Christians: under siege or political posturing
Major
General Mrinal Suman
Before the Lok Sabha
polls last year, Father Frazer Mascarenhas, principal of St Xavier's College,
published a letter on the college website in which he criticised the Gujarat
model of development and cautioned the students, “The prospect of an alliance
of corporate capital and communal forces coming to power constitutes a real
threat to the future of our secular democracy.” Apparently, he was terming BJP
as a threat to secularism. Although most considered the principal’s act to be
grossly inappropriate, they were not surprised.
Hundreds of Christians,
led by the church leaders, marched in protest on the roads of Delhi against the
alleged vandalisation of churches and a theft in a Christian school. Timing being
of essence, the protest was launched when the campaigning for Delhi polls was
close to its feverish pitch. Suggesting an anti-minority conspiracy, they blamed
the BJP government for their alleged anxiety.
Apparently, the church
leaders were cooking-up sensitive issues to defeat BJP as per their
pre-determined agenda. They ensured extensive coverage of their protests by the
foreign and Indian media, thereby damaging India’s secular image. In a way, it
was an anti-national act as channels like BBC are only too eager to shame
India. Unwisely, even Obama got carried away with his uncalled for advice,
losing considerable goodwill in India.
The pattern was similar
to what the Vajpayee government faced. Somehow, BJP governments raise the
hackles of the church leaders and they concoct reasons to denigrate it. Whereas
all have a right to vote for the party of their choice, playing of divisive politics
and fanning of fissiparous tendencies should be avoided.
The Alleged Sense of
Insecurity
Most disconcertedly, a
letter written by Julio Riberio has
caused immense pain to his admirers. Riberio is an iconic figure and is treated
with due reverence. Affectionately called a Super Cop, the nation honoured him
with the award of Padma Bhushan.
How can a man on whom
the nation has bestowed so much of adulation, love and honour feel insecure in
his own country? Why does he feel ‘threatened, not wanted, reduced to a stranger
in my own country’? Most unfortunately, he goes on to add, “I am not
an Indian anymore, at least in the eyes of the proponents of the
Hindu Rashtra.” How has he reached such an astonishing conclusion? Which Hindu
organisation has conveyed such a message to him?
I had the privilege of
meeting Riberio at a seminar at the Nehru Centre at Mumbai a few months ago. We
had a long conversation. He is as impressive and alert as ever. I have always been
his admirer. I became his devotee that day. Therefore, his letter came as a
rude shock. Either Riberio was coerced to write the said letter or it was a
case of an emotional outburst (the proverbial human weakness). Whatever be the
reason, no one expected a man of his stature to fall prey to the misinformation
campaign and pen those lines.
In his letter, Riberio cites
four issues that he claims have added to his sense of insecurity. One, ‘Ghar
Wapsi’ call of some Hindu organisations. Riberio is not being reasonable in
objecting to ‘Ghar Wapsi’? If conversion of Hindus to Christianity is fair and ‘secular’,
why should a call to Christians to return to the Hindu-fold be termed ‘communal’
and a threat to the minority community? Either conversions should be totally
banned or there should be a level playing field. It cannot be a one way
movement.
Two, Riberio faults the
government for declaring Christmas as ‘Good Governance Day’. One fails to
understand as to why Christians are opposing it. The most auspicious occasion
of Christmas is considered synonymous with goodness in all spheres of life.
Good governance is one such sphere. Christians have every reason to be proud of
it.
Three, any word uttered
against Mother Teresa is considered to be an affront to the Christian
community. Mother Teresa belonged to the whole humanity and it is unfair to
identify her exclusively with one community. Her righteousness and compassion
for the poor were beyond comparison. No criticism can lower the status of such
saintly souls. Hindu gods and goddesses are commonly made the butt of crude
jokes, especially in films.
The fourth issue raised
by Riberio is about the alleged attacks on the churches in Delhi. This needs
examination. Two cases of fire were due to short circuiting. In Jasola, a glass
pane broken by the kids playing close by was termed as vandalisation of the
church by the church leaders. A drunken brawl was the cause of damage to a
church in Vikaspuri. Having being caught on CCTV, the miscreants have already
confessed their guilt. Similarly, it is unfair to term theft of money from a
school as an attack on the Christians. Money is irresistible and thieves do not
hesitate to steal, even from temples and other religious places.
As per the Delhi police
statistics, crimes against religious places are routine and have been occurring
every year. In 2014, the incidents of theft numbered 206 against temples, 30
against gurdwaras, 14 against mosques and 3 against churches. Yet, the church
leaders were most vociferous in tarnishing the secular image of the country. Expectedly,
the church leaders declined to accept the police findings that there was no
communal angle to the incidents. The church leaders knew the truth but wanted
to paint BJP in communal terms and generate fear psychosis amongst the
minorities, deliberately during the elections.
The heinous crime of the
gang rape of a 71-year old nun in Ranaghat town of West Bengal last month shook
the conscience of the nation. In addition, a sum of Rs 12 lakh in cash was
looted. Sadly, attempts were made to convert such an abominable offence into an
anti-Christian plank. All efforts were made to term it as a handiwork of Hindu
religious fanatics. A West Bengal Minister blamed ‘religious intolerance in the
name of Ghar Wapsi’ for the crime. The world media covered it extensively.
Fortunately for the Modi government, the culprits were identified to be
Bangladeshi Muslims. Most have been arrested and have confessed to the crime. As
expected, having dented India’s reputation, presstitute media chose to ignore
the true facts as they emerged.
Recently, desecration of
the St. Mary’s Church on 16 April in Agra evoked wide-spread protests by Christians.
In no time, the incident was communalized. Blaming Hindu organisations, the
displayed placards read ‘stop atrocities, against Christians’ and ‘we have a
right to worship and practise our faith’. Once again, they complained of
threat to the minorities.
It must have come as a
rude shock (and disappointment) to the protestors when they learnt that a
jilted lover, rickshaw-puller Haider Ali was responsible for the offence. On
being spurned by a Christian girl, he had committed the crime out of ‘pure
frustration’, done under the influence of liquor. He is under arrest and has
confessed. Yet, many priests and leaders of the Christian community decline to
believe the police version and demand ‘a fair probe’.
In view of the facts
that have emerged after the investigation of all church related incidents, one
is sure that Riberio must be regretting his gullibility. He got carried away
with the falsehood spread by the church leaders. Being a man of character, he
must be seeking ways to make amends for having hurt the sentiments of millions
of his admirers. For most Indians, he is a national hero and a role model; and will
always remain one.
Et tu Admiral
What has shocked the
soldiers most is the statement made by Admiral Sushil Kumar Isaac that ‘fear
among Christians could percolate into the armed forces’. It was a most brazen,
appalling and detestable comment. It was an act of the worst kind of blasphemy
and amounted to injecting the virus of communalism in the armed forces.
For military leaders, communalism
is an anathema. It is a manifestation of selfish nature, unprofessional
character and unethical disposition. It poses a grave threat to the cohesion of
the services. Needless to say, the Admiral has let the services down with his highly venomous comments. A man with such prejudiced, narrow and communal mindset should have
never been selected for the coveted post. Sorry, Admiral, you have proved
yourself to be unworthy of the appointment you held. You owe an unconditional
apology to the entire soldiering community.
We, in the services, are a cohesive whole and do not ever talk of our different religious affiliations. Our religious identity is confined to our homes. Like all other communities, Christians
have done India proud and made supreme sacrifices for its defence. Their
commitment to nationalism is beyond reproach. For Christ’s sake, leave the
services alone. You have already done enough harm.
Finally
Secularism is an article
of faith and a commitment for all Indians. No community needs to feel
threatened. The conviction of co-existence is strongly embedded in the Indian
psyche. While it is incumbent on the majority community to dispel all misapprehensions
of the minorities, leaders of the minorities should shun crying wolf to arouse
communal emotions for narrow political gains. In any case, use of religion as a
political instrument amounts to its sacrilege.
History stands testimony
that a nation infested with the virus of parochialism has always been an easy
prey for subjugation. No one knows this bitter truth better than India, whose
centuries-long suffering under foreign rule was the direct fallout of the malaise
of parochialism. And, communalism is the worst and most destructive type of
parochialism. It has the potential to split the country on communal lines – a
dreadful scenario indeed.*****
Sir,
ReplyDeleteWill the worthy former Commissioner and the Admiral have the moral courage to publish an open letter of apology? That would go a long way in redeeming their erstwhile stature which they strived so hard to achieve. If not the public will move on knowing that our admiration was misplaced in this cases.
I am not sure about the authenticity of the statement "one is sure that Ribeiro must be regretting his gullibility..." Did he? Or is the author giving him a clean chit? If so, why is the author giving him a clean chit?
ReplyDeleteOther than that this is a very objective article with examples proving the point that an artificial environment of intolerance is being generated by opponents of BJP.