By chhotebhai
Kanpur, Oct 21`, 2021: Two friends from different parts of India sent me the now viral letter about priests and trusts. The letter No 0899/21/IN dated October 8, 2021 is written by Archbishop Leopoldo Girelli, the apostolic nuncio to India. It is addressed to the bishops of Tamil Nadu and makes interesting reading, meriting circumspection.
The nuncio’s attention was drawn to several priests in Tamil Nadu establishing private trusts “registered under the guise of Non-Governmental Organizations ostensibly to help those in need.” The nuncio writes that “all too often they become financial and political power bases for the priests involved”. He continues that priests and religious should not be associated with autonomous trusts/societies/companies, unless they are specifically approved by the bishops concerned.
He then quotes canon law. Priests are not permitted to take up the management of goods belonging to lay persons or secular offices which entail an obligation of rendering accounts. They cannot even stand as personal surety for such acts without the bishop’s permission (cf Can 285:4). He goes on to say that Canon 286 states that “clerics are prohibited from conducting business or trade personally or through others, again without the bishop’s permission. Non-compliance would attract penal provisions, according to their gravity, as per Canon 1392.
He then “recommends” that the Tamil Nadu bishops formulate guidelines for such activities. The bishops are to ascertain details of personal trusts run by priests. They should be closed down and no new ones permitted. Genuine trusts may be brought under diocesan control and there should be no sole trusteeship whatsoever.
On the face of it this is a bold and pragmatic step by the Nuncio and needs to be fully appreciated. However, I see it as a conundrum, raising more questions than it answers. Here’s why.
1. If by the very nature of their vocation priests are not supposed to indulge in trade and commerce, then why should the bishop permit it at all? Take the Rupees Thirty Crores (300 million) cash scandal in Jalandhar diocese on March 29, 2019. The Punjab police raided the premises of a church and recovered several millions in cash. Note that this was just two days before the close of the financial year, when most businessmen start padding up their books.
The Model Code of Conduct for the Lok Sabha elections was also in force that specifically bans the possession of large amounts of cash. It is also contrary to Income Tax rules. The real shocker though is the “Important Clarification” issued by Bishop Agnelo Gracias, the apostolic administrator. It was published on page 9 of the diocesan magazine “Christward’ in April and states, inter alia, that a group of companies was being run under the name of Sahodhaya for supply of text books, smart boards, training of security personnel and construction work.
These “companies” were not run by the diocese, but by some diocesan priests with due permission and within the ambit of law. 140 million had already been deposited in the bank and the remaining amount of 166,500,000 rupees was being counted by a single bank employee late at night when the police raid took place. Docile and gullible Catholics swallowed this story hook, line and sinker. I didn’t.
2. The next example is of Bishop Gallela Prasad of Cuddapah diocese. In the wake of ample evidence of diversion of funds to his alleged mistress and son, he was removed from office and now resides in St. Patrick’s School, Gandhinagar, Chennai. The moot question is, “What happened to the misappropriated funds?” Is this not a betrayal of trust? Where is the recompense and restoration that should form part of repentance?
3. What about Bishop Franco Mulackal, again of Jalandhar, who is being tried on multiple rape charges? Who is funding his expensive lawyers in Kerala and even in the Supreme Court? How can he continue to reside in the Bishop’s House in Jalandhar, when he is facing such serious criminal charges? In contrast, the poor victim faces shame and trepidation. Did not the bishop betray the trust of a woman religious over whom he exercised authority?
4. Bishop K.A. William of Mysore is also in the news for multiple counts of betrayal of the trust reposed in him. Around 37 priests of his diocese have submitted a written complaint against him that includes allegations of murder, sexual molestation and financial misappropriation. On September 15, 2020 Cardinal Tagle ordered him to undergo a paternity test. No action taken. The nuncio appointed an enquiry committee that made two visits to the diocese in March and July this year.
Several witnesses deposed, even on oath. Dossiers of evidence were submitted. All we know is that the committee ordered him to desist from selling a 269 acre coffee estate in Yercaud, Tamil Nadu. On the complaint of the parishioners of Nagavalli the Senior Civil Judge, Chamarajnagar, passed a restraining order on September 22 this year against the bishop selling off the parish property. The dossier alleges financial misappropriation running into several millions, and lists 3.3 million rupees put into personal Life Insurance in 2016, just before he was appointed bishop. If the committee report does not reflect these allegations, or the nuncio refuses to act on it, then again it will be a huge betrayal of trust.
5. There are several other provisions in Canon Law that would merit the nuncio’s attention. Canon 284 states that clerics should wear suitable ecclesiastical dress. Do they? Canon 282 says that they should have a simple way of life and avoid anything that smacks of worldliness. I presume that includes fancy cars, electronic gadgets, photographic equipment, watches, perfumes and liquor. Canon 277 says that clerics are obliged to observe perfect and perpetual continence, not just celibacy. So all and every sexual act or stimulus is out. Canon 276:2 imposes the obligation of the liturgy of hours. How many priests do we see today with their breviaries? They seem to have been replaced by briefcases. Canon 279 warns against profane novelties and pseudo-science. This is a tough task.
6. Trusteeship cannot be limited to an organization. More importantly, it is a huge responsibility that a priest or a bishop voluntarily accepts to carry. But seen in its strictly legalistic sense we find that in the Bombay Archdiocese, the parish priest is the sole trustee of the parish. Attempts by the Charity Commissioner to curtail this hegemony or monopoly have failed. Most dioceses are registered as societies, trusts or even as companies. Legally therefore their trusteeship (stewardship) is limited only to the members of such bodies. The common people have no locus standi, and cannot hold such juridical bodies accountable. Courts function on legalities, not moralities; so in the absence of any other checks and balances, such trusts, by their very opaqueness, breed mistrust.
In India we have various civil laws to govern religious places. The Sikhs are governed by the rules of the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee. Muslims have Waqf boards and in many states there are Devasom Boards to manage big temple trusts. There have been attempts in Kerala to bring in legislation to manage or control Church properties, but the all-powerful hierarchy has stymied such attempts.
So what does the laity do about trusts, trusteeship, the trust deficit or even the betrayal of trust? Part of Pope Francis’ agenda on Synodality is to break this hegemony. He calls it the curse of clericalization that is not according to the mind of Christ. Vatican II was about the devolution of power in collegial and fraternal relationships. It didn’t happen. The present Synod could meet the same fate. Yet I believe that “hope springs eternal in the human breast”.
How does one restore power parity, as in a weighing scale? Either one removes some weight from one pan, or adds weight to the other. The first option is what happened during the French Revolution when the people grabbed power from both the monarchy and hierarchy. The other alternative is much slower, the Ambedkar approach, that knowledge is a power. The ignorant laity should stop blaming others and became knowledgeable and aware.
Secondly, it must build its own financial resources and institutions. Just like the Tatas and Azim Premji, Catholic industrialists and leaders should focus on becoming economically independent. In this context I welcome the clamp down on easy access to foreign funds that made the hierarchy and clergy even more self-sufficient and the laity redundant. Then, and only then, will the powerful hierarchy/clergy take note of you. Till that happens all we will get is cautionary notes from the nuncio on trusteeship. May this Synod be an opportunity for the laity, the somnambulant giant, to come of age.
(The writer is the convener of the Indian Catholic Forum)
The Nuncio is “MISGUIDED” by a “selfish group” and hence he has written this type of letter holding “only the priests” responsible for running Trusts/Societies and that too only in Tamil Nadu!! The TRUTH is that the BISHOPS AND PRIESTS ARE HAND IN GLOVE in this matter almost in every diocese in India. So, the Nuncio must “pull up” all the bishops including the CBCI and CCBI, who are very well aware of these issues and give them a SEVERE WARNING.
Beautiful Article Dear Brother Chhotebhai.
Congratulation.
As you said the church authority should keep an eye on few bishops who are generating crores of money.
In my Diocese many priests are suffering without basic facility. Whereas Bishop William is building his house worth of 5 crores. Is it necessary when the Holy Father speaks about simplicity?
I thank archbishop Most Rev. Leopoldo Girelli, the apostolic nuncio to visit Mysore Diocese to know the aristocratic life of the bishop.
For his pleasure lot of church properties have been sold out.
I have gone thorough your many articles specially about the Synod 2023 so I do want to add anything here about cleric life. Really it is wonderful opportunity for all the followers of Jesus. Pope is doing wonderful job. This synod work should have two ways – one-way – synodal instructions have come from the clerics way and now the important things is opinions/suggestions should go forth from only faithful/lay to high authority which will have transparency and it will be the expected result by Pope.
Power: Power means work of spreading of Good News should be shared proportionally. we say we have very few priest but this is our mistake because we have framed who will be the priest. It shouldn’t be like this. Worshiping, rites, praying authorities, sacraments like Baptism etc should be allowed to do by any deserving faithful. All should be allowed to be part of Administration of catholic places and not only the particular group. Money matter is the very important point which should have any penetration in this devotional work.
Mission: This is very important point what Jesus expect from all of us. In the name of Jesus mission we become wealthy and healthy but the thing what God expect from us remains stand by. For this we must have perfect plan else all will move out from one christian community to other christian community (sects) in search of God. In this way few come out with self proclaimed pastors, some publish devotional hymns, some other activities and just earn fame, wealth etc. Now a days people go out from the regular church/church activities and join the healers group and this is not the work of God from any way. I myself should become a perfect example of the follower of God by my act. We give more importance to the Sacrament than the practical life.
My request to Chotta chetan sir – Lead the group of lay people with the support of like minded people and bring good awareness, God may be calling you. Try to reach all the people with the vernacular language post etc which will help people to know more about the true work of God and the participation of each one of us. Priests and no one is our enemy but we must all work and walk together with the light of knowledge and love.
Edwin
MANY PRIESTS IN TAMILNADU HAD STARTED VARIOUS TRUSTS WHICH ARE BIG MONEY SPINNERS AND A HAVEN FOR BLACK MONEY. THE JOSEPH HOSPITAL TRUST, ASHA NIVAS, ETC. ARE A FEW TO MENTION.
IT IS VERY UNFORTUNATE THAT THE INDIAN CATHOLIC CHURCH HAS SURROUNDED ITSELF WITH WEALTH, POWER, FAME , ETC. AND HAS BETRAYED THE TRUST OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST.
THE AUTOCRATIC AND KINGLY BEHAVIOUR OF MANY BISHOPS AND PRIESTS ARE THE CAUSES FOR WHOLESALE CORRUPTION AND ABUSES IN THE CHURCH OF GOD.
UNLESS THE BISHOPS AND PRIESTS MEND THEIR LUXURIOUS LIFE STYLE AND INVOLVE THEMSELVES FULLY IN RELIGIOUS WORK THE CHURCH OF GOD WILL SUFFER AND REMAIN BROKEN AND BRUISED.
THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE PARISHES AND DIOCESES SHOULD BE ENTRUSTED IN THE HANDS OF ELECTED CATHOLIC LAITY COMMITTEE MEMBERS LIKE THE SYSTEM FOLLOWED BY THE CHURCH OF SOUTH INDIA FOR PROPER ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY. IF THE INDIAN CHURCH DOES NOT PAY HEED TO THE WARNINGS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT THEN WE WILL WITNESS RUIN AND DISASTER TO FOLLOW. THE TRUSTS WILL BE DISSOLVED AND SOME OF THE CHURCH RELIGIOUS LEADERS WILL BE ARRESTED FOR CORRUPTION,ABUSES, ETC..
THE LAITY SHOULD ALSO BE INVITED FOR THE BISHOPS SYNOD IN VATICAN TO REFORM AND MAKE THE CHURCH TRUE IN COMMUNION, PARTICIPATION AND MISSION.
F.A.NATHAN
PRESIDENT
NEW LIFE PEOPLE’S PARTY
MOB.09840231914
EMAIL fanathan@gmail.com
In the report Chhotebhai has written: “The ignorant laity should stop blaming others and became knowledgeable and aware.” But there are several lay leaders who are wide awake and very well-conversant with the goings-on, both in the spiritual domain and the temporal world. They are also very well aware of the slip-ups by the Indian church hierarchy. They also have suggested corrective measures to arrest the dwindling pew in the church. These lay luminaries are David Lobo (Deejay Coconut Farm) who pioneered coconut hybridization. He is a world leader and his farm produces the fastest and highest yielding coconut palms on earth. Participants of Indian Catholic Forum (ICF) inaugural conference in 2019 at Praggaloy (Barasat) will recall his masterly presentation on “CRISIS MANAGEMENT.” Chhotebhai has always been there with his very strong knowledge of church doctrine and current social issues. He latest book “The Jerusalem Code” proves his deep knowledge. We have senior advocate Kirit Macwan of Gujarat. He has written a document on Parish Finance Committee and presented it at the ICF Barasat meet. We have retired Justice Michael Saldanha (of Bombay and Karnataka High Courts). He has taken on Bishop K.A. Williams and also written to the Vatican wanting to argue the case for Sr Lucy. We have several lay Catholic doctors, engineers, chartered accountants (I know at least two from Kolkata) across all 174 dioceses, These leaders can very well teach our Bishops and heads of institutes a lesson or two. But are they willing to “LISTEN” which is the very foundation of Synod-2023? Fr Dr Suresh Mathew has aptly written in his editorial (Indian Currents): ” Listening to people will be meaningful when every voice is heard. It doesn’t matter whether one speaks what is pleasing to the ear of the authorities or something critical of their actions. The Church should lend an ear to both. There cannot be a one-size-fits-all approach in synodality.”
Regarding Chhotebhai’s remarks on who is footing the hefty legal expenses for Bishop (?) Franco Mulakkal, the laity of Jalandhar has to question his boss/ concerned Archbishop/Administrator of Jalandhar. Questioning from a distance won’t be answered. Regarding paternal test of Bishop (?) K.A. William he won’t listen to anybody except the court. May be Justice Michael Saldanha and his associates may follow up on this, if the local laity prefer to remain as sheep.
The million dollar question is: Are black sheep Franco and William invitees to Synod 2023?
Chhotebhai’s article is an eye-opener. The Laity has to wake up from its sleep. However, all said and done, one must congratulate the Nuncio for giving a clear-cut mandate on financial aspect being handled by priests – that is running private trusts.
A trust has 4 elements. They are
• The settlor: The person who creates the trust. (in the Trust Deed of PM CARES Fund, Prime Minisiter Narendra Modi signed as the Settlor).
• Trustee: The person who holds the property for another’s benefit
• Beneficiary: The person who is benefited by the trust.
• Trust property: The property involved in the transaction
(1) A private trust is constituted for the benefit of one or more individuals who are, or within a given time maybe, definitely ascertained. (2) When the trust is established for family members, relatives, friends, etc. then the trust is called a Private Trust.
Going by point (2) above, clearly a priest cannot be a Trustee as it has got nothing to do with the welfare of the church.
The Nuncio is absolutely right in pointing out that priests, being part of the Church, cannot run Private Trusts. When the Lay members of a parish/diocese are in doubt, they must ask the concerned priest/bishop to show them the Trust Deed (and not excerpts from the Trust). In the interest of Transparency & Accountability (which they preach from the pulpit), they are bound to show all the papers, especially if the Trusts are registered in Parish address.
Going by the Kerala High Court judgement (Times of India, 11 October 2012) Laity has a right over Church property. While hearing a case over property rights between parishioners and church authorities of Mukkad Thirkududmba Church, Kollam, the judges ruled that parishioners, independently or together as a committee of administrators, are competent to represent the parish and claim rights over the property of the church. The church had argued that as per the Canon Law, church property is vested in the hands of the bishop or the vicar for initiating a litigation. The court held that the law of the land would take precedence over Canon Law and that Church and its properties would not vest in the Pope or Bishop/Archbishop. They further ruled the maxim “Rome has spoken, the matter is closed” no longer holds good. Such personal law (Canon Law) cannot have any legal impact. Readers will recall, it is by the same reasoning, Cardinal Allencherry was pulled up by the court regarding Ernakulam Archdiocese land scam. The Cardinal had told the court he was only accountable to the Pope and not to any court.
In this respect, Mr Kirit Macwan, Senior Advocate (from Ahmedabad, Gujarat) and his advocate friend Mr Romesh Niven who are important members of Indian Catholic Forum (ICF) can be requested to enlighten the Laity.
This issue should also form part of Pre-Synodal discussion at all parishes/dioceses, under the head Financial Matters or in church parlance `Temporal Matters!’
Fr Rohan is quite right. It could be diplomatic immunity. This is the reason bishops like Franco Mulakkal , K.A. William, etc are flourishing with impunity. However, Fr Rohan is not entirely right about “Church authority acting very swiftly on priests.” In the Archdiocese of Calcutta there are at least two priests on whom charges of sexual and other misconduct have been levelled repeatedly. (1) The first is Principal of a Salesian School in Kolkata. The Salesian Provincial and the Archbishop of Calcutta are both aware of his predatory adventures. But both have looked the other way. This has emboldened him (he boasts of his high-level connections). With the help of the pliant and spineless School Managing Committee, he has got several female staff members (who complained against him to the concerned authorities including police) terminated from their services. (2) The second is Parish Priest of Kidderpore. He has got an on-going criminal (sexual and extortion) case going in Barrackpore Criminal Court. On top of he as Secretary of the school, is playing havoc with some teachers of his school and terminated their jobs. The Archbishop appointed him as Parish Priest knowing fully well that he has an on-going criminal case.
There is a third case which has gone out of hand, and has resulted in police posting. Parishioners are agitating against the reported handover of a Missionary School (St Thomas School) to a non-Christian local politician who also contested (against TMC) the recent state elections. They are also boycotting the Parish Priest who they say is dining and dancing with the politician, including attending his election rallies. The Archbishop is neither going to Chandannagar to meet parishioners nor is he granting them an audience. He too, is reportedly, trying to put a lid on the matter through his political connections. So while he is preaching the Synodal sermon of “LISTENING”, in practice he is doing just the opposite. So much for invoking the Holy Spirit and “Discernment!”
Therefore, no wonder we hear of priests and bishops running (charitable?) Trusts and minting money. As Chhotebhai has written in the above report, their lifestyle (sheen all over with the latest electronic gizmos and cars) show it. Money leaves its trail behind. The preliminary Synodal documents are totally silent on these financial, sexual and other forms of corruption by the clergy.
Brilliant and timely comment, and quite sad too. And I love his few acerbic comments on the ‘somnolent laity’…Of course as a ‘retired Catholic’, while I have a right to read and comment on an article such as this, I am afraid that our wealthy Catholic church in India, will change their essentially masculine understanding of religion…
Reform involves both cooperation and nonconformism. Both have a price. Reform depends on our paying it.
Does it mean, the Nuncio’s letter of caution will have little effect and the dioceses, not only Tamil Nadu, will carry on merrily floating Trusts/NGOs where Laity cannot have any say?
Church authority acts very swiftly on priests on misconduct but on the contrary very very slow on bishops! Why is this partiality?