Archives

Point of view by Lucien Rajakarunanayake

First they came for theCommunists,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up,
because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.

Rev. Martin Niemoller, (Germany) 1945

Soon after the Supreme Court gave its order late last year, prohibiting the incorporation of a Roman Catholic Order of nuns, the Minister of Justice W. J. M. Lokubandara told the media that the judgment of the Court was far reaching enough as to make it unnecessary to introduce a new law against unethical conversions.

He also said it was not only Buddhists who were affected by these unethical conversions, and that the Roman Catholic Archbishop Rt. Revd. Oswald Gomis, had informed him that the Catholic Church was also being targeted by these "fundamentalist" Christian groups.

In the highly charged situation following the sudden death of the Ven. Gangodawila Soma Thera, the Catholic Bishops Conference was quick to issue a statement condemning unethical conversions, and declaring that the Catholic Church was both opposed to and had no truck with such conversions.

Whether one is in agreement with the practices of some evangelical or divergent extremist Christian groups or not, what the Catholic Church did, in the need to protect its own flock, was to distance itself from a large number of other Christian organizations that do not come within what is now known as the established churches. Whether such distancing is in keeping with the teachings of Christ is a matter for concern, but it certainly touches the sentiments expressed by the Rev. Martin Niemoller, who campaigned against the Nazis in Germany, in the celebrated lines by him reproduced above. The church should watch out for the boomerang effect of what's taking place now.

Over and over again our society has demonstrated an unfortunate proclivity to rush into actions that are either often long overdue and past their usefulness or irrelevant to the current needs, after letting the issues involved hibernate for many years.

The call for legislation to stop proselytizing and "unethical conversions" by Christian fundamentalists has been echoing in our society for many years. Yet, no one saw any action taken to address this issue, in its proper perspective all these years. And now we have been promised a 60-day wonder, a law against "unethical" conversions. The Catholic Church now says it will study the Draft Bill when presented and make its observations known.

When such a far-reaching piece of legislation is to be passed as an "Urgent Bill" in Parliament, awaiting the draft of this 60-day legal solution to what is claimed to be a long-standing problem, may be too late to alter its core content. The need is to discuss the practicality of using laws to stop these "unethical conversions". Discussion of this should have a wider audience, beyond confines of the leaders of the established religions, as to what constitutes "ethics" in conversion.

A much wider discourse is needed as such a law could lead to exacerbating those suspicions that already exist among religious groups especially as seen in the targeting of "kristianikarayo, katholikayo, and kurusakarayo" all lumped together in one group.

In any discussion of the ethics of religious conversions, there should be serious study of what causes or creates the environment for conversions. If the established religions looked at how in fact they function, with all the resources available to them both here and even abroad, it is inevitable to see little being done by them, whether Buddhist or Catholic, to sufficiently reach and have greater communion with the lesser advantaged or poorer sections of their own religions, in a country that has such widespread poverty.

Particularly among Christians, it is wrong to believe it is the offer of help in overcoming poverty and social disadvantage only, which draws increasing numbers of their flock to the new evangelicals. There are many of Catholics who have genuine doubts about the dogmas of the Church being true interpretations of the teachings of Christ.

There are also matters such as opulence and lifestyle of religious leaders, which make followers suspect their sincerity of adherence to the teachings of their respective religious founders. I am personally not impressed by any religious leader who has taken a vow of poverty or decided to renounce the pleasures of this world, travelling in a Mercedes Benz or any other luxury car, whether gifted by the State or not. Such floating above the people, distances them from the people they preach to. Such religious leaders, especially in among Christians, lose the touch of the Good Shepherd.

As for the antagonisms that exist towards Christians, there is the fact that even the established churches, do not give sufficient importance to the traditions and cultural values of our own people. One example is how the Sinhala & Tamil New Year is still considered by most Christians, as something that is alien to them. They wholly ignore it being part of the culture of this country. Why do most Christians not encourage their children to pay respect at the feet of their parents in the traditional manner when leaving for school, instead of the cheese sandwich by-bye of the TV ads?

Conceding that Sinhala-Buddhists being the majority population in the country, and that they make up the larger number of meat eaters in our society, what efforts have the established Christian religions taken to discourage the cruel and inhumane slaughter of animals for food, particularly when it is well own that a large number of illegal slaughter houses are located in areas with large Christian populations, and are owned by prominent Christians or Catholics, some of whom are also well-known politicians?

What action has the Catholic Church taken to discourage the killing of turtles, a protected species, by fishermen of the predominantly Catholic, Negombo area? These are areas of activity in which concerned Christians and their leaders could help give leadership to the revival of the traditional values of our people. Why remain such towers of silence when all this violence against animals goes on unrestricted, with laws that will not be changed even in 60 times 60 days to prohibit and impose serious sanctions against such violence?

There are other areas of public ethics too that need questioning. What justification is there for the Urban Development Authority to spend public funds to maintain the Roman Catholic Basilica at Tewatte, Ragama, under the patronage of the Minister of Christian Affairs? Is the Church truly unable to maintain this all-important shrine? Could not this money of the UDA be put to better use to help the homeless in the Ragama area? The dependence on State assistance to do what one can do with one's own resources is a bad trend being more and more ingrained in our society, encouraged by religious leaders of all persuasions.

If I may sound a note of caution, there is also growing dissatisfaction about the manner of admission to Catholic and other Christian schools, with justified grounds to describe the procedures adopted as "unethical". This is a powder keg that awaits ignition in the not too distant future.

Unethical conversions cannot be treated in isolation. What do Christian churches do about areas of ethical concern, such as the increased exploitation of workers in the private sector, the massive retrenchments due to privatization, the corruption brought to one's homes via the electronic media, the degrading of traditional values and the silent genuflection before globalization?

I recall the days when the Christian pulpit was freely used to urge churchgoers to vote against Marxists. Why is it not possible today, to urge one's flock to reject corrupt politicians, instead of them gaining in the "manapey" because of their Christian faith and church patronage?

These are all matters of Christian ethics, and adherence to them could be a better protection from the threat of so-called fundamentalists, than any hastily passed legislation.

Considering ethical honesty in governance, why do all religious leaders keep asking both the President and Prime Minister to settle their differences in the interests of the country, instead of clearly asking the Prime Minister to take honest note of all the proposals and concessions the President has offered, regarding Defence?

As for ethics and "unethical conversions" itself, why should ethics be confined to conversions from one religion to another only? Should it not apply to other aspects of social life, too? Is it ever possible to ignore the unethical practices that proliferate in politics? How can a society that tolerates unethical crossovers from either side of Parliament, with no answerability to the people who elected such political long jump athletes, be only concerned about unethical, religious conversions, as to bring in urgent legislation against it?

How can we leave it in the hands of politicians known for their wholly unethical behaviour in the face of social needs and priorities, to legislate on ethics in religious conversions? Can we believe they would be ethical even in this? Finally, how can a society where ethics has the least respect in the widest range of activities, from the professional to the religious, realistically expect ethics to be respected in conversions from one religion to another, even if there is law providing for such ethical behaviour?

www.ceylincoproperties.com

www.ppilk.com

www.crescat.com

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries

Produced by Lake House
Copyright © 2003 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager