It’s a widespread
firm notion among the resolute Hindu community that Christian missionaries in
India have been converting people to Christianity under the guise of service. This
accusation has now been leveled by the leadership of Hindu community against Mother
Teresa – arguably the most popular face of contemporary Christianity.
Mother
Teresa founded ‘Missionaries of Charity’ – a prominent Catholic social service
organization that cares for the needy - children, sick, dying and destitute.
The
Christian community in India is a meager minority. However, the minority status
did not prevent Christians from establishing hospitals, schools & colleges,
and care-homes for the needy.
Having said
this, let us look beyond the allegation of conversion to establish a few
undeniable facts.
First, the
accusations highlight a definite need for these social services in the Indian context.
Indians needed social care. Even today, a demand exists for proficient service
organizations in India.
Second, in
response to the need, the Christian missionaries and the Christian community in
India established social service organizations. Notably, the allegations of the
Hindu leadership have graciously granted the Christian missionaries the due recognition
of blessing the needy Indians.
Significantly,
the Indian community, notwithstanding religious persuasions, was benefited by
these services. In other words, these service institutions, although
established by Christian missionaries, served the needs of Hindus, Muslims,
Christians, Buddhists etc.
Third, these
service organizations were government authorized ventures. They were
established by the Christian missionaries after obtaining formal authorizations
from the governing authorities.
Notably,
the governing authorities in India were not a Christian majority at any given point
in time. So, the majority Hindu community did allow the formation of these
service ventures.
Finally, if
the governing authorities had a compelling need to terminate these service institutions
established by the Christian missionaries, they would have done so. Nothing
could have prevented the government from terminating any institution. Hence,
the continued existence of these institutions emphasizes their utmost
credibility in their specific social service domain – healthcare, education
etc.
So the
following facts have been established:
1. There was
a need for social services in the Indian society.
2. The Christian
community catered to the need by establishing the required service institutions
to bless the Indian community without any religious barriers.
3. These
service institutions were government authorized ventures. The majority Hindu
community allowed the formation of social service organizations founded by
Christian missionaries.
4. The
continued existence of these services emphasizes the credibility of these
social service organizations in their specific service domain.
As a stark
layman in Indian constitution, allow me to briefly address the subject of
religious conversion in India by examining the background:
1. Indian
constitution does seem to allow a person to practice and propagate his
religion, for Article 25(1) of the Indian constitution states that “Subject to public order, morality and
health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally
entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and
propagate religion.” 1
2. In the
past, this very article, albeit contextually, has been diversely interpreted to
deny religious conversion e.g. Rev.
Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (AIR 1977 SC 908). 2 In
other words, “The Supreme Court has
unequivocally declared that the right to propagate does not mean the right to
convert.” 3
3. “Ghar
Wapsi” (home-coming) is a reconversion drive undertaken by Hindu religious
organizations. Media has widely reported this phenomenon, especially the recent
statement that in the next 10 years 5 million Christians would be reconverted
to Hinduism.4
Significantly,
the Supreme Court of India, as a mark of approval of reconversion, has ruled
that those reconverting to Hinduism from Christianity would be entitled to
reservation benefits.5
4. Indian Prime
Minister, Mr. Narendra Modi, stated that “each
person has an “undeniable right to retain or adopt” any faith.” 6 The
Prime Minister has also condemned violence against any religion, “We cannot accept violence against any
religion on any pretext, and I strongly condemn such violence. My government
will act strongly in this regard” 7
In a
nutshell, these background instances posit that…
A. …any
Indian can freely practice any religion.
B. …any
Indian can freely propagate his religion.
C. …Indians
are treading murky ground, if they aim to convert people. Why? The aspect of
conversion seems to firmly reside in a disputable realm. On one hand, it seems
that people can freely convert based on their conscience, but on the other hand
it seems that people should not convert. There seems to be no clarity, at least
to a layman such as myself.
Now let us
approach the aspect of conversion from a theological standpoint.
First, people
born into a Christian home or a non-Christian home are not different. They are
unbelievers, to begin with. Anybody who professes to be a Christian now was an
unbeliever.
Every
Christian, their earthly citizenship notwithstanding, is a converted Christian.
An Indian, American, Chinese or an Arab could be born into a Christian home. Mere
birth into a Christian home does not make anyone a Christian.
So nobody
is a born-Christian. Christians can only be born-again Christians (John 3:
1-21). A person is born-again as a Christian when he/she consciously accepts the
Lord Jesus as God and Savior.
Thus, a
person could only be born-again into Christianity. A person is never a born-Christian.
So every Christian is a converted Christian.
Second,
true conversion happens only when man realizes his sinfulness and believes in
the Lord Jesus, who through HIS perfect life, sacrifice, resurrection and
ascension saved man from his/her sins. Thus the sinful man believes and loves
the Lord Jesus.
Man loves God
for who God is – it was God who assumed the form of man, died and resurrected
to save man from his sins. Man who loves God to derive material benefits is, in
essence, in love with material benefits. Such a man does not love God.
So a true
conversion happens for spiritual reasons and not earthly reasons. Conversion
into a religion for material benefits cannot be a true conversion.
Third, true
conversion is an act of God who initiates people into Christian life (John 3:
8, 16: 8-11). I may provide reasons as to why I am a Christian and not a Hindu.
Similarly, Mother Teresa may have provided reasons as to why she reckoned Christ
as God or Christianity as the only true religion. That was her spiritual
responsibility, as much as it is every Christian’s spiritual responsibility to offer
reasons for the hope we have in Christ (1 Peter 3: 15).
It was
virtually impossible for Mother Teresa to have converted anyone into
Christianity. Neither can you or I convert anyone into Christianity. So Mother
Teresa was not guilty of conversion. The Indian constitution does seem to allow
a Christian to offer reasons for the hope he/she has in Christ.
Converting
anyone into Christianity is an act initiated by God and not man. It is God who
initiates people into Christian life. When God initiates, man merely repents
and believes in God.
Finally,
when true conversion occurs, the Christian loves God more than his own life. In
other words, a truly converted Christian will not reject God even if his life
is under threat or for the sake of material benefits. A Christian who truly
converts and genuinely falls in love with God, if he/she remains in Christ,
will not reject Christ.
A Christian
who rejects Christ may have been a true Christian to begin with, but over a
period of time, if he/she does not remain in Christ, then there is every
possibility that he could reject Christ for the sake of the world. Those who
remain in Christ cannot reject HIM under any circumstances be it pain, pleasure
or persuasion.
So a
program such as Ghar Wapsi could be successful against those Christians who do
not remain in Christ. Those who do not remain in Christ would reject Christ
when they encounter Ghar Wapsi.
Those who remain
in Christ would not fear death; they would not fear man. Those who remain in
Christ would love God over and above anything and everything. Those who remain
in Christ would rather die in the name of Christ than live by rejecting Christ
(Philippians 1: 20-21; cf. Galatians 2: 20).
Ghar Wapsi
cannot succeed against Christians who remain in Christ.
Christians’
primary responsibility is to God and secondarily to man. While we respect and
submit to our earthly rulers, we should, in gentleness and respect, offer many
valid reasons for the hope we have in Christ.
As a good
Christian, I assume, Mother Teresa would have offered her reasons for the hope
she had in Christ. Offering reasons for the hope we have in Christ does not
convert anyone, for conversion is initiated by God and not man.
This then
is our sine qua non; we will, by being subject to public order, morality,
health, and other provisions of Indian constitution, offer reasons for the hope
we have in Christ. We will be good witnesses for Christ.
Since conversion
is initiated by God and accepted by man, one man cannot convert another.
If we are
to come in harm’s way for having been a good witness for Christ or for having
offered the reasons for our hope in Christ, then so be it.
Daniel 3:
16-18 is as much a linchpin of Christianity as John 3:16. So I conclude with
these verses, “King Nebuchadnezzar, we do
not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. If we are thrown into
the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and he
will deliver us from Your Majesty’s hand. But even if he does not, we want you
to know, Your Majesty, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of
gold you have set up” (Daniel 3: 16-18, NIV).
And all God’s
people said, “Amen.”
Endnotes:
1 http://www.constitution.org/cons/india/p03025.html
2 http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/conversion-and-freedom-of-religion/article6716638.ece
3 http://www.thehindu.com/sunday-anchor/propagation-without-proselytisation-what-the-law-says/article6711440.ece
4 http://www.charistimes.com/next-10-years-5-million-christians-reconverted-hinduism/
5 http://www.firstpost.com/india/sc-ruling-on-reconversion-its-a-stamp-of-approval-for-ghar-wapsi-says-vhp-2126461.html
6 http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/my-government-will-ensure-complete-freedom-of-faith-modi/article6905042.ece
7 Ibid.
