2011

MAY - JUNE

Sacrosanctum Concilium and Inculturation of Liturgy in the Post-Conciliar Indian Catholic Church By Jon Douglas Anderson "Theology and Inculturation in India" Directed Study, SummerAutumn 2009, with Dr. Michael Sirilla [Associate Professor of Theology], Franciscan University of Steubenville
http://wisc.academia.edu/JonAnderson/Papers/237033/Sacrosanctum_Concilium_and_Inculturation_of_Liturgy_ in_the_Post-Conciliar_Indian_Catholic_Church NOTE: ALL USE OF COLOR [GREEN, RED AND BLUE] FOR THE PURPOSE OF EMPHASIS IS MINE MICHAEL "Even in the liturgy, the Church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters which do not implicate the faith or the good of the whole community; rather does she respect and foster the genius and talents of the various races and peoples. Anything in these peoples' way of life which is not indissolubly bound up with superstition and error she studies with sympathy and, if possible, preserves intact. Sometimes in fact she admits such things into the liturgy itself, so long as they harmonize with its true and authentic spirit." -Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, 37. "To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by means of acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons, and songs, as well as by actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes." -Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, 30 "He who dwells in Rome knows that the people of India are his members." -St. John Chrysostom, On John, Hom 65, 1; PG 59, 361. Cited by Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, 13

Introduction: The Uniqueness of India within the Catholic World: Given its ironic, arguably 'liminal' status as both a quintessential "mission land" and yet, according to tradition, also the home of Christian believers since the middle of the first century (St. Thomas the Apostle is believed by the faithful there to have arrived on the Malabar Coast of present day Kerala in southwest India in the year 52 A.D.), there is arguably no nation of the modern world comparable to India, in which the pastoral concerns about, theological clarifications concerning, and reforms of the liturgy initially advanced by Sacrosanctum Concilium--the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy promulgated by the Second Vatican Councilwere at once so desperately needed, so eagerly anticipated and so widely advocated, yet nonetheless so widely controversial and unevenly implemented following the council. Perhaps, given the remarkable diversity and pluralism which so thoroughly characterizes Indiaeven within its indigenous Christian communities in general and the Catholic Church in particularthis was to be expected, although such factors have not made the processes of change any easier. When Portuguese explorer Vasco de Gama arrived on Indias western coast in 1498, followed thereafter by waves of western merchants, missionaries and political elites who consolidated Portuguese control of the area under their "Padroado agreement"* with the Vatican, the Indian Church was, it seems, destined to endure centuries of enforced "Latinization" of the Syrian liturgy through which it had long traced its allegedly Apostolic origins to the earliest centuries of the common era, in the process risking the loss of the ancient Syro-Chaldean rites practiced by the socalled "St. Thomas Christians," together with their own indigenous languages and customs, which were systematically repressed, marginalized, and ultimately forbidden. After nearly five centuries of "rigid unification" and "unyielding uniformity," the liturgies of the Indian Catholic Church (whose unity was, ironically, never truly advanced by such means) were surely ripe for change, for revision

and restoration, for the introduction of vernacular languages, and desperately in need of genuine renewal.1
*http://dictionary.sensagent.com/padroado/en-en/- Michael

In this essay, I examine the post-Conciliar Indian reception of Sacrosanctum Concilium, critically evaluating several key texts of that document, together with their often widely-divergent interpretations and some of the controversies surrounding their implementation in various contexts. Such discussion inevitably raises issues of authority and questions surrounding the legitimacy of certain innovations witnessed in liturgical ceremonies which different constituencies within the Indian Church have variously advocated, endorsed, and/or resisted in the decades since Vatican II. Finally, I will evaluate some specific examples of inculturation in the Indian liturgy, particularly concerning the adoption, adaptation, and/or appropriation of several 'indigenous' Indian/Hindu postures, gestures, bodily attitudes and ritualized actions, considering in the process widely divergent opinions concerning these from both influential advocates and representative opponents. Although theological in subject matter, the essay retains a comparative, rather than evaluative tone. Fully cognizant of my own 'liminal' status as both a concerned Catholic and yet an 'outsider,' I resist any temptation I might initially have had to endorse or to criticize such developments. While that may remain a goal for a later, more thorough treatment of this timely topic, it is not countenanced herein.2
1

The phrase "rigid unification" is borrowed from Theodor Klauser, A Short History of the Western Liturgy, 2nd ed., trans. John Halliburton (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979); "unyielding uniformity" is taken from Josef A. Jungmann, The Mass of the Roman Rite, 2 Volumes. (St. Louis: Herder, 1949). Further discussion of and detail concerning the Indian Church,, its drastic colonization and subsequent renewals from the early modern to the contemporary eras, is contained in my own : "Latinization and Inculturation of the Syro-Malabar Liturgy, 1498-2009: Paradigm for the Church Universal." Unpublished manuscript, 2009. 2 Concerning my personal motivations for and the methodologies employed both within this essay and in the larger projected research project of which it is but an initial endeavor, I should like to state the following, by way of contextualizing my own work. In this essay, I aim to highlight several passages of Sacrosanctum Concilium which are crucially important to understanding the reception and implementation of the Second Vatican Councils calls for a reform, restoration, and renewal of the Sacred Liturgy within the post-Conciliar Indian context. I shall proceed by way of textual analysis of the Constitutions own words, juxtaposing them with critical commentaries and interpretations offered by some leading figures of the vibrantbut often controversialliturgical renewal movement in India since the Council. Thus, my analysis considers documents from the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI), from the National Biblical, Catechetical, and Liturgical Centre (NBCLC), (established by the Indian Bishops in Bangalore in 1966), and its long-time director, Fr. Amalorpavadass, from the front matter of the 1969 revised typical edition of the Roman Missal used in India, from the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (and its antecedent body, the Consilium ad Exsequendam Constitutionem De Sacra Liturgia), from some leading contemporary Indian theologians, from Pope John Paul II and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, former Prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, now Pope Benedict XVI, as well as from some leaders amongst the laity of India strongly opposed to some of the forms that the post-Conciliar liturgy of the Mass has taken in the name of "inculturation"texts which, in many ways, gave initial impetus to my interest in this area. I will also bring to bear my own personal experience and observations based on a recent research visit to south India, wherein I sought specifically to interview both advocates and opponents of the inculturation of the Indian Catholic Church, to visit several of the centers associated with liturgical renewal, revision, and innovation, including the aforementioned NBCLC, as well as to observe, experience, and to participate directly, insofar as possible, in inculturated forms of the Indian liturgy. During the course of this research, I visited a number of parachurch ministries, Catholic ashrams, parish churches, cathedrals, bishops houses, diocesan offices, retreat centers, formation houses, seminaries, colleges, universities, and schools for the performing and visual arts, as well as several shrines, pilgrimage sites, and places of historical significance to the Catholic Church in India. I conducted my research over twelve weeks from late May to mid-August 2009partly by means of textual and archival work, partly through audio recording and photography, documenting people, places and things, partly by personal visits and interviews with noteworthy individuals (including bishops, priests, religious, historians, artists and architects), and partly through anthropological field work as a participant-observer, sometimes as a decidedly conspicuous outsider but more often as one with a profound sense of respect for and affinity with my co-religionists (or, better, with my brothers and sisters in Christ!). Travelling across south India, I sought thoroughly to engage the theories, processes, and manifestations of inculturation, to learn it not only from books, but to know and experience it from the inside. I wanted to know what inculturation looked like, how it sounded, smelled, tasted, and felt. My experiences were most often profoundly moving, frequently humbling, and sometimes bewildering. I asked myself several questions: "What were the theological imperatives which have led to inculturation in the Indian context?"; "What are the socio-political and the religio-cultural impulses which underlie the processes it requires and undergoes?"; and "How is the inculturation of the Church and her Gospel affected by means of liturgical, artistic, and architectural traditions and innovations, by the interaction of both the 'old' and the 'new'?" While the answers to these questions lay well beyond the scope of this essay, their prominent place in my recent work certainly bears upon the motivations evident herein: in my choice of India as its geographic focus, in my selection of the text(s) under consideration, in the historical developments which have so captivated my interest, attention, and critical examination, and in the methodology utilized in that analysis. Indeed, India herself looms large in this work, and the uniquely diverse Catholic Church which I encountered within her borders has in turn inspired, challenged, and ultimately transformed me by contact with her genuinely vibrant faith, her courageously powerful witness, and her unforgettable aesthetic beauty.

Sacrosanctum Concilium and Liturgical Renewal: The First Fruits of Vatican II: I cannot herein adequately treat the historical, theological and sociological backgrounds to the Second Vatican Councilnor even address more than casually the considerable role played therein by ecclesial authorities, bishops, priests, and theologians, of India. I have mentioned the ancient status of Christianity in India, and the early modern arrival of Portuguese Catholics, factors so central to the subsequent (and unique) history of the Catholic Church in India. Beyond this, I cannot venture, except to include a few points of particular relevance to the local context and situation which confronted the pre-Conciliar Indian Church, thus defining her needs and expectations. During the post-independence and pre-Conciliar eras, the anticipated revisions and renewal of the liturgy soon forthcoming with Vatican II were advocated within the Indian Catholic Church, at least in part, for the extent to which some hoped they might help the Church not only to be perceived as such, but moreover to be, in fact, more 'authentically Indian': allowing her to adopt, adapt, and appropriate traditional Indian categories of thought, systems of belief, cultural traditions, even some of the 'religious' symbols and spiritual disciplines of other Indians, together with their musical, artistic and architectural heritages, themes and motifs, as well as some deeply-ingrained, millennia-old ritual practices. Thus, for many Indian bishops, theologians, liturgists, and scholars, (both before and after the Council itself) it was hoped and believed that a thoroughgoing but carefully-planned and gradually-realized "Indianization" of the Churchs liturgy (and an accompanying assertion of her status as an 'indigenous,' rather than as a 'foreign' institutionas she too often had been perceived) would affect not only a deeper, more authentic and effective participation of the faithful in the life of the Church, but also win for the Church and for Catholics a renewed status and improved perception amongst non-Christians in India as belonging more fully and authentically to the newly-independent nations socio-political structures and its traditional religio-cultural heritages.3 While one may fairly question whether such a strategy was feasible, credible, or wise, whether it has truly been attempted since the Council, as well as whether and to what extent it has been successful, pursuit of such questions must remain again for yet another essay. For better or worse, however, Sacrosanctum Concilium, the first document resulting from the Second Vatican Council, was formally promulgated on 4 December, 1963, setting in motion complex processes of revision to the liturgy across the universal Church. Although sometimes misunderstood, often misinterpreted, and/or misapplied, in retrospect one must admit that the documents implementation has been thoroughly extensive, albeit decidedly uneven, in India as elsewhere. Still, whether vilified or championed, marked as they have been by occasional foolishness and abuses on one hand and remarkable successes on the other, the revisions to and renewal of the Churchs liturgies have been universally recognized by the faithful as the most obvious and noteworthy results of the Council: its "first fruits." Reinforcing its own foundational status (if not its primacy) among the documents which the Council would produce by asserting clearly the centrality, dignity, and essential nature of the Churchs liturgyespecially her celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the MassSacrosanctum Concilium also reflected at length upon its connection with the Heavenly liturgy performed by Jesus Christ, the one High Priest, and upon the earthly liturgys status as the "source and summit," of the Christian life for believers: "the liturgy is the summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed; it is also the fount from which all her power flows" (SC10). Given this fundamental significance of the Sacred Liturgy, and aiming as they did above all at "the promotion of liturgical instruction and active participation," the Fathers of the Council declared explicitly that Mother Church earnestly desires that all the faithful should be led to that full, conscious, and active participation in liturgical celebrations which is demanded by the very nature of the liturgy, and to which the Christian peoplehave a right and an obligation by reason of their baptism (SC 14).
3

A richly detailed and, to my knowledge, utterly unique account of the role of Indian ecclesial authorities at the Second Vatican Council has been researched and written by Fr. Paul Pulikkan, a priest of the Diocese of Thrissur, Kerala and Chair for Christian Studies and Research, Calicut University): Rev. Dr. Paul Pulikkan, Indian Church at Vatican II: A HistoricoTheological Study of the Indian Participation in the Second Vatican Council. (Thrissur, Kerala: Marymatha Major Seminary, 2001).

But what was meant by the prominent and oft-repeated phrase "full, conscious, and active participation?" The official Latin phrase "participatio actuoso," as has been suggested by many, might better be translated as "real" or "actual participation" than as "active participation," for these terms, while not countenancing passivity in any way, nonetheless do not carry the connotations of the term "active," in response to which too many interpreters of the council, caught up in the 'Spirit of Vatican II' and the ubiquitous urges toward 'aggiornamento,' it seems, were inclined to think worshipers should be continuously active during the Mass, fully "participating" in the Sacred Liturgy, with little or no room left for reverent silence, spiritual contemplation, and proper interiorization. Twenty years after the conclusion of the Council, a Second Extraordinary Synod of Bishops was held in Rome to consider the relative successes of its implementation and the ongoing challenges facing the Church, as well as to make recommendations for further work. On this matter, the bishops stressed that The liturgical renewal cannot be limited to ceremonies, rites, texts, etc. The active participation so happily increased after the Council does not consist only in external activity, but above all in interior and spiritual participation, in living and fruitful participation in the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ (cf. SC11).4 Whether and to what extent later inculturated liturgies in the post-Conciliar Indian context have been guilty of such a misunderstanding of "active participation," recommending as they did a more thorough 'engagement' of the faithful by means of bodily postures, gestures and actions, are questions I shall have occasion to address later. Religious, Scholarly and Popular Literature on Liturgical Renewal and Inculturation in the Post-Conciliar Indian Reception of Sacrosanctum Concilium: Before undertaking such an evaluation, however, and because they have been so diverse, I thought it worthwhile very briefly to survey the breadth of Indian responses to the Second Vatican Council and its document on the liturgy. By my estimation, in India Sacrosanctum Concilium was largely welcomed by both clergy and laity, by hierarchical leaders and religious congregations, by Catholics of the Latin, Syro-Malabar, and Syro-Malankara Rites alike, as evidenced by a significant body of literature on the subjects of liturgy, inculturation and related topics. Certainly, its reception, interpretation and implementation continues to be engaged as a source of both rigorous intellectual and pastoral work by ecclesiastical bodies, such as the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI), and by a variety of religious, academic, and scholarly institutions and their members.5 A good deal of literature was early generated by those involved in Catholic ashrams (or in "ashrams of Catholic initiative"), such as Dom Henri Le Saux (Abhishiktnanda) and Dom Bede Griffiths from the Saccidnanda Ashram (aka Shantivanam) which aimed principally to articulate and defend their often unconventional interpretations of both Christian and Hindu myth and doctrine.6 Among Indian artists, there have been numerous works both theoretical and iconic which aim to educate their readership on indigenous Indian aesthetics and to justify their use in Christian art and architecture.7 Among Indian academics (many of whom are also members of religious orders), much of the scholarly work has focused on the practical implications and potential methods of inculturation, but some of it has been framed more broadly in the contexts of biblical, historical, sociological, and theological terms; if not neglecting Sacrosanctum Concilium and the documents of Vatican II entirely, such works certainly go well beyond them to consider larger questions surrounding culture, community, and missiology.8 By contrast, there has been only a rather limited,
4

"The Church, in the Word of God, Celebrates the Mysteries of Christ for the Salvation of the World." Final Report of the 1985 Second Extraordinary Synod. 5 A good example of such literature is that by Fr. D. S. Amalorpavadass, Inculturation: Some Practical Implications and Conclusions. NBCLC: Inculturation Pamphlet Series no. 8. (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical, and Liturgical Centre, no date). 6 Cf. Abhishiktnanda, (Dom Henri Le Saux), Saccidnanda: A Christian Approach to Advaitic Experience. (Delhi: ISPCK, 1974). First published in French as Sagesse Hindoue Mystique Chretienne. (Paris: Editions de Centurion, 1965); and Bede Griffiths, The Marriage of East and West (Saccidananda Ashram, no date). 7 E.g., Jyoti Sahi, The Child and the Serpent: Reflections on Popular Indian Symbols. (Bangalore: Asian Trading Corporation, 1980). First published by Routledge &Kegan Paul, London, 1980); and Johnson Vadakumchery, CMI, ed. Icons of the Unseen: Asian Theology Through the Eyes of Artist Joy Elamkunnapuzha, CMI. (Trivandrum: Carmel International Publishing House, 2002). 8 An example of the latter, among several balanced, scholarly, and yet popularly-accessible 'indigenous' treatments of inculturation in the post-Conciliar Indian Catholic Church, is Julian Saldanha, S.J., Inculturation. 2nd Revised Edition

though perhaps growing, interest among Western academics in the processes and development of inculturation in India.9 Finally, and predictably, the entire Indian movement toward liturgical revision and inculturation has also engendered a wealth of criticism, controversy, and resistance, especially amongst an oftbewildered laity, many of whom have been slow to embrace the adaptations, innovations, and efforts at inculturation made by bishops, liturgists, religious, and leaders of other 'elite' movements such as those involved in the Catholic ashram movement. Those authors working in this vein, though frequently without formal theological training and often lacking access to traditional avenues of publishing, have resorted to self-publishing and, more recently, turned to the internet to gain a hearing for their perspectives, which usually find the "elite" status of the advocates of inculturation and liturgical innovation less troubling than what they perceive as the outrages of catechetical misinformation and liturgical abuseswhich they characterize unambiguously as a lamentableeven demonic"Paganization" of the Indian Church.10 The documents of the Second Vatican Council and the authority of the Church herself (both locally in India and in Rome) have only very rarely, to my knowledge, been directly attacked, although the Council and the imperatives it expressed have certainly led some members of the Church in India to conceive, develop, and engage in a great variety of new approaches to and strategies of mission, sociopolitical engagement, and interreligious dialogue initiatives which have often made others uncomfortable. Sacrosanctum Concilium in particular has nonetheless been subjected to the harshest of criticisms from traditionalists and others among the faithful in India, as elsewhere. Given its far-reaching implications for the spiritual and religious lives of the faithful, the sometimes radical interpretations given it, and the only-too-human tendency to resist change, particularly in relation to religious traditions, this, too, may easily have been expected. Selected Texts of Sacrosanctum Concilium: Interpretations and Implementations in the Post-Conciliar Indian Church: For both advocates and opponents of inculturation, there are, of course, several key passages of Sacrosanctum Concilium which are of particular importance to the developments, adaptations, and changes in the liturgy that have occurred in the post-conciliar Indian Church. While Indias bishops, priests, theologians and liturgists have not always cited them explicitly in their subsequent works and whether or not they have been rightly understood, carefully interpreted and correctly implementedthese texts of the Second Vatican Councils Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy remain most salient and useful for understanding the theories, processes, and manifestations of inculturation in India. Nonetheless, one must consider them within the larger context of both conciliar and post-conciliar documents, and occasionally with an eye to several broader issues, such as different models of ecclesiology and authority within the Body of Christ. Clearly, the Fathers of the Council advocated only a cautious, balanced revision of the Sacred Liturgy, one which would remain firmly grounded in the depositum fidei, in the Churchs Tradition and traditions, while also remaining open to such innovations as might affect a genuine renewal of worship among the faithful and hence promote their "full, conscious, and active participation in liturgical celebrations." Yet in the interest of forestalling unnecessary innovations of dubious value, in Sacrosanctum Concilium they also stated explicitly that only certain elements of the liturgy were, in fact, changeable: In order that the Christian people may more certainly derive an abundance of graces from the sacred liturgy, holy Mother Church desires to undertake with great care a general restoration of the liturgy itself. For the liturgy is made up of immutable elements divinely instituted, and of elements subject to change. These not only may but ought to be changed with the passage of time if they

(Mumbai: St. Pauls, 1996). More recently, see Michael Amaladoss, S.J., Beyond Inculturation: Can the Many Be One? (Delhi: ISPCK, 2005). 9 e.g. Catherine Cornille, The Guru in Indian Catholicism: Ambiguity or Opportunity of Inculturation? Louvain Theological & Pastoral Monographs 6. (Louvain: Peeters Press, 1991). Notable among recent publications is Rev. Dr. Paul M. Collins, Christian Inculturation in India. Liturgy, Worship and Society Series. (Aldershot, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate, 2007). 10 Most notable in this regard is Victor J. F. Kulanday (Swami Kulandaiswami), The Paganization of the Church in India. Second Revised Edition. (Madras: Author/Diocesan Press, 1988). Among contemporary lay efforts to resist the tide, cf. METAMORPHOSE, Web site developed by independent lay scholar Michael Prabhu, available online at http://www.ephesians-511.net

have suffered from the intrusion of anything out of harmony with the inner nature of the liturgy or have become unsuited to it (emphases added). (SC21) With regard to the immutability of certain elements of the liturgy, Rev. Dr. Seby Mascarenhas, SFX, Rector of the All India Mission Seminary in Pilar, Goa, acknowledges this fact, reassuring those who might have misgivings about the ongoing processes of inculturation of liturgy and worship in India: Obviously, the basic things remain the same: the reading, the Bible, the consecration, the words of the consecration: those we will not changethat is what unites all of us. But other things can change. The whole point of this is: be at home while celebrating. Celebrate what you live, not something artificial or theatrical, but at the same time with awe, with wonder, with sobriety, because finally, we are in the presence of God.11 What Can Be Changed? How? And By Whom? National Catholic Bishops Conferences and the Ambiguous Issues of Authority: Asserting the immutability of some elements of the liturgy while simultaneously maintaining the existence of other elements which not only may, but sometimes must be changed, however, the Council Fathers thus raised some fundamentally problematic and difficult questions: How can one tell the difference? What distinguishes the "immutable" elements from those "subject to change"? And who decides? Of course, the same passage contains a clue to the answer to the first two questions in its use of the phrase "divinely instituted." Yet many aspects of the Churchs liturgy, amongst sacramental celebrations and in the Sacred Liturgy of the Holy Mass itselfeven while possessing more-or-less clear foundations in a biblically-based and hence presumably divinelyinstituted traditionhave nonetheless been subjected over the centuries to significant doctrinal, theological, practical and historical developments, to the vicissitudes of widely-varied historical circumstances, to alternating accretions and truncations, and thus, to substantial revisions. Who, then, could be entrusted to distinguish the immutable from the changeable; to ascertain what is Sacred Tradition and what is merely traditional practice; to be led infallibly by the Holy Spirit to discern Gods will in such matters? The Pope? The collective bishops? The individual bishops? The various episcopal conferences? The Council itself?

With regard to such questions, and in a concerted effort to balance the universality with the catholicity of the Church, to preserve both unity and diversity within her liturgical theologies and practices, the Council Fathers here wisely dictated only a few "general norms" concerning their collective juridical authority over the various liturgies, restricting their more specific recommendations for the renewal of the liturgy to the Latin Rite alone, leaving aside the complexities and varieties of liturgies utilized in the Oriental or Eastern Catholic Rites and delegating that authority to "various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established" (SC 22.2). In light of the extensive treatment the documents of Vatican II as a whole give to ecclesiological issues of the Churchs hierarchical structure, the collegiality of her bishops, and similar matters, the appearance of explicit statements in Sacrosanctum Concilium regarding the special duties and obligations of the bishops for liturgical renewal in their jurisdictions is hardly surprising. Indeed, it might well have been expected that this document would reinforce statements made elsewhere concerning their unique roles as "teachers for doctrine, priests for sacred worship, and ministers for governing" (Lumen Gentium 20, paragraph 3). Far less predictable, I suspect, was the great extent to which the Council Fathers seemingly deferred to such local and regional bodies of bishops not only in matters of discipline, but enjoined upon them the tasks of making further studies, of experimenting with new liturgical forms, (after having sought the formal approval of the Apostolic See) and of making their own final recommendations for revisions to the liturgy in their territories. Surprising or not, this is precisely what happened, of course, in India as elsewhere; in India, however, such experimentations by and recommendations from the bishops conferences and their commissions seem often to have preceded the requisite approval from the Vatican.12 It was upon the CBCI that responsibility fell for the interpretation of
11

Quoted in India: The Lotus and the Cross, DVD. Directed by Vishnu Mathur 2004, Toronto: Silvertouch Productions, 2004. [(Documentary Film)]. (DVD presented by me to Jon Anderson when he interviewed me at my residence August 6 and 7, 2009- Michael) 12 For detailed documentation of this point, see Rev. Anastasio Gomes, O.C.D., Matters Liturgical, Appendix IV in Victor J. F. Kulanday (Swami Kulandaiswami), The Paganization of the Church in India, (Madras: Author/Diocesan Publications,

Sacrosanctum Concilium in the Indian context and for whom the adaptation and inculturation of various liturgical rites in India became an urgent, complex, and often controversial matter of concern in the years immediately following the conclusion of the Council. Indeed, the issues surrounding the regulation, revision and renewal of the liturgy in India continue to be at the forefront of episcopal activity there, and have remained both complex and controversial for over four decades now. Yet at times, Sacrosanctum Concilium is less than clear (when it speaks of the "competent" and "ecclesiastically-established" "territorial authority") whether it speaks of individual bishops or if it intends to grant a substantially-increased authority to national bishops conferences. To be sure, subsequent theological debate ensued on precisely this matter. Indeed, in a 1984 interview, former Cardinal and Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger weighed in on this controversial topic, noting that when the First Vatican Council was interrupted, having pronounced the dogma of Papal infallibility but before having opportunity to treat the authority of the bishops, this created in the minds of some a confusion and/or imbalance within their understanding of the Magisterial teaching authority of the Church. Vatican II clarified these matters, he opines, only in the documentsbut not in practice, where another of the paradoxical effects of the postconciliar period has come to lightThe decisive new emphasis on the role of the bishops is in reality restrained or actually risks being smothered by the insertion of bishops into episcopal conferences that are ever more organized, often with burdensome bureaucratic structures. We must not forget that the episcopal conferences have no theological basis, they do not belong to the structure of the Church, as willed by Christ, that cannot be eliminated; they have only a practical, concrete function.13 I must admit that Ratzingers stress upon this point surprised me. Growing up entirely in the postconciliar era, and as an adult convert to the Catholic Church, I have never known a time when the national episcopal conferences have not enjoyed a certain prominence in both the ecclesial and social lives of their respective countries. It is undeniable that since the Second Vatican Council, they have enjoyed a greatly-enhanced prestige, often becoming far more active than before not only in Church politics, but also in the socio-political and religio-cultural lives of their countries. But only recently have I learned how profoundly true this is both in the United States and in India, and just how prominent a role the decisions of the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) and its bureaucratic committees have played in the inculturation of the Indian Church, especially in its revisions to and renewal of the Sacred Liturgy of the Mass. But how is "the decisive new role of the bishopsrestrained" by their own episcopal conferences? And why is this so important? Ratzinger explains: Becauseit is a matter of safeguarding the very nature of the Catholic Church, which is based on an episcopal structure and not on a kind of federation of national churches. The national level is not an ecclesial dimension. It must once again become clear that in each diocese there is only one shepherd and teacher of the faith in communion with the other pastors and teachers and with the Vicar of Christ.14 Before one dismisses Ratzingers critique as being merely a theological prejudice against national conferences of Catholic bishops, concluding that he is simply in favor of upholding (and even restoring where necessary) the power, prestige, and recognized authority of individual bishops, he goes on to give concrete reasons for his suspicions of such bodies, locating their potential (and sometimes actual) flaws in both individual and collective psychological factors, as well as in typically bureaucratic mechanisms: It happensthat with some bishops there is a certain lack of a sense of individual responsibility, and the delegation of his inalienable powers as shepherd and teacher to the structures of the local conference leads to letting what should remain very personal lapse into anonymity. The group of bishops united in the conferences depends in their decisions upon other groups, upon commissions that have been established to prepare draft proposals. It happens then that the search for
1988), 208-27, particularly 220 ff. 13 Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger with Vittorio Messori, The Ratzinger Report: An Exclusive Interview on the State of the Church. Trans Salvator Attanasio and Graham Harrison. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1985). First published in Italian as Rapporto Sulla Fede, (Milan: Edizioni Paoline, 1985), 59. 14 Ibid, 60.

agreement between the different tendencies and the effort at mediation often yield flattened documents in which decisive positions (where they might be necessary) are weakened.15 Finally, Ratzinger notes that even for Ecumenical Councils of the Church, with their "unanimity of such a large number of bishops of different origins, of different cultural formation and of different temperaments,"16 "Truth can only be found, not created." 17 Citing Canon Law, he confirms that "No episcopal conference, as such, has a teaching mission; its documents have no weight of their own save that of the consent given to them by the individual bishops"18 and concludes that therefore there is no further need to demonstrate why a [national] episcopal conference, which represents a much more limited circle than a council, cannot vote on truth. In this regard I should like here to refer to a psychological state of affairs. We Catholic priests of my generation have been habituated to avoiding oppositions among colleagues and to trying always to achieve agreement and not to drawing too much attention to ourselves by taking eccentric positions. Thus, in many episcopal conferences, the group spirit and perhaps even the wish for a quiet, peaceful life or conformism lead the majority to accept the positions of active minorities bent upon pursuing clear goals.19 Ratzingers comments and the weight of his arguments should be borne in mind as one considers the leading, often decisive role that has been played by the CBCI, its commissions, centers, and the powerful individual theologians and liturgists who have received their authority to compose innovative new liturgies for the Indian Church in the post-conciliar era entirely from them. They are not without relevance, furthermore, when examining anew the documents of Vatican II, particularly Sacrosanctum Concilium, the first sections of which explicitly addressing matters of authority are quoted immediately below. Note that four levels of authority are addressed: first, the Apostolic See; second, the individual bishop; third, the territorial bodies of bishops; and fourth, the individual, including priests. These juridical statements are extremely germane, given not only the extremely active role of the Indian bishops in revising their own liturgies, but also claims of several observers that there have been many instances of individuals (mostly priests) who have far overstepped the bounds of their authority (even that granted by the bishops) in introducing radical innovations into the practice of liturgical rites, especially the Mass. A) General Norms 22. (1). Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See and, as laws may determine, on the bishop. (2). In virtue of power conceded by the law, the regulation of the liturgy within certain defined limits belongs also to various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established (emphasis added). (3). Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority (emphasis added). If at first glance these pronouncements appear clear, specific and useful, take another look; the presence of phrases like "as laws may determine," "within certain defined limits" and "various kinds of competent territorial bodies of bishops legitimately established" betray at least something of an unintentional ambiguity in the texts, one which theoretically could be exploited, perhaps by groups such as the "active minorities bent upon pursuing clear goals" of which Ratzinger spoke.20
15 16

Ibid, 60-61. Ibid, 62. 17 Ibid, 61. 18 Ibid, 60. 19 Ibid, 62. 20 Be that as it may, I discovered that on one hand, in my own historical research and fieldwork as a participant-observer at several Indian Masses, it was not often possible to ascertain (and rarely seemly to inquire) precisely which (if any) among several unique aspects and elements of a particular communitys celebration of the liturgy enjoyed the explicit and specific approval of the Pope (which I imagined to be very few); the CBCI (somewhat more likely, I was sure), or most importantly, of their local bishop! Such documentation would, I imagined, only rarely be made available, even if asked for, if in fact it existed at all. Sometimes such concerns were simply not an issue, as many of the Masses in which I took part were firmly within the tradition of the Novus Ordo Mass in vernacular English with which I was most familiar. Even then, however, one must often proceed with due humility, accepting the established practice of a local community which

Preservation of Latin and Introduction of Vernacular Languages into the Liturgy: A glance at the texts of Sacrosanctum Concilium which explicitly allowed and endorsed the introduction of vernacular languages into the liturgy is worthwhile. They reveal again a due concern with and emphasis upon juridical matters, citing the by-now familiar "competent territorial ecclesiastical authority" as the body for implementing these changes, even though the reserved tone is notably far more 'traditional' or 'conservative' in its specific recommendations on this matter than many interpreters, moved by 'the Spirit of Vatican II,' might lead one to believe. It specifically enjoins the preservation and continued use of Latin, allowing merely that "the limits of [the vernaculars] employment may be extended" first to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants." It likewise reasserts the primacy and final authority of the Apostolic See in confirming the decisions of the "competent territorial ecclesiastical authority" regarding any prospective introductions of vernacular languages to the liturgy: C) Norms based upon the didactic and pastoral nature of the Liturgy 36. (1). Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites. (2). But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters. (3). These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language. (4). Translations from the Latin text into the mother tongue intended for use in the liturgy must be approved by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned above. Whereas Sacrosanctum Concilium provided a merely prosaic, rather dry, guarded endorsement and a merely didactic justification for the introduction of vernacular languages into the liturgy, many others have gushed with poetic abandon concerning the virtues of the vernacular. Herein, I allow my own voice joyfully to join in their chorus:

For if the (sometimes) great solemnity of sacred music, the standardized structure and prescribed readings of the Mass, and the quintessentially regular arrangement in intervals of sacred (liturgical) time, together with the recognizably sacred space of churches oriented in familiar fashion, adorned at once with both truly 'familiar' and yet utterly unique images, does not make one feel entirely at home at most any Catholic Mass celebrated anywhere in the world, one may be obliged either to lament his non-Catholic identity or to confess his state of sin and return to restored communion with the Lord and his Church. Next to these gifts, so outlandishly bestowed on Catholics, perhaps nothing can effect the longed-for feeling of being 'at home' in a far-away land more thoroughly and more effectively than hearing ones mother tongue, especially in the context of ritual, and most especially at the Mass. Thus it is that I personally was so thankful for the approval and permission
bears all the marks of fidelity to Christ, to his Body the Church, to his Vicar the Pope, to its particular bishop, to the Creed and to the universal practice of the Faith. Unique and innovative examples of revised or inculturated Masses were, I determined, best left duly noted and documented in my multiple capacities as a guest, as an outsider, as a spiritual seeker, as a fellow Catholic, and as an anthropologically-minded historian of religions and aspiring theologian. Thus I determined early that I was neither on a witch-hunt nor aiming to make an expos of irregularities and so-called liturgical abuses. That said, on the other hand, I must acknowledge that I encountered many examples during my time in south India of inculturated or so-called Indian rite Masses (not including those performed within the Syro-Malabar or Syro-Malankara rites which necessarily bear many traits making them distinct from the celebration of the Latin rite Mass) which bore many unfamiliar and often quite surprising elements. In time, I gained the familiarity necessary to recognize commonplace Indian customs and to distinguish them from more unique, idiosyncratic, or innovative aspects of the liturgies I joined. At no time, however, was I so shocked or offended as to find myself unable fully to participate in good conscience.

granted by Holy Mother Church, at the Second Vatican Council, in Sacrosanctum Concilium, for the gift of the vernacular English Mass which I so often encountered, enjoyed, and truly celebrated (with "full, conscious, and active participation") during my time in India. The introduction of vernacular languages into the Sacred Liturgy of the Mass is surely one of the most visible, momentous, and important changes advanced by the Holy Spirit through the Council Fathers and affected by Sacrosanctum Concilium. Nowhere, perhaps, was this change more urgently needed, more eagerly anticipated, and more thoroughly welcomed than in India, where "individual mother tonguesnumber several hundred" and 22 "languages of the 8th schedule" enjoy an "official" status granted by the government of India.21 Moreover, in terms of inculturation, there is arguably no more effective means of adapting the liturgy to the manners, customs and understanding of the laityand thus of truly promoting their "full, conscious, and active participation" thereinthan the simple use of a peoples vernacular language. In India, as has been noted, the use of indigenous languages in Christian liturgy has an extremely long but decidedly uneven history. With the arrival of Portuguese merchants and missionaries at the dawn of the sixteenth century, the St. Thomas Christians of south India, after centuries of practicing spiritual disciplines in their indigenous languages and of liturgical observance in Syriac, faced an unwelcome imposition not only of the Latin language, but also a forced "Latinization" of their forms of art, of prayer, liturgical rites, customs, hierarchical structures and spiritual authorities. This sad situation, so deleterious to the dignity, identity, and freedom of so many faithful Catholics, pertained widely throughout India for several centuries, in some places persisting even beyond the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council. Fr. Hilary Fernandes, Pastor of Our Lady of the Sea Church in Vasai is among those Catholic priests who lamented this ongoing, nearly exclusive use of the Latin language in Catholic liturgies across India, and who, following Vatican II, began to advocate for the introduction of vernacular languages, of indigenous forms of music, instrumentation, and art, as well as to compose works for the creation of a new, authentically Indian liturgy: All [our] religious services were in Latin. I said, what type of worship are we having which is not being understood by us. I was thinking that the Church has been alienated from our own culture, and how can it go on like this? This is something western which has been imposed upon us.22 In the course of my field research across south India in the summer of 2009, I participated in Masses at cathedrals, parish churches, shrines and pilgrimage sites, as well as in chapels of universities and religious formation houses celebrated variously in English, Hindi, Telugu, Marathi, Konkani, Kannada, Malayalam and Tamil. A typical large suburban parish, St. Pius X in Mulund, Mumbai, regularly serves parishioners in five languages; a parishioner there informed me that "all our parishes in Mumbai city have their main Masses in English, with a few regional languages. Our parish has English, Konkani & Malayalam every Sunday; Tamil once a month, and Hindi once in 2 months."23 In a 'revelation' that might prove upsetting to the authors of Sacrosanctum Concilium, to some of the Council Fathers, and no doubt to several traditionalist Catholic friends, I have yet to encounter any significant liturgical usage of Latin (let alone an entire traditional Latin Mass) in India, although presumably they are available occasionally, if one looks hard enough.

Charges of Paganization: Traditionalist Backlash against the Use of Sanskrit and Hindu Elements of Worship: Far less widespread than the use of vernacular languages, but nonetheless prevalent at most of the Catholic ashrams I visited, there are frequent readings and chantsboth during the celebration of Mass and during morning and evening prayerin Sanskrit (sometimes taken from sacred Hindu texts and devotional literature and sometimes translated into Sanskrit or composed specifically for these liturgical rites).

21 22

Detailed statistics are available online at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_India; accessed 30 October, 2009. Quoted in India: The Lotus and the Cross, DVD. Directed by Vishnu Mathur 2004, Toronto: Silvertouch Productions, 2004. [(Documentary Film)]. DVD presented by me to Jon Anderson when he interviewed me at my residence August 6 and 7, 2009- Michael 23 Personal email correspondence from Reena Viegas, dated 20 April, 2009.

It was precisely this introduction into the Catholic liturgy of "Hindu" elements such as the Sanskrit language that most scandalized some traditionalist Catholics in India, leading them to launch organizations and campaigns to lobby both the Catholic Bishops Conference of India and the Vatican itself to intervene, to stop such developments, or at least to withdraw their explicit support for them. One such lay leader was Victor J. F. Kulanday, founder of the "All India Laity Congress," who in 1983 helped to organize "a delegation of three laymen and one priest-adviser," who went to Rome armed with documentary evidence of the "paganization" of the Indian Church to which he so strongly objected, bearing a "Petition to His Holiness Pope John Paul II From the Catholics of India Through the All India Laity Congress."24 By his own account, Kulanday notes the explicit support, prayers, and assistance he received in this endeavor from Fr. Hamish Fraser, Dr. Eric M. de Saventhem, Fr. Fred F. Schell, Mons. Arnaud de Lassus and Michael Davies, all of whom were, according to my own research, deeply invested in various traditionalist, reactionary and/or schismatic groups firmly opposed to the reforms of liturgy affected by Vatican II.25 Like Davies, whose opposition to Sacrosanctum Concilium and its reforms is well known, Schell, de Lassus and the others also reveled in conspiracy theories concerning the influence of "antichrists" and Freemasons in the Church, attacked the decidedly pro-Vatican II pontificate of Pope John Paul II as "indefensible" and lamented the victory of "progressives" at the Second Vatican Council. Objecting most vehemently to the introduction of the Sanskrit language, the aforementioned petition to the Pope decries what it unabashedly calls the "paganization" of the Church in India, arguing that No decree of the Holy See has given the Church in Indiapermission to use the Sanskrit language. Sanskrit is the language of the Hindu religion even as Latin is of the Church. Sanskrit is ONLY used for Hindu pujas (sacrifices) and in Hindu rituals. Only the Brahmin priests use Sanskrit and the Hindu worshippers do not know this language at all. Vatican II with the wisdom of the Church permitted the use of local languages thereby making it possible for priests in India to offer Holy Mass in any of the Indian languages. The Hindus too are today revolting against the use of Sanskrit in their temples and especially in the South local languages are now being used. When the trend is to use the local language, the action of those who use the Indian rite mass to invoke God in Sanskrit is ONLY to give the mass the semblance of a Hindu puja (sacrifice).26 The tenor of this petition (not surprisingly given that it was addressed directly to the Holy Father himself), like much of Kulandays book in which it appears, certainly appeared to acknowledge the legitimacy of Vatican II and its Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, even admitting "the wisdom of the Church" in allowing for use of the vernacular languages. Elsewhere, however, Kulandays tone betrayed his utter frustration witheven disdain forthe bishops of India, whom he characterized as complicit in what he tellingly called "the devastation of the Lords vineyard,"27 echoing the title of Dietrich von Hildebrands famous book, so critical of Vatican II and the Council Fathers. While extolling the virtues of the courageous and valiant Indian laity, Kulanday contrasted them sharply with what he saw as their largely incompetent and blameworthy episcopal authorities: The Laity have through the years fought the evil. The Bishops have either kept quiet or have fully co-operated with the paganization movement. Paganization is spreading with the collaboration of most Bishops and with the silent acquiescence of the weaker ones. It is a great pity that the shepherds are themselves destroying their flock.28

Such accusations of episcopal malfeasance are relatively rare, but occasionally courageous. His traditionalist and schismatic associations notwithstanding, and despite using such bellicose language, in his critiques Kulanday often demonstrated a thorough familiarity with both the 'letter
24 25

Victor J. F. Kulanday (Swami Kulandaiswami), The Paganization of the Church in India. (San Thome, Madras, 1988, 157 ff. Ibid, 156. I have not attempted to include in this essay any documentation of these individuals and the various groups to which they belonged, marginal as they are to the subject at hand. Nonetheless, a clear picture of their theological, ecclesiological and even ideological opinions, agendas and associations is readily available with a quick perusal of their names and the results returned upon them from a Google search upon the Worldwide Web. 26 Ibid, 161. 27 Ibid, 159. 28 Ibid, 157.

and spirit' of the Second Vatican Council, and the contributors to several appendices in his worthwhile volume (most notably Rev. Anastasio Gomes, O.C.D) likewise give evidence of their own intimate familiarity both with Sacrosanctum Concilium and with the historical events which followed in its wake as the CBCI aimed to foster an 'authentically Indian' (by Kulandays account, a "paganized" or "Hinduized") liturgy. The Requirements of Theological, Historical, and Pastoral InvestigationUnnecessary Innovations vs. Organic Developments of the Liturgy: Article 23 of Sacrosanctum Concilium stresses a fundamental principle very important to the proper adaptation and inculturation of the liturgy. It asserts the existence within the Church of a "sound tradition" to be preserved and yet acknowledges a possible need for "legitimate progress" to be made in the Churchs liturgy. To achieve the proper balance, it advocates extreme caution and prudence, desiring to minimize the potentially-confusing impact of having different rites in use in adjacent regions (always a major consideration in India). More importantly, though, it counsels the implementation of a three-fold "investigation"theological, historical, and pastoralbefore the introduction and implementation of any concrete changes to the liturgy. 23. That sound tradition may be retained, and the way remain open to legitimate progress, careful investigation is always to be made into each part of the liturgy which is to be revised. This investigation should be theological, historical, and pastoral. Also the general laws governing the structure and meaning of the liturgy must be studied in conjunction with the experience derived from recent liturgical reforms and from the indults conceded to various places. Finally, there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them; and care must be taken that any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing. As far as possible, notable differences between the rites used in adjacent regions must be carefully avoided (emphases added). Most notable in this passage, of course, is its emphatic statement of two absolute imperatives: 1. that there must be no innovations unless truly required for the good of the Church; and 2. that any new forms introduced into the liturgy be genuinely "organic" developments "grown" from previous ones. Upon brief reflection, one might conclude this to be the single most conservative, most demanding, strongest and strictest condition amongst all the prescriptions to be found in Sacrosanctum Concilium. For surely, establishing the absolute necessity of innovations in the leitourgia, by nature a traditional 'work of the people' arguably inherently resistant to change, would be extremely difficult in itself, quite apart from taking into account "the good of the [whole?] Church." Moreover, demonstrating convincingly the authentically "organic" development of one liturgical form from another could only cause a liturgist or theologian headacheswhy is the alleged development sufficiently similar to establish continuity and yet sufficiently different to warrant a change for the genuine good of the Church? Whatever futile attempts at answers to such questions some Indian theologians and liturgists eager for new, inculturated forms of worship might have begun to develop, however, they were rarely if ever necessary in the post-conciliar atmosphere of the Indian Church. Of course, opponents of inculturation and "paganization" such as Kulanday certainly seized upon these stringent conditions, appealing to them in an effort to demonstrate the unnecessary, irrelevant and illegitimate natures of the changes which eventually found their way into Indian liturgies soon after Vatican II. But for the proponents of inculturation and the development of a new Indian Mass, the text of Sacrosanctum Concilium provided passages to which they likewise could appeal: 40. In some places and circumstances, however, an even more radical adaptation of the liturgy is needed, and this entails greater difficulties. Wherefore: (1). The competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, must, in this matter, carefully and prudently consider which elements from the traditions and culture of individual peoples might appropriately be admitted into divine worship. Adaptations which are judged to be useful or necessary should then be submitted to the Apostolic See, by whose consent they may be introduced.

(2). To ensure that adaptations may be made with all the circumspection which they demand, the Apostolic See will grant power to this same territorial ecclesiastical authority to permit and to direct, as the case requires, the necessary preliminary experiments over a determined period of time among certain groups suited for the purpose. (3). Because liturgical laws often involve special difficulties with respect to adaptation, particularly in mission lands, men who are experts in these matters must be employed to formulate them (emphases added). The apparent presence of a 'mandate' and the expressed need for "an even more radical adaptation of the liturgy" in Sacrosanctum Concilium, together with the promise of authorized "experiments" and the potential need for "expertsto formulate them" seemed thus to provide certain constituencies within the CBCI and the larger Indian ecclesiastical community with precisely the justifications they required to proceed with their agendas of adapting and inculturating a newlyconceived Indian Mass. Whether the bishops would exercise their rightful authority, "carefully and prudently" researching any proposed directions for new liturgical innovations, or whether such efforts would, in fact, be led by "radicals," "experimenters" and supposed experts" would remain to be seen. My own choice consciously to contrast these two crucial passages of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy notwithstanding, Fr. Anastasio Gomes, O.C.D., has argued persuasively that there is no tension between the two texts, but rather, in fact, the prudent and careful consideration [advised by SC 40] is equivalent to what [SC 23] calls a theological, historical, and pastoral investigation. Theological in our context where Hindu rites (mistakenly called Indian or indigenous) are sought to be introduced into the liturgy, as Cardinal Gracias put it well, [demand that] we must 'make sure of the specific Hindu ideology underlining' these rites. Then we must ask ourselves whether this ideology as it stands in Hinduism is acceptable to the Catholic faithfaith, that is, in its objective content as proposed by the Magisterium, not just some emotional reactions of nationalistic minded local or foreign 'experts.' If the investigation shows, that before being adopted, these rites have to be given a Catholic meaning, a further question is to know whether the Church in her present condition (1% of the total population) is in a position to change this meaning and GET THIS MEANING ACCEPTED not only by the re-educated nuns, priests and laity, but also by the overwhelming majority of the population of the country, who are Hindus (emphasis in original).29 Whats the Difference? Appropriation, Adoption and Adaptation: Besides noting the essential unity of Sacrosanctum Conciliums articles 23 and 40, Gomes renders explicit an extremely important point: the fact that honest theological investigation of a Hindu (or any other "pagan") rite (i.e. ritual) requires a twofold process before any such thing may be introduced into Catholic practice. First, it must be deemed to be inoffensive to Catholic doctrine, belief, and practice, not as interpreted subjectively by individuals, but objectively by the Magisterium of the Church herself. Second, on those not-infrequent occasions when the Church considers adopting or adapting such a rite into her own doctrine, belief, or practice, it may require a substantial reinterpretation, in order to gain and thereafter convey a new meaning or significance. No doubt, this has happened often enough in Church history. Indeed, one need only to consider the gradual development of the liturgical calendar with its seasons, its adoption of previously-pagan 'holidays' and their transformation into Christian feasts and 'holy days,' or the relatively frequent conquest, acquisition, and appropriation of sacred sites, spaces, and buildings from their former pagan owners, variously reworked, destroyed, or otherwise consecrated for Christian use to realize just how common such 'syncretistic' occasions have been. But isnt there a fundamental difference, Gomes might have asked rhetorically, between the Church adopting or adapting times and placesmany of which had likely fallen out of favor, or into relative disuse, among the waning paganism of the ancient Mediterranean worldand her use of well-known, widely-accepted, and much-beloved Hindu ritual practices in contemporary India? Yes, we would have to admit, there certainly isa big difference. Yet personally Im not entirely convinced that Gomes was correct to assert that contemporary Indian Catholics, in
29

Gomes, op.cit. 215-6.

order validly to utilize Hindu rites, must be able to give them an entirely new meaning, utterly divorced from their Hindu philosophical and theological origins and contexts.

If the Church sought to appropriatethat is, to take away from Hindusa certain rite or practice of theirs, then such an interpretation might be warranted. But in adopting and/or adapting Hindu rites or practices, it is conceivable that Indian Catholics might legitimately seek merely to "borrow"and thereby to gain froma fresh, albeit admittedly different, observance and/or perspective. Of course, Gomes was perfectly right to emphasize the utter impossibility for Catholics in the Indian context to accomplish the former. But he failed, it seems to me, even to countenance the possibility of the latter. In todays much more pluralistic and cooperative interreligious environment, both in India and in the west, such possibilities appear not only far more realistic and likely than they have in the past, but also considerably more appealing. As will soon become clear, many others in the post-conciliar Indian Church have believed likewise. At any rate, if judged only on the basis of literature from a few well-informed and persuasive opponents of these prevailing trends such as Gomes and Kulanday, one might imagine that there were immense theological and ecclesiological struggles in the Indian Church over the interpretation of such passages in Sacrosanctum Concilium. In fact, however, such was not the case, at least if Kulandays and Gomes narratives are to be believed. On the contrary, they suggest, either the advocates of adaptation, inculturation, and liturgical revisionas an elite minority within the Churchsimply encountered no effective resistance to their ideological agendas from mostly ineffective bishops (who must thus be considered acquiescent), or else their triumph amongst the Indian hierarchy was nearly complete (thus making the bishops complicit). Either way, it seems, for Gomes and Kulanday at any rate, the bishops of India remain blameworthy, as further evidenced in the years immediately following the Council, when the Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) has been only too eager to locate, promote, and invest with remarkable authority certain "experts" who, for better or worse, have pursued a remarkably ambitious agenda, successfully fostering, creating, and implementing a highly inculturated liturgy for use in India. Fr. D. S. Amalorpavadass, the CBCI and NBCLC: Regardless of the degree to which the Indian bishops themselves, in their collective identity as a "competent territorial ecclesiastical authority"the CBCIactually received deferential authority from the Council Fathers (an interpretation which was at least partly warranted, as has been seen, by Sacrosanctum Concilium) in their freedom to experiment with, to recommend to the Apostolic See, and ultimately to implement changes to the liturgies celebrated in their own ecclesiastical territory, in their turn, they certainly wasted no time in placing a remarkable degree of trust and authority into the hands of one specific individual, an expert in matters of adaptation and inculturation who consequently became an unusually (if not inordinately) influential priest, Rev. Dr. Doraisamy Simon (D. S.) Amalorpavadass (1932-1990). Indeed, in October 1966, during its first post-conciliar meeting, the CBCI appointed Amalorpavadass (who was not, it should be noted, himself a bishop) to be the founding Director of the National Catechetical and Liturgical Centrea post he held until 1982. For sixteen years, Amalorpavadass presided over what came to be known as the National Biblical, Catechetical, and Liturgical Centre (NBCLC) in Bangalore, even as the Bishops Conference entrusted him also to be Secretary (not Chairman) of their Commission for Liturgy (1967-82), Secretary of their Commission for Catechetics (1967-82), and Secretary of their Commission for the Bible (1971-82).30 The influence Amalorpavadass thus exercised by virtue of these positions was immeasurable, and only grew with the subsequent founding of similar regional and diocesan centers which followed the lead of the NBCLC in its advocacy, development, institution and dissemination of highly inculturated forms of bible study, catechesis, liturgy, worship, art and architecture through educational literature, conferences, and above all by way of example. Amalorpavadass thus became, by virtue of his position as Director of the NBCLC, one of the most prominent and influential priests in India, as a theologian, liturgist, conference organizer, and the chief architect of
30

The several positions of authority held by Fr. Amalorpavadass (together with the years in which he exercised them) are carefully documented and displayed in a museum-like display of photographs, paintings, artifacts, and textual commentary permanently installed at the Anjali Ashram, a community founded by Amalorpavadass in Mysore, Karnataka, in 1979; I visited the ashram in August 2009.

many initiatives furthering the inculturation of what began to be called (unofficially) "An Order of Mass for India." Eulogizing Amalorpavadass in a 1991 festschrift as "the most articulate promoter of the Vatican II Church Renewal," Gerwin van Leeuwen likewise noted

his constant and tireless working for an adequate participation of the laity in the mission of the Church, his total commitment to the inculturation of Christian life, his firm belief in the providential role of all authentic religions and his inclusive, open understanding of evangelization.31 The same biographical essay underscored the important role which the time and place of Amalorpavadass advanced education played in his own formation and outlook, noting that he received Masters and Doctoral degrees from LInstitut Catholique de Paris, providentially having studied there from 1962-65, during the same years as the Second Vatican Council, a happy coincidence which "enabled him to follow theCouncil very closely" and where "as an accredited journalist he came into personal contact with prominent bishops and the best theologians": This shaped him more deeply than his academic studies. His stay in Europe from 1962-1965 enabled him to absorb the spirit of Vatican II. That in particular prepared him to spearhead the Vatican II renewal in India.32 Van Leeuwen also stressed Amalorpavadass considerable efforts to forge a place for Christians in Indian higher education and his prolific publishing efforts, noting that he was the first to start a chair (1979) and a Department (1981) of Christianity in a secular (state) university in India. This chair and Department in Mysore University clearly manifest the secular character of the Indian nation. But for his tact, insight and perseverance, this bold venture would never have been materialized In spite of his time-consuming involvement in formation and animation, Amalorpavadass list of publications is impressive. He also edited 'Word and Worship,' the Centres review, for 15 years and many documents and papers.33 Neither inclined toward 'ivory-tower' academic pursuits nor to renounce the World in an effort to pursue 'spirituality,' Amalorpavadass rather integrated the Churchs preferential option for the poor and its consequent commitment to a radical restructuring of the unjust society with its urgent task to become incarnate in a nation that breathes religiously...34 He was also deeply involved in the international ecumenical movement, participating in such organizations as the World Council of Churches, the ICEL (International Commission for English in the Liturgy), and Pro Mundi Vita, in addition to being a founding member of the WCFBA (World Catholic Federation for Biblical Apostolate) and EATWOT, (the Ecumenical Association for Third World Theologians). For all of his involvements in and efforts to promote education, ecumenism, social justice and international cooperation, however, Amalorpavadass most lasting legacy was no doubt to be found in his efforts to promote an authentic Indian spirituality amongst Catholics and to realize an inculturated Indian liturgy for the indigenous Church. Toward this end, as he neared the end of his tenure at the NBCLC in Bangalore, Amalorpavadass also founded the Anjali Ashram in Mysore in 1979. Catherine Cornille has elaborated on his motivations for doing so: It was in order to balance a merely intellectual understanding of Christianity with a more experiential one and to experiment with the possibilities of inculturation that the Anjali Ashram emerged. Father D. S. Amalorpavadass started the ashram in 1979, a week after he had been appointed Chair of Christianity at the University of Mysore. He believed that theoretical study 'ought to be coupled with and supported by a genuine Christian community life, lived in an Indian
31

Gerwin van Leeuwen, "D. S. Amalorpavadass." In Church in India: Institution or Movement? A Commemorative Volume in Honour of Fr. D. S. Amalorpavadass. Ed. Rev. Paul Puthanangady, SDB. (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical and Liturgical Centre, 1991, xi. 32 Ibid, xi-xii. 33 Ibid, xii-xiii. 34 Ibid, xiii.

tradition, context and atmosphere, following an Indian life-style.' The name 'Anjali' ashram was adopted to illustrate the hospitality and love with which everyone was received in the ashram.35 While traditionalist opponents of inculturation such as Kulanday lamented the reforms which began to be implemented throughout India in the wake of Vatican II, they could never counter the power and influence of advocates such as Amalorpavadass, whose access to and affiliation with the bishops provided him a platform from which to disseminate his views, presenting what appeared to many on the 'cutting edge' to be an exciting new means for the Church to assert its 'authentically' Indian identity.

Explicitly acknowledging the possibility of and perceived need for "legitimate variations and adaptations to different groups, regions, and peoples," Sacrosanctum Concilium gave sustained impetus to the efforts of Amalorpavadass and to several other likeminded bishops, priests, religious, theologians, liturgists, missionaries, ashramites, artists and architects in their ongoing efforts to introduce inculturated elements of worship and ways of living the faith to every aspect of the Churchs liturgical, spiritual, social, artistic, and ecclesiastical life in India. In this regard, two more articles of Sacrosanctum Concilium became favorites, and were frequently appealed to: D) Norms for adapting the Liturgy to the culture and traditions of peoples 37. Even in the liturgy, the Church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters which do not implicate the faith or the good of the whole community; rather does she respect and foster the genius and talents of the various races and peoples. Anything in these peoples' way of life which is not indissolubly bound up with superstition and error she studies with sympathy and, if possible, preserves intact. Sometimes in fact she admits such things into the liturgy itself, so long as they harmonize with its true and authentic spirit (emphasis added). 38. Provisions shall also be made, when revising the liturgical books, for legitimate variations and adaptations to different groups, regions, and peoples, especially in mission lands, provided that the substantial unity of the Roman rite is preserved; and this should be borne in mind when drawing up the rites and devising rubrics (emphasis added). Amalorpavadass appears to have embraced these passages in particular, taking them to heart and finding in them a mandate not only to introduce minor innovations, but to develop his own version of "An Order of Mass for India," the restrictions of SC22.3 notwithstanding. With the Indian bishops virtually giving him carte blanche to do so, Amalorpavadass introduced into this Mass a great many elements of traditional Indian (i.e. Hindu) spirituality, including concepts, symbols, words, texts, devotional practices, gestures, bodily postures, and other devotional practices. Evidently, for Amalorpavadass, none of the elements thus adopted, adapted and/or appropriated from Hindu traditions were "indissolubly bound up with superstition and error." Indeed, so far from "imposing a rigid uniformity" of practice, Amalorpavadass enthusiastically "foster[ed] the genius and talents" of India, studying them most "sympathetically" and "admitting" them into 'his' liturgy. 'By way of an apologia for his endeavors, he noted what he perceived as the urgent need for such adaptations and innovations, placing his efforts within the context of what he saw as the proper relationship between the local and universal Churches: Inculturation implies creativity and originality, dynamism and relevance: if the Local Church is considered as only a part of the universal Church and as a lower administrative unit, the attitude of the Local Church will be one of importing and copying, of implementing orders and conforming to what comes from the top, in a passive mentality of receiving. There will be uniformity and sameness everywhere; but it will be irrelevant and cease to be a Church. On the other hand, if every Local Church contains the full mystery of Christ and expresses it in its socio-cultural milieu, then there will be creativity and originality.36
35

Catherine Cornille, The Guru in Indian Catholicism: Ambiguity or Opportunity of Inculturation? Louvain Theological & Pastoral Monographs 6. (Louvain: Peeters Press, 1991), 144.
36

Fr. D. S. Amalorpavadass, Inculturation: Some Practical Implications and Conclusions. NBCLC: Inculturation Pamphlet Series no. 8. (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical, and Liturgical Centre, no date).

The extent of "creativity and originality" realized by Amalorpavadass and other leaders in the Catholic ashram movement, who led so many efforts to create an inculturated Indian liturgy, was mitigated however, at least in part, by their importing and copying" of traditional forms, structures, and practices borrowed not from the universal Church, but from Hindu ashrams. Cornille thoroughly describes the extent to which such adoptions and adaptations have occurred: Catholic ashrams have been given considerable liberty to experiment with the inculturation of the liturgy and other rituals and to adopt Hindu practices which are not in contradiction with Christian faith. Besides individual spiritual direction, the ritual life in Hindu ashrams evolves around the three (or four) samdhyas or gathering times for prayer and meditation. One or different forms of yoga represent the essence of religious practice in Hindu ashrams. Various initiation rites, for example that of studenthood, brahmacharya, or that of the great renunciation, sannyasa, may also be performed. Hindu ashrams are characterized by a ritualized form of worship of the guru, the guru-puja. It is from the way in which these rituals and religious practices are adopted and the degree to which they are modified that the specificity of Catholic ashrams and of the status and role of the spiritual leader in Catholic ashrams may emerge.37 In this connection, notwithstanding his emphases here and elsewhere on the essential role of the community and its efforts collectively to adapt the Catholic faith to their unique cultural milieu, the identity of Amalorpavadass as a 'guru' begins to emerge. In her provocative study, The Guru in Indian Catholicism: Ambiguity or Opportunity of Inculturation?, Catherine Cornille has illuminated the historic role of the 'guru' in traditional Hindu ashrams, a role which, with certain modifications, has also found a place in the nascent 'Catholic ashram' movement. She suggests that it "isin the religious practice proper, in ritual and sadhana that the role and status of the spiritual master in Catholic ashrams explicitly appears."38 She elaborates: Sadhana is the general Indian term used for religious practice or spiritual discipline. It refers to the whole complex of prescriptions which the religious seeker, or Sadhaka, must follow to reach a certain spiritual goal. In India, it is traditionally the guru who assigns a certain spiritual path to the disciple and who follows the progression. The disciple is to blindly and religiously follow every instruction. While this is the essence of a Hindu ashram, the religious practice in Catholic ashrams follows in addition the ritual life of the Church.39 In adopting many of the aforementioned structures, principles and practices of traditional Hindu ashrams, Amalorpavadass thus became a 'guru,' not only to the Anjali Ashram community which he founded in 1979, but moreover to the larger liturgical renewal movement across India. Yet the distinctive status of a 'guru' in Catholic ashrams is typically balanced by the recognition of Christ as the unique and transcendent Sadguru, with the local leader being often referred to merely as an acharya or 'teacher.' In any case, Catholic ashrams have also typically aimed fully to integrate the traditional ashramic practices they adopted with the rhythms of the universal Churchs daily prayers, its liturgical calendar, and its own Sacred Tradition. Cornille continues: The central role of the Eucharist is one of the distinctive characteristics of Catholic ashrams. It is understood as the sacramental gathering around the Sadguru Christ and is celebrated daily, usually after the morning samdhya. Christian ashrams have made an important contribution to the inculturation of the liturgy in India. While the Church was struggling with controversies which arose around often minor points of inculturation, the ashrams experimented freely with the use of Indian symbols and ways of worship. A typically Indian eucharistic liturgy, often called Bharata Puja, came to be fully developed and daily celebrated in Catholic ashrams. The ritual may differ slightly from one ashram to the next. The religious diversity and symbolic richness of the Hindu tradition allow for the use of a wide variety of symbols, texts, ideas and gestures in the inculturation of the liturgy. The form which the Bharata Puja has taken in a particular ashram often reflects the identity and the sensitivities of its spiritual leader. In some, the process of inculturation has enhanced the participation of the community in the eucharist, while in others the central role and status of the officiating priest has been emphasized.40
37 38 39 40

Cornille, op. cit., 167-8. Ibid, 167. Ibid. Ibid, 169-70.

Keeping in mind this characteristic of diversity, and encouraged by Cornilles highlighting of the variety of "gestures" in use therein, I shall turn now toward a consideration of some specific examples drawn from one specific Bharata Puja, the 'Order of Mass for India' composed by Amalorpavadass, after returning once more to a crucially-important text from Sacrosanctum Concilium, which leads us to consider carefully the distinctive meanings and significance of postures, "actions, gestures and bodily attitudes," particularly within the context of Catholic liturgy. As will be seen, various bodily postures and gestures do not always possess given, certain, unitary or well-defined meanings, but rather are profoundly multivalent, being susceptible of widely divergent interpretations. Hence, it is hardly surprising that the introduction of uniquely Indian "bodily attitudes" into the liturgy has not proceeded without some controversy. Postures, Actions, Gestures and Bodily Attitudes: B) Norms drawn from the hierarchic and communal nature of the Liturgy 30. To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by means of acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons, and songs, as well as by actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes. And at the proper times all should observe a reverent silence (emphasis added). One of the most conspicuous aspects of adaptation or inculturation of the liturgy in contemporary India is the frequent useamong those who have adopted an inculturated form of liturgyof traditional Indian postures, ritualized gestures and other actions during worship which are strikingly different from the postures and bodily habits more familiar to those of us from the west. In several of the ashrams, retreat centers, religious and priestly formation houses and institutions of higher education that I visited, worshipers and/or priests sit on the floor for the duration of Mass, bowing low with hands clasped rather than genuflecting toward the Blessed Sacrament reserved in the Tabernacle, and prostrating themselves in a manner similar to devout Muslims praying toward Mecca. As different as these postures and gestures are from ours in the west, they nonetheless remain profoundly reverent, and feel more than appropriate, even when practiced by an 'outsider' such as myself. Certainly, there is an undeniable 'fittingness' to their use within the Indian context. Rev. Dr. Noel Sheth, S.J., a prominent Indian Jesuit priest, former rector of the Papal Seminary in Pune and now Professor Emeritus of Jnana Deepa Vidyapeeth (JDV"Light of Wisdom University," also in Pune), comments upon several of the "actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes" or postures distinctive to the Indian rite Mass which he often celebrates at JDV. He strongly advocates sitting on the floor cross-legged, a posture he adopts not only for meditation, but also when celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass: I, as an Indian, somehow or the other, have within my psyche this 'Indianness' and I notice that when I squat on the floor and pray, its true, somehow Im more devotional, Im more attentive, whereas if Im sitting on a chair and praying, Im not so concentrated.41 Not everyone has been nearly so enthusiastic or pleased, however, with such adaptations to local Indian customs, to the traditional postures and gestures that have been experimented with, utilized, and ultimately approved for use in the inculturated forms of liturgy that have appeared in India over the last few decades. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, for instance, before he became Pope Benedict XVI, expressed his personal opinions concerning the faithful being seated at various points during the liturgical celebration of the Mass in his 2000 book The Spirit of the Liturgy. While he acknowledges that, in general, "our bodies should be relaxed, so that our hearing and understanding are unimpeded," Ratzinger also opines that Today (as, doubtless, in different ways, also in the past) it is noticeable that there is some curious mixing and matching going on with the different postures. Here and there, sitting has become very like the lotus position of Indian religiosity, which is regarded as the proper posture for meditation.* Now I do not want absolutely to rule out the Christian use of the lotus position, which is again being practiced, in different ways, by some Christians. However, I do not believe it has any place in the liturgy.42
41

Quoted in India: The Lotus and the Cross, DVD. Directed by Vishnu Mathur 2004, Toronto: Silvertouch Productions, 2004. [(Documentary Film)]. DVD presented by me to Jon Anderson when he interviewed me at my residence August 6 and 7, 2009- Michael 42 Joseph Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy. Trans. John Saward. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2000), 196-7.

*"Indian" here means "Hindu". "Meditation" has only one explanation: YOGA. The "lotus posture" facilitates, according to Vedic philosophy, the movement of kundalini energy via the chakras and the sushumna- Michael

It is unclear whether, with these comments, Ratzinger had in mind the Indian Mass specifically or whether, in fact, he was more concerned about the adoption by western Catholics of the practice of sitting attentively (or worse, sitting inattentively!) through certain parts of the Mass (e.g. during the Preparation of the Gifts). In any case, following this passage, Ratzinger articulates what he sees as the profound meanings inherent within different bodily postures and gestures and explains the great differences to be perceived between them. He sharply contrasts the kneeling posture of prayer and reverence so familiar to Catholics with that of sitting, particularly in the Indian style: If we try to understand the inner language of bodily gestures, then we can begin to understand their origin[s] and spiritual purpose[s]. When a man kneels, he lowers himself, but his eyes still look forward and upward, as when he stands, toward the One who faces himIn the sitting position of oriental meditation, it is all quite different. Man looks into himself. He does not go away from himself to the Other but tends to sink inward, into the nothing that is at the same time everything.43 One might rebut Ratzingers criticisms here, noting that Catholics using this posture of sitting on the floor during an Indian rite Mass are most certainly not "looking into" themselves nor "sinking inward," that they are not making any metaphysical claims of an advaitic or non-dualistic nature, and that in any case, even if they were, they are certainly entitled, as faithful Catholics, to affirm the presence of an interior, indwelling God by virtue of their baptisms and the presence within them of the Holy Spirit. On the contrary, reverence for the 'Real Presence' of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist remains the focus of the Indian Mass, despite variations in the form of that reverence, according to local customs and traditions. Nonetheless, Ratzinger ultimately acknowledges the Christian understanding of the interiority of God and our need for "the wisdom of Asia," but remains steadfast in his strong preference for traditional western postures: True, the Christian tradition is also familiar with the God who is more interior to us than we are to ourselvesthe God whom we seek precisely by breaking away from aimless wandering in the external world and going inward. It is there, inside ourselves, that we find ourselves and the deepest ground of our being. In this sense, there are real bridges from the one attitude to the other. With all of todays empiricism and pragmatism, with its loss of soul, we have good reason to learn again from Asia. But however open Christian faith may be, must be, to the wisdom of Asia, the difference between the personal and the a-personal understandings of God remains. We must, therefore, conclude that kneeling and standing are, in a unique and irreplaceable way, the Christian posture of prayerthe Christians orientation of himself toward the face of God, toward the face of Jesus Christ44 Whatever Pope Benedicts personal opinions of traditional eastern and Indian postures, their applicability to Christian practice and their admissibility in Catholic worship and liturgy, it remains nonetheless a fact that the Holy See itself made significant allowances for their use as early as 1969, less than four years following the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council. The Twelve Points of Adaptation in the Liturgy: In March 1969, The Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) approved and then submitted to the Apostolic See a list of proposals "for certain adaptations in the liturgy, according to articles 3740 of the Liturgical Constitution."45 On April 25 of that same year, in a letter to Most Rev. D. Simon Lourdusamy*, Archbishop of Bangalore and Chairman of the CBCI Commission for Liturgy, the Vatican officially approved the Indian bishops proposals. This document, containing twelve specific requests cum
43 44

Ibid, 197. Ibid, 197-8. 45 Letter 851/1971/50, dated 25 April, 1969, from the Consilium ad Exsequendam Constitutionem De Sacra Liturgia to Most Rev. D. Simon Lourdusamy, Chairman, CBCI Commission for Liturgy. Prot. n. 802/69. (The document is included in this essay as Appendix One).

recommendations, is now included in the front matter of the Roman Missal used in India and has come to be known popularly as "the Twelve Points of Adaptation or simply as "the 12 Points." *Jon
Anderson does not mention that the Cardinal is the brother of Fr. Amalorpavadass- M

On behalf of His Eminence Cardinal Benno Gut, this letter was prepared and signed by none other than Archbishop Anniballe Bugnini, C.M., then Secretary of the Consilium ad Exsequendam Constitutionem De Sacra Liturgia, the Vatican body responsible at that time for the Sacred Liturgy, now the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. Bugnini, whose intimate involvement in the preparations for and the composition of Sacrosanctum Concilium is well known, has been portrayed by some as a negative force both during and after the Council, even as one who presided over the systematic "destruction" of the Roman Rite liturgy. Indeed, Michael Davies, one of the Second Vatican Councils harshest critics and author of Pope Johns Council (the second of a three-volume "expos" of Vatican II) regarded Bugnini as the "villain"principally responsible for the destruction of the Roman Rite liturgy [as] one of the principal architects of Vatican IIs Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium) "That Archbishop Bugnini has destroyed the Roman Rite, [he claimed], is an easily demonstrable historic fact."46 According to Alan Schreck*, "Davies also presents what he considers convincing evidence that Bugnini was a Freemason who was banished by Pope Paul VI when this came to light."47 In the course of my own textual research in India, I was surprised to learn first of this claim from an American missionary priest, who nonetheless proposed a slightly different historical explanation and sequence of events.48

*Alan Schreck, author of Catholic and Christian: An Explanation of Commonly Misunderstood Catholic Beliefs and several other books is a completely reliable source. He was Director of Theology at the Franciscan University of Steubenville [where Jon Anderson, the author of this essay, works and studies]. See
http://franciscan.edu/uploadedFiles/Top_Level/About/Our_Faculty/Faculty_Pages/Biography %E2%80%93Dr.AlanSchreck.pdf?n=5762

Yet whatever the truth of the circumstances and chronology surrounding Bugninis dismissal from his post in the Vatican overseeing liturgical reforms, it is certain not only that he wielded an enormousperhaps inordinateinfluence, but also that many have been dissatisfied and even scandalized by the specific changes over which he presided. Given his association with Kulanday, it is clear that Davies was familiar with these and likewise was among those for whom the so-called "twelve points of adaptation" confirmed their worst fears and deepest suspicions not only of Bugnini, but also of the illegitimacy of the changes thus affected and indeed, of the Second Vatican Council itself. For those adaptations requested by the Indian bishops and approved by the Vatican allowed the implementation of several elements of worship quite foreign to the traditional Latin Rite Mass, however 'traditional' they may be within the context of Indian/Hindu culture, custom, and religious observance. To be sure, their introduction and use has garnered the harshest of criticisms, resistance, and the disgust of not a few traditionally-minded (and often highly-westernized) Catholics within India, as will become clear. But first we must consider what specific adaptations were mandated (or at least allowed) by this momentous and historic document in the life of the Indian Church.
46

Michael Davies, Pope Johns Council (Kansas City, MO: Angelus, 1977), 507. Cited in Alan Schreck, Vatican II: The Crisis and the Promise (Cincinnati: Servant, 2005), 6. 47 Alan Schreck, Vatican II: The Crisis and the Promise (Cincinnati: Servant, 2005), 286, n. 11. 48 In a personal email correspondence dated 15 July, 2009, Fr. James Fannan, PIME, wrote to me: "When we looked at the letter from Bugnini (regarding the liturgical changes allowed in India), I do not remember if I told you that at the time people accused Bugnini of being a mason. I asked some people about this in Italy (since it was fresh on my mind) and was assured that this was widely known. When I returned, I checked Yahoo. I used his name for "exact phrase" and then the words "liturgy" and "mason" for "containing the following words." I got hundreds of references. What is clear is that a very kind and charitable Pope, Blessed John XXIII suddenly dumped Bugnini who seemed to be a rising star. Another kind Pope, Paul VI, must have thought that some injustice [had] been done, so he raised him to full responsibility for the liturgy. Then suddenly, while Bugnini was on vacation, his department was merged with another, and he was sent to Iran as nuncio (a huge demotion). Any study of the liturgical changes that occurred under him would be incomplete without some reference to this problem. Of course, there [are] a lot of conservative attacks on him, but there does seem to be some basis in fact, so I thought I would alert you to this."

In harmony with their efforts to promote the "full, conscious, and active participation" of the laity, in Sacrosanctum Concilium the Council Fathers insisted that "the revision of the liturgical books must carefully attend to the provision of rubrics for the peoples parts" (SC31). By my estimation, over half of the so-called "twelve points" not only concern "the provision of rubricsfor the peoples parts," but directly address their postures, gestures, and ritual actions during the Mass, as well. Among these, the most noteworthy include the following specific provisions: 1. The posture during Mass, both for the priest and the faithful, may be adapted to local usages, that is, sitting on the floor, standing and the like; footwear may be removed also. 2. Genuflections may be replaced by the profound bow with the anjali hasta. 3. A panchanga pranam by both priests and faithful can take place before the liturgy of the Word, as part of the Penitential rite, and at the conclusion of the Anaphora. 4. Kissing of objects may be adapted to local custom, that is, touching the object with ones fingers or palm of ones hand and bringing the hands to ones eyes or forehead. 5. The kiss of peace could be given by the exchange of the anjali hasta and/or the placing of the hands of the giver between the hands of the recipient. 10. The preparatory rite of the Mass may include: (a) the presentation of gifts; (b) the welcome of the celebrant in an Indian way, e.g. with a single arati, washing of hands, etc.; (c) the lighting of the lamp; (d) the greeting of peace among the faithful in sign of mutual reconciliation. 12. In the Offertory rite, and at the conclusion of the Anaphora the Indian form of worship may be integrated, that is, double or triple arati of flowers, and/or incense, and/or light.49 Clearly, such adaptations of and changes to the Roman Rite liturgy presented a radical departure from the rubrics previously familiar to the faithful (and still widely used both within and beyond India). Evidently, the Holy See neither advocated nor expected their wholesale, widespread implementation, at least not immediately, urging as it did the necessities of measured patience, caution, and discretion (even a measure of invisibility), ultimately leaving the requisite administrative decisions concerning these innovations to the Indian bishops: The above mentioned adaptations can be put into effect by the Episcopal Conference and local hierarchies in places where they see fit and in the degree and measure that they think fitting for the faithful. A catechesis, however, should precede such changes, and if necessary, a gradual implementation could be done. The proposal to compose a new Indian Anaphora in collaboration with experts in different fields is most welcome. When completed, copies should be sent to the "Consilium" for study. It might help if this were not published too much.50 Amalorpavadass, in his capacity as Director of the NBCLC, composed a pamphlet which provided his commentary on the "Twelve Points of Adaptation."51 It is worthwhile briefly to consider his explanation of those points I have included above. Sitting Posture and Removal of Footwear: As has been noted, inculturated Masses celebrated in India since the approval of 'the twelve points' often find both the celebrant priest and congregation seated on the floor. I encountered this practice typically only in Catholic ashrams, seminaries and formation houses, and at various other institutions of higher education. The removal of footwear, on the other hand, is a nearly ubiquitous (though not quite universal) practice, followed by both clergy and laity alike, not only in institutions such as those just mentioned, but fairly often in parish churches, particularly those of the SyroMalabar Rite, as well. Only in the relatively prosperous cathedrals and parish churches of large, urban areas did I encounter Roman Rite congregations who did not observe this well-established traditional Indian practice.

49 50

Letter 851/1971/50, op. cit. (See Appendix One). Ibid. 51 D. S. Amalorpavadass, "The 12 Points of Adaptation in the Liturgy and Their Commentaries." (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical, and Liturgical Centre, 1981).

Addressing himself first to the sitting posture prescribed for observance of the Indian rite Mass, Amalorpavadass articulated several reasons for the desirability of following this prototypical Indian custom, appealing not only to its cultural resonance and historical foundations, but moreover to its most favorable psychological and spiritual effects: People sit or squat on the floor (on mats/carpets) in accordance with the Indian posture at worship. In no temple in India, however modern and recent, will one find any furniture. In almost all our Churches in the villages in India there is hardly any furniture. People are accustomed to sitting on the floor. The comfortable posture (Sukhasana) or diamond posture (Vajrasana), or the lotus posture (Padmasana) are considered to be most conducive to prayer and worship in India. For through this posture one holds ones body as a single piece (unification at the body level) almost motionless and erect. It facilitates better breathing and consequently greater concentration. It is most conducive to holding oneself together, and thereby realizing wholeness, and awareness of Gods presence. This is necessary for prayer and full involvement in the worship. Besides, the squatting posture facilitates a greater contact with 'Mother Earth' through which man can enter into communion with the whole universe (cosmos) which is permeated by Gods presence.52 Concerning the removal of footwear, Amalorpavadass appealed specifically to Exodus 3:5, which narrates the encounter of Moses with God at the so-called 'burning bush' and noted, moreover, that It is a long tradition and venerable practice in India that we enter the place of worship barefoot, out of reverence for and in awareness of Gods presence. This has been the practice of people of all religions in India and this is equally the Biblical tradition.53 Indeed, The New Community Bible*, a controversial edition of the Holy Scriptures published in 2008 which presents notes and study aids with a decidedly inculturated approach to the Bible specific to the Indian context, features a two-page illustration in connection with Exodus 3:5, wherein Moses was instructed to remove his own sandals: The LORD said to him, 'Do not come near. Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.'
*Jon and I discussed this New Community Bible during his visit. This ministry had led a campaign to have it recalled by the CBCI because of its unacceptable "inculturated" commentaries. The Exodus 3:5 issue was one of them, see** and 17 other related reports. The matter was taken by us to the Holy See. The campaign was apparently successful. All attempts by St. Pauls to bring out a "revised" second edition have proved futile. **THE NEW COMMUNITY BIBLE [NCB] 1 A CRITIQUE http://ephesians-511.net/docs/NEW%20COMMUNITY%20BIBLE%201_CRITIQUE.doc

The pen-and-ink illustration depicts Moses kneeling before the 'burning bush,' staff in hand, with his untied sandals prominent in the foreground. On the page opposite, a stylized and imaginary skyline featuring silhouettes of a Hindu temple, a Muslim masjid or mosque, a Sikh gurdwara and a gothic church spire towers over a variety of footwear, implying their having been left at the portals of the respective houses of worship.

A more striking illustration of this quintessentially-Indian religious observance is hard to imagine.54 When failing to remove their footwear at church, it seems only too likely that some Christians in
52 53

Ibid, 2. Amalorpavadass, "The Twelve Points," op. cit., 1. 54 Bombay Saint Paul Society. The New Community Bible. (Mumbai: St. Pauls, 2008), 92-3. A detailed commentary follows: "On pages 92 and 93 are two pictures, each one being the completion of the other. Together they are a meditation on Exodus 3:5. The artist is inviting us to join the meditation against the background of the multi-religious and multi-cultural context of India. In asking us to take off our sandals, Scripture is telling us that every place or manner in which God manifests himself is sacred and, therefore, every religion is deserving of our respect, even if we do not accept all of their cultural and social wrappings. As Mahatma Gandhi said, Respect for other religions helps us to understand our own religion better. This concept is perfectly in keeping with the mind of the Church. A few of the pronouncements of the Second Vatican Council and subsequent teachings of the popes are given below to help in the meditation of the devout Catholic." Following this statement are quotes from Nostra Aetate, Vatican IIs 1965 Declaration on Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions; from Evangelization of the Modern World by Pope Paul VI; from Dialogue and Mission, a 1984 document from the Secretariat for Non-Christians; and from Ecclesia in Asia, Pope John Paul IIs address delivered during one of his own visits to India in 1999.

India must surely make their non-Christian neighbors wonder at their lack of reverence and perhaps even question the sanctity of their houses of worship. Use of the Anjali Hasta: The 'anjali hasta' is a gesture commonly used throughout India as a means of greeting, conveying honor and profound respect for the one toward whom it is directed. Often, it is combined with a Hindi greeting, "Namaste," which communicates a humble acknowledgement of the presence of the divine in the one thus greeted. It is performed by joining the hands, palms together, either on the forehead or in front of ones breast, and is nearly always accompanied by a more-or-less deep bow at the waist. Amalorpavadass claims that "this practice was recommended by the CBCI as early as October 1966."55 In describing its deeper significance, he suggested that Both hands signify the totality of ones person. The total gift of oneself, as englobed in ones joined hands and placed on the noblest part of the body (the crown of the head, or the foreheadthe focal point, or the inner eye) is a beautiful gesture of adoration. This gesture has already been in practice in the oriental rites of India. (Genuflection is a custom, derived from the Roman Court or feudalism).56 This assertion of the feudal origins of the familiar genuflection has often been reiterated by others, by whom it is seen as a culturally-relative importation from the west, and therefore not an obligatory practice. Indeed, it seems fair to characterize this as one of the elements of the liturgy which, as Sacrosanctum Concilium article 21 makes clear, is susceptible of change. Yet the positive assessment of the 'anjali hasta' provided by Amalorpavadass has by no means been shared by all. Some critics, such as Kulanday, are not only suspicious of its Hindu origins, but object specifically to its use as a means of conveying respect toward the presence of Christ in the Eucharist or the Tabernacle in lieu of what he called "the age-old" custom of the more common genuflection. Indeed, Kulanday argued, in his aforementioned petition to His Holiness Pope John Paul II, that Anjali haste is done in Hindu religion ONLY to minor gods and goddess[es] and NOT to the ALMIGHTY Creator. For him it is a total prostration called Sashtangam[wherein] the worshipper fully prostrates [himself], his forehead and limbs touching the ground. So, when Hindus see Catholics just folding the palms and worshipping the Holy Eucharist, they take it that ONLY A MINOR GOD IS WORSHIPPED BY THE CATHOLICS (emphasis in original).57 Whether or not Kulanday was correct in his judgment of the 'anjali hasta' as a gesture which conveys merely a moderate respect appropriate for minor deities within its Hindu context, his suggestion that Hindus would make such an assessment of Catholic worship and devotional practice based solely on their use of the 'anjali hasta' seems, at best, questionable. Nonetheless, one can certainly recognize and appreciate his intention to preserve a distinctive mode of worship and honor reserved for the presence of God alone. Indeed, acknowledging the profound importance of "bodily attitudes," we should carefully consider precisely what degree of honor, respect, and devotion is conveyedeven to those outside the faithby the adaptation of local customs and gestures.

Prostration or Panchanga Pranam: A full prostration similar to the 'Sashtangam' mentioned by Kulanday, 'panchanga pranam' is a profound gesture of homage utilizing "five organs of the body."58 The third among the 'twelve points of adaptation' mentions its permissibility "before the liturgy of the Word, as part of the Penitential rite, and at the conclusion of the Anaphora." Once again, Amalorpavadass explained the gesture in detail: In Anjali hasta, homage with two organs of the body is the basic gesture of homage or greeting. Panchanga Pranam is a more significant gesture. Sitting in Vajrasana (i.e. on ones heels) one

55

Amalorpavadass, "The Twelve Points," op. cit., 1. Amalorpavadass himself cites the Report of the CBCI Meeting, held in Delhi, October 1966. 56 Ibid. 57 Kulanday, op. cit., 164. 58 Amalorpavadass, "The Twelve Points," op. cit., 4.

touches the floor with ones forehead and both palms. The hands may also be joined in the gesture of anjali hasta or kept on both sides of ones head, downwards or upwards.59 Not surprisingly, Kulanday was no fonder of the panchanga pranam than he was of the anjali hasta. Favorably citing a converted Hindu priest who shared his views and "a learned Monsignor" who was the editor of a traditionalist newsletter, The Examiner, Kulanday quoted a letter to the editor which posed the following rhetorical question: Mr. Parmanand clearly showed that anjali haste which is now introduced in the place of genuflection to the Blessed Sacrament is really a gesture used by Hindus to worship their gods or devas like Ganesh, Lakshmi, Hanuman, etc. By replacing the genuflection with an anjali haste, Catholics therefore are now being asked to give Our Lord the same worship which is given to Ganesh and Lakshmi etc., which is simply ridiculous. Mr. Parmanands contention is that only a gesture like Sashtanga pranama (involving all parts of the body) would do justice to the Supreme Being. Are Catholics prepared to do this instead of genuflection?60 Clearly, at least for Amalorpavadass and others who advocated the adaptation of Indian and Hindu ritual practices into the liturgy, the answer was a resounding "Yes." Substituting the Anjali Hasta for the Kiss of Peace: Kulandays objections to the use of the 'anjali hasta' gesture to convey respect for the Blessed Sacrament had yet another aspect, which I find to be the most compelling of his arguments. As has been mentioned, he noted the common use of 'anjali hasta' in certain forms of Hindu puja or worship, on account of which he felt it to be inappropriate for Catholic devotion to the Eucharist. Yet Kulanday also noted the recommendation, contained in the fifth of the 'twelve points,' that the kiss of peace (often replaced in the post-conciliar era by the common handshake) "could be given by the exchange of the anjali hasta and/or the placing of the hands of the giver between the hands of the recipient." If this gesture was appropriate for greeting ones peers, Kulanday reasoned, how could it possibly convey the profound honor, respect, and devotion which the Eucharist must surely command of the faithful Catholic? In a sarcastic rhetorical flourish, comparing the profound reverence typically exhibited by Hindus and Muslims with what he perceived as a lack thereof amongst so-called 'inculturated' Indian Catholics, Kulanday exclaimed that by doing the same anjali haste to worship the Holy Eucharist it is obvious that the design is to denigrate the sacredness of the Holy Eucharistpoint five proves that anjali haste is a common form of salutation among people. Therefore, a respectful and external form of sacred worship worthy of the Holy Eucharist has to be used. If full prostration is not very practical, as least one could bend both knees and bow low, as bending on one knee is condemned as feudal and western by the Hinduisers. Muslims fall on both knees and bend their heads low and pray five times a day; Hindus fall on both knees and worship. Only the Hinduised Catholic nods to his God!61 Use of Arati in the Mass: The traditional practice of 'arati,' another "Indian* form of homage," is most typically performed by the waving of an open flame before individuals, objects and images worthy of reverence, respect, and/or worship. Because of its prominent and ubiquitous use in inculturated Catholic liturgies, Amalorpavadass took particular care to highlight the multivalent symbolic significance of fire and its uses in worship: After the community is reconciled/purified it becomes aware of the presence of the Lord. This presence of the Lord is symbolically expressed by the lighting of the lamp. Through the rite, the community is made aware of the illuminating presence of God in their midst. Lamp/flame, though a created object, is a sign of God. In Biblical tradition too, Light/fire is a special sign of God.62
*'Hindu' is the right word.

Describing the oil lampa symbol truly ubiquitous in Indian spiritual life, from Hindu temples to the family household, as well as one used for centuries in very many Indian churchesand the touching of the flame (something borrowed directly from Hindu ritual practice and adapted

59 60 61 62

Ibid. Kulanday, op. cit., 165. Ibid, 165-6. Amalorpavadass, "The Twelve Points," 4.

for use in inculturated Indian Catholic liturgies), Amalorpavadass again was at pains to describe their symbolic efficacy and fittingness: [The oil lamp] is an auspicious symbol of the presence of God and as such it is always used for all social and religious functionsGreat care should be taken to see that the flame does not go off due to wind or lack of oil. The lighting of the lamp is done by going round the lamp keeping it always on ones right. As the celebrant touches the flame, the community from the place where they are seated (for the sake of convenience) extend their hands towards the lamp and bring their palms towards the eyes or forehead as a sign of acceptance of Jesus Christ as their light. It is not worship of the lamp of Flame/Fire but worship of God symbolized, signified by it. In the Incarnational economy one cannot have communion with God except through signs, and the signs are many.63 In my personal experience at several Catholic ashrams, the flame was, in fact, brought to each individual worshiper so as facilitate his or her actual touching of the flame. In any case, Amalorpavadass here does well to highlight the Incarnational (and thus necessarily physical) nature of Catholic worship, which not only lends itself naturally, but actually demands the engagement of the senses with material symbols of the power, presence, and activity of God. Once again, however, despite the insistence of Amalorpavadass that Catholics most certainly do not worship the fire, Kulanday sees no redeeming quality in such a practice, accusing those promoting it of inappropriately introducing foreign rituals and illegitimate pagan deities into Catholic liturgy: Fire Worship: This is done also as a part of the Mass. A temple lamp is lighted wick after wick, offering it flowers etc. and the priest worships the fire in the Hindu way: touching the flame with the tips of his fingers and then brings his fingers to his eyes! [The] congregation is also asked to worship in the same manner. Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, MuslimsNONE worship the fire EXCEPT the Hindus to whom Fire (Agni) is a god. And now the misled Catholics of India also do. Aarathi: This is a superstitious practice to wave lighted camphor along with flowers etc. at a person to ward off evil or the effects of evil eyes. Aarathi is a Hindu goddess and the invocation is to her. In the Indian mass the celebrant is welcomed with a ceremony based on goddess Aarathi.64 Clearly, Amalorpavadass held in high regard objects such as the oil lamp traditionally used in Hindu temples and elsewhere, gestures such a the anjali hasta and ritual practices such as arati, "studying them with sympathy" and finding in them an opportunity to "respect and foster the genius and talents" of the Indian people in the spirit of Sacrosanctum Concilium article 37, whereas Kulanday regarded these same elements of worship as being "indissolubly bound up with superstition and error," appealing to the self-same article of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. Surely, the juxtaposition of these passages within the same article, to which appeals have been made on one hand by advocates and on the other hand by opponents of liturgical adaptations, underscores both the widely divergent uses to which they have been put and the overriding importance of their proper interpretation and implementation. It also highlights again the absolute need for a "competent territorial ecclesiastical authority" to adjudicate such disputes. Kulandays objections notwithstanding, Amalorpavadass introduction of arati into his 'Order of Mass for India' included not only the waving of fire, but also of flowers and incense. He noted that all three may be used separately, but are used simultaneously or in conjunction only when worship is thus being offered to God alone. In one passage of his commentary, he described various forms, contexts and uses of the practice of arati: Arati of flowers (garlanding, placing flowers around, showering petals and waving a tray of flowers with incense stick or oil lamp in the centre). Arati of incense (in an Indian bowl meant for it). Arati of fire/flame (with oil or camphor). [Performing] all three together is called Maharati and is done to God alone. It is done by waving the above from left to right three times before the person/object to whom/which homage is done keeping the person/object always on ones right hand side.

63 64

Ibid. Kulanday, op. cit., 163-4.

There are four signs of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist: a) The gathered community; b) The president of the liturgical assembly; c) The Word of God (the lectern and lectionary); d) The Eucharistic Species (the altar); To all these Arati is done and homage paid at different moments during the Eucharistic celebration.65 Although he makes no reference to it herein, Amalorpavadass assertion of Christs fourfold presence in the Eucharistic liturgy echoes Sacrosanctum Concilium article 7, which likewise renders explicit this important liturgical truth: [Christ] is present in the Sacrifice of the Mass not only in the person of his minister, 'the same now offering, through the ministry of priests, who formerly offered himself on the cross,' but especially in the eucharistic speciesHe is present in his word since it is he himself who speaks when the holy scriptures are read in the Church. Lastly, he is present when the Church prays and sings, for he has promised 'where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them' (Matthew 18:20) (SC 7) (emphases added). As Christ is present during the Eucharistic liturgy in all of these forms, it is particularly appropriate, given the underlying logic of the 'Order of Mass for India,' that some form of arati should be offered to each of them, and that the most reverential formthe Maharatishould be reserved for the Eucharist itself. We learn from the commentary of Amalorpavadass that this is precisely the case. He explains that there are, in fact, just such ritualized gestures offered to each: To the Celebrant-PresidentPushparati with a tray of flowers (with a burning wick or incense stick place in it) is offered to the priest as he reaches the sanctuary after the bhajan singing (prior to arati he may be given the tilak with sandal paste and kumkum); [later] the celebrant receives the tray of flowers and does arati to the community, another sign of Jesus Christ; [during the Liturgy of the Word there is] double homage to the Bible[which] as a container of Gods Word is now given homage with flowers (garlanding) and with incense. Incensing is done by waving it three times in the form of a circle around the Bible. Garlanding a person as a sign of respect and welcome is a typically Indian gesture; [finally, during the Liturgy of the Eucharist] the Maharati or the triple arati of flowers, incense, and fire is done to the Eucharist as the whole tray is lifted up by the celebrant. At the end of the doxology, the community does Panchanga Pranam as a sign of identification with Jesus Christ in his total self-oblation to his Father and his brothers and sisters. The celebrant himself prostrates (Sashtanga Pranam) which is the greatest form of self-surrender and oblation.66 Evaluation of and Reflection on Postures, Actions, Gestures and Bodily Attitudes: The use by Indian Christians of traditional customs such as the removal of footwear and rites such as arati may reflect what Rev. Dr. Paul M. Collins, an Anglican priest and Reader in Theology at the University of Chichester, has called "unintentional inculturation." His discussion of this factor in relation to worship is inevitably set against the background of a shared cultural and ritual heritage. An instance of such shared heritage in India is manifested in the tradition of greeting visitors or people of particular significance on a given occasionthe use of garlands and flowers to welcome and honour visitors or particular individuals, and also the use of a sacred flame waved in front of such persons, the rite known as aarti. One of the issues facing the practice of contextualization/inculturation in India is the attribution of some rites to high caste praxis or to those who favour political or religious 'saffronization.' Undoubtedly an evaluation of rituals in relation to social standing and power-play is crucial. Howeverit is an over-simplification to attribute aarti to Brahminical practice. The reception and interpretation of rites and ceremonies from any shared heritage is an intricate and complex undertaking, which may require the discernment of local usage in relation to local or wider power dynamics or other external influences.67

65 66

Amalorpavadass, "The Twelve Points," op. cit., 3. Ibid, 3, 5, 6. 67 Rev. Dr. Paul M. Collins, Christian Inculturation in India. Liturgy, Worship and Society Series. (Aldershot, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate, 2007).

There is, without doubt, a wide variety of and significant variance across India in the use of such rites of welcome.

What is important is to recognize that the adoption and/or adaptation of arati by some Catholics is more cultural than religious (though it is certainly appropriate for use in religious contexts) and that, due to its nearly ubiquitous use by Indians across the social spectrum, the rite cannot be ascribed either a high-caste, Brahminical status or attributed to a religio-political agenda of "saffronization", "Hinduization," or "Paganization," Kulandays pejoratives notwithstanding. Whatever objections may be raised against Amalorpavadass form of the 'Order of Mass for India' (and have been raised by detractors such as Kulanday), one cannot but admire the genuine reverence which such sustained ritualized gestures convincingly convey, even to non-participant observers, let alone the profound meaning they must surely hold for faithful participants and, perhaps above all, for the celebrant himself. Regardless of the Hindu or otherwise non-Christian origins of some ritualized practices adopted and adapted for use in such inculturated liturgies, the 'language' of Indian postures, "actions, gestures and bodily attitudes" speaks clearly: Christ is present in the Mass (in multiple ways); Christ is lovingly, adoringly and reverently worshipped because truly, Christ is God. Whereas some post-Vatican II liturgies in the west have devolved into overly-active 'festivals,' wherein there is often too little emphasis on solemnity, too little "real [or] actual participation," and too few opportunities for reverent silence, the spiritual contemplation and proper interiorization promoted by the inculturated Indian Mass developed and disseminated by Amalorpavadass has avoided these pitfalls. On the contrary, the very postures, "actions, gestures and bodily attitudes" thus utilized promote at once a physical relaxation and attentiveness, together with a certain psychological and spiritual quietude and receptivity to the mysteries conveyed in the Mass. Indian Reception of Liturgical Inculturation since Vatican II: In a recent (2007) essay, "Liturgical Inculturation in India after Vatican II," Rev. Jacob Theckanath has both usefully summarized the history of post-conciliar efforts at inculturation in the Indian Church and presented some statistical analyses of the attitudes toward the relative successes and failures thereof amongst the Indian clergy and laity. With regard to "inculturation efforts made in the Roman Rite in India primarily in the Eucharistic Celebration," Theckanath notes first that "most of them [have been] by individuals in the areas of art and architecture, dance and music, yoga, and in many other ways such as prayer, meditation, and spirituality."68 Yet he chooses to focus not on the efforts of more-or-less isolated individuals, but "only on the efforts at inculturation made at the level of the Bishops Conference and Commission for Liturgy those that have been undertaken at the National level [including those of the] NBCLC."69 This is a conscious decision that I likewise have made in the present essay, and one which has consequently restricted my focus to 'official,' ' top-down' effortswhat Collins terms "intentional inculturation." Appealing to a survey conducted in 1978, (nearly a decade after the introduction of 'the twelve points,') and stored in the records of the NBCLC in Bangalore, Theckanath reveals that the majority of those polled are favorably disposed toward the liturgical innovations allowed in the interest of producing an inculturated, indigenous Indian liturgy. The responses he records are, for a survey, remarkably detailed: 58% accept them with enthusiasm. They consider that the 12 points enable them to worship God in keeping with the spirit and genius of India. They are conducive for a deeper experience of the Mystery and helpful for maintaining a prayerful spirit throughout. The use of symbols, the chants and bhajans sustain involvement and a contemplative spirit.70 It is interesting to observe that amongst all of the responses reported by Theckanath, a sizeable number of them make specific mention of the use of various postures, gestures and ritualized actions. Theckanath notes, significantly, that among those who had direct exposure to the NBCLC
68

Rev. Jacob Theckanath, "Liturgical Inculturation in India After Vatican II." In Re-Launching Our Evangelizing Mission: A Renewed Encounter Between Gospel and Cultures in India. Ed. Rev. Mrio Saturnino Dias. (Povoao, Benaulim, Goa: Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences Office of Evangelization, 2007), 111. 69 Ibid. 70 Ibid, 119.

by having attended any of the numerous seminars they frequently host, "the response is overwhelmingly positive." Of these: 89% felt that such elements have contributed to a deeper prayer and worship. They appreciate the Indian atmosphere. They reported in particular that the chants, bhajans and some symbols and gestures helped them to pray better.71 Finally, among the remaining respondents, Theckanath reports a mixture of qualified, detailed endorsements and specific criticisms, as well as a minority who expressed outright opposition to liturgical inculturation: Some say that it might help much more new converts and those whose life is rooted in the traditional cultures of India (14%). Some oppose inculturation (17%). They feel that it creates confusion. Distinctiveness of Christian worship may be watered down. Some 8% have reservations on the "passive" posture of sitting on the floor throughout the Mass, and others on panchanga pranam, arati, etc. Some others mention that the postures at Mass should be those adopted for daily life. 12 % feel that all of this amounts to Hinduization. They say that the Christian identity will be lost if inculturation is pursued.72 Still more recently (2009), Indian Archbishop Thomas Menamparampil, SDB, has assessed certain failures and limits of inculturation in India, as well as documenting some of its successes. Concerning the latter, Menamparampil sharply contrasts the isolated efforts of individuals with others which have been coordinated with those of larger (parish/diocesan) communities and especially with those of the Indian Catholic hierarchy: much progress has been made in areas wherever serious (re)search and reflection have preceded individual inculturation initiatives, and where there has been a serene effort to reach consensus involving the liturgical commission and the local ordinaries of a region. Whenever persons who are both competent and sensitive have succeeded to interpret the mind of the Church and the sensitivity of the community correctly, new ground has been broken. For example, barefoot entry into holy places [has] become universal. Aaratis were easily adopted during some of the sacred moments of the liturgy. The initiative for introducing tribal dances into the processions during the entrance, offertory and recession was very widely welcomed. The traditions like the washing of the hands, placing of the shawls or gamchas on the shoulders, placing of kumkum on the forehead, offering of bouquet, throwing of flowers, or sprinkling of scented water as a sign of welcome were easily accepted, each in its own context. Some retained the practice of throwing salt towards a holy object, others betel leaves, others flower petals. Standing, sitting on benches, on muras or the flooreach would have its own meaning in different cultural contexts, and has been adopted by the believing community as they have felt comfortable with it. Genuflections, bows, handshakeshomage paid to ancestorsthese have been differently accepted by different communities (emphases in original).73 It is striking to note here the number of bodily postures, gestures and actions to which the Archbishop points as examples of successful efforts at authentic liturgical inculturation. Normative Prescriptions: What Inculturation Should Be: Time and again, Menamparampil stresses the need for the entire communitys involvement in liturgical inculturation and the necessity of achieving and/or maintaining a balance, given what he sees as the dual nature of inculturation. Professing great respect for any school of thought and point of view sensitive to the religious longings of every Christian community that treasures its cultural patrimony on the one hand and its Christian faith on the other, he then personalizes this prescription, further explaining that, as an Asian I am very eager that every value in our various Asian traditions be preserved and strengthened; and as a believer I am equally eager that nothing in the Christian message be compromised, nothing in its rich heritage be lost. When, in true Asian tradition, we bring harmony

71 72

Ibid, 120. Ibid. 73 Archbishop Thomas Menamparampil, SDB. Inculturation of the Sacred Liturgy in Asia: Possibilities and Problems. Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 73:2 (February 2009), 103-4.

between these two loyalties and do it together as a Church, we are on the way to inculturation; for inculturation is a communitarian undertaking.74 Menamparampil provides his readers with a detailed taxonomy of the stages through which what has come to be called 'inculturation' has historically passed, noting that the complex processes have variously been termed "adaptation, contextualization, indigenization, acculturation, enculturation, and finally inculturation."75 Elsewhere, he suggests subtle differences between these terms, often used interchangeably; "we are enculturated into [one] culture after birth, and acculturated to another by adoption. Inculturation is something different [still]."76 Surveying the history of post-conciliar Magisterial documents concerned with instructions for inculturation, from both the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments and Pope John Paul II, Menamparampil notes the considerable difficulties facing inculturation in the contemporary Indian context, which such pastoral documents have addressed, warns against what he calls the "commodofication of religion," (which tends to denigrate the "sense of the sacred" expressed by various religious symbols), and advocates "the principle of graduality," (by which the Church has historically only slowly accepted the insights of 'other' culturesespecially their philosophical and artistic heritages). Menamparampil affirms again that "inculturation is [necessarily] a community process," arguing that The really significant contextualizers are the members of the local community, however importantnon-indigenous authorities, theologians, social activists and missionariesmay be. Missionaries can only take the first steps and set in motion the process.77 Yet he also balances such calls for the involvement of the community with an affirmation of the necessary oversight by competent 'experts' and Church authorities: Acculturation must move on to inculturation, to the creation of well integrated, indigenous patterns of thought, worship, relationships, organization, and celebration. Inculturation should be carried out by competent persons who are close to the people. Hasty, populist, unreflected, unplanned inculturation leads to syncretism. For us Catholicsguidance from the Magisterium is a necessity.78 Without specifying the Indian Church, Menamparampil suggests that "many particular churches have only reached the point of acculturation, not inculturation." In light of the often-controversial nature of the efforts at inculturation considered in this essay, his prescription for "successful inculturation" is telling. It should, he says, create a sense of security, not tension; enhance identity, not cause alienation; create social harmony, not disaffection; provide a sense of purpose and direction, not theological deviation and an irresponsible leap into the dark.79 Whether the efforts at liturgical inculturation made by Amalorpavadass and others in post-conciliar India have achieved these lofty ideals remains an open question. Yet Menamparampils reflections on the relevance of inculturation for the proper relationship between local and universal Churches are clearly reminiscent of Amalorpavadass: The more a Christian community becomes indigenized, the more it becomes open to the universal Church. A closed attitude can bring into existence culture-bound churches that cannot understand each other. Each Christian community needs the insights drawn from the faith experiences of other communities in different cultural contexts to acquire a deeper grasp of the revealed word. Christians from other cultures and civilizations can tell us of our own cultural biases in the theologies and traditions which we have developed, and we may be able to point out similar deficiencies in theirs. That is how believing communities move together towards the fuller realization of the Christian possibility.80
74 75 76 77 78 79 80

Ibid, Ibid, Ibid, Ibid, Ibid, Ibid. Ibid.

88. 96. 91. 92. 93.

The Promise and Problems of Liturgical Inculturation in India: The theories, processes and concrete manifestations of the post-conciliar inculturation of Catholic liturgy in India present the observer with a complex, sometimes bewildering plethora of voices, some advocating the urgent need for still more radical and innovative revisions, others resisting any change whatsoever, clinging tenaciously to traditional rites and practices, asserting the normative status of familiar forms and labeling efforts at change "paganization" or "Hinduization." The common denominator I discovered in the course of my own field research was simply that everyone I asked, from prominent bishops and theologians to the humblest parish priest and lay parishioner had some opinion of 'inculturation,' whether good, bad, or (rarely) indifferent. Yet based on the aforementioned statistical data, most Indian Catholics seem still to be somewhere in the middle, expressing cautious optimism and/or qualified endorsements of inculturation generally, although one may rightly wonder about the accuracy of statistics and the debatable representative nature of the surveys samplewhether it might not be skewed toward a relatively more 'elite' clientele which has been exposed to seminars at the NBCLC is certainly a fair question. In any case, it appears safe to assert that "the jury is still out," so to speak, among the average lay Catholic in the pews. Many continue in their spiritual and parish lives much as they ever did, with few effects of inculturation reaching them directly, save the nearly ubiquitous implementation of the Novus Ordo Mass and the introduction of Indias many vernacular languages at the national, regional, diocesan and parish levels. Indeed, it appears that more thoroughly inculturated forms of the liturgy are to be encountered only "off the beaten path," as it were, within the more-or-less 'elite' environs of Catholic ashrams, and in more remote, rural lands populated by low-caste tribal peoples, 'Dalits' and so-called 'Other Backward Castes.' Accordingly, my own future field observations and research will require much more extensive exposure to the liturgy in such contexts. In keeping with my comparative method and seeking to address both the 'positive' and 'negative' aspects of inculturation in India, I appeal to another recent (2007) essay, "Inculturation of Liturgy: Its Problems and Possibilities" by Rev. Paul Puthanangady, SDB, which does precisely the same. Puthanangady considers the procedures which have shaped the inculturation of liturgy in postconciliar India, particularly the supervision and oversight of such efforts by the CBCI and other ecclesiastical bodies and summarizes historical phases through which they have passed. Having encountered the enthusiasm of Fr. Amalorpavadass for his own efforts at liturgical adaptation, having briefly viewed Archbishop Menamparampils assessments of the positive results of inculturation, and having considered Fr. Theckanaths statistical analyses of the largely positive popular reception of liturgical reforms in the post-conciliar Indian Catholic Church, Puthanangadys personal opinions provide a relatively less rewarding perspective, though one worthy of attention. Aiming first at the construction of his own normative definition and proceeding toward an acknowledgment of the "possibilities" of liturgical inculturationits positive aspects Puthanangady argues that it "cannot be restricted merely toreplacing one set of symbols with another [nor is it] a technique to make liturgy more interesting and varied."81 On the contrary, he contends, it "has certain implications which go beyond the act of worship." Among these, Puthanangady highlights what he regards as five particularly positive effects of the inculturation of liturgy: a). It highlights the sacramental character of the Church; b). The proclamatory character of liturgy becomes more evident; c). Inculturation of liturgy can unfold the riches of the Mystery; d). Inculturation of liturgy promotes better participation; [and] e). Inculturation of liturgy promotes better universal communion.82 The common theme amongst Puthanangadys analyses of these potential benefits is the role of 'indigenous' symbols, the use of which he strongly advocates and which he seems virtually to equate with 'inculturation'. For example, noting a significant change in post-Vatican II ecclesiology,

81

Rev. Paul Puthanangady, SDB, "Inculturation of Liturgy: Its Problems and Possibilities," In Re-Launching Our Evangelizing Mission: A Renewed Encounter Between Gospel and Cultures in India. Ed. Rev. Mrio Saturnino Dias. (Povoao, Benaulim, Goa: Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences Office of Evangelization, 2007), 104. 82 Ibid, 105-6.

which placed a renewed emphasis on the sacramental character of the Church, he suggests that because The Church visibilizes Christ in the midst of the world as the sacrament of salvation [and because] this happens in a special manner during the liturgy[therefore] when the liturgy is celebrated using the symbols taken from the culture of a particular people, the encounter between him and the people becomes easier and more experiential. They will be able to recognize him as the living Lord in their midst because the symbols will proclaim his presence in a more intelligible manner.83 Such an assertion seems, at best, merely plausible, and largely speculative, being unsubstantiated as it is. Puthanangadys assertion of the liturgys "proclamatory character" is similarly provocative. He claims that, "for Christians," Liturgyis more an act of proclamation than a ritual action. In a ritual action the divine almost becomes identified with the rite and no change can be effected without interfering with its divine character. In a proclamation [by contrast], the divine is brought into the awareness of the people. The symbols play an evocative role. The more they are capable of manifesting the reality, the more the people will come into communion with it. The symbols with which they are familiar very much help in this. Inculturation of liturgical symbols thus make the proclamation more effective because they can elicit a more fruitful response from the community.84

This interpretation of the liturgy as proclamation and of the (merely) evocative role of symbols is truly insightful, and suggests that traditionalists who object, prima facie, to liturgical changes may themselves have an erroneous, overly ritualistic perception of the liturgy. Indeed, Puthanangady argues, because "the Mystery of Christ" is "unfathomable," no one symbol can fully reveal its rich content. The more symbols we use [therefore], the more we will be able to manifest its richness. Through inculturation this becomes possible.85 While I certainly agree with Puthanangady that appropriate symbols capable of expressing the manifold aspects of Christ are necessarily pluriform, and that therefore no singular symbol or complex of symbols is adequate fully to capture "the Mystery of Christ," this by no means negates the facts that there are, nonetheless, some truly normative and 'catholic' symbols intended for use throughout the Church (e.g. the cross or crucifix), that these are absolutely necessary to maintain the unity and universality of the Church, and that a mere multiplication of (sometimes 'foreign') symbols remains an inadequate basis for a carefully-considered, proper inculturation of the liturgy. Moreover, the introduction of particular symbols drawn from cultures outside the Church always presents unique challenges; in the post-conciliar Indian Church, for example, there have been numerous and repeated attempts to incorporate the traditional Indian Om symbol into Catholic iconography and liturgical usage. Much debate has transpired concerning this sacred syllables 'Hindu' status. While traditionalists such as Kulanday and not a few Hindu cultural nationalists have been only too willing to assert its unequivocal Hindu origins and 'ownership,' it nonetheless remains a historical fact that others, notably Buddhists and Jains, have adopted and adapted it to their own use, in the process lending the symbol considerably altered meanings and significance. Should Catholics in India do likewise? S. M. Michael, SVD, a cultural anthropologist at the University of Mumbai and the Institute of Indian Culture, offers one plausible answer to this question. He argues that There should be mutual interaction and respect between the local Church and the universal Church in terms of expressing Christian meaning and life in symbols and rituals of liturgy and life. For example, in the context of India, the Hindu Om cannot replace the Christian Cross, because the theological foundations and the world view of these are very different in terms of their meaning, content and moral implications. Even when inculturation took place in the context of Hellenistic culture the Greek letters Alpha and Omega were used not exclusively but with the Cross, as for example in Easter Vigil Service. As the Greek letters Alpha and Omega do not fully express the mystery of the Cross, similarly the Sanskritic Om is inadequate to signify the meaning of the Cross. There are variegated and contradictory meanings of the term 'Om' in Hindu
83 84 85

Ibid. Ibid, 106. Ibid.

traditions. [Therefore, only] if [a] theologically acceptable and agreeable consensus of the term 'Om' is arrived at among theologians and the Indian Christian community, [could] the 'Om'be used together with 'Cross' in an esthetically appropriate manner. But this requires much research, deep reflection and pastoral prudence.86 Michaels condition that a consensus be reached merely among Christians in India about the meaning and significance of 'Om' for them seems far more sensible and plausible than was Kulandays claim, noted earlier, that Christians, in order appropriately to use 'Hindu' terms, concepts, or practices, must first succeed in having their own 'reinterpretations' thereof "accepted" by the nations Hindu majority, which is clearly impossible. In any case, as has been noted, the introduction of such symbols, widely perceived to have not only cultural but deeply religious significance outside the Church, can tend to be very divisive. I harbor similar reservations about Puthanangadys indemonstrable, categorical claims concerning the efficacy of liturgical inculturation to effect "better participation" and to promote "better universal communion." Again, while I agree that authentic "participation means a life involvement in what is celebrated and not just a presence or active involvement at the time of the liturgy," I remain skeptical of his claim that If the symbols used to celebrate this one Mystery are varied according to the culture of the people, each one will have a better understanding and experience of the same Mystery. This will undoubtedly lead to a deeper communion among all those who participate in the same Mystery. It will be a communion in depth and not a mere communion based on external uniformity.87

Pope John Paul II on the Potential Pitfalls of Liturgical Inculturation: This essay has lent considerable space to objections against liturgical inculturation from traditionalist critics such as Kulanday, and considered briefly the reservations and misgivings of Magisterial Church authorities such as Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI). Yet any analysis of post-conciliar liturgical inculturation would be woefully incomplete without reference to the works of Pope John Paul II, who did so much to foster and further the work of the Second Vatican Council and to open wide the doors of the institutional Church to her children from all corners of the world. Reflecting on the conclusions reached at the Special Asian Synod of Bishops held in Rome from 18 April to 14 May, 1998, the Pontiff, in a visit to India the following year, officially promulgated his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation in New Delhi on 6 November, 1999. It reiterated many of the Churchs conciliar and post-conciliar documents concerning the necessity and value of inculturation, suggesting that, among many requisite aspects, the liturgy nonetheless plays a key role, being as it is a decisive means of evangelization, especially in Asia, where the followers of different religions are so drawn to worship, religious festivals and popular devotions.88 While acknowledging the successes of the past, he also noted several challenges which remain for the ongoing tasks of liturgical inculturation, recommending that more attention be given to oftenmarginalized segments of the population and urging that the mere incorporation of "traditional cultural values, symbols and rituals" is insufficient: The liturgy of the Oriental Churches has for the most part been successfully inculturated through centuries of interaction with the surrounding culture, but the more recently established Churches need to ensure that the liturgy becomes an ever greater source of nourishment for their peoples through a wise and effective use of elements drawn from the local cultures. Yet liturgical inculturation requires more than a focus upon traditional cultural values, symbols and rituals. There
86

Michael, S. M., SVD. "Cultural Diversity and Inculturation in India." Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 73:1 (January 2009), 54. 87 Puthanangady, Inculturation, 107. 88 Pope John Paul II, "Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Ecclesia in Asia of the Holy Father John Paul II to the Bishops, Priests and Deacons, Men and Women in the Consecrated Life and all the Lay Faithful on Jesus Christ the Savior and His Mission of Love and Service in Asia," 22. Accessed online 23 November, 2009 at: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_06111999_ecclesia-inasia_en.html.

is also a need to take account of the shifts in consciousness and attitudes caused by the emerging secularist and consumer cultures which are affecting the Asian sense of worship and prayer. Nor can the specific needs of the poor, migrants, refugees, youth and women be overlooked in any genuine liturgical inculturation in Asia (emphasis added).89 Finally, the Pontiff also stressed the responsibilities of the national and regional Bishops Conferences to work closely with the Vaticans Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments "in the search for effective ways of fostering appropriate forms of worship in the Asian context," reminding his listeners once again of the proper balance between the local and universal Churches: Such cooperation is essential because the Sacred Liturgy expresses and celebrates the one faith professed by all and, being the heritage of the whole Church, cannot be determined by local Churches in isolation from the universal Church.90 Over a decade earlier, to mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of the promulgation of Sacrosanctum Concilium on 4 December, 1988, John Paul II had delivered an Apostolic Letter, Vicesimus Quintus Annus, wherein he likewise took account of the successes and challenges facing the processes of "adaptation." Noting the successful introduction (albeit "with some difficulties") of vernacular languages into the liturgy, and the "more delicatebut equally necessaryadaptation of rites," he pointed to the considerable task of continuing to implant the Liturgy in certain cultures, welcoming from them those expressions which are compatible with aspects of the true and authentic spirit of the Liturgy.91

Reiterating the affirmation of Sacrosanctum Concilium that the liturgy contains aspects both immutable (because of their divine institution) and others "open to change," which the Church occasionally has a "duty" to adapt, especially to "the cultures of recently evangelized peoples,"92 the Pope underscored several challenges which face such efforts, some of which may be "dangerous to faith" and/or challenge the Churchs unity, others of which may prove to be particularly difficult for those who must leave behind certain "ancestral customs," even while encouraging all that "this is not a new problem for the Church": Liturgical diversity can be a source of enrichment, but it can also provoke tensions, mutual misunderstandings and even divisions. In this field it is clear that diversity must not damage unity. It can only gain expression in fidelity to the common Faith, to the sacramental signs that the Church has received from Christ and to hierarchical communion. Cultural adaptation also requires conversion of heart and even, where necessary, a breaking with ancestral customs incompatible with the Catholic faith.93 Alongside his acknowledgment of such challenges, John Paul II also expressed grave reservations about and disappointment over several "erroneous applications" of the principles of liturgical renewal, including the following: Side by side with these benefits of the liturgical reform, one has to acknowledge with regret deviations of greater or lesser seriousness in its application. On occasion there have been noted illicit omissions or additions, rites invented outside the framework of established norms; postures or songs which are not conducive to faith or to a sense of the sacred; abuses in the practice of general absolution; confusion between the ministerial priesthood, linked with ordination, and the common priesthood of the faithful, which has its foundation in baptism.
89 90

Ibid. Ibid. 91 Pope John Paul II, "Apostolic Letter Vicesimus Quintus Annus of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II on the 25th Anniversary of the Promulgation of the Conciliar Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium on the Sacred Liturgy," 16. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_04121988_vicesimus-quintusannus_en.html.
92 93

Ibid. Ibid.

It cannot be tolerated that certain priests should take upon themselves the right to compose Eucharistic Prayers or to substitute profane readings for texts from Sacred Scripture. Initiatives of this sort, far from being linked with the liturgical reform as such, or with the books which have issued from it, are in direct contradiction to it, disfigure it and deprive the Christian people of the genuine treasures of the Liturgy of the Church.94 Because His Holiness (perhaps diplomatically) omitted any reference to specific individuals or instances of such abuses, it remains impossible to ascertain with certainty which, if any, of the liturgical adaptations experimented with in post-conciliar India he had in mind. Yet one may reasonably conclude that the composition by "certain priests" of new Eucharistic Prayers and the occasional substitution of "profane readings for texts from Sacred Scripture," (which surely call to mind the efforts of Amalorpavadasswho nonetheless, it must be recalled, worked with and for the CBCIand others in the Indian Catholic ashram movement), were not far from his thinking. In fact, a new Indian Anaphora was composed and used briefly in 1974, in accordance with the provisions of 'the twelve points,' but later "was withdrawn from use following concerns expressed by the hierarchy."95 As for the "substitution" of "profane readings forSacred Scripture," I can, based on my own field observations, affirm only that readings from Hindu texts such as the Bhagavad Gita often accompany, but do not necessarily replace readings from the Christian Sacred Scriptures in liturgical celebrations and daily prayers at some Catholic ashrams. Whether this rather nuanced distinction would have been or is sufficient to quell the expressed concerns of John Paul II and other Magisterial authorities remains unclear. In any case, at least in the text of Vicesimus Quintus Annus, it remained a task for the bishops to root out such abuses, because the regulation of the Liturgy depends on the bishop within the limits of the law and because "the life in Christ of His faithful people in some sense is derived from and depends upon him."96 Responses to Common Objections and Tasks for the Future: Returning briefly to Puthanangadys critique, we may note that he summarizes five common objections to and sources of resistance against post-conciliar efforts at liturgical inculturation in India, all of which he tries to answer and thereby overcome. Each is based on what Puthanangady views as either an inadequate understanding or a misperception. They include: a). A monolithic understanding of Christian universality; b). An inbuilt feeling that the symbols taken from other religions are intrinsically bad. c). [An] objection from the need to be relevant to the modern world; d). [An] objection that adopting symbols from other religions will make Christianity a ritualistic religion; e). [A] fear that adopting symbols from classical Hinduism will perpetuate and glorify the oppressive structures symbolized by Brahmanism.97 We have observed just such tendencies and encountered most of these objections in our consideration of traditionalists like Kulanday, who clearly shared a "monolithic understanding of Christian universality" and a corresponding tendency to perceive any deviation from familiar and widely-accepted norms as "unorthodox" at best and "pagan" at worst. Appealing to Christian and Church history, Puthanangady counsels the need to "initiate people into the possibility and even necessity of a pluralistic approach to the symbolization of the Christian Mystery."98 I agree with him concerning this possibility (and perhaps even its necessity), but, with [Fr.] Michael, advocate the rigorous work necessary to achieve a consensus (at least among Catholics) about the meanings and significance to be attributed to (new) symbols before they are introduced into Catholic theology, catechesis, iconography and/or liturgy. Given the inevitably multivalent natures of symbols (as well as those of terms, concepts, images, postures, gestures, bodily attitudes, rites and

94 95 96 97 98

Ibid. Collins, op. cit., 149 n. 44. John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Vicesimus Quintus Annus, op. cit., 13.
Puthanangady, "Inculturation of Liturgy, op. cit., 107-9. Ibid, 107.

rituals), however, I am rather less optimistic than Puthanangady at the prospects for any easy incorporation of non-Christian elements into the life of the Church. Without a doubt, Kulanday was likewise offended byeven 'allergic' tothe introduction of nonChristian, "Hindu" or "pagan" symbols, concepts, rites and practices, finding them to be "intrinsically bad," overly "ritualistic," and even "oppressive" (though not in the sense Puthanangady intends). In seeking to answer objections based on such attitudes, Puthanangady appeals to the Second Vatican Councils Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate, suggesting that such a "negative approach" to other religions "was inculcated into our people in the course of their evangelization."99 In light of Nostra Aetate however, Puthanangady, adopting a rather expansive interpretation of the document, opines that now, we [can be] sure that there is the presence and action of the Spirit also in their expressions of religiosity. The symbols used by them in their worship have many positive aspects. The Church has adopted some of these symbols in the past; even today we can follow the same policy provided we make sure that they are free from any type of ambiguities.100 It is easy to imagine Kulanday dismissing such platitudinous assertions, presented as they are without specific historical precedents, without addressing specific symbols or their allegedly "positive aspects." Moreover, we might well ask, in what non-Christian "expressions of religiosity," and in what "symbols usedin their worship" may we find aspects which are, or ever can be, "free from any type of ambiguities"? One would look in vain. Thus, in seeking to adopt, adapt and/or appropriate non-Christian symbols and practices into our liturgy, I would not so much advocate that a consensus be sought (which could finally remove any and all such ambiguity) as that a minimal, yet nonetheless common understanding might (and must) be sought. Strict definitions are not de rigueur for Christian terms, concepts or symbols, for Christian theology or aesthetics. On the contrary, the Church has a great, time-honored capacity for accepting (even relishing) and for dwelling within 'Mystery.' We must pre-serve and maintain this gift of God. Vis--vis our efforts at liturgical inculturation in particular, we should use it. On the other hand, however, I firmly agree with Puthanangady that while Catholicism must never be mistaken for or reduced to a merely "ritualistic" religion, but rather dwell in the abode of its inherently Incarnational nature and Mystery, it must thus seek ever to express itself anew in symbols. Thus I also agree with Puthanangady that those who object to liturgical inculturation on the basis that "Indian symbols of worship represent a cultural agewhich has already been surpassed," that they are 'archaic' and thus 'outdated,' are simply wrong. Indian symbols, despite the fact that many are older by far even than the oldest and most traditional of Christian symbols, are certainly not pass; on the contrary, they have not even begun to exhaust their meanings. Indeed, they cannot. And what is more, the Catholic Church has only barely begun to explore their perennial fecundity, their depths, and their fortuitous potential for Christian thought, practice, and worship.

Appealing thus once again to Archbishop Menamparampils "principle of graduality," I suggest that Catholic scholars begin more thoroughly to engage (as, of course, many have already begun to do) in the hard work of studying, understanding, and (re)interpreting the symbolic riches of India with a view toward the mutual enrichment of both the local and the universal Churches. The Body of Christ itself, as Puthanangady suggests, "the primordial Christian symbol," is now "invisible" and hence "we need to have something visible through which we can relate ourselves to Jesus Christ and through him to the Father."101 The adoption and adaptation of non-Christian symbols will notmust notchange this Incarnational nature of Catholic self-understanding and liturgy, any more than the adoption of other non-Christian symbols (such as the Alpha and Omega) has in the past, at least not necessarily. There is a danger, however, that in the pursuit of consensus and unity, a certain watering-down of the Mysteries otherwise inherent in some nonChristian symbols, as much as in the inbuilt 'ambiguities' of certain terms, concepts, gestures, postures, and ritualized actions, could occur. In fact, there are two dangers to be avoided: on one
99

Ibid, 107-8. Ibid, 108. 101 Ibid.

100

hand, the reduction of Catholicism to something unworthy of its great heritage and traditiona lamentable flattening-out of its Mystery; and on the other hand, its potential devolution to a Gnostic, esoteric 'Mystery Religion.' The manner in which the Church adopts, adapts and/or appropriates non-Christian symbols, concepts, beliefs and practices, could, if not very carefully conducted (and led by the Spirit), lead in either direction. We must, therefore, conscientiously avoid both extremes in our efforts toward liturgical inculturation, in India as elsewhere. Finally, I must address what is surely one of the timeliest, most crucial, and potentially-devastating objections to and criticisms of liturgical inculturation as it has been practiced within the postconciliar Indian context. It is timely because both past and present efforts to produce an indigenous, inculturated Indian liturgy have far too often ignored it, and because future efforts must confront the matter squarely. It is crucial because to ignore this criticism is to deny the Churchs fundamental unity, her universality/catholicity, and her missionary mandate, to abnegate her very faith and indeed to demonstrate bad faith in the execution thereof. It is potentiallydevastating both because it directly affects the vast majority of Indian Catholics and because continued pursuit of the policies and practices that have given rise to this criticism would only serve to perpetuate further threats to unity and betray a lack of charity. I speak, of course, of the objection, noted by Puthanangady and many other critics, that "adopting symbols from classical Hinduismperpetuate[s] and [glorifies] the oppressive structures symbolized by Brahmanism."102 While he allows that "perhaps in the initial stages of our liturgical inculturation we may have committed this mistake," such an admission appears rather disingenuous. For there is no doubt that Indias deeply-ingrained, millennia-old and institutionalized hierarchical system of social stratification known as the caste system, with its often oppressive, inhuman discrimination and other injustices, has been perpetuated not only by those Brahmins atop traditional Hindu society, but too often by Christians, both foreign and domestic, as well. Ironically, perhaps, several post-conciliar efforts at inculturation of the liturgy, despite their best intentions merely to fashion an indigenous Catholic liturgy for 'all' Indians, have too often (perhaps unwittingly) contributed to just such a perpetuation of injustice and social inequities, thus potentially undermining and seriously compromising the Churchs moral integrity and her stance on issues of social justice, as well as failing to promote the desired unity of the Catholic population in India. There has been, at any rate, at least the perception of such a sad perpetuation and glorification of "oppressive structures." This objection is based on the fact that many of the early efforts (and a number of ongoing examples) of liturgical inculturation in the Indian Catholic Church, taking as they have various highcaste, Brahminical Hindu symbols, terms, concepts, and ritualized practices to be normative, or definitive of some imaginary 'Indianness,' have thereby consequently (even if inadvertently) alienated Dalits and others who have been historically marginalized and oppressed precisely by the caste systema system which has thus apparently been indiscriminately adopted by the Churchs bishops, priests, theologians and liturgists, some of whom may already appear to many Dalits as an elite class and a potentially oppressive force. For the Catholic Church, this intolerable situation is only exacerbated by the fact that the "lower layers of Indian society"'Dalits,' 'untouchables' and/or 'low-caste' persons(many converted only recently), comprise "more than seventy percent of Indian Christians today."103

Fortunately, the Indian Church has recently grown much more sensitive to such objections and to the broader concerns of Dalits, tribals, and other marginalized social groups, often with the help of theologians increasingly drawn from their own ranks. The recent ascendancy and prominence of their voices in the Indian Church is due, in part, not only to the sheer numbers of low-caste converts, but also to their acquiring more gainful employment and better living conditions, to their increasing social mobility, and perhaps above all, to their much-improved access to education, each a factor to which the Church happily continues to contribute. In addressing the injustices and insensitivities of past efforts at liturgical inculturation and seeking a remedy to them, Puthanangady stresses that
102 103

Ibid, 109. Michael, op. cit., 50.

We cannot have a uniform style in inculturizing liturgy in India. We should make sure that the symbols adopted are not only capable of expressing the Mystery of Christ, but also [that] they evoke in different peoples an appropriate response according to their life situation. Hence, in introducing an inculturated liturgy for the Dalits, care should be taken to avoid any symbol that might perpetuate and glorify the oppressive elements in their lives. Besides, we should takesymbols from the Dalit culture itself and introduce them into their liturgy. Moreover, it is important that the Church, being sent by Jesus Christ to the poor and oppressed, [does] not adopt into her liturgy any symbol that might indicate the oppressive structures of our society (emphases added).104 The remarkable (though unintentional) tension betrayed by Puthanangadys juxtaposition and use of potentially-contradictory terms such as "their liturgy" and "her liturgy" and "our society" highlights an interesting element of his prescriptions for remedy. In recognizing the validity and potential use of still more specific and localized symbols, and seeking to "introduce" them either into Dalit or broader 'Indian' liturgies, the necessary balance to be achieved even between local and regional or national Churches becomes a paradigm for the still more difficult and problematic nature of the relationship between the 'local' and 'universal' Churches. Clearly, in navigating an appropriate balance, the Indian Bishops have a challenging task before them. With the emergence of what may properly be called a 'Dalit theology' in India in recent decades, what I might callcautiously'the democratization of theology' therein is finally poised to accept its long-awaited and much-needed prophetic role. As Paul Collins suggests, The quest of Dalit theology is a quest for justice, and thus by extension a quest for truth and for God. It is also a quest rooted in the experience of Dalit peoples; experience, which becomes a primary resource for theology. Michael Amaladoss argues that in the encounter between gospel and culturethe gospel needs to be interpreted and made active in the contemporary context, so that it becomes relevant and prophetic. Such a hermeneutical process requires accurate reading of the signs of the times, and needs to start with questions which contemporary life poses. To enable such processes he identifies a need to remove the discussion of inculturation out of the hands of an elite, who have often been seen to be prejudiced against popular culture and religion. In order to secure a renewal of popular culture and religion in the task of inculturation, Amaladoss suggests that the churches need to place trust in local communities and in the sensus fidelium [i.e. 'the sense of the faithful'].105 Before his untimely death last year, Selva J. Raj corroborated the call of Michael Amaladoss for more 'popular' inculturation and for the abandonment of needless and often counterproductive 'elitism,' noting its potentially fruitful effects in broader areas, so crucial in the Indian context, such as interreligious dialogue. Making a similar "plea for the local, grass-roots and popular elements of inculturation to be respected and incorporated into the churches endeavors," Raj suggested that The success and efficacy of popular inculturation call for the re-imaging and reformulation of institutional adaptive initiatives, if it is to foster genuine and fruitful dialogue. Institutional inculturation would better serve the interests of interreligious dialogue if it were to shed its inherent elitism and institutional character and become truly inclusive in perspective, membership and rituals. Such initiatives could benefit by becoming a more collaborative effort, not merely among Hindu and Catholic leadership, between Sanskritic Hinduism and official Catholicism, but also among the laity, Hindu and Catholic alike. In this regard, popular indigenisation could act both as a corrective and as a model for indigenisation that is neither arrogant nor one-sided.106 If Amaladoss and Raj are right, as they surely are, there is today an urgent need for the empowerment of formerly-marginalized voices, as well as for the incorporation of social-scientific perspectiveshistorical, anthropological, sociological, ethnographic and other similar approaches in the development of an authentically indigenous Indian theology, the ramifications of which for efforts to construct an appropriately-inculturated liturgical renewal for the entire Indian Church may as yet only scarcely be guessed at. The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council, even with the progressive agendas expressed in documents such as Sacrosanctum Concilium, could hardly have anticipated or imagined the social and cultural revolutions which would, a few decades hence,
104 105

Puthanangady, "Inculturation of Liturgy," op. cit., 109. Collins, op. cit., 178. 106 Selva J. Raj, "Two Models of Indigenization in South Asian Catholicism: A Critique." Vidyajyoti: Journal of Theological Reflection, 69:6 (June 2005), 429. Cited in Collins, op. cit., 187-8, n. 99.

make possible such interreligious dialogue and socially-progressive cooperation, in India or elsewhere. The Holy Spirit, we must believe, nonetheless led them providentially to open paths to "a still more radical adaptation of the liturgy" which might thereby promote not only "the full, conscious, and active participation" of all the faithful in the liturgy of the Church, but their intimate and active involvement in its renewal and (re)construction, as well. This applies in a special way even to those only recently converted to the faith, to 'Dalits,' 'tribals' and other 'lower-caste' Indians, to those "voices from the margins," who, despite their traditionally-oppressed historical conditions and lack of worldly status, nonetheless demand and deserve a voice in the Church and her liturgical life. Indeed, the Church needs them and their potentially prophetic voices as much as they need her. Leaving behind the privilege and power relations of exclusively 'elite' leadership in efforts at liturgical inculturation, both the 'local' (Indian) and the 'universal' (Catholic) Churches may providentially be led to a deeper and still more authentic realization of the maxim, expressed by second-century BCE Roman author Terentius, "Homo sum: humani nil a me alienum puto" ("I am a man; I consider nothing of the human foreign to me.") Such an affirmation of universality, of openness to 'other' peoples, cultures and indeed to all cultures (not only those of 'elites'!) is precisely what is needed in the Churchs ongoing efforts at liturgical inculturation. In this spirit, as Cardinal Ratzinger proclaimed repeatedly during the decade of the 1990s, perhaps we should talk no more about 'inculturation,' but about a meeting of cultures, orif we have to use a technical termabout 'interculturality.'one cannot see how two organisms that are in themselves totally alien to each other should, through a transplantation that starts by mutilating them both, suddenly become a single living whole. Only if it is true that all cultures are potentially universal and have an inner capacity to be open to others can interculturality lead to new and fruitful forms.107 The Indian Church is like a microcosm of the larger universal Church of which she is an essential part; even as the Catholic Church must remain open to the persons who constitute her members and affirm as authentically human (and thus not 'foreign') the diverse cultures which define and shape their lives, so too must the Church of India affirm her own unity-in-diversity, being careful neither unduly to privilege 'elite' segments of society nor to ignore the vast riches of the myriad of rich and authentically-human cultures in which she "lives and moves and has her being." The opening up of liturgical inculturation to the various, wonderfully diverse Indian cultures, while creating considerable challenges, is as essential for the Indian Church at this historical moment as liturgical renewal and inculturation into the worlds many cultures has ever been and continues to be for the Church universal. By finding and maintaining the proper balance between the local and the universal, between the part and the whole, between the Churchs own culture and the several human cultures with which she strives peacefully to coexist, both the Indian Church and the global Catholic Church alike may be able to assert, a la Terentius, "Catholicus sum; catholici nil a me alienum puto." (I am a Catholic; [therefore], I consider nothing of the whole foreign to me." When the Churches are able truly to say this, the renewal of the liturgy envisioned and promoted by the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council in Sacrosanctum Concilium will occur more or less naturally and efforts toward liturgical inculturation will likewise discover a harmony and mutual enrichment between the Church and all the human cultures in which she lives. Select Bibliography:
Abhishiktnanda (Dom Henri Le Saux). Saccidnanda: A Christian Approach to Advaitic Experience. (Delhi: ISPCK, 1974). First published in French as Sagesse Hindoue Mystique Chretienne. (Paris: Editions de Centurion, 1965). Amaladoss, Rev. Michael S.J. Beyond Inculturation: Can the Many Be One? (Delhi: ISPCK, 2005). Amalorpavadass, Rev. D. S. Efforts Made in the Roman Catholic Church Towards Indigenisation. (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical and Liturgical Centre, 1971). _____. Gospel and Culture: Evangelization and Inculturation. Mission Theology for Our Times Series 11. (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical and Liturgical Centre, 1978). _____. Inculturation: Some Practical Implications and Conclusions. NBCLC Inculturation Pamphlet Series no. 8. (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical and Liturgical Centre, no date). _____. "The 12 Points of Adaptation in the Liturgy and Their Commentaries." (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical, and Liturgical Centre, 1981).

107

Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance: Christian Belief and World Religions. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2004), 64.

Barla, John Berchmans. Christian Theological Understanding of Other Religions According to D. S. Amalorpavadass. Documenta Missionalia 26. (Roma: Editrice Pontificia Universit Gregoriana, 1997). Bombay Saint Paul Society. The New Community Bible. (Mumbai: St. Pauls, 2008). Collins, Rev. Dr. Paul M. Christian Inculturation in India. Liturgy, Worship and Society Series. (Aldershot, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate, 2007). Cornille, Catherine. The Guru in Indian Catholicism: Ambiguity or Opportunity of Inculturation? Louvain Theological & Pastoral Monographs 6. (Louvain: Peeters Press, 1991). Dias, Rev. Mrio Saturnino, ed. Re-Launching Our Evangelizing Mission: A Renewed Encounter Between Gospel and Cultures in India. (Povoao, Benaulim, Goa: Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences Office of Evangelization, 2007). Gomes, Rev. Anastasio, O.C.D. "Matters Liturgical. Appendix IV in Victor J. F. Kulanday (Swami Kulandaiswami), The Paganization of the Church in India. (Madras: Author/Diocesan Publications, 1988), 208-27. Griffiths, Rev. Bede, OSB. The Marriage of East and West (Saccidananda Ashram, no date). John Paul II, Pope. "Apostolic Letter Vicesimus Quintus Annus of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II on the 25th Anniversary of the Promulgation of the Conciliar Constitution 'Sacrosanctum Concilium' on the Sacred Liturgy." http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jpii_apl_04121988_vicesimus-quintus-annus_en.html. _____. "Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Ecclesia in Asia of the Holy Father John Paul II to the Bishops, Priests and Deacons, Men and Women in the Consecrated Life and all the Lay Faithful on Jesus Christ the Savior and His Mission of Love and Service in Asia." http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jpii_exh_06111999_ecclesia-in-asia_en.html Kulanday, Victor J. F. (Swami Kulandaiswami). The Paganization of the Church in India. Second Revised Edition. (Madras: Author/Diocesan Press, 1988). See page 52 of this article- Michael Leeuwen, Gerwin van, OFM. "D. S. Amalorpavadass." In Church in India: Institution or Movement? A Commemorative Volume in Honour of Fr. D. S. Amalorpavadass. Ed. Rev. Paul Puthanangady, SDB. (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical and Liturgical Centre, 1991, xi-xiv. _____. "Liturgy, the Struggle for Relevance Continues." In Church in India: Institution or Movement? A Commemorative Volume in Honour of Fr. D. S. Amalorpavadass. Ed. Rev. Paul Puthanangady, SDB. (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical and Liturgical Centre, 1991, 25-35. Mathur, Vishnu. India: The Lotus and the Cross. DVD, 2004. Toronto: Silvertouch Productions, 2004. Menamparampil, Archbishop Thomas, SDB. "Inculturation of the Sacred Liturgy in Asia: Possibilities and Problems." Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 73:2 (February 2009), 85-106. Michael, Rev. S. M., SVD. "Cultural Diversity and Inculturation in India." Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 73:1 (January 2009), 43-56. Prabhu, Michael. "METAMORPHOSE." http://www.ephesians-511.net. Pulikkan, Rev. Paul. Indian Church at Vatican II: A Historico-Theological Study of the Indian Participation in the Second Vatican Council. (Thrissur, Kerala: Marymatha Major Seminary, 2001). Puthanangady, Rev. Paul, SDB, "Inculturation According to the Sound Traditions of the Church." In ReLaunching Our Evangelizing Mission: A Renewed Encounter Between Gospel and Cultures in India. Ed. Rev. Mrio Saturnino Dias. (Povoao, Benaulim, Goa: Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences Office of Evangelization, 2007), 87-94. _____. "Inculturation of Liturgy: Its Problems and Possibilities." In Re-Launching Our Evangelizing Mission: A Renewed Encounter Between Gospel and Cultures in India. Ed. Rev. Mrio Saturnino Dias. (Povoao, Benaulim, Goa: Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences Office of Evangelization, 2007), 95-110. _____, ed. Church in India: Institution or Movement? A Commemorative Volume in Honour of Fr. D. S. Amalorpavadass. (Bangalore: National Biblical, Catechetical and Liturgical Centre, 1991). Ratzinger, Cardinal Joseph. The Spirit of the Liturgy. Trans. John Saward. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2000). Original German edition: Einfrung in den Geist der Liturgie. (Freiburg im Breisgau: Verlag Herder, 2000). _____. Truth and Tolerance: Christian Belief and World Religions. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2004). Original German title: GlaubeWahrheitToleranz: Das Christentum und die Weltreligionem. (Freiburg im Breisgau: Verlag Herder, 2003). Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal with Vittorio Messori, The Ratzinger Report: An Exclusive Interview on the State of the Church. Trans. Salvator Attanasio and Graham Harrison. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1985). First published in Italian as Rapporto Sulla Fede, (Milan: Edizioni Paoline, 1985), 59. Sahi, Jyoti. The Child and the Serpent: Reflections on Popular Indian Symbols. (Bangalore: Asian Trading Corporation, 1980). First published by Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1980); Saldanha, Rev. Julian, S.J. Inculturation. 2nd Revised Edition. (Mumbai: St. Pauls, 1996 Schreck, Alan. Vatican II: The Crisis and the Promise. (Cincinnati: Servant, 2005). Theckanath, Rev. Jacob. "Liturgical Inculturation in India After Vatican II." In Re-Launching Our Evangelizing Mission: A Renewed Encounter Between Gospel and Cultures in India. Ed. Rev. Mrio Saturnino Dias. (Povoao, Benaulim, Goa: Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences Office of Evangelization, 2007), 111126.

Vadakumchery, Rev. Johnson, CMI, ed. Icons of the Unseen: Asian Theology Through the Eyes of Artist Joy Elamkunnapuzha, CMI. (Trivandrum: Carmel International Publishing House, 2002).

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Jon Anderson contacted me by email on August 5, 2009, requesting an interview for his research project. He was then in Chennai, traveling in India as an M.A. student of Catholic Theology at the Franciscan University of Steubenville [FSU] in Ohio, USA, which is one of the leading centers of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal in the United States. He wrote, "I've recently come across your website, 'Metamorphose,' and have read with great interest a couple of your articles. I would very much like to visit with you, particularly if you might find time to share your perspectives on the Catholic Ashram movement, its liturgical (and architectural) innovations, and the movement toward inculturation of the Catholic Church in India more generally. I'm sorry that I didn't contact you sooner...I'd found links to old articles of yours some weeks ago, but only just today found your new and updated website. Perhaps it is Providential that I've discovered that your contact information indicates that you're in Chennai. I hope that this message will reach you in time and that you will be available to meet with me. I am persuaded that your perspective is one which I must take seriously and to which I must listen carefully, in order to be as thorough and as balanced as possible in my own research. I am seriously considering moving to India as soon as next summer to pursue further postgraduate studies (M. Phil. and/or Ph.D. in Religious Studies and/or Theology). I'd like to hear your perspective on Catholic (and secular!) institutions of higher education, as well." Jon is currently pursuing a second Master of Arts degree in the Department of Languages and Cultures of Asia. He is also a Writing Center Tutor at FSU. He spent the spring semester, 2010, studying Theology at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas, [the "Angelicum"], run by the Dominicans in Rome, Italy, for his M.A. degree. He was awarded a FLAS [Foreign Language and Area Studies] Fellowship [for Hindi] from the Center for South Asia at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. He has recently been admitted to the Ph.D. program in "Religion & Culture" in the School of Theology & Religious Studies at the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC! Jon was raised a Baptist but was received into the Catholic Church a few years ago. From: prabhu To: jonanderson Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2011 9:37 PM EDITED Dear Jon, I hope that all is well with you and your research and studies too

Sacrosanctum Concilium and Inculturation of Liturgy in the Post-Conciliar Indian Catholic Church is a brilliant piece of scholarly work. I have several observations to make and questions
to ask regarding your essay and I would like to know if I can send them to you right away. What have been the responses/reactions to your paper? I have just opened a section on Liturgy and Liturgical Abuses on my site and I have completed around seventy new articles and reports [on a wide range of issues, including over a dozen related to Liturgy] which are about to be hosted. Your essay brought to focus the relationship between Liturgy [and its abuses] and Inculturation, something that I was already well aware of but never really looked at closely. A friend is presently converting Victor Kulanday's book "The Paganization of the Church in India" to Word so that I can get on with writing on certain aspects of Inculturation that you treated in your essay. I don't believe in coincidences, and I am sure that neither do you! More when I hear from you. God bless, Michael From: jonanderson To: prabhu Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 7:35 AM EDITED Dear Michael, I am glad to hear from you! Thanks for writing and thanks, also, for the nice things you have to say about my paper. In any case, that is what is new and ongoing in my life. How is your family--especially your lovely, charming, and holy wife Angie? I hope and trust (and pray!) that all is well with both of you, your children and extended families. Unfortunately, while many people are finding my essay online via Google searches into matters of Inculturation, the Indian churches, and "Sacrosanctum Concilium," I have had very little substantive feedback from readers. Of course, since I completed the paper in November 2009, I've had little time to continue work of the themes taken up therein, although I do hope to do further research in the future. Indeed, I made much of the network of contacts I've established across India and in my preparation for further work in this area in my application to CUA...God willing, I might resume more serious research on inculturation and the Indian Catholic (and other) Church(es) once I begin work on a doctoral dissertation. I'm very nearly certain that you won't agree with everything I wrote, but do want you to know that while we may not agree on everything, I must stress that my interest in and exposure to the relevant issues is still in its nascent stages, being only at most 3 years old, and that even when and where we may disagree, I fully acknowledge the sincerity and proper, holy motivations which appear to underlie your own work upon and concerns regarding these matters! Perhaps given the nature of some of my own academic/scholarly training, I am often more inclined to reserve judgment, as it were, and/or to keep "an open mind," maintaining a humble demeanor and being reluctant to consider myself an expert (or even sufficiently informed or learned

enough) to make "evaluative assessments." Indeed, before converting to the Catholic Church, or being trained formally in Catholic Theology, I majored as an undergraduate student in the academic (nonconfessional) study of religion, a field sometimes called the "history of religions," and the methodological imperatives of that academic discipline continue (admittedly sometimes even subconsciously) to shape my outlook and form my approach to issues. Often, I think that I might be better as an historian and/or anthropologist/sociologist than a theologian, although I am certainly interested in (and, I believe, usually competent) to articulate well-informed theological opinions. I might add that, given the conservative nature of my theological education and spiritual formation at an institution such as Franciscan University of Steubenville (for which I'm very humbly thankful to God!), I firmly intend ever to remain faithful to Holy Mother Church and her authoritative Magisterium. Feel free to forward your comments and questions regarding my essay. Indeed, I look forward to substantive feedback. Warmest Regards in Christ, Jon Jon Douglas Anderson, FLAS (Foreign Language & Area Studies) Fellow, Center for South Asia (2010); M.A. Student, Languages & Cultures of Asia; University of Wisconsin-Madison M.A. Candidate, Theology; Writing Tutor; Franciscan University of Steubenville, 5835 Russett Road, Apt 2A Madison, WI 53711, USA; mobile: (USA): (001) 614.439.4093 (India): (+91) 993-062-9101 From: Jon Anderson To: prabhu Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 8:12 AM Subject: One newer addition to my bibliography... Dear Michael, I hope that, among whatever else you find useful in my essay on "Sacrosanctum Concilium and the Inculturation of the Post-Conciliar Indian Catholic Church," the bibliography might prove to be most especially so. Among the works therein, I wanted to highly recommend one by Rev. Dr. Paul M. Collins (an Anglican priest and former Reader of Theology at the University of Chichester in the U.K.). I've not yet had the pleasure of meeting Rev. Dr. Collins in person, but have occasionally corresponded with him over the last 3 years. He is one of the VERY few "western" scholars interested in and working on matters of inculturation in the Indian context. Moreover, he just sent me a book which he co-edited with Rev. Paul Pulikkan, a SyroMalabar priest in the diocese of Thrissur, Kerala, who also happens to be the Chair of Christian Studies & Research at the University of Calicut. I'm curious whether you are familiar w/him and/or his work? He is also Editor-in-Chief of the Eastern Journal of Dialogue and Culture. His dissertation at the Katholike Universitat Leuven (in Belgium) was published as Indian Church at Vatican II. I desperately want a copy of that book, but have been unable to locate it! In any case, the new book of which I speak was published from Delhi in 2010 by the ISPCK entitled The Church and Culture in India, Inculturation: Theory and Praxis. I have known about its forthcoming publication since at least June 2009, and eagerly awaited its arrival, since I know personally at least 6 of the contributors. This latter book will likely be easier to locate and procure in India than the former, but just in case you've not heard of it, I thought that I'd inform you. I haven't yet found time to read the volume, but it addresses MANY diverse aspects of inculturation and, given the direction of your current and recent research, might well make a welcome and needed addition to your personal library. It is so new that it has not, to the best of my knowledge, been reviewed in any western academic journal, although I hope to suggest that it should be and submit my own review later (perhaps by the end of the year), if I can find time to give it the thorough reading which it so richly deserves! My own essay has not been published (nor, in my opinion, is it yet anywhere NEAR worthy of publication). Nonetheless, it IS copyrighted intellectual property and, as you have learned, it IS available to the whole world online, thanks to the 'miracle' of Academia.edu! Please feel free to cite my work if and when you find it useful, with the URL to my Academia.edu website and including the current page numbers. I would be much obliged to have any such acknowledgements! I do hope that you find the formatting of my own footnotes and quotations both useful and "user-friendly". Warm Regards in Christ, Jon

MY RESPONSE TO JON ANDERSONS PAPER ON THE INCULTURATION OF THE LITURGY

From: prabhu To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 6:54 PM Subject: Sacrosanctum Concilium and Inculturation of Liturgy in the PostConciliar Indian Catholic Church-2 Dear Jon, You wrote, "I'm very nearly certain that you won't agree with everything I wrote, but do want you to know that while we may not agree on everything, I must stress that my interest in and exposure to the relevant issues is still in its nascent stages, being only at most 3 years old, and that even when and where we may disagree, I fully acknowledge the sincerity and proper, holy motivations which appear to underlie your own work upon and concerns regarding these matters! I might add that, given the conservative nature of my theological

education and spiritual formation at an institution such as Franciscan University of Steubenville Feel free to forward your comments and questions regarding my essay." I would like to say that I have benefited immensely from it. There is always much to learn and I thank you for this paper which has brought into sharp focus certain perspectives of inculturation, especially in the context of the liturgy, that I have failed to concentrate on till now. When I first studied your essay minutely, a lot of thoughts came to my mind but now I can hardly recall a few. So they may not be particularly ordered here or may lack continuity in this commentary. Kindly bear with me. I have no pretensions to being an expert. This not a point-by-point or academic response to your paper. None of my work claims to be academic. I am an ordinary lay man and I write what I perceive to be correct after examining and comparing the research of other more eminent people on both sides of the equation. Still, you may use this letter in any way that you wish for what it is worth. I am happy that you have had a conservative Catholic formation at FSU; otherwise your paper might have turned out very differently. Rather than say that I agree or don't agree with anything that you have written as a result of your research, I will just share my thoughts and perspectives with you. You have done well in presenting both sides -- or should I say -- several sides of the inculturation issue. I expected that your study would be completely objective but I noted that in certain situations you commented either in favor of one position or another. I'm not saying that I find that objectionable. It is just my observation.

Your interest in the inculturation issue, as you wrote, is about 3 years old. I don't believe that that criterion is particularly relevant here. There are two other criteria which would tend to play a more influential role in your study: -the first is that your Catholic background is conservative (again, thank God for that); if you had studied at a liberal or modernist Catholic university, more particularly in India and to be more precise -- under Jesuits, your paper would have had an entirely different color; -the second is that your research would, like it or not, be tinted by your 'Western' spectacles. Again, I'm not in criticism of that. One would have to be soaked in or have a long-time exposure to the Indian culture AND at the same time be able to escape the all-pervading influence of the majority of Indian theologians [which in my humble opinion is corrupt to a great extent] to be able to see things the way that Catholics like me see them. There are many people in India who share my thinking. They include priests who have Providentially come unscathed out of these very centres of theological training that teach what we all are not in agreement with. But that is because of the resistance that they inwardly put up while appearing outwardly to subscribe to what was being taught. I experienced this myself while attending the contact classes for my M.A. degree in Christian Studies under Indian theologians, both priests and nuns, at the University of Madras. I can honestly say that not one of them was teaching us what Rome teaches. Instead, we were forced to listen to their personal theories, interpretations and aspirations. There are seminarians who regularly visit my web site to learn what they are not taught in their formation. On my mailing list are a few priests whose eyes opened only after meeting with me and studying my work. They admit that all those years in the seminary they never imagined that their professors might be wrong. They believe that there are no seminary teachers left who oppose the Hinduisation tide. I'm not saying there aren't. But a visiting French priest theologian-professor who spends three months a year in India feels the same way too. Even if you were to live in India for an extended period of time, the chances are that you would meet and interview only those priests and theologians who we [people like me] believe are Hinduising the faith. Those who oppose them are isolated, ostracized and unknown in public life. Such a priest might be completely isolated -- as I have known it to happen -- even within his own community. Many of them run into continuous hassles with the powerful and authoritarian -- almost feudal --Indian bishops and are rewarded if they drop their fights against error. Catholic media plays a crucial role in the scheme of things. I have been writing for years, starting with letters to the editors of Catholic periodicals. My experience has been anything but positive. It appears that Catholic media is heavily under the 'influence'. There are a few exceptions, very few, but even most of them will not always publish anything that I -- or people like me -write. Our writing is not published for two different reasons: either it conflicts with the beliefs of the editorial board/or the editors are in sync with our views but the superiors of the congregation do not want to publish anything that may be controversial; or else the magazine staff want to publish our material but they do not want adverse reaction from the Bishops as is often inevitable. I can support these claims with much evidence. Often our material is not published simply because it has our names on it. We checked this out by writing under pseudonyms. In short, there is an unofficial muzzle on the Indian Catholic press. One can write any nonsense, dissent, criticize a Vatican document, but one's writings may not oppose the trend that is led by the theologians' lobbies. Whether what we write is in support of or in defense of Church teaching is not the consideration. I could get a book on yoga, Zen, vipassana or any New Age alternative therapy printed, published and sold by a Catholic publishing house, but not one that opposes any of the above from a Catholic perspective, even if supported by a wealth of data from Vatican and other authentic Catholic sources. Victor Kulanday's book is a rare exception. It was self-published. He was already influential when in New Delhi and he was able to draw a number of supporters to him when he moved to Madras [Chennai]. None of them was able to take up his mantle when he passed on. I have met a few survivors of his 'movement' and found that that while they espouse his ideals

they are not able to defend their positions. They have not cared to study his work and assimilate his knowledge. So the organized resistance is all but dead. Moreover, some of them leaned heavily toward Traditionalism and hence lost their credibility. As a cumulative result, to all appearances Catholics seem not to care about the way that thing are going, but in reality that is not the case. It is simply that those Catholics have no voice to speak for them, no one to represent them, no knowledge or adequate formation for them to be able to present and defend their case. And, things are only getting worse [from our perspective of course]. As a new generation of Catholics has been exposed only to the vernacular, Hinduisation of rituals, innovations during Mass, aberrations in the Liturgy, etc. people are unaware of the existence of any other scenario or alternative. Its like the story of the frog that was cooked to death in a pan of water when the temperature was raised very gradually. Another point to note is that the laity is led to believe that these liturgical innovations and aberrations are approved by Rome. While they are confused about what is going on, when priests themselves commit these abuses on a regular basis, and nuns blindly follow whatever the cassocks say, the laity finally decides that "the Church" must know better. Those that can't take it either walk out of the church services or stay at home. I myself, preferring the quieter Eucharistic celebrations, completely avoid the big, festive Masses where there is bound to be abuses of the liturgy and some or other aspect of "Hinduisation". And, I'm no Traditionalist, not by a long shot, nor am I an opponent of inculturation, genuine inculturation that is. You simply must visit my web site and read THE NEW COMMUNITY BIBLE 4 - ONGOING ROBBERY OF FAITH http://ephesians-511.net/docs/NEW%20COMMUNITY%20BIBLE%204_ONGOING%20ROBBERY%20OF %20FAITH.doc "Ongoing Robbery of Faith" is a little book published in 1996 by Dr. Fr. P.K. George SJ. I have reproduced it verbatim. I quote from the above article from my February 24, 2009 comments on the book: In my letter of July 27, 2008 to Bishop Valerian DSouza of Pune [who has publicly defended the St Pauls' 'Indianised' New Community Bible], point no. 12, I had written [and received no response]: "In regard to the NCB, the Tamil Catholics have a precedent or should I say precedents. The details can be found in a twenty-six page booklet titled, "Ongoing Robbery of Faith" authored in 1996 by Fr P K George, SJ. It makes some startling and fearful allegations of the Tamil Nadu Bishops' deceit in matters of Faith. Fr George analyses 3 issues: a) The newly translated Tamil Missal, 1993 b) The new translation of the Holy Bible in Tamil, 1995 c) A Tamil book titled "Yar Intha Yesu?" ["Who is this Jesus?"] by theologian Fr Paul Leon, 1995; it has the Imprimatur of a Tamil Nadu Bishop. [Fr Paul Leon is apparently currently teaching at a seminary in New York.] Fr George documents the serious errors in these books, including the new Tamil Bible, which have been perpetuated on the ignorant faithful. The priest insists that a fraud has been perpetrated on the Tamil Church, and more precisely, that Tamil Catholics have been blatantly lied to. The fraud or lie that he mentions is that the Bishops of the Tamil Nadu Bishops' Council [TNBC] have stated that the contents of the new Missal were approved/authorised by Rome whereas they were not. I am producing a soft copy of this booklet and will send it to you as soon as my correspondence regarding the NCB slows down --which does not seem likely for some time. Your Grace will have to wait for the details as I do not want to quote out of context in this delicate matter. Tamil Catholics whose children now use existing English Bibles fear that the same fate awaits them with the NCB." It is 15 years and 13 years respectively since the Tamil Missal and Bible were released. As in the case of the NCB, they do not appear to have approval from Rome. My enquiries reveal that Fr. George, some Catholic individuals and lay groups in Tamil Nadu, and the traditionalist Society of St Pius the Tenth [SSPX] had strongly objected. Today, these Tamil Bibles and Tamil Missals are the only ones available to the faithful in Tamil Nadu. We fear that this will be the case with the NCB unless Catholics unite to make their voice heard. So, join in this crusade. I now reproduce the contents of Fr. Georges expos. I submit it to the Bishops, most of whom would not even be aware of this issue, to evaluate Fr. Georges report and do the needful in case he is correct. END The priest is very old and feeble, but still alive. However he has no internet access and is communicable only via a land line phone or snail mail. I don't know if he is the same "priest-advisor who went to Rome" along with Kulanday to deliver a report to the Pope in 1983. You were absolutely correct when you observed: "in India, however, such experimentations by and recommendations from the bishops conferences and their commissions seem often to have preceded the requisite approval from the Vatican." I believe that the situation continues.

Who or which is the competent -- and unbiased -- authority in the Indian Church that can determine what proper inculturation is and what is not? How is the thin line that separates culture from religion to be defined? The two are so closely interwoven in this nation as to be indistinguishable from each other. Do people understand that there is not any one distinct entity called "Indian" culture? The culture changes every couple of hundred miles in any direction. There is the caste factor and the tribal religions to be considered. There is also a myriad of Hindu deities with as many rituals associated with their worship. The meaning of a symbol or ritual may vary according to local paramparas [traditions]. When adopting, adapting and inculturating these religious symbols and rituals into our liturgy for us, who decides for us their original spiritual significance? The interpretations of Vedic scriptures and other Hindu holy books by different gurus and godmen contradict each other, much like in Protestantism and unlike Catholicism which has only one interpreter of the Sacred Books, the Magisterium. Whose interpretation then are we to take as the basis for our inculturation? Who is to determine which are the "Hindu practices which are not in contradiction with Christian faith"? The theologians who are already protagonists of Hinduisation? It appears that there IS no available alternative. If the powerful inculturationist lobby has its way, Rome will accept any new demands made by the Indian Bishops believing it to be the voice of the Church in this nation. It happened with the Indian rite Mass. It happened with the Tamil Missal. In the case of the NCB, we had to go to Rome over the heads of the Indian Bishops to have its publication halted. As you rightly reflected, "Whether the bishops would exercise their rightful authority, "carefully and prudently" researching any proposed directions for new liturgical innovations, or whether such efforts would, in fact, be led by "radicals," "experimenters" and supposed "experts" would remain to be seen." The priest-depleted West has become the new "mission" territory and the ill-formed or subverted Indian priests are exporting error to all corners of the globe. The rot has infected the Federation of Asian Bishops' Conferences. The number of our priests in Rome and in the Vatican dicasteries is growing! I know several of them either personally or through correspondence. How long will our voices continue to be heard in Rome? If you have even casually read my "Catholic Ashrams" and related reports, you would have noted the preponderance of evidence provided by me to show that 1. The ashrams movement is the epicenter of the so-called "inculturation" programme. Their teachings are heretical. 2. The NBCLC, Bangalore, is a registered member of the ashrams movement. They work in tandem. 3. The inculturation is, in reality, no inculturation at all; it is Hinduisation, Brahminisation to be precise. 4. The vast majority of theologians and Bishops are already "into it" way above their necks. Their influence has pervaded the Conference of Religious, India [CRI], seminaries, houses of formation, and even some leaders of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. 5a. The first casualty has been the Liturgy. In the name of Conciliar reform and the Indian rite Mass, anything goes. 5b. The second casualties have been the desecration of the Eucharist [see Ashrams report] - and the demand for the Blessed Sacrament to give way to meditation which is more accommodating and politically correct. 6. The leaders of the ashram/inculturation movement are in rebellion against the 'hegemony' of Rome. Their goal is an autonomous Indian Church. 7. Inculturation goes hand in hand with heresy, dissent, New Age, feminist theology and a host of other evils. When you meet priests on your next visit to India, I suggest that you enquire from them about their familiarity with Conciliar and post-Conciliar documents. Your findings may startle you, or then again they won't. Vatican Documents and encyclicals are cited more by the inculturationists and ashramvasis but only insofar as they read their own meanings into selected passages in order to justify their programmes. I have documented this in several of my reports including those on the St Pauls' New Community Bible. I might add here that the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur have no meaning in India, especially after the publication of the New Community Bible. I don't believe that any bishop really examined the commentaries before it was officially released. This is what I understood from my telephone conversations with several Archbishops and Bishops and from a number of letters that they wrote to me. They met to examine the issue -- the commentaries in the 'Bible' to be precise -- only after I went public with my protests. I would like to see any documentary evidence that inculturation has directly led to evangelisation and to conversions [people from Hinduism, Islam, tribal religions seeking baptism.] In my records, all the testimonies of conversions have nothing whatsoever to do with inculturation. In fact, the opposite is true, in my records. Inculturation has led to traumatized and scandalized Catholics leaving the Church for Traditionalist groups like the Society of St Pius X or joining Pentecostal churches. Dozens of my friends are in those places now. At my web site, I have written about the Army of Jesus ex-nuns' Pentecostal church. There is also the more recent report on the Emperor Emmanuel cult which, during their retreats, screens movies that depict the excesses and abuses of inculturation in the Roman Catholic Church. It is estimated that between 75 to 90% of the retreatants either join the cult or simply exit the Church after watching the movies, one of which is India: The Lotus and the Cross, the DVD which I had given you when we met, which you have mentioned in your notes in your paper. In all the talk of inculturation that I come across -- and I have been collecting information from Indian Catholic sources for 15 years -- the only evidence that I find is of syncretism. What is presented is a diluted social Gospel, a syncretised kichdi [pot pourri] that has become increasingly acceptable when served to a lulled and ignorant laity, but which is vehemently rejected by those who are vigilant and knowledgeable. It is the same with what passes as interfaith or interreligious dialogue ["Institutional inculturation would better serve the interests of interreligious dialogue"- Fr Selva J. Raj, quoted in your paper] and to an extent, ecumenism.

God-willing, over the next few months I would be publishing a series of articles with documentation that will substantiate my claims. I will start with the release next month of two fairly lengthy articles on the aberration of Liturgical Dancing in the Indian Church, with particular reference to Bharatanatyam. It will be followed by a study of the significance of various symbols and sacramentals [I have already written extensively on the OM symbol and will now do Arati, the "Indian" lamp, etc.] used in Hindu worship. Then will come two articles on Inculturation and one on Interreligious Dialogue. The information therein -- which is compiled mostly from Catholic news stories -- will leave no doubt in the minds of even the greatest skeptic that inculturation [or at least the type that is presently being enforced] is an insidious poison, a Trojan horse that will leave the Indian Church a travesty of what it was before Vatican Council II and just another shade of Hinduism with some Catholic trappings. The irony of it all is that, as my reports have repeatedly shown, fundamentalist and devout Hindus don't see it that way at all. They sincerely believe that interreligious dialogue and inculturation [the annexation of symbols like the Om and rituals like the arati] are newly-invented Vatican ploys to entice Hindus into accepting Christianity. They could not be more wrong, but they cannot be convinced otherwise. While going through your paper again just now, I noticed that you face the problem that we all do when you wrote: "Indian/Hindu postures, gestures, bodily attitudes and ritualized actions...", "Amalorpavadass introduced into this Mass a great many elements of traditional Indian (i.e. Hindu) spirituality...", "within the context of Indian/Hindu culture, custom, and religious observance..." It is well-nigh impossible to call these rituals etc. Indian, without at the same time qualifying them as Hindu. I disagree with your contention that "...their introduction and use has garnered the harshest of criticisms, resistance, and the disgust of not a few traditionally-minded (and often highly-westernized) Catholics within India, as will become clear". Kulanday was not "highly-westernized" [he called himself a Swami], neither was Fr. Anastasio Gomes, nor are my family. We have Indian names along with our Christian baptismal names [our sons do not have Christian names], do not dine at a table, eat using our fingers, wear traditional Indian dress and are proud to speak in our local languages. Traditional? Conservative? Not necessarily. Is it not possible that we opposed the so-called inculturation simply because it is Hinduisation?

It is true that "Hindus too are today revolting against the use of Sanskrit in their temples" and replacing it with South Indian languages. Why is that? Sanskrit is the temple/worship-language of the Brahmin caste. But if they had their way, the advocates of inculturation would introduce Sanskrit in the Indian Rite of Mass wherever possible. Happy at being able to assist at Mass in English while in India, you wrote: "Whereas Sacrosanctum Concilium provided a merely prosaic, rather dry, guarded endorsement and a merely didactic justification for the introduction of vernacular languages into the liturgy, many others have gushed with poetic abandon concerning the virtues of the vernacular. Herein, I allow my own voice joyfully to join in their chorus: ... ... ..." While I understand what you mean and how you felt, the thought immediately came to my mind that if Masses all over the world were said in Latin, you would still have experienced "being 'at home' in a far-away land" at a Mass in India. What would your reaction have been if you have stayed for months in an isolated Indian village where Mass was said in the local language only? At least with Latin, many laity knew what was going on and could respond to the celebrant. Even I am unable to do that in many regions of India. You quoted Fr. Hilary Fernandes from the Lotus and the Cross DVD: "All [our] religious services were in Latin. I said, what type of worship are we having which is not being understood by us. I was thinking that the Church has been alienated from our own culture, and how can it go on like this? This is something western which has been imposed upon us." I would have appreciated it greatly if you had also/instead quoted his equating Jesus Christ with the Hindu deity Ganpati to give your readers an understanding of what he REALLY means when he talks of "our own culture". See THE LOTUS AND THE CROSS - THE INCULTURATION OF CHRISTIANITY IN INDIA http://ephesians511.net/docs/LOTUS%20AND%20THE%20CROSS_THE%20INCULTURATION%20OF%20CHRISTIANITY%20IN %20INDIA.doc I knew the saintly Fr. Anastasio Gomes OCD and stayed with him for a few days at the Carmelite seminary in Goa, years ago. Until I read your citation of his comments, I did not know that he too opposed the excesses of inculturation as I have not yet read completely through Kulanday's book. I wonder what happened to his invaluable library sources that he wouldn't share with anyone till the very end. I note that you did not agree with some of Fr. Gomes' concerns. That brings me to my earlier statement that as a Westerner you might not be able to perceive the problem the way that we do. I mean no offense to you when I say that. Like Kulanday and Fr. Gomes, I too lay the responsibility and blame at the door of the Indian bishops who appear at times to be pawns in the hands of the theologians' lobbies. I don't know if you are aware -- since it is not mentioned by you -- that Simon Cardinal Lourdusamy and Fr. D.S. Amalorpavadass, the "founder-director" of the NBCLC and developer of the Indian rite Mass, are siblings.

If Amalorpavadass did not have a powerful supporter in his brother, the Cardinal, [he still is in Rome, I understand], would the Indian rite and the "12 Points of Adaptation" have been so easily and quickly approved by the Holy See? Vatican officials would have had to have someone influential who could reassure them that these adaptations were not only genuine inculturation but also that their implementation was something that the Bishops and the laity were eagerly looking forward to. It is significant that Amalorpavadass also founded the Anjali Ashram at Mysore [The NBCLC itself is a founder-member of Ashram Aikiya, the organization of Catholic ashrams]. I too, like you, have visited and observed the goings-on at several ashrams and cannot accept that they promote what Cornille terms an "authentic Indian spirituality" unless by that one means a syncretistic or Hindu spirituality. Cornille, as cited by you, observed that "the religious practice in Catholic ashrams follows in addition the ritual life of the Church". To all appearances that may be so. But it is a travesty of the real thing. My Catholic Ashrams report provides the evidence. After producing heretical writings that distort all accepted Church teaching, promoting rebellion against the 'hegemony' of Rome, Hinduising the Mass, equating the Bible with religious texts of other religions and desecrating the Eucharist by distributing it to anyone and everyone who strolls in to the ashram temple, observing a bare minimum or skeleton framework of traditional Catholic practices provides the illusion that they are following "the ritual life of the Church". You must read the writings of several leading ashram figures concerning the Eucharist to know that you erred very badly when you concluded that "reverence for the 'Real Presence' of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist remains the focus of the Indian Mass". To my mind, the Eucharist is in fact one of the major barriers to the ashramites' thrust toward achieving a complete "inculturation", where it [the Eucharist] will be replaced by "meditation" which is acceptable to all, meaning Hindus as well as those of no particular spirituality, and including a number of New Agers who flock to these ashrams. The centrality and presence of the Eucharist is an irritant which only serves to rub in the unicity of Catholicism. The section "Postures, Actions, Gestures and Bodily Attitudes" in your paper may be read in the light of my above comments. A few paragraphs later, you discussed "Sitting Posture and Removal of Footwear" in which you mentioned the common practice in India of squatting on the floor. In the Indian Church -- if one can deem them to be a part of that Church, heretical as they are -- the ashrams are probably the only place where you'll find people squatting as a rule. During your visit to India, you might have noted that this is the standard practice for religious ceremonies, specifically the Mass which is now popularly known as the squatting Mass, satsangs, 'meditating', interviews, and the like. The same is seen at the NBCLC. But dinner at the NBCLC, the nerve-center of the ashrams movement is at table where cold beer [Carlsberg!] is served on occasion. Ashram leaders' offices are equipped with tables and chairs. They do not travel by conventional Indian transport but ride in SUVs. In the wider church, squatting and removal of foot gear are only for the Indian rite Mass. At some squatting Masses I have seen concelebrants wearing footwear and sitting on chairs. The whole thing can be on occasion, a big farce, a sham. Once completed, its back to Western ways. I know of ashram leaders who come to the big city and stay with rich Catholics enjoying every modern Western convenience that one can imagine without the least protest. In Bangalore, I have visited the flat-cum-ashram of one of the leaders of Ashram Aikiya [the ashram movement]. Again, lots of tables and chairs; squatting was only for prayer and the ubiquitous 'meditation'. Most Hindu priests live at home or in their ashrams in the same style as they conduct worship and rituals in their temples. The actual inculturation, the one that we are seriously concerned about is what is done in the Liturgy. That is Hinduisation. Squatting on the floor, and the postures that you list: "the comfortable posture (Sukhasana) or diamond posture (Vajrasana), or the lotus posture (Padmasana)" have explanations in Vedic philosophy [these are discussed in some of my articles like the ones on Yoga]. In themselves, they mean nothing and are but what they are: postures. BUT, when carried over into Catholic usage [call it by any of the names you used: adoption, adaptation, inculturation] as promoted by our ashram protagonists, they DO NOT LOSE the meanings of their origins [the inculturationists do not try to lose them; they take them in toto or try to Christianize them, unsuccessfully.] On the contrary, the meanings cross over too. Fr. D.S. Amalorpavadass, as cited by you, confesses, "The squatting posture facilitates a greater contact with 'Mother Earth' through which man can enter into communion with the whole universe (cosmos) which is permeated by Gods presence." Unfortunately, the Bishops and everyone else gloss over these statements, not understanding their significance. The statement of the NBCLC founder is not just New Agey; it is advaitic-monistic. How can I allege that? I can produce scores of articles and dozens of yoga books authored by priests to back my claims. It is enough to look at just one book, Shabda Shakti Sangam, edited by Vandana Mataji, Catholic nun and ashram founder, 1995. If you read my explanations of the padma-asana posture, you would learn that it is the ideal posture for moving prana energy, shakti or kundalini power from the base of the spine, up through the psychic chakras via the alleged energy cord called the sushumna. Funny thing is, all these ashram priests and nuns ACTUALLY BELIEVE this. The yoga that is their mainstay is not a spirituality-free physical exercise as is commonly believed. It is a meditation system that is inextricably linked with Vedic religious philosophy and Brahminism. In your section on the use of the 'Anjali hasta', you have cited Amalorpavadass on the use of the 'Namaste' wherein he explains the position of the "inner eye" or the "focal point" on one's forehead. The more common term would be the "third eye" which is one of the seven psychic chakras. These beliefs are occult. The expected role of a priest such as Amalorpavadass would be to debunk these claims and steer Catholics away from such esoteric concepts. But he does the opposite. And that was what, thirty-odd years ago? Much polluted water has flowed down the Ganga since then.

This is the inculturation that we fear and speak against and wage war on. Catholicism would be unrecognisable in India in a few years at this rate. I have talked to many priests about all of the above issues. I can honestly report that a significant number of them believe in a monistic all-pervasive energy called prana, in kundalini, in the third eye, in the chakras. I could continue, ad nauseam. Maybe now you would evaluate Kulanday's anjali hasta comments differently. In one place, you described him as a "detractor" of Amalorpavadass. I feel that you could use a more positive alternative. Kulanday's prophetic role was unique in combating the potential dangers of inculturation in its early stages, and a generation later we are witnesses to its degeneration into all sorts of abuses, excesses and aberrations. I move on now to your reference to the pictures in the St. Pauls New Community Bible [NCB] concerning Exodus 3:5. The commentary on that portion would be plausible and acceptable, even commendable, if it stood by itself. But the commentators words have to be looked at in the light of the entire picture of Indian Catholic theology as it is today. That is what Catholics like me do and see. And that is why we object to them. I look at the NCB pictures of different religions' shrines and the removal of footwear as a subtle but forceful and powerful suggestion that all religions are the same, all their deities are equal. I don't manufacture this concern out of thin air. I see it when I enter Anjali Ashram -- which you visited -- and find scriptures of all faiths, including the Holy Bible at the "altar". I see it all the time in my studies and research. So, when someone finds the NCB commentary on Exodus 3:5 to be a noble acknowledgement of the divine presence in all religions, I can't fault that, because that person does not know what I know and what I saw and understood after reading ALL the commentaries of the NCB, and which I crammed into a critique of eight tight pages to send to the Bishops and to Rome. That was only the first of no less than seventeen reports that I published on the NCB issue, running into several hundred pages. Concerning the Indian rite Mass, you said, "one cannot but admire the genuine reverence which such sustained ritualized gestures convincingly convey". While I do not deny that you might have felt that way when participating in such an event at the ashrams, I wonder at the same time if that is the only or most important criteria for the celebration of the Eucharist. Is the Latin rite extraordinary form any less reverent than the Indian rite form, or even the Novus Ordo for that matter? A satanic mass might also be found to be reverent in its detailed ritualism. There are certainly a host of other factors to be considered when evaluating the appropriateness and acceptability of any form that purports to be the Holy Mass. I have a problem also with this statement that you made, "When failing to remove their footwear at church, it seems only too likely that some Christians in India must surely make their non-Christian neighbors wonder at their lack of reverence and perhaps even question the sanctity of their houses of worship". It is my personal opinion that the use footwear to Church or the lack of it has not been a factor that either scandalized anyone or motivated anyone to want to become a Catholic.

When I was young, almost five decades ago and even post Vatican Council II, only the elite or westernised people sat in the pews and sported footwear in the big churches in metropolitan Madras. The others sat on the floor and most of them actually did not own even a pair of sandals, forget about their having to remove them at the door. Today, none in Chennai, the renamed city, sits on the floor at Mass, and even those visiting the Blessed Sacrament in the adoration chapels or the Tomb of St. Thomas voluntarily jettison their expensive Nikes and Reeboks at the entrance. I am a stickler for reverence in Church, and I find what is more scandalizing is the behaviour of Catholics in the presence of the Living God at Mass or generally in church. I don't think I need to elaborate much. Take the way people dress to church. Visit any temple and see the reverence of devotees. Hindus might go to their temples out of fear and superstition with the end of propitiating their gods, thus explaining the outward reverence that they manifest. But what would they think of Christians who claim to have a God who died for them but chat and play with cell phones in His presence while their children run around uncontrolled? Go back and take a look at the deportation of children who visit Hindu temples. How many of us can claim to have seen a priest celebrate Mass Padre-Pio like as if he really believed that God was truly and physically present there on the altar or in the Tabernacle? I have. Fr. Anastasio Gomes OCD for one! Footwear? It doesn't even figure. I wouldn't have thought of looking at Fr. Gomes' feet to find out if he was barefoot or wearing sandals while celebrating Mass. I'm glad I never did. I simply didn't have to. Concerning the "Om" symbol, you say, "Buddhists and Jains have adopted and adapted it to their own use", and ask, "Should Catholics in India do likewise?" Unless I am very mistaken, Buddhism and especially Jainism are regarded as sects of Hinduism, in India. You might want to check that out. Classic Buddhism has no deity, but under the inescapable influence of Hinduism that is not so today. Buddha is worshiped as god. Jainism too has degenerated and is much unlike the early religion taught by Lord Mahavir. No Jain home or office is without rituals to a number of HINDU deities. Jains celebrate Hindu festivals. It is no surprise that they have appropriated the "Om" for their use. Should Catholics do likewise? Fr. Hilary Fernandes, mentioned earlier, brought Ganpati into his parish church. The NBCLC installed Nataraja [Shiva] and others. These are not exceptions. Selective incorporation of pagan symbols and rituals has not worked and never will work. Religion and culture are so closely entwined that if one boogey man is let in [which first happened in the NBCLC], one will be unable to stem the tide. I concur with Fr. S. M. Michael SVD when he says, "the Hindu Om cannot replace the Christian Cross, because the theological foundations and the world view of these are very different in terms of their meaning, content and moral implications". Note that Fr. Michael says that the "Om" is HINDU, not Indian. Two further thoughts came to my mind:

If the Om's theological foundations and implications conflict with Christianity, what about the arati, Bharatanatyam dance and other Hindu symbols, rituals and sacramentals that have been incorporated into the liturgy? Are they any less Hindu? The "Om" as a symbol has generally not REPLACED the cross. It is used ALONG WITH the cross, SUPERIMPOSED ON the cross or vice versa as you might have observed at Bede Griffiths' Shantivanam ashram and elsewhere. But the "OM" as a chant or as a mantra has played a great role in replacing traditional Catholic prayers or at least components of them. This is as bizarre as the Hindus' attempting to borrow the cross or using the "Amen" instead of the "Om". Hindus are today talking in terms of "intellectual property rights" in respect of their dance forms, symbols, etc. I wish them all the very best. I concur with your observation that "it appears that more thoroughly inculturated forms of the liturgy are to be encountered only "off the beaten path," as it were, within the more-or-less 'elite' environs of Catholic ashrams" though I would qualify inculturated here as Hinduized, or "paganized" a la Kulanday. In continuation, you wrote, "and in more remote, rural lands populated by low-caste tribal peoples, 'Dalits' and so-called 'Other Backward Castes.'" Fr. Paul Puthanangady discounts the "fear that adopting symbols from classical Hinduism will perpetuate and glorify the oppressive structures symbolized by Brahmanism." The last word should read as "Brahminism". [The same spelling again when you quote him at note 102]. Brahman-ism would relate to the Brahman of the Hindu triadBrahma, Shiva and Vishnu, creator, preserver, destroyer. I agree with Puthanangady that the Dalits' fears may be misplaced, but for me what is significant here is that he is obliged to admit that these symbols originate in "classical Hinduism"/Brahminism. You too remarked that "such an admission appears rather disingenuous" because "the caste system, with its often oppressive, inhuman discrimination and other injustices, has been perpetuated not only by those Brahmins atop traditional Hindu society, but too often by Christians, both foreign and domestic, as well", when Puthanangady enlarged that "perhaps in the initial stages of our liturgical inculturation we may have committed this mistake". Puthanangady further recommends that "care should be taken to avoid any symbol that might perpetuate and glorify the oppressive elements in their lives". You also quote Fr. Michael as saying, "many of the early efforts (and a number of ongoing examples) of liturgical inculturation in the Indian Catholic Church, taking as they have various high-caste, Brahminical Hindu symbols, terms, concepts, and ritualized practices to be normative, or definitive of some imaginary 'Indianness,' have thereby consequently (even if inadvertently) alienated Dalits and others who have been historically marginalized and oppressed precisely by the caste systema system which has thus apparently been indiscriminately adopted by the Churchs bishops, priests, theologians and liturgists, some of whom may already appear to many Dalits as an elite class and a potentially oppressive force."

Enlightened Dalit Catholic leaders oppose inculturation not for the reasons that we do but simply because it represents the hegemony of the same Brahminism that has held them in servile bondage for millennia. Unfortunately, by their very definition of being backward and oppressed, most Dalits are unaware of the relationship between the two that some of their leaders see, and I believe that one of the major potential oppositions to inculturation would come from here if only those leaders, especially the lay ones, would partially shift their focus from politico-socio-economic issues to religious ones. For many of us who oppose Hinduisation/Brahminisation, it is NOT because the symbols and rituals are Brahmin per se, and/or anti-Dalit, but because of their deeply ingrained, non-detachable religious and spiritual significance. Not many will agree with me on what follows because as is widely reported there are even priests who do not believe in the existence of an entity called the devil, and my stance may well be described as fundamentalist in a pluralist world, but there is the truth that dark powers are associated with certain pagan symbols. Christians are enjoined to worship only the Living God. Since the only other supernatural power is that of evil, there have been reports from eminent priests and lay people in the exorcism and deliverance ministries of cases of diabolic possession and obsession that have been brought to them wherein the entity has identified itself as the spirit of "Om' or that of "Nataraja", the dancing aspect of Shiva. It is not possible for me to go into any detail here. I have presented enough of evidence related to these issues in two recently completed articles SATANISM, DELIVERANCE AND EXORCISM and DANCING AND BHARATANATYAM IN THE MASS. In the latter, the information that I mentioned is found in Section D. I am not saying that Hindus who use their symbols and perform Bharatanatyam are worshiping the devil or are possessed; but Christians who are involved could lay themselves open to demonic influence. Before I forget, I would like to know more about the mistake that Puthanangady believes that inculturationists committed in the "initial stages" of tampering with the liturgy. What was the result of that "mistake"? How did they realise their "mistake"? From your paper: "Theckanath reveals that the majority of those polled are favorably disposed toward the liturgical innovations allowed in the interest of producing an inculturated, indigenous Indian liturgy ... Theckanath notes, significantly, that among those who had direct exposure to the NBCLC by having attended any of the numerous seminars they frequently host, "the response is overwhelmingly positive."." When I attended an eight-day Emperor Emmanuel cult retreat last year, I witnessed that almost a hundred percent of the retreatants went in as faithful Catholics and emerged as ex-Catholics. That happens at almost every one of their programmes. It is much the same when cynics and unbelievers attend week-long retreats at the Divine Retreat Centre in Muringoor, Kerala. If a survey is conducted or a poll taken, a majority will describe their experience as positive. It is the same with the NBCLC programs. Most laity has had little or no catechesis. The NBCLC uses a battery of experienced theologian-priests as

well as nuns and a well laid out curriculum. Those who sign up have virtually no chance of avoiding being influenced by the program. They live together for several days and develop a familial bond. They feel they are valued and wanted and that they belong. It is therefore not surprising that a majority of them would wholeheartedly support the NBCLC initiatives. After I wrote this, I just read that you support what I wrote above when you commented "one may rightly wonder about the accuracy of statistics and the debatable representative nature of the surveys samplewhether it might not be skewed toward a relatively more 'elite' clientele which has been exposed to seminars at the NBCLC". As for me, I would be more interested in "12 % feel that all of this amounts to Hinduization. They say that the Christian identity will be lost if inculturation is pursued". God bless that 12%. May their tribe increase. You quote Collins as saying, "it is an over-simplification to attribute aarti to Brahminical practice". I don't know how she reached that conclusion. You alluded to "its nearly ubiquitous use by Indians across the social spectrum". I have not completed my own research into the meaning of arati. But we know that conducting rituals was the exclusive privilege of the Brahmin caste, and fire was worshipped exclusively by the so-called Aryans. Brahmins are reputed to be those Aryans. It is logical that the arati is Brahminical as are many or most other symbols and rituals in Hinduism. Archbishop Menamparampil is quoted as saying, "The more a Christian community becomes indigenized, the more it becomes open to the universal Church. A closed attitude can bring into existence culture-bound churches that cannot understand each other." To me the meanings of both the statements contradict themselves. How does a heavily inculturated local Church, say one that is best exemplified by the ashram movement's Indian rite Mass, become "more open to the universal Church."? From the above do we conclude that when there was only one Mass, the Tridentine one, the local Churches were less open or not open to the universal Church? Methinks the opposite is true. If one reads the writings of the ashramites, one is left with no doubt about the fact that they are campaigning for an autonomous Indian church which will appoint its own bishops, have its own indigenous theology, and women priests. Feminist nuns and lay feminists supported by feminist priest-theologians already have an unofficial underground network in place and I can assure you that they exert disproportional influence, one of them -- a lay woman -- having served in the Federation of Asian Bishops' Conferences and in the CBCI. But then, I'm not a theologian, so I'm not theologizing or prophesying the future, just struggling to understand the implication of the Archbishop's statements... You mentioned that "Indian Archbishop Thomas Menamparampil, SDB, has assessed certain failures and limits of inculturation in India". However you only included his assessment of "some of its successes". Why? Anyone interested in the subject, and more especially people like me, would very much want to know what he concludes are the "failures and limits of inculturation". You quote Pope John Paul II on "...the Potential Pitfalls of Liturgical Inculturation". That's nice. But this same Pope scandalized many by his passive participation in the very same "liturgical inculturation" during his visit to India. If one conducts a Google search, one will find numerous articles on this issue, all of them by radical Traditionalists who are having a field day attacking the Novus Ordo and Vatican Council II with the support of numerous photographs on their site -- which can be very disturbing to a faithful Catholic [like me]. And then there's the now infamous "Spirit of Assisi", 1986, for which there is no one else to blame but Pope John Paul II. He was there, he was party to it, he did not condemn or criticize it then or later; and it was repeated, 2002. Significantly, Cardinal Ratzinger showed both fortitude and discernment. He distanced himself from it then, and now, as Pope, he has assured that the coming 2011 Assisi event will not repeat the errors of 1986 and 2002. "Institutional inculturation would better serve the interests of interreligious dialogue": Fr. Selva J. Raj, as quoted by you. Since the problem at Assisi was the prominence given to eastern religions and their leaders, and Assisi is all about Inter-faith Dialogue, I am preparing an article on Interreligious Dialogue to establish its connection to the whole inculturation thing. Fr. Michael Amaladoss SJ whom you cite does not believe that devils exist. He is against organized religion and wants ours to be a "local church". He is an ashrams enthusiast. Fr. Paul Puthanangady SDB believes that Catholics doing yoga, reiki, pranic healing is permissible. He told me that himself at Muringoor in 1999. I have quoted their liberal teachings in my reports on the ashrams and the New Community Bible. When such priests are in the vanguard of inculturation, how can we expect anything good to come out of it? How can I pay any attention to whatever they say? Thirty such theologians wrote the commentaries that were introduced in the St. Pauls New Community Bible which received the Imprimatur from the seniormost bishop of the Archdiocese of Bombay and the Nihil Obstat from the Chairman bishop of the Doctrinal Commission of the CBCI. Yet, it eventually had to be withdrawn after popular protest. The NCB was an "Indianized" bible, an "inculturated" bible. The whole NCB affair confirmed that neither our bishops nor our theologians who apparently dominate them can be trusted with the security of our souls. The question in the bottom line must be: is all this inculturation business going to result in a holy, eucharistic, Spirit-filled, prophetic, non-compromising, powerful, evangelising and witnessing Church that is an integral part of the Universal Church of Rome? Methinks not. Michael PS. Some possible errors in your paper: 1. "In Anjali hasta, homage with two organs of the body is the basic gesture of homage or greeting. Panchanga Pranam is a more significant gesture. Sitting in Vajrasana (i.e. on ones heels) one touches the floor with ones forehead and both palms". I don't think that it is physically possible to "sit...on one's heels".

2. ""a learned Monsignor" who was the editor of a traditionalist newsletter, The Examiner". Are you certain about that? There is/was no Traditionalist Indian newspaper that I know of; the only 'The Examiner' is the Archdiocesan weekly of Bombay.

JON ANDERSONS RESPONSE WILL BE INCLUDED AS AND WHEN IT IS RECEIVED BY ME- MICHAEL THE CCBI/CBCI DIVIDE AND INCULTURATION
Latin-Rite Bishops Plan For National Mission Congress In India
http://www.ucanews.com/html/ucan/f_dishpatch.asp? ucalang=English_../news_report/english/2007/03/w3/thu/IA02097RhW.txt

BANGALORE, India (UCAN) March 15, 2007 India's Latin-rite bishops have taken the initiative to organize a national follow-up to the Asian Mission Congress (AMC). The Federation of Asian Bishops' Conferences organized the AMC in Chiang Mai, northern Thailand, in October 2006, and called for similar events in each Asian country as part of the Church's efforts to tell the story of Jesus across the continent. At a March 8-9 preparatory meeting at Bangalore's National Biblical Catechetical and Liturgical Centre (NBCLC), the Conference of the Catholic Bishops in India (CCBI), the forum of Latin-rite bishops in the country, drew up an initial plan to host the national mission congress in April 2008. The CCBI is the largest episcopal body in India, with 164 prelates who serve 23 archdioceses and 105 dioceses. About 120 people, including nine prelates, attended the meeting. Aside from the Latin rite, the Indian Catholic Church has two Oriental rites, the Syro-Malabar and SyroMalankara Churches, which have bishops' synods, not conferences. The Syro-Malabar Church has 25 dioceses, while the Syro-Malankara Church has six. Prelates from all three rites form the Catholic Bishops' Conference of India (CBCI), which addresses matters of significance for all rites. Father Vijay Shanthiraj, secretary of the CCBI commission for proclamation, says the Latin-rite bishops [CCBI] took the initiative to host the national congress, since the CBCI has no commission for proclamation. The priest told UCA News March 10 that his Church would collaborate with the Oriental-rite Churches to conduct the congress. The CBCI has been the national body of Catholic bishops since 1944, fulfilling Church law that bishops in every nation should have national bishops' conferences. But papal instructions in 1987 led to the formation of bishops' forums for the different rites. While each forum has its own commission for rite-specific Church needs, the CBCI continues to facilitate study and discussion of intra-rite matters affecting the Church in India. But it has no commission for proclamation, which should have facilitated a national mission congress such as the one that the Latin-rite bishops [CCBI] are planning, officials explained. CCBI deputy secretary general Father Udumala Bala told UCA News March 12 that most Catholics in India, including a sizeable number of priests, were not aware of the AMC when it was held. "We had only a handful of laity and women participating in the Asian Mission Congress, which must not happen again here," he asserted. Father Bala said some participants at the meeting want diocesan and regional congresses to precede the national congress, while others want to have the national event first. Father Shanthiraj says his Church does not plan to collaborate with CBCI as all prelates in India come under any of the three episcopal bodies. However, he said that collaboration among the forums of various rites would ensure total participation of the Catholic Church in India. CBCI president Cardinal Telesphore Toppo of Ranchi says the national body should be involved in organizing the congress for better participation. "CCBI can take the initiative, but it must see that all sections of the Church in India are actively involved in the program," the prelate told UCA News March 12. Father Jan Dumon, secretary general of the Rome-based Society of St. Peter the Apostle, told the preparatory meeting that every Catholic has a role and responsibility to tell the story of Jesus in his surroundings. The bishops proposed two places for the national mission congress. One is Ranchi archdiocese, in eastern India. The archdiocese, considered the nerve center of eastern India's tribal church, is based in Ranchi, the capital of Jharkhand state, 1,160 kilometers southeast of New Delhi. Cardinal Toppo said, however, that Ranchi archdiocese currently lacks funds and infrastructure to host the national event. The other proposal is to have it in Nagpur archdiocese in central India. The archdiocese is based in the town, which also houses the headquarters of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS, national volunteers' corps), the umbrella body of rightwing groups that want to create a Hindu theocratic state in India. Father Bala said some expressed apprehension about holding the event at Nagpur. The Church would seek the blessing and cooperation of the RSS leaders to hold the congress. If RSS can organize grassroots rallies and processions to celebrate the birth centenary of their second leader, "we can celebrate the festival of Jesus in Nagpur as well," the Catholic priest asserted. Infrastructure is also a problem for Nagpur, a major city in Maharashtra state, 1,010 kilometers south of New Delhi, says Father Oscar Nazareth, a liturgy expert from Nagpur's St.

Charles Seminary. A decision on the venue would be taken at CCBI's national executive meting scheduled for April in Bangalore, Father Shanthiraj said.

THE OWNER/MODERATOR OF KONKANI CATHOLICS GROUP COMMENTS ON THE ABOVE

From: Austine J. Crasta To: prabhu; Rohit D'Souza; Deepak Ferrao; Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 1:07 AM Subject: Re: CCBI /CBCI Dear Michael, I see that the power struggle among Indian prelates is a very old one and from the time of the Portuguese missionaries, it seems to be an "India" versus "Foreign" struggle. Now though we don't have any foreign missionary presence, the same struggle continues especially using the rites as an excuse. The Eastern rites are considered to be indigenous while the Latin rite is made to appear foreign. Some observations about the Eastern rites in India: a) The two Eastern rites are restricted, so far as I know, ONLY to the Malayalam-speaking community/Keralites. The very 2000 year-old Indian Christian tradition they boast of is a witness against their poor missionary efforts in the country. c) Both the Syro-Malabar rite and Syro-Malankara rite stem from the same Syriac/Chaldean liturgy and hence should have been identical if not for the differences introduced in the Syro-Malabar rite before the other faction of St. Thomas Christians was reconciled with the Church as Syro-Malankara. d) The Eastern rites have a tendency to project themselves as being INDIAN, though being Syriac they are equally "foreign". Now as I noted in a) the Eastern rites being restricted only to Malayalee people, we may not be able to understand some the developments on their side, if we do not take into special account the nature and tendency of the Malayalee community. I have often noted that among Keralites, there is a tendency to regard the Syro-Malabar rite as superior to the Latin rite in matters of marriage or even when it comes to switching rites. Perhaps it is a hangover of an Indian/Hindu class tendency. This perhaps is also the reason why this closely knit community tends to seek more autonomy for itself from Rome (considered Latin rite), something which they did even in earlier centuries prompting the Portuguese missionaries to falsely regard them as heretics. This may also be the reason why - I have noted this several times - that Malayalees tend to portray their language, culture and rite as though it were the entire country's, as though THEY represent India. Further the Malayalees have a way of finding their way through things by use of influence and tact, for e.g. by making friendship with someone who can be a bridge for them with the person they seek to convince. Coming back to the UCAN story: Jose Kavi is a Syro-Malabar Catholic and I have observed a slant [against the Latin rite- Michael] in the tone of the UCAN stories on the Pope/Vatican. An official in the CCBI office too pointed this out to me earlier. The line in the story, "Father Shanthiraj says his Church does not plan to collaborate with CBCI" is NOT A QUOTE by Fr. Shanthiraj but a paraphrase of the journalist/editor. I find reason to assume to that this was a deliberate slant against the CCBI/Latin rite first of all because it is a very unusual usage for any Latin rite Catholic to refer to the Latin rite as "his Church." Apart from that it is as though the Church in India was equally divided in number and in language/communities among all the 3 rites, which is SIMPLY A FALSE PROJECTION GIVEN TO THE WEST BY THE SYRO-MALABARS!!!

The reference to Rome, as I understand it, has to do with establishing the Indian practice of inculturation, inter-religious dialogue and other new age philosophies and theologies (like Dalitology, the liberation theology of India), and thereby rendering Rome voiceless in India and gaining more autonomy for the "Indian Church" and power to the prelates.

Now, applying what I said about the Malayalee tendency to make friendship and find their way through to the rites, what I see is that much of the development regarding inculturation and related things comes from a collaboration with the Syro-Malabar rite, which during its internal reforms abandoned the Chaldean liturgy in favour of a more Indian liturgy. I feel their whole point of asking for national conference of bishops is so that ultimately they will have their way through, i.e., by gaining positions of authority for themselves (despite being a smaller part of the church in India) in the CBCI whose jurisdiction extends even among the other rites (including Latin), by introducing some of their own ideas, presenting it as "Indian" (rather than Malayalee) and getting it passed unitedly thereby challenging Rome with the strength of ALL the Indian

Bishops rather than with a few syro-malabar bishops.

I believe this is the Syro-Malabar church's hidden intention that Jose was hinting at. (I'm not saying this against Malayalees. Indeed there are a very many of them who are really sincere and hard-working. They deserve our praise. Moreover every community has its own weaknesses while some may be peculiar to it and inspired by elements of its own culture)

Cardinal Parecattil of the Syro-Malabar Church and Dr. Amalorpavadas of the Latin rite are considered the master-minds behind the inculturation movement in the Indian Church. And so what were these ritual clashes and Indianisation leading up to? A common rite that would be called the Indian Rite Mass. It was in the General Meeting of the CBCI in October 1966, barely one year after the Council, that Archbishop Raymond made this suggestion in these words: "In the future there would be a COMMON MASS for the whole of India: We must cling neither to East nor West, but to our Land." In the wake of such thinking which indeed was a distortion/misinterpretation of the conciliar texts (Sacrosanctum Concilium), the Congregation for Divine Worship and the discipline of the sacraments, in its fourth instruction for the right implementation of the constitution on the sacred liturgy made clear that "the work of inculturation does not foresee the creation of new families of rites" but that "inculturation responds to the needs of a particular culture and leading to adaptations which still remain part of the Roman rite" In other words, the Church through Vatican II does not foresee the creation of a non-apostolic, artificial (common) Indian Rite mass, the subject of all Indian inculturation related discussions. Austine Crasta

Apparently there is plenty of rite "politics" behind the "Indian rite Mass"Michael
The following story cannot be located on the Internet now and I had not noted the date of its publication

CCBI Liturgy Commission Releases - A Book on Arathi

http://ccbi.in/publications.php SAR news October 2006 The Liturgy Commission of the CCBI has brought out a book on Arathi and the syllable Om based on the research on these two ritual symbols of India, which are adopted here and there in Christian worship in the spirit of inculturation and dialogue. The newly appointed Deputy General Secretary of the CCBI, Fr. Udumala Bala said that he was happy for the release of a new book from the Liturgy Commission of CCBI as relevant and most modern studies in the Spirit of Vatican Council should take place in India. He affirmed that Liturgy includes every aspect of Christian life. When we can rightly adapt having good understanding of the social symbols of the nation in the Indian culture made by qualified people according to the directives of the Catholic Church it will help us to integrate the message of Christianity in the national and social life of the people in a meaningful way. Speaking to SAR News the liturgist, Fr. Jesudhasan Michael, the Executive Secretary of the Liturgy Commission of the CCBI said that his book, 'Worship in the Agamic Tradition of Hinduism' speaks mainly of his studies on the method of adopting Arati in India and the meaning of the Syllable OM in Indian tradition. The book handles objectively with the help of the existing Hindu Literature, the more sensitive and controversial issues in liturgical inculturation in India regarding the use of Arathi and the syllable OM. Fr. Jesudhasan who has a doctorate in Liturgical studies claims that the information on the Agamic Tradition of Hinduism and the description of Hindu Worship, given in this book though not exhaustive is the result of his one man team study of the ancient literature, and his encounter with the experts of Hindu religion. Explaining the reasons for writing the book the priest said that the Vatican document, Sacrosanctum Concilium urged the active participation of the people in the liturgy and the need of adapting the liturgy to the culture and the tradition of the people. The very nature of the liturgy calls for a full, conscious and active participation on the part of the people in liturgical celebration because it is their right and duty by reason of their baptism, it said. To promote the active participation the Council speaks of adaptation of the cultural elements in the liturgy. Acknowledging that the Church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in the liturgy it affirms the Church's principle of pluralism, even in the liturgy in matters not affecting the unity of the faith or the good of the whole community. It was this aspect of adaptation that encouraged the Church in India to introduce certain cultural elements and religious symbols into Christian liturgy, the author said. One of the 12 points of Adaptation approved by Rome for the Church in India was the rite of Arati during the Eucharistic celebration and subsequently this rite was added in the Roman missal for use in India. Taking the cue from this development, there were attempts here and there to adopt the Hindu religious symbol of the syllable OM too in our liturgy.

This booklet tries to look into these two elements from the point of view of Hindu religious worship, as these are two important elements in any Hindu temple worship, said the author. The book does not claim to be exhaustive it is the result of a personal study on the problem of Arati and OM in Christian Worship based on literature and available documents. The booklet also will help to understand the real problems that persist in India in the process of inculturation, said the Executive Secretary of the Commission for Liturgy, the scholar said.

The Om has already been dealt with in my document

MANTRAS, 'OM' OR 'AUM' AND THE GAYATRI MANTRA http://ephesians-511.net/docs/MANTRAS_OM_OR_AUM_AND_THE_GAYATRI_MANTRA.doc

I will write an article on the Arati shortly, including citations from the above book.Michael Living the Eucharistic mystery
Homily at the Closing Solemn Mass of the FABC* IX Plenary Assembly in Manila, 16 August 2009 http://www.rcam.org/news/2009/FABC/living_the_eucharistic_mystery_homily_cardinal_arinze.html EXTRACT 4. Eucharistic Celebration and Inculturation The Second Vatican Council calls for healthy inculturation also in matters liturgical. "Even in the liturgy, the Church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters which do not involve the faith or the good of the whole community. Rather, she respects and fosters the spiritual adornments and gift of the various races and peoples" (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 37). Asian cultures have many values highlighted in our discussions in the past six days; such as a sense of the sacred and the transcendent, contemplation, mysticism, silence, a sense of living traditions and organic development and gestures and postures which enhance celebration. The Colombo Liturgical Convention of September 2008 already mentioned gives importance to this question in paragraphs 1 to 6 of his final statement. Liturgical inculturation is demanding. The Bishops Conference of the country in question has first to set up a multi-disciplinary study committee of theologians, liturgists, biblical scholars, musicians, ethnologists and experts in literature, which ponders over a cultural question indicated by the bishops and eventually makes a recommendation to the Bishops Conference. After adequate study of the document, the Bishops see if they can gather at least two-thirds of their votes in favor. If the outcome is positive, the Bishops bring the entire matter with their proposals to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. Only when this Congregation gives its recognition may the cultural element in question be introduced into sacred worship. The major Church documents that give directives on how inculturation is to be made are Sacrosanctum Concilium, 37-40, the 1994 Instruction: Roman Liturgy and Inculturation, and Chapter IX of the General Instruction on the Roman Missal. If these directives are followed, the local Church will be spared questionable or downright mistaken innovations and idiosyncrasies of some enthusiastic cleric whose fertile imaginations invents something on Saturday night and whose uninformed zeal forces this innovation on the innocent congregation on Sunday morning. Dance in particular needs to be critically examined because most dances draw attention to the performers and offer enjoyment. People come to Mass, not for recreation but, to adore God, to praise and thank him, to ask pardon for their sins, and to request other spiritual and temporal needs. The monasteries may be of help in how graceful body movements can become prayer. The Colombo statement quoted above remarks: "When pastoral zeal combines with cultural and religious sensitivity, new ground is broken. On the contrary, hasty and un-reflected changes weaken or damage the religious significance and life-transforming power of worship" (Colombo Statement, 6). *Federation of Asian Bishops Conferences

We will briefly visit some Church documents for their guidelines on what genuine Inculturation is. 1. INSTRUCTION: INCULTURATION AND THE ROMAN LITURGY VARIETATES LEGITIMAE

Fourth instruction for the right application of the Conciliar Constitution on the Liturgy issued on March 29, 1994. http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/cdwinclt.htm The Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments issued on January 25, 1994, under approval and order of the Pope, a Document with the above title, which says, #4, "The constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium spoke of the different forms of liturgical adaptation. Subsequently the magisterium of the church has used the term 'inculturation' to define more precisely the 'incarnation of the Gospel in autonomous cultures, and at the same time the introduction of these cultures into the life of the Church'. [John Paul II, encyclical Slavorum Apostoli, June 2, 1985, #21: AAS 77 (1985), 802-803; discourse to the Pontifical Council for Culture plenary assembly, January 17, 1987, No. 5: AAS 79 (1987), 1204-1205.] Inculturation signifies 'an intimate transformation of the authentic cultural values by their integration into Christianity and the implantation of Christianity into different human cultures'. The term 'inculturation' is a better expression to designate a double movement: "By inculturation, the church makes the Gospel incarnate in different cultures and at the same time introduces peoples, together with their cultures, into her own community." [John Paul II, encyclical Redemptoris Missio, December 7, 1990, #52: AAS 83 (1991), 300.] On the one hand the penetration of the Gospel into a given socio-cultural milieu "gives inner fruitfulness to the spiritual qualities and gifts proper to each people ..., strengthens these qualities, perfects them and restores them in Christ." On the other hand, the church assimilates these values, when they are compatible with the Gospel, "to deepen understanding of Christ's message and give it more effective expression in the liturgy and in the many different aspects of the life of the community of believers." [Vatican Council II, Gaudium et Spes #58] This double movement in the work of inculturation thus expresses one of the component elements of the mystery of the incarnation. [Cf. John Paul II, apostolic exhortation Catechesi Tradendae, Oct. 16, 1979, #53: AAS 71 (1979), 1319.]"

Genuine inculturation entails the implantation of Christianity into cultures. It does not permit syncretization and it envisions the transformation [by Christianity] of authentic cultural values, values compatible with the Gospel, not of authentic HINDU RELIGIOUS values, through their integration by inculturation. [Continued on
following page]

2. SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM #37, 40

Anything in these peoples' way of life which is not indissolubly bound up with superstition and error she [the Church] studies with sympathy and, if possible, preserves intact. Sometimes in fact she admits such things into the liturgy itself, so long as they harmonize with its true and authentic spirit. [Episcopal conferences must] carefully and prudently consider which elements from the traditions and culture of individual peoples might appropriately be admitted into divine worship. Adaptations which are judged to be useful or necessary should when be submitted to the Apostolic See, by whose consent they may be introduced.

Genuine inculturation assimilates only that which is not indissolubly bound up with superstition and error. The Bishops are responsible for ensuring that, and they need to get prior approval from Rome before incorporating elements from other traditions and cultures in the liturgy. 3. EVANGELII NUNTIANDI #18-20
Apostolic exhortation of Pope Paul VI, December 8, 1975 For the Church, evangelizing means bringing the Good News into all the strata of humanity, and through its influence transforming humanity from within and making it new: "Now I am making the whole of creation new." [] for the Church it is a question not only of preaching the Gospel in ever wider geographic areas or to ever greater numbers of people, but also of affecting and as it were upsetting, through the power of the Gospel, mankind's criteria of judgment, determining values, points of interest, lines of thought, sources of inspiration and models of life, which are in contrast with the Word of God and the plan of salvation. All this could he expressed in the following words: what matters is to evangelize man's culture and cultures (not in a purely decorative way, as it were, by applying a thin veneer, but in a vital way, in depth and right to their very roots), in the wide and rich sense which these terms have in Gaudium et spes []

The Gospel, and therefore evangelization, are certainly not identical with culture, and they are independent in regard to all cultures. Nevertheless, the kingdom which the Gospel proclaims is lived by men who are profoundly linked to a culture, and the building up of the kingdom cannot avoid borrowing the elements of human culture or cultures. Though independent of cultures, the Gospel and evangelization are not necessarily incompatible with them; rather they are capable of permeating them all without becoming subject to any one of them. The split between the Gospel and culture is without a doubt the drama of our time, just as it was of other times. Therefore every effort must be made to ensure a full evangelization of culture, or more correctly of cultures. They have to be regenerated by an encounter with the Gospel. But this encounter will not take place if the Gospel is not proclaimed.

Genuine inculturation must result in the evangelization of cultures. The inculturated Gospel transforms the culture in question, not the other way around where the resultant entity is barely distinguishable from its pre-Christian/pagan origins. 1. [Ctd.] INSTRUCTION: INCULTURATION AND THE ROMAN LITURGY VARIETATES LEGITIMAE
Fourth instruction for the right application of the Conciliar Constitution on the Liturgy, March 29, 1994 #4, 5, 32, 47, 48 http://www.adoremus.org/doc_inculturation.html The Church assimilates these values when they are compatible with the Gospel to "deepen understanding of Christs message, and give it more effective expression in the liturgy and the life of the community of believers." [Vatican Council II, Gaudium et Spes #58] Inculturation thus understood has its place in worship as in other areas of the life of the Church. It constitutes one of the aspects of the inculturation of the Gospel which calls for true integration in the life of faith of each people of the permanent values of a culture, rather than their transient expressions. As in all forms of the work of evangelization, this patient and complex undertaking calls for methodical research and ongoing discernment. [Cf. Eastern Code of Canon Law, canon 584.2; Cf. Catechesi Tradendae, #53; Cf. Redemptoris Missio, #52; Cf. Pontifical Biblical Commission, Foi et culture a la lumiere de la Bible, 1981; and International Theological Commission, "Faith and Inculturation, 1988.] [Bishops] conferences may determine, according to the procedure given whether the introduction into the liturgy of elements borrowed from the social and religious rites of a people, and which form a living part of their culture, will enrich their understanding of liturgical actions without producing negative effects on their faith and piety. They will always be careful to avoid the danger of introducing elements that might appear to the faithful as the return to a period before evangelisation. [] The liturgy is the expression of faith and Christian life, and so it is necessary to ensure that liturgical inculturation is not marked, even in appearance, by religious syncretism. This would be the case if the places of worship, the liturgical objects and vestments, gestures and postures, let it appear as if rites had the same significance in Christian celebrations as they did before evangelisation. The syncretism will be still worse if Biblical readings and chants or the prayers were replaced by texts from other religions, even if these contain an undeniable religious and moral value. The Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium envisaged the admission of rites or gestures according to local custom into rituals of Christian initiation, marriage and funerals. This is a stage of inculturation. But there is also the danger that the truth of the Christian rite and the expression of the Christian faith could be easily diminished in the eyes of the faithful. Fidelity to traditional usages must be accompanied by purification, and if necessary, a break with the past. The same applies, for example, to the possibility to Christianizing festivals or holy places In every case it is necessary to avoid any ambiguity. Obviously the Christian liturgy cannot accept magic rites, superstition, spiritism or rites with a sexual connotation. END

We may look again at some of the key phrases of these Church Documents to check whether the ongoing Inculturation in the Indian Church is, or is not, faithful to the guidelines given by Rome. Keeping in view the different elements that have been assimilated, from the practice of "Christian" yoga, the use of the 'Om' [and other Sanskrit mantras], arati, the "Indian" lamp and even the Shiva linga, to the gestures, postures and some embellishments of the Indian rite Mass, we may ask if they are "authentic cultural values" "compatible with the Gospel to deepen understanding of Christs message," or if instead they are "bound up with superstition and error", some having a "sexual connotation," and the

usage of which "might appear to the faithful as the return to a period before evangelisation". Do they "bring the power of the Gospel into the very heart of culture," or is it the other way around with the Gospel being diluted and compromised? Can we confidently say that all of the inculturated elements are "generally religious" and not "specifically idolatrous" which possibility Rome does not preclude? Has inculturation led to "the evangelization of cultures" or have we suffered "religious syncretism? And, are the Indian episcopal conferences carrying out "methodical research" and practising "ongoing discernment" or are they controlled/influenced by the theologians who are in league with the leadership of the ashrams movement who are Hinduising the Church in India? While the answers may already be obvious to the reader, the issues will be dealt with in at least three forthcoming studies. One of them will examine the different symbols and sacramentals of Hinduism [arati, the Indian lamp among others]. Two others will provide documented evidence that the assimilation that is being carried out is Hinduisation and not the inculturation that Roman documents envisage, and that the ashrams movement led by the NBCLC is chiefly responsible for it. INCULTURATION AND THE LITURGY
http://www.csviator.net/ENG/upload/090204_182636-AmaladossInculturationLiturgy.PDF by Fr Michael Amaladoss SJ, 2004 Forty years ago the Second Vatican Council initiated a revolution with its document Sacrosanctum Concilium (SC) on the Liturgy. It recognized that the Church had now become a world-Church characterized by pluralism. The move to allow the use of different languages in the liturgy was only an indication of this awareness. It made provision, not only for the adaptation of the liturgy to the different cultures of the world (SC, 37-39), but also for the emergence of new Ritual families (SC, 40). The goal it set itself was the conscious, meaningful and active participation of the people in the liturgy. The reason why this was important was that life should be celebrated in the liturgy and liturgy should animate life and make it meaningful. The Church affirmed its power to change whatever is not divinely instituted (SC, 21). It wanted to associate the Conferences of Bishops in this revolutionary task (SC, 40). Though we have made some progress, the task remains as urgent as ever. About ten years later the term 'inculturation' was applied to this process. Now I am not going to ask whether we need inculturation. I am taking this for granted. I am going to ask rather how we can promote inculturation in the liturgy. But before I go on to answer this question I would like make some clarifications regarding the two words in my title. What is the Liturgy? My first question is what is the liturgy? I am not aiming here at working out a definition, but clarifying our understanding. Is the liturgy primarily a mystery - Jesus paschal mystery, for example - that we make present through symbols or is it primarily a symbolic action of the community sharing food and drink together in memory of Jesus that acquires a mysteric dimension, when celebrated in faith, because Jesus, in accordance to his promise, becomes personally (bodily) present there in that food and drink? The sacramental action has a three level structure. At the first level is a community meal: a group of people eating and drinking together. This can happen in various circumstances. This is the ritual level. This meal symbolizes fellowship, togetherness and equality. Sharing food is sharing life. This is the second, social level of meaning. When this meal is taken in memory of Jesus by a community of his disciples obeying his command a third, mysteric level is added. Jesus bodily presence in the food in encountered in faith and the community has living fellowship with Jesus. Jesus giving his life to us and for us is a sacrificial action. Sharing his life he shares Gods life with us. In the process the symbolic action becomes prophetic. It challenges us to live what we symbolically celebrate, namely a life of fellowship and equality, and promote that life in the world. In celebrating the Eucharist we are symbolically living Jesus new commandment: "Love one another as I have loved you." The primary symbolic action here is a group of people eating and drinking together. This action acquires further meaning in the context of the faith of the community. A similar action can have other meanings in other contexts and in other religions. The basic human/social meaning will be the same. But the mysteric meaning will differ according to the context and to the religious faith. The action itself can be transformative if it brings together around one table a community that is divided and in conflict.1 1 Cf. M. Amaladoss, Do Sacraments Change? Variable and Invariable Elements in Sacramental Rites. Bangalore: Theological Publications in India, 1979. The Symbolic Structure of the Eucharist Sharing the life of God through the body and blood of Jesus - Mystery Celebration of community Social event Sharing food and drink Ritual action

The symbolic structure schematized here is very complex because of compound symbols. At the level of the ritual, it is a symbolic action made up of objects, gestures, words and actions. The Social event and the ritual action together constitute a symbolic whole, the ritual symbolizing the event. The ritual action and the social event together symbolize the mysteric event in the context of faith. The pivotal symbol in the whole structure is the social event. It can be ritualized in other ways. It can symbolize other mysteric events in other faith contexts. If we wish to make the Eucharist relevant to a particular cultural community the aim is not how best to symbolize the mysteric meaning in that culture, but how meaningfully that community can celebrate a common meal. Inculturation starts therefore, not from above from mystery , but from below the symbolic action of the community. When we speak of the Liturgy, normally we limit our attention to the official rites that relate to the Sacraments and the Prayer of the Church. The worship of the people however includes also para-liturgical services and popular religious practices. Sometimes these may be more important in the life of the people. So we will have to keep in mind also these forms of worship.2 2 Cf. Thomas Bamat and Jean-Paul Wiest (eds), Popular Catholicism in a World Church. Seven Case Studies in Inculturation. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1999. What is Inculturation? Is inculturation the mere translation of the Gospel in various languages and cultures of the world or is it the way that the people respond to the Gospel in their own cultures and languages? Is it translation or creative response? A response is obviously conditioned by the question. It is not given at random. But it is not a repetition of the question. Should a group of people give their own response to the Gospel in terms of their present context or should they repeat, by making it their own, the response given by some other group in some other place at some other time? Some people suppose that the Gospel has been given a privileged answer by the early Church and all that we have to do is to repeat it (the structure) in our own language and symbols. Others think that the Gospel has to be freshly responded to by every people in every culture and context.3 3 Cf. Anscar J. Chupungco, Liturgical Inculturation. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1992; M. Amaladoss, Beyond Inculturation. Delhi: ISPCK, 1998. Are there some constants? Yes. The Church has spelt out seven symbolic community actions as sacraments: a person being admitted to the community, a person passing into adulthood, a man and a woman setting up a family, a person designated to a role of leadership in the community, a person needing the loving concern of the community in time of illness, persons that need to be reconciled and, finally, the group itself celebrating its togetherness. But these community actions can be lived in different ways in different cultures. The Church believes that these actions have been chosen in some way by Jesus who endows them with a mysteric significance. In the process he has determined one or other action or symbol that the Church has to hold on to. When this matter came up for discussion in the Council of Trent in the context of communion under both the species demanded by the Protestants the Church affirmed its right to change all sacramental symbolic actions, provided the "their substance was preserved".4 4 J. Neuner and J. Dupuis, The Christian Faith. (1990), 1324. Theologians think that this substance refers to the various socio-anthropological situations that I referred to above. The Second Vatican Council mentions another criterion. The Church cannot change what has been "divinely instituted." (SC, 21) Theologians once again think that the only symbolic actions that Jesus has determined are 'washing with water' in the rite of initiation and 'eating and drinking together' in the Eucharist. Theologians are discussing whether Jesus also intended to determine the use of the materials of bread and wine. This means that, provided the basic meaning of the sacramental actions are preserved, the field is wide open for the choice of symbols and formulae. The various Ritual traditions are proof of this possible variety. In any case, washing and eating, anointing and imposition of hands are common human symbols in every culture. What we need to look at are the celebrations themselves, trying to locate them in the social context. The tragedy of course is that in spite of such openness at the Councils, Trent and Second Vatican, the authorities in the Church have chosen to insist on the preservation of the substantial unity of the Roman Rite for the Latin Church. A further dimension is that the central authority in the Church claims the exclusive right to control the process of inculturation. (SC, 22) I think that this claim is not justified. Another realization of the Second Vatican Council was that the Church is a communion of local Churches and that the Church is primarily the People of God (Lumen Gentium, 9-17) served by chosen leaders (LG, 18-56). These collegial and democratic dimensions of the Church however have not been encouraged and developed. It is strange that a central authority, localized in a particular place and culture, claims to discern the fine points of languages, symbols and cultures across the world even in a postmodern world. What actually happens is that while the authority in the Church keeps a tight control on the official rites, the people creatively develop popular

rituals. They have shown creativity and responsibility in doing this. When the rituals of the Church developed originally, I suppose they emerged from the people, though the people in authority had a role of coordination, direction and discernment. I would like to suggest that the creativity of the people precedes the discerning and guiding role of the leadership. Ongoing Tensions There are many sources of tensions in the liturgical life of the Church today. The official Church, in the name of liturgical reform, has tidied up the many accretions in the course of history, going as far as possible to earlier texts and ritual forms. This is welcome. After this one would have expected a certain creative activity in the context of modern world and its multiple cultures. But apart from some local external decorative elements permitted in India and Congo no deeper and substantial creativity has been encouraged. Any creative process is set in the context of such complex bureaucratic controls that nothing new can really happen. Even the translations in local languages made with the help of local experts are controlled. The local Bishops Conferences are allowed to add on some decorative local gestures. Some interested pastors and communities may add to these. This is the only concession given to cultural diversity. The consequence is that more and more people everywhere, even in the West, do not find the Liturgy meaningful and relevant and stop participating. They drift towards New Age and Pentecostal movements or independent Churches for their religious needs. The second source of tension is that, even where people are still practicing, not satisfied with the official liturgy which does not nourish them, they develop forms of popular religiosity. These are not only popular devotions. There are also parallel rituals that go together with the official ones and cater to their specific human, social and cultural needs. When we discuss inculturation we often tend to focus on translation (at the moment) and look at decorative materials, symbols, gestures and language. The Gospel must not only take form in a new culture. It must also challenge the culture to transformation. In a community divided by economic, caste, class or ethnic distinctions, for instance, it is more important that the Eucharist is celebrated in such a way that real equality and fellowship are symbolically and really promoted and ongoing relationships in the community are transformed than whether we introduce some local dress, dcor, music or dance. What Can We Do? We are in a moment of transition - in an ambiguous situation. We can wax eloquent on the need of inculturation. But if nothing substantial is happening or allowed to happen, what do we do? As things stand today we cannot touch the official rituals. While we go on agitating for the freedom to inculturate them we need not be idle. To start with, we can fully exploit whatever we are allowed to do now, even if it concerns only the externals. Beyond this we can transform the living and liturgical context in which the official rituals are celebrated. Through this we will be preparing the people to celebrate the liturgy in a new, relevant manner so that inculturation, when it is allowed (or when we dare to take it up), will be easier to do. I shall mention six ways of doing this. Changing Attitudes First of all we must change the peoples attitude to liturgical celebration. People tend to look on the liturgy primarily as worshiping God. The stress is on the vertical dimension. We have to make the people understand that the worship dimension is set in a horizontal dimension of a celebrating community. Liturgy is for life; life is not for the liturgy. The liturgy sets the lifecycle rituals in a sacred dimension of the mystery of Christ. It is not primarily an act of devotion. Baptism, for instance, celebrates the admission of a new member into the community. In the process the individual, child or adult, participates in the mystery of the death and resurrection of Jesus and is reborn in the Spirit as a child of God. While the readings and prayers bring out the mysteric dimension, the celebration itself is a social one. Rather than focusing exclusively on the mysteric dimension, we can focus on the social celebration and make it really meaningful. This is not an attempt to 'socialize' the 'mystery', but an effort to find the 'mystery' in the 'social' as its depth dimension. The official ritual is part of the celebration. The tendency is to do the official ritual in the Church and the social celebration at home or elsewhere. Will it be possible to integrate both in a convenient location in the home or in a parish hall or in the Church itself? Becoming Agents Secondly, we must make the people feel that they are the agents of the celebration. The priest, of course, has a ministerial role to play. But he should not be the dominating presence helping to verticalize the event. The people must be encouraged to do celebrate, with the priest being at their service. We could develop the ritual in such a way as to enable people to get more involved. The sacraments are community celebrations in which the priest also has a part. It is not a celebration by the priest in which the people happen to be present and participate. We need not idealize the church as a mysteric entity and attribute agency to it. The celebrating Church is primarily the local community, in communion with other local communities all over the universe. We should persuade the people to own their celebration. As a part of this effort we should also encourage the women to take a more active part in the celebration.

One way to help people to participate actively is to make the readings from the Bible really meaningful, followed by a time of silence and shared reflection. People must be catechized so that they can share in the ritual as a spiritual event. It must give them spiritual nourishment. In other words we must form the people in living the spirituality of the celebrations in which they participate. When a sick person is anointed, for instance, the people gathered together can show their concern by imposing hands and praying over the person. The anointing by the liturgical minister can come as a conclusion. The people are not mere spectators but a comforting and interceding community. Some of the texts of the rituals do refer to this aspect. But normally the priest reads through these texts rapidly and the people hardly pay any attention to them. They are simply assisting in an act of devotion. For example, how meaningful is the profession of faith made by the parents, god parents and others during baptism? By making people participate meaningfully, we can build up a meaningful celebration around the official ritual. Promoting Creativity While the official Church is touchy about the ritual action and the formula that accompanies it, there is lot of freedom with regard to the artistic elements that can enrich and localize the celebration. This is true of the music, the dcor, the dress, the symbols, etc. that give not merely local colour to the celebration, but root it in a particular place and time. Some readings or rituals can be dramatized. This is already happening in many parts of the world. The initiative for this localization can be left to the people. The liturgical ritual and texts are not magical formula that we have to reproduce literally so that it can have its automatic effort. They are like a page of music or the text of a poem or of a play that an artist creatively interprets to bring out its meaning. Interpretation is not a reaching out to the original authors mind or to a meaning set in stone. A creative interpreter may discover new dimensions of meaning in new contexts. If we feel free to interpret the text of the word of God in the Bible, we can feel free to interpret the texts of the Church. Liturgy, like the Sabbath, is for the people, not people for the liturgy. In a recent letter to mark the 40th anniversary of the publication of the Second Vatican Councils document on the Liturgy, John Paul II writes: The liturgical renewal that has taken place in recent decades has shown that it is possible to combine a body of norms that assure the identity and decorum of the liturgy and leave room for the creativity and adaptation that enable it to correspond closely with the need to give expression to the respective situation and culture of the various regions.5 Could we use this open policy as an occasion to push ahead in creative ways? 5 Spiritus et Sponsa (Dec 4, 2003), 15. Focus on the 'Para-Liturgy' Fifthly, experiments at inculturation often tend to focus on the Eucharist, since it is the rite that is most frequently celebrated and is also central to the liturgy. It is also the most jealously protected by the central authority in the Church. Maybe we should shift our focus to other sacramental rituals and come back to the Eucharist later when the process of inculturation has already taken a certain hold in the Church. In keeping with this orientation we should perhaps start with the life-cycle rituals and popular religiosity. Here the people have already taken the initiative to 'Christianize' their traditional rituals. The attitude of the priests at the moment is to tolerate it or even to encourage it because it meets the devotional needs of the people and brings them to the Church. Some would even profit by them to tag on a Eucharist. It may be helpful for the priest to get involved in the popular religiosity of the people and make it more conforming to the spirit of the liturgy. In this way the priest can help purify them from deviations. The priest should not attempt to depopularize them by imposing what he considers rigid liturgical styles. For example, I have known priests who kill a good procession in which people sing and dance spontaneously by imposing an orderly march in line, holding candles and saying prayers. This is a narrow conception of liturgical practice. The sacraments relate to a few life-cycle rituals. They do not cover all the life-situations that the people consider important. There are also cosmic (seasonal) and historical cycles that vary from place to place which popular religiosity takes seriously. Liturgy need not be limited to the sacramental rituals that are covered by the official books. We do have a list of blessings for various occasions and objects. But these need to be localized and elaborated. Freeing the People A final word about the dialectics between law and freedom. People familiar with the history of the liturgy know that the people or the local Churches often take creative initiatives that are later approved and sanctioned by the official authority in the Church. The reforms of the liturgy by the Second Vatican Council were preceded by liturgical movements in France and Germany. This could now be true of other parts of the Church. The local Churches will have to feel free to make creative attempts at inculturation. We need to encourage the people to feel and exercise this sense of mature and knowledgeable freedom in the Spirit, being faithful to the spirit rather than the letter of the law. We see this happening in many small communities and on special occasions. Thanks to the "sense of the

faithful" (sensus fidelium) inauthentic experiments will slowly disappear and good, creative efforts will remain. The authorities in the Church can also exercise their discerning role at the appropriate time.6 After these general reflections on what can be done in the present pastoral situation, I would like to focus on some areas that I think are important for the life of the people. These are healing, prayer, reconciliation, the Eucharist and Festivals. 6 John Paul II indicates the responsibility of the pastors as discernment and guidance. Spiritus et Sponsa Rituals of Healing Much of popular devotion and religiosity is need-based. This is so particularly among poor people. They have nowhere else to go except to God or to other divine intercessors in their moments of crisis. Pilgrim centres like Lourdes draw thousands of pilgrims. Since an important element of the Liturgy is thanksgiving for gifts received there is no problem in making known to God ones needs. I think that the most important of these needs is healing from mental, emotional and physical illnesses. These are often interrelated. People are ready to cross religious boundaries when they recognize a sacred place or person. Ministers who claim to possess the power of healing attract thousands of people. This is one of the attractions of the charismatic movement. But there is nothing in the official liturgy that meets this need. Yet, healing is one of the important ministries that Jesus did during his life time. The sacrament of the anointing of the sick is often kept for the dying. In my parish, a priest used to bless oil every Wednesday and attract hundreds of people. In other parishes I have seen mothers bring their sick children for a special blessing at the end of the Eucharist. In some places lay people are seen to exercise the gift of healing. I have met Christian healers in Africa. I think that healing services can become part of the liturgical programme of the Christian community. A programme of psychological counseling could also be associated with it. People with gifts of healing and counseling could be identified. A ritual with readings from the Bible, prayer with imposition of hands, symbolic gestures like sprinkling with water or anointing with oil, counseling encounters, etc. could be evolved through experimentation. Some healers even use medical counseling, especially in the field of indigenous medicine, though anything professional should be left to qualified practitioners. In this context people could be encouraged to visit hospitals and old peoples homes, comforting them certainly and praying with them and for them where possible. This ministry could also include members of other religions. The concerns of these people could be brought to the liturgical assembly at appropriate moments. Praying Together Apart from the liturgical rites the only prayer that the liturgy proposes is the "Liturgy of the Hours". This had its origin in monasteries. I really wonder whether this is really suitable to the ordinary people, particularly the young. It is not workable in non-ecclesial settings either, though there is a tendency to idolize it by calling it the 'prayer of the Church' once again, an ideal, mysteric entity. It is significant that John Paul II has introduced the common praying of the Rosary.7 7 John Paul II, Rosarium Virginis Mariae. (2003) Among the more committed and during retreats there is also the practice of meditation. This has often become rational reflection in the West. In recent times the practice of shared prayer around a text from the Bible, especially in basic communities, is becoming more common. Today people all over the world are being attracted to different oriental methods of prayer. Anthony DMello [sic] of India was a pioneer in this field with his book Sadhana. There are many ashrams and prayer centres all over the world. The oriental methods of prayer are not action-oriented but lead to inner peace, which seems to be a great need today. People must be free to practice the method of prayer that they need and that suits them. Our own Holy Father Ignatius wisely chose not to impose any particular method of prayer on any one, but let it be discerned by each individual. I think that any kind of formation to Christian life must include an initiation to prayer. People must be exposed to different forms of prayer so that they can choose from them. In the parish we could encourage different groups of people practicing different forms of prayer. Common prayer can be encouraged. But common prayer does not automatically imply vocal prayer. A group can sit together in silent meditation encouraging and sending positive vibrations to each other as happens in Vipassana or Zen groups. Prayer will be the occasion for people to discover the value of silence.8 8 Cf. Spiritus et Sponsa, 13 Then it would be meaningful and easy to build periods of silence into liturgical rites also. Silence can be enjoyed and be fruitful only when it is observed for a period of time accompanied by concentration. A minute or two of silence after a reading or other activity can be nothing more than a symbolic gesture. We could also promote other forms of group prayer like singing together, bhajans for example, or listening to sacred music, either vocal or instrumental or even watching sacred drama and dance. This is common in the Bhakti traditions of India. The Latin (Western) tendency is to look on art and music as decorative, the primacy

being given to the word. But the arts can also be mediations of prayerful self-expression, sometimes more powerful than words. Paintings and sculptures can also be objects of meditation, not merely media of illustration. All methods of prayer require attention and concentration. We must be warned of course that the line between praying and being an observer of a performance, even ones own, is rather thin. Reconciliation Jesus, during his public ministry, presents God as a forgiving Parent. The parable of the Prodigal Son is a good example. (Lk 15:11-32) He often heals through forgiving. (Lk 5:17-26) He exhorts his disciples to forgive without limits. (Mt 18:21-22) In the prayer that he teaches his disciples he links divine forgiveness to mutual forgiveness among them. (Lk 11:2-4) He teaches that reconciliation must precede offering of gifts to God. (Mt 5:23-24) Forgiveness is a dimension of love. In the early Church the sacrament of reconciliation was used to reconcile public sinners who had hurt the community in some way. But historical development has made it an individualistic forgiveness of sins in secret. Even this individualistic ritual is not very much used today. Contemporary community celebrations of the sacrament of reconciliation have nothing to do with real community reconciliation. They just offer a community atmosphere for individual reconciliation. In an atmosphere of personal and structural conflicts between persons and groups and of movements for liberation from various sorts of oppressions we have to rediscover the sacrament of reconciliation as a social act of forgiveness. The ritual must be preceded and surrounded by various activities that promote peace and concord at every level. There must be opportunities for public confession of guilt. We have to develop practices of conflict resolution. The spirit of forgiveness must also extend beyond the community to include actual and imagined enemies locally and globally the economic, the political, the social and the religious others. The enemies that the Lord asks us to forgive may be of all kinds. We cannot ask for forgiveness unless we have an open heart free of all rancour and enmity. Many of contemporary psychological maladies are related to unhealed hurts and unresolved hatreds. Reconciliation then is closely related to healing which I have spoken of above and can be developed together. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa and elsewhere offers a good example of a method that could be recreated in an ecclesial setting.9 9 Cf. Desmond M. Tutu, No Future Without Forgiveness. New York: Doubleday, 1999; Douglas Johnston (ed), Faith-based Diplomacy. New York: Oxford, 2003. The Eucharist The celebration of the Eucharist by a community that is characterized by inequality of any kind without any ongoing effort to overcome such inequality is a scandal rather than a sacrament. The source of inequality may be caste or race or social or economic status. The community cannot sit around the Eucharist if the participants cannot relate to each other as brothers and sisters, not merely 'in the Lord', but actually. Since some of these inequalities are culturally rooted, a cultural transformation is required. I am not saying that equality and community must precede any authentic celebration of the Eucharist. But if the community is not making some active effort at promoting equality and community, the symbolic action becomes insincere. The community must at least be aware of its guilt and make a firm purpose of amendment. Such an inculturation of the Eucharist may be more urgent than its decoration with some local symbols, gestures and music. The Eucharist is certainly the summit of the Christian liturgy. But it has become largely an act of devotion focused on the sacrificial dimension. I am not saying that the 'banquet' dimension must predominate over the 'sacrificial' one. I am rather asking that the Eucharist must be a symbolic celebration of a living and experiential communion of a community. This means that the Eucharist becomes meaningful only in the context of a vigorous project of community building. While I understand the devotional role of the daily Eucharist, the ideal frequency of a meaningful community Eucharist is open to discussion.10 10 Francis Gonsalves (ed), Body, Bread, Blood. Eucharistic Perspectives from the Indian Church. Delhi: Vidyajyoti, 2000. Festivals Festivals relate to the cycles of nature. It involves the whole community. It is a symbolic celebration of the community which manifests and confirms its structures and its interrelationships. Recent attempts to prescind from these structures have resulted in making the festival centred on the Church and the priest, in which the people merely participate. In doing this I think that the Church has lost a powerful tool for social transformation. In some places the people continue to celebrate the festival marginalizing the priest and the Church. In other places secular festivals have replaced religious ones. These often reflect the newer social structures of a global, post-modern society. Festivals are also occasions for the manifestation of popular religiosity.11 I think that the Church must discover ways of being present to the festivals of the people. Festivals are occasions for family reunions. They relate the community to the wider world and to nature. We have to evolve ways through which God can be present also to these celebrations of community. If the Church is present there, then there is a possibility that it can try to transform the social structures that often underlie the organization of the festival. Factors like who contributes to the festival and in what way and who

is involved in its organization and management reflect the existing social order. This is particularly true in rural areas. Getting involved is necessary for any effort at transformation. 11 Selva T. Raj and Corinne G. Dempsey (eds), Popular Christianity in India. Riting Between the Lines. Albany, NY: SUNY, 2002; M. Joseph Britto, Festivals and Social Change. Dindigul: Vaiharai, 2002. Liturgy and the World Just as liturgy is for life, the Church is for the world. Its liturgy must not make it to close in on itself. Liturgy is said to have a missionary dimension. Today this would mean that the community that gathers to pray is an open community. In every part of the world the community will be in dialogue with people belonging to other Churches, religions and ideologies. I shall not however go into the challenges of intercommunion here. With regard to other religions I think that we should explore the possibilities of common prayers and celebrations rather than participating in each others official ritual. In our dialogue with people who follow ideologies rather than religions we may have to evolve secular celebrations that focus on basic human values. But inculturation involves a process of inreligionization,12 since every culture is animated by one or more religions. People at the level of popular religiosity do it rather spontaneously. At a more conscious level we explore the possibility of using the scriptures and symbols of other religions interpreting them in our own faith context. We should look at this with a new awareness. For me, Hinduism is not another religion. It is part of my own heritage. It is the religion of my ancestors. God has reached out to my ancestors through them. So I do not look at its scriptures, symbols and methods as something foreign to me. I have the right and the liberty to integrate them as part of my spiritual tradition. At a certain level this sense of belonging can extend to the whole of humanity. As the Latin poet said: "Nothing human is foreign to me!" I can rephrase it to say "No gift of the Spirit is foreign to me!" since we accept today that the Spirit of God is present and active in all religions and cultures. We need not interpret them as Christian as some of the Fathers of the Church did. But we can see God reaching out to us also through those manifestations. 12 The term is that of Aloysius Pieris, Fire and Water. Maryknoll: Orbis, 1996. Conclusion We will not make any progress in inculturation till we assume our right and liberty as the People of God gathered to celebrate Gods presence with and action in us. The community that celebrates is the Body of Christ. Christ is present in it as it celebrates. There are people the ministers - who are designated to serve the community. But Christ and the Spirit who is praying in us do not need mediators to make their presence effective. In practical life prudence and wisdom may be necessary. But they need not extinguish the creative freedom that is the gift of the Spirit to us. We have the right and the responsibility to respond to the Gospel through our own culture. There are institutional difficulties in doing this. But if we do not do so we should not be surprised if the people around us look on us as foreigners in our own land or consider our rituals are 'other worldly' and alienating, if not magical. This brings on us a crisis not only in our mission as dialogue, but in our identity itself. Multiple identity is not a rare thing these days.13 It is even inevitable in the post-modern world. But we will have to have our roots somewhere. Strangely enough, if we search for our roots in our faith, it sends us back to life in the world. The mystery of the incarnation, which is the model of inculturation, confirms this change in perspective. Liturgy, after all, is the celebration of life. 13 Dennis Gira and Jacques Scheuer (eds), Vivre de plusieurs religions. Promesse ou illusion? Paris: LAtelier, 2000; M. Amaladoss, "Double Religious Belonging and Liminality", Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection 66 (2002) 21-34. We have read Fr. Michael Amaladoss SJs reflections and suggestions on Inculturation in the light of Sacrosanctum Concilium.

WHO IS FR. MICHAEL AMALADOSS?

He "is one of the best known Indian theologians at the international level." To the question, "what are the lessons life has taught you?" his reply is that he has assimilated: "Almost a Buddhist sense of accepting life in its flow an experience of the relativity of everything: there is only one Absolute that pervades everything," in the Jesuit monthly Jivan, July 2000, page 30. "Jesus saving us from sin consists in showing* us how to turn away from sin." Jesus and Sin, The New Leader, August 1-15, 2003. *'SHOWING' US? THE ERROR IS SUBTLE, BUT INTENTIONAL! In the 'Theology and Life' column in The New Leader, September 1-15, 2000, one of his numerous articles titled Spirits and Ancestors' was published. Some extracts: "Death is not the end of human beings. They continue to live in a different way It is not helpful to imagine them in bizarre ways when we do not know how they are! That is why it is more helpful to think of them as ancestors, people who have gone before us, but who are related to us

(At the time of death they) do not simply disappear. They are somehow with us, interested in how we are and what we are doing. They want to guide and protect us in some way. They communicate with us through dreams They do not disappear to some far away place. The idea that our ancestors do not simply disappear, but are near their loved ones need not shock us. We can take it for granted Some spirits are more threatening. If we have seen people who are possessed, they are often possessed by people who are dead. People who die an untimely death through accident or disease are said to be wandering around the place of their death and possess people who pass that way Once dead, they do not look at life and at other people in the same way as they did when they were alive A popular exorcist said that he had no reason to believe that any spirits were involved How many of us pray to a parent or even to a child who is alive I know some people who do." Amaladoss believes that there are no spirits, only 'ancestors'. But the Bible (Hebrews 9:27) and the Catechism teach clearly that people who are dead do not wander around and cannot possess anybody. They teach that there ARE spirits. There is no such thing as "an untimely death". And Christians certainly DO NOT pray TO the living on earth. In an earlier issue, The New Leader, August 1-15, 2000, asking us Do devils exist?, he explains: "Is it not strange that a loving God (may have) created a category of beings to whom repentance and forgiveness do not seem to be available ?It is (the) conflict between a loving God and devils who remain evil and unforgiven forever that makes me wonder whether devils are simply playing a role in our own worldview. We should not then rush to conclusions about their existence Humans are given a chance to repent and be saved but devils do not seem to have such a chance. The Bible seems to indicate that God almost 'needs' such evil spirits Why is God condemning a group of Gods creatures, namely the devils, to hell fire forever without any hope of redemption? Does not this fact tarnish somehow the image of a loving God? I wonder whether devils are necessary projections of our concerns? The devils are objects on which we can project all the evil in ourselves Do we not hurt the image of God as loving and good, if God needs unredeemed spirits to run the universe and eventually hell as the place for punishment? Perhaps we need to explore other answers." Fr. Amaladoss understands that the Bible teaches that God created devils and that he seemed to have a 'need' to 'create' them into existence. He teaches that devils are objects', a figment of our own imaginations and concerns. If there are no evil 'spirits', obviously there can be no devils. Like many other liberal theologians he projects the love and mercy of God to the exclusion of his righteousness and justice and our inevitable judgement by a holy God. In The New Leader, September 1-15, 2000, Letters to the Editor, H. R. T. Roberts remarked Christians believe that devils exist because it is taught by Scripture and formulated as dogma by the Church. Sr. M. Johanna from Goa wrote: (The article by Amaladoss) proves to what extent Satan has succeeded on making even theologians of such repute doubt, or even deny, his existence. 'Are we spirits?', a sequel to the first article, in The New Leader, October 1-15, 2000, is nothing less than a manifesto on the paranormal, the occult, holistic health and New Age Alternative Medicine. In keeping with the basic premises of the 'New Science' and New Age Alternative Therapies Amaladoss denies the reality of the 'spirit' and of spirits, and asserts that "the 'spirits' in phenomena of possession are 'thought forms' constructed by the mind In Vipassana meditation people are asked to send good vibrations to others. In the same way, evil vibrations can be sent too I think that the phenomenon of the so-called evil-eye belongs to this order" As with all New Age theory, he agrees with the alleged existence of "energy fields that surround our bodies as in Alternative Healing practices like Reiki and Pranic Healing Our ancient yogis mapped such energy fields." He criticizes "some religious leaders, especially the charismatics who say that such healing practices are superstitious Such narrow judgements can be ignored." Amaladoss expresses his belief in "many paranormal phenomena like Extra-Sensory Perception, Clairvoyance, Mind-reading, Telepathy prediction of the future by genuine clairvoyants etc." Such [and many more that I am not reproducing here] are the heretical, occult and New Age beliefs of "leading Indian theologian" Fr. Michael Amaladoss SJ. He is the 'Theological Consultant' to the 'Disciples of Christ for Peace' of Swami Sachidananda and Dharma Bharathi, which belong to the seditious Catholic ashrams movement. It is no wonder that he frequently cites the works of ashram leaders and their sympathizers, writers like Jacques Dupuis SJ and Tony de Mello SJ [towards his death, de Mello was a virtual

Buddhist] and looks with hope to "oriental methods of prayer", "silent meditation encouraging and sending positive vibrations to each other as happens in vipassana or Zen". Fr. Anselm Poovathani SSP, in the editorial of Petrus, November 2005, wrote: "We saw how, on the Churchs censuring of some of the writings of Tissa Balasuriya, Anthony de Mello and Jacques Dupuis, many of our theologians and even Major Superiors defended these theologians as if the Church were wrong and the censured writers right. It was not an edifying picture" The CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH NOTIFICATION CONCERNING THE WRITINGS OF FATHER ANTHONY DE MELLO, SJ, dated June 24, 1998 and signed by the present Pope enumerated the errors of De Mellos writings and concluded, "the abovementioned positions are incompatible with the Catholic faith." From what I understand, Amaladoss is unhappy with the "individualistic forgiveness of sins in secret" of traditional Confession and suggests other "social" and "public" alternatives of expressing guilt. Remember his understanding of sin. It is hardly an offense against a personal God -- hence the abrogation of the need for a Redeemer -- and more of a social justice offense which involves "turning away" from such "sin" and a "social act" like confessing our culpability to our aggrieved fellow-men. Quite New Age! It is not surprising then that he appeals to the writings of a Protestant leader, Desmond Tutu, and suggests that "A programme of psychological counseling could also be associated with it." Not Catholic pastoral counseling or Biblical counseling, but humanistic "psychological counseling". Is Amaladoss a sympathizer of the Indian-theologian-led call for the ordination of women as priests? "As a part of this effort we should also encourage the women to take a more active part in the celebration." In "The ministerial priest" by Amaladoss, New Leader of March 1-15, 2010, he concludes "This needs to be rethought." By "this" I understand that he means the traditional male role of the cultic priesthood or presbyterate in the Catholic Church. The preparatory article for that was "Jesus is the only priest", The New Leader of February 1-15, 2010. While one cannot deny that the general sense of the article is irreproachable, the similarity of some of its arguments to those of other pro-womens ordination theologians like Subhash Anand is unmistakable. Read Amaladoss concluding lines which I reproduce below: "We can now see the inappropriateness of speaking of priesthood in terms of offering sacrifices, bloody or unbloody! It has been a symbol of many religions and even in the Old Testament. But Jesus has shown its inadequacy or rather, gone beyond the symbol to the reality it symbolizes, namely establishing divine-human relationships. The best we can do is to forget it in the way we think and speak about priesthood." See my article THE NEW COMMUNITY BIBLE 15 PRIESTHOOD UNDER ATTACK, DEMAND FOR ORDINATION OF WOMEN PRIESTS - FR SUBHASH ANAND AND OTHERS http://ephesians511.net/docs/NEW_COMMUNITY_BIBLE_15_PRIESTHOOD_UNDER_ATTACK_DEMAND_FOR_ORDINATION_OF_WOMENPRIE STS.doc In the light of the above disclosures, how would one understand Amaladoss reflections and suggestions? Catholic festivals [one of his sub-headings] in India, especially in the South, are Hinduised. Catholics also have adopted and adapted Hindu festivals like Pongal and Ayudha Pooja along with overtly Hindu rituals. Is this his 'inreligionization'? Acknowledging that "the official Church is touchy about the ritual action and the formula that accompanies it", he still looks forward to the "freedom" of "spontaneity" [of a procession] and "creativity" at Mass: "Some readings or rituals can be dramatized. This is already happening in many parts of the world. The initiative for this localization can be left to the people. The liturgical ritual and texts are not magical formula that we have to reproduce literally so that it can have its automatic effort." This "freedom" has already led to improvisation, innovations, adlibbing and a host of aberrations in the Liturgy. Read my article on DANCING AND BHARATANATYAM IN THE MASS and a dozen other articles on abuses in the Liturgy. What Fr. Michael Amaladoss proposes for the Indian liturgy is not the spirit of Sacrosanctum Concilium.

LITURGY AND INCULTURATION

http://mangalapuzha.wordpress.com/2009/08/28/liturgy-and-inculturation/ by Fr. Antony Nariculam, Posted by Mangalapuzha Seminary, August 28, 2009

St. Josephs Pontifical Seminary, Mangalapuzha is a Major Seminary of the Syro-Malabar Church of the St. Thomas Christians. It is the continuation of several Seminaries and the outcome of the centralization of the priestly formation in Kerala. It has a long history of untiring service and selfless sacrifice of several missionaries, native clergy and laity.

The universality of the Church makes it imperative that the Church and her liturgy are inculturated. God became man to save humankind. This saving mystery in Christ must be presented to the whole world in a manner that is understood by the people of a given place. There was a period in history when some Christian theologians considered the 'Christian culture' as a universal monoculture. For them this Christian culture was 'normative'. But in course of time, the empirical approach in philosophy and sociology began to affirm pluralism in culture. Slowly these theologians had to admit a multicultural world which led to the realization that universality does not necessarily mean uniformity. One of the greatest achievements of Vatican II and the subsequent magisterial teachings is the openness the Church has towards the wider world with its religions and cultures. This 'cultural opening' was initially received with great enthusiasm. But later, due to a variety of reasons, it came to be looked upon with suspicion and diffidence. Vatican II, which allowed vernacularisation in the liturgy, was aware of the variety of cultures. Hence it suggested that provision be made in the revision of the liturgical books "for legitimate variations and adaptations to different groups, regions and peoples, especially in the mission countries".1 This view is theologically supported by another statement of the same document: "The liturgy is made up of unchangeable elements divinely instituted, and of elements subject to change. These latter not only may be changed, with the passage of time, if they have suffered from the intrusion of anything out of harmony with the inner nature of the liturgy or have become less suitable" (Sacrosanctum Concilium 21). Pope John Paul II, establishing the Pontifical Council for Culture on 20 May 1982, said that the synthesis between culture and faith is not just a demand of culture, but is also of faith. A faith which does not become culture is a faith which has not been fully received, not thoroughly thought through, not fully lived out.2 In fact, there is never a cultureless Christianity and never yet a fully Christian culture. On 19 November 1969, during the course of a General Audience, Pope Paul VI said: "The rite and the relative rubric are not in themselves dogmatic definitions. Their theological qualification may vary in differing degrees according to the liturgical context to which they refer. They are gestures and terms relating to a religious action experienced and living of an indescribable mystery of divine presence, not always expressed in a univocal way".3 This vision he already had as Cardinal John Baptist Montini when he stated on the floor of Vatican II that "Liturgy is for man and not man for liturgy".4 This article is an attempt to point out how important is culture to express the Christian faith through liturgical celebrations. What is Liturgy? The rule of prayer is the rule of faith. Liturgy is the celebration of our faith. It is a response of man (the 'ascending' man) to the 'descending' God who comes to save humankind. Being a response of man, it has to be a fully 'human' act. No human act can be dissociated from his/her culture and life situations. Here we should remember that the liturgical celebrations are not only celebrations of our faith in God and our relationship with Him. It is also a celebration of our lives and the relation among human beings, not excluding the realities of the created world. Thus the 'verticality' with God cannot be separated from the 'horizontality' with our fellow-beings. One of the most important acts by which the Holy Spirit reminds the Church about the message of Christ is the liturgical celebration because it is the memorial (anamnesis) of the Lord. It is an expression of faith. So much so, history tells us that there was no recitation of the Creed during the celebration of the liturgy since the whole liturgy is an expression of faith. The Creed was reserved to baptism as an immediate preparation for it. Liturgy, though an expression of faith, is not simply an act of worship. The New Testament worship, as we understand from the Letter to the Hebrews, is not merely a ritual act. In fact, Christ abolished all rituals and replaced them with symbols (Hebrews 10:5-10). The rituals are very often conventional, and they can be performed even 'impersonally', whereas the symbols are used between living persons as a means of communication. The language of the new worship inaugurated by Christ is a symbolic one in which the body is very much involved.5 Human beings normally require bodily expressions to actively participate in the celebration of the mysteries of Christ through worship. The signs and symbols are the ordinary means to have this participatory experience. Speaking about active participation in the liturgy, Vatican II states that it should be "conscious, active and fruitful" (SC 14). In order to achieve this goal, choice of appropriate symbols that emerge from the cultural context of the people is a must. The transformation of the sacramental celebrations, as a "means of grace" rather than as an act of faith by means of signs and symbols, has led to a distortion of the understanding of the liturgy itself. Therefore, we need to rediscover their meaning and value for the man of today.

What is Inculturation? From a Christian point of view, inculturation means a dialogue between the gospel message and a culture. This message is not fully independent of a culture. In fact, the gospel message is not simply an idea or a dogma. It is the message about a person the person of Jesus Christ himself. It is Christ who is coming into dialogue with cultures. Thus inculturation is a response to the call of Christ. It is a gradual transformation that has to take place in the community through individuals. No individual can impose it upon the community. The individuals can only act as agents of this transformation. Thomas Groome describes inculturation as "a dialectical encounter between Christian faith and a particular culture in which the culture is affirmed, challenged, and transformed towards Gods reign, and in which Christian faith is likewise affirmed, challenged, and enriched by this unique instance of its realization".6 This description is based on the thesis that the Christian inculturation is a dialectical encounter between an already cultured version of Christian faith and another culture that is either new to Christianity or has aspects not yet explicitly permeated by it. He further observes that for a meaningful application of the principles of inculturation one should be convinced of the following facts: There is never a cultureless Christianity or a faithless culture. That is, wherever the Christian faith is implanted, it has always taken elements from the local culture to grow, and that Gods saving presence is already planted in every culture. The story and vision of Christian faith continues to unfold throughout history. The Christian faith is a living tradition, and its vitality demands that it incarnates in every cultural and historical context. Each cultural expression of Christian faith should be profoundly unique, while remaining bonded in essential unity with all other expressions. 'Unity in diversity' should be the motto of the process of inculturation. No cultural expression should be detrimental to the essential unity of faith. The values of Gods reign should be reflected in the very process of inculturation. Inculturation should not be at the expense of the values of Gods kingdom in this world that of love, peace, justice, freedom, integrity of Gods creation etc.7 One of the greatest insights of Vatican II on inculturation is found in Ad Gentes 22: "In imitation of the plan of Incarnation, the young Churches, rooted in Christ and built upon the foundation of the apostles, take to themselves, in a wonderful exchange, all the riches of the nations which were given to Christ as an inheritance". In the past the Christians in general thought that they had a 'finished product' by way of ecclesiastical structures, including the liturgy. But, Ad Gentes 21 notes that the lay people must give expression to the 'meaning of life' given to them in baptism 'in the social and cultural framework of their own homeland according to their own national traditions They must develop it in accordance with modern conditions, and finally perfect in Christ'. Therefore, openness towards cultures, traditions, customs etc. is a sine qua non if we really wish to make the Church and her worship relevant for the modern era. That is why the Vatican II decree on the Catholic Eastern Churches, while insisting on the need of returning to the sources and ancient practices, wishes that they are adapted to the needs of different times and places (OE 2). Incarnation is one of the most important theological bases of inculturation. It is a redemptive incarnation. Christ became similar to us in all things but sin. Through his death and resurrection he redeemed the humankind. This leads to the conclusion that inculturation "recognizes the presence of evil in the world, the reality of sin and its imprints, forces and consequences in all realities of the world and human life".8 Any element taken from the cultures should be made to pass through the redemptive death and resurrection of Christ. In other words, the yardstick to judge the appropriateness of inculturation is the mystery of Christ. Consequently, inculturation has a double task: of liberating the cultures from sin, evil and error, and of giving them a true Christian meaning, orientation and fulfilment. Thus inculturation calls for a prophetical critique and a Christian interpretation. It calls for "dying and rising" on the part of the Church for new flowers and new fruits. In this process of inculturation, it is not sufficient that we make the Christian formulae intelligible to the peoples of various cultures. Rather, it implies a genuine experience of Christ in every culture through authentic signs and symbols taken from the culture concerned. What is Liturgical Inculturation? To speak about the need of inculturation in liturgy is to repeat the obvious. Nobody seems to have any objection to its relevance and the need though there are apprehensions with regard to how to go about it and how far we can go with it. The renewal and updating of liturgy practically means inculturation in the same. The Pan-Asian Consultation on Inculturation and Liturgy made the following statement after their meeting in 1995. "All Asian countries struggle with the issue of inculturation. Our sharing revealed that liturgical developments in Asia have consisted mainly in the translation of the typical editions of the Roman liturgical books in the wake of Vatican II. This has, by and large, marked the first phase of inculturation. The translation of liturgical texts composed in another time and culture is an extremely difficult task. The transplantation of signs and symbols is even more difficult. Even supposedly universal signs and symbols, when transplanted into another culture, often hide or even distort the very mysteries they are meant to convey. No universal model can speak with equal clarity and force throughout the world. Moreover, no Christian community can

become creative in language and symbol system that is basically alien to it. Unless the Word of God becomes flesh in our cultures, the soul of Asia will remain untouched".9 What is liturgical inculturation? A. Shorter defines inculturation as "the on-going dialogue between faith and culture or cultures. More fully, it is the creative and dynamic relationship between the Christian message and a culture or cultures".10 And then he makes three observations about inculturation. First, it is an on-going process, and hence even the so-called 'Christian' nations need to undergo inculturation. In other words, it should not be confined to the newly evangelized missions. Second, the Christian faith transcends all cultures. At the same time, it cannot exist except in a cultural form. Third, there is need of a reciprocal and critical interaction between the Christian faith and culture.11These observations are of prime importance when we deal with the whole question of liturgical inculturation. The issue of liturgical inculturation is primarily an ecclesiological one. It cannot be understood and practised separate from the life of the Church in all its aspects. One reason for the relative failure of liturgical inculturation is the inadequate understanding of the liturgy as a vertical celebration in a numinous sphere unrelated to the real life situations of the celebrating community. There is a close relationship between a ritual and the community that enacts it. Ritual, in fact, is a symbolic expression of the structure of the society. What are the areas of inculturation in the Church? There is no area of the Church that does not need inculturation. The liturgical inculturation should not be reduced to the exclusive sphere of worship. But, of course, one needs to fix priorities.

To worship God is a fundamental need of a religious minded person. It affects the core of his/her religiosity. It is a personal, deep experience of the human soul. Being persons with senses, they require visible signs and symbols to express this experience. This visible expression becomes meaningful and communicative only when it is understood by the generality of the people. Hence it is imperative that it is expressed through the symbols of the people of the place. The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy underlines this dimension of the culture in relation to the liturgy in the following words: "Even in the liturgy the Church does not wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters which do not involve the faith or the good of the whole community. Rather she does respect and foster the qualities and talents of the various races and nations She sometimes even admits such things into the liturgy itself, provided they harmonize with its true and authentic spirit (SC 37). The Council is also in favour of allowing "legitimate variations and adaptations to different groups, regions and peoples, especially in mission countries" (SC 38). Conscious of its absolute need, the Council also notes that "in some places and circumstances however an even more radical adaptation of the liturgy is needed" though it entails "greater difficulties" (SC 39). Liturgy is the expression of the experience of the risen Lord manifested in various cultural forms. One and the same experience is expressed by different peoples in different historical and geographical contexts. In this manifestation there are universal and unchangeable, as well as particular and changeable, elements. The universal elements are celebrated by a particular community in a particular place. The unchangeable truths are celebrated with changeable elements. And, the Divine is celebrated by human beings. This is something marvellous in the universal Church. A successful liturgical inculturation depends upon striking a balance between these elements. Jesus did not hand over to us a 'prototype' of liturgy, but an experience. Since this experience is linked with cultural manifestations, its expressions vary. This variety, however, is not to be determined by laws and regulations, but from the cultural experiences of a living community of a given place. Therefore, liturgical inculturation is defined as "a process of inserting texts and rites of the liturgy into the framework of the local culture".12 In order to attain this goal, it is not enough that we merely adapt some cultural elements into the institutionalized form of Christianity. Rather, "we need to undergo a process of symbiosis by which our faith becomes an experience in the context and expresses itself in a symbol system that is capable of communicating this experience to others".13 Hence the liturgical inculturation is not simply a matter of discovering adequate cultural symbols to express the content of faith and worship, but is a question of ecclesiology and a pastoral methodology. Regarding a practical methodology of liturgical inculturation, A. Chupungco suggests a three-step process. It consists of Dynamic Equivalence, Creative Assimilation and Organic Progression.14 Dynamic Equivalence is practically an adaptation of the editio typica. Though some creativity is involved in this process, it is dependent on the typical editions of the liturgical books. Creative Assimilation is a methodology used in the Patristic era. The giving of a cup of milk and honey in the baptismal Mass, renouncing Satan looking towards the West and making the profession of faith turning towards the East, the celebration of Epiphany on 6th January and Christmas on 25th December are examples. In Organic Progression comes the question of 'new forms' in worship which are unknown till then. Though they are 'new', they have to respect the principle of "organic growth".15 Vatican II has identified certain areas of the liturgy where this process needs to be undertaken. Besides SC 37-40, which we have referred to above, the document mentions also the Christian initiation rites (SC 65), the rite of Marriage (SC 77), the liturgical music (SC 119) and the liturgical art (SC 123).

In this process, the sacramentals, especially the blessings, have a special place as most of them are closely related to the day to day life of the people. Though there are sacramentals that have some sort of a universal character, mostly they are attached to the culture and the customs of the people. Therefore SC 39 names them among the liturgical books wherein the Conferences of Bishops have a free hand to make adaptations. Local Church: The Venue of Inculturation The Church being the sacrament of Christ is the visible manifestation of Christ. The institutional Church which is localized must have a visible expression congenial to the community of the people. The Church becomes authentically local in so far as she bears the imprint of the place and the people where she lives. "The Church becomes Church when it is incarnated in a place and this localization is called the local Church".16 We know from history that liturgy developed in the local Churches resulting in liturgical diversities. Only later they began to be unified, a phenomenon more prevalent in the Western liturgy. In the East, maintaining the unity of faith, liturgies continued to flourish in diversity. As the decree on the Catholic Eastern Churches notes, the universal Church is made up of the faithful who are organically united in the Holy Spirit by the same faith, the same sacraments and the same government. But they combine into different groups which are held together by their hierarchy and so form individual Churches keeping their own particular liturgy, spirituality and discipline (OE 2-3). From this it is clear that the liturgical celebration is not a 'universal act'. It is always an action of the community of faithful 'here and now'. That is why the Eastern Churches are very particular about insisting on the universal Church as a 'Communion of Individual Churches'. As Pope Paul VI notes, the universal Church is in practice incarnate in the individual Churches that are heirs of a cultural patrimony, of a vision of the Word of God, of an historical part of a particular historical substratum.17 It responds to the deep aspiration of peoples and human communities to find their own identity ever more clearly.18 One of the important characteristics of an individual Church is the manner in which it expresses its faith in worship form.

A local Christian community is not a 'fraction' of the universal Church. Every worshipping community manifests the full mystery of the Church. This manifestation is based on its social, cultural and religious milieu, and hence appropriate signs and symbols congenial to the people are to be employed. History of the Churches both in the West and in the East gives evidence to this fact. The existence of the liturgies according to the Roman Rite, the Ambrosian Rite, the Spanish Rite, and later the Indian Rite, the Philippino Rite, the Congolese Rite etc. are examples. The five liturgical families Alexandrian, Antiochian, Byzantine, East Syrian and Armenian with 22 individual Churches bear ample witness to it in the East. Even within an individual Church there can be diverse liturgical expressions according to the culture, place and the context of the people as we see in the Western and Eastern ecclesiastical traditions. Liturgical Inculturation: An Historical Review Inculturation is essentially an historical phenomenon, and the history of the Church is practically a history of inculturation. When we examine the history of the Roman liturgy, we find that the so-called "classical period" (5th 8th centuries) was a time of 'classical' inculturation too. It was a period of liturgical creativity with original composition of liturgical texts for the people of the time. The Popes like Gelasius, Leo the Great and Gregory the Great have contributed their insights for its growth. In the 8th century, as the Church spread to FrancoGermanic world, it underwent another type of liturgical inculturation. Liturgy was transformed from its Roman simplicity and sobriety to a charming, dramatic and colourful one to suit the temperament of the FrancoGermanic people. The first half of the first millennium was a period of intense inculturation in liturgy. Some examples will clarify this point.19 Though Christianity was in close relationship with the Jewish religious tradition, when it required the liturgical vestments the West adopted the festive attire of the Greco-Roman world and the East that of the Byzantine Empire. From the Jews she inherited the Bema a platform for reading from the Torah for the proclamation from the Bible. The morning and evening holocaust of the Jews appears in the form of morning and evening prayers in the Christian tradition. The language used in the liturgy was the language of the people. The apophatic (negative Neti, neti of the Indian tradition) approach towards Gods name (YHWH: I am who am) without a positive affirmation is adopted from the Jewish understanding of God as IN-visible, INcomprehensible, IN-expressible, UN-fathomable etc. The Christian litanic prayers are an imitation of the Roman manner of prayers. The liturgical gestures like kissing the altar, the prostrations, the use of incense and the candles, etc are taken from the non-Christian practice. The prayer turning to the East has its roots in the Sun-cult of the pagans.

The Christian tradition of fasting on Wednesday and Friday was influenced by the Tuesday and Thursday fasts of the Jews. The pre-Christian mystery cults have influenced the Christian practice of exorcism, the imposition of hands and the anointing. The architecture of the ancient churches followed that of the Roman basilicas. The "May they rest in peace" (R.I.P) in the funeral rites has its origin in the pre-Christian Roman funeral acclamation. The feast of Transfiguration on 6th August is related to the Jewish commemoration of Moses transfiguration on Mount Sinai. The feast of Epiphany on 6th January recalls another epiphany (manifestation) of a ruler to a province of his kingdom. The feast of Christmas on 25th December is inspired by the birth of the Invincible Sun-god. The feast of the "Cathedra" of St. Peter is in imitation of the anniversary of the Roman emperors assumption of office. The feast of martyrs, saints, etc originated from the pre-Christian practice of venerating the tombs of the dead. In the later period of the Church too we have luminous examples of inculturation. The history of the St. Thomas Christians of India before the 16th century is a classical example of how the Christians could find themselves completely at home in the Indian culture. In their social and religious practices, and worshipping customs they were very much like their non-Christian neighbours.20 The Chinese experimentation of Matteo Ricci (1552-1610) with the cult of the familial dead that was administered with prostrations, the burning of incense and the offering of food at their tombs was condemned as superstitious practices. Roberto Nobilis (1577-1656) attempts with Indian culture were frowned upon by his confreres, and later they had to be abandoned. Even during this period, we come across some silver lining by way of official sanction in favour of liturgical inculturation. Thus in 1615 Pope Paul V allowed the Chinese to use the Chinese language in the liturgy though this permission was withdrawn in 1661 due to the objections of the missionaries themselves. In 1659 Propaganda Fide wrote a letter asking the missionaries not to make attempts to persuade the people of the mission lands to change their rites, customs and ways, provided they are not very manifestly contrary to religion and morals.21 Challenges of Inculturation One of the notable limitations of liturgical inculturation is the non-permanent nature of culture. Given cultures susceptibility to change, the product of any attempt at inculturation is bound to be an unstable mixture. Therefore at no time can we have a complete and perfectly inculturated liturgy. It is a continuous search and a constant struggle. Only a genuine local Church can cope with the ever new demands of the changing culture. All religions carry with them some cultural expression. Christianity, for example, has many Semitic elements. For some people these cultural expressions are part and parcel of their religion, and any change in them is considered a threat to their religious experience. In other words, the cultural expressions are equated with religion itself. This is nothing short of religious fundamentalism. In the process of liturgical inculturation a crucial factor should be borne in mind. Faith transcends all cultures. Faith in Christ can even purify and transform cultures. Therefore some hold that the duty of the Christian faith is to purify the cultures and make them 'Christian'. As a matter of fact, culture is not good or bad, holy or sinful. Human choices make them bad or sinful. In this perspective, the Christian inculturation can also mean a purification of the sinful culture through the intervention of the Christian faith. At the same time, we should also remember that the mysteries we celebrate in the liturgy transcend all cultures though the expressions of the mysteries and the peoples response to it in the liturgy are culturally conditioned. Here the role of culture in relation to worship needs to be properly understood. "Christian worship should not end up being a mere ingredient of the local culture, nor should culture be reduced to an ancillary role. The process of interaction and mutual assimilation brings progress to both; it does not cause mutual extinction".22 Conclusion Pope Paul VI once warned that evangelization would lose much of its force and effectiveness "if it does not take into consideration the actual people to whom it is addressed, if it does not use their language, their signs and symbols, if it does not answer the questions they ask, and if it does not have an impact on their concrete life".23 Among them the signs and symbols employed in the liturgy are of great relevance because "the religious symbols have the power to render the real more real. They induce faith, conviction, commitment because they act upon the creative power of the human intellect and galvanize the will towards action No religion can exercise this power if its symbols are not inseparable from those of culture".24 However, we need to make a distinction between inculturation and 'culturalism'. A religion, when it assumes various external forms by way of inculturation, should not lose its essential identity. If it loses its identity, it is no more inculturation, but 'culturalism', that is, absolutization of culture. Besides, the Christian religion cannot take cultural symbols of a place if they are inseparably associated with

the religious faith of another religion. There is the need to evolve a liturgy which speaks for itself, and which requires not much commentary. Therefore, clerically inspired and clerically managed inculturation is likely to fail. Inculturation is a way of life. It is an on-going search. Failures are possible. But they should not deter us from continuing our search. As Pope Benedict XVI rightly remarks, the abuses that have occurred in the process of inculturation should not "detract from this clear principle, which must be upheld in accordance with the real needs of the Church as she lives and celebrates the one mystery of Christ in a variety of cultural situations".25 1 Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, SC 38 2 LOsservatore Romano, 28 June 1982, p. 1-8 3 Jacob Manathodath, Culture, Dialogue and the Church, Intercultural Publication, New Delhi 1990, p. 141. 4 J. Manathodath, Culture, Dialogue and the Church, p. 139 5 Paul Puthanangady, Challenges of Cultures and Religions in Asia to Christian Liturgy, in Federation of Asian Bishops Conference Office of Education and Student Chaplaincy, Asian Worship in Spirit and Truth, Madras 1995, p. 11 6 "Inculturation: How to Proceed in a Pastoral Context", Concilium 2 (1994) 120-133. Here p.122 7 "Inculturation: How to Proceed in a Pastoral Context", p.122-129 8 D. S. Amalorpavadass, Inculturation is not Hinduisation but Christianization, NBCLC Bangalore 1981, p. 7 9 FABC-OESC, Asian Worship in Spirit and Truth, p. 201-202 10 Aylward Shorter, Toward a Theology of Inculturation, Geoffrey Chapman London 1988, p. 11 11 Toward a Theology of Inculturation, p. 11-13 12 Abscar Chupungco, Liturgical Inculturation: Sacramentals, Religiosity and Catechesis, The Liturgical Press Collegeville: MN 1992, p. 30 13 P. Puthanangady, Challenges of Cultures and Religions in Asia to Christian Liturgy, p. 4 14 A. Chupungco, Liturgical Inculturation: Sacramentality, Religiosity and Catechesis, p. 37-51 15 SC 23, OE 2. Antony Nariculam, The Holy See, The Syro-Malabar Bishops Conference and the SyroMalabar Bishops Synod on the Inculturation of the Syro-Malabar Liturgy: A Study, in Bosco Puthur (ed.), Inculturation and the Syro-Malabar Church, LRC Publications Kochi 2005, p. 66-68 16 D.S. Amalorpavadass, Gospel and Culture, NBCLC Bangalore 1978, p. 22 17 Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (1975) 62 18 Evangelii Nuntiandi, 63 19 Julian Saldanha, Inculturation, St. Paul Publication Bombay 1985, p. 25-28 20 For details see Antony Nariculam, "Evangelization and Inculturation Eastern Churchs Perspective", Ishvani Documentation and Mission Digest, January-April 2000, p. 95-108 21 Referred to in Cyprian Illickamuri, Inculturation and Liturgy, in Antony Nariculam (ed.), Inculturation and Liturgy, Star Publications Alwaye 1992, p. 85 22 A. Chupungco, Liturgical Inculturation: Sacramentals, Religiosity and Catechesis, p. 29 23 Evangelii Nuntiandi, 63 24 A. Shorter, Toward a Theology of Inculturation, p. 41 25 Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis (2007) 54

The Paganization of the Church in India by Kulanday, Victor J. F. (Swami Kulandaiswami) http://biblio.co.uk/books/320691321.html

Book Description Madras, India: Galilee. Very Good 1988. Softcover. 8vo - 21.5 x 14 cm.; xvi - 255 pp. Illustrated with black and white photographs. This is the second revised edition, the book was first published in 1985. Both Victor and his wife, Daisy, have been active Catholics in India for several decades and have represented the Holy See at various international conferences. Dr. Daisy Kulanday has been the only Christian to appear before the Indian parliament to present the Christian point of view on abortion. Bookseller Inventory #: 18581. From Pilgrim Reader Books - IOBA: $20.00

I had been searching for a copy of this book ever since I moved to Chennai in January 1993, but in vain. I had approached some of the surviving members of the erstwhile All India Laity Congress [AILC] as well as a couple of Traditionalists, but they either did not have a copy or would not lend me theirs simply because I am Catholic and loyal to Conciliar/post-Conciliar Rome, which Traditionalists arent. I have encountered former AILC members who are also now Traditionalists, though I am not clear whether Victor Kulanday was one. When "Culford", our sprawling twenty-four room bungalow in San Thom, Madras, now Chennai, was sold off in the 1980s, Victor Kulanday was one of the seven parties who purchased it. He renamed the main portion "Galilee". Kulanday and his wife Daisy passed away around the same time that I moved to Chennai, so I never got to meet them. Moreover, I was a few years away from entering into the current aspect of my ministry. When I did make a visit to "Galilee" in pursuit of a copy of "The Paganization of the Church in India", I found that it was now the Indian headquarters of the banned Fr. Nicholas Gruners cult "Fatima Crusaders" -- who maintain that the 'Third Secret' of Fatima has not been completely revealed to the Church by Rome and that Russia has never been truly consecrated by the Popes to the Immaculate Heart of Mary as per the desire of Our Lady as expressed to the three seers at Fatima, Portugal in 1917 -- otherwise known as the Tridentine Latin Rite Church, a fact that is cleverly concealed in all of their publications. This sect denies the teaching authority of the Second Vatican Council and the popes of the Council and succeeding. See FATIMA CRUSADERS [TLRC], ARCHBISHOP MILINGO, AND THE UNIFICATION CHURCH OF REV SUN MYUNG MOON http://ephesians-511.net/docs/FATIMA_CRUSADERS_TLRC_ %20ARCHBISHOP_MILINGO_AND_THE_UNIFICATION_CHURCH_OF_REV_SUN_MYUNG_MOON.doc "Galilee" does have a good library of old books but not a copy of "The Paganization of the Church in India". It was only in August 2009, a couple of weeks after Jons meeting with me, that I managed to secure a copy of the book from a parent of a friend of our younger son, in Bangalore. Chance or coincidence? I dont believe in either. While Jon Andersons bibliography, see page 36, gives the 1988 second edition title of the book as "The Paganization of the Church in India", a copy of which is in the FSU library, the title of the copy in my possession, which is the 1985 original [first] edition, is "The Paganized Catholic Church in India". The book apparently has no copyright and is not available online either. Accordingly, a friend of mine has copied the contents of the book and it will be made available in its entirety at this ministrys web site shortly. He has also just ordered what is apparently the last copy available anywhere of the 1988 second edition from Pilgrim Books, Canada, at a cost of US$ 20 plus an additional US$ 20 for shipping, a price that he considers worth the investment. The front cover picture for the 1985 edition is of Nataraja, the dancing aspect of the deity Shiva, "an actual photo of the idol displayed in the Bishops National Centre Church (Temple) in Bangalore." However, the front cover picture of the 1988 second edition of the book, like its title, is different as can be seen from the picture above. Its contents are also somewhat different from that of the first edition.

Victor J. F. Kulanday's The Paganization of the Church in India...

http://worldofutep.blogspot.com/2008/08/victor-j.html By Dennis Paul Morony [EXTRACT color emphasis authors] Adapted from his 1988 book. The book, we're told, was "Printed at the Diocesan Press, Vepery, Madras - 7, India." "Chapter VII Worship of Idols, Sun, Fire, Snake "The gorgeous multi-colored picture on the cover of this book is of Lord Ganapathi, an important deity of the Hindu pantheon. "He is a very popular God and Hindus of all castes worship him. "In keeping with the present trend of imitating the Hindu in everything, Catholics are now being urged by priests to worship Ganapathi. "This deity with an elephants head and large ears, an enormous paunch and four hands is the favorite of Fr. Michael Gonzalves, Our Lady of Fatima Church, Chulna, in the Archdiocese of Bombay -- the region administered by the President of the Bishops' Conference of India, Most Rev. Dr. Simon Pimenta." ... this elephant-head god [is] above Christ in all respects... "For the past few years [as in prior to 1988!] Fr. Michael has done aggressive propaganda to brainwash Catholics to worship Ganapathi.

"In the media he writes extolling Ganapathi and placing this elephant - head god above Christ in all respects. "Writing in the Marathi mass - circulation journal, NAMRATA, Michael Jee, as he calls himself, this Catholic priest has the following ideas to propagate: "1. Michael Jee states that If anyone wants to know the concepts of the Almighty, one must break all the barriers of various religions and study their deities and by doing this the knowledge of the Almighty will be increased and one can reach Him without having any recourse to any particular tutelar deity. "2. Michael Jee Denigrates Christ "He says Christ sacrificed his life on the cross for the salvation of mankind but this was the only aspect of his life. He cannot be a faithful and ideal husband because he was not married. And this is where Bhagwan Ramachandra comes in to prove as an ideal husband. "He further states that though Christ pardoned his executioners yet Lord Krishna was Supreme because he slaughtered his relatives to fulfill his duty on the battle-field. "3. Michael Jee Advocates Worship of Ganapathi "He says with the aid of pictures, statues and symbols Catholics are allowed to worship God. Then Catholics could also adopt [an] idol of Ganapati as one of the visual aids to reach the Almighty..." So on and so forth! A good, fascinating read, you better believe it!

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Inculturation is the Word for Asian Church

http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/inculturation_is_the_word_for_asian_church/ Anto Akkara, Register Correspondent, New Delhi, January 5, 1997 Zealous missionaries urging non-Christians to forsake their faith to escape eternal doom are a thing of the past in Asia. These days, inculturation and interreligious dialogue are more typical concerns for the Asian Church. Major Church meetings there tend to end with calls for more harmony with other creeds and greater sensitivity toward native cultures. "We've looked down on other religions as agents of evil," said Bishop John Manat of Ratchaburi in Thailand, head of the Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs Office of the Asian Bishops' Conference (FABC). "We need to educate our own bishops, priests and others in this respect. Religion and faith should not separate us. Because we built walls, we have lived separately for centuries." Summing up the small steps achieved in the more than 25 years of interreligious dialogue by the FABC, Bishop Manat told the Register that "we have to look for the Kingdom of God which comprises all religions. There are still obstacles within the Church. And though some cracks have developed in the old thinking, the wall has yet to fall." Understanding and promoting mutual trust with other creeds has been one of the prime concerns of the FABC, which includes 17 national episcopal conferences. The FABC's Office of Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs has sponsored several series of dialogues under the Bishops' Institute for Religious Affairs (BIRA). The initial sessions were meant to train Church leadersincluding bishopsto conduct effective dialogue within the Vatican II framework. Prior to the last meeting, held under the banner theme of "Christians in Dialogue with Confucius thought and Taoist Spirituality" in April in Taiwan, BIRA had brought together Muslims and Christians in Muslim-majority Pakistan. An earlier meeting with Buddhists took place in Thailand, where Buddhism is almost a state religion; and the venue for the dialogue with Hindus in Oct. 1995 was India, a nation of more than 700 million Hindus. When FABC launched the interreligious dialogue process, Bishop Deogracias Iniguez of the Diocese of Iba in the Philippines said that "others were skeptical of our efforts. The BIRA series was looked down upon as a ploy to convert others." "We have succeeded in changing that cynicism," he added. "Christianity is no longer considered a conquering religion, but we have a long way to go." Indeed, the situation of the Church in Asia is unique. The number of priestly vocations in Asia doubled between 1970 and 1994, from 10,074 to 23,943, according to the Vatican's latest Statistical Yearbook of the Church. Asia also has the most promising ratio for seminarians, with 25.07 for every 10,000 Catholics compared to 16.65 in Oceania and 10.27 for Europe. The worldwide figure is 10.77. But Christianity has only a nominal presence 2.83 percent of the population on the Asian continent, which accounts for more than two-thirds of the world's population. The Philippines, which includes 55 million Catholics among its 66 million people, is the exception. "We need to educate our own bishops, priests and others in this respect. Religion and faith should not separate us. Because we built walls, we have lived separately for centuries." A year ago, in an attempt to deal realistically with the Church's minority position in Asia, the FABC's Theological Advisory Commission urged Asian Churches to counter "situations that threaten and contradict harmony." Calling for a theology of harmony "from below" in solidarity with the Asian reality, the Asian Theological Commission noted that Churches in the continent posed a challenge to harmony because of their past failures to assimilate local cultures and traditions.

The colonization of the Philippines, including the imposition of a 16th century-European way of living, was thought of as an almost integral part of the task of evangelization, said Ferdinand Dagmang, professor of Christian Ethics and Popular Religion at Maryhill School of Theology in Quezon City, the Philippines. The dominant Roman Catholic symbols, rituals and practices were expected to supplant native beliefs and practices. As a result, even in the Philippines, where Christians constitute nearly 90 percent of the population, Christianity is often considered a religion of "foreigners". In marked contrast, the dominant religions in other Asian countries Buddhism, Confucianism, Hinduism and Islamare intimately linked with their cultures and woven into their national history. "Only through an inculturated liturgy will the people of Asia recognize [Jesus] as bread is broken in their midst," 14 leading liturgical experts in Asia declared after the first meeting of Asian Liturgy Forum (ALF) under FABC last spring. In its discussion of what was referred to as the "relevant and deeply pastoral problem of inculturating the liturgy in Asia," the forum concluded that the transplantation of a liturgy "made it difficult for [Asians] to experience the depth of the Christian mystery and [that] their participation in worship became in many ways superficial." If Vatican II's call for liturgical renewal is to become a reality in Asia, the ALF final statement noted, Churches in Asia need to assimilate the local culture. Arguing that "inculturation is the manifestation of the urge to proclaim the Gospel to the nations," the statement said that "only through a meaningful encounter between the Gospel and the culture can the unfolding of the Mystery take place" in Asia. Salesian Father Paul Puthanangady*, an ALF member, stressed that "inculturation is something that Rome itself urges. It was Vatican II that boosted the growing inculturation awareness." Father Puthanangady, who heads the Indian bishops' preparatory Committee for Jubilee 2000, cited the Congregation of Divine Liturgy's "Instructions on Inculturation of Liturgy" to demonstrate the Holy See's support for the Asian Church's attempts to render itself relevant to the local culture. Wherever inculturation has taken place, after proper instruction and periodic scrutiny by Church authorities, the people have accepted it whole-heartedly, he said. When, for example, the Syro Malabar Church in south India decided to celebrate Qurbana (Mass) in the local Malayalam language instead of in Syriacwhich is unfamiliar to most of the local peoplein late 1960s, there were apprehensions. But the switch to their mother tongue in the end encouraged the faithful to become more active participants in the Mass. *successor to Amalorpavadass as director of the NBCLC In response to criticism that inculturation sometimes undermines the authority of the Holy See, Father T.K. John SJ, a noted Indology professor at the Jesuit Theologate in New Delhi, said that "inculturation does not and should not mean deviation from the faith or challenging the authority of the universal church." Diluting the faith becomes a problem "when over-enthusiasm leads to neglect of the necessary link between the adopted symbol or ritual to Church teaching," he added. "Each Asian country has its own cultural milieu, and faith should not standardize culture. Christianity should be interpreted to the people in their cultural environment, without deviating from the faith. This is certainly a difficult path, one on which we have to proceed carefully." END We already know who Fr. Paul Puthanangady SDB is. Read about him also in my other reports. While Fr. T.K. Johns words appear to be reassuring, let us not be carried away. First of all this is a 1997 news report, not a recent one. A lot of water has flowed down the Ganga since then and the FABC is today even more under the domination of the influential liberal Indian theologians and the Bishops who encourage them. Secondly, everything is always not as it appears to be. Let us met the real Fr. T.K. John: Fr. T. K. John SJ, Theologian, Professor of Theology and Indology, Principal, Vidya Jyoti College of Theology, Delhi is a contributor to ashram leader Vandana Matajis [ed.] Shabda Shakti Sangam, 1995. No faithful Catholic will accept this book Shabda Shakti Sangam in whole or in part. It is occult, it is New Age. It showcases the Catholic ashrams movement which itself is heretical, seditious and New Age. FOUR OF THE CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS BOOK ARE ALSO COMMENTATORS OF THE ST. PAULS NEW COMMUNITY BIBLE, 2008, THAT WAS EVENTUALLY WITHDRAWN BY THE CATHOLIC BISHOPS CONFERENCE OF INDIA THAT HAD PROMOTED IT, IN THE WAKE OF A SUSTAINED CRUSADE INITIATED BY THIS MINISTRY AGAINST ITS PROBLEMATIC COMMENTARIES! One of the four theologians is, you guessed it, Fr. T. K. John SJ. Rome warns against the dangers of religious pluralism. But: "The kind of experiment Vandana Mataji has been undertaking needs to be recognized as opening a new chapter in religious pluralism," according to Fr. T. K. John, SJ in Living With Hindus, ISPCK, 1999, page xiii. "Jesuit Father T.K. John, who guided them [seminarians], said such visits [to Hindu temples and ashrams] help his students gain "first-hand knowledge of ashram (hermit) life.":

http://www.ucanews.com/search/show.php? q=Liberation&page=archives/english/1998/12/w1/fri/ic1500fw.txt, 1998. Fr. T.K. John criticized Rome and defended the writings of censured Jesuits Dupuis and Tony de Mello, e.g., "According to Jesuit theologian Father T.K. John, [Jacques Dupuis SJ] is known for his orthodox faith and uncompromising stance on Christ's uniqueness despite his appreciation of dialogue and inculturation": http://www.ucanews.com/search/show.php? q=mello&page=archives/english/1998/11/w3/tue/ia1404rw.txt 1998. This "dialogue and inculturation", see following story, has become the bane of the Indian Church. The spirit of evangelization that several instructions from Rome exhort us to uphold in all interreligious dialogue is non-existent; instead we are faced with the NBCLC-ashrams led Hinduisation of our own liturgy.

Jesuit Father Irudhayam, Catholic ashram movement pioneer, dead at 85

http://www.ucanews.com/search/show.php?q=ashram&page=archives/english/1995/04/w1/tue/ib2388.txt April 4, 1995 MADRAS, India (UCAN) Jesuit Father Ignatius Irudhayam, a promoter of the Catholic ashram (community prayer center) movement in India, died March 25 in Madras, southern India. He was 85. "The Asian Church will always remember Father Irudhayam's relentless pursuit of dialogue and inculturation," said Jesuit Father Maria Jeyaraj, 61, who worked with the late priest until his death. In 1967, Father Irudhayam founded "Aikiya Alayam" (temple of unity), a religious dialogue center in Madras, some 2,160 kilometers south of New Delhi, which became a research center for interreligious and intercultural studies. People of various religions attended his funeral at the center March 27 celebrated by acting Jesuit Madurai provincial Father Susai Sebastian. "Father Ignatius helped form an Indian rite Mass and Aikiya Ashram (federation of Catholic ashrams)," said Jesuit Father Dhanaraj, Father Irudhayam's companion in the work for the past 25 years. Born in the Ramnad district of Tamil Nadu state, Father Irudhayam, who completed 50 years as a priest Sept. 8, 1994, specialized in Hinduism's Saiva Siddhanta philosophy and wrote several works on Saivite theology. To form the ashram federation, Father Irudhayam collaborated with the late Benedictine Father Bede Griffiths, British mystic and founder of another Tamil Nadu ashram. J.R. Jayavelu, a Saivite and regular participant in interfaith meetings, described the Aikiya Alayam as "a living example of transcendental values of humanism and spirituality" and "an extension of Father Irudhayam." He told UCA News the center is modeled on Hindu ashrams where disciples seek guidance from a guru. "We seldom come across someone like Father Ignatius who identifies so fully with an institution's lofty ideals," he added. Father Dhanaraj said Aikiya Alayam helps people attain inner dialogue through Scriptures of various religions. The late Jesuit also founded a school to promote classical Indian music and dance among Christians and toured Europe and the United States several times to promote his ideals. He was resource person at a national seminar on the Indian Church in 1969 in Bangalore, southern India, which helped develop an inculturated liturgy. "He was also a pioneer in inculturation of Christian faith in liturgy, spirituality and theology," said Father Dhanaraj. Father Irudhayam's book on Indian Christian spirituality has three volumes and some 1,000 pages in Tamil.

A NEW AGE RATIONALE FOR A SQUATTING MASS [from my report on the Catholic ashrams movement]
Sebastian Painadath SJ is the founder-director of Sameeksha Ashram, Kalady, Kerala, VicePresident of the Ashram Aikiya, the federation of the ashrams, a leader of the New Age, heretical and seditious Catholic ashrams movement. He heads the Jesuit theologate in Kerala. He is one of the contributors to the Shantivanam, Saccidananda ashrams golden jubilee souvenir Saccidanandaya Namah. After reading this, consider his impact on the formation of future priests and on the Indian rite Mass liturgy

The Spiritual and Theological Perspectives of Ashrams - A Tribute to Shantivanam, 50 Years

Satsangs and spiritual discourses often take place under an auspicious Tree thus recognising that the Tree is the primal teacher of humanity. For meditation one sits on the floor: earth is experienced as the body of the Lord and as the primordial mother of all living beings.* [Saccidanandaya Namah, page 14] *Bhagavad Gita, 11, 10ff, Atharva Veda, X11, t, 1-63.

The new danger, Ratzinger says, is relativism: when Cardinal Ratzinger draws a new target into his sights there are often serious consequences
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n44_v32/ai_18791240/

By John Thavis, National Catholic Reporter, October 18, 1996 VATICAN CITY Early this year, on a plane to Latin America, Pope John Paul II dismissed liberation theology as irrelevant. There were a few howls of protest, but with Marxism rapidly fading as a global ideology, many church thinkers quietly agreed.

Now Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the Vatican's chief doctrinal official, has offered a more definitive obituary for this branch of theological thought -- and some words of warning for the future. He explained his position in talks in May to Latin America bishops and in September to some 80 bishops from mission territories. In the 1980s, the German cardinal said, liberation theology in its more radical forms was the most urgent challenge to the faith. Its appeal collapsed along with Marxist regimes, when people recognized that redemption was not a political process, he said. But that doesn't mean the sun is now shining on the state of Catholic theology. For Cardinal Ratzinger, a dark new cloud hangs on the horizon: relativism, or the idea that no one can presume to know the true way. Relativism may ultimately be more dangerous to Catholicism, he said, because it is popularized in efforts to "democratize" the church, to arbitrarily modify the liturgy and to erase differences with other religions. "Relativism has thus become the central problem for the faith at the present time," he stated. That's pretty heavy judgment. When Cardinal Ratzinger draws a new target into his sights there are often serious consequences. Dubbed by the Italian press the "Panzer-Kardinal" -- after the German tank -- the 69-year-old prelate has summoned a number of theologians to the Vatican in recent years for clarification and, if necessary, correction of their views. His Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is considered the most powerful at the Vatican, because its authority extends to any question of church teaching. In the name of doctrinal integrity, it can freeze an ecumenical dialogue, remove a Catholic professor or throw out a translation of a catechism. So when Cardinal Ratzinger talks, church people listen. The bishops were an especially attentive audience. In the cardinal's view, relativism is a bigger threat than liberation theology was a decade ago largely because its ideas are so embedded in democratic society. The key to successful modern politics, he said, is compromise and a rejection of absolute positions. But now, theologians are mistakenly applying these methods to religion and ethics, he said. As a result, the cardinal said, Jesus is widely seen today as "one religious leader among others" and not as the living God. Likewise, concepts like the church, dogma and the sacraments are also viewed as too "unconditional," and the church is accused of intransigence and fundamentalism. Cardinal Ratzinger's exposition revealed why he and other Vatican officials often bristle at the terms "dialogue," "pluralism," "democracy" and "multi-culturalism" when they are applied to the church. All these concepts involve an assumption of equal rank among the participants, he said, yet the church can never accept putting one's faith on the same level as the convictions of others. Unfortunately, he added, many Catholics are leaving the church because they think questions of doctrine should be decided by majority vote, as if the faith were some kind of party platform. The relativistic view, he argued, is typically Western, yet it has links to Asian religious philosophy -- a dangerous combination. The cardinal warned that some Christian theologians in India, for example, "set aside the image of Christ from its exclusive position" and place it on the same level as Indian saving myths. Meanwhile, many in the West have embraced New Age beliefs, described by Cardinal Ratzinger as an anti-rationalist manifestation of the "everything is relative" attitude. New Age followers seek a return to the mystery of the whole and the infinite, through "inebriating music, rhythm, dance, frenetic lights and dark shadows, and in the human mass," he said. "The gods return. They have become more believable than God" to the New Agers, he said. Inevitably, Christianity is seen as a "spiritual imperialism" that must be thrown off. The cardinal said the much-reformed Catholic liturgy is especially vulnerable to New Age ideas today. Because some Catholics are weary of the pure, spoken liturgy, they seek what is "inebriating and ecstatic." "I admit that I am exaggerating," he said. "But the tendencies are there." Cardinal Ratzinger, who once delivered a dour assessment of the post-Vatican II church, is sometimes described as a pessimist. He sees strong opposition to the gospel in the world; he calls it a miracle that the Christian faith survives in the current cultural situation. But his views on the state of theology are not all doom and gloom. There are hopeful signs, he said, that reason is opening itself up to faith. Interestingly, he avoided crediting church authority for that. Rather, he said, it's the result of the human being's natural yearning for the infinite and for a God who enters into our world. This is a thinking man's faith, not blind belief. As Cardinal Ratzinger put it: "Reason will not be saved without the faith, but the faith without reason will not be human."

Benedict's Previous Writing May Portend Change in Mass and Bishops Conferences
http://www.spiritdaily.org/ratzingerliturgy.htm April 25, 2005

If he adheres to positions he took as a cardinal, Pope Benedict XVI could prove to be a pontiff who clamps down on liturgical abuse (especially the freelancing of priests during Holy Mass) and strips bishops' committees of at least some of their power. Speaking of bishops, Benedict XVI, in a book called The Ratzinger Report, said he never tired of warning that the Church "needs saints more than functionaries" -- an apparent allusion to the worldliness in the lifestyle of many clerics -- and pointed out that the role of bishops, who were to be given a more decisive role in the wake of Vatican II, was being "restrained" or even "smothered" by what he described as "the insertion of bishops into episcopal conferences that are ever more organized, often with burdensome bureaucratic structures. "We must not forget that the episcopal conferences have no theological basis, they do not belong to the structure of the Church, as willed by Christ, that cannot be eliminated; they have only a practical, concrete function," he said in the book, which was first published in 1985 and may be the most telling volume by the current Pope, with opinions that, it appears, stand to this day. What such views may portend -- if they indeed still stand -- for conferences such as the powerful United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is not yet clear. As prefect for the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Pope Benedict warned that such conferences produced a herd-like mentality, reducing the individuality of bishops and piling on yet another layer of bureaucracy. The Pope's own Congregation functioned with 30 people -- far less than the number employed by most diocesan offices. Some of the new Pope's strongest statements were reserved for the Mass itself. In a book called Das Fest des Glaubens, or "The Feast of Faith," which is discussed in The Ratzinger Report, Pope Benedict worried about which liturgical reforms would be "real improvements" and which would be "trivializations" in the wake of the Vatican Council. "It follows that we must be far more resolute than heretofore in opposing rationalistic relativism, confusing claptrap and pastoral infantilism," he said pointedly, and presciently. "These things degrade the liturgy to the level of a parish tea party and the intelligibility of the popular newspaper. With this in mind we shall also have to examine the reforms already carried out, particularly in the area of the Rituale." They were biting words and indicate that beneath the pontifical veneer may remain the ironclad warrior of orthodoxy. Pope Benedict said that many liturgical treasures, as he had warned in Das Fest des Glaubens, indeed had been "squandered away." "One shudders at the lackluster face of the post-conciliar liturgy as it has become, or one is simply bored with its hankering after banality and its lack of artistic standards," he said in the follow-up book. It would be easy to show, he said, how "the surrender of the beautiful" has resulted in a "pastoral defeat." Although Pope Benedict saw great merit in bringing vernacular to the liturgy and instituting the Novus Ordo Mass, he lamented about the way Latin had been stripped from religion when the Council, he said, clearly pointed out that "the use of the Latin language, with due respect to particular law, is to be preserved in the Latin rites" and that "care must be taken to ensure that the faithful may also be able to say or sing in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them." "The liturgy is not a show, a spectacle, requiring brilliant producers and talented actors," said Benedict. "The life of the liturgy does not consist in 'pleasant' surprises and attractive 'ideas' but in solemn repetitions." As regards clapping, singing, and shaking hands, Cardinal Ratzinger, while not disapproving them as part of the congregation's involvement, said that "it was forgotten that the Council also included silence under actuoso participatio, for silence facilitates a really deep, personal participating, allowing us to listen inwardly to the Lord's Word. Many liturgies now lack all traces of silence."

FOOTNOTE: FOOD FOR THOUGHT FROM POPE JOHN PAUL II QUOTING POPE PAUL VI:
Chant: Music for the Few? Or the Many? A slightly light-hearted look at the history and usage of Gregorian chant
http://www.adoremus.org/1007LucyCarroll_Chant.html EXTRACT By Lucy E. Carroll, Adoremus Bulletin Online Edition: October 2007 Vol. XIII, No. 7 Pope John Paul also quoted Paul VI, commenting on a decree from the Council of Trent:

"Not all which is distinguished outside the temple (profanum) is worthy to cross its threshold." MORE FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Disputed Questions Like Salvation Outside of the Church
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/19632?eng=y EXTRACT 16.7.2003 From Tokyo, an analysis of one of the most controversial points of John Paul IIs pontificate. Epicenter: Asia

The pope himself did not escape criticism. There were those who recalled that in February of that same year, during his voyage to India, he had given speeches of unprecedented openness toward that country's religions, and at Bombay had even let a priestess of the god Shiva anoint his forehead with a sacred Hindu symbol. A few of those who complained about this were Indian bishops. One of them, from Andhra Pradesh, said, "The pope knows Hinduism from books, but we, who live with it and see the damage it does to our good people, would never make certain speeches."