Indian Campaign Against Church Corruption

A group of concerned church leaders and activists in southern India has launched a campaign to combat "the deep-rooted cancer of corruption" within churches.



The campaign has been established following the murder of a bishop, the imprisonment of another, and a rise in concern among church members that corruption is rife in church hierarchies, particularly in denominations which receive funding from abroad.



A seven-member task group of officials from church-related organizations "to fight corruption and violence within the church" has been set up following a meeting by more than 20 church leaders on December 9 at the Inter-Church Service Association (ICSA) in Chennai, capital of the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu.



"We are now planning to convene a larger meeting with as many church leaders as possible to make the movement against corruption [in churches] effective," Moses P. Manohar, ICSA executive director and co-ordinator of the anti-corruption campaign, told ENI.



The meeting on was chaired by K. Rajaratnam, a prominent Lutheran leader and former president of the National Council of Churches in India, who is also director of the Gurukul Lutheran Theological College in Chennai.



He told ENI: "Corruption is rampant among church leaders. The mission of the church is not on the agenda of many church leaders. Their real agenda is power and money." Rajaratnam is also the executive secretary of the United Evangelical Lutheran Church of India (UELCI), a forum of 11 Indian Lutheran churches.



Shortly after the meeting, the church leaders issued a statement saying the campaign had been prompted by the recent "killing of a head of a church on property-related issues and the award of two months' imprisonment by the judiciary to another bishop."



Bishop G. Emmanuel, president of the 800 000-member Andhra Evangelical Lutheran Church (AELC), was stabbed to death last July in the AELC complex, allegedly because of a dispute over the lease of AELC property.



Three months later, Bishop M. I. Kesari, of the Church of South India (CSI) diocese of Kannyakumari, in India's southern tip, was sentenced to two months' imprisonment for corruption and contempt of court. Bishop Kesari was jailed for defying a court order not to declare the outcome of a church election allegedly rigged by the bishop's faction. The bishop has appealed against the sentence, and the prison sentence has been put on hold.



The church leaders' statement declared that "a movement must be initiated to bring rethinking and revival in the church. The movement is not just aimed at a few individuals, but is meant for creating a new ethos where people should be ashamed of becoming suddenly rich and the people in general must be prepared not to be tolerant of corruption.



"The status of the church looks like a sucked-out orange and a salt which lost its saltiness," said the statement, which added that "church journals have shrunk to the level of carrying only the obituaries and bishops' tour details" instead of discussing real church concerns.



The meeting identified the misuse of foreign funding, along with indifference, tolerance of corruption, and the granting of absolute power to church heads as the main factors "that breed corruption" in the churches.



As well as the task force, committees to be known as "Nathan's Clubs" - named after the Old Testament prophet Nathan - will be established at various levels in Christian communities "for prophetic action of challenging corruption and abuse of power."



"If we speak of corruption to the people, they will tell us to go and advise the bishops first. Just as Nathan went to David in the name of the Lord, speaking the truth in love, we need to do the same," CSI pastor T. Dayanandan Francis told ENI, referring to the second book of Samuel in the Old Testament.



Pastor Francis, who is general secretary of the Christian Literature Society in Chennai, said that "we [Christians] are very fed up with church leadership. The cleansing should start at the top [with those] who call themselves shepherds."



According to Rajaratnam, even traditional churches like the Orthodox Church, based in the southern Indian state of Kerala, suffer from factionalism promoted by church leaders who have vested interests.



"As for the new [Protestant] churches, the situation is much worse," he told ENI. "Church leaders are more interested in material concerns than spiritual matters."



Esther Kathiroli, executive secretary of the Tamil Nadu Christian Council and one of the members of the new task force, said in an interview that "many church leaders start well, but gradually get involved more in money matters than spiritual matters."



Kathiroli said that church leaders "should act like David who repented when the prophet Nathan pointed out his sins." Corruption in the churches was a "vicious problem," with some pastors failing to take their mission seriously. "Consequently, disappointed congregation members join new churches mushrooming around these days," she said.



While corruption was a problem "in almost all churches," Moses Manohar said that churches "directly connected to overseas churches are more prone to corruption" because of their access to foreign funds.



He added that the swift amassing of wealth, including big houses and other properties, by church leaders was "a scandal to ordinary faithful."



"Widespread corruption has made churches also embroiled in too many court cases," he said, adding that "judges are virtually ruling our churches."



Rajaratnam told ENI that leaders of the National Council of Churches in India, the CSI, and officials of theological colleges had written to him welcoming the campaign against corruption.



However, Rajaratnam said that the task ahead was a "difficult one," and that most of those supporting the campaign were retired church leaders. "The challenge before us is to bring active church leaders into the campaign for accountability and merit in church decisions and administration. But, the question is how many would be willing to surrender power to public scrutiny?" Rajaratnam said.



From Christianity Today Magazine (www.christianitytoday.com)

Corruption charges laid against the Bishop in North Kerala: The Church of England Newspaper, Jan 28, 2011 p 8.

The Church of South India (CSI)’s synod has taken charge of the administration of the Diocese of North Kerala after its Bishop, the Rt. Rev. K P Kuruvilla failed to convene the diocesan council.



North Kerala has been the scene of heated debates between its bishop and lay leaders.  In a letter to the moderator of the CSI dated Jan 21, the CSI North Kerala Diocesan Laity Fellowship accused the bishop of pocketing school funds. They alleged that since June 2010 the bishop had collected approximately Rs. 85 million rupees (£1.2 million) “through the appointment of thirty two teachers in four of the newly sanctioned higher secondary schools” in the diocese.



At a meeting of the diocesan executive committee held on Oct 20, questions about the disposition of the funds were raise.  The diocesan treasurer “admitted to have received only Rs. 15 million (£207,000). When asked about rest of the amount, bishop responded that the amount received cannot be divulged and the executive committee members [would] have to just trust him on this matter,” the complaint said.



A new diocesan council that included critics of the bishop was elected at the end of October, but the bishop did not convene the council.  Critics have charged the bishop with seeking to derail the new council so as to avoid an inquiry into diocesan finances.



Under the CSI’s constitution, if a diocesan council is not convened within 90 days of its election, its administrative responsibilities pass to the synod. On Jan 24 the synod appointed an interim council that included Bishop Kuruvilla and directed that a new council be elected and installed by May.



A number of CSI dioceses have witnessed conflicts between their bishop and clergy and lay groups. In May 2010 six clergy and a lay member of the Diocese of Rayalaseema staged a protest before the diocesan offices, calling for the ouster of Bishop K.B. Yesuvaraprasad.



A lay member of the diocese, Dr. Y.S. Thomas Reddy, had distributed tracts accusing the bishop of misusing diocesan funds and called for a protest at his residence on May 25. Bishop Yesuvaraprasad requested police protection, and when the protesters arrived they were arrested for a breach of the peace when they did not disperse.



Allegations of misconduct have also been leveled against the moderator of the CSI, while a criminal investigation is underway into the finances of the Bishop in Coimbatore, the Rt. Rev. Manickam Dorai. Last year the CSI synod dissolved the diocesan council and suspended Bishop Dorai pending the outcome of the criminal proceedings.



Two other CSI dioceses are currently under the administrative oversight of the CSI synod. In the Diocese of Madhya Kerala the Bishop in East Kerala has been given temporary charge of the diocese following the retirement of the Rt. Rev. Thomas Samuel on Jan 24. In November the Diocesan Council nominated the Rev. Thomas Oommen and Dr. Oommen George to stand for election at the Jan 18 meeting of the diocesan synod. However, a dispute over the balloting has postponed the election pending a review by the provincial ecclesiastical court.



On Dec 25 the former moderator of the CSI, Bishop John Gladstone retired as Bishop in South Kerala. The Synod has appointed the Bishop in Kanyakumair to oversee the diocese until a new bishop is appointed.



Courtesy - http://geoconger.wordpress.com/

“When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (Psalm 11: 3)

The turn of events in the recent past of synod appointing an interim administration with upright persons have been received by all with a sigh of relief. But again situation has changed dramatically with the synod reconstituting the interim administration by removing two honest and upright persons and inducting three nominees of Bishop Kuruvilla, thereby exposing its vulnerability. The synod has to deal with half a dozen bishops of the same category, who are facing the wrath of people and are mired in extreme forms of corruption. The synod and the dioceses are very much under the watchful eye of the Income tax Authorities. These factors may have played into this decision besides Bishop Kuruvilla’s obstinacy.

It has become clear that the synod and the moderator are guided by extraneous factors. Bishop Kuruvilla, unashamed as he is, may be considering this as a victory; he could buy time to cover up his misdeeds. But his temper tantrums and the legal actions through proxies have all exposed to the general public the fact that he has something to hide. It has also exposed the hollowness of his sermonizing on “ecclesiastical obedience”; he can threaten and disobey the moderator and the synod, while denying the same right to the clergy and laity. The bishop has proved himself to be unscrupulous, corrupt, greedy for power and money and pathologically and callously egotistic and narcissistic. He has no moral right to continue as a bishop. He has set in motion an irreversible process of self-destruction and nobody can save him from that except his own repentance.

A piece of purple cloth, an Episcopal staff, and a flag bearing top model car will not make one a bishop; even consecration has no meaning without genuine acceptance by the people. These are things one can buy. All clergy should know that reverence is not something you can claim by virtue of the cassock, it is something to be earned. We all know the story of Saul. He was anointed by Yahweh, through Prophet Samuel to be the king of Israel. But he became arrogant, avaricious, and disobedient to the Lord. The consequence is that God rejected him from being king of Israel. We read, “Now the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and evil spirit from the Lord tormented him.” (1 Samuel 16: 14) The diocese is suffering from a bishop tormented by an evil spirit.

Many pastorates, many clergy and laity had been fighting this corrupt regime and suffering under it and has been hoping for a relief. All the faithful who fear God and believe in a just and moral ordering of our society have been earnestly expecting that an end to this suffering would be around the corner. It is true that their hopes were belied. The recent developments surely are disappointing and it is natural that we sigh along with the Psalmist and ask the question, “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (Ps. 11: 3)

This question arose from David as he was followed by Saul day and night; his life was under constant danger. “For look, the wicked bend their bows; they set their arrows against the strings to shoot from the shadows at the upright in heart.”(Ps. 11: 2). The very office of the king, which they asked for hoping that it would provide security and stability and a moral foundation for the Israel as a nation, had proved to be the opposite. It became a source of torment and persistent threat. In the midst of this unpredictable threat to one’s life, David had the temptation to flee from the situation and look for a safe haven for himself. There were those in David’s own camp (the Righteous) who were saying to him that he should run/flee to his mountain, presumably Jerusalem (Mount Zion). “How then can you say to me, "Flee like a bird to your mountain” (Ps. 11: 2). Surely, it would be easier to flee from the arrows shot in the dark than to stand and face them.

But, Can we give up the fight and flee? Is that what the Lord expects from us? David throwing up his hand in desperation asks the question: “When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?" The question comes to us with all its pathos. The question may equally reflect all our pathos associated with what is happening in our diocese and the Church of South India in general. The moral universes we are familiar with, in which our ancestors pinned their hopes are crumbling. The word "foundations," here, refers to those things on which society rests, or by which social order is sustained - the great principles of truth and righteousness that uphold society, as the foundations uphold the edifice of the building. The reference is to a destruction of those things in a community that provides security and stability. When truth, justice and honesty do not prevail, and when integrity and virtue affords no longer any security, the argument is, there is nothing on which the righteous can repose his confidence. Is this not the situation we are in as a church, a Christian Community and a nation?

But the psalmist calls for a response different from that of fleeing in desperation; David’s response is different. First, He takes refuge in the Lord. (Ps. 11:1) The Psalmist repeats this affirmation in Psalm 46: 1-2, “God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble. Therefore we will not fear though the earth should change, though the mountains shake in the heart of the sea; though its water roar and foam, though the mountains tremble with its tumult.” In the book of Jeremiah we read, “But blessed are those who trust in the LORD and have made the LORD their hope and confidence.”(Jer. 17: 7)

Second, the righteous has the firm conviction and faith that “The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD's throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. (Ps. 11: 4) We read in book of Habakkuk, “But the Lord is in his holy temple; let all the earth keep silence before him.”(2: 20) It is important that we realize that God is in control; His eyes see all that is happening. His eyes not only see but also examines (tries) the righteous but the wicked, those who love violence, he hates with a passion. Lastly, we know that “our Lord is righteous, he loves justice; the upright will see his face.”(Ps. 11:7) The very character of our God is righteousness and justice. This is a time when we should recognize our sole refuge and strength is our Lord. Hence we shall not be afraid. We know that He is in control. God sees and examines. He will reward us accordingly. But it is certain that the upright will see his face.

What is the implication of this faith? This means that we cannot have our way. We cannot trust purely in worldly wisdom and resources. We should put our complete trust in the Lord. We must find refuge in God and God alone. Second, it means that we should be prepared to wait for God’s time. Thirdly, we need to work and pray for a true repentance and renewal within the church. But this should begin with us as individuals and congregation. We need to pray for the Holy Spirit to sweep mightily over us and the whole of CSI. This will not occur through the bishops and the clergy, the “priestly class”. It can only come from the laity. What the bishops and the clergy would do is to contain the charisma, the gift of the Holy Spirit, and transform it into a manageable piety towards the institution of the church, instead of a costly following of Jesus Christ. This does not mean that we do not want an educated and ordained ministry in the church. But such an ordained clergy is not to replace the laity and but equip them for their ministry in the world. They cannot treat laity as dirt and use the Episcopal staff to beat them into submission. It also means that the congregations must reclaim its autonomy and cannot be dictated by an upstart clergy or a bishop and thus by remote control, turned into a mere puppet in their hands.

This, in other words, will be an attempt to reclaim our “protestant” and “reformed” past. It is one of throwing off the yoke of Papal/Episcopal infallibility and challenging their mediation of divine grace through ‘sale of indulgences’. The freedom Christ has brought to us is the freedom from “dead works” to worshipping the living God through living sacrifices, actions that truly transform the world according to kingdom values. We become the light and salt by our witness in the world of the transforming power of the gospel. This is clearly a shift from ritualism, by which the priestly class try to hold sway over us and exploit us.

Lastly, as Christians, we should not just be working for victory; our victory comes through the cross of Jesus Christ; it is without its price. Our victories and achievements are not without the blemish of human sinfulness. Hence, for a true Christian his victories must also be critically looked at from the vantage point of our ultimate hope. That means we cannot consider as absolute our penultimate achievements, but we will still be striving for that perfect reality, which we will receive as a gift from God. We are not called to be successful, but to be faithful. Our joy and prayer should be that we remain faithful to God and may be found by him to be his faithful servants. We are called to be rebels - rebels for Christ and his Kingdom.

A Clarification from CSI North Kerala Diocese Officers

Click on the image for more clarity

Click on the image for more clarity

Bishop's Efforts to Sabotage the Synod Appointed Committee Foiled

It would have been better for Bishop Kuruvilla to step down like how Mubarak and Ben Ali did in Egypt and Tunisia. But no. Possessed by an unregulated appetite for more money and power, the bishop continues to conspire, throw tantrums, hurl abuses, and remain overprotective of his chair. The thought that he has lost all moral legitimacy to continue as the bishop of North Kerala Diocese has still not dawned in his mind and he remains hell-bent on subverting all democratic processes to have his way.

On the morning of 22 February 2011 at Shantigiri Ashram, near Aluva, Bishop Kuruvilla and a coterie of his loyal followers, which included Rev. Daniel George, Rev. Kurien Peter, Rev. N. K. Prasad, Rev. P. G. Thompson, Rev. Abraham Kuruvilla, Rev. Prince, Rev. Jacob Daniel, Mr. Jayan Samuel and Mrs. Soumini Jayan came to meet Rt. Rev. Vasantkumar, the Moderator of Church of South India. Overwhelmed by the number of visitors who had arrived at his room uninvited, the moderator ushered everyone out, since whatever has to be discussed would be between him and Bishop Kuruvilla and no one else.

Subsequently, the moderator reprimanded the bishop for all the trouble he had caused in the diocese and gave him a letter reconstituting the Synod appointed committee by removing two members from the existing committee and appointing three members loyal to the bishop. The moderator made it clear that he was doing this favour under the condition that all cases filed by the bishop would be withdrawn; no vindictive action would be taken against any member or clergy in the diocese; the finances of the diocese would be managed by P. C. John, a member of the synod appointed committee and a former IAS officer; and the bishop would not interfere in the financial matters of the diocese. Considering the moderator had done him a favour by appointing three of his loyalists into the synod appointed committee, the bishop should have been quite pleased. But, he was not. He stormed out of the moderator's room, using abusive language against the latter and calling him a thief bigger than Earnest Edapally. So much for his defence of 'ecclesiastical authority'.

Later that day, representatives of CSI North Kerala Laity Fellowship met with the moderator and conveyed their anguish over rendering relief to a bishop, who by his subversion of democratic processes brought about this impasse, when those aggrieved were the faithful members of the church who had been denied their democratic rights, and who now had no one to address their grievance to. The moderator, after giving a patient hearing, explained that it was the present circumstances that compelled him to take such a decision. The accounts of the synod and the various dioceses are under the investigation of Income Tax authorities, and the possibility of CSITA losing its Income Tax exemption is imminent. Under such circumstances, he preferred not to have any instability in the administration of the diocese as a result of prolonged litigations. He assured the representatives of the laity fellowship that this was only a temporary arrangement, for a period of three months within which, a new diocesan council and executive would be elected; the elections would be fair and Bishop Kuruvilla would not be allowed to interfere with it; in case the synod appointed committee failed to conduct elections within the stipulated time, he reserves the right to reconstitute a new committee and hold the elections; and finally, Bishop Kuruvilla would not be allowed to touch the diocesan money and all financial matters will be managed by a trustworthy member of the synod appointed committee, namely P. C. John. The moderator then sought the cooperation of the laity for the smooth administration of the diocese till 31st May 2011.

However, some of the later developments have raised certain serious questions about the legality and viability of the newly reconstituted synod appointed committee. Firstly, on 13 January 2011, through a proxy, Bishop Kuruvilla had acquired a court order from Hon. Munsiff Court, Kalpetta, restraining the original synod appointed committee from taking charge. On 16 February 2011, this court order was vacated. But, this ruling was kept in abeyance, as per the request of the plaintiff (bishop's proxy), until an appeal could be filed in an higher court. However, till today, bishop's proxy has neither acquired a certified copy of the court order nor gone for an appeal. In essence, the court order restraining the synod appointed committee from taking charge continues to stand as it is. This being the reality, the claim made by the bishop to the media that the newly reconstituted synod appointed committee has taken charge is nothing but a misrepresentation of facts.

Secondly, neither the synod nor the bishop has informed the original synod appointed committee, constituted on 13 January 2011 and took charge following the vacation of the interim injunction restraining them from doing so, of the formation of a new committee that would replace it. As far as the original committee is concerned, it continues to be an active and functional committee that cannot be reconstituted without sufficient reason and without following the appropriate procedures and protocols. It is learned that members of the original committee have now approached the court of law, questioning the arbitrary nature in which the existing committee was dissolved and a new committee was formed. Meanwhile, P. C. John, who had been entrusted with the financial responsibilities of the diocese and a member of the original and the new committees, has written a letter to the moderator expressing his unwillingness to work as treasurer in a committee with bishop as its chairman.

The final development that has sealed the fate of the newly formed synod appointed committee is the court order that came from the Ottapalam Sub-court on 1 March 2011. Following the formation of the new committee, Col. James Hunt, one of the members of the original committee and who ceases to be in the new committee, filed a case for declaring the original committee as the sole committee in charge and restraining the moderator and the bishop from handing over charges to any other committee. In response to this case, the Ottapalam Sub-court issued a court order restraining the newly formed committee from managing the finances of the diocese until the diocesan council elections are held and a democratically elected body is in place.

Given these developments, it has become clear that the move to hand over charges to a newly reconstituted committee, which was one of the last resorts of the bishop, has become null and void. Although it would be wishful thinking, at least now, good sense should prevail and the bishop should submit his resignation. If not, the restless people may soon storm the palatial bungalow he has just constructed and drive him out. The patience of the faithful believers have been tested and they are now ready to launch a people's movement to save the diocese.