Follow TNM's WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
Signalling a clear shift from his earlier position, the head of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, Baselios Marthoma Mathews III, has spoken out against attacks against Christians and questioned the silence of the Union government.
He made the remarks while delivering the feast message at St Mary’s Church in Panayampala of Kottayam, on January 2.
Highlighting recent incidents targeting Christians, the church head said, “Here, today, one thing that we are forced to face are the attacks against the Christian community. It is necessary to create proper awareness about this. In a very wrong approach, RSS affiliates like the Bajrang Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad are attacking Christians and other religious minorities in this society. It is a fact.”
He pointed to reports in the media regarding incidents of violence and cautioned that it could escalate further. “We know that after the nuns, now it is the turn of the priests. After ruining the Christmas celebrations outside the church, it won't be long before they enter the church itself. Maybe, the coming attacks will be against worship inside the church. We must surely expect that.”
Emphasising constitutional guarantees, Baselios Marthoma Mathews III underlined the responsibility of governments to rein in extremist elements. He said, “Every religion gives a message of truth, justice, and love, but in any religion there can be fanatics. The people who govern the country are responsible for controlling such fanatics, regardless of the community or religion. We all have the freedom of religion and the right to practice our rituals.”
'Christians and Muslims born and raised here’
Referring to slogans raised during attacks on Christmas displays, the bishop questioned claims that some religions were “foreign” to India.
“Any person who knows history will understand what a wrong notion they are expressing. There is no Aryan or Hindu who originated solely from India; everyone came from the Iranian region.”
He went on to outline migration patterns to argue that no community could claim exclusive ownership of the land. “The Dravidians are not originally from here either; they reached India from Africa through Iran. However, they were living in the Indus Valley Civilisation until the Aryans came in 2000 BC and took over, seizing all the regions and pushing the Dravidians to the south. The Dravidians who thus fled and migrated south live in south India today.”
Questioning present-day rhetoric, he asked, “People who arrived in 2000 BC are saying that all ‘foreigners’ must go back. Who is the foreigner? The Aryans were early migrants. Before them, the Dravidians.”
Rejecting claims that Christians and Muslims are ‘outsiders’, he asserted their rootedness in India. “The Christians here were born and raised here, having embraced Christianity since 52 AD. They are citizens of this country.” He extended the same argument to Muslims, saying, “It is the same for the Muslims here; they were born and raised here. Therefore, that religion has the right to exist here, as does Christianity and Hinduism.”
Warning of the consequences of the Union government’s inaction against the attacks on Christians, the bishop said minorities would read silence as consent. “When they remain silent without raising their voice against it or condemning it, Christians or minorities can only understand it as being part of their programme. Everyone knows that if they do not condemn or control it, they are silently approving it.”
Shift in tone
The speech marks a notable shift in tone from the senior church leader, who in the past had publicly engaged with and expressed support for the Union government’s development initiatives. During a meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Parliament in April 2023, he had welcomed the Union government’s development initiatives and described the concerns faced by Christian institutions in some regions as limited and localised.
At the time, he had expressed confidence that dialogue with the government could address such issues and resolve grievances. The interaction, which took place in the presence of a Union minister, was publicly projected by the government as cordial and constructive.