Every quarter my fifth grader is required to write a book report on a book that he would never choose to read himself. He’s a reluctant reader (although that’s changing a bit), and the level of books that are forced upon him make the task that much more difficult. So, quite often I read the books to him. He gets the information (it’s amazing how much more he gets out of a book read to him than he does from one he reads himself, but that’s a whole ‘nother topic!) and there is much less exasperation on my part. It’s all ultimately about me anyway, right??? Don’t answer that please!
Back to the book report… This quarter the book is any book on a Saint. My son is not all that interested in Saints (unless you count the New Orleans Saints, but I don’t think that’s what the curriculum had in mind). I tried to make St. Francis sound interesting, but all the book descriptions make the Saints sound pretty boring to young boys. In the end I looked at my own bookshelf and found a biography of Saint Teresa that I decided he was going to use. With the bargaining chip of me reading it to him he agreed. Now that we are into the book he’s actually enjoying it quite a bit. I, on the other hand, am amazed by it.
One thing that has gotten my attention is the attitude of the Catholic Missionaries of Charity towards conversion of their fellow Indians. Conversion is not one of their aims. This seems strange to me. I’m only talking about my own personal experience here, not any creed of Protestants, but whenever I was involved with church charity work, mission trips, etc. conversion was the main aim. We might be diagnosing illness or passing out medicine. We might be helping with building projects. We might have been tutoring urban students. But at the heart of all these activities was the ultimate aim of converting these people to Christianity. We offered them tutoring because it was a way to get them in the church. In fact, immediately after the tutoring session there was a Bible Study. I’m sure not all of the students stayed for this, and surely it wasn’t required, but the hope was that these kids would stay. When I went on mission trips to Latin America we intentionally tried to convince Catholics of the error of their ways and wanted them to join “our” church. We argued the validity of Christianity over those with Hindu beliefs. When I went to Britain we targeted Muslims with the intention of conversion.
Now, I’m not suggesting that this is bad. It’s good to want people to become Christians. This was Jesus’ last instruction to the Apostles, “Go out into all nations, baptizing…” But I ran into a phenomenon - when people wanted money (for good things mind you) they would “fake” conversion because they thought this would get them what they needed. If a man had a sick wife, he would feign conversion because he thought this would enable him to get money for the hospital. I can only assume that this was based on some sort of precedent. Why would people do this if the money was available to all equally? I also saw lonely young girls feign conversion because they wanted to be accepted, wanted to be a part of something. Maybe they didn’t feel truly welcome and so they faked it. I can’t say anything definite because I was there on a missionary effort, not there all the time.
I never questioned any of this. In fact I advocated it. I personally believed that any charity work was futile if the people you were ministering to were going to hell! Without conversion their physical healing was pointless. It wasn’t that I advocated not trying to help people who weren’t Christians, but I would have considered the work a failure if the people being helped weren’t converted by the efforts. It was not enough to advocate being a better person, being a better Hindu, being a better Muslim. It was not enough to love just for love’s sake. I didn’t look at the poor as Jesus in disguise. Of course, I live in suburban America. I have to go pretty far to find real poverty. But I firmly believed that most of the people on the street corners with those signs - Will Work for Food - were scam artists. Those people that slept on park benches downtown? They were drug addicts who should kick the habit and get a job! Single mothers on welfare? Well, they should get off their lazy butts and get a job and quit taking all my hard earned tax dollars! Yes, I was one of “those people”. I was hard and cold and unforgiving. But I didn’t know it. Mother Teresa is the one who told me, she is the one who woke me up to what I really was.
When the Missionaries of Charity went out into the streets of Calcutta they didn’t have conversion of anyone other than themselves in mind. M. Teresa firmly believed that each and every suffering person she met was “Jesus in distressing disguise”. When a Hindu died in her house for the dying he was taken to the Hindu temple for a proper Hindu burial. Same for the Muslims that she helped. She didn’t try to convert them on their deathbeds. And this is what saved her order. India at that time was a dangerous place to live. There were battles in the streets between warring factions - basically boiling down to Hindu vs Muslim. There were few Christians in Calcutta. The Missionaries went out every day and ministered to people in different quarters of the city, both Hindu and Muslim. At first there was a huge outcry against her because it was assumed that she was converting these folks to Christianity. It was assumed that the Missionaries were baptizing the babies they took in, it was assumed that they were spiriting away the dying to Christian burial. But it was untrue. The Missionaries did not baptize the babies, and whenever they could they turned those babies over to those who would adopt them - Hindu babies to Hindu parents and Muslim to Muslim. When it became well known that the Missionaries did not convert then they became safe in a city where no one else was safe. Even the gangsters left her alone. She and her sisters were truly Missionaries of Charity (love).
This idea of helping people, of loving people, but not converting them is a very new idea to me. I have a hard time with it. But, ultimately I think it’s “what Jesus would do”. Jesus didn’t confine his healings or his dealings to acceptable persons. Did Jesus have ulterior motives, however good, when He healed someone? M. Teresa made sure that the sick and dying of Calcutta didn’t die alone. That they didn’t die unloved. I think this is the sign of true Christianity - that we love all unconditionally. That we love all sacrificially. That we love. This is a hard lesson.
