Catholics of the Archdiocese of Goa oppose the so-called “Interreligious Dialogue” propagated by the Indian Church
To understand the difference between genuine Interreligious Dialogue as envisaged by Rome and the syncretistic, pluralistic model which our clergy indulges in and propagates, the reader must first study
INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 01-POPE BENEDICT XVI
8 DECEMBER 2014/JANUARY 2015
What follows immediately below is a 2012 condemnation by Goan Catholics for what passes as interreligious dialogue at a programme at which Mr. Joseph Dias of the Christian Secular Forum, Mumbai, “represented the Christians”.
Attached to the February 2012 email of Mr. Joseph L.R. Vaz and group of concerned Catholics from Goa is a much earlier letter of August 30, 2008, also reproduced below, written by them to the Archbishop of Goa.
Receiving neither any response from the Archbishop nor finding any change in the archdiocese’s pursuit of such inter-religious dialogue, Vaz and his group of concerned Catholics circulated another email, immediately followed by an appeal to their Archbishop, both dated
March 11, 2015.
I have received copies of both letters (the second of them having 4 attachments) and I have reproduced them further below.
Of the 4 attachments, one is the above mentioned letter of August 30, 2008 to the Archbishop of Goa, 2 are articles from the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti web site condemning what they recognize are Catholic attempts to appropriate their Hindu religious philosophies, symbols and rituals under the guise of inculturation (see HINDUS STILL BELIEVE THAT INCULTURATION IS A CATHOLIC PLOY TO CONVERT THEM http://ephesians-511.net/docs/HINDUS_STILL_BELIEVE_THAT_INCULTURATION_IS_A_CATHOLIC_PLOY_TO_CONVERT_THEM.doc), and one is a pdf file title “True Religious Unity”, a 1928 Encyclical of Pope Pius XI which too is reproduced below.
Responses were received from two individuals and one of them (edited) is made available to the reader.
As received chronologically:
Joseph L. R. Vaz
Sunday, February 12, 2012 11:13 PM
Subject: Re: Canossians’ Inter-Religious Meet for Peace Harmony & Brotherhood
I’m greatly saddened seeing the picture below of the Cross (the sign of the true God) clubbed along with other pagan symbols. Here in Goa, we are opposed to such things and have written to our Bishop regarding the same which I’m attaching to this email. Please read. Hope they help you understand our point of view.
-Joseph L R Vaz, Goa
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 10:20 PM, The CSF <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Republic Day Inter-Religious Meeting in Mumbai
The Canossian Sisters of the archdiocese and that of the nearby diocese of Vasai organised an inter-faith meet where prominent citizens representing different religions and movements were given an opportunity on share what their beliefs had to say on deepening the bonds of friendship and working together. They all spoke on bringing about, PEACE, HARMONY AND BROTHERHOOD, beginning from our homes, then the neighbourhood, the city and finally the nation. This was of great witnessing value and very impressive, leading all the speakers to profusely thank the organisers for bringing about the emotional union as Indian citizens.
Joseph Dias, The CSF general secretary, who represented the Christian faith, said the community, commanded by their Lord and Master, Jesus had no option, but to love – God, neighbour and even their enemies.
Thus, our contribution to peace, harmony and brotherhood was the most. He also suggested that every Christian school should have such meets and also celebrate feasts of different religions together. The program held at the Canossa High School Auditorium in Andheri (E) was coordinated by Sr. Rose D’Souza, along with Frs. SM Michael and Aniceto Pereira, who moderated the session.
ARCHBISHOP’S INTER RELIGIOUS MADNESS
These days, our Bishop Felipe Neri Ferrao, is on a round of Parish Pastoral visits. A common feature of all his visits has been “Inter Religious Prayer Meetings/dialogues.”
As a convinced Roman Catholic, I am categorically opposed to such meetings. (Mother Mary warns us that it is precisely such meetings which will lead to communal riots wherever they are held. See “To the Priests”, message of 27 October 1986). I feel these meetings increase the confusion in the minds of the Roman Catholic Community, which is already highly confused, and all but abandoned by both their political and religious leaders, in the face of the onslaught by migrants and land sharks and the Govt., who are stealing their lands, houses and fields right in front of their eyes.
But I have another nagging doubt about the timing and resoluteness and regularity of the Bishop about having these meetings even in the interior villages of Salcette, which have negligible populations of Hindus and Muslims.
These are the villages that are also being targeted by the builders of Mega Projects. And these builders have nothing less in their minds than a demographic revolution. Overnight, the overwhelmingly Catholic and Goan character of our villages is sought to be changed. We are sought to be immersed into a flood of migrants who are neither Catholic nor Goan.
But this prospect is already being vigorously opposed by the people at the village level. And even a fool would realize that the Mega Projects cannot be established till the Goan people are fooled or confused by “convincing” them that “we are all one!”
This is precisely what the Goan Archbishop is doing! Just think about it! Who is in a better position to “convince” the people of Goa, that they have to not only accept hordes of migrants in their midst, but that they have to welcome them as brothers and live peacefully with them? There is no one better than Felipe Neri Ferrao!! And so he is doing precisely that these days! Why he is doing this is a question only he can answer.
It is also a fact that the Mega Projects originated from the Church’s sale of huge properties. The Church was once one of the biggest land owners in Goa. But that land has been sold in connivance with the Church authorities. But there is an interesting canon law in the Report of the Fourth Council of Constantinople (Canon 15), which decrees that any Bishop who sells church property is to be demoted and anyone who buys Church property is under a curse till he restores it to the Church and publicly burns the sale deed! And Canon 2 of the same Council stipulates that anyone who disobeys the decrees is to be stripped of his dignity and rank! In the light of this Canon, does Felipe Neri still qualify to be Archbishop?
So what I want to clearly state is that the Bishop is actually working for the mega builders through his inter religious prayer meetings. While the rest of Goa is fighting and suffering to retain hold of its Catholic identity, here is the Shepherd leading his flock straight to the slaughter, having already sold it to the mega butchers and their henchmen in the Government.
Hence, Goans, if you want to save Goa, you now have to fight the Archbishop’s Inter Religious Madness.
30 August 2008
Miguel Vas and Others
H. No.178, Sinquetim,
Goa, India – 403707
Rev. Filipe Neri Ferrao,
Archbishop of Goa,
Sub: Inter Religious prayer meetings
Your Holy Grace,
With due respect to You, we would like to submit to you our objections to the so called Inter Religious prayer meetings your Grace has been holding in all the Parishes of Goa during your Pastoral visits.
We are writing this letter to you as requested by Your Grace when we met you and objected to this so called Inter religious prayer meeting which was being held at “Socorro” Parish in north Goa on 17th of August 2008 in the Panchayat Hall. We had come prepared with leaflets and banners to object to this nonsense program you are promoting in the name of communal harmony, but refrained from doing any public demonstration because of your request and hence this letter to request your Grace to please stop this program immediately.
We would like to clarify that we are not promoting communal hatred, but this is certainly not the way to spread communal harmony. As the Head of the Catholic Church in Goa, are you trying to tell us that Jesus Christ made a mistake in telling us that “This is the only way to Heaven” and that “there is only one God”? Please remember that Jesus sacrificed his life to show us the correct way and here you are trying to tell us that all religions are same. From these inter religious meetings are we to imply that there are many ways to Heaven? And that it is okay for a Catholic to pray in a Temple or a Mosque and break the 1st commandment? And that all Gods are equal? Which also poses another question – How many Gods are there?
If you read the scriptures, it is written in 2 Corinthians 6: versus 14 to 18, “Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God: as God saith: I will dwell in them and walk among them. And I will be their God: and they shall be my people. Wherefore: Go out from among them and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing: And I will receive you. And will be a Father to you: and you shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty“.
So whatever little Grace we receive from God will also stop and God will abandon us at a time when our Houses and land are threaten by the so called development, like the Mega Projects, Highways/roads, SEZs, STZs, CZM, Food Parks, IT Parks, Mining, etc. So how can we have Inter Religious prayer meetings?
We could understand if a Politician does so to gather votes, but a Religious Head doing such a thing is ridicules. How can a Catholic Religious Head say that all religions are same?
We request you to kindly stop this madness called Inter Religious prayer meeting. It will confuse the people all the more. In the name of modernism the Goan Church has already confused a lot of faithful who have ultimately joined believers.
If you see the attendance at these meetings, it is only the Catholics who attend, except the speakers and preachers of other religions.
There are other better ways to spread communal harmony, through personal example, by practicing what Jesus and Mary teaches us, so that people of other faith realize and follow our example. That is what Mother Mary and Jesus wants us to do, spread the Good Word to every corner of the world and not the other way round.
Goan Catholics have never had a problem with Goan Hindus or for that matter even with Goan Muslims. There has never been any communal problem between Goans even though there are continuously communal clashes going on in other parts of the country.
So why do we need these Inter Religious prayer meetings in Goa, in fact it can have an opposite effect and communal clashes may start here too. Or is that since Goans are a little conservative and organizing themselves and stopping the “Mega Projects” and objecting to “outsiders” settling in our villages that you want to dilute this attitude and change the mindset of the people to accept the demographics changes going to take place and thus allow these Mega Projects to come up? Do you want to suggest to the people that they have to ‘Welcome’ all the Non-Goans with open Arms and let them stay in our houses that after some time they throw us all out and they become the bosses of our Land? It is already happening, and such prayer meetings will only hasten things. And by that time even God will be angry with us and will not listen to our prayers.
I hope you realize the folly in these inter religious prayer meetings and stop this immediately otherwise we will be forced to demonstrate publicly and expose this futile, yet damaging exercise to the Goan Catholics.
We would also like to object to the manipulations and denigration of the “Cross” which is a symbol of Catholicism by modifying it to suit your ideas as displayed at the above mentioned programs.
If Your Grace is really serious about promoting communal harmony, we would suggest that you have at least one “Tridentine Mass” in each of Parishes in Goa during your Pastoral visit. You are very much aware that Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI has given permission for the traditional Mass and is quite keen that we go back to our “Traditions”.
Hoping that better sense prevails and these Inter Religious meetings end.
With Warm regards,
i. Archbishop of Goa (Retired), Mons. Raul Gonsalves, – for information and advice
ii. His Eminence, Cardinal Ivan Dias – for information and advice
iii. Papal Nuncio Rev. Peter Lopez Quintana, 50-C, Niti Marg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi–110021
iv. His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI, through His Eminence Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos, Piazza del Sant Uffizio 11, 000120, Vatican City, Italy – For information and advice
From: Joseph L. R. Vaz <email@example.com> To:
Subject: Inter-Religious (IR) prayer meetings are an insult to Our Lord Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 00:19:44 +0530
Worried with the sudden rise in the phenomenon of “Inter-Religious (IR) prayer meetings”, in Goa which is being actively promoted by the Bishop of Goa, some young Roman Catholics of Goa met in Margao to deliberate and discuss the consequences and also ways and means to spread awareness against these I-R prayer meets.
These young men & women felt that this activity causes much confusion not only to Roman Catholics, but also to the non-Catholics who are cajoled into attending these meetings. The confusion in their minds is related to the teachings in the Scriptures, the writings of the Popes and the Church Fathers and the Messages of the Blessed Virgin Mary, all of which directly forbid such meetings.
To put things into a proper perspective, the phenomenon of Inter Religious prayer meetings is called Pluralism. Pluralism is a Masonic belief that states all religions are the same in the eyes of God. Catholic Doctrine states that “except for invincible ignorance, there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church”.
There are numerous passages in Scripture which explicitly forbid such I-R prayer meetings. 2 Corinthians 6:14-18, 1 Corinthians 10:20 and Deuteronomy 13:1-10, are a few of such passages. Can the Bishop take the believers in a direction contrary to Scripture and still claim that we are a Catholic people?
Pope after Pope pontificates against such gatherings. The various Ecumenical Councils down the ages also take the same uncompromising view. Pope Pius IX, Pope Leo XIII, Pope Pius XII also state unequivocally that there is no salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church. It is also very clear that the people organising as well as those attending such I-R prayer meetings are guilty of breaking the 1st and the most important Commandment of God.
The Blessed Virgin, in her message to Father Stefano Gobbi, also decries the phenomenon of Pluralism and warns that not only will Pluralism fail, but will create confusion and unleash a persecution of the Catholics as has already happened in other places where such meetings have been practiced, the most notable example being Mangalore.
It is these warnings and these denunciations by the highly respected authorities of the Church, which are agitating the minds of these young men & women and making them wonder whether the Bishop is leading the Church in Goa down the road to ruin and disaster.
Some of the persons had personally approached the Bishop some years ago, and ‘His Grace’ could not explain the aims and objective of these IR prayer meetings. A memorandum was also submitted to the Bishop and a follow-up meeting was held, wherein the Bishop’s representatives were themselves were not sure about the fruits of these meetings and whether they really serve any purpose in spreading peace or on the contrary they lead people to sin.
Hence the Bishop is requested to reconsider his misplaced enthusiasm on the matter.
The Parishioners of various Parishes in Goa should reflect on this subject and discern for themselves rather than be led by a herd mentality.
Here’s another article:
Recently I read about Inter-Religious prayer meetings being held at some places in Goa. I’m a little worried about the consequences of these, because the next step after mixing all the “Gods” is confusion which leads to the belief that there is no God. You talk to any atheist and he will mention to you that there are so many religions and so many Gods that it is not possible that way, hence there is a question on the very existence of God. And they will also tell you that all these different religions are an imagination of people and in reality there is no God.
The communists who promote this idea of “No God” are the biggest threat to the Roman Catholic Church and not the other religions between themselves. That is why Mother Mary had given a message at Fatima in 1917 to consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart, which is sadly, yet to be done. Her warnings are coming through, that Russia will spread its errors and truly China an off shoot of Russia is becoming more and more powerful and dangerous. So we got to be wary of these Inter-Religious prayer meetings.
When you ask these people the purpose of these Inter-Religious prayer meetings, they say for communal harmony. I cannot understand how an Inter-Religious prayer meeting between a few harmless people can spread communal harmony. If at all anything can be done, then the leaders of all the religions should sit together and discuss steps to maintain peace. The best way would be that each religious leader should ensure that his flock does not harm the others and condemn / ex-communicate publicly anybody from his flock who disrupts the communal harmony. Just merely a leader of one religion preaching to the other that his religion is peaceful does not help. The followers of their respective faiths should show by example that their religion is peaceful.
Inter-Religious prayer meets will only confuse people and the end result would be atheism which is the biggest challenge to the belief on the very existence of God. The people, who are doing it, are breaking the 1st Commandment as Catholics and even though they may think that they are spreading communal harmony, they are in reality playing with fire and creating a fertile field for the spread of Russia’s errors. And a perfect atmosphere for the entry of the Anti-Christ.
From: Joseph L. R. Vaz <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: CC:
Subject: Fwd: Your Pastoral visit to Navelim and Inter Religious prayer meeting
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 23:34:12 +0530
Rev. Filipe Neri Ferrao,
Archbishop of Goa,
Your Holy Grace,
With due respect to You, we would like to once again submit to you our objections to the Inter Religious prayer meeting which is scheduled to be held in Navelim on 15th March 2015 as the last program of your much delayed Pastoral visit to Navelim.
We had requested our Parish Priest, Fr. Jose Roque Gonsalves much in advance, i.e. in the month of November 2014, not to include this, but the Inter-Religious prayer meet is still included in your program.
Navelkars are asking why this need for the Inter-Religious prayer meet when Navelim has no communal problem. Navelim is a peaceful village; predominately Catholic and the few Hindus and Muslims families who live here are happy, without any communal tension. Some Navelkars remembered an old saying in Konkani – “chull dakovun, maru gharant kiteak addop?” i.e. “why show fire and get the evil spirit inside the house?” Therefore it is best to leave the situation as it is and not to rake up unnecessary tension, thinking that you are solving a non-existent issue, you will unconsciously invite trouble. Don’t we have faith in Our Lord Jesus Christ to grant us Peace? Ask the Faithful of Navelim.
In fact this activity causes much confusion to Roman Catholics. The confusion in their minds is related to the teachings in the Scriptures, the writings of the Popes and the Church Fathers and the Messages of the Blessed Virgin Mary, all of which directly forbid such meetings. Catholic Doctrine states that “except for invincible ignorance, there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church”.
Some years ago, some persons from Navelim had personally met you and objected to the Inter religious prayer meeting which was being held at Socorro Parish in north Goa on 17/8/2008 and on your request refrained from doing any public demonstration and followed with a letter dated 30/8/2008, after which a meeting was held in your Palace, in Altinho (copy of letter attached).
Since then 6years have passed and in spite of having these I-R prayer meetings, the persecution of Catholics has increased many fold. In these circumstances the wisest thing to do, would be to organise a meeting with the RSS and VHP leaders along with the Government of Goa and take up all the issues effecting Catholics in Goa, e.g. (i) The shortage of beef and closure of Goa meet complex and the unnecessary harassment to meat suppliers. (ii) The issue of the “Ghar Wapsi” movement (iii) The harassment to Tiatrist by setting up a Censor board (iv) Harassment for Catholic weddings using the M.P. Sound Act., (v) The unsolved robbery at the Museum of Christian Art, Old Goa, (vi) The unsolved desecration of the Tabernacle of St. John’s Church, Benaulim, amongst other issues.
Therefore we humbly request your Grace to call off the Inter Religious prayer meeting which is scheduled to be held in Navelim on 15th March 2015 during your Pastoral visit to Navelim.
Hoping that you take a positive step on our request and thanking you in anticipation,
With prayerful wishes,
Joseph L. R. Vaz and others,
Navelim, Salcete, Goa.
Cc: The Parish Priest, Fr. Jose Roque Gonsalves, Our Lady of Rosary Church, Navelim, Salcete.
Cc: President, Catholic Association of Goa, Old GMC Complex, Near ESG / INOX, Marquinez Palace, Panaji, Goa.
From: Cedric da Costa (from Margao) email@example.com
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 12:20:33 +0400
With due respect to you and your team, it is a very good initiative and the reasons cited by you are also excellent.
But however, let me remind you that (as it is vociferously promoted by our Parish Priest Fr. Ligoin every year as part of the Xmas week celebrations) the inter-religious meet is an initiative of the Archbishop (for reasons best known to him and his collaborators in and outside our religion). By now we know what is the wisdom, logic and acumen of our Archbishop, how he functions, and what he has done in his tenure in a way to destroy church properties, the church formations and the faith in general. We Catholics have been downed more by this failed leader of ours. And sending him this letter is like asking the founder of this product to stop this product for which he rakes in a lot of praise (and perhaps other things) from other faiths…and we do not require this.
i would say circulate this letter cc to all and sundry, all Goa Church heads and also to the hierarchy our questionable Archbishop reports to.
I request you along with the parishioners (if they are religiously abiding to oppose a priest and break the 11th commandment inserted by the Goa Archdiocese – Never question the Parish Priests of Goa Archdiocese if you want to save you and your family from eternal damnation) to pressurize him not to have it in his parish. He can have it in the secretariat or CMs official residence or where ever else.
We Catholics are harassed by members of other faiths at government work places and other areas and our funny Archbishop doesn’t even bat an eyelid. On the contrary we very regularly see him praise this Government and his friends in it as we saw at the Exposition recently.
I do not wish to discourage you, but I think Goan Catholics in mass should oppose this with reason. I feel there is lot more than meets the eye, and it is the ‘hidden agenda’ of our Archdiocese and Archbishop that they are promoting these meetings with some other target on the radar.
ON “TRUE RELIGIOUS UNITY”, ONE OF THE 4 ATTACHMENTS WITH MR. JOSEPH L.R. VAZ’S LETTER OF MARCH 11, 2015 TO THE ARCHBISHOP OF GOA:
TRUE RELIGIOUS UNITY
Encyclical Letter of Pope PIUS XI
‘Mortalium Animos’ (The Minds of Mortals) 1928
With an Introduction by His Eminence Cardinal Bourne, CATHOLIC TRUTH SOCIETY No. Pe1928a (1933)
The Encyclical Letter Mortalium Animos, which follows, is a reaffirmation of the traditional doctrine of the Catholic Church, rendered necessary by the many endeavours made in recent years to bring about a united Christendom. Those efforts have failed; as such efforts must always fail, because they leave out of account the very definite teaching and tradition of the Church founded by Jesus Christ.
There is indeed a fundamental difference between Unity as understood by the average Protestant mind and Unity in the Catholic’s conception of that term. In the case of the Protestant, Unity is something which has probably never existed; which certainly does not exist to-day; which may, perhaps, be realized in some far-off future by a compromise between contending and even contradictory opinions. To a Catholic such a conception of Unity is not only repugnant but quite impossible. He believes that Unity has existed from the day when Christ established His Fold and set up His Church, comparing it to a kingdom and a house; that from that day the Church has had a visible organic unity, which, because it is divinely constituted and divinely protected, can never be broken. In the exercise of their free will, men may abandon it and be no longer within its range, but the Unity itself remains unbroken and unimpaired. Their abandonment cannot break or impair it. Like every healthy organism, that one Church possesses the vital faculty of rejecting and ejecting every element that menaces its vitality or organic unity.
Thus, the company in the Upper Chamber on the day of Pentecost constituted the Unity of the one Church. A few days later the Church numbered some hundreds, and they were the whole Church, and the entire world without was outside the Unity of that one Church. Gradually the numbers grew to thousands, and to-day they are many tens of millions.
But it is not a question of numbers or extent. The Church has, indeed, both the mission and the power of existing at all times and in every nation. In all probability, her growth has been continuous from the beginning. Loss in one direction has been more than compensated by gain in some other. But the existence of the one Church and her Unity are independent of time and place and numbers.
The Catholic holds that this conception of the Unity of the Church is the necessary logical consequence of the Divine Founder’s words. She accepts them in their natural literal sense. ‘As the Father has sent Me, so do I send you.’ ‘Going, therefore, all of you, teach all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.’ ‘He that believes and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believes not, shall be condemned.’
‘You are Peter: and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.’ When, too, the Founder spoke of the sheep outside the Fold, He showed clearly that the Fold existed actually and was no mere dream of the future. Into that Fold, all were gradually to be gathered; and then, eventually, all mankind would be one Fold under the Shepherd: but, until they are gathered in, they are outside the Unity of the one Fold, outside the visible organic Unity of the Catholic Church.
It is clear that the Unity of the Catholic Church was thus understood from the earliest days of Christianity. Those were within the Unity who, being baptized, accepted the teaching and submitted to the authority of the Church. All others were regarded as outside the Unity. Baptism was the gate of entry. To reject the teaching once accepted was to become a heretic and to be treated as such. To throw off the authority of the Church was an act of schism incurring the punishment thereof. And the Church claimed then, as she claims today, to have power to declare and set forth the revelation of truth entrusted to her by her Founder, and to be divinely protected against error in such authoritative declaration or setting forth.
This is the conception of Unity held by every Catholic, a Unity which has existed from its constitution by Christ Himself, and is to exist in virtue of His promise until the end of time. All those who accept this idea of Unity are within the visible unity of the one Church; those who reject that idea are outside the Unity, and can enter within only by accepting the teaching and authority of that Church founded by Christ our Lord. Any other conception of Unity is tantamount to admitting that the promises of Christ have failed, so far as His Church is concerned; and is a virtual denial of the divine origin of that Church.
Another point stands out clearly from this Catholic conception of Unity. If Christ has actually given a clear, definite revelation of truth about God and His relation to His creatures, and has promised that that revelation shall continue to the end of the world, and be safeguarded against error, it follows that every creature who becomes convinced of the reality of that revelation is bound to accept it, and commits sin if he refuses to accept it. If God the Creator speaks, the creature is bound to listen and to believe what He utters. Hence the axiom ‘outside the Church there is no salvation’. But, as it is equally true that without the deliberate act of the will there can be neither fault nor sin, so evidently this axiom applies only to those who are outside the Church knowingly, deliberately, and wilfully.
And this is the doctrine of the Catholic Church on this often misunderstood and misrepresented aphorism. There are the covenanted and the uncovenanted dealings of God with His creatures, and no creature is outside His fatherly care. There are millions — even at this day the vast majority of mankind — who are still unreached or unaffected by the message of Christianity in any shape or form. There are large numbers who are persuaded that the old covenant still prevails and are perfectly sincere and conscientious in their observance of the Jewish Law. And there are millions who accept some fashion of Christian teaching who have never adverted to the idea of Unity as I have described it, and have no thought that they are obliged in conscience to accept the teaching and to submit to the authority of the Catholic Church. All such, whether separated wholly from acceptance of Christ and His teaching, or accepting that teaching only to the extent in which they have perceived it, will be judged on their own merits. They are bound to accept and follow God’s teaching so far as their reason rightly used shall lead them. They must obey the dictates of the moral law, which their conscience imposes upon them. They must regret before God, and endeavour to undo, the faults and sins that they commit against their reason and their conscience. And they are bound at all cost to enter within the Unity of the Church as soon as they realize that that obligation is incumbent upon them.
When or how such realization may come to them no one can say. To what extent they may attain it, is the secret of God. But this is certain, that no man of really good will is ever rejected by his Maker, and that to every soul is offered real opportunity of salvation. None can be lost, whether within or without the visible Unity of the Church, except by his own deliberate fault.
A conscious neglect of prayer, which is Christ’s own appointed means of finding truth, evidently involves fault on the part of him who in doubt does not seek from God in prayer the removal of his perplexity. ‘Ask, and you shall receive; seek, and you shall find.’
Meanwhile the external work of the Church must always continue, for Christ the Founder has so willed and ordained it: ‘Go, and teach all nations.’ He Himself used human means and instruments to accomplish His divine purpose, and He uses them still. The Gospel will spread slowly and gradually, dependent for its extension on frail, changeable, and mortal men, on human means of transport, and on the concurrence of various human factors. It is often hampered, checked, and thwarted by the resistance of human wills. But just as our Master did not hesitate to say, ‘I have finished the work which You gave me to do,’ when the Passion was yet to come, and to human eyes the work of redemption seemed hardly yet begun, so may we in all reverence and humility claim that our work is accomplished when we have done our best to carry out that Master’s will in our regard, and have striven to obtain His pardon for all that we have left undone or done amiss. And all men must surely labour and hope and pray that in God’s own time every human creature may be gathered into that Unity which is undoubtedly according to His will. And it is their duty, whether they be already within or still outside that Unity, by brotherly love and mutual helpfulness and the uprightness of their lives, but without compromise of truth, to hasten the coming of that day.
It is this conception of Unity which also explains why the Catholic Church, in accordance with the tradition of Christianity from the beginning, declines to participate in the worship of those who do not accept her teaching and authority, and refuses to admit them to her Sacraments. To act otherwise would, in her judgment, be disloyalty to her Founder and to the truth which He has given into her care. Worship, to be acceptable, must be sincere and based on truth. Convinced that she possesses divinely revealed truth, she would be acting disloyally and insincerely were she, by participation in their worship, to seem to admit that those who think that this divinely revealed truth is uncertain and still awaiting discovery and proof are, perhaps, after all in the right, while she has been deceived. She is fully persuaded that in her worship of God she is dealing with truth, reality, and fact. She is essentially unable to regard Divine worship as a matter of opinion, sentiment, or uncertainty. Thus Catholics, while respecting the religious convictions of others and acknowledging their sincerity and good faith, are precluded from any action that would appear to call in question the objective truth of the revelation delivered to her by Jesus Christ our Lord. She must ever be, as she has been from the beginning, an exclusive Church both in her teaching and in her worship.
This, then, is the unchanging and unchangeable teaching of the Catholic Church on Unity, which the actual occupant of the Papal Chair authoritatively proclaims once more in terms that are quite clear.
They are inspired solely by apostolic zeal for the accomplishment of the Master’s purpose, and by most earnest desire that all men may be brought to His Sacred Feet in loving acceptance of the truth which He has taught.
ENCYCLICAL LETTER of Our Most Holy Lord PIUS XI, By Divine Providence, POPE
ON FOSTERING TRUE RELIGIOUS UNITY
Pope Pius XI to his Venerable Brethren gives Greeting and the Apostolic Benediction.
Never perhaps in the past have the minds of mortals (men) been as engrossed as they are today with the desire to strengthen and extend for the common good of mankind that tie of brotherhood — the result of our common origin and nature — which binds us all so closely together. The world does not yet fully enjoy the fruits of peace; on the contrary, dissensions old and new in various lands still issue in rebellions and conflict. Such disputes, affecting the tranquil prosperity of nations, can never be settled without the combined and active goodwill of those who are responsible for their government, and hence it is easy to understand — especially now that the unity of mankind is no longer called into question — the widespread desire that all nations, in view of this universal kinship, should daily find closer union with one another.
It is with a similar motive that efforts are being made by some, in connection with the New Law promulgated by Christ our Lord. Assured that there exist few men who are entirely devoid of the religious sense, they seem to ground on this belief a hope that all nations, while differing indeed in religious matters, may yet without great difficulty be brought to fraternal agreement on certain points of doctrine which will form a common basis of the spiritual life.
With this object, congresses, meetings, and addresses are arranged, attended by a large concourse of hearers, where all without distinction, unbelievers of every kind as well as Christians, even those who unhappily have rejected Christ and denied His divine nature or mission, are invited, to join in the discussion. Now, such efforts can meet with no kind of approval among Catholics. They presuppose the erroneous view that all religions are more or less good and praiseworthy, inasmuch as all give expression, under various forms, to that innate sense which leads men to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Those who hold such a view are not only in error; they distort the true idea of religion, and thus reject it, falling gradually into naturalism and atheism. To favour this opinion, therefore, and to encourage such undertakings is tantamount to abandoning the religion revealed by God.
Nevertheless, when there is a question of fostering unity among Christians, it is easy for many to be misled by the apparent excellence of the object to be achieved. Is it not right, they ask, is it not the obvious duty of all who invoke the name of Christ to refrain from mutual reproaches and at last to be united in charity? Dare anyone say that he love Christ, and yet not strive with all his might to accomplish the desire of Him who asked His Father that His disciples might be “one” (John 17:21)? Did not Christ will that mutual charity should be the distinguishing characteristic of His disciples?
‘By this shall all men know that you are My disciples, if you have love one for another ‘ (John 13:35). If only all Christians were “one”, it is contended, then they might do so much more to drive out the pest of irreligion which with its insidious and far-reaching advance is threatening to sap the strength of the Gospel. These and similar arguments, with amplifications, are constantly on the lips of the “pan-Christians” who, so far from being a few isolated individuals, have formed an entire class and grouped themselves into societies of extensive membership, usually under the direction of non-Catholics, who also disagree in matters of faith. The energy with which this scheme is being promoted has won for it many adherents, and even many Catholics are attracted to it, since it holds out the hope of a union apparently consonant with the wishes of Holy Mother Church, whose chief desire it is to recall her erring children and to bring them back to her bosom. In reality, however, these fair and alluring words cloak a most grave error, subversive of the foundations of the Catholic faith.
Conscious, therefore, of Our Apostolic office, which warns Us not to allow the flock of Christ to be led astray by harmful fallacies, We invoke your zeal, Venerable Brethren, to avert this evil.
We feel confident that each of you, by written and spoken word, will explain clearly to the people the principles and arguments that We are about to set forth, so that Catholics may know what view and what course of action they should adopt regarding schemes for the promiscuous union into one body of all who call themselves Christians.
God, the Creator of all things, made us that we might know Him and serve Him; to our service, therefore, He has a full right. He might indeed have been contented to prescribe for man’s government the natural law alone, that is, the law which in creation He has written upon man’s heart, and have regulated the progress of that law by His ordinary Providence. He willed, however, to make positive laws which we should obey, and progressively, from the beginnings of the human race until the coming and preaching of Jesus Christ, He Himself taught mankind the duties which a rational creature owes to his Creator. ‘God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days has spoken to us by His Son’ (Hebrews, 1:1 and following.). Evidently, therefore, no religion can be true save that which rests upon the revelation of God, a revelation begun from the very first, continued under the Old Law, and brought to completion by Jesus Christ Himself under the New. Now, if God has spoken — and it is historically certain that He has in fact spoken — then it is clearly man’s duty implicitly to believe His revelation and to obey His commands. That we might rightly do both, for the glory of God and for our own salvation, the only-begotten Son of God founded His Church on earth. None, we think, of those who claim to be Christians will deny that a Church, and one sole Church, was founded by Christ.
On the further question, however, as to what in the intention of its Founder was to be the precise nature of that Church, there is not the same agreement. Many of them, for example, deny that the Church of Christ was intended to be visible and manifest, at any rate in the sense that it was to be visibly the one body of the faithful, agreeing in one and the same doctrine under one teaching and governing authority. They conceive the visible Church as nothing more than a federation of the various Christian communities, even though these may hold different and mutually exclusive doctrines. The truth is that Christ founded His Church as a perfect society, of its nature external and perceptible to the senses, which in the future should carry on the work of the salvation of mankind under one head, with a living teaching authority, administering the sacraments which are the sources of heavenly grace. (John 3:5; 6:48-59; 20:22 and following. And see: Matthew 18:18, et cetera.).
Wherefore He compared His Church to a kingdom (Matthew 13), to a house (see Matthew 16:18), to a sheepfold (John 10:16), and to a flock (John 21:11-17). The Church thus wondrously instituted could not cease to exist with the death of its Founder and of the Apostles, the pioneers of its propagation; for its mission was to lead all men to salvation, without distinction of time or place: ‘Going therefore, teach ye all nations’ (Matthew 28:19). Nor could the Church ever lack the effective strength necessary for the continued accomplishment of its task, since Christ Himself is perpetually present with it, according to His promise: ‘Behold, I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world’ (Matthew 28:20).
Hence, not only must the Church still exist today, and continue always to exist, but it must ever be exactly the same as it was in the days of the Apostles. Otherwise we must say — which God forbid — that Christ failed in His purpose, or that He erred when He asserted of His Church that the gates of hell should never prevail against it (Matthew 16:18).
And here it will be opportune to expound and to reject a certain false opinion which lies at the root of this question and of that complex movement by which non-Catholics seek to bring about the union of Christian Churches. Those who favour this view constantly quote the words of Christ, ‘That they may be one. . . . And there shall, be one fold, and one shepherd’ (John 17:21; 10:16), in the sense that Christ thereby merely expressed a desire or a prayer which as yet has not been granted. For they hold that the unity of faith and government which is a note of the one true Church of Christ has up to the present time hardly ever existed, and does not exist today.
They consider that this unity is indeed to be desired and may even, by cooperation and good will, be actually attained, but that meanwhile it must be regarded as a mere ideal. The Church, they say, is of its nature divided into sections, composed of several churches or distinct communities which still remain separate, and although holding in common some articles of doctrine, nevertheless differ concerning the remainder; that all these enjoy the same rights; and that the Church remained one and undivided at the most only from the Apostolic age until the first ecumenical Councils. Hence, they say, controversies and long-standing differences, which today still keep asunder the members of the Christian family, must be entirely set aside, and from the residue of doctrines a common form of faith drawn up and proposed for belief, in the profession of which all may not only know but also feel themselves to be brethren. If the various Churches of communities were united in some kind or universal federation, they would then be in a position to oppose resolutely and successfully the progress of irreligion.
Such, Venerable Brethren, is the common contention.
There are indeed some who recognize and affirm that Protestantism has with inconsiderate zeal rejected certain articles of faith and external ceremonies which are in fact useful and attractive, and which the Roman Church still retains. But they immediately go on to say that the Roman Church, too, has erred, and corrupted the primitive religion by adding to it and proposing for belief doctrines not only alien to the Gospel but contrary to its spirit. Chief among these they count that of the primacy of jurisdiction granted to Peter and to his successors in the See of Rome. There are actually some, though few, who grant to the Roman Pontiff a primacy of honour and even a certain power or jurisdiction; this, however, they consider to arise not from the divine law but merely from the consent of the faithful. Others, again, even go so far as to desire the Pontiff himself to preside over their mixed assemblies. For the rest, while you may hear many non-Catholics loudly preaching brotherly communion in Jesus Christ, yet not one will you find to whom it ever occurs with devout submission to obey the Vicar of Jesus Christ in his capacity of teacher or ruler. Meanwhile they assert their readiness to treat with the Church of Rome, but on equal terms, as equals with an equal. But even if they could so treat, there seems little doubt that they would do so only on condition that no pact into which they might enter should compel them to retract those opinions which still keep them outside the one fold of Christ.
This being so, it is clear that the Apostolic See can by no means take part in these assemblies, nor is it in any way lawful for Catholics to give to such enterprises their encouragement or support. If they did so, they would be giving countenance to a false Christianity quite alien to the one Church of Christ.
Shall we commit the iniquity of suffering the truth, the truth revealed by God, to be made a subject for compromise? For it is indeed a question of defending revealed truth. Jesus Christ sent His Apostles into the whole world to declare the faith of the Gospel to every nation, and, to save them from error, He willed that the Holy Ghost should first teach them all truth. Has this doctrine, then, disappeared, or at any time been obscured, in the Church of which God Himself is the ruler and guardian? Our Redeemer plainly said that His Gospel was intended not only for the apostolic age, but for all time. Can the object of faith, then, have become in the process of time so dim and uncertain that today we must tolerate contradictory opinions? If this were so, then we should have to admit that the coming of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles, the perpetual indwelling of the same Spirit in the Church, nay, the very preaching of Jesus Christ, have centuries ago lost their efficacy and value. To affirm this would be blasphemy. The only begotten Son of God not only bade His representatives to teach all nations; He also obliged all men to give credence to whatever was taught them by ‘witnesses preordained by God ‘ (Acts 10:41).
Moreover, He enforced His command with this sanction: `He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; he that believes not shall be condemned’ (Mark 16:16). These two commands, the one to teach, the other to believe for salvation, must be obeyed. But they cannot even be understood unless the Church proposes an inviolate and clear teaching, and in proposing, it is immune from all danger of error. It is also false to say that, although the deposit of truth does indeed exist, yet it is to be found only with such laborious effort and after such lengthy study and discussion, that a man’s life is hardly long enough for its discovery and attainment. This would be equivalent to saying that the most merciful God spoke through the prophets and through His only-begotten Son merely in order that some few men, and those advanced in years, might learn what He had revealed, and not in order to inculcate a doctrine of faith and morals by which man should be guided throughout the whole of his life.
These pan-Christians who strive for the union of the Churches would appear to pursue the noblest of ideals in promoting charity among all Christians.
But how should charity tend to the detriment of faith?
Everyone, knows that John, himself, the Apostle of love, who seems in his Gospel to have revealed the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress upon the memory of his disciples the new commandment ‘to love one another’, nevertheless strictly forbade any intercourse with those who profess a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house, nor say to him, God speed you’ (2 John 10).
Therefore, since the foundation of charity is faith pure and inviolate, it is chiefly by the bond of one faith that the disciples of Christ are to be united. A federation of Christians, then, is inconceivable in which each member retains his own opinions and, private judgment in matters of faith, even though they differ from the opinions of all the rest. How can men with opposite convictions belong to one and the same federation of the faithful: those who accept sacred Tradition as a source of revelation and those who reject it; those who recognize as divinely constituted the hierarchy of bishops, priests, and ministers (deacons) in the Church, and those who regard it as gradually introduced to suit the conditions of the time; those who adore Christ, really present in the Most Holy Eucharist through that wonderful conversion of the bread and wine, transubstantiation, and those who assert that the body of Christ is there only by faith or by the signification and virtue of the sacrament; those who in the Eucharist recognize both sacrament and sacrifice, and those who say that it is nothing more than the memorial of the Lord’s supper; those who think it right and useful to pray to the Saints reigning with Christ, especially to Mary the Mother of God, and to venerate their images, and those who refuse such veneration as derogatory to the honour due to Jesus Christ, ‘the one mediator of God and men’? (See 1 Timothy 2:5)
How so great a variety of opinions can clear the way for the unity of the Church, We know not. That unity can arise only from one teaching authority, one law of belief, and one faith of Christians. But We do know that from such a state of affairs it is but an easy step to the neglect of religion or “indifferentism”, and to the error of the modernists, who hold that dogmatic truth is not absolute but relative, that is, that it changes according to the varying necessities of time and place and the varying tendencies of the mind; that it is not contained in an immutable tradition, but can be altered to suit the needs of human life.
Furthermore, it is never lawful to employ in connection with articles of faith the distinction invented by some between “fundamental” and “non-fundamental” articles, the former to be accepted by all, the latter being left to the free acceptance of the faithful. The supernatural virtue of faith has as its formal motive the authority of God revealing, and this allows of no such distinction. All true followers of Christ, therefore, will believe the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God with the same faith as they believe the mystery of the august Trinity, the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff in the sense defined by the Ecumenical Vatican Council (of 1870) with the same faith as they believe the Incarnation of Our Lord. That these truths have been solemnly sanctioned and defined by the Church at various times, some of them even quite recently, makes no difference to their certainty, nor to our obligation of believing them. Has not God revealed them all?
The teaching authority of the Church in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that the revealed doctrines might remain for ever intact and might be brought with ease and security to the, knowledge of men. This authority is indeed daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops, who are in communion with him; but it has the further office of defining some truth with solemn decree whenever it is opportune, and whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or again to impress the minds of the faithful with a clearer and more detailed explanation of the articles of sacred doctrine. But in the use of this extraordinary teaching authority no fresh invention is introduced, nothing new is ever added to the number of those truths which are at least implicitly contained within the deposit of Revelation divinely committed to the Church; but truths which to some perhaps may still seem obscure are rendered clear, or a truth which some may have called into question is declared to be of faith.
Thus, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics. There is, but one way in which the unity of Christians may be fostered, and that is by furthering the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it; for from that one true Church they have in the past fallen away. The one Church of Christ is visible to all, and will remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it. The mystical Spouse of Christ has never in the course of centuries been contaminated, nor in the future can she ever be, as Cyprian bears witness: ‘The Bride of Christ cannot become false to her Spouse, she is inviolate and pure. She knows but one dwelling, and chastely and modestly she guards the sanctity of the nuptial chamber’ (De Catholicae Ecclesiae unitate, 6). (On the Unity of the Catholic Church.)
The same holy martyr marvelled that anyone could believe that ‘this unity of the Church built upon a divine foundation, knit together by heavenly sacraments, could ever be rent asunder by the conflict of wills’ (De Catholicae Ecclesiae unitate, 6). For since the mystical body of Christ, like His physical body, is one (1 Corinthians 12:12), compactly and fitly joined together (Ephesians, 4:15), it were foolish to say that the mystical body is composed of disjointed and scattered members. Whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member thereof, neither is he in communion with Christ its head.
Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize, and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors. Did not the ancestors of those who are now entangled in the errors of Photius and of the Reformers obey the Bishop of Rome, the chief shepherd of souls? Their children, alas! have left the home of their fathers; but that house did not therefore fall to the ground and perish for ever, for it was supported by God. Let them, then, return to their Father, who, forgetting the insults in the past heaped upon the Apostolic See, will accord them a most loving welcome.
If, as they constantly say, they long to be united with Us and Ours, why do they not hasten to enter the Church, ‘the mother and mistress of all Christ’s faithful’? (Council of the Lateran, 4, chapter 5). Let them heed the words of Lactantius: ‘The Catholic Church is alone in keeping the true worship. This is the fount of truth, this the house of faith, this the temple of God: if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. Let none delude himself with obstinate wrangling. For life and salvation are here concerned, and these will be lost for ever unless their interests be carefully and assiduously kept in mind’ (Divinae Institutiones (“Divine Institutes”) IV. 30, 11-12).
Let our separated children, therefore, draw nigh to the Apostolic See, set up in the City which Peter and Paul, Princes of the Apostles, consecrated by their blood; to the See which is ‘the root and womb whence issues the Church of God’ (Cyprian, Epistle 48 ad Cornelium, 3); and let them come, not with any intention or hope that ‘the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth’ (1 Timothy 3:5), will cast aside the integrity of the faith and tolerate their errors, but to submit themselves to its teaching and government. Would that the happy lot, denied to so many of Our predecessors, might at last be Ours, to embrace with fatherly affection those children whose unhappy separation from Us We now deplore.
Would that God our Saviour, ‘Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth’ (1 Timothy 2:4), might hear our humble prayer and vouchsafe to recall to the unity of the Church all that are gone astray. To this all-important end We implore, and We desire that others should implore, the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of divine grace, Help of Christians, victorious over all heresies, that she may entreat for Us the speedy coming of that longed-for day, when all men shall hear the voice of her divine Son, and shall be ‘careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace’ (Ephesians 4:3).
You, Venerable Brethren, know how dear to Our heart is this desire, and We wish that Our children also should know, not only those belonging to the Catholic fold, but also those separated from Us. If these will humbly beg light from heaven, there is no doubt but that they will recognize the one true Church of Jesus Christ, and entering therein, will at last be united with Us in perfect charity. In the hope of this fulfillment, and as a pledge of Our fatherly goodwill, We impart most lovingly to you, Venerable Brethren, and to your clergy and people, the Apostolic Benediction.
Given at St Peter’s, Rome, on the 6th day of January,
The Feast of the Epiphany of Our Lord Jesus Christ,
In the year 1928, the sixth of Our Pontificate.
Pius Pope XI.
The above Encyclical of Pope Pius XI, used here to expose the errors of most of what presently passes for
interreligious dialogue, is also a most suitable submission against the false
ecumenism that is being engaged in by the Church with heretical Protestant denominations.
As Successor of St. Peter and Vicar of Christ on Earth, Pius XI issued this teaching in 1928, but its validity holds good today and forever because the Truth does not change with time (Hebrews 13:8, John 14:6).
The Archdiocese of Goa figures in several of this ministry’s reports, for example:
Goa Archbishop’s Message on Ganesh Festival 2009
Posted in MangaloreanCatholics yahoo group digest no. 1614, August 24, 2009
It is feast time, once again, when our Hindu brothers and sisters – our fellow pilgrims on earth – honour their Lord Ganesh. It is an occasion when the fruits of earth – the fruit of human work – are laid at his feet. It is a moment of special joy, as they experience the visit of the deity to their homes. And no wonder this joy overflows in the exchange of greetings and goodies with their dear and near ones.
We take particular note that Ganesh is venerated as an icon of wisdom, tenderness, compassion and prosperity. While sharing in the joy of our Hindu brethren, we also pray that those high qualities of human interaction be instilled in the members of the Goan community, that they may serve to strengthen the fabric of tolerance, cooperation and mutual help, which have marked it for centuries.
We will then be able to journey, side by side, as partners for the progress and prosperity of our beloved Goa, so as to build a Great India and sing praises to the glory of God.
+ Filipe Neri Ferrao, Archbishop of Goa and Daman, Archbishop’s House, Panjim, Goa
2. PILAR PRIEST FR PETER CARDOZO VENERATES THE HINDU DEITY GANESHA
3. PILAR SEMINARY, GOA-SYNCRETISM AND NEW AGE NOVEMBER 2006/JULY 2008/APRIL 2012
4. SANGAM INTEGRAL FORMATION AND SPIRITUALITY CENTRE, GOA-NEW AGE PSYCHOLOGY, ETC. JULY 2009
The following June 2009 letter from this ministry to the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Vatican City, which echoes the concerns of Mr. Joseph L.R. Vaz and team, is copy-pasted from my report
NEW COMMUNITY BIBLE 11-VATICAN HELD RESPONSIBLE, BRAHMIN LEADERS DEMAND ITS WITHDRAWAL http://ephesians-511.net/docs/NEW_COMMUNITY_BIBLE_11-VATICAN_HELD_RESPONSIBLE_BRAHMIN_LEADERS_DEMAND_ITS_WITHDRAWAL.doc:
Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, President
PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE
THIS IS REGARDING YOUR RECENT VISIT TO MUMBAI, INDIA
[…]In Mumbai, India, on the 12th of June, 2009, an “inter-faith dialogue” was held between the Catholic Bishops led by Cardinal Jean Louis Tauran, President of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Cardinal Oswald Gracias, Archbishop of Bombay, Cardinal Telesphore Toppo, Archbishop of Ranchi, Bishop Thomas Dabre of Poona and Apostolic Administrator of Vasai, Bishop Gali Bali of Guntur, Bishop Felix Machado of Nashik, Bishop Ralph Manjaly of Varanasi and Archbishop Pedro Lopez Quintana, Apostolic Nuncio, on the one hand, and the leaders of the Hindu faith led by the Sankaracharya of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham, Jayendra Saraswati, and represented by the godman Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, founder of the Art of Living movement, Sudheendra Kulkarni, senior BJP member and adviser to Mr. L.K. Advani, etc. on the other.
From the pro-Hindutva media reports, the Church came across as being apologetic and on the defensive: “The Catholics did not expect HH* to hit them so hard – well revealed in their faces.”
We were asked by the Hindu leaders for our assurance on several issues ranging from desisting from (forced) conversions, to the management and disbursal of funds received by Catholic institutions. The Catholics were also asked to bring along with them the representatives of the Protestant churches — whom the Catholics have accused of being behind the forced conversions: “The Catholics denied that they are involved in conversion and it was only the Protestants who do the same. So HH* asked them to bring the Protestants for the next meeting, scheduled for December” — for the proposed follow-up meeting. One blog quotes the Sankaracharya as saying that the next such dialogue will be held only if and when the Catholic leaders meet their demands: “The next meeting like this, according to Periyava* will only happen when they do what they have agreed to do”. *The Kanchi Sankaracharya
I quote again from the kanchiforum web site. EXTRACT:
“After their Press Briefing, when question time arrived, I put a question to Cardinal Oswald Gracias: “In the Indian Community Bible released by Mumbai Catholic Church, you have included hundreds of verses from Vedas and Upanishads.
Does this not amount to steeling [sic] the intellectual property of Hindus?”
The answer given by the Cardinal was “I am not aware of this.”
P. Deivamuthu, Editor, Hindu Voice, 210 Abhinav, Teen Dongri, Yeshwant Nagar, Goregaon West, Mumbai 400062. Tel: 022-28764460, 28764418, 09324728153.”
We once again appeal to the Magisterium to take note of the genuine concerns of the people of India as well as the people of your Church, concerning the Church’s efforts in what is perceived as inter-faith dialogue and inculturation; and the erroneous New Community Bible which is both a vehicle and product of that inter-faith dialogue and inculturation.
We can achieve much more against the forces of communalism in India by walking in the Spirit than acting in the flesh.
Another extract from the same report NEW COMMUNITY BIBLE 11 which proves that at these “dialogues” (Remember that Cardinal Jean Louis Tauran presided over this one) Catholics are on the back foot:
HH Sri Kanchi Sankaracharya’s briefing on June 12, 2009
The Points that Pujya Shankaracharya made at the inter-faith dialogue and was made into a press statement [… Points 1-10 …]
11. The Church in India must stop forthwith the use of Hindu religious words, phrases and symbols like Veda, Agama, Rishi, Ashrama, Om and other such in what is referred to as ‘inculturation’ tactics, but which are only intended to deceive the vulnerable sections of our people who are the intended targets for religious conversion. This is also insulting to and wounding the religious sensitivities of Hindus. Similarly it has been brought to our notice that some churches are scripting a new Bible for the new converts by usurping sections of our sacred Vedas, Upanishads and Puranas and incorporating them into the Bible. This must stop immediately and all such Bibles must be withdrawn from circulation. We urge the Indian government to look into the issue and do the needful.
The image below is from the web site of a Bombay archdiocese parish, St. Francis Xavier’s Church, Panvel. Their mission and vision is “co-existence” with other religions “to build a new social order based on values”.
What values? It doesn’t say. We can safely assume that they are pluralistic-syncretistic from the multi-faith logo:
If you have opened the INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 01-POPE BENEDICT XVI
http://ephesians-511.net/docs/INTERRELIGIOUS_DIALOGUE_01-POPE_BENEDICT_XVI.doc file, you might have seen that the logo is all over the Church, literally in the sanctuary and on the altars at Holy Mass, and even on the masthead of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India’s Commission for Dialogue and Ecumenism:
What’s in a word?
By Eddie Russell FMI, Catholic apologist, September 23, 1998
Faith and Reason – East and West Dialogue.
Dialogue, which is a frank exchange of ideas or views in an effort to attain mutual understanding, is vastly different from actually practicing something. In the encyclical ‘Faith and Reason’ the Pope encourages us to learn from what he calls ‘the rich heritage of the East’, but nowhere does he encourage us to take on their religious practices and disciplines as Dom Freeman is doing. What is offensive to me is the propagation of the idea that these yoga meditations using mantras, are Christian.
I’m not saying that we shouldn’t investigate that which is good and compatible and, I firmly believe that many of those Christians who practice these things are genuinely seeking the Lord with a good heart albeit in ignorance and error. However, I cannot say the same for Freeman and the other Catholic nuns and priests that teach this eastern mystical syncretism. By presenting this article I am not trying to be uncharitable to anyone. I am simply attempting to make people aware of what they might be doing without understanding it. I am however saying to those who know the difference, stop lying, confusing and deceiving people by your words; you are guilty of corruption and deception and as Jesus said, “It is far better for you to be thrown into a lake with a millstone around your neck than to lead one of these little ones astray”.
This is very recent news:
Press release from the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue
Vatican City, 13 February 2015 (VIS)
The Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India have organised a series of events in the country, which will also be attended by Archbishop Salvatore Pennacchio, apostolic nuncio in India.
Two representatives of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Rev. Fr. Indunil Kodithuwakku, undersecretary, and Rev. Fr. Santiago Michael, official for Asia, travelled to India to participate in the Fifth Buddhist-Christian Colloquium on 12 and 13 February in Bodh Gaya. Entitled “Buddhists and Christians Together Fostering Fraternity”, it is divided into five sub-themes: (1) “We belong to one human family”; (2) “From a culture of diversity to a culture of solidarity”; (3) “Fraternity, a prerequisite for overcoming social evils”; (4) “Fraternity wipes away tears”; and (5) “Together fostering fraternity: the way forward”, all to be considered from both Christian and Buddhist points of view. The participants, both Buddhists and Christians, come from various countries: Sri Lanka, Thailand, Korea, Japan, Myanmar, Mongolia, Taiwan and India. A message will be issued at the end of the event.
From 14 to17 February the representatives of the dicastery will travel to Varanasi to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the promulgation of the Conciliar declaration “Nostra aetate” (28 October 1965). There will be encounters with the Jain, Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh and Hindu communities, on the theme “Celebrating Diversity of Religions to Foster a World of Peace and Love“.
On 15 February, again in Varanasi, at the St. Mary’s Cathedral Campus, there will be a multi-religious prayer meeting organised by the PCID, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India and the diocese of Varanasi, to be attended by representatives of various religions and Christian communities.
This ministry will follow it up and report on it in INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 03.
Some related files:
CARDINAL IVAN DIAS LIGHTS A LAMP FOR THE HINDU DEITY GANESHA
THE ST PIUS X SEMINARY CELEBRATES HINDU DEITY GANESHA
9 FEBRUARY 2013
TAMIL NADU CLERGY VENERATE THE HINDU DEITY GANESHA
22 FEBRUARY 2014
PILAR PRIEST FR PETER CARDOZO VENERATES THE HINDU DEITY GANESHA
INDIAN CLERGY OBSESSED WITH THE HINDU DEITY GANESHA FEBRUARY 2015
CATHOLICS CAPITULATE OVER CHRIST NOT SANTA CLAUS
FR ANTHONY DE MELLO-WRITINGS BANNED BY THE CHURCH
HABEMUS PAPAM INDIANUM-WE HAVE AN INDIAN PONTIFF
HINDU FLAG POLE AT CATHEDRAL OF ST THOMAS IN MADRAS-MYLAPORE ARCHDIOCESE
HINDUS STILL BELIEVE THAT INCULTURATION IS A CATHOLIC PLOY TO CONVERT THEM
INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE 02-GOAN CATHOLICS OPPOSE
INCULTURATION OF THE LITURGY AND SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM-JON ANDERSON-AND MY RESPONSE
IS HOLY COMMUNION EQUIVALENT TO PRASADAM-IS IT SAFE FOR CATHOLICS TO CONSUME PRASADAM
IS THE SYRO MALABAR CHURCH NOW OPENLY PROMOTING ITS HINDUISATION?
LOTUS AND THE CROSS-THE HINDUISATION OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN INDIA
MAY CATHOLICS CELEBRATE THE FESTIVAL OF HOLI?
MAY CATHOLICS CELEBRATE THE HARVEST FESTIVAL OF PONGAL
MOTHER TERESA AT PRAYER IN A BUDDHIST TEMPLE
PAGANIZATION OF THE CHURCH IN INDIA 01
PAGANIZATION OF THE CHURCH IN INDIA 02
PAGANIZATION OF THE CHURCH IN INDIA-RESPONSES
SONIA GANDHI-CATHOLIC OR HINDU?
THE GOLDEN SHEAF-A COLLECTION OF ARTICLES DEALING WITH ECCLESIASTICAL ABERRATIONS
THE HINDUISATION OF MUSIC IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
THE HINDUISATION OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH-IMAGES
THE ONGOING ROBBERY OF FAITH-FR P K GEORGE
THE PAGANISATION OF THE LITURGY IN INDIA-C B ANDRADE
THE PAGANIZED CATHOLIC CHURCH IN INDIA-VICTOR J F KULANDAY
THE TWELVE POINTS OF ADAPTATION FOR THE INDIAN RITE MASS-WAS A FRAUD PERPETRATED ON INDIAN CATHOLICS?
WAS JESUS A YOGI? SYNCRETISM AND INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE-ERROL FERNANDES
WHY INDIAN CATHOLICS DO NOT WANT AN INDIAN POPE
Categories: Hinduisation of the Catholic Church in India