Can a new St. Pius X come from India?
It all begins with an idea.
R. BaccelliOn the eve of a Conclave, and considering the tendency in the modern Church to emphasize on “the periphery”, the hypothesis of an Indian Cardinal being elected to the throne of St. Peter is not farfetched.
But there is also a motive of a higher order that makes this hypothesis possible. We know that divine Providence allows heresies to exist so that, through their condemnation, truth and orthodoxy may shine much brighter.
This was the case with the election of St. Pius X during the modernist crisis and the outbreak of false ideas in the Church, especially in Germany, France, Italy and England. The Holy Pope strongly denounced those errors in his Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis. But he did not stop there. He issued decrees, compiled a syllabus of errors to be avoided, and organized a system of holy vigilance throughout the Church against these errors. This vigilance extended to Catholic seminaries and universities, to the clergy and episcopate, and even to certain circles within the Roman Curia.
The blow against Modernism was effective for a long time. But the supporters of those errors did not rest; they came to the fore again with the Nouvelle Théologie. The new theology was condemned by Pope Pius XII, but not with the same vigour that characterized the action of St. Pius X.
In order to progress and influence the whole Church, some theologians of the doomed Nouvelle Théologie resorted to a stratagem: they tried to re-interpret Christianity with the categories of Hindu thought and mysticism. At the instigation of Fr. de Lubac, Fr. Daniélou and others, missionaries such as Jules Monchanin, Henri Le Saux and Bede Griffiths embarked on this mission to India. Here they founded ashrams to promote Hindu pantheistic mysticism. The ashrams were – and are – visited by Westerners who soak up Hindu ideas and mysticism, carrying them thereafter to the West.
On the other hand, invoking the Second Vatican Council, the Indian Hierarchy organised an All India Seminar in Bangalore, in 1969, which was followed by other theological and missiological meetings. These meetings proposed to reform the Church of India in practically all its doctrinal, institutional and missionary aspects.
The proposals made at the All-India Seminar concerning the faith and the structure of the Church were so disturbing that the then Cardinal, His Eminence Valerian Gracias, speaking of the possible consequences of this Convention, stated that it was not improbable that, "after bitter experiences in experimentations, one would decide to revert to Vatican I." (ALL INDIA Seminar - Church in India Today, Bangalore 1969, CBCI Centre, New Delhi, p. 434)
This statement by Cardinal Gracias can be considered prophetic in view of the current situation of the Church in India.
In fact, as early as 1991, Cardinal Tomko, Prefect of the Propaganda Fide, at a meeting with cardinals from various parts of the world, warned against the "destructive doctrines" of Indian Theologians and their “devastating" effects.
In his address, a summary of which was published by The Examiner, Bombay (April 27, 1991, p. 5. See also L'Osservatore Romano, Weekly Edition, N. 15, 15 April 1991), the Cardinal stated that there is a gnostic relativism and a “theological misunderstanding which levels all religions” and that some theologians in India “have developed unacceptable and destructive doctrines.” This impairs missionary activity by “reducing evangelization only to development and dialogue, with the abandoning of preaching, of religious education and of the logic of conversions and baptisms”. According to such doctrines, evangelization “would consist solely in dialogue, inculturation and liberation,” he said.
The Cardinal blamed the theologians of India, but did not name them, stating that “although India is the epicentre of this tendency and Asia is the principal camp, these ideas already circulate in Oceania, in some African countries and in Europe.” The Cardinal continues: “According to some Indian theologians, in the search for dialogue, Jesus Christ divides rather than unites.” And in the attempt to level the parties engaging in dialogue, “either Jesus Christ is downgraded, by not mentioning His divinity, or the founders of other religions are exalted, making them quasi incarnations of God." This leads to the unavoidable conclusion that “the universal mystery of salvation is accomplished through all religions,” said Cardinal Tomko. He explained that the new theologians claim that there is a cosmic Christ-Logos distinct from the historical Jesus and that this Christ-Logos “can appear in other religions and be hidden in other historical figures.” From this perspective “the Kingdom of God would include all religions, which are called to build it in mutual dialogue; it would be identified with the 'new humanity' which is to unite everyone in a community of love, justice, and peace.”
The Cardinal commented that the effects of such doctrines “are simply devastating” in the field of missionary activity. “The abandonment of the preaching of the Gospel and the flight towards social work is a widespread phenomenon in Asia". Preaching “is silenced, as propaganda or proselytism. Evangelization is reduced to a social dialogue or socio-economic promotion” and conversion is considered to be “Western chauvinism,” he concluded.
All these years after Cardinal Tomko’s speech, and despite some documents from the Magisterium drawing attention to the errors and praxis in force in the Church of India in the name of inculturation and interreligious dialogue, the situation has only worsened. A large part of the clergy and members of religious orders no longer believe that Our Lord Jesus Christ is the only Saviour, that the Church and baptism are necessary for salvation. They claim that the mission consists of promoting the values of the Kingdom of God, which is not identified with the Church, and that all religions are ways of salvation. Scandals of priests and religious worshipping idols go unpunished and in some cases are justified by the authorities. Books containing all sorts of heresies – such as equating man and God – circulate freely.
It is in this context that the hypothesis of a St. Pius X of Indian birth is raised. Is Divine Providence preparing a new St. Pius X who will root out the errors and condemn the syncretistic practices of the Church in India?
If the upcoming pope hails from India, will he erect a barrier and condemn the errors, like St. Pius X did with Modernism? Will he issue decrees, compile a syllabus of errors to be avoided, and organize a system of holy vigilance against these errors in the Church? Will he extend this surveillance to Catholic seminaries and universities, to the clergy, to religious houses and Catholic ashrams?
Or will he be silent or, worse still, take the Indian theological revolution to the West?
Among the Indian Cardinals, who could be elected pope?
Cardinal Gracias has been mentioned in the past. But it is known that he appreciates yoga and, in a recent interview, speaking of non-Christian religions, he said: “We no longer refer to them as non-Christian religions or other religions. We begin to refer to them after the conference [of FABC] as ‘neighbor religions’”
Cardinal Filipe Neri Ferrão is also brought up. But on the occasion of a controversy in the diocese of Goa, he said in a public statement that “India is blessed with a confluence of different religions”, and that this is an “enriching diversity”.
The relativist and pan-ecumenist heresies, preparing the mixing of all religions, are widespread in Asia and are well known to the Asian Cardinals. Will Providence choose one of them to fight against these devastating errors?
How great is our hope that a new pope, coming from India, or some other Asian country, will shine on the throne of St. Peter with the same glory as St. Pius X, in the defence of the Catholic Faith, "Ad majorem Dei gloriam!". "For the greater glory of God!"
Ronaldo Baccelli was born in Brazil in 1954. From a young age, he was a disciple of the great Catholic leader Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira – founder of the Brazilian Society for the Defence of Tradition, Family, and Property (TFP) – from whom he learned to love the Catholic Faith and the principles that govern Christian civilization. He commited himself to promoting the ideals of the TFP throughout Brazil, Europe and Asia.
In the 1980s, Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira identified a significant threat to the Church and Western Christian civilization resulting from heretical theories circulating in Catholic environments in India.
He then tasked the author with conducting an in-depth study on interreligious ecumenism and compiling documentation with the aim of informing the Holy See and encouraging the general public to respond to these threats. In fact, Rome appears to be ignoring the full extent of the cancer that is eating away at Indian seminaries, religious congregations and various Catholic institutes, and the high risk of it gradually affecting the laity.
The book whose cover is shown above is the result of extensive study, patient research, and documentation gathered over more than three decades of the author’s stay in Asia, where he currently lives dedicated to the lay Catholic apostolate.
With this publication, the author aims to serve the Holy Church and Christian civilization, both of which face an unprecedented revolution that undermines not only the very foundations of God's revealed Truth, but also the most fundamental principles of rational thought.
The documentation included in this book illustrates that the ongoing interreligious ecumenism poses a dual threat: it endangers the Church and undermines the very notion of institutional religion, paving the way for a world guided by pantheistic mysticism. It is therefore a threat not only to Christian civilisation but to every form of civilisation.
As a Roman Catholic, the author of this historical, doctrinal and apologetic work submits himself with filial ardour to the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church. However, if inadvertently there has crept in something that does not conform to these teachings, he categorically rejects it.