FOR OR AGAINST MODI? – AN INDIAN’S RESPONSE

Recently I received an email from a close family friend, now in his eighties, whom I have held in great esteem. The said email is reproduced below, ad verbatim. It necessitates a point-by-point rebuttal, which follows the original text that is in italics.

Why India needs Modi to remain a secular state?

Over 80% percent of India’s population or 900 million people in the country are Hindus+Sikhs+Jains+Buddhists. Yet, shamefully, the country is being ruled by the Minorities, who may now constitute around 20% of the population count. India is the only country in the world where its minorities –– principally the Muslims and the Christians –– have ganged up together to enact laws that decide how the Hindu majority should behave in their own country!

It is truly a matter of great regret and shame that Hindus are taking this injustice and tyranny lying down! Since Congress chairperson Sonia Gandhi led UPA, the sinister efforts are underway to selectively appoint the Christians and Muslims in sensitive and powerful positions within the administration. Here are a few glaring examples of it:
Chairperson of the country’s ruling political alliance UPA is Sonia Gandhi, a practising Catholic Christian. Her son Rahul Gandhi, another Catholic Christian, is being groomed to be the next Prime Minister of India. Country’s Defense Minister - A.K. Antony, the Foreign Secretary  - Ranjan Mathai, Head of the Air Wing of military  - Anil Kumar Browne, P.J. Kurien – Dy. Chairman Rajya Sabha,   - P.C. Chacko, newly appointed Congress Spokesperson,  - P.J. Thomas, 14th Chief Vigilance Commissioner (appointment subsequently quashed) are all Christians.

The country’s Foreign Minister Mr Salman Khurshid, Minister of State for External Affairs Mr E. Ahmed, Chief Justice of India Mr Altmas Kabir, Vice President and Chairman of Rajya Sabha Mr Hamid Ansari, Chief Election Commissioner Mr S.Y. Qureshi, Attorney General of India Mr Goolam Essaji Vahanvati, Minister for Minorities Affairs - K. Rahman Khan, and Rashid Alvi - the Congress Spokesperson are all Muslims. To add an insult to the injury Syed Asif Ibrahim, a Muslim IPS officer has been appointed as Chief of Intelligence Bureau (IB). Many Hindu leaders believe that his appointment could endanger India’s internal security.

In this connection, readers should note that in order to pave the way for Asif Ibrahim to be the Chief of IB, at least four of his senior Hindu officers (R.N. Gupta, V. Rajagopal, S. Jayaraman and Yashovardhan Azad) were transferred to insignificant posts. Closest political advisers of Sonia Gandhi are Margaret Alva, a Christian, Ahmad Patel, a Muslim and Oscar Fernandez, a senior Indian National Congress leader, a Christian. The country’s Minister of Health and Family Welfare Gulam Nabi Azad is a Muslim.

For all practical purposes, the overall Hindu people and India as the country are presently under a state of siege. Unknown to the common public, that siege has been laid with the help of radical Islamists, ISI jihadists, and Left Wing-Marxists.
The chief aim of this insidious conspiracy is to demoralize and denigrate the Hindus and their organizations….............and encourage the centrifugal forces to balkanize India into several mini-Pakistans and mini-Communist nations.

Almost all Hindus have already been driven out of Kashmir. Over 70 million (7 Crore) Bangladeshi Muslims have infiltrated into Assam, West Bengal and other neighbouring states. The states like Assam, Bengal, and Kerala are witnessing a big demographic change. No matter how strongly we deny it, the unfortunate fact still remains intact that the “demographic conquest of any land is the most permanent form of a conquest.” Discrimination against Hindus in India is rampant. Top Hindu temples like Tirupati and Sabrimala are taken away from Hindu hands – through the legislation – and given to ‘secular’ civil servants for managing them. From the religious offerings of Hindu devotees meant strictly for the Hindu issues, the bureaucrats unfairly dole away Rs.690 crores a year as the Haj subsidy alone.

Remember there are 54 Muslim countries in the world but NONE of them give Haj Subsidy BUT for India alone. There is a complete economic mess and utter chaos in India created by various mega-scams: Coal-gate scam worth Rs. 10,86,000 crores, 2G scam worth Rs. 1,76,000 crores, and Commonwealth Games scam worth Rs. 70,000 crores.

Massive payoffs from these scams have made it possible for a half-literate Italian-Indian woman like Sonia Gandhi to become the fourth richest politician in the world.
(Not to mention uncountable amount of money that will be spent in Food Security bill, which is going to crush already burdened middle classes with more inflation)

Amidst all this gigantic plunder and loot, there is little hope for our country.
The only way out is if the honest and courageous leaders like Narendra Modi, after whose life and blood, these leeches and parasites are after, can become the Prime Minister of India who manoeuvre the country away from the sure doom and disaster waiting ahead.

An Indian’s Response

Please note that the text reproduced above has no date, place of origin, or name of the writer. This is typical of cowardly propagandists, anarchists, alarmists, and faceless anti-nationalists. It is highly probable that this text is being flashed all over the country, and to the rich NRIs who relish such jingoistic rhetoric. We need to protect our motherland from such a lethal virus. Hence this rebuttal.

Prima facie the text has originated from a right wing extremist Hindutva source, that, a la Don Quixote, tilts at windmills. In this case the usual suspects are – radical Islamists, ISI jihadis, left wing Marxists and, for good measure, the “practicing Catholic Christian” Sonia Gandhi and her beta Rahul. The Congress is painted as a scam tainted party, and Modi is projected as the “honest and courageous” saviour.

The Congress and the BJP are welcome to slug it out for the 2014 elections. As an Indian that is not an issue for me. However, if Modi’s supporters seek to elect him by denigrating the Muslims and Christians, then I have a serious problem with Modi-ism.

A careful reading of the text shows that it indulges in alarmist generalities, distortion of facts, selective data and blatant bigotry. There is an old adage that “A half truth is more dangerous than a lie”. This is because a lie is recognised for what it is. But a half-truth is attractive, like sweet poison, which is fatal if ingested. The offending text falls in the category of half-truths, and is therefore lethal, if not logically and factually rebutted. Let us address some of the issues as mentioned in the text.   

COUNTRY RULED BY MINORITIES: This is a baseless allegation. One swallow does not a summer make. So a handful of Christians or Muslims holding high office cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be construed to be a “ruling class”. I will not swallow that. It is a reality that the Christian representation in Parliament, at about 4%, is higher than the percentage of the population at 2.3%. However, the Muslim representation is much less than its 12.5% of the population. It is also worth noting that Christian MPs are from different national and regional parties, and their constituents are not necessarily Christian.

STATUS OF MINORITIES: Far from being a ruling class, the Minorities are more of a deprived class. Here are some statistics from the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) for 2009-10. In education Muslims have the highest drop out rate of 45%. Among urban male graduates employment per 1000 for Hindus was 234, whereas for Muslims it was an abysmal 69, actually down from 75 in 2004/5. The living standard (per capita per month actual expenditure) of Muslims is again the lowest at Rs 980/-, while the Sikhs are the highest at Rs 1659/-. If Christians have relatively good education, employment and living standards, it is through their own efforts and institutions, and no thanks to the Govt.

CHRISTIANS AS RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS: Having been National President of the All India Catholic Union, I am fairly well acquainted with the status and statistical data of the Christian community in India. I quote from the Census of India 2001 (as the data of 2011 is not yet in the public domain). The two States with the oldest Christian presence are Kerala (2000 years) and Goa (450 years). In Kerala in 1961 there were 3,587,365 Christians in a population of 16,903,715, which is 21%. In 2001 this had dropped to 6,057,427/ 31,841,374 or 19%.  More alarmingly in Goa the percentage dropped from 227,202/ 626,667 (36%) to 359,568/ 1,347,668 (27%), a drop of 9 percentage points. The sex ratio figures for the country show that among Christians it was highest at 1009, as against the national average of 933. In Kerala and Goa this was even higher at 1031 and 1107. So, far from being “rulers”, Christians are responsible citizens of the country, whose myriad institutions are “service”, not ruling ones.

PRACTICING CHRISTIANS: This is a term seldom used by those who are not Christians themselves, so I am rather bemused by this turn of phrase. It usually refers to those Christians who go to church every Sunday, especially among Catholics. The text refers to Sonia Gandhi and Rahul as “practicing Catholic Christians”. Has anybody seen Sonia or Rahul going to any church to pray or worship? I haven’t. A few years ago, at Mother Teresa’s funeral, which was telecast live, Sonia Gandhi did not step forward to receive the Holy Communion, an indication that she is not a “practicing Catholic”. As for her internal beliefs, or that of her son, it is their personal matter, and their privacy should be respected.

CHRISTIANS IN HIGH OFFICE: The text referred to A.K. Antony (Defence Minister), Ranjan Mathai (Foreign Secretary), Air Chief Marshall Browne (Air Chief), P.C. Chacko (Congress spokesperson), P.J. Kurien (Dy Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha), P.J. Thomas (proposed Chief Vigilance Commissioner), as also Margaret Alva and Oscar Fernandes. This therefore surmounted to Christians ruling India! Now for the facts. A.K. Antony, though of Christian origin, is known to be an agnostic, certainly not a “practicing Christian”. Mathai has already demitted office. Browne (nick-named Charlie Brown in his native Allahabad) is a distinguished pilot, whose son is also an ace pilot. The appointment of P.J. Thomas as the CVC was opposed in the Supreme Court by James Michael Lyngdoh, former Chief Election Commissioner, and a fellow Christian! P.J. Kurien and P.C. Chacko are popular leaders in Kerala, as is Oscar Fernandes in Karnataka. Margaret Alva is from a family of freedom fighters – Joachim and Violet Alva. So there is nothing sinister about their holding high office.

On the other hand, this scenario is not exclusive to Congress regimes. When the BJP was in power, George Fernandes was the Defence Minister, ironically another non-practicing agnostic; and Admiral Sushil Kumar Isaac was the Naval chief. Lyngdoh was the Chief Election Commissioner from 2001-04, when the BJP was in power. General Sunith Francis Rodrigues was Army Chief from 1990-93, when a non-Congress Govt, supported by the BJP was in power. Purno Sangma, also a Christian, was the Speaker of the 11^th Lok Sabha from 1996-98, again when a non-Congress Govt was in power. Again he was one of the main opponents of Sonia Gandhi on the issue of foreign origin. Even Air Chief Marshal I.H. Latif (a Muslim) was appointed when a non-Congress Govt was in power. So Christians holding high office is in no way peculiar to Congress rule. On the other hand, Modi’s supporters are doing a singular disservice to the nation by tying to give a communal tinge to defence appointments. Shame.

HEROIC CHRISTIANS: It is said that war heroes are the greatest. I recall that in the 1965 Indo-Pak war Col Tarapore (a Parsi), Abdul Hamid (a Muslim from Meerut), and Albert Ekka (a Christian from Ranchi) were all awarded the Param Vir Chakra posthumously. The Keelor brothers both got Vir Chakras for downing the Pakistani Sabre jets with their tiny Gnats, and Brig (later Lt General) R.S. Noronha got the Mahavir Chakra for the second time (a rare distinction). I have a book “Patriotism in Action” written by Valmiki Faleiro, which enumerates the long list of officers and heroes from the tiny State of Goa, who distinguished themselves in the defence services. 95% of them were Catholics.

Perhaps the greatest act of “wilful heroism” was that of Wg Cdr Clarence Joseph D’lima on 4^th November 1977. He was piloting a TU 124K aircraft of the VIP squadron, taking Prime Minister Morarji Desai to Assam. Since there was no way of a safe landing he decided to ditch in a soft paddy field. He opted for a “nose first” landing that invited certain death, but saved the Prime Minister in the tail of the aircraft. Another crewmember that was martyred was Sqn Ldr Mathew Cyriac. Ironically, another Christian onboard, John Lobo, the then head of the Intelligence Bureau, used his 6-foot frame to pull the Prime minister out of the wreckage before it went up in flames.

Another unique act of heroism was that of paratrooper Maj Ivan Joseph Crasto. It was he, who in October 1992, risked his life to rescue 10 passengers suspended 1300 ft in the air in a cable car in Himanchal Pradesh; when he jumped from a helicopter to save them. The latest in this galaxy of heroic Christian officers was Wg Cdr Darryl Castellino, the pilot of the ill-fated helicopter that had saved hundreds of lives in the Uttarakhand disaster. He laid down his life saving “Hindu pilgrims”, while Feku Narendra Modi claimed to have saved 15,000 Gujaratis in Innovas!

Let us not forget the real heroes (Christians or anyone else) and also identify the pretenders to the throne, the masqueraders, or rather marauders like Modi, for what they actually are – just pretenders.

BANGLADESHIS: The text claims that 70 million (7 crore) Bangladeshis have illegally entered India. This is a gross exaggeration because the total population is just about 170 million! What of the lakhs of Tibetans (Buddhists) to whom India has given refuge and all amenities? What of the millions of Nepalis (Hindus) who have made India their home, and are now demanding a separate State of Gorkhaland? Should we not have a common approach to all migrants/ refugees, regardless of religion?

HINDU TEMPLES: Another allegation of “discrimination” against Hindus is regarding the Trusts formed to manage “top Hindu temples like Tirupati and Sabarimala”. Who made these trusts, and who are their members, if not Hindus themselves? So why raise such canards? Incidentally, the temples of the South have so much gold and jewellery (all non-productive assets) that even the Reserve bank of India is worried, and asking for details of gold hoarded in the Guruvayoor and Sabarimala temples. The Supreme Court is already monitoring the treasures of the Shree Padmanabha Swamy temple. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if rationalist and nationalist Hindus spent more money on serving deprived sections of society, tribals and dalits; instead of on offerings of gold?

CONCLUSION: I have tried to counter the allegations with facts. Since many of the allegations stemmed from an anti-Christian bias, I had to frame my rebuttal accordingly. It would be nice if some Muslim scholar were to also air his views on the allegations made. The real issue here is not of the Congress or the BJP; or Hindus, Muslims and Christians. The real issue is of India, and the fear of its “balkanisation”. How true. Balkanisation of territorial India may not be that easy. But balkanisation or polarisation of society into “we” and “they” is a distinct possibility. A feku like Modi would be the largest beneficiary of such a polarisation. As a concerned Indian I will not let that happen. JAI HIND!

WHY FRANCIS?

When I awoke on the 14^th morning my wife told me that a new pope had been elected.  My initial reaction was of dismay, because she didn’t say who it was.  I was apprehensive of a hasty decision, as happened in the previous conclave; and said so in my last article “Past, Present, Future – All Tense”.  I hurriedly switched on BBC News.

Then it hit me.  A relatively “unknown” Argentinean had been elected.  I was happy that it was a Latin American, as I had advocated in 2005 and again this time round.  Then I heard the name he had chosen – Francis.  Tears of joy welled up in my eyes.  I rushed to the altar in our bedroom, and prostrated before the Lord in joyous thanksgiving.  For me “Francis” is special – very, very special.

When I was just 7 years of age my elder sister Christine was preparing me for my confirmation. I had to choose a name of my patron saint, so she told me about several saints.  I chose Francis of Assisi, not for any lofty ideals, but because his love of birds and animals appealed to me.  I remember the day after my confirmation, walking out into the garden and calling out to the birds to not be afraid of me as I was Francis of Assisi!  Not surprisingly, the birds were not impressed.  My second, and far more fruitful encounter with Francis, was 17 years later, when I was seeking to know what the Lord wanted of me.  That is when my good friend Sr Adel UMI, and thereafter Bp Patrick D’souza of Varanasi, directed me to Fr Deenabandhu Ofm Cap in Jyotiniketan Ashram, Bareilly.  The person and place were the game changers in my life.

Fr Augustine Deenabandu was an elderly Capuchin priest, who was in his 60s when he left the “comfort” of his monastery in the south to come up to Jyotiniketan in the north, to learn Hindi, to squat on the ground and even to roll chapattis.  Jyotiniketan was founded by Rev Murray Rogers, an Anglican pastor, an Englishman, and his wife. They subsequently moved to Jerusalem to make Jyotiniketan truly Indian. Life there was truly spartan – no electricity, no running water, and very little protection from the biting chill of winter, the scorching summer sun, leaking roofs in the monsoons; or from dacoits, snakes and mosquitoes.  Fr Deenabandhu was living the truly Franciscan life.  For us “festivity” meant boiled eggs for Easter or Christmas.

It is here that I discovered the real Francis of Assisi, not just by reading about him, but by experiencing true Franciscan spirituality.  I discovered several similarities in Francis’ youth and my own.  He was 25 when he heard God’s call, ”Go and repair my Church”.  I too was concerned about my Catholic community.  On my 25^th birthday, I committed myself as a layman to live the Franciscan way of life and took the name “chhotebhai” which was Hindi for Friar Minor; what Francis called his followers.

St Francis was unique.  While others hankered after ecclesiastical power, he chose to be a “brother”.  He shamed a corpulent church by a life of extreme poverty, humility and simplicity. He did not hesitate in taking on cardinals and even the then Pope Innocent III.  In fact the Pope had a dream of a frail young man holding up a tottering Lateran Basilica, the then seat of the papacy.  That man was later identified as Francis. Many people have a rather romantic notion of Francis, the “Il Poverello”, the lover of nature, and his enduring friendship with the beautiful St Clare.

The other side of Francis was a man who mortified himself so much and identified so closely with Jesus, that he received the Stigmata, the wounds of Jesus in his own flesh.  While popes and kings were launching into crusades to free the Holy Land from the Muslims, Francis was actually engaging in dialogue with the Saracens (Muslims).  His prayer “Make me a Channel of Peace” was adopted not just by Mother Teresa, but also by Mahatma Gandhi.  Even today it is found in the Gandhian prayer book, and we recite it together on Gandhi Jayanti and his martyrdom day.

Another striking similarity was the emergence of a “middle class” to which he belonged, as distinct from the royals and feudals.  The church was in desperate need of change.  He didn’t do it by violence, as in the French Revolution.  Nor did he resort to Reformation like Martin Luther, from outside.  He did it by Renewal from within.  That required much more courage.  As somebody once said “It is easy to throw stones from outside”.  It made me wonder.  If the problems are the same, so should the solution be.  That is why I believe in the Franciscan way of life and radical renewal.

That is also why I had tears of joy when I heard that Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio SJ had taken the name of Francis on his election.  For me it was a sure indicator that the new pope saw St Francis of Assisi as his role model.  When I subsequently learnt that this Argentinean cardinal lived in a small apartment, took public transport to commute, and even cooked his own food, my joy knew no bounds.  St Francis was called the “Alter Christi” (another Christ) the greatest saint after the apostolic era. Are we then looking at another era in the Catholic Church? I sincerely hope so.

When I found that the new pope was also a Jesuit (some say the first one to become a pope) I was even more excited.  As a Franciscan layman I had begun to develop a fixed state of mind.  Then I got exposed to the Jesuits - Pepe Casasnovas (Spanish), Peter Ribes (again Spanish), Dan Rice (American) and Josef Neuner (Austrian). I learnt much from them about ecclesiology and the discernment of spirits.  Their guidance has held me in good stead.  I felt that a combination of Franciscan zeal and Jesuit intellectual prowess was ideal.  That seems to be the strength behind the new pope. “Great indeed are your works oh Lord“.

I also feel a personal sense of vindication.  Immediately after Benedict XVI’s resignation I wrote, ”Quo Vadis Mater Ecclesia?” in which I asked, “Do we need another Francis of Assisi?”  I had also referred to the impact of St Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuits.  So did I discern the spirits correctly?  In my Open Letter to the 5 Indian cardinal electors I expressed a first preference for a Latin American.  Again spot on.  In my last article, “Past, Present, Future – All Tense”, I had hoped that the new pope would embody the 6Hs – human, humble, honest, holy, harmonious and hardworking.  By all accounts I seem to have got what I asked for.  Surely this must have been the unspoken aspiration of millions of Catholics around the globe.

Now to the pollsters and punters.  I read two articles in the Tablet, the most respected Catholic weekly in England. One had an analysis of the “experience” of the 115 cardinals, under six heads – Curial experience, Moral Teaching, Social justice, Liturgy, Ecumenism and Religious Dialogue, and Governance. It rated Bergoglio with just 3 – Curial experience, moral teaching and social justice.  This was even less than the 4 stars of Cardinal Ivan Dias, and on par with the 3 stars of Telesphore Toppo. So much for experience.

Another article used Human Resource Management techniques.  It identified 3 areas or qualities required - Charisma, Governance and Global Fluency (acceptance).  Strangely the only area that Bergoglio covered was “Governance”, which was not featured in the previous analysis.  The only 3 who qualified by the HR formula were Schonbohn of Vienna, Scola of Milan and O’Malley of Boston.  So much for HR too! As for the punters, Ladbrokes of Britain had odds of 33/1 on Bergoglio. Seems so odd now!

In my personal preference (not published) I had hoped for Francis Arinze (Nigeria) Peter Turkson (Ghana), Agnelo Scola (Milan) and Sean O’Malley (Boston).  I was subsequently also impressed by Luis Tagle (Manila).  I may have got the brand names wrong, but I think the generic name of the prescription was correct.  Cardinal Bergoglio may have been the dark horse in the race, but I see in Pope Francis a light of hope for the future. Viva il papa!

WAS IT REALLY THAT EARLY?

To a large extent I would agree with Farrukh Dhondhy’s piece, “Leaving Office Early” (HT 15^th February), on the unexpected resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. Some of his statements bear repetition: “Nothing becomes Benedict’s office as his leaving of it … he has through his resignation demonstrated for our sceptical times that the papacy is not a throne, but a grave responsibility … No other religion in the world today has the means to boast of such a humble and at the same time grand gesture. Even calling it a gesture is an impertinence … With enhanced respect there is a pontiff who resigns power through awesome humility”.

Dhondhy describes himself as a non-ritualistic Zoroastrian, author and columnist, based in London. I am also an author and columnist, but happily resident in the country of my birth. I am a Catholic, a believing yet questioning one, who also does not give too much importance to rituals. As an “insider” there are many more things about the papacy and Catholicism that I could now share. Here I would differ from Dhondhy’s simplistic observation that the Catholic Church has been both persecutor and persecuted. Such a statement could very well apply to every religion, nation or even married couples. In this context, what distinguishes Catholicism from the others is that it has the best-documented history, hence been under the microscope of both friend and foe.

With the advent of perpetual protestor, Anna Hazare, in the public space, the politician has become the favourite whipping boy, often with good reason. Similarly, after the Reformation and Renaissance in Europe, Catholicism became the soft target, again, often with good reason. But it would be grossly unfair to demonise Catholicism just because we do not accept homosexuality or abortion. Nor does Islam. Would columnists have the guts to criticise Islam in similar vein?

In all humility I accept that there are many failings and shortcomings in the Church, but that does not warrant demonising it. Even fiction writer Dan Brown had to name his book on the Vatican “Angels & Demons”! I too would not like to demonise, trivialise or even pedestalise Catholicism. I believe in pragmatic existentialism, which has more than fifty shades of grey, and very little in black and white.

For example, it would be grossly unfair to label Catholicism as anti-science. One Galileo fiasco does not a summer make. Infact Nicolas Copernicus (1473 –1543), a Polish monk, who was a renowned mathematician and astronomer, a century before Galileo, (1564 – 1642) established that the earth orbited the sun, but he was not “persecuted” by the church. Sylvester II, the 139^th pope, a Frenchman, had doctorates in maths and science. He is credited with inventing the pendulum clock in 1003. Likewise, the 183^rd pope, John XXI from Portugal, had studied medicine before he became pope in 1276. He was more interested in science than religion. He was actually working in his laboratory during a storm, when the roof caved in, causing his death. The Vatican infact has its own department of science, and even an astronomical (not astrological) observatory. Here in India the Jesuits (St Xavier’s) have imparted the best scientific education to millions. Likewise, the Salesians (Don Bosco) have trained the best technicians. So no demonisation please.

The same goes for trivialisation. This has assumed monstrous proportions with the mad race for “breaking news” on TV channels, which have little or no time for verification or straining out fact from opinion. TV hogs end up gulping the tea with the tealeaves!  That causes heartburn. The same goes for the twitter bugs. Most have an uninformed opinion. Most of the tweets about the pope’s resignation, published in HT on 12^th February were in exceedingly poor taste. Again, had such remarks been made about some other religious leaders, there would have been bloodshed. So Dhondhy was right in saying that there are no Catholic jihadis or terrorists. Thank you sir.

At the other end I am also against pedestalisation of the papacy, or any other religious authority, for that matter. We pedestalise a person when we put him “up there”, beyond reach or reason, while we ourselves remain “down here”, to merely pray, pay and obey, as we lay people call it.

St Peter, the first pope, was fully human, his frailty often manifest. He tried taking up a sword to protect Jesus, and was rebuked for doing so. Shortly after that came his infamous triple denial of Jesus, just before the crucifixion. Jesus trusted his sincerity, despite his frailty. A study of the history of the papacy reveals that several of them, especially during what were termed the “dark ages”, were shady or downright evil characters. We need to remember this to avoid repeating such historical blunders.

Now to the present. There is speculation of an African or a Latin American becoming pope. Why not? For centuries the papacy was a near monopoly of Europe, or even Italy. But Peter himself was from Palestine in the Middle East. The 11^th, 87^th and 90^th popes (Anicetus, Sininnius and Gregory II) were from Syria. The 14^th, 32^nd and 49^th popes (Victor I, Meltiades and Gelasius I) were all from Africa. But they were probably from the Semitic races, the North African Arabs, and not from the Negroid races.

Among the amazing papal elections was that of the 20^th pope, Fabian. He was a simple farmer, a bystander, when a dove descended on him. It was interpreted as divine intervention, and he was straight away ordained deacon, priest and bishop, all in one go. At the other extreme was the 130^th pope, John XII. Because of his influential father he was made pope when he was just 18 years of age. To put it mildly, he was immoral to the core. A study of papal elections down the ages shows that all kinds of factors were at play, not all of them divine.

To revert to Dhondhy, the Catholic Church has ”settled down”.  The fireworks may be missing.  But settling down also leads to comfort, complacency and compromise.  Since the Catholic Church is the single largest organised entity in the world, its global impact cannot be minimized.  So who gets to be the 266^th pope is certainly a matter of concern, not just to Catholics, but to all world citizenry, for which we need to express ourselves.

Oh yes, Mr. Dhondhy, it was not really a case of leaving office early. As the saying goes, it is better to retire when people ask why, rather than later, when they ask why not?

FEBRUARY 2013