The conversion issue

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

Robert Zydenbos wrote:
<<>
> At 12:18 18.01.99 +0100, Artur Karp wrote:
>
> >"Conversion" it seems may mean different things in different contexts.
>
> Indeed. E.g., the Roman Catholic view is that conversion is "man's free turning to God" and "has always to be seen as a response, made possible by God's grace, to a call from God." (K. Rahner, "Conversion", in _Sacramentum mundi_ vol. 2). It is a matter between God and the individual, a fundamental decision for which the individual bears responsibility (in the same article, Rahner accepts the possibility of conversion to non-Christian religions on the same principle). But much of the Indian press turns it into a plot to destroy Indian culture, or
something weird like that.
>>

Well, quoting some 20th century version (or whatever) of Roman
Catholocism doesn't serve much purpose. Believe it or not, even Indians
do remember some historical happenings, especially within 300-400 years.
How about the Portugese who came and demolished the Kapalishvara temple
in Madras about 400 years back? Of course, the docile Tamils moved lock,
stock and barrel to the current place. Or what about St Francis who
speaks about the great joy he derived from demolishing Hindu temples? Or
what even of the burning of anti-church personalities in medieval
Europe? Or what of the Roman Catholic priests who abused the hospitality
of the docile Buddhist priests in Sri Lanka and conducted virulent
propoganda against them? I guess these are not destroying culture? Some
politically correct version of Catholocism does not serve much purpose
in understanding the psyche of people, does it? After all, we are not
shaped just by present events, but by the past also. For the record, I
am not a Hindutvavadi or whatever, demanding demolishing churches and
mosques. I am fully in support of letting bygones be bygones. But,
quoting some author conveniently forgetting past happenings (especially
concerning the wrong doings of one's own culture) doesn't help
Hindu-Christian dialog much. And is it any surprise that the press is
reactionary? Certainly not.

Rama