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 (pachake@yahoo.com)
‘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]
No comments:
Post a Comment