The Pope Is About To Canonise This Convert From 18th Century Southern India—But The Devasahayam Pillai Martyrdom Story Is A Hoax

Even as Prime Minister Narendra Modi met the Pope and invited him to India, the Catholic Church announced on 9 November 2021 that Pope Francis shall formally canonize one Devasahayam Pillai on 15 May 2022. Most of the mainstream media joyously reported that he was the first Indian lay Catholic to make it to the list of Catholic saints.

Who was Devasahayam Pillai?

According to Catholic martyr cult accounts, Pillai was born in a Nair family as Neelakandan in Travancore, in the late 18^th century. He embraced Catholic religion and was baptised. As a consequence of this, he was martyred by the then Travancore kingdom ruled by Marthanda Varma.

It is said as Neelakandan was having financial difficulties the captured mercenary introduced the Bible to him. The Catholic Mass Book claims that ‘Neelakandan was baptized in 1745 at Vadakkankulam in a Jesuit church under Rev.Fr. R. Bouttari Iyalus S.J.’. Four years after his baptism, he was said to have been arrested and then after 'three years of torture', as he refused to abandon Christianity, he was said to have been executed.

Catholic propaganda literature including plays, modeled after traditional Hindu village plays, show him as 'giving up the right of his noble birth by identifying himself with the outcastes and the marginalized.'

A recent Vatican release has this to say:

So, the ‘upper caste’ Hindus in general and the Brahmin head minister-adviser of Travancore State, Rama Iyen Dalawai, in particular have been made the villains of this martyrdom story.

Let us look into the factual possibilities of these claims one by one:

Travancore Hindu Kings and Christian missions

Generally, the Travancore kings often allowed proselytising activities and in a typical show of misplaced-tolerance, even condemned Hindu resistance to conversions. Thus, as early as 1526 CE, having obtained Portuguese help through St. Francis Xavier against the Vijayanagara kingdom, the Travancore king, Bhutala Vira Udaya Marthanda Varma (not to be confused with later century Marthanda Varma) warned Hindus of coastal provinces not to hinder the conversion activities.

He made an edict warning 'the senior and junior Kangan (the head-man and his assistant among the Hindu fishermen) who resided in the haven at Kumari-muttam, commanding them that they should not 'harass' the Christian converts who 'were exempted from paying the taxes due to the village community of the heathens, such as -idankai, valankai-panum (the tax for the right and the left hand castes) padaippanam and prachanda-kannikai.' (V.Nagam Aiya, The Travancore State Manual, Vol-I, 1906, p.296)

Myth of Brahmin Diwan Rama Iyen's Hostility towards Christian Converts

Marthanda Varma (1706-1758) who ruled from1729 till 1758 was both a ruthless king and a person open to modernity of the times. He mercilessly eliminated his opponents and auctioned their women and children. He made enemies of quite a significant number of Hindu communities in his quest for power. At the same time, he declared himself to be 'Padmanabha Dasan'.

After his 'victory' over the Dutch, the captured mercenary Flemish captain Eustace Benoit de Lannoy (1715–1777) was employed by the king to transform Travancore army into a form similar to a European military. According to Catholic propaganda, it was Lannoy who had counselled Pillai 'on the uncertainty of earthly riches and advised him to put his trust in God.' (Fernando & Gispert-Sauch,'Christianity in India:Two Thousand Years of Faith', Viking, 2004,p.94).

That a mercenary who worked for Dutch navy and later worked luxuriously with Travancore army should be teaching a Hindu about the impermanence of earthly riches is quite a stretch, even by Catholic standards.

Both Marthanda Varma and his chief minister Rama Iyen Dalawai, the major strategist, often relied on converted Christians as well as Muslims when they feared the loyalty of their Hindu soldiers. For example, here is an incident that happened in the period 1749-50, the time when Pillai was said to have been jailed and tortured for his Catholic faith:

How is it possible that Rama Iyen who did not hesitate to employ converted Christians and Muslims to brutally attack the crowd of Brahmins with the help of De Lannoy, should allow torture and subsequent execution of a person who had allegedly converted to Catholic religion supposedly under the influence of the very same De Lannoy?

Jesuits and Caste Discrimination

Pillai is said to have been baptised in a Jesuit church by a Jesuit priest. Of all the missionaries in India, Jesuits were the most sympathetic to caste divisions. They had constructed walls within the Church separating the so-called upper castes from lower castes. Also, if there were so-called 'untouchable' converts, they had to stand outside.

It should be remembered that while the Church did not attach much importance to India’s indigenous social hierarchies, nevertheless, for them social hierarchies and birth-based hierarchies were important in their own society. Jesuits happily accepted the social discrimination and exclusion that existed in India. Here is a classic statement endorsing caste-based pollution in the context of evangelism by Constantine Beschi, another Jesuit priest who was working in southern India with great zeal:

Beschi had died two years after the alleged baptism of Pillai. Given such a nature of Catholic Christianity, particularly as served by the Jesuits, how could Pillai, who was baptised in a Jesuit Church, have gone against the caste restrictions, and that too because of his Christian faith?

One of the veteran historians of Kerala, Nagam Aiya, who authored the multi-volume Travancore State Manual, had given particular attention to this myth of the martyr and had recorded some interesting observations:

Therefore, not only is the claim untenable in the historical sense, it is also offensive to Hindus – particularly the Hindus of Travancore. They have been only hospitable and concessional towards the evangelicals, including the Catholic and Protestant missionaries; yet, they have to bear the charge of religious persecution and execution.

Historic Precedence of Hoax Hatred

The Catholic Church is known to fabricate such martyr stories and grand them sainthood, particularly when it has to create a monster out of the ‘other’ they want to proselytize. In this case—Hindus.

Hindus would do well look into the stories of such fabricated martyrs and saints which the Church used to propagate hatred against Jews and the Jewish religion.

They used the false story of Simon, a child who was said to have been martyred by Jews in a bloody ritual. It was only in 1965 – after the Holocaust- that the Pope removed Simon from Catholic martyrology.

It is through a sustained campaign across the world that Jews were able to prove their innocence and the hate-cult dimension of martyr-hoaxes. Today, the Church would not dare do such a thing against the Jews.

In India though, the Church has been creating fake archeological and historical claims throughout the Kanyakumari district for the Devasahayam Pillai hoax.

Hindus of the district have been hapless witnesses and victims of this hoax. So, who is there to speak for Hindus when they get vilified by an internationally powerful and proselytizing Church?

The onus is definitely and doubly upon Narendra Modi—who had invited Pope to India—and his government to stand firm and tell the Church not to play its hoax games on Hindus. Modi has done right in inviting Pope to India and now he should use the opportunity to tell him to make the Church realize that such hate-hoaxes will not be tolerated.