Author: MV Kamath
Publication: The Free Press Journal
Date: October 17, 2002
URL: http://www.samachar.com/features/171002-features.html
The Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Forcible
Conversion of Religion Ordinance should have been expected a long time
ago. Many believe that it has not come a day too soon. The Ordnance issued
by Governor, P. S. Ramamohan Rao, not only bars ``forcible'' conversions
but hands imprisonment and a hefty fine to those found guilty. The Ordnance,
besides requires that all conversions be reported to district magistrates.
Among other things the Ordinance says: ``No person shall convert or attempt
to convert either directly or otherwise, any person from one religion to
another either by use of force or by allurement or by any fraudulent means'',
nor, the Ordinance adds, shall any person `` ``abet any such conversion''.
Any violator is liable to imprisonment
which may extend to three years and a fine which may extend up to Rs. 50,000.
In case the converted persons are minors or women or SC/STs, the penalty
would be much higher. The imprisonment then could extend up to four years
and the fine to one lakh rupees. But how come Tamil Nadu has suddenly woken
up to this issue? Behind the Ordinance that has been newly passed lies
a major story which no Indian paper had found it proper to publish.
After all, in a secular country,
isn't conversion a perfectly legitimate occupation? The story of mass conversions
was first published in an NRI paper, India Abroad (20 September). That
it was not promptly picked up speaks for the news sense of the English
media. Written by George Iype with additional reportage by R. Sadananda
it reveals an exceedingly explosive situation in Tamil Nadu.
Reports Iype: ``In many villages
across south India religion is turning out to be a question of money. Flush
with funds from their headquarters in the United States, a number of evangelical
and Pentecostal church groups are converting hundreds of Hindus belonging
to the low castes, to Christianity. Similarly, Muslim scholars are touring
villages in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka to lure locals to Islam.'' Iype quoted
the following instances:
* August 22: Some 250 villagers
- all of them poor dalits - in Madura underwent baptism by water and converted
to Christianity. The ceremony was conducted by the Seventh Day Adventists,
a US-based Pentecostal Church, which has missionaries working across India.
Over the last six months, reports say, Seventh- Day pastors have converted
as many as 2,000 Hindus to Christianity in the Madurai region.
* In July, the Covenant and High
Land Trinity, an evangelical church group working in Andhra Pradesh's Guntur
district, converted 70 Hindu villagers to Christianity. Reports said all
the converts were paid money and given jobs for changing their religion.
* Last fortnight (in early September)
two dozen Hindus in a poor mason's colony outside Pathanamthitta town in
Kerala converted to Christianity under the influence of a charismatic Christian
prayer group called Master Ministry of Jesus. One convert, P. K. Krishnankutty
who has since changed his name to Joshua Davis said: ``I did not have any
work and I could not feed my three children and wife. Now I go for Bible
teaching and we are living as a happy family''.
Iype says in his report that Intelligence
agencies have revealed that the Deendar Anjuman, an Islamic sect that follows
an eclectic theology has been converting poor Hindu villagers to Islam
in the rural areas of Hubli and Gulbarga in Karnataka and Vijayawada in
Andhra Pradesh. It may be remembered that it was the same Deendar Anjuman
which a couple of years ago masterminded a series of bomb blasts in churches
across Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh and had to be banned. The activities
of these missionary groups, both Christian and Muslim, go unreported in
the secular press. The presumption has always been that propagation of
religion is permissible under the Indian Constitution and what missionaries
do is their business.
Pastor J. Tito Arattukulam, the
Seventh-Day Church's Communication Director for South Asia has been quoted
as saying: ``Thousands of people attended the conference of religious and
social workers we organised in Madurai. It may have happened that people
who are attracted to our faith decided to get themselves baptised and join
the Church.
There is nothing wrong in a person
voluntarily joining a religion of his or her choice''. To buttress their
case missionaries freely quote Article 25 of the Indian Constitution which
says: ``Subject to public order, morality and health and to other Provisions
of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience
and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion''. But
what if public order gets affected by the activities of evangelist missionaries?
According to some reports, the situation in Madurai was getting restless.
A Madurai-based VHP activist, K.
K. Ramanathan has been quoted as saying: ``I attended one evangelization
function during which the pastors distributed free food, books and money
to poor children and orphans. I heard one of them announcing that the Seventh
Day Church's mission is to convert one million Indians''.
Church insiders reportedly admit
that evangelical groups with plenty of foreign money have mushroomed all
across south Indiawith conversion as their main propaganda. They have exotic
names like Exodus Church, New Life Evangelists, Covenant & High Land
Trinity, Master Ministry of Jesus etc.
These groups reportedly reject church
rituals. Not all Christian denominations are happy with what is going on.
India Abroad quotes Father Paul Thelakat, a prominent priest in the Syro-Malabar
Church as saying: ``We are against any form of forced conversions. Converting
people by giving them money and other allurements is not correct''. But
how is one to determine which is a voluntary and which is a forced conversion?
If a person gets converted because he gets a job and reasonable security
or is paid a handsome amount to get over immediate financial difficulties,
would it be described as a ``forced'' conversion when no apparent force
has been used? How is one to define `force' in such a situation? Article
25 does not ban conversions anyway.
It is clear that when our elders
set out to write a Constitution they could not have imagined what lay ahead.
Now their descendants are told to read the Constitution that their elders
wrote. There is not question but that people belonging to the SC/ST groups
are tempted to convert. The immediate advantages are considerable. It is
a feeling of being accepted and of gaining one's self-respect.
But past dalit converts have been
up in arms against their co-religionists because casteism is still practised
among Christians and dalit Christians often find themselves segregated
even in churches. The usual riposte that one hears from Christians is:
``Why are Hindus so worried? After all Christians barely form 3 per cent
of the country's population.
Even if we convert a million more
people, our percentage strength will not substantially alter''. But many
Hindus are beginning to see in conversion an assault on their culture and
civilisation. And if the situation is not rectified soon the likelihood
of needless clashes cannot be ruled out.
Hindus feel that their very liberalism
is being taken advantage of and they are hung by their own petards. It
is obviously to check public unrest that Jayalalitha had the anti-forced
conversion Ordinance passed. Already battle positions are being taken.
Vice President of the Catholic Bishops Conference and Delhi's Archbishop
Vincent M. Concessao is quoted as saying: ``We will study the Ordinance
first and consult legal opinion about what exactly it means. On the surface
of it, the Ordinance looks fine but if we feel that it will be used to
intimidate and torture the minority community, we will have to go to court...We
don't want this Ordinance to make minority community a target and also
interpret our work for the poor in India as incentives to get them converted.
We are also against forceful conversions....It should not restrict the
freedom given under our Constitution and will not restrict us from spreading
the teaching of Christianity''.
Similarly, the All India Christian
Council (AICC) has reacted sharply. A statement it issued says: ``Forcible
or induced conversion is an oxymoron. It is not possible and is rejected
by the Church. Conversion is the exercise of free choice by an individual
in fulfilment of his or her spiritual needs. This is a basic human right
in the United Nations and in the Indian Constitution''.
Hopefully things will not reach
such a stage where battle lines will be clearly drawn and people take to
the streets. It is one thing to claim a constitutional right and quite
another to give needless offence to a majority community. Conversion to
many Hindusis like flaunting the red rag before a bull.
Christians can live quite peacefully
and happily without pushing their rights too far. One suspects that matters
were getting out of hand in Madurai. A wise minority leadership will not
push too hard. It just isn't worth the candle. And western powers must
be kept informed of this in time. We have had enough of communal disturbances.
We don't need more. Can't we have some peace in this wretched land?
