Kolenchery Issue – Why the state promots mobocracy? Is this not contempt of court?

Written By: on Sep 16th, 2011 and filed under Columns, Opinions.

Why are the right wing politicians who rule the Kerala State today so blind to the deep commitment of Gandhiji to truth? Gandhi’s devotion to relative truth was an integral part of his dedication to the absolute truth. He wrote in My Experiments with Truth about this commitment in these words: “I worship God as Truth only…… I am prepared to sacrifice the things dearest to me in pursuit of this quest. Even if the sacrifices demanded be my very life, I hope I may be prepared to give it. But as long as I have not realized this Absolute truth, so long must I hold by the relative truth as I have conceived it. That relative truth must meanwhile be my beacon, my shield and buckler.” It was based on this fundamental principle that he led many satyagrahas for the liberation of the nation and transformation of the society.

But today many politicians including the present state leadership indirectly say that ‘craze for power is our beacon, our shield and buckler’. Marinating power without any regard for morality is the governing principle of Political realism. Henry Kissinger in his masterpiece Diplomacy has extensively described political realism unhindered by his moral feelings or those of politicians of his stamp. Why do the present state authorities follow just the ideology of Kissinger or Otto van Bismarck rather than Gandhiji.

When there is a dispute regarding any issue and opposing claims regarding truth, it is not politicians or any officials of the government who make a verdict to determine truth and the right procedure in future. Political interests or any other interests should not blind people to see the truth. That is why a deep analysis of all claims and an impartial concluding verdict by the courts are extremely essential and relevant.

Upholding the 1995 Supreme Court verdict concerning the Malankara church and rejecting the suit filed by Antiochean loyalists (OS 43/2007) , the Ernakulam district court gave the order that Kolenchery church should be governed by the 1934 constitution as any other parish in the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church. An appeal for stay against this was rejected by the High court of Kerala on September 6th, 2011.

Why is the Executive reluctant to do the needful earnestly to ensure the implementation of justice? Why are a group of church members and certain politicians arguing for a settlement through reconciliation at this juncture? Why cannot this be considered as contempt of court and dishonouring of the Judiciary. Why is the state promoting mobocracy? Is this not an indirect encouragement to people by the State to resort to goondaism and violence to get their selfish interests fulfilled? Is this not an attempt to ridicule the law abiding people of this nation?

Exhortation to love one another is the core of the teachings of Lord Jesus Christ. The Spirit of God, the governing principle of unity in the Church, inspires the faithful to follow Christ and grow in Him. Why can’t we think of the Formulation of a Constitution for the Church to ensure this unity as part of the guidance of the Holy Spirit? Then what was the spirit which moved those who gave leadership to a division in Malankara Orthodox Church disregarding the Constitution and Christ? As a conclusion of the consequent legal suits, the apex court of this country gave the verdict that there is only one Malankara Orthodox Church, which is governed by the 1934 constitution. Before and after this also there were many official and unofficial discussions to restore unity. The Supreme Court judgment as well as the District judgments like that in the case of Kolenchery church are invitations to restore unity of the faithful in the Church. When the parish follows this order, most of the people even in the patriarchal faction will also be joining the parish to promote unity in the church. But a few leaders, who were struggling to keep them away against the will of the Spirit of truth, fear this re-union. So the present fasting and satyagraha under the leadership of H.H. Baselios Marthoma Paulos II is a struggle and motivation for the unity of the Church too.

It is very important to hope against hope that fasting and prayer will unleash divine energy to overcome egoism and all evil forces in all factions to strengthen this ancient church in unity.

The martyrs of the Church who offered their lives out of their love to God or their commitment to the church and society which was inspired by that love, declared their fearlessness publicly. They were not ready to succumb to pressures of the State to give up their commitment to truth and justice. For them, love of God was more valuable than self love. Let us wish and pray that the present struggle for justice be ultimately a boost for following Christ in truth and love. May God bless us to experience a glorious union of justice and love so that we could be an instrument of peace in the society.

(Excerpts from Fr. Dr. Bijesh Philip’s address to the Nagpur Seminary community (STOTS) on the occasion of coordinated fasting and prayer at the Seminary in solidarity with the Church’s struggle for justice at Kolenchery.)

Click For More Articles By:

Readers are welcome to leave their thoughts and reflections below by posting a comment on this topic.
(3 votes, average: 3.67 out of 5)

Email This Post Email This Post

Print This Post Print This Post

Disclaimer: Indian Orthodox Herald does not moderate or edit the comments posted in this column. All opinions are solely of the writers and IOH holds no responsibility what so ever for the views written here below.

22 Responses for “Kolenchery Issue – Why the state promots mobocracy? Is this not contempt of court?”

  1. Aji says:

    I just hav to say that jacobites really fear us that is why they always create problem.they should either live peacefullly or otherwise put behind bars….ioc is the true church of india and true followers of christ..we r the supreme church…..no one dare play wit us….live and let live….ioc pedikenda lakshyam lakshyam pinallee..jai jai catholicos….

  2. Joshua says:

    The Correct Perspective

    There was a father, who had 12 sons. Before his final days he gave
    his possessions among them. These sons had their own families and
    they lived peacefully.

    Unfortunately, one son was called to rest when he was quite young and
    his family was without support. His kids were very small and his wife
    beautiful. The neighbours started to eye them with evil intentions and
    tried to plunder their properties. At this juncture the eldest of the 12 sons
    came forward in their support and protected them during their difficult
    times. Thus, the eldest son (Valiyappan) had a major role in guiding the
    family of the deceased son.

    Many years passed. The offsprings of the late son grew up, acquired
    education and wealth, under the able guidance of the Valiyappan. They
    prospered and in time they were better off than their Valiyappan.

    It was at this point in time that Valiyappan put forth his claim that he
    is their father, their mother his wife and all their belongings his own
    property. He even brought out a strange theory that the dead son was
    not actually the offspring of their grandfather; rather he was only an
    adopted son or just a servant in their family. Thus the true colour of the
    false benefactor came out.

    Just ponder over this situation.
    1. Can a person, however helpful and good willed he may be, claim to be
    one’s father and put a claim on one’s own mother and one’s belongings?
    2. Can one accept a person who cast doubts on the heredity of one’s own

    The Valiyappan definitely has an important position in the extended family, but
    he is not the head of this specific family. He is neither the father of these
    children nor the husband of the lady of this house. He cannot confiscate the
    property, for his own use, against the wishes of this family.

    Now, let us draw a parallel. Consider Jesus Christ to be the father of the
    family with 12 children and Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, the
    family of the deceased son. The Church was established in Malankara
    by St Thomas in AD 52. The church prospered and the members lived
    in harmony with the local populace for centuries. However, with the
    invasion of Malankara by the Westerners (Portugese, Dutch, English
    etc) the Church fell into hard times. The invaders wanted the Malankara
    Church to adopt to their style of Christianity, which was basically alien to
    the latter and this lead to lot of ill will and frustration among the
    Christians in Malankara. It was at this point in time, that the Patriarch of
    Antioch, whose throne was established by St Peter came to the rescue
    of the Malankara Church. Under the able guidance of the Patriarch the
    church in Malankara, founded by St Thomas prospered and later could
    stand on its own.

    Unfortunately, no one in Malankara could make out that the help and
    guidance of the Patriarch of Antioch came with strings attached nor
    foresee the future where he will raise a claim against everything owned
    by them, including their very mother church. On his part he even came
    out with a strange theory that St Thomas was not a real apostle of Christ
    and that his position is not higher than a sexton in the church.

    The Malankara Church should be grateful to the Patriarch of Antioch for
    his help during their difficult times. They have made it clear in their
    Constitution of 1934.

    1. The Malankara Church is a division of the Orthodox Syrian Church. The
    Primate of the Orthodox Syrian Church is the Patriarch of Antioch.
    2. The Malankara Church was founded by St.Thomas the Apostle and is
    included in the Orthodox Syrian Church of the East and the Primate of
    the Orthodox Syrian Church of the East is the Catholicos.

    The Patriarch of Antioch, does have a position of the head of the
    orthodox larger family, but he is not their father (he is just the elder
    brother of their father). The real father is the Catholicos. The Patriarch of
    Antioch, cannot claim the Malankara Church to be his property and use
    it for his personal benefit.

    All this is clearly mentioned in the 1995 Supreme Court verdict.

    1. The constitution framed in 1934 by Malankara Association is valid.
    2. The constitution framed by the Malankara Association as amended from
    time to time shall govern the Churches attached to the Malankara
    3. The Parishes are bound by the constitution framed in 1934.
    4. The claim, therefore, that the Patriarch Churches are autonomous and
    independent in temporal matters cannot be accepted.
    5. The Patriarch of Antioch has no temporal powers over the churches.
    6. Relationship between the two spiritual superiors, that is, the Patriarch of
    Antioch and Catholico of the East at Malankara is neither of superior nor
    subordinate but of two independent spiritual authorities with Partriarch at
    the highest in the hierarchy.

    Conclusion :
    The Malankara Church should be governed according to the 1934
    Malankara Constitution. Those who do not accept and believe in
    the 1934 Malankara Constitution do have the freedom to go out and
    form/join any other Church Group (as Jacobites did already) or
    faith. But they cannot claim/demand anything that originally
    belongs to the Malankara Church.

    Obey the court orders and live peacefully.
    No one is above the law of the country.
    Let the truth and justice prevail.

  3. Thomas says:

    Fair is foul and foul is fair





    The First Additional District Court,Ernakulam,dismissed the suit as not
    maintainable due to lack of sanction under Section 92 of the Code of Civil
    Procedure,1908. It was held that the Puthencruz Church is a Public Trust of a
    religious and Charitable nature and as such no suit can be filed with regard to
    its affairs without previous sanction from the Principal Civil Court of Original
    jurisdiction under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908,





  6. If the lower court verdict is not valid and the supreme court verdict is only valid why the wastage of money by the government in establishing lower courts and high courts ?Funny people.why wasting time for justice?Let the lower courts verdict be implemented.Then we will wait for the verdicts of higher courts and implement that at that time accordingly.

  7. Joshua says:

    “Law will take its own course.” This is what we hear from everyone in India, in all the issues/disputes. Even a small comment from the court is getting highlighted and acted up on in the normal cases. But when the issue/dispute is related to the Indian Orthodox Church, it seems like law doesn’t have its own course. It is always a dead end for the IOC. The court orders, which are in favor to the IOC are not getting implemented. Everyone forces IOC for the mediation route with the aggressor for settlement of the issue even when there is a clear court order in favor of the IOC against its aggressor. Even the elected government which swears on the Indian Constitution is running away from its duties. It is strange that the government is calling for the mediation between the parties, even after the court has given its final verdict. If this ( mediation) is allowed today, tomorrow everyone who loses a case in the court ( both criminal & civil ) will demand for the mediation, for getting a favourable/lenient verdict to their liking. Every one gives a blind eye to the natural justice for the IOC. All the politicians and the leaders of the communities call for the mutual settlement on the dispute, even when there is a clear verdict from the court. Is this justice? Why only IOC has to come to a mutual settlement though the mediation process with the aggressor? Why IOC cannot get the justice implemented, which was awarded to it through the Indian Judicial System after fighting in the court patiently for many years? This is a dangerous situation. Government should take immediate steps to implement the court order. Indian Judicial System is one of the cornerstones of the Indian democracy. We, as a law abiding Indian Citizen, should not allow the Mobocracy to overrule the Indian Judicial System. “NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW OF THE COUNTRY.” Jai Hind. Joshua

  8. anup says:

    I do not know why all jus discuss without knowing the truth. The Lower division Court has granted an order favourable to orthodox. That does not mean that Orthodox chruch will get chruch. The appeal has been given to High Court, initially the Hon. High court didnot accept it (Because the division bench is not willing to hear it), but latter they are ready to take the appeal, but before that they suggested if paussible the issue should be settled outside. All people know These things , then why you all are lying.

    Hon.Chief Minister Can not do anything, the high court did not ask him to implement the order passed by lower division court. So how he can forcefully do that.

    So please be patient, if we cannot seetle the issue outside, The high court will take care of it. And will wait for what high court has to say? Nothing we are going to loose.

    Kolenchery chruch members your bad fate

  9. Reni Daniel says:


    ഒരു ക്രിസ്തയാനി മറ്റൊരു ക്രിസ്ത്യാനിയെ കോടതി (ക്രിസ്ത്യാനിയല്ലത്ത) കയറ്റരുത്. (1 കോരി. 6 : 1 -8 )

    ആരാണ് ഇവിടെ ശരിയായ ക്രിസ്ത്യാനി? ആരാണു ക്രിസ്ത്യാനി അല്ലാത്തത്?

    സഭ ഒന്നായിരിക്കണമെന്നു ഉത്തരവിട്ട (ക്രിസ്തുവിന്റെ പ്രാര്‍ഥന –യോഹന്നാന്‍ 17 :21 ) Hon’be judges of the Supreme Court ആണോ ശരിയായ ക്രിസ്ത്യാനി?


    “സഭ മുറിക്കണം” എന്ന് ആഗ്രഹിച്ചു അതിനു പാത്തും പതുങ്ങിയും ഒളിഞ്ഞും തെളിഞ്ഞും പിന്തുണ നല്‍കുന്ന വിദേശവാലുള്ള സഭകള്‍ ആണോ?

    ആരിലാണ് ക്രിസ്തുവിന്റെ സ്വഭാവം നിഴലിക്കുന്നത്? തോമസ്ലീഹയാല്‍ സ്ഥാപിതമായ തദ്ദേശീയമായ സഭ വളാരാതിരിക്കാന്‍ മലങ്കരസഭയെ പീഡിപ്പിക്കുന്നത് ഹിന്ദുക്കളല്ല, ഇവുടുത്തെ മറ്റു മതസ്തരല്ല. പിന്നെ ആരാണ്?

    ക്രിസ്ത്യാനി എന്ന് സ്വയം വിളിക്കുകയും വിദേശികള്‍ക്ക് വേണ്ടി വിടൂപണി ചെയ്യുകയും അവര്‍ക്ക് വേണ്ടി ഇവിടെ അക്രമങ്ങള്‍ നടത്തുകയും ചെയ്യുന്ന ഭിന്നിപ്പിന്റെ മനസ്സുള്ള (സാത്തനില്‍ നിന്ന് വരുന്ന ക്രിസ്തുവിരുദ്ധമായ) കാപാലികന്‍മാരാണ് അവര്‍. അവര്‍ ദൈവത്തിനുള്ളവര്‍ അല്ല.

    അനീതി കൊണ്ട് സത്യത്തെ തടുക്കുന്ന (റോമര്‍ 1 :18 ) , സഭയെ പിളര്‍ത്തുന്ന ഇങ്ങനെയുള്ളവരോടാണ്‌ “അധര്‍മം പ്രവര്‍ത്തിക്കുന്നവരെ, ഞാന്‍ നിങ്ങളെ അറിയുന്നില്ല” എന്ന് ക്രിസ്തു പറയുന്നത് (മത്തായി 7 :23 )

    ശലോമോന്റെ മുന്നില്‍ കുഞ്ഞിനെ മുറിക്കുന്നതാണ് നീതി എന്ന് അക്രോഷിച്ച്ച സ്തീയുടെ രൂപമാണ് ഇന്ന് കാണുന്നത്. അവരെ ദൈവം ശിക്ഷികാതെ വിടികയില്ല

    പല കഷ്ണങ്ങളായി ഈ സഭ മുരിക്കപ്പെട്ടു. ഇനിയും മുറിവ് ത്ങ്ങാണീ സഭക്ക് ശേഷിയില്ല. അതിനാല്‍ പ്രിയ മലങ്കര മക്കളെ സത്യം ജയിക്കുനതിനു നമുക്ക് പരിശുദ്ധ ബാവ് തിരുമേനിയോടൊപ്പം പ്രര്ധിക്കം. “മുരിക്കരുതെ എന്ന് കേഴുന്ന സഭാമാതാവിന്റെ കണ്ണുനീര്‍ ദൈവമുമ്പാകെ വിലയെരിയതാകുന്നു.

  10. Joshua says:

    Mr. Geogy, When you say that a dispute should be settled in favour of the majority faction, then why we should have the Judicial System in India? We may just need a referendum court. I am wondering what will happen to the Mulla Periyar Dam issue if we leave that dispute between Kerala & Tamil Nadu, to the referendum method/court. I do not think any sensible person can believe in Mobocracy.

    Even on this majority & minority point, I think you are thoroughly mistaken. The court has approved the elections held in the parish and based on the same only the court has given the verdict in favour of the Orthodox Church. To understand this process you should have a clear idea about the functioning of an institution. All the institutions will be governed by the process which is outlined in the Constitution of the same. As per the 1995 Supreme Court verdict in the case between Orthodox and Jacobites, the court has approved the 1934 Constitution of the Church. Those who don’t approve this Constitution will not have any voting rights/say in the church matters.

  11. Geogy says ”if unity did not happen in 1958 ,then there would not have any problem
    in SOC Churches now.it would have run smoothly.”

    The only way to retain the churches after the 1958 supreme court verdict was to opt for unity or leave the churches like the Marthomites.Because the people in those days were law abiding and not like the present hooligan followers of the H.B.

    There was no SOC in those days.They were called Jacobites.The jacobites and the patriarch (not the prince patriarch but the king patriarch !)all of a sudden decided to join the Orthodox Church who were treated as out castes till that day.The Orthodox church also welcomed the opponents subject to the 1934 constitution.So you don’t blame those who opted
    for unity but blame those made the split.
    your statement that there were no orthodox people in those belt before 1958 is not true.Augen mar Themotheos(later on H.H.the catholicos) was the diocesan
    metropolitan of those area and was residing in the Moovattupuzha aramana.
    So let the new Jacobite church formed in 2002 which occupy the churches of the Malankara church argue and argue and argue but nothing is going to happen.

  12. Abraham (old) says:

    @ Geogy

    Further south of Kottayam, Jacobites are an extreme minority, too smaller than the Orthodox in North.

    There are alteast 400 Orthodox families in Kolenchery Church, and 550 families in Mulanthuruthy Church, however none of the Jacobite parishes further south have families more than 50 ( Except Thumpamon and Trivandrum I believe). And their are parishes fewer than 40, majority of them erected very recently.

    Please dont say, there aint any closed church, there is one near Adoor, and there were severe issues in Kattachira and Kayamkulam.

    Very recently( months back) the Jacobites of Kayamkulam, paraded a dead womens body (she was in an Old age home for 22 years) and blocked the NH47 for hours, demanding burial by a Jacobite priest. A burial by the IOC priest was always offered, but they wanted a jacobite burial, for a women with no relatives. Where were these people for 22 years ???

    Kattachira, another parish near kayamakulam, faced severe problems couple of years back, I remember jacobite radicals from north arriving truck loads to create a commotion there.

    Again, I dont see any high standards of morality from Jacobites in south, since court verdicts are clearly against jacobites and the minorities in South, have no interest wasting there money. Question, will Jacobite church ever achieve anything by going to court over assets maintained by Orthodox chruch? Then whats the points saying, we are holy, we did nothing bad.

  13. Geogy says:

    First of all be reminded that regions like Kadanad, Angamali & Kochi diocese there are no “ORIGINAL” IOC members (i.e. I meant IOC who supported since 1912 onwards upto now)..In these region 100% it is SOC..It is because of the UNITY the church dispute started in these region (1958-1972)…First of all I would blame the people who supported for UNITY and then made SPLIT; which further created so much trouble from there on…

    If the UNITY in 1958 didn’t happen, there wouldn’t have any problem in SOC churches now… It would have run smoothly..

    As the belief of the two church are different it always better to split and divide the properties and live as sister church…Else problems shall exist in these region forever..

    I haven’t heard any church been closed in the region of Kottayam and further down region even though there are SOC which are very minority in nos…Those minority have always moved and formed a separate congregation and built a new church…

    Conclusion: To be resolved in amicable and democratic way. Judiciary must support democracy (majority people voice), but keeping in mind giving some consideration to minority (i.e. like conducting service, marriage, cremation by their priests).

  14. Abraham (Old) says:

    @ Geogy

    We understand the concerns of the jacobite faithful, however, the majority jacobites are not ‘expelled’ as you termed. The Orthodox Church, did mention, that the ‘pastoral resources’ of the church are always available to the jacobites. The issue of ‘faith’ and ‘beliefs’ are fabricated, to lay stronger grounds to the claims of ‘one’ party, and the hypocrisy is evident, when both party have no qualms engaging through marriages.

    You did mention, about the church being administered by the Syrians, pre 1958. You should also understand that the association with the West Syrians reigns for a meagre 300-350 years. Lets see how the association increased over time;

    After Connen Cross Oath ( through Abdul Jaleel Bava, Kothamangalam Eldho Bava) = Weak relationship

    After the arrival of Mor Sakralla and delegates = Medium relationship

    After the Mulanthuruthy Synod = Strong relationship.

    Kolencherry Church, built in 7th century, had a larger history of NOT associating with the Patriarch, it had a history of being associated with the Marthoma Metropolitans and the Persian church, hence the claims that Syrians had more hand in the administration prior to 1958 does not make much sense. How about this, the majority Patriachs faction, now accept the Pope, now will the minority give away the church in favour of faction that accept pope? Such theories are not written even in the canon books of the Syrian church.

    Now coming to Parumala Church issue, I stay very close to Parumala, and we nearby people do very well know, the naked truth that NOT ONE, jacobite soul resides in 6 km radius of the parumala church. The nearest Jacobite church is Chennithala Horeb church, which is 7 km from Mannar. We doubt the intentions of the Jacobite leadership; after building the church, what next? Mor Coorilose, by claiming the existence of 20 Jacobite families in parumala island, did increase our doubt and concerns. A bishop, uttering such blatant lies, to the media, will only raise more fears and confusion. The jacobite leadership never came ‘clean’ in the parumala issue, their necessity to build a church for nonone, in a peace prevailing place is questionable. When jacobites are even allowed to conduct ‘baptism’ in parumala, we dont understand, the necessity of a seperate church. Parumala is a peaceful place, lets not make it ugly.


    The political protection the jacobites enjoy at present is short lived. The Roman Catholics and Muslims through encouraged ‘breeding’ will overtake us, and make both the Orthodox and Jacobite church a minority without any political patronage. Lets see who will support us then.

    The next generation, will blame us for figthing and wasting our time on STUPID things like the ‘throne’. If we receoncile today, we make a better tomorrow for our future generation, else we both are gonna perish.

  15. Geogy says:

    It is not quite easy to enforce the court order there in Kolenchery…If it was the case why the government authorities dint enforce the court order…

    IOC church member in the region of Kandanad, Angamali are duplicate IOC people; which means (i) people who moved along with Thomas mor Athanasisu (i.e. after 1997 or later) (ii) some people joined after IOC after 1972..
    Prior 1972 the Kolenchery St.Peter & StPauls church was 100% managed and administered by SOC..If you go as per the church register, 75-80% or more belong to SOC..It is not correct to expel the majority parishioners and not allowing to do their worship as per their beliefs..

    If you look for example when SOC church started with the program to built a new church in Parumala name of St. Gregorios, the IOC church objected for it…Please could you give one respectable reason..Anyway leave it…

    Govt/Court should order to proceed with “pothu yogum” and further decide how to proceed with church administration. Both faction IOC & SOC shall conduct their prayers as per their allocated time…The result of “pothu yougum” the majority shall administer the church..

  16. M Jacob says:

    As indicated by KT George, Oommen Chandy is CM to all of Kerala. Don’t expect him to be partisan. It will not happen.

  17. This refers to certain observations made by Mr. K.T. George, which I could see now only, as I was busy this week with certain my own personal issues.

    Q. ) Did Oommen G. Panicker or anybody in his frame of mind ever have guts to ask for the contempt of court proceeding against the chief ministers for not implementing the Supreme Court verdict since its release in 1995? Those included Karunakaran, Anthony, Nayanar and Achuthanandan, and whoever else.

    A.) There is a vast difference between the Supreme Court Order of 1995 which is as a whole relating to 1064 churches of Malankara Orthodox Church during that time & the present order of Ernakulam District Court, which is in particular, relating to only one church, which is Kolencherry Church!

    Moreover, to the best of my knowledge, the then Catholicose, Mathews II moved an Application with the Hon. High Court of Kerala, for implemention of the Supreme Court Order, 1995. However, it was later withdrawn for reasons best known to HH the Catholicose and I believe, he made a serious error by doing so! I think, he has done it with a view to appease the then Jacobite faction and in order to woo them to join the Orthodox Church as a whole! He has partially succeeded in his attempts, with the joining of 3 Jacobite Metropolitans and few others in to Orthodox Church. However, the Orthodox church is now paying a heavy price for his wrong move !

    His successor, HH the Didimose II Catholicose preferred to keep a low profile in church affairs, may be due to his old age. However, the situation has changed drastically with the enthronement of HH Catholicose Paulose II and he is in the right direction and I am sure, the Malankara Orthodox Church is going to see the results soon!

    As regards Mr. Jacob’s mentioning of former Chief Ministers, those included Karunakaran, Anthony, Nayanar and Achuthanandan; I should say that Mr. Karunakaran was a good friend of Malankara Orthodox Church, one who was responsible for stopping the ‘Great Alwaye Thrikkunnathu Seminary March’ undertook by the Jacobite Shreshtha Catholicose, Thomas I ! . Mr. Nayanar and Mr. Achuthanandan choose to keep equal distance, while Mr. Anthony’s name is not worth mentioning!

    We don’t care whether Mr. Oommen Chandy is an Orthodox or a Jacobite, as he goes to Puthupally Church, as well as Manarcad Church. As Chief Minister of Kerala, he is duty bound to implement any Court Orders and that is what the Malankara Orthodox Church expect from him!

  18. Kiran says:

    Every civilized land is governed by the law of the land. The executive’s failure to implement the law of the land reflects the lawlessness and the state of anarchy.
    Lack of willingness of the government authorities to implement the court order will exude the confidence of the common man in the judiciary and the government it elected.

    If a section of people can prevent the implementation of court order, what is the guarantee that the government elected by people would be able to safeguard the interests of the law abiding citizens of the country.

    Also,government’s inaction regarding implementation of the court order is encouraging lawlessness .Government’s inaction will encourage the people from either factions to start movements to capture each other churches.,which would engulf the entire state in the abyss of lawlessness.

    I hope the government would send a strong message by implementing the court order that our state is governed by law of the land and we do not live in a barbarian era.

    I would kindly request the government to implement the court order related to Kolencherry Church dispute.

  19. Varghese J. says:

    Why did Anna Hazare’s fast receive massive public support? It moved public opinion decisively away from the government.

    Did the fasting by our spiritual leaders move public opinion? Why not? Do not blame the media when they expose some of our actions. We need to ask ourselves.

    So now Oomen Chandy CM has to prove that he is an Orthodox Christian CM. Was he elected as an Orthodox Christian candidate or as a Congress candidate? As CM, his primary responsibility is to maintain law and order.

  20. JOHN K RAJAN says:

    please find solutions rather than indulging in blame games

  21. K. T. George says:

    Did Oommen G. Panicker or anybody in his frame of mind ever have guts to ask for the contempt of court proceeding against the chief ministers for not implementing the Supreme Court verdict since its release in 1995? Those included Karunakaran, Anthony, Nayanar and Achuthanandan, and whoever else. When it is one of your own, you have the privilege of showing guts to lower yourself to the level of a parish pothuyogam participant and treat the other Oommern – that is Oommen Chandy – as another pothuyogam participant.
    Why blame him alone? Or that matter why blame any politician? Did the Bava of the time that is 1995, sought any implementation order after the 1995 verdict and handed it over to the politician? Absolutely not. The Church had the opportunity and it failed – unlike 1959, when after the verdict, Dionysius Metropolitan of Niranam Diocese had the guts and vision to go the Sheriff or his equivalent in Thiruvalla and changed the lock of Kattappuram parish church, and as result it is still under the Catholicose.
    Remember, Oommen Chandy is a politician just like the names I mentioned elsewhere and is the Chief minister of 330 or so lakh people, and happens to be a member of a (very strong?) 12 lakh religious faction. He behaves like any other politician and deals much honorably with anybody who comes across him.
    It is Church’s responsibility to protect its interests and it failed miserably after a unanimous – and termed final by the court – verdict in 1995 by not going for a single implementation order in time. When it finally awoke to the reality, it was too late as the other faction gained ground and strength. So any attempt to blame Oommen Chandy will ultimately boomerang.

    As for the contempt of court issue or the issue of how the judges view the warring factions, let me reproduce an article that appeared on the Herald last year
    [KOCHI: The honorable High Court of Kerala asked the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church and the Jacobite faction to explore possibilities to solve the decades old factional feud between each other through mediation.
    Advocates from both factions have to consult with each other as well as with their clients and have to inform the court on the outcome. The court also opined that in case a unity not being possible, a separation in goodwill and mutual respect be also a possibility.
    Problems did not subside even after various courts wished to settle disputes amiably. Disputes within courtrooms that have begun in 1890 and continued until the PMA Metropolitan case in the honorable Supreme Court in 2001, but sustain even unto this day.
    Seventy cases exist in the First Additional District Court, Ernakulam, a special court established per Government orders, to settle litigations between these two warring factions. Seventy appeals are pending at the High Court. Various courts at Ernakulam, Trissur, and Idukki have another seventy more pending cases. More cases are possibly pending at other courts in the State of Kerala.
    The court does not propose the modus operandi to solve the cases. Clients shall find an answer through suggestions and advises from mediators. They shall inform the court within two weeks considering the nature of cases. Who are acceptable mediators is also a matter that interests the court.
    Division Bench including Justice Thottathil Radhakrishnan and Justice P. Bhavadasan issued this verdict on the background of the case on Sehion Orthodox Church, Onakkoor, Ernakulam Dist.
    Unfortunately there exists a separation between lay people as well among the Orthodox and Jacobite factions. Allusions thereto exist in the verdicts from Supreme Court and other courts. Interestingly there is no dispute among Christian priests or laity on the importance or meaning of Christ or of Cross, observes the court.]

    From the above, it is clear that the courts are fed up with the hyprocrites who quote Bible in the church and indulge in anything but bible on the streets.
    Go ahead and file suit.


Leave a Reply

Advertisement CLICK HERE

Photo Gallery

Log in / © 2002-2009 BMM Creations Inc. All Rights Reserved.