Newsletter of the District
- June 2004
Indian Seminaries still Catholic?
three Indian seminarians
three testimonies were written by three of four seminarians who
left the Bombay Major seminary in early 2002 to join the Society
of St Pius X. The four seminarians had done respectively 8, 7,
6 and 5 years of study in this their diocesan seminary. They joined
the Society’s Australian seminary in 2003, and have now begun
their 2nd year. As one of them said after being told that they
would have to start their studies all over if they joined the
SSPX seminary, “we have been taught error for so many years, we
don’t mind learning the truth for 6 years”!
It was in the
evening of 29th June, 1997 that I entered St Pius X College (Diocesan
Seminary of Bombay Diocese in India) with great joy and enthusiasm
not knowing that in the near future I would have to leave it in
the circumstances that happened. This Seminary which was built prior
to the II Vatican Council (1962-1965) is known as the ‘Ideal Seminary’
in the whole of India, and for this reason the bishops of other
dioceses prefer to send their seminarians to this Seminary so that
they can get an ‘All Round Formation’— for which the seminary was
quite well known.
In that seminary
a priest was defined as a community builder. By this, one can very
easily understand that the priest has to do all these things, which
a community needs for its development. For example, picnics, parties
and social activities. By defining it so, the Catholic Faith — if
any of it remains — becomes so insignificant that it is hardly noticeable.
list gives only a few illustrations by which the Catholic Faith
was either minimized or ‘indifferentiated’, and then finally destroyed
in a very tactful, deceitful manner.
The Rosary regarded as a prayer of the illiterates
Professor, Fr. Aniceto Nazareth, narrated the source, origin and
development of the rosary in the following words:
“It so happened
that St Theresa of Avila was reciting her breviary in Latin. In
the same convent there was a nun who unlike St Theresa did not
know Latin but she wanted to pray with St Theresa of Avila. Seeing
her ignorance and enthusiasm to pray, St Theresa came up with
a wonderful idea. She told her to recite a Hail Mary for each
Psalm. So, since there are 150 psalms and there would be 150 Hail
Mary’s. Thus the rosary came into being. It is therefore only
the prayer of the illiterates.”
after listening to this narration were startled and deeply scandalized,
and as result of such teaching, gave up praying the rosary.
The Holy Bible treated as a purely fictitious book with a profound
Pereira who was in charge of the First year of Seminary Formation
regarded Psychology as the most reliable and authentic knowledge.
First he told us about the various incidents of his life; then after
a few days he asked us to write these down. After saying this he
added that if we did write about his life then he would certainly
get different stories from different seminarians. Likewise, the
Gospels were written down many years after the death of Our Lord.
Firstly he said, it was the gospel of Mark which was written in
65 AD, then it was the Gospel of Matthew, written in 80 AD, then
that of Luke written in 85 AD, and lastly the Gospel of St John
written in 90 AD. These considerations made the Bible just like
any other book but with a message which no other book carries.
of this was that seminarians who once had reverence to the Holy
Bible lost it completely. After all it was the priest, a man of
God, who was telling them such things.
Ideas on Hell
God is believed
to be a God of unconditional, boundless, fatherly love. If He can
send His only begotten Son to suffer and die for humanity then why
would He punish human beings to hell?
Views on the Resurrection
Life on earth
is treated like the rest. Everything begins with life on earth and
everything ends with death on earth. The idea of heaven is treated
like a pie in the sky or a consoling word for suffering mankind.
If Christ did
rise from the dead then why didn’t the two disciples of Emmaus recognize
him instantly? Since in our day to day life we do experience death
and resurrection, for instance with our joys and sorrows, happiness
and sadness, hope and despair, the resurrection of Christ has hardly
anything to offer us.
Views on the Virginity of Our Lady
This was dealt
in Mariology by Fr. Agnels Gracias who is now a bishop. He was well
known for his spiritual talks, conferences and retreats. He was
regarded as a great devotee of Our Lady. He was very often seen
in his cassock and reciting the rosary.
in teaching was to entreat answers from his students. For example,
one time he mentioned the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 (new translation),
“Behold a woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name
shall be called Emmanuel.” Then he said that Matthew the evangelist
had changed the word woman to virgin in the following,
Mt.1:23, “Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,
and his name shall be called Emmanuel, which means ‘God
is with us’.” After the scriptural evidence he resorted to Tradition,
which said that Our Lady took the vow of virginity at the age of
5. This Tradition he discarded by historical evidence which said
that barrenness was regarded as an evil, and hence no Jewish women
would ever think of remaining a virgin. Then coming to the point
of the matter he said that virginity was divided into the following
categories: a) Physical Virginity, b) Mental Virginity, c) Spiritual
simply means that one is pure in body.
Father Gracias asked his students, “What do you say of a virgin
who is raped? Is she still a virgin?” He himself answered and
said that she was still a virgin in the mental sense of the term.
category applied to Our Lady. She was a virgin in the spiritual
sense, that is, in her readiness to do God’s will. He then further
added that it is quite possible that after the birth of Jesus,
Mary and Joseph had a normal relationship just like any other
husband and wife.
such things from a Catholic priest the students were dumbfounded.
Catholic Tradition by the sheer grace of God through Our Blessed
Lady, while being in such an un-Catholic seminary, we cannot but
remind ourselves of the words of St. Paul who said “Beware lest
any man cheat you by philosophy and vain deceit; according to the
tradition of men, according to the elements of the world and not
according to Christ” (Col. 2:8). We surely lived these words in
Let us remain
with Christ ‘for in Him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead
corporally.’ (Col. 2:9). And may Our Lady always guide and protect
us in this valley of tears.
St. Paul in
Ephesians chapter 4, exhorts the Ephesians to conduct themselves
as members of Christ’s mystical body. Hence, the Church is Christ’s
Mystical body. And the Seminary is called the ‘heart’ of the diocese.
If this heart pumps bad blood, the whole body shall suffer harm.
Indeed so, this is exactly the situation of the seminaries all over
the world as it was in our seminary in Bombay. The Cardinal of Bombay
calls the seminary, the ‘apple of his eye’ and yet this
‘apple’ though it looked red and well-grown from the outside, was
infected and eaten by worms of heresy from within. These worms of
heresies were the priests and professors of the seminary who were
raving modernists, having ‘itching ears’ and ‘profane babbling of
tongues’ as Holy Scripture attributes to false doctors. The Sacred
Scripture in 2 Tim. 3:1-8 characterises these men of depraved mind
as “lovers of themselves, covetous, haughty, proud, blasphemers,
disobedient to parents, ungrateful, wicked, without affection, without
peace, slanderers, incontinent,
unmerciful, without kindness, traitors, stubborn, puffed up, and
lovers of pleasure more than of God: Having an appearance indeed
of godliness but denying the power thereof; (…) led away with divers
desires: Ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of
the truth. (they) also resist the truth, men corrupted in mind,
reprobate concerning the faith.”
It is time
that we take St. Paul’s warning seriously concerning the depraved
men of our times, who are occupying the high places in authority.
And much more of those in charge of forming priests, about whom
Our Lord Himself pronounces judgement and woe in Mt. 23:15 – “Woe
to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you go round
about the sea and the land to make one proselyte. And when he is
made, you make him the child of hell twofold
more than yourselves.” This woe from Our Lord is truly applicable
to these depraved formators in the seminaries of today – for they
do everything to gain vocations through vocational centres, yet
through their profane babbling and deceitful humane appearances,
‘seduce’ young minds slowly but surely in the years of formation
(or rather ‘deformation’) turning out these vocations to make of
them ‘sons of hell’ twofold more than the formators themselves as
aptly described by Our Lord Himself, so that these young priests
in turn become Pharisees: “you shut
the kingdom of heaven against men: for you yourselves do not enter
in and those that are going in, you suffer not to enter.” (Matt.
priest once told me that “it may be that the young priests of today
in the Novus Ordo have the intention of doing what the Church has
always done!” Well, it isn’t so simple, for the intention to do
what the Church has always done, requires that the intentions of
the priests be formed in the seminaries and founded on the rock
of Catholic doctrine, which is too far from being a reality. In
this, I shall provide a Conspectus of the Academics in the Bombay
mainly in theology, not forgetting to mention that the philosophy
taught in our seminary was Existentialism, Phenomenology, Indian
Philosophy, Pragmatism, and not St. Thomas Aquinas as decreed by
the Great Popes of happy memories such as Leo XIII and St. Pius
It is on such
a foundation as of ‘sinking sand’ that the edifice of contextual
theology was built. ‘Studying’ theology was contrasted with ‘doing’
Theology. Seminarians were given a 10-day seminar at the beginning
of theology on ‘Contextual Theology’ with the aim of a total ripping
away of the ‘Supernatural’ from the study of God, which is essentially
the content of Theology [Theos-God, logos-study]. St. Thomas Aquinas
(Ia, q.1 a.7) teaches the following about
theology: “(since) all matters treated in Sacred doctrine are
viewed under the aspect of the Deity either because they are God
Himself or because they have a relationship to God as their beginning
or goal, it follows that God is in very truth the subject matter
of this science.”
in the Bombay Seminary is far from being the supernatural science
as has been well defined by the Angelic Doctor. It is completely
naturalised and horizontalized, to begin and end in ‘this-worldly’
experience of ‘this-life’ (with ‘eternal life’ forgotten, if not
erased). And therefore the modernists talk of ‘doing theology’ and
as a natural consequence of such a ‘doing’, seminarians are sent
to Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO’s) to get in ‘touch
with reality’, to mingle with those non-Catholic atheistic, sometimes
perverse social workers who themselves have loose morals and broken,
disintegrated family life. The seminarians are then fed with the
Marxist agenda of ‘classless society’ with rebellion against legislative
authority in the Church as well as in the State, sowing in them
seeds of the ‘revolution’ against God’s natural Order.
Peace and serenity
of recollected religious life is now replaced with agitation and
dissipation of mundane concerns of the world in the disguise of
striving for social justice and ecumenism, supposedly to create
“communal harmony” – another proof of the ‘depravity’ of the modernist
mind. I shall provide a few samples of modernist academics that
demonstrate clearly the complete loss of faith and movement towards
the Great Apostasy.
With the background
of ‘contextual theology’, let us now go deeper into the theological
trends which are logical consequences of contextualised theology,
i.e., Naturalism, Religious Indifferentism and ultimately creating
a Masonic mindset in the seminarians. At this point, I am
reminded of Our Lord’s parable in which “the enemy came, while
the men were asleep and sowed cockle amid the wheat and went his
way.” (Matt. 13:24). Reading into this parable
coming from the sacred lips of Our Lord, we can see the ‘cockle’
which today is the “Masonic” mindset that the enemy of God sows
in the young minds thus destroying the good seed of Catholicism
in the field of God, which is the Catholic Church.
is the first field of study that we shall examine. We were given
a theological tract on the very person of Our Blessed Lord. The
modernists teach their perverse doctrine as follows:-
“Jesus is One
but Christologies are many” – Diversity of Christological spotlights
blend with the “blinding light of Easter proclamation” – interpret
the Christ-event in response to various contexts and needs of the
community. Vatican II contributed to the growth of variety of Christologies
such as Liberation Christology, Inclusive Christology, Black Christology,
Tribal Christology etc. In this respect, ‘Theocentrism’ is preferred
to ‘Christocentrism’ – where ‘God is the centre, not Christ’. (This
is called by modernist theologian as “Copernican revolution in theology”).
doctrine on Christology has many diverse implications that are the
many other modern errors.
of Christological spotlights blend(ing)’ depicts “Perspectivism”,
thus downplaying the person of Our Lord and reducing the Gospels
to mere perspectives and ‘faithreflections’ of the community according
to its context and needs. This is an attempt to downplay the Divinity
of Our Lord and reduce all his supernatural works to naturalism.
Hence the outcome is as many ‘Christologies’ (perspectives) as there
are people. Therefore Liberation Christology,
Black Christology, Tribal Christology etc. No objective Truth but
truth is made ‘perspectival’, i.e., relative.
is preferred to Christocentrism, whereby God is the centre, not
Christ.’ Therefore Christ can be normative or one among many
different ways to God. – This is Religious Indifferentism, condemned
by Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos, by Leo XIII in Humanum Genus
and by Pius IX in Quanta Cura and in his Syllabus
of Errors. ‘Religious Indifferentism’ is now practiced and made
‘sacrosanct’ by Vatican II that speaks of God’s presence and revelation
in other religions : ‘seeds of the word’ (Ad Gentes 11, 15), ‘Reflections
of the say of truth’ (Nostra Aetate
2) are proofs
of this error of Religious Indifferentism practiced openly through
inter-religious dialogue, inculturation and other Ecumenical practices.
3) Modern theologians
such as Edward Schillebeeckx who perceives ‘experience as the medium
of God’s revelation’ teach that the Christologizing process began
from Jesus’ own ‘experience’ and the ‘experience’ of his followers
of his presence. The disciples underwent a deep conversion after
the death of Jesus and ‘experienced’ themselves as being forgiven
and recommitted themselves to the Kingdom of God because they ‘sensed’
his risen presence – the saving presence of Christ in the community.
Unless the message of the Kingdom of God is intrinsic to One Christology,
the possibilities are great that we find ourselves admiring a ‘divine
icon’ and thus making a new ideology out of Christology itself.”
“The Kingdom of God Jesus proclaimed should be spelled out first
in terms of what it means to be truly ‘human’… The crucifixion is
thus the climax of human injustice – ‘social injustice’…. This is
the holistic understanding of salvation.” (Rather ‘hollowistic’
St. Pius X
in Pascendi (1907) clearly describes the modernist according
to principles as “a summary of experiences ” – thus though asserting
a general inspiration of the sacred books, they admit no inspiration
in the Catholic understanding. [Section on Holy Scripture]. The
above quotation from Schillebeekx speaks of the apostles ‘sensing’
Christ’s risen presence – another ambiguity deliberately devised
to downplay the reality of Our Lord’s bodily resurrection. This
too, has been condemned by St. Pius X while he pointed the errors
of ‘religious sense’ [a kind of intuition of the heart which puts
man in immediate contact with the reality of God] combined with
other fallacies opening wide the way to ‘Atheism’. Pope Pius VI
in Auctorem Fidei (August 28, 1794) teaches that “One
must condemn heretical statements as they appear, despite what contradictions
and ambiguities they are camouflaged in.” He further warns us
that “those who let heresies slip by because they are veiled
in wilful ambiguity, cannot be excused and allow the faith to be
led by subtle errors to their eternal damnation.”
(i) One of
the statements of modernist Christology was – “Jesus was a middle-class
man, who became an outcast by choice. John the Baptist
preached to sinners. Jesus identified Himself with sinners.”
This is a completely
Marxist interpretation of the very person of Our Divine Lord reducing
Him to a social class, and depicting Him as a revolutionary.
(ii) “The Kingdom
of God is that God would one day banish all injustices and misery
from this life. It is a kingdom of the poor not of the rich, a kingdom
where no one will be left out.” The Kingdom of God is thus reduced
to a this-worldly reality, to Marx’s classless society. This is
the error of Naturalism.
Kingdom of God for Jesus is one where no one will be treated as
inferior but will receive full recognition as human being.”
This is horizontalized
Christology, again the error of Naturalism.
(iv) “It is
impossible that Jesus did miracles – but for Jesus, everything was
miraculous, for he lived in a world full of God. Jesus is not interested
in the mechanics of the miracle, he sees it as a ‘sign’ of the Kingdom
What is that
‘sign’, and of what kind of Kingdom of God or classless society
is it a sign? There is nothing supernatural about it.
shared the world-view of his people and times, therefore he ‘saw’
the devil at work in physical illness as well as psychological sicknesses.”
Denial of the
existence of Satan and the devils; rejection of Hell, and the Son
of God is reduced to a mere human being completely conditioned by
his time and culture – A clear heresy!!!
(vi) “A contextualised
question for reflection – If Jesus were preaching in India today,
what kind of kingdom would he preached?”
makes explicit the contextual theology of the modernists. It means
everything i.e. the Gospels, Tradition in fact, the whole faith
changes according to time and space!
(vii) “At the
heart of Jesus’ message was not orthodoxy but orthopraxis. That
message of incarnation is that we find God in our brothers and sisters.”
message of incarnation – Masonic!
death is a logical consequence of his preaching. In faith, we
see his death as ‘salvific’. For instance, two men went to Calvary
one Friday afternoon – one saw a Jew dying; another saw God redeeming…”
is clearly perspectivism – “we see Christ’s death as salvific”
But in reality….?
(ix) “Did Jesus
foresee his death? Probably… from all growing opposition. Was He
aware of his resurrection? Hardly possible – otherwise it knocks
the pain of death. What He is sure of is his Supreme Confidence
that God would vindicate Him. This is translated by the Evangelists
in terms of the Resurrection.”
This is an
implicit denial of Our Lord’s divinity and hence, of his Omniscience.
The Resurrection is made a subjective experience for the disciples.
The Resurrection, they say, is not a past memory of something that
happened, it is that Jesus is a living person, and I commit
myself to a living person. Again we see a humanised, anthropocentric
message of the Resurrection – we find Jesus today, not
the Jesus of the past, but in Sacred Scripture, in the breaking
of bread, in fellowships, in daily events and celebrations.”
This is a denial
of the continuity of the Divine person of Our Lord, a Protestant
understanding of Christ’s presence.
(xi) The modernists
say that all the titles of Jesus evolved as centuries passed. The
community in the early centuries never thought of Jesus as God;
it was only after breaking away from Judaism in 70 A.D. that divinity
was ‘attributed’ to Him and Christian forms of liturgical worships
developed. Hence in Jesus, the modernists assert that God taking
a human face, he takes everything human — this leads to an incarnational
spirituality, therefore we need to take the
‘human’ as our centre.
Thus we see
a fervent attack on the very person of Our Divine Lord. Everything,
including Sacred Scripture and Tradition, is twisted and reduced
to naturalised secular humanism, ultimately a Freemasonic interpretation,
hence a total loss and deterioration of Catholic faith and theology.
Virgin Mary is stripped of all her titles and privileges, reducing
her to a ‘type of Church’ as in keeping with chapter 8 of Lumen
Gentium. Her Divine Maternity is belittled and it is subordinated
to the incarnation thus reducing it to human Motherhood. The Dogmas
are taken to be time-conditioned, hence in need of hermeneutics
according to time. Dogmas are reduced to verbal formulas, which
the modernists say are ‘icons of God’s word and can harm our faith
if we turn to idols.’
Virginity is interpreted spiritually, hence implicitly denied. They
dispute her vow of virginity reducing it to a “commitment to God’s
service”. — Again the denial is couched and concealed with ambiguity.
Here is a statement explicitly made: “Jesus would not be less divine
if he was to be born of Joseph”! Disputing tradition from St. Augustine
and all the Fathers of the Church!. The perpetual Virginity of Our
Lady is reduced to “single-minded openness to God” – that she retained
this ‘attitude’ all through her life. And hence it should not be
taken literally. This is downplaying Divine Revelation and is indeed
the hymn of Our Lady, is turned into ‘song of social liberation’.
‘Mary sings a hymn of God’s revolution’ [by J. Mollmann]. Mary is
once again reduced here to be a “liberated woman” – It is indeed
outrageous! Our Lady is depicted as a herald of the “diabolically
inspired feminist movements” of modern days, which are revolting
against God’s established natural order in creation.
Sin, Salvation, Grace, Sacraments
modernists, there is no concept of sin possible except in the social
context – “structures of sin” [Soli Rei Socialis 36-37], as spoken
by Pope John Paul II, “social sin”. Reconciliation does not take
place in the confessional but in the world, in the arena of plurality
of cultures and religious….
this naturalistic thinking of the modernists, ‘salvation is not
spiritual, individual and other-worldly, but “holistic” and “social”
in the dialectical relationship with society. Thus, the mission
of Christ ,and redemption wrought by him, are from the oppressive
social structures. Therefore Salvation = Liberation = Social Justice
[classless society of Marx].
Hence, as a
logical consequence of the naturalistic absurdities, ‘Grace’ is
something social. By this they naturalise ‘Grace’ which is a supernatural
gift of God to horizontalizing it into a “a joint effort of person
and communities that entails ‘Universal Solidarity’.
too are reduced to community dimension with no definite number of
sacrament as defined by the Council of Trent to be i.e., 7 sacraments.
They say that the number of sacraments has changed in the past due
to social change. Therefore another change could lead
to new sacraments – heresy!!! Sacraments are stripped off from
their supernatural level – as being a supernatural life of Grace
to having an anthropological dimension reaching out to human
needs within the community and orienting us to do the same with
people of all other religions. And so, the modernists “heretically”
hold that in response to Protestant reformation, Trent decided the
sacraments to be seven in number. In some other context of space
and time, the Holy Spirit could inspire the Church to define
also downplay the official term used by Trent ‘ex opere operato’
with the disguise of “re-interpreting” it to mean in the words of
Karl Rahner and Juan Segundo (periti of Vatican II) that “sacraments
signify and celebrate God’s presence and power everywhere.”
Therefore the term ‘ex opere operato’ implies no privilege of grace;
rather it is a “responsibility to be at the service of humanity”.
This certainly makes one who is serious about his own salvation
to doubt the validity of the ‘New Mass’ which is intrinsically evil,
as well as the Novus Ordo sacraments. The professor, a priest, at
the Bombay seminary said that “the Council of Trent encouraged a
‘magical’ approach to sacraments while today we re-interpret all
the sacraments in terms of ‘human response’ ”.
is portrayed within the Common Priesthood of the people (LG 10)
where each one is participating in the Priesthood of Christ. By
this the Priest is not a Maxi-Christian bigger than the lay people.
The Priesthood is meant to serve the common priesthood. The Council
of Trent is ridiculed and downplayed for its starting point for
the priesthood being a “power to consecrate, absolve…”. Hence, the
starting point for the modernist is not a power to
consecrate etc., but the mission of Jesus as Priest, prophet and
king – announcing the Gospel and leading to Eucharistic assembly
which is no longer the holy sacrifice to be present by the
priest alone, but it is an ecclesial action of the whole
Church – the “Ecclesiastical Eucharist”, by which the priest is
only the presider of the assembly in the Eucharist.
To be a priest
is to enter the Presbyterian, not as an individual, but as a ‘community’.
Therefore, sharing the views of another heretical Indian, so-called
theologian, Fr. Amalodoss S. J., the professors of the seminary
held that “even though traditionally (even until Vatican II) the
priesthood was considered with “Christ” as the starting point, today
it is seen with the “priestly people” as the starting point – in
terms of the new Apostolic – It shows their implicit denial of these
And so, the
whole purpose of “Evangelisation or New Evangelisation” as called
by the modernists – is firstly, to contextualise the mission-command
of Jesus. The modernist twist the Mission-Command of Our Lord “Go
make disciples of all nations….” by saying that the apostles presented
Christ according to their context, i.e., the ‘text’ was kept in
the creative tension with the ‘context’ namely, the people, their
culture, way of thinking etc., and accordingly they
re-interpreted the mission-command.
too interpret the Mission-Command accordingly to our Indian or Asian
context – And the FABC (Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conference)
based on Gaudium et Spes 1, interprets the Mission-Command erroneously
thus -“Share the good news in continuous, loving and humble ‘dialogue’
with India’s/Asia’s poor, with its local cultures and religious
traditions, live in harmony with all religions thus achieving mutual
enrichment and recognizing the “signs of Christ’s presence and of
the working of the spirit in other religions” (Redemptoris Missio,
John Paul II No, 56).
Mission-Command (not that of Our Lord) speaks of witnessing
of life (this-worldly) valued more immensely than doctrines and
dogmas. This is linked with their false conviction that concerning
the ultimate reality we cannot grasp what it is, but only what it
is not. “Whatever be the doctrines held, one looks for witness of
life which is “personal experience” and to make Christ present in
“some manner” – [Mission in the Present Decade by
Fr. Julian Saldanha S. J. in Ishvani Documentation and Mission
Digest, 1999 No. 2].
When I look
back on those years in the Bombay Seminary, the only picture that
comes to my mind is that of “Israel caught in the slavery of Egypt”
– the years of physical but much more a spiritual oppression that
I saw, heard and felt with all my senses. It was as though once
again as in the time of Moses, that Aaron the Priest made the Golden
Calf. This time there was not just one but many golden calves! Such
were ‘Social Justice’, ‘Inculturation’, ‘Inter-religion dialogue’,
‘Community building’ etc., all these calves were supported and based
on one foundation namely the ‘Novus Ordo Missae’ – the Ecumenical
In the words
of Our Lord to those who came to arrest Him: “It is your hour and
the power of darkness”. These ideologies which are directly contrary
to the Catholic faith have taken its place by sneaking into the
Church through the crack of Vatican II. The Progenitors as well
as the teachers of these iniquities were prophesied about by St.
Paul in 2 Thess. 2:10 saying that “God shall send them the operation
of error, to believe lying”. What chastisement more terrible can
there be than a hierarchy that has lost its direction and of which
our great founder, Archbishop Lefebvre quoting the 3rd secret of
Our Lady of Fatima, says – “the hierarchy that has undergone a “diabolical
disorientation” [They have uncrowned Him, p. 251]. In the years
that I was studying theology, my only guide and inspirer was the
Blessed Virgin Mother, with all the pain and anguish of my heart
over all these blasphemies that were taught to us,
also the mocking and the ridicule against the Catholic faith that
was manifested in every lecture of theology, in words as well as
in the behaviour of my fellow seminarians.
formation created manifold types of seminarians namely:
a. The majority
of the seminarians was swayed into ‘liberalism’ and became ‘practical
atheists’ if not, ‘explicit or real atheists’. However, it wouldn’t
take too long to become atheists ‘explicitly’.
b. A group
of seminarians emerged as “radical Socialists” deeply imbued by
the perverse and revolutionary spirit of communism. More and more
seminarians began joining them, for such a naturalistic and secularised
ideology provided them a “readymade” platform for all ‘licentiousness
were a few seminarians who chose to be “fence-sitters” swaying
themselves sometimes towards ‘liberalism’ and sometimes towards
‘conservatism’ depending on favourable winds.
were still a few who held on to the ‘Charismatic Renewal’ and
deluded themselves by believing that the happy-clappy ‘charismatic
spirit’ of Protestantism will ultimately triumph and resolve the
confusion in the Church. They can be compared to the class of
‘Zealots’ at the time of Our Lord, who believed that they
could force the hand of God to work ‘signs and wonders’, thriving
on flamboyant ‘gifts of the Spirit’ whilst still rejecting
the Messiah and
His way of the Cross.
were still some others, who were ‘complacent’ about everything.
They adopted an ‘indifferent’ attitude to heresies and
sacrileges around them, and being the ‘yes man’ of the superiors,
even though some of them at heart, knew the evil surrounding them
but tried ‘playing safe’ with a deluded intention that
after getting ordained, they would be different by doing their
own thing. However the fact is that, once knowingly one becomes
a slave to the devil it is easy to be enslaved by him forever,
unless a total conversion takes place.
As for me,
in the midst of all this confusion, Our Blessed Mother through her
holy Rosary, guided my steps to Tradition. I was once told by the
Rector himself that “Praying the Rosary is to be engaged in superstition,
we must do what Our Lady has done, i.e. ‘reach-out’. Once again
they were reducing Our Lady to naturalism.
The first step
of Our Lady’s guidance was to lead some of us, in September 2001
to the “Tridentine Mass” which was said in the diocese by the Indult
granted by the Cardinal himself. This became the immediate cause
of halting my ordination to the diaconate by the Cardinal himself,
accusing me of being a “Lefebvrist” along with my companions and
friends who were attending the Indult Mass granted by him.
It was thus, that the Cardinal through his “accusation” introduced
for the first time for us the name of our holy founder and father
in the faith, Archbishop
This was Our
Blessed Mother’s second step, through the mouth of the Cardinal
himself leading us to the only successor of the apostles, who preserved
the Catholic faith and introduced the Lord’s most Holy Sacrifice.
next called me on December 7th for another meeting with him. The
three months before this meeting were indeed a period of great anguish
for me and my only consolation and consoler was Our Lady of Sorrow.
My family was very supportive in every way, especially in prayer
and penance. My mother, in whom ever since childhood I saw the shadow
of Our Blessed Mother, was the one who strengthened me to remain
firm in the Catholic faith, to have recourse to the Blessed Virgin
Mother and not to fear or give in to the pressure of the devil coming
through the hierarchy. This was indeed the truth: it was the devil
himself that was trying to break all my defence through the authorities.
3rd, feast of St. Francis Xavier, Our Lord through the intercession
of the Mother of God answered my prayer. A friend of mine gave me
the “Open Letter to Confused Catholics” by Archbishop Lefebvre,
which I read twice before December 7th, the day of meeting the Cardinal.
the Cardinal welcomed me warmly and then disclosed to me his plan.
He intended to give me a Jesuit Priest as a counsellor to clash
down all my funny ideas (of faith) and during this period of one
or two years, I would have to work and “rub my shoulder with Hindus,
Moslem and all types of people of various religions and then realize
that they too possess the truth.” In this way I would be purified
of all old and outdated ideas of faith, and accept Vatican II with
all its Ecumenical orientations. He demanded complete obedience
to his authority. He himself would then come to my parish and lay
his hands on me and so that “I would climb up the ladder” – This
phrase demonstrates the Masonic technique of luring souls
to the vanity of this world. Here, it was as though I came
face to face with the devil who was saying to me “I will give you
all this, if you bow down and worship me.” I went back home with
a heavy heart, only trusting in God’s providence.
That same evening,
on the eve of the feast of Immaculate Conception, a friend of mine
called me up and told me he had to tell me something important.
I met him the next day after the Tridentine Mass held in the crypt
of Don Bosco’s shrine and he introduced me to the Society of St.
Pius X. Thanks be to God, for at last after a long journey through
heresy and so many traps of the devil, He led me to the Truth. And
as Our Lord says “And the Truth will set thee free.” Indeed!
Mother did everthing for me and then I was invited by Fr. Thomas
Blute, superior of India, to attend the retreat at Palayamkottai
with Fr. Couture and six other priests. For the first time, after
a life-long company with so many priests, that retreat gave me a
company of true priests. I felt myself truly in priestly company.
The retreat blessed me with necessary grace to renounce evil and
turn to the Truth.
Thanks be to
God, I say, for preserving the Catholic faith through our great
father and founder Archbishop Lefebvre, and I pray to the Blessed
Virgin Mother who has crushed all heresies under her feet to enlighten
and deliver all her sons, beginning with Our Holy Father, and all
Cardinals, Bishops, priests and religious, so that Her own promise
may come to be fulfilled. “In the end, my Immaculate Heart will
my fellow seminarians have written, I would simply like to add the
following on Moderators’ Groups which played a important role in
This was a
system by which the seminarians, under the guidance of a priest
met every week to have discussions on various topics, followed by
a mass on the following day. Each moderator group comprised 10 to
15 members. The seminary had about 7 to 8 moderator groups. One
of the purposes of these groups was to facilitate a greater interaction
among its members. But unfortunately, they were a good means of
innovation and adaptation to the excess of modernism.
Each week the
mass was said by the priest in his room .As a priest of inculturation,
he said it by squatting on the floor. A lot of novelties were introduced
at this mass, which included substituting the prayers from the missal
by spontaneous prayers, a group sharing on a topic after the gospel,
passing of the paten and the chalice for the receiving of communion
under both species individually by each member and a replacement
at the proper mass vestments by a
these moderator meetings, guest speakers were invited to speak to
the group. These included Protestant pastors, Jewish rabbis, members
of the non governmental organizations involved in humanitarian works
irrespective of religion, doctors, Catholic youth, married couples,
etc. As part of the meetings, we also visited the home for the aged,
clergy home (for retired priests), home for the terminally ill,
parishes that implemented the principles of liberation theology,
on a few occasions, these meetings fostered an ecumenical approach,
downplaying the necessity of conversion to the one true Catholic
Faith, promoting justice irrespectively of religion, substituting
tradition with the principles of liberalism, etc. One of the moderator
meeting was focused on the great injustice done by the authorities
of the Church in excommunicating a Sri Lankan theologian (Fr. Balasuryia,
O.M.I.) whose writings on our Lady were heretical.
the system of moderator groups was a vehicle for modernism.