It took someone of the Bangalore Archbishop’s stature to get Karnataka State Government in to action against the recent attacks on churches. The whole issue sparked an intense debate on the issue of religious conversions. And the matter of conversions evokes intense reactions even from the most moderate folks. To understand the nature of these conversions and to know why conversions have begun to evoke violent reactions only in recent decades despite Christianity’s entry in to country centuries back, we need some history of its evolution in India. The major relevant points here are :
i) Christianity has its own ’sects’: Well, this is well known fact : there are Catholics, then there are the Protestants and there are other Christian denominations whose number is as mind-boggling as the number of dialects in India (Jehovah’s Witnesses, Lutherans, Baptists etc.). I wont give precise dates on who came when to India, but for our purpose the fact that all these different ’sects’ exist is sufficient. And quite understandably these different sects have different approaches to expansion of the religion. Their beliefs, practices, rituals, social outlook are markedly different although the underlying principles are almost always derived from the Holy Bible.
ii) The Vatican’s approach to expansion: The Roman Catholicism is considered the most organized and prevalent form of Christianity. Of course this power is derived from the political power and financial muscle of the Vatican. Vatican is an institution that is centuries old and whose main motive is to expand the religion. While it had tried to expand the religion in India by pumping in money initially, it also had the wisdom to see that culture and religion are two different aspects. It realized the futility of trying to meddle with the local cultures : after all, the objective is to carry Christ’s message and not to infringe on the way of living of the people. Consequently, Vatican adapted the religion to suit the culture of respective countries. For instance, Catholic women do not do away with their Sindhur, their marriages are still performed using the traditional ‘Mangal Sutra‘, the prayer songs build heavily on the local literature, children are given Indianzed names such ‘Mariya Dasu’ (worshiper of Mary). Its almost as if nothing changes except the belief concerning God. This keeps the catholics in harmony with the society around them.
Of course, harmony is brought in other ways as well. The way Vatican operates in India has evolved so much that it now seems and ideal model that the state itself should adopt. My experience with the remote village of ‘Jadi Jamalpur’ where my grandparents used to live has been an extraordinary one. The local church controlled by Hyderabad Archdiocese essentially is a governing body of the village. It runs the local school, hospital, finances local farmers during the crop season, gives scholarships to children, counsels students and troubled individuals, searches sponsors abroad who are willing to sponsor higher education for youth, oversees social welfare activities and community service… ‘Gram Swaraj” I would say!!. A striking feature that most people fail to notice is that the services (except those that involve external funds) are not denied to non-Christians. Missionary schools, wherever I have been, do not try to impose their religious allegiances upon students nor are hospitals less/more sympathetic to certain groups. That was revelation to me. I had no problems in embracing Christianity, no matter how patriotic I was ( I already was influenced by ideas of RSS founder Hedgewar). To this day, people get to know that I am a Christian only when I tell them. This non-intrusive operation, in my opinion, did not trouble anyone. Thus, Catholic expansion in India was relatively smooth. The number of prestigious educational institutions, charity organizations and hospitals etc. is a proof of that.
iii) The Other approach to expansion : Now comes the second approach to expansion. I wont label any particular denomination as responsible for this trend because this second approach emerged purely out of overzealous individuals who are carried away by the ideas of Christianity which seem such logical things to them (to them). ‘I am only preaching peace’ said one such person to me while standing in front of temple and distributing pamphlets. Individual evangelists, pastors and self appointed messengers of Christ, who lack the systematic training that Catholic priests undergo, have emerged from all quarters. Some with the intention to exploit and some influenced by Christianity to fanatic levels and others anywhere between these extremes. And each followed different methods to expansion that seemed fit to them. Not that these people do not make contributions to the society around them. But such service now comes with an invariable zeal to change the religious landscape around them.
Even that would have been fine!!. But then that zeal encouraged criticism of other religions, partly helped by the Bible verses that suggest Christianity does not recognize other Gods. And scathing criticism of age old customs and traditions began : idol-worship is superstition, wearing Sindhur is a sin, true Christians are not supposed to even visit at a temple. It worsened with the tolerance displayed by the other communities. Open character-assassination of Hindu Gods such as Lord Rama and Lord Krishna, outrageous literature investigating the truths behind Hindu Gods, Castigation of Hindu spiritual leaders and derogatory comments on the institution of marriage have become increasingly common. This sowed the first seeds of conflict.
Imagine a Christian zealot standing in front of a temple and calling names, addressing the devotees as ‘sinners‘ and distributing free copies of ‘truth about Lord xxx’. The Indian culture and way of living is something we have imbibed in ourselves. It is our identity. To many Indians, Gods like Lord Rama and spiritual leaders are icons whom they have come to respect, who have symbolized the ultimate evolved individual, who led exemplary lives and whom they would like to be like. And logically, it should make any patriotic Indian’s blood boil. And when I say this people jump and say ‘Hey, wait a sec.. you say Indian’s blood. Shouldn’t it be Hindu’s blood’… ‘No Sire.. there IS certain thing called Indianness which I do not find is in conflict with my religious allegiance. When somebody says I cant quote verses from the Upanishads, I cant sing the Annamayya keertana that I have to come to love so much because its devotional song dedicated to Lord Balaji.. they are, of course, not only asking me to change my religious allegiance alone but also to change my own identity.’ And that is deeply unethical, in my opinion.
Unfortunately, liberal media is too carried away by the urge to be the guardian of the minorities. When such comments are made against the minority religions it is quick to condemn, demand action and what not!!. In what way are religious sentiments of the majority inferior to those of the minority? Do we need a violent protest to convey that a section’s sentiments are hurt (as in the Taslima Nasreen case)? Shouldnt ‘freedom of speech’ be distinguished from ‘freedom to abuse’? These are questions that have troubled me earlier. And of course, as is evident, they trouble others as well. But it would be foolish to justify violence as a response to such infringement. Protecting Indianness using violence which is so non-Indian is an antithesis. How then can we bring this new breed of fanatic mudslingers to see the realities?. To examine the solutions, we again need to look at what is causing the tolerant Hindu to take up this route, what other routes exist and how can communities be brought to exist in harmony.. That will be part II. Ciao till then.
). If I were a feminist, I would have taken this very seriously and made sure that such derogatory connotation disappears from our literature and movies 
.
.
