Devasahayam's sainthood links Pope Francis to Kanniyakumari
KANNIYAKUMARI: The faithful in Kanniyakumari remembers him for conferring sainthood on Devasahayam — the first Indian layman to be canonised by the Catholic Church. It was on May 15, 2022, that Pope Francis declared Devasahayam of Kanniyakumari a saint during a solemn ceremony at St Peter's Basilica in Vatican City.
Speaking to TNIE, Father Hilarius, the former Vicar General of the RC Diocese of Kottar, said the diocese of Kottar undertook the cause for Devasahayam's canonisation.
Born as Nilakandan in a Hindu family in Nattalam village in present-day Kanniyakumari district on April 23, 1712, Devasahayam was baptised on May 14, 1745, by Italian Jesuit missionary Fr Giovanni Baptista Buttari. He took the name Lazarus, later translated to 'Devasahayam', meaning 'God is my help'.
Working in the Travancore royal court, Devasahayam embraced Christianity and began preaching the faith while denouncing caste discrimination. This drew the ire of the authorities and he was falsely accused of treason and espionage. He was executed by gunfire at Kattadimalai in Kanniyakumari on January 14, 1752.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Most powerful Russian attack on Ukraine's second city since the start of war
News • 5 days ago In a chilling echo of the George Floyd tragedy, 42-year-old Indian-origin man Gaurav Kundi is fighting for his life in Australia after a violent police encounter in Adelaide. Kundi, a father of two, was allegedly tackled and kneed in the neck by police officers after they misread a loud argument between him and his partner, Amritpal Kaur, as a domestic violence incident. Despite Kaur's pleas that he was simply drunk and not violent, police restrained him forcefully. His condition deteriorated on the scene, with Kaur begging officers to take him to the hospital—not the station. Kundi is now on life support with suspected brain damage. South Australia Police have launched an internal investigation and are reviewing bodycam footage. The incident bears painful similarities to the death of George Floyd in 2020, which ignited global protests against racial injustice and police brutality.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Can't jail a man for marrying outside his faith: Supreme Court
The state cannot object to two consenting adults living together merely because they belong to different religions, the Supreme Court asserted while granting bail to a Muslim man jailed for nearly six months after marrying a Hindu woman. A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma passed the order as it allowed an appeal filed by a man, who was denied bail by the Uttarakhand High Court in February 2025. The petitioner was arrested under provisions of the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, for allegedly concealing his religious identity and fraudulently marrying the woman under Hindu rites. In an order issued recently, the Supreme Court said: 'The respondent-state cannot have any objection to the appellant and his wife residing together inasmuch as they have been married as per the wishes of their respective parents and families.' The bench further clarified that the ongoing criminal proceedings would not come in the way of the couple living together by choice. ALSO READ | 'Failure of marriage not end of life', Supreme Court tell young couple The court directed the petitioner's release on bail, noting that he had been incarcerated for nearly six months and that a charge sheet had already been filed. 'Considering the facts on record, in our view, the case for bail is made out,' said the bench. The court also took note of the argument made by the senior counsel for the petitioner, who contended that the FIR was lodged only after certain individuals and organisations objected to the interfaith marriage. It was pointed out that the wedding took place with the full knowledge and presence of both families, and that Siddiqui provided an affidavit the day after the marriage affirming he would not force his wife to convert and that she would be free to follow her faith. The FIR in question was lodged on December 12, 2024, at Rudrapur Police Station in Uttarakhand's Udham Singh Nagar district, just two days after the couple's wedding on December 10. The Uttarakhand High Court earlier declined to grant Siddiqui bail, holding that facts relating to his religion had allegedly not been disclosed to the woman and her family before the marriage. In its February 28 order rejecting bail, the High Court accepted the prosecution's argument that the man's religious identity was deliberately concealed. The High Court observed that while the wedding was solemnised under Hindu customs, and the applicant and his family failed to reveal their Muslim identity until after the marriage. The complaint was lodged by a cousin of the woman, alleging that the family discovered the groom's religious background only upon visiting his residence in Delhi, where they noticed that 'most of the people belonged to a different community.' The FIR was filed the very next day, despite an affidavit submitted by Siddiqui on December 11 assuring that he would not pressure his wife into converting and would respect her religious autonomy. While Siddiqui's counsel highlighted that his mother is a practising Hindu and that he grew up in a Hindu environment, the High Court remained unconvinced. It noted that the couple did not marry under the Special Marriage Act, which governs interfaith unions in India, and that key facts were allegedly kept from the woman's family, pointing to the affidavit as evidence that 'correct facts had not been disclosed.' Rejecting the defence that the information was known to both sides, the High Court concluded, 'The applicant does not deserve bail.' In contrast, the Supreme Court viewed the matter through the lens of personal liberty and marital autonomy, reiterating that the right of adult individuals to live together cannot be curtailed by the state on the ground of religious difference. 'This is an appropriate case where the relief of bail ought to be granted,' held the bench, noting the petitioner's submissions that the couple may choose to live separately from their families and continue to live peacefully without any hindrance.
Indian Express
3 hours ago
- Indian Express
Newark airport videos: Delhi formally takes up matter with US Embassy
The Ministry of External Affairs has formally raised the matter with the US Embassy in New Delhi in the wake of social media videos purportedly showing an Indian national being handcuffed and pinned to the ground at the Newark airport. The Indian Consulate in New York has also been in touch with the US authorities to ascertain the details of the incident, as per sources. Posted on X by Indian-American entrepreneur Kunal Jain, the videos and photographs showed an unidentified young man being restrained by officers from the Port Authority Police Department (PAPD), the agency responsible for law enforcement across major transport hubs in New York and New Jersey Sunday night. Jain had tagged the Indian Embassy in Washington DC and External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar in his series of posts. During a call from The Indian Express to Port Authority Police Department at Newark International Airport, an officer said that 'the PAPD doesn't get involved in deportations'. 'The Ministry has formally raised the matter with the US Embassy in New Delhi. Our Embassy in Washington DC and the Indian Consulate in New York have also been in touch with the US authorities to ascertain the details,' sources in the Ministry said. 'We have so far have not received any details about the incident or the circumstances under which he was restrained, the flight he had to board or boarded and his final destination,' sources said, adding that the ministry will continue to follow up on the matter. There is still no information if the person has left Newark or has arrived in India, as per those aware of the matter.
