An AIADMK leader in Pondicherry recently sounded the alarm over a conversion spree in his constituency, Uppalam, which is resulting in an open assault on Tamil culture in the area (New Indian Express, 18 April 2003). In a debate in the State Assembly, Mr. A. Anbalagan alleged that married women were being prohibited from sporting the tilak, mangala sutra or flowers in their hair, which are traditional accoutrements of married women in Tamil culture. He claimed that in this manner, women who would otherwise like to be attired as sumangalis were forced to change their appearance in the name of conversion, and this was having a deleterious impact on the social fabric.
Discerning readers would have read recent press reports regarding the efforts of Christian missionaries to forcefully convert war-ravaged Iraqis. That these activities have fulsome backing from the governments of predominantly Christian nations is undeniable, and this should be a cause of concern among civilized world citizens, as monotheism (of whatever variety) militates against the spirit of civilization itself. The United Nations, which has a charter to respect religious plurality and protect native religious traditions, has a special responsibility in this regard, and needs to shed its current stupor.
Press reports indicate that among the organizations that have rushed to provide humanitarian (sic) aid to the Iraqi people are the International Missions Board of the Southern Baptist Convention and Samaritan’s Purse run by controversial evangelist Franklin Graham. Readers may recall that Graham, who is extremely close to President George Bush, Jr., acquired international notoriety by labelling Islam as a “very evil and wicked religion.” As for the language used for the Prophet by a Southern Baptist Convention leader, the less said the better.
There can be little doubt that the US administration is hardly averse to this “aid evangelism.” The coming weeks and months therefore are likely to see food packets, water, shelter, medical aid, all efficiently exchanged for baptized souls. American evangelists are said to be brimming with the hope that “in victory, God is opening a door for more missionaries.” The element of coercion and inducement in such an approach is as overt as it is abhorrent. Mr. Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American Islamic Relations has rightly objected that the two groups are “seeking to exploit people in their moment of vulnerability.”
In this context, I feel that there is much merit in the Indian view that the right to propagate one’s faith is not co-terminus with the right to convert; nor are these rights absolute. There is a greater need to respect the hostility and resistance of persons targetted for conversion towards such a mind-control activity, and to recognize their right not to be so humiliated. In other words, where poor people object to the muscular invasion of their hamlets by foreign-funded missionaries, it is the duty of the administration to evict these trespassers. I am told that in Delhi, in the slums of Badarpur and other outlying areas, poor families are currently being badgered to convert, but the police and administration are unmindful of their plight.
What is most objectionable about conversions is that though missionaries exploit existing vulnerabilities of people and blame their plight upon their traditional faith, the conversion rite hardly solves any problem. Instead, people are cut off from their traditional mores and cultural sources of stability, while encouraged to become alienated from their fellowmen. Verrier Elwin, missionary-turned-anthropologist, recognized this danger as early as 1944 when he warned that the rapid pace of conversion of tribes would turn them into a querulous, anti-national, aggressive minority community, with none of the old virtues and few of the new, which would pose grave problems to the future Government of India.
Advocating a complete ban on proselytization, Elwin asserted that “change of religion is actually harmful to the aborigines it destroys tribal unity, strips the people of age-long moral sanctions, separates them from the mass of their fellow country men and in many cases leads to decadence that is as pathetic as it is deplorable. The methods employed are questionable. There is economic exploitation, exploitation of ignorance and social exploitation. Therefore missionaries should be withdrawn from tribal areas.”
These words hold true even today, and apply equally to villages and urban slums. If we take poverty and caste discrimination as the legitimizing principles of conversions, we find that poverty hardly disappears with change of religion. As for caste discrimination, Indian church leaders are not averse to perpetuating it. In Tamil Nadu, for instance, discrimination against Dalit Christians is a way of life (New Indian Express, 14 April 2003). They have separate pews, a separate chalice for the Holy Communion, and separate burial grounds. When some enlightened priests rose in revolt, the double chalice system made way for a new system in which the communion wine was served with a spoon. In other words, the church found an intelligent way to evade the issue of egalitarianism.
Some churches have erected separate crucifixes (miniature churches) for Dalits, in the vicinity of the main church. Going by the account of a rebel priest, Rev Dr Dhyanchand Carr of the Tamil Nadu Theological Seminary, Arasarady, Madurai, casteism is so deeply embedded in the church that Dalits have no place in decision-making bodies and Dalit students face immense difficulty entering educational institutions and hostels run by the church. Those who protest against the caste bias are quickly demonized as ‘Dalit pastors.’
Yet, if conversions are to be effectively resisted so that people are not cut adrift from their social and cultural moorings, the evils bedeviling the society must be tackled head-on. To begin with, we must admit that the Hindu social reform agenda has virtually been on the back-burner since the death of Mahatma Gandhi. This can be easily calibrated in the degradation of women over the past five decades. Crimes like dowry and bride-burning have spread to communities where they were previously unknown, and new evils like amniocentesis and sexual harassment (at school, college, workplace, neighbourhood) have been added.
For all the rapid strides made in certain spheres, even in the realm of women’s empowerment, society in many respects chooses to move in reverse gear. The fact that Dalits are beaten and abused for entering village temples or sharing well water is simply unacceptable in this day and age. Yet I do not believe it is difficult to end this menace. If the local police station in-charge is made personally accountable for all offenses in his ‘thana,’ cases will be registered promptly and there will soon be a steep drop in the number of incidents as bigots get the message that the administration means business. It is simply a matter of political will, which successive governments have failed to demonstrate in order to exploit Dalit sympathy and votes during elections.
Recently, the Samajwadi Party sought to exacerbate social tensions by releasing a CD of Ms. Mayawati criticizing Hindu gods. The Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister responded by declaring that though she is a Hindu, she will not tolerate evil in the name of the dharma. Ms. Mayawati has a point. It is now for spiritual leaders and responsible citizens to rise to the challenge and reform society from within by shunning the artificially sustained caste hierarchy.
The Pioneer, 22 April 2003