Author: Muzaffar Hussain
Publication: The Organiser
Date: November 19, 2000
The Vatican has now come out loud
and clear that according to its faith there is no salvation to followers
of other religions and only the Catholic Church can grant salvation, though
it has not been put so bluntly. This startling revelation has come
from an extensive excerpt from a 36-page document recently released by
the Vatican, published in a Chicago paper, The Indian Reporter and World
News in its September 8 issue, under the title "Vatican does not believe
in equality of religions". It says that the Pope has lambasted some
theologians for their statements considering one religion as good as another.
The Catholic Pontiff says this concept is detrimental to the message of
the Church, and tantamount to laying the axe at the very root of Christianity.
He grants that the followers of other religions, at best can hope to attain
spiritual peace or happiness. But for their salvation they have to
follow the Church. To call all Churches as "sister churches" has
also been objected to as it would affect the status of the Catholic Church
as the mother of all churches. The chief cardinal of the congregation
Joseph Ratjinger has explained several points of the document at a press
conference. He demurred at the series of efforts to change and dilute
the ideals set by the Second Vatican Council regarding religion and liberty.
The original spirit of the ideals had been twisted to such an extent that
the pristine spirit had lost its identity, he said.
The extensive report published in
the Chicago paper indicates that the Pope rejects the idea of equality
of Christianity with other religions. He maintains that Christianity
is superior to other religions. He openly asserts that salvation
is possible only through Christianity. The Pontiff rejects all attempts
at changing and modernising Christianity. These efforts according
to the Pope would hurt the very soul of Christianity.
The Pope's assertion of Christian
superiority and monopoly of salvation can never be acceptable to non-Christians.
If they accept it the very need for other religions vanishes. The
Pope not only praises Christianity but in the same breath condemns other
religion. To date most philosophers had maintained dud all religions
were equal and were only different ways to reach God. All these paths
are equal in the eyes of God. But this statement of the Pope is fraught
with religious controversy, conflict and strife presenting a serious problem
to the governments of the countries having non-Christian populations.
The Pope's statement bristles with serious consequences that could even
lead to religious confrontation and even bloodshed like the crusades.
If such dire consequences were to
be avoided, the Christians should confine their activities and statements
to their respective. countries. Whatever may be the Pontiffs
pontifications, every country's government will have to be alive to its
own ground realities and will have to consider whether it can afford to
subscribe to the Pontiffs view of superiority of Christianity and its monopoly
of salvation, and whether its departure from the belief in equality of
religions can be tenable. Christianity is free to propagate its 'truth'
all over the world, but it has no right to condemn other religions in an
untenable "holier than thou" attitude. While every where efforts
are afoot to establish all over the world the principle of equality of
religions as a means to world peace, how can such separatist and arrogant
attitude be tolerated? Therefore now it becomes the lot of every Christian
community to ignore the fatwas promulgated by the anachronistic Papal See,
and evolve a form of Christianity that is neither anachronistic nor antithetical
to the ethos of the nation of which they form a part and yet would retain
the main principles of Jesus Christ. And such a form is bound to
accept the concept of equality of religions. Because the Bible stands
for confluence of cultures and not a clash of cultures. The Pope
may to his heart's content manipulate and twist the Biblical message, but
he has no business to create a world-wide religious conflict.
The Pope's statement is tantamount
to a conspiracy against those countries which are not part of the Catholic
'Suzerainty'. Islam and Judaism have not so far come out openly to
challenge the pontification only because this concept of religious superiority
and exclusiveness of salvation is implicit in their teachings also.
If that was not the case the pan-Islamic movement of Jehad to turn the
entire planet into a Caliphate, would have never arisen. If that
was not the case the Jews would not have declared their dream of greater
Israel and would not have reiterated that there would again be David's
Empire. The fact of the matter is these three religions that rose
from the and Arab deserts, do not subscribe to concept of equality of religions.
They only pay lip service to that concept only where the followers of these
religion are in minority with a view to increasing their number and propagation
of their faith. But when they attain majority in a country they,
deck" it as an Islamic State treating the followers of other hitherto "equal"
religions as second class citizens or no citizens at all. Can any
other religious community propagate its religions freely in Pakistan or
Israel?
In view of the serious consequences
of the Pontiffs peroration the suggestion of a national church put forth
by the RSS Chief K.S. Sudarshan should appear not only pertinent
but also a prescription for the disease of this "globalisation" of the
Catholic Church. The Tripura Christians, though erstwhile Hindus,
are free not to worship Durga the Hindu deity, but they can never be allowed
to arrogate to themselves the right to prevent the local tribals and Hindus
from performing their age-old traditional worship. India is multi-religious
community. If followers of one religion attempt to dictate the Followers
of other religion what religious practices they should follow, life in
India would turn-out to be sheer hell. And the anarchy that would
ensue would be extremely difficult to control. Therefore the Tripura
Church should evolve a Christianity that is compatible with the multi-religious
nature of our nation. So long as such a nationalisation is not brought
about in the Tripura Church, Indianisation is not brought about in that
Church, people will not accept their behaviour and the government cannot
allow them to pursue their aggressive manner of religious propagation.
If the government does not take such step today under the false sense of
decorum, it can not be construed to mean that government would remain a
silent spectator to the religious violence that is sure to break as a consequence
of the arrogant direction the Pontiff has given for his missionaries by
claiming superiority to his faith and the monopoly of granting salvation.
China has already set a clear example.
In China Christianity can operate within the cultural and geographical
confines. This is an established fact that conversion is not done
for religious reasons. It is done for purely economic reasons.
This commerce of conversion is extremely dangerous. Because conversion
almost automatically results in conversion of nationality. Ever since
Christianity overpowered the Greek community Greece no longer remained
the same old Grecian Greek. Any nation would become similar to today's
Greece after its conversion to Christianity. The illustrations of
Kenya is enough to demonstrate what havoc the moneys poured in the name
of conversion plays in the national life of a country. A social leader
there had once quipped, "When the missionaries started to spread their
"truth", we had all the land in the country and they had the Bible.
Today the missionaries have all the land in the country and we have only
the Bible."
It would be a silly mistake to imagine
that Indianisation or nationalisation of the Church would result in denial
of Christianity. Because Article 25 of our Constitution grants full
freedom to every religion for its propagation. Missionaries of all
the religions of the world come here and merrily operate in their mission
of spread of their faith. But when a religion claims that it is superior
to other religions and the nation's other religions are incapable of achieving-their
followers salvation, it amounts to transgressing the limits of both the
constitutional right and religious freedom not to speak of cultural decency.
The right granted by Article 25 is not for spreading religious animosity,
but it is granted to allow all religions equal opportunity to spread their
religion by convincing the people of their version of the spiritual truth.
Not to encourage religious arrogance and ensuing violence Christianity
can enjoy this right, this religious freedom, so long as it operates on
the plane of equal opportunity for all religions. When it denies
other religions the same status as it enjoys, it forfeits the Constitutional
right granted by Article 25.
What exactly is the implication
of a Swadeshi Church? Well, it means the Christians should form a national
body of Church which is not controlled by alien authority. The spiritual
head for India should be appointed by this national Church without any
foreign influence. Today the Vatican is the capital of the Catholic
Empire, the Pontiff at Vatican appoints the religious governors' for each
country. When he appoints an Archbishop for any country he does not
even consult the Catholics in the country, nor even the nation's government.
Thus an anti-Indian person can also be an Archbishop of India if it so
pleases the Pope. When an independent body of Indian Church is formed,
its head will be elected or appointed by the Indian body without consulting
the wishes of the "Emperor" of the Catholic Empire. And thus the
appointment of a Swadeshi head of the Swadeshi Church will not recognize
the suzerainty of the Pontiff which often functions in non-religious matters
as well as religious. The second benefit of formation of such a Swadeshi
would be that the present chaotic state of the Pope-appointed "governor"
of the Indian Catholics doling out the largesse received from the "Emperor"
without any accountability will end. There will be some national
agency that can audit the accounts of this National Church. It cannot
be ignored that the Vatican is a political state as well as a religious
empire. Therefore when it "infiltrates" in the name of Christianity
it also carries out political infiltration. The Archbishops of many
countries elsewhere are appointed after consultations of the domestic governments.
England a predominantly Protestant country does not allow direct appointment
of its Archbishop without reference to the government of the country.
In Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini tried to concentrate both the power of the
state and the power of religion in his own hands. But world pressure
compelled him to surrender the state power to the elected representative
of the people. When Khomeini was not given this opportunity to usurp
the state power why should the Pope be allowed the papal empire? The Indians
may not worry about the wishes of other nations. But in India the
Indian Christians should not recognize the imperial power of the Vatican!
