- Msgr Antony Nariculam
Forty years have passed since Joseph Cardinal Parecattil of revered memory was called from our midst. At this special occasion, it is fitting that we remember with deep gratitude and admiration this noble soul, recalling his vision and his lasting contributions to the renewal of the Church in India, particularly in the field of inculturation.
Parecattil can rightly be regarded as a pioneer in the field of inculturation, for he sought to translate into concrete action the bold and innovative vision of the Second Vatican Council. The Council stated unambiguously that, even in the liturgy, the Church does not wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters that do not touch upon the faith or the good of the whole community. Rather, she respects and fosters the qualities and gifts of diverse peoples and cultures, and is prepared to welcome these into the liturgy, provided they are in harmony with its true and authentic spirit.
I believe that the crosses in my life have helped me to purify myself. I have been misunderstood and criticized for no fault of my own. Yet I believe this is part and parcel
of the life of a pastor or a bishop.
(From the “Last Will and Testament” of Cardinal Parecattil))
He spearheaded the liturgical movement in the Church in India, inspiring bishops, priests, religious, and lay faithful alike to recognize the need for inculturation, the growth of local Churches, and a renewed impetus for evangelization. He was deeply convinced of the true meaning of a local Church – not merely as a segment or administrative unit of the Universal Church, but as its concrete realization here and now.
Parecattil was a man of vast knowledge and rich experience. Endowed with a keen and perceptive mind, he was creative in thought and farsighted in discerning the signs of the times. As a result, he consistently sought innovation in the structures and attitudes of the Church, particularly in the areas of liturgy and interreligious relationships.
Vatican II and the ‘Church in India Today’ Seminar
Two events had a decisive influence on Parecattil in shaping his ministry as a pastor and a bishop: the Second Vatican Council and the 1969 “Church in India Today” seminar, which brought together all three Catholic individual Churches in India. In his two interventions at the seminar, he stressed the need to ‘seek and find’ the truth and warned against yielding to pressures that could divert the Church from its path of renewal. He also emphasized the importance of making the Church authentically ‘Indian,’ rather than merely a reflection of European or Middle Eastern cultures.
He was widely acclaimed for his powerful address at the Synod of Bishops in Rome in 1974. In his speech, he observed that the success of the Church in India has been quite limited both quantitatively and qualitatively, owing to its Western garb. He further noted that it was often perceived as a foreign religion, associated with colonialism and therefore viewed with suspicion by many.
Parecattil was also keenly aware of the tensions between so-called “conservatives” and “progressives” within the Church. On this conflict, he offered a perceptive insight: error tends to swing between extremes, but eventually the pendulum returns to the centre where truth resides.
He made these remarks after first acknowledging the Church’s significant contributions in India, particularly in education, healthcare, and charitable service to the poor and marginalized. The Cardinal then strongly emphasized that, in the contemporary Indian context – and indeed in any mission territory -evangelical work must be reoriented with deep respect for the country’s culture, spiritual heritage, and religious traditions.
During the second session of Vatican II, Parecattil argued for a careful and systematic study of the truths present in the scriptures of non-Christian religions so as to foster meaningful dialogue and to assimilate the positive elements found within their religious cultures. With particular reference to Indian Catholics, he observed that the nation’s cultural heritage and the rich wisdom preserved in its past remained largely an ‘untravelled world.’ He also maintained that the global community looked to India for the authenticity of its religious experience and for its intuitive vision of the unity of reality.
Parecattil believed that Christianity must follow the example of Christ by incarnating itself within different countries and cultures, setting aside only those elements incompatible with its divine mission. Just as Christ, in becoming human, was born a Jew and affirmed what was enduring in Jewish cultural and religious traditions, the Church – seen as a continuation of that incarnation – should likewise take root in local cultures, elevating them and transforming them into instruments of salvation.
In one of his interventions at the 1974 Synod of Bishops in Rome on “Evangelization in the Modern World,” he went so far as to suggest that, in principle, the inclusion of readings from non-Christian scriptures in the Divine Office and even in the Liturgy of the Word was not inherently objectionable. However, he immediately cautioned that the time might not yet be ripe for such a step, since many people still tended to regard non-Christian religions as superstition or idolatry.
Addressing the Catholic bishops of India in 1976, Parecattil delivered a landmark speech outlining his vision and expectations for the Church in India. He noted that the Apostle St. Thomas had given the faith a first-century Indian expression, the Syrian Church of Iraq a fourth-century expression, and European missionaries a sixteenth-century expression. It now remained for contemporary Indians, he argued, to give the Church a twentieth-century expression – one shaped by local culture and by the new hopes and awareness awakened among the people in the wake of the Second Vatican Council.
Incarnation and Theology of Inculturation
Addressing the bishops of India in January 1974, Parecattil urged them to make every effort to rediscover the country’s rich cultural heritage. He maintained that if the Catholic Church wished to incarnate herself in India as a continuation and fulfillment of Christ’s incarnation and salvific mission, she needed to build bridges of understanding between Christianity and the non-Christian religions. Only then, he argued, could the Church exercise a genuine spiritual influence on the vast population of the nation.
Parecattil believed that Christianity must follow the example of Christ by incarnating itself within different countries and cultures, setting aside only those elements incompatible with its divine mission. Just as Christ, in becoming human, was born a Jew and affirmed what was enduring in Jewish cultural and religious traditions, the Church – seen as a continuation of that incarnation -should likewise take root in local cultures, elevating them and transforming them into instruments of salvation.
Although Rome and many of his fellow bishops were not always sympathetic to Parecattil’s initiatives in inculturation, he remained convinced until his death that the inculturation of the Church was a theological necessity rooted in the very mystery of the Incarnation. Because of the originality of his vision and the pioneering nature of his contributions, he became, in many ways, a “sign of contradiction.” He was ahead of his contemporaries in several respects, and this distinctiveness made him both a controversial figure and a prophetic voice in modern Indian Catholicism.
As an illustration, he compared the Hindu ashram tradition with Christian monastic life. Long before monasteries emerged in Europe, ashrams in India had flourished as centres of prayer, learning, and ascetic discipline, usually organized around a sage who served as Guru, mentor, and spiritual guide. Parecattil observed that many early Christian missionaries were not fully aware of India’s spiritual heritage or of its longstanding inclination toward renunciation, asceticism, prayer, and the pursuit of the spiritual, all deeply embedded in its ancient culture. He therefore proposed points of dialogue between Indian ashram life and Christian monasticism, highlighting shared elements such as the relentless search for God, the central role of the Guru, the ideal of renunciation, and flexibility in forms of prayer.
To realize the goal of adapting religious life within its cultural context, Cardinal Parecattil proposed a gradual, step-by-step process. This included the translation of liturgical texts (linguistic adaptation), identifying suitable conceptual equivalents, incorporating local art forms, adapting indigenous customs such as dress and modes of living, and ensuring proper formation of clergy, religious, and lay leaders.
Deeply rooted in Indian spirituality and culture, Cardinal Parecattil cherished the soul of India and preferred to be known as an “Indian Catholic” rather than a “Syrian Catholic.”
The Cardinal was deeply aware that inculturation was a demanding and complex task, fraught with significant challenges. For this reason, he used every available platform – regional, national, and international – to promote the renewal of the Church and its cultural adaptation. His interventions at the Synod of Bishops in Rome and in the meetings of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India stand as testimony to his tireless efforts to advance this vision.
Firmly rooted in the apostolic tradition of the Syro-Malabar Church and deeply proud of the cultural and spiritual heritage of his homeland, Cardinal Parecattil dreamed of a harmonious integration of authentic traditions. He envisioned the emergence of a truly Indian Church – one that would grow in fidelity to its apostolic roots while shedding outdated and irrelevant elements imposed at different times by foreign cultures.
Facing the Challenge of Opposition
Cardinal Parecattil, a man of prophetic vision and indomitable courage, boldly advocated the inculturation of the Church in every possible sphere. Yet his efforts were often misunderstood, misinterpreted, and even criticized by many.
The strongest opposition he faced came from some of his fellow bishops and priests of the Syro-Malabar Church, along with support from certain officials in the Vatican dicasteries. He challenged those who described the liturgy of the Syro-Malabar Church as “Indo-Oriental.” In his view, if it were truly Indian, it would naturally be Oriental in the fullest sense, since all rites originating east of Rome could claim that identity. He therefore considered the term “Indo-Semitic” more accurate, as the structure, language, thought patterns, and prayer forms of the liturgy were deeply rooted in Semitic traditions.
Firmly rooted in the apostolic tradition of the Syro-Malabar Church and deeply proud of the cultural and spiritual heritage of his homeland, Cardinal Parecattil dreamed of a harmonious integration of authentic traditions. He envisioned the emergence of a truly Indian Church – one that would grow in fidelity to its apostolic roots while shedding outdated and irrelevant elements imposed at different times by foreign cultures.
Examining various Indian adaptations – such as church architecture modeled on Hindu temples, the use of ornamental umbrellas, musical instruments, and flagstaffs, as well as customs like the palliyogam, the thali in place of a wedding ring, and the manthrakodi in marriage – Parecattil observed that these were largely external adjustments. His primary concern was the ‘soul’ or spirit of the liturgy. This, he believed, should engage deeply with the philosophical background, cultural heritage, spiritual patrimony, language, music, and lived experiences of contemporary men and women to whom the Church offers its ministry. At the same time, he insisted that such adaptation must never conflict with the message of the Gospel or the core tenets of Christianity.
Parecattil was convinced that this paradigm shift would bear rich fruit in the Church’s apostolate in India, shaping its future and making the Christian message more relevant and meaningful to contemporary society.
Reflecting on the future of Christianity in India, Parecattil drew support from two significant addresses of Pope Paul VI – one delivered in Kampala, Uganda, and the other to the Asian bishops in Manila, Philippines. Speaking to the African bishops, the Pope affirmed that while faith remains one, its expressions – language, style, and modes of manifestation – may legitimately vary according to the character, culture, and genius of different peoples. In this sense, he emphasized, pluralism is not only legitimate but even desirable.
The primary concern of Cardinal Parecattil was the ‘soul’ or spirit of the liturgy. This, he believed, should engage deeply with the philosophical background, cultural heritage, spiritual patrimony, language, music, and lived experiences of contemporary men and women to whom the Church offers its ministry. At the same time, he insisted that such adaptation must never conflict with the message of the Gospel or the core tenets of Christianity.
Addressing the Asian bishops, the Pope observed that the spread of the Gospel had often been hindered by an inadequate appreciation of the hidden riches of Asian civilizations. Just as Christ shared the human condition of those among whom he lived, he noted, a person in Asia could be fully Catholic while remaining authentically Asian.
Although Rome and many of his fellow bishops were not always sympathetic to Parecattil’s initiatives in inculturation, he remained convinced until his death that the inculturation of the Church was a theological necessity rooted in the very mystery of the Incarnation. Because of the originality of his vision and the pioneering nature of his contributions, he became, in many ways, a “sign of contradiction.” He was ahead of his contemporaries in several respects, and this distinctiveness made him both a controversial figure and a prophetic voice in modern Indian Catholicism.
History records that his unconventional, innovative, and courageous efforts toward Church renewal, especially in the area of inculturation, led some within the Syro-Malabar Church, as well as certain Vatican officials, to regard him with suspicion or distance. Yet he was widely recognized as a progressive pathfinder who approached questions of religion, theology, liturgy, and Church governance with remarkable openness. Deeply rooted in Indian spirituality and culture, he cherished the soul of India and preferred to be known as an “Indian Catholic” rather than a “Syrian Catholic.”
Parecattil was also keenly aware of the tensions between so-called “conservatives” and “progressives” within the Church. On this conflict, he offered a perceptive insight: error tends to swing between extremes, but eventually the pendulum returns to the centre where truth resides.
In his last Will and Testament, the Cardinal wrote: “I believe that the crosses in my life have helped me to purify myself. I have been misunderstood and criticized for no fault of my own. Yet I believe this is part and parcel of the life of a pastor or a bishop.”
Following his death, Archbishop Cornelius Elanjikal, former prelate of the Archdiocese of Verapoly, remarked in November 1987: ‘Cardinal Parecattil was a prelate for the twenty-first century. Future generations may come to appreciate his views better.’
