. History records his barbarism and the brutality with which he dealt with the Hindus. Places of worship were raided-destroyed and his public punishment was chopping off the hand for those who followed any form of Hinduism. The pillar where these unfortunate ones were dragged and hand chopped off is called the Pillar –De- Amputation. This pillar even today exists in Old Goa. This is the reason why the victims of Francis Xavier oppose the public display of his corpse. But the Church has raised him as a saint.
That may be old history but what about the much revered Mother Teresa. Did she not use blackmail to convert? Innocent children who were dying-the old and the infirm were baptized all under the garb of caring for them. They were not even aware of what was happening to them. They were in pain and in utter misery. Today the church looks on innocently. So when one says there should be no forced conversions I am flabbergasted because all conversions have some sort of a force-be it physical, psychological or social. Allurements and enticements were used especially where there is starvation and disease and pain and hopelessness. How did the North East States become Christians-due to their volition? I know a Salesian priest who used to write to my husband to send money for conversion. He even revealed that ‘the priests do not go openly but through the catechist(a low level functionary of the Church) we approach the tribal people and give them money and promise other benefits’ .So for a loaf of bread for a few rotis and for a few rupees these unfortunate ones are ready to change their religion. Is this faith or force? Has this changed? Not one of the so called political leaders raised their voices against Mother Teresa’s blatant conversion business? Where was the Constitutional norm then? Where was secularism then? So it is only when the Hindus engage in ‘ghar wapasi’ that our political netas become aware of the Constitution and secularism and cry themselves hoarse-They then pose as great defenders and champions of secularism. This is a fraud and an injustice. This double standard is what they always resort to.
When I was working in a village project in the outskirts of Chennai-near Mahabalipuram many of the SC families told me that they were converted by the local parish priest. This they said was for their children to get admission in a minority run institution and or to get some employment. They did not mention cash .I am fully aware that the tactics used in Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh (may be in other States also of which I do not have firsthand knowledge) the priests tell them plainly to continue with their Hindu names and enter in their application forms as SCs so that they get all the benefits due to the SCs but in reality they are all Christians. So Varadan becomes Victor for the Church record but for government records he continues to be Varadan. Take the example of Andhra Pradesh’s former Chief Minister Rajasekaran Reddy. Many thought he was a Hindu but his first name is Samuel. These are not exception cases but the normal rule-the double deception that the Christians used. The thousands of conversions that he affected through the evangelical church of his by giving them money and luring them with other promises is well known to those in AP
But a reading of the historical data on Church history will be an eye opener for those who today think that ‘ghar wapsi’ is against the Constitution and secularism. Where did this notion of secularism go when thousands of years conversion was only through force? In recent times too it is covertly done. Whether some netas like it or not how does one account for the millions of other religious followers. Does it mean that on their own accord through faith and belief and enlightenment they all got converted?
Did the Muslims not convert through the sword? Is there no love jihadi? It is common for the Muslim/Christian to marry a Hindu and then later convert the partner to the Muslim /Christian religion. But as far as I know the Hindus did not go in for conversion. Today one talks of ‘ghar wapsi’-I fail to understand why this full throated Opposition. Where did this opposition go when conversions were taking place in India earlier and now only through some form of force. The Constitution has paved the way for this business by granting Minority Rights to the Minorities. Hence right from a tender age children are segregated in Christian institutions and in Madrassas and groomed to think that they are different from others on the basis of religion. So we Christians think and proclaim that we have the ONE true God…Children brainwashed thus are subjected to forced-an intellectual force- whereby they think in terms of differences and grow up thus in ghettos. We have Catholic doctrine for the Catholics, Bible classes for the Christians and Ethics for the Hindus. All this in Minority institutions which is run on government money. I do not know if other education Institutions also follows the same. Is this secularism? As though the Catholics and the Christians and the Muslims do not need ethics!!!
Why is it when one says that India is a Hindu country there is so much of opposition and anger-but then one says that Pakistan is a Muslim country and so are other Middle East countries there is no adverse reaction. If in conversation one terms the UK/US and other European countries as Christian countries there is no objection. Why this allergy to call India a Hindu country? That does not mean others cannot live here and that does not mean that secularism is thrown out. It simply means that Hinduism was in India as far as memory goes-it is as old as this country. Hinduism sprung from the soil of this country and did not come from any other shores-unlike other religions. So what is the problem in calling a spade a spade? Similarly when one talks of Hindutva the so called secularists see red. Is it wrong or against secularism to be nationalist and a patriot? I think it a weakness and a phobia of the so called ‘secularists’. After all let us be honest when Jinnah wanted Pakistan the reason he gave was that the Muslims will not be able to coexist with the Hindus. So he wanted the country to be partition which was done. Now can the Hindus not have their own ethos and their own religion and their own perception of nationalism? What is the problem in accepting this simple truth that this in no way destroys secularism.
For that matter it is the politicians who are hell bend in destroying secularism. Why even the demand of reservation on the basis of religion is anti-secular. For the sake of vote bank politics the political leaders divide the people. We have other religious leaders even threatening the Hindus. The political leaders simply looked the other way when conversions in large numbers were taking place. But now that the Hindus have started the ‘ghar wapasi’ they pretend to be shocked that secularism is being destroyed. I remember some years ago in Trichirapally in Tamilnadu one of the pastors baptized even those who were not present because their names were on the list but were unable to attend the service. It is well known that evangelical churches look for numbers and even poach on other churches members. Foreign funds flow in depending on numbers. One has to watch a couple of channels in the TV to realize this. The psychological blackmail that these pastors indulge in is a fraud and vulnerable people fall a prey to it. The testimonies of cures-the revelations etc are all a fraud inflicted on a vulnerable already affected and afflicted populace. The political netas are not worried about this. As long as it is not Hinduism they simply look the other way. It seems to be a sin or an aberration if one is a devote Hindu but if one is a devote Christian /Muslim then it is not frowned upon. And that the devotedness of being a Christian/Muslim mean…even when it comes to following the anti-secular dictates of their religion like the ‘fatwa. It is no secret that Muslim scholars keep on repeating that Islam is a peace loving religion. Is that what the world experience –see in the Islamic countries. Even another Islamic sect is not tolerated. The World Human Rights forums do not raise their voices against the persecution, the killings the beheadings and above all the terrorism unleashed by religion. It is only when the Hindus raise their voices and reconvert then hackles are raised that it is unconstitutional and against secularism. This is not only a double standard but an injustice and a display of a warped perception. [Courtesy: Hildaraja's Blog]