Author: Tarun Vijay
Publication: Rediff
of Net
Date: November 24, 2000
I live near the Gole
market church in Delhi. For the last four years, my wife, two children
and I visit the church during Christmas. Never have we said anything
critical about Jesus or Christianity to our children. We would like
them to grow up in an atmosphere, free from hate and acrimony. However,
seeing the hate campaign by a handful of individuals masquerading as spokespersons
for Christians, in the media, specially the English language one, I feel
sad.
We can do without the
tirades of the so-called protectors of the faith, whom my Christian friend
describes as 'neo-dollar-seekers' of the East.
My son often asks me,
"Papa, are Hindus so bad that they would burn a father and his sons alive?
Do we have to be Christian and hate Diwali to seek salvation? Are Hindus
pagans, heathens and are we a country of devils? Does Om Namah Shivaya
mean 'let the evil forces befall upon you?"
All these voices, have
unfortunately reached him from the offices of the same church and the literature
published by its followers, where we go to bow our head before Jesus, an
apostle of peace.
Hate kills. And
those who call themselves 'leaders' of Christians are at the forefront
of this hate campaign against the Hindus and their Dharma, exactly in the
same way as in the times of Swami Vivekananda.
The irony is that the
same Swami started celebrating Christmas, officially, in every ashram of
the Ramakrishna Mission worldwide. If the church was not controlled
from a foreign soil, the culture, traditions and civilisation of this great
country would have had a beneficial influence on the indigenous church.
It would have never thought of a hateful campaign against fellow non-Christians.
The idea of establishing
a national church originated with Indian Christians themselves in the early
sixties. His Eminence Mar Athanasius Joel S Williams, archbishop
of the Indian National Church, demanded that in the best interest of India's
security and the well being of Indian Christians, a national church, devoted
to Jesus Christ and loyal to the soil of India, should be established.
The need arose because
during the imperial time, whether the rulers were Portuguese or British,
the church and the missionaries active in India always owed their loyalties
to the foreign ruler. They got protection and 'harvested' the poor
souls of 'heathens and pagans' (read Hindus) under the shadow of tyrannical
white masters. When the nation became free and imperialism ended,
it was but natural that the patriotic Christians felt the need to free
themselves from the yoke of foreign churches.
Archbishop Williams gave
dozens of examples of how the missionaries active in India were loyal to
the imperialist rulers and had to take an oath which among other things
enjoined them, "to be loyal to Portugal in all the countries discovered
or to be discovered, conquered or to be conquered, by Portugal. And
to warn Portugal of any activity (political or otherwise) which may be
contemplated against her."
After the decline of
the Portuguese, the British also prescribed a similar oath for all the
missionaries active in British India. It said: "I .. (name)..
swear in the name of god that I will be exactly faithful to all those prescriptions
of the holy See. I include in this promise exact obedience to any rules
laid down by His Majesty's representatives, and also an undertaking to
refrain from doing, saying or writing anything either publicly or privately,
to the prejudice of the British government in India."
After Independence also,
the church, thriving on foreign money, controlled and dictated by the foreigners,
continued spreading hatred against the very people who were tolerant enough
to shelter it and gave it the freedom to propagate Christianity here!
Today there are several
big publishing houses controlled and funded by foreign funding agencies
producing tones and tones of hate literature against Hindus. The
very call of the Pope on our soil to bring us to the fold of Christianity
was the most unwarranted 'attack' on Hindus and other non-Christian faiths.
One might even legitimately
ask what is the church doing in the northeast? Rebel Christian outfits
controlled and financed by international church organisations like the
World Council of Churches, are attacking the sovereignty and integrity
of India. There is enough evidence of it especially in Nagaland and
Tripura.
The idea of a national
church has nothing to do with the way Christians choose to profess their
faith. This is not nationalising the faith as some have argued.
I do not believe that there is a direct relation between religion and patriotism.
However, the moot point is that only if India survives can the faith --
any faith survive. The world is aware of the dirty role played by
the Vatican in the disintegration of the Soviet Union and in the change
of regime in Poland. The Vatican-CIA nexus has been exposed too often
that it does not bear repetition.
A foreign church that
does not believe in the equality of religions, which gives a call for a
crusade against another religion in Europe when its growth frightened it,
is against the very grain of the idea called Bharat.
I believe that a majority
of ordinary Indian Christians are different from their so-called 'leaders'
sitting in Delhi. In pursuit of dollar-grants they abuse, insult,
and defame Hindus and the nation.
If a national church
were there, no one would have ever thought of a Christian 'leader' deposing
before the US Congress and thus insulting the India state. No national
church would have thought of attacking Hindus during Diwali by giving or
accepting a call to proselytise them.
A national church would
profess and propagate the faith in an atmosphere of mutual co-existence
and respect. It would stand for the security and the integrity of
the nation. It would not be a 'dollar-seeker' church, but a church
for Bharat and Bharatiya people. Even Jesus would not object to it.
(Tarun Vijay is the editor
of the RSS weekly, Panchjanya.)