saidevo
12 October 2008, 11:42 PM
Even as we speak volumes about the vicious Christian missionary activities of conversion by coercion and allurements, we needs must also know about the Indian Christians who seek to uphold the national and traditional values of their country and speak vehemently against the Christian aggression. This thread is to introduce and honour such Christian nationalists. May their numbers grow!
Hilda Raja
Dr. Mrs. Hilda Raja is a Retired Professor of Social Science from Stella Maris College, Chennai. She regularly writes Letters to the Editors and occasionally writes Columns too. Apart from being a practicing Catholic Christian, she is a true nationalist, who values the cultural heritage of this great country and respects the Hindu tradition too.
Excerpts from Hilda Raja's Writings and Rejoinders
A rejoinder by Dr. Mrs. Hilda Raja to the article "Don't target converts" by Michael Pinto in the 'Times of India' dated 8 October 2008
Michael Pinto's article at:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Editorial/Dont_Target_Converts/articleshow/3571221.cms
Hilda Raja's reminder at:
http://psenthilraja.wordpress.com/2008/10/12/dont-convert-a-rejoinder/
• "Don't target Converts" by Michael Pinto (TOI 8th OCT) poses many questions than it answers. No amount of provocation can justify violence is easily said but humanly not easy to follow. All are not Gandhians or Jesus to show the left cheek when slapped on the right.
• Aggressive policy of conversion followed by some fundamentalist churches and fundamental Christians cannot justify taking law into one's hand and no amount of provocation can justify violence is correct theoretically and logically. ... In the midst of such oppression, exploitation can we expect the people to meekly be submissive and subservient? Or is the author's theory held good only in the provocation rising in the business of conversion?
• When Indira Gandhi was assassinated why thousands of Sikhs were butchered in the capital? Was it not justified by the Congress party? When the Brahmin pundits were killed and chased away from their homes in the Valley and forced to become refugees in their own country under ethnic cleansing no voices were raised against such an abuse and violation? When a holy man held in great reverence was brutally murdered with his three disciples in his own ashram will the author's theory be strong enough to hold back the emotional, social, and religious upheaval of the hurt psyche?
• Every action has a reaction. When a nun is raped then all hell breaks loose-Daily children are sexually violated and raped and murdered, no protest voice is heard -no church rallies are held, no Archbishop/bishop rebukes Chief Ministers and express pain and anguish. And no EU raises the issue with the PM in a foreign land.
• So Christians have global brokers and Christian lives become sacred and the PM is accountable to foreign powers for their safety.-the lives of others can be snuffed out without even a whimper. What is the root cause of this warped perception but religion? This is not to down play the rape of the nun but to point out that it is a harsh world we are living in and to high light the discrimination in our perception. Does a crime become more heinous because the victim belongs to a particular religion?
• 'Terrorists do not belong to any one community knows no religion', pontificates our political leaders. Is this again reserved only when it comes to the terrorists of the Minority community?
• It is a utopia that Michael Pinto is envisaging when he states that no amount of provocation can justify violence. This is armchair wistful thinking. When the Christians were oppressors this theory vanished. The tables are turned and when there is an assertion of the Hindus to retain their culture, their religion and their heritage then the drum beating of the Constitutional guarantees is heard. It is the right of the Hindus to protect the Hindu ethos of this country which they feel is threatened.
• It is shocking that politicians are equating the Bajrang Dal and the VHP with the SIMI. The latter is a terror outfit with its branches now functioning in new names. ... But the same cannot be said of Bajrang Dal and the VHP. They are nationalists- they may be attacking a particular community for reasons of their own- the root cause being forced conversion and a reaction to the denigration of the Hindu gods and goddesses. Those involved in such violence and criminal activities must be apprehended and brought to justice. But where is the justification to demand a ban on such outfits? This is indulging in vote bank politics. Till date not a single terrorist has been brought to justice.
• Conversion from time immemorial has a concomitant- violence. Indian history is replete with it. The oppression, force, torture, massacre of the Indians to convert them to Islam, and Christianity is not a fable. The Inquisition and all that it wrought is world record. Again it is in the name of religion. What you sow you reap. Violence begets violence-this is nature's order.
• But then to preach and propagate one's religion does not mean to force and use fraudulent means to pressurize people to change from one religion to another.
• The inducement-a plate of rice, a loaf of bread to the hunger, shelter for the homeless, and also the promise of the green pastures in the next world-The strategy has first an entry point-first denigrate, abuse, degrade and demolished their gods and icons. Second instill in these victims the doubt that their gods are false and then promise to lead them to the true god. A vulnerable victim, with a vacuum inner self is then ready for the initiation into a "New Life"/to be "Born Again". The false propaganda is vicious because of its attack on another religion. This kind of provocation is not easy to overlook because human nature is to refute and repel this atrocious slander/blasphemy.
• What will the author say if one prints pamphlets that the mother of Jesus was a prostitute and Jesus' birth was not a virgin birth? That after her marriage Joseph found her pregnant and toyed with the idea of putting her away. Only the intervention of an angel restrained him from taking such a drastic action. This is what the bible narrates. Will the Catholic Church and other fund churches sit back and humbly submit to such provocation?
• When posters depicting Jayalalitha as a Virgin Mary appeared in Chennai there were massive rallies and protests. But if Madhuri Dixit is depicted as Durga and the goddess is painted nude it comes under the freedom of expression of a painter. Only difference is that the same painter will not dare to let his artistic acumen and constitutional right to freedom of expression to depict Allah even in the best form. This is how we perceive the operation of guarantees/Rights enshrined in our Constitution.
• If opting for a "New Life"/ "Born Again", demands discarding of one's culture, social practices, adapting a western life style and adapting western forms of worship then the convert becomes an alien to the Indian/Hindu 'ethos', and is sucked into a process of alienation. This has other ramifications. Why did East Timor break away from Indonesia when its Christian population swelled to 27percent just in a matter of ten years? Similarly in our own context the partition of India was based on the theory that two religions-Islam and Hinduism cannot co-exist as a nation-that was the contention of then Muslims leaders. World history and Indian history is replete with the experience that 'peace cannot co-exist with conversion. The reason being conversion has an inbuilt violence: physical, psychological, social and cultural. It may even abet one to be anti-national.
• A leader from Kashmir proclaimed on the floor of the Parliament that he is a Muslim and an Indian. No Muslim/Christian will state, 'I am first an Indian and then a Muslim/Christian' . One can change one's religion but not one's nationality into which one is born. Politicians too have abetted this by not addressing citizens but focusing on communal/caste/ religious divide.
• I belong to the Catholic Church and my understanding of conversion is that it is a process-a life long search for truth. Conversion is a private affair and not a street tamasha-neither is it an activity intended to swell numbers.
• When conversions are a threat to peace then it needs to be banned. Like the curfew order-the ban to strike etc. The million dollar question is why conversion? Is it a prerequisite for development work? Why are the foreign agencies funding conversion activities? It is strange that the fundamental Christians and the churches to which they belong do not turn their attention and energy in this salvation ensuring business to the Muslims.
• The number of converts is co-related to the quantum of funds that flow in. This must not be overlooked. Why not ban foreign funds and watch how evangelization evaporates?
• Conversions must be banned to ensure peace and harmony. Let us give peace a chance-for peace and conversion cannot co-exist.
Dr Mrs Hilda Raja,
(Former member of the National Advisory committee of the CBCI)
Hilda Raja
Dr. Mrs. Hilda Raja is a Retired Professor of Social Science from Stella Maris College, Chennai. She regularly writes Letters to the Editors and occasionally writes Columns too. Apart from being a practicing Catholic Christian, she is a true nationalist, who values the cultural heritage of this great country and respects the Hindu tradition too.
Excerpts from Hilda Raja's Writings and Rejoinders
A rejoinder by Dr. Mrs. Hilda Raja to the article "Don't target converts" by Michael Pinto in the 'Times of India' dated 8 October 2008
Michael Pinto's article at:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Editorial/Dont_Target_Converts/articleshow/3571221.cms
Hilda Raja's reminder at:
http://psenthilraja.wordpress.com/2008/10/12/dont-convert-a-rejoinder/
• "Don't target Converts" by Michael Pinto (TOI 8th OCT) poses many questions than it answers. No amount of provocation can justify violence is easily said but humanly not easy to follow. All are not Gandhians or Jesus to show the left cheek when slapped on the right.
• Aggressive policy of conversion followed by some fundamentalist churches and fundamental Christians cannot justify taking law into one's hand and no amount of provocation can justify violence is correct theoretically and logically. ... In the midst of such oppression, exploitation can we expect the people to meekly be submissive and subservient? Or is the author's theory held good only in the provocation rising in the business of conversion?
• When Indira Gandhi was assassinated why thousands of Sikhs were butchered in the capital? Was it not justified by the Congress party? When the Brahmin pundits were killed and chased away from their homes in the Valley and forced to become refugees in their own country under ethnic cleansing no voices were raised against such an abuse and violation? When a holy man held in great reverence was brutally murdered with his three disciples in his own ashram will the author's theory be strong enough to hold back the emotional, social, and religious upheaval of the hurt psyche?
• Every action has a reaction. When a nun is raped then all hell breaks loose-Daily children are sexually violated and raped and murdered, no protest voice is heard -no church rallies are held, no Archbishop/bishop rebukes Chief Ministers and express pain and anguish. And no EU raises the issue with the PM in a foreign land.
• So Christians have global brokers and Christian lives become sacred and the PM is accountable to foreign powers for their safety.-the lives of others can be snuffed out without even a whimper. What is the root cause of this warped perception but religion? This is not to down play the rape of the nun but to point out that it is a harsh world we are living in and to high light the discrimination in our perception. Does a crime become more heinous because the victim belongs to a particular religion?
• 'Terrorists do not belong to any one community knows no religion', pontificates our political leaders. Is this again reserved only when it comes to the terrorists of the Minority community?
• It is a utopia that Michael Pinto is envisaging when he states that no amount of provocation can justify violence. This is armchair wistful thinking. When the Christians were oppressors this theory vanished. The tables are turned and when there is an assertion of the Hindus to retain their culture, their religion and their heritage then the drum beating of the Constitutional guarantees is heard. It is the right of the Hindus to protect the Hindu ethos of this country which they feel is threatened.
• It is shocking that politicians are equating the Bajrang Dal and the VHP with the SIMI. The latter is a terror outfit with its branches now functioning in new names. ... But the same cannot be said of Bajrang Dal and the VHP. They are nationalists- they may be attacking a particular community for reasons of their own- the root cause being forced conversion and a reaction to the denigration of the Hindu gods and goddesses. Those involved in such violence and criminal activities must be apprehended and brought to justice. But where is the justification to demand a ban on such outfits? This is indulging in vote bank politics. Till date not a single terrorist has been brought to justice.
• Conversion from time immemorial has a concomitant- violence. Indian history is replete with it. The oppression, force, torture, massacre of the Indians to convert them to Islam, and Christianity is not a fable. The Inquisition and all that it wrought is world record. Again it is in the name of religion. What you sow you reap. Violence begets violence-this is nature's order.
• But then to preach and propagate one's religion does not mean to force and use fraudulent means to pressurize people to change from one religion to another.
• The inducement-a plate of rice, a loaf of bread to the hunger, shelter for the homeless, and also the promise of the green pastures in the next world-The strategy has first an entry point-first denigrate, abuse, degrade and demolished their gods and icons. Second instill in these victims the doubt that their gods are false and then promise to lead them to the true god. A vulnerable victim, with a vacuum inner self is then ready for the initiation into a "New Life"/to be "Born Again". The false propaganda is vicious because of its attack on another religion. This kind of provocation is not easy to overlook because human nature is to refute and repel this atrocious slander/blasphemy.
• What will the author say if one prints pamphlets that the mother of Jesus was a prostitute and Jesus' birth was not a virgin birth? That after her marriage Joseph found her pregnant and toyed with the idea of putting her away. Only the intervention of an angel restrained him from taking such a drastic action. This is what the bible narrates. Will the Catholic Church and other fund churches sit back and humbly submit to such provocation?
• When posters depicting Jayalalitha as a Virgin Mary appeared in Chennai there were massive rallies and protests. But if Madhuri Dixit is depicted as Durga and the goddess is painted nude it comes under the freedom of expression of a painter. Only difference is that the same painter will not dare to let his artistic acumen and constitutional right to freedom of expression to depict Allah even in the best form. This is how we perceive the operation of guarantees/Rights enshrined in our Constitution.
• If opting for a "New Life"/ "Born Again", demands discarding of one's culture, social practices, adapting a western life style and adapting western forms of worship then the convert becomes an alien to the Indian/Hindu 'ethos', and is sucked into a process of alienation. This has other ramifications. Why did East Timor break away from Indonesia when its Christian population swelled to 27percent just in a matter of ten years? Similarly in our own context the partition of India was based on the theory that two religions-Islam and Hinduism cannot co-exist as a nation-that was the contention of then Muslims leaders. World history and Indian history is replete with the experience that 'peace cannot co-exist with conversion. The reason being conversion has an inbuilt violence: physical, psychological, social and cultural. It may even abet one to be anti-national.
• A leader from Kashmir proclaimed on the floor of the Parliament that he is a Muslim and an Indian. No Muslim/Christian will state, 'I am first an Indian and then a Muslim/Christian' . One can change one's religion but not one's nationality into which one is born. Politicians too have abetted this by not addressing citizens but focusing on communal/caste/ religious divide.
• I belong to the Catholic Church and my understanding of conversion is that it is a process-a life long search for truth. Conversion is a private affair and not a street tamasha-neither is it an activity intended to swell numbers.
• When conversions are a threat to peace then it needs to be banned. Like the curfew order-the ban to strike etc. The million dollar question is why conversion? Is it a prerequisite for development work? Why are the foreign agencies funding conversion activities? It is strange that the fundamental Christians and the churches to which they belong do not turn their attention and energy in this salvation ensuring business to the Muslims.
• The number of converts is co-related to the quantum of funds that flow in. This must not be overlooked. Why not ban foreign funds and watch how evangelization evaporates?
• Conversions must be banned to ensure peace and harmony. Let us give peace a chance-for peace and conversion cannot co-exist.
Dr Mrs Hilda Raja,
(Former member of the National Advisory committee of the CBCI)