Author: PTI
Publication: The Times of India
Date: January 6, 2004
URL: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/408182.cms
[Note from Hindu Vivek Kendra:
Pehpas the church may wish to define what it means by forced conversions.
An article by Swami Dayanand Saraswati is enclosed herewith.]
Catholic Bishop's Conference of
India's (CBCI) President Mar Cyril Baselios today said that the church
was totally against any kind of forced conversion.
Baselios, who is also the Archbishop
of the Syro-Malankara church, said the Catholic church did not encourage
forced conversion at all.
He was addressing a press conference
convened to explain the details of the 26th biennial general body meeting
of the CBCI scheduled to commence at nearby Mulayam Marymatha Seminary
tomorrow.
He, however, said that the "conversion
to God" could not be objected by anybody as it depended on the individual
religious freedom and conscience.
The "conversion to God" would be
continued for the improvement of humanity and social development, he said.
He said certain groups in the Christianity
were blindly objecting to any kind of progressive activities by the Church.
Replying to a query on the reported
refusal by the clergy to allow burial of a AIDs patients body in the church
cemetery in Ernakulam district recently, he said that no discrimination
after death could be tolerated.
The church was totally against
any kind of discrimination after the death of the faithful, he said.
The 26th conference would be attended
by 200 delegates, including 149 Heads of Dioceses in the country, apart
from three Cardinals and 26 Archibishops.
Open Letter to Pope John Paul II
Conversion Is Violence
Pujya Sri Sri Swami Dayananda Saraswati
Your Holiness,
On behalf of many Hindus whom I
know personally, I welcome your visit to India. This is a country with
an ancient civilization and unique religious culture which accommodates
many religious traditions that have come to this country throughout the
centuries.
Being the head of the Vatican State
and also the Catholic Church with a great following all over the world,
you enjoy a highly venerable position and can play a significant role in
defusing religious conflicts and preserving the world's rich cultures.
You have in your Apostolic Letter tertio millennio adveniente, 38 (November
10, 1994) voiced your intention to convoke a Special Assembly of the Synod
of Bishops for Asia. After seeing the report of the Pre-Council of the
General Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops Special Assembly for Asia appointed
by you, I want to bring to your kind notice the concerns of many Hindus
in this country about religious conversion. In the Second Vatican Council,
the status accorded to the world religions was that of a means of preparing
them for Christ. We all understand that the Catholic religion does not
accommodate other religions, except in this context. But I am appealing
to you here to accept that every person has the freedom to pursue his or
her own religion.
In the recent past, you mentioned
that reason should be respected. On the basis of reason, no non-verifiable
belief is going to fare any better than any other non-verifiable belief.
Therefore, according to reason, there is no basis for conversion in the
matters of faith.
Apart from reason, there is another
important issue which I request you to consider. Among the world's
religious traditions, there are those that convert and those that do not.
The non-converting religious traditions, like the Hindu, Jewish and Zoroastrian,
give others the freedom to practice their religion whether they agree with
the others' tenets or not. They do not wish to convert. I would characterize
them as non-aggressive. Religions that are committed by their theologies
to convert, on the other hand, are necessarily aggressive, since conversion
implies a conscious intrusion into the religious life of a person, in fact,
into the religious person.
This is a very deep intrusion, as
the religious person is the deepest, the most basic in any individual.
When that person is disturbed, a hurt is sustained which is very deep.
The religious person is violated. The depth of this hurt is attested by
the fact that when a religious sentiment is violated, it can produce a
martyr. People connected to a converted person are deeply hurt. Even the
converted person will suffer some hurt underneath. He must necessarily
wonder if he has done the right thing and, further, he or she has to face
an inner alienation from his community, a community to which he has belonged
for generations, and thus an alienation from his ancestors. I don't think
that this hurt can ever be fully healed. Religious conversion destroys
centuries-old communities and incites communal violence. It is violence
and it breeds violence. Thus, for any humane person, every religious sentiment
has to be respected, whether it is a Muslim sentiment or a Christian sentiment,
Hindu or Jewish sentiment.
Further, in many religious traditions,
including the Hindu tradition, religion is woven into the fabric of the
culture. So, destruction of a religion amounts to the destruction of a
religious culture. Today, for instance, the ancient Greek culture
is no longer living; there are only empty monuments. The Mayan, Roman and
many other rich cultures are all lost forever and humanity is impoverished
for it. Let us at least allow humanity to enjoy the riches of its remaining
mosaic of cultures. Each one has some beauty, something to contribute
to the enrichment of humanity.
In any tradition, it is wrong to
strike someone who is unarmed. In the Hindu tradition, this is considered
a heinous act, for which the punishment is severe. A Buddhist, a Hindu,
a Jew, are all unarmed, in that they do not convert. You cannot ask
them to change the genius of their traditions and begin to convert in order
to combat conversion. Because it is a tradition of these religions and
cultures not to convert, attempts to convert them is one-sided aggression.
It is striking the unarmed. I respect the freedom of a Christian or a Muslim
or Jew to practice his or her faith. I do not accept many of their beliefs,
but I want them to have the freedom to follow their religion.
You cannot ask me to respond to
conversion by converting others to my religion because it is not part of
my tradition. We don't believe in conversion. Thus, conversion is
not merely violence against people; it is violence against people who are
committed to non-violence.
I am hurt by religious conversion
and many others like me are hurt. Millions are hurt. There are many
issues to be discussed regarding conversion, but I want to draw your attention
to only the central issue here which is this one-sided violence. Religious
conversion is violence and it breeds violence. In converting, you are also
converting the non-violent to violence.
Any protest against religious conversion
is always branded as persecution, because it is maintained that people
are not allowed to practice their religion, that their religious freedom
is curbed. The truth is entirely different. The other person
also has the freedom to practice his or her religion without interference.
That is his/her birthright. Religious freedom does not extend to having
a planned program of conversion. Such a program is to be construed as aggression
against the religious freedom of others.
During the years of your papal office,
you have brought about certain changes in the attitude and outlook of the
church. On behalf of the non-aggressive religions of the world, the Hindu,
the Parsi, the Jewish and other native religions of different countries,
I request you to put a freeze on conversion and create a condition
in which all religious cultures can live and let live.
