Christian Missionary Role In India - 5

[Guest]

<P>What exactly did the Pope say ?</P>

<P>http://www.asianews.it/view.php?l=en&art=6206</P>
<P>The Holy Father told Ambassador Amitava Tripathi of his concern for the “disturbing signs of religious intolerance which have troubled some regions of the nation, including the reprehensible attempt to legislate clearly discriminatory restrictions on the fundamental right of religious freedom, [and which] must be firmly rejected as not only unconstitutional, but also as contrary to the highest ideals of India's founding fathers” who believed in a nation in which ethnic and religious groups could live in peaceful coexistence and mutual tolerance</P>

<P>So the Pope has made 3 significant remarks. </P>
<P>- First that there are disturbing signs of religious intolerance</P>
<P>- second that attempts to legislate are unconstitutional</P>
<P>- thirdly that these legislations are contrary to the highest ideals of the founding fathers.</P>
<P>Well Offstumped analyzes all 3 of these charges by the Pope as well as throws futher light on what else is happening here. Interestingly enough Offstumped is now on the radar of the Christian activists in India, so this post welcomes the attention and invites comment.</P>
<P>So Offstumped has done some digging around. The current Pope previously when he was a Cardinal authored what is referred to in Vatican Lingo a Doctrinal Note. This Doctrinal Note was on the subject of <FONT size=4>The Participation of Catholics in Political Life</FONT></P>
<P>http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congre...ca_en.html</P>
<P>In this note, then Cardinal Ratzinger makes a very interesting observation:</P>

<P>Promoting the common good of society, according to one’s conscience, has nothing to do with <<CONFESSIONALISM>> or <B style="COLOR: black; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #a0ffff">religious intolerance </B></P>
<P>All the faithful are well aware that specifically religious activities (such as the profession of faith, worship, administration of sacraments, theological doctrines, interchange between religious authorities and the members of religions) are outside the state’s responsibility. The state must not interfere, nor in any way require or prohibit these activities, except when it is a question of public order</P>

<P>First important item to be observed in the statements above, there is no reference to Propogation or proselytization. So in effect the catholic doctrine acknowledges that regulating proselytization is within the State's responsibility and can be prohibited.</P>
<P>The second important to be observed is that acting of one's conscience to promote the common good of society is not to be confused with religious intolerance.</P>
<P><FONT color=#ff0000>So one can conclude by the Pope's own prescription that if the State were to act of its own conscience to promote common good and regulate proselytization (which by the way doctrine does not deem to be outside the state's responsibility) the State would not be guilty of Religious Intolerance and would be acting well within its limits</FONT></P>
<P>Now let us examine the other 2 questions that these attempts are unconstitutional and against the ideals of the founding fathers. </P>
<P>We once again turn to the Constituent Assembly Debates when this issue was first discussed on 29th April 1947</P>
<P><A style="BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: groove" href="http://parliamentofindia.nic.in/ls/debates/vol3p2.htm">http://parliamentofindia.nic.in/ls/debates/vol3p2.htm</A></P>
<P>THE HON'BLE SARDAR VALLABHBHAI PATEL,  Chairman. Advisory Committee on Minorities, </P>
<P>Fundamental Rights, etc. when introducing the Fundamental Rights submitted the below annexure which clearly stated:</P>

<P>All persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience, and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion subject to public order, morality or health,  </P>
<P>Conversion from one religion to another brought about by coercion or undue influence shall not be recognised by law</P>
<P>The freedom of religious practice guaranteed in this clause shall not debar the State from enacting laws for the purpose of social welfare and reform</P>

<P dir=ltr><FONT color=#ff0000>So the founding fathers were very much alert to the issue of illegal conversion through coercion or undue influence and did indeed make provisions for the right of the State to enact laws to deal with it in the interest of social welfare.</FONT></P>
<P dir=ltr><FONT color=#ff0000>As far as the question of Constitutionality of the Law is concerned, the Pope and his christian fellowship would agree that it is for the Courts of India to deem what is Constitutional or Unconstitutional and not for Vatican or anyone else for that matter.</FONT></P>
<P dir=ltr><FONT color=#000000>What is even more interesting is that the Christian bodies across the globe are acknowledging the lack of guidelines within the Church on Do's and Donts on how to convert and are engaging on a 3 year project to come up with the same</FONT></P>
<P dir=ltr>http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories...602697.htm</P>

<P dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>planned a series of meetings aimed at assessing the nature of religious conversions and creating "a code of conduct" for Christian churches </FONT></P>
<P dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>some Christian organizations can be very aggressive in their attempts to convert people of another faith,</FONT></P>
<P dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>We want to convert people; we don't hide that," </FONT></P>

<P dir=ltr><FONT color=#000000>best of luck with that</FONT></P>
<P dir=ltr><FONT color=#ff0000>Offstumped Bottomline: The Pope's remarks are out of line by his own doctrine and reflect a lack of understanding of the Founding Fathers ideals and were clearly out of bounds on what is and what is not Constitutional.</FONT></P>