Friday, 14 April 2017


The attachment is my comment on an article published in the ‘SATHYADEEPAM’ Malayalam weekly dated 25-11-2009, based on a statement of the then Pope with regard to the relationship of the Artists and the Church. It is given here mainly to show how people are interpreting wrongly without understanding the purpose and circumstances particularly with reference to Judas Iscariot in continuation to my earlier post. The published matter is roughly translated as follows: “  The statement of the Holy Father was not with reference to the Church Construction. On the contrary it was made when he was addressing the Artists. Hence it cannot be taken as justifying the extravaganza on the church construction of the medieval period also known as dark ages. Those churches are standing today as museums rather than churches.

Similarly another extravaganza event in the Bible, ‘He said this, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief. He carried the money bag and would help himself from it’ was not told by Jesus. But it is only a remark of the Gospel writer John. What Jesus told was, ‘Leave her alone! Let her keep what she has for the day of my burial’ and not made any comment against Judas Iscariot. On the contrary there is no such mention about Judas Iscariot in the Gospels of Mathew and Mark who also described the same incident. (Jn 12:6)

Similarly, there are also other circumstances quoted at wrong places. They are, to justify drunkenness quote the miracle of turning water into wine, to justify high interest rate quote the Parable of the Talents etc. The use of certain biblical quotes by the Satan during the temptation of Jesus is also a good example for using words at wrong place and/or purpose.

Go to my home page:

Wednesday, 12 April 2017


"Stop judging, that you may not be judged (Mt.7:1). Still we judge and condemn Judas Iscariot for his betrayal and suicide.

But why we do not think in a different way which could be the nearest possible in such a situation. First of all he might have been approached by the high priest and their men to help them in catching Jesus in an isolated place, for which money was offered, because they feared the crowd. Having full faith in Jesus’ ability to escape through miracle, he accepted the offer to take the money as well as to fool the High priest and his men. And his plan was coming true, when all of them fell to the ground when Jesus told “I am he”(Jn.18:6). This chance was enough for Jesus to escape and that was what Judas had in his mind. But making his calculations wrong, Jesus did not escape as he expected. Since he loved and trusted Jesus too much, he could not bear this situation and ran back to the high priest and his men and begged for his release in return of the money. Here also he failed. Because of the shock of such an unbearable situation, he went mad and ran away and committed suicide. Here we cannot see any of his love for money as is believed, but we can see the love and blind faith in Jesus. Perhaps that may be the reason why Jesus told, “For the Son of Man indeed goes, as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. It would be better for that man if he had never been born" meaning everything goes according to the will of god as is written, but this poor fellow would be cursed by all.

Therefore, considering the whole incidents together with the contradictions and confusions in the testimony of different gospel writers, there is enough room to give the benefit of doubt to the alleged betrayer, for we do not know whether Jesus included him also in the list of disciples who will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Lk.22:30).

To know more about me, go to my home page:

Thursday, 30 March 2017



The  following  paragraphs  are  my opinion on  the  latest  Supreme  Court  of  India decision  on  the  divorce law  relating  to the  Catholic  Christians  in  India  as published  in  the  LIGHT  OF  TRUTH  in  its 16-31 March  2017  issue.  In  fact  there  is no  provision  for  Catholics  for  a  divorce in  the  Canon  Law.  This  is the  basic reason  for  the  start  of  the  Protestant ‘Church  of  England’  (its  Indian  version  - CNI  and  CSI) who  protested  against  this and  introduced  divorce.  

This  is  in response  to  the  article  ‘CIVIL LAW  AND CANON  LAW’  in  this publication  dated 16-022017.  As mentioned  by  the  author,  I am  fully  agreeable  with  his  statement that  the  quality  of  today’s journalism  is very  poor  particularly  in  this  case  where it  is  stated  that  the  Supreme  Court decided  that a  “divorce”  granted  by  an Ecclesiastical  Tribunal  is  not  valid  in  the eyes  of  the  Civil  Law.

In  the  instant case (CLARENCE  PAIS  VS.  UNION  OF  INDIA  & ORS.)  decided  on  19-01-2017,  the Supreme Court  simply  dismissed  the  Writ  Petition quoting  a  Kerala  High  Court  Judgement of  three members  bench  headed  by Justice  K.T.THOMAS  and  its  confirmation by  the  supreme  court  in  Molly Joseph alias  Nish  Vs.  George  Sebastian  alias  Joy [(1996)  6  SCC  337].  To  quote  SC’s  own words  for clarity,   “The  solitary  prayer made  by  the  petitioner  through  the instant  writ  petition  is  as  under:

“a) Issue a  writ  in  the  nature  of Mandamus/Certiorary  and  thereby  grant declaration  that  the  Code  of Common Law is  the  Personal  Law  of  the  Indian Christians  and  has  to  be  recognized  as such  by  the Courts  (Civil  and  Criminal) in India  and  which  would  supersede  any other  law  in  conflict  thereto  and other accordingly.  …………..  In  view  of  the decision  rendered  by  this  Court,  as  has been  extracted hereinabove,  we  are  of the  view,  that  the  instant  writ  petition is wholly  devoid  of  merit  and  is  liable  to be  dismissed.”  It  was  also  mentioned  in the  record  of  proceedings  that  the advocate  of  the  Petitioner was  absent during  the  hearing.  There  is  nothing else in  the  judgement  as  blown  out  by  the press.

However,  in  my  opinion,  the original  Kerala  High  Court  case  as  well as  in  the  instant  case,  the  issue was  not properly  handled  by  the  parties  in  the right  direction  by  challenging  the constitutional  validity of  the  existing  laws made  during  the  British  Raj  matching  to the  laws  of  the  Church  of  England (counter  part  of  the  CNI/CSI),  as distinguished  from  the  Canon  laws  and personal  local  laws applicable  to  the Indian  Catholics  and  particularly  Malabar Christians  who  were  in  existence  in India since  A.D.52,  even  before  the  Canon  Law was  brought  to  India  by  the  Portuguese after  A.D.  1500.

In  this  regard,  my  view on  a  similar  issue  published  in  this publication  dated  01-12-2009  under  the caption,  ‘CHURCH  PROPERTY:  CANON LAWS V/S CIVIL LAWS’ may also  be referred  to.

(Visit my HOME PAGE for more details of my other activities.)

Wednesday, 8 March 2017


In the Sathyadeepam English edition THE LIGHT OF TRUTH (March 16-31,2008), I had written under the heading,"CHARISMATIC PENTECOSTALISM" distinguishing what is Catholicism, Protestantism, Pentecostalism and Christianity. What Jesus told and what we are doing? This is what Pope Francis told recently according to The Huffington Post reported under the heading “Pope Francis Slams Hypocrite Christians, Suggests Atheists Are Better”. It continued quoting Pope Francis, after he gave an example of a Christian boss taking a vacation as his workers went unpaid -- and issued a stern warning about where that will lead.
“You will arrive in heaven and you will knock at the gate: ‘Here I am, Lord!’ ― ‘But don’t you remember? I went to Church, I was close to you, I belong to this association, I did this… Don’t you remember all the offerings I made?’ ‘Yes, I remember. The offerings, I remember them: All dirty. All stolen from the poor. I don’t know you.’ That will be Jesus’ response to these scandalous people who live a double life.”
And see the copy of my writing below:-

Also read my blogs, books etc:-
Home page:

Thursday, 2 March 2017


കത്തോലിക്കാ പുരോഹിതരുടെ ബ്രഹ്മചര്യത്തെപ്പറ്റിയും അതിലെ ചില തെറ്റിദ്ധാരണകളെപ്പറ്റിയും എന്റെ ചില അഭിപ്രായങ്ങൾ "സത്യദീപം" (ഇംഗ്ലീഷ്) ദ്വൈവാരികയിലൂടെ :


Wednesday, 28 December 2016