With the publication of this post and ending of the year 2013, we close the chapter which began five years ago; on 24th, October, 2008 to be precise. The Collection box, at the HOLY CROSS, Kharodi; was STOLEN BY ROGUES WHO WERE PAMPERED BY PARISH AUTHORITY. Our efforts to bring them to book, revealed, how the Parish Authority and hierarchy is hellbent on protecting such rogues. This is a true revelation from this episode.

We credit the Birth of SILENT VOICE, Voice of a Silent Majority, to this incident.




These words, we as Catholics repeat daily, at number of times; expressing our faith in the Christian VALUE, which has emerged, along with the



is a Value, which Christian Faith is based on.

Therefore any kind of Manipulation, Subversion of TRUTH, in any form, could not be acceptable to a true Christian.







This is a delayed post; in respect to Archdiocese Enquiry Commission (AEC), related to St. Anthony’s Parish; Malwani. You may remember, Fr. Ajit Bandekar, the then Parish Priest of St. Anthony’s Church, Malwani, was unilaterally Declared Guilty by us, because the Archbishop House was silent on the issue, in spite of the Enquiry having concluded, a long time ago.


The Enquiry Commission thereafter, hurriedly summoned yours truly, who was a complainant and through Archbishop Cardinal Oswald Gracias, handed over the FINDINGS OF THE ARCHDIOCESAN ENQUIRY COMMISSION. It is needless to say that the accused Fr. Ajit Bandekar was expectedly, found NOT GUILTY.

The matter was put behind by us. But the expected mischief compelled us to respond, which we did in apt manner as the title suggests; through a letter addressed to H. E. Cardinal Oswald Gracias. Please read it and understand as to how some members of Clergy, without any FEAR OF GOD, behave. Thanks to His Eminence, with whose intervention the copies of the findings were handed over to us.

Though Fr. Ajit Bandekar was declared NOT GUILTY, officially; his transfer prior to the tenure reveals fact.

Just for your information, the members on the Panel were: 1. Fr. Michael Goveas, Parish Priest, St. Andrews Church, Bandra; 2. Fr. Savio Fernandes, Chancellor of Archdiocese, Bombay( Now a Bishop); and Fr. Seraj Pinto, Parish Priest, St. Anthony’s Church, Vakola.

Fr. Austin Norris, who replaced Fr. Ajit Bandekar, has been doing excellent job being transparent with issues. However, the rogue elements, nurtured by his predecessor are still to be seen in the wings of Parish. Will Fr. Austin purge them? It remains to be seen…..


St. Anthony's Church Malwani




Constuted UnderPara 29 of Christifideles Laici

(Post Synodal ApostolicExhortation ofH. H.Late Pope John Paul II)

A/7, Rodrigues Compound, Malwani Village, Malad(W), Mumbai,400095. Contact no. 98707 19628.

E Mail:

10th, September, 2012;


Most Rev. Cardinal Oswald Gracias,

Archbishop of Bombay;

Sub:    Archdiocesan Enquiry Commission (AEC), a Farce.

Your Eminence,

This is with reference to our meeting on June, 2nd, 2012, where you handed over the order related to subject matter. As we have mentioned in our letter of 12th, May, 2012 that your verdict will be accepted, whatever form it is in; however, a conclusion by AEC panel has compelled us to rethink and respond. Delay in our response, is due to anxiety of expected Legal Notice or a Court Summons, from Church/Parish Authorities, for following reason. Usurping a Trust property and helping the usurper to do so, is a seriously punishable crime under Indian Constitution, which as per the order of AEC, we have committed. Besides, we also expected this verdict to be made public by Church authorities to counter the one by us, PRONOUNCING FR. AJIT BANDEKAR, FORMER PARISH PRIEST OF ST. ANTHONY’S CHURCH, GUILTY OF CORRUPT PRACTICES.

Your eminence, nothing of the kind mention above has occurred, obviously because the Church authorities in their wisdom are aware that the order is not based on TRUTH. An example to AEC’s misdemeanor is here for everyone to see.

Conclusion By AEC:       Even his allegations that Mr. Karveer paid some money to Mr. Fredrick Gracias in order to allow him to resurface the road on the plot bearing CTS No. 1668/1688 has fallen flat. Rather, the evidence on hand shows that Mr. Greg Pereira is the one who is close to Mr. Karveer and has helped him in getting some of the Church plots for development, as mentioned by Mr. Karveer himself.

Here, your Eminence, Mr. Karveer has accepted that he has developed some Church Plots. Surely, he must have also given the list of Church Plots that he has developed with our help (Greg Pereira). He also must have submitted evidence of our involvement in the matter. However, it doesn’t find any place in the Findings, obviously, because it does not exist. The only evidence they have is what Mr. Karveer has said.

In this matter, AEC panel has deliberately ignored following statements of Mr. Jerry Rodrigues, who is also a Eucharistic Minister and a revered parishioner.

  • He (Mr. Karveer) does not know Greg Pereira too well: -:     In fact, I had never spoken to him before this meeting. I was called by him through Jerry Rodrigues, in anticipation that I would be able to reign in Fredrick Gracias and Godfrey Patel, who were demanding more and more from him. At this point in time I told him that he is an encroacher on Church Property and he has to vacate. : GREG
  • Mr. Sunil Karveer told me that Fredrick and Godfrey have been asking him money for the Access passage (Road)”. Jerry Rodrigues reiterated this statement, when he was told that, Sunil Karveer has denied it. (Deposition of Jerry Rodrigues, Page 24 & 25)
  • Greg Pereira and Ravindra Patil were sitting with me when Mr. Karveer told me about this.

Besides, both Godfrey Patel and Fredrick Gracias have stated in their depositions that they have been receiving donations from Sunil Karveer for some Cricket and Football Matches. Sunil Karveer also corroborates this, which may please be noted. Because they have not given details of the matches they organized??????????

Your Eminence, this is enough evidence to conclude that AEC Verdict is tapered to bail out the accused. However, in their enthusiasm they have also bailed out the corrupt elements operating in Parish for their personal gains.

Going through the entire document, it becomes obvious that AEC has tried to twist the TRUTH around technicalities, to taper the judgment in favour of accused. Besides, implicating the complainant into similar corruption is a ploy always used by politicians, to divert attention from the main issue. AEC has used the similar ploy to defend the corrupt one among them. This is not a first case your Eminence; a lady Parishioner from OL OF SALVATION PARISH, DADAR; was similarly accused of fraud, just because she raised the issue of Corruption, related to Properties, by Parish authorities. She fought tooth and nail for eight years, to get her name cleared. A media report recently, suggests that you have found her innocent.

We are not casting aspersions on the character of entire team of AEC. But it is well known that Fr. Savio Fernandes, Chancellor of Archdiocese; is a staunch defender of Corruption within Church Administration. He has made a valiant attempt to counter allegation of Corruption within Church, (On Corruption & Transparency; Examiner, 25th, July 2011) that appeared in the Examiner of April, 2011; under the title, THE CHURCH NEEDS AN ANNA HAZARE.

We are not surprised with this verdict. It was obvious from the inception of this matter that Church authorities are not interested in curbing corruption within Parishes. Bishop Percival gives clean chit to Fr. Ajit Bandekar, via his letter of February 20, 2010; without even discussing the matter with the complainants.

 Extracts: “I have carefully studied all that you have placed before me, and find that Fr. Ajit Bandekar has done well. I find no reason to blame him in any way in matter related to what you have written to me”. “As a person interested in the good of the Church, may I kindly request you, dear Greg, to meet Fr. Ajit personally, and have a dialogue with him. He is an excellent priest and respected by all those who have worked with him. I am confident that this dialogue will help you to understand the outstanding qualities of this Priest of ours”! (VOSM PG. 8).

Fr. Salvadore Rodrigues, declined to officiate on AEC, after we raised objection to his presence, stating that as a Dean, he had looked into the matter. (Your letter dated 14th, May 2011).

What did he find? Not known.

Your Eminence, Now that we have chosen to respond, let us authenticate further our claim with more evidence.

The matter related to theft of Collection box:

Here, AEC has done its best to bail out the accused Mr. Fredrick Gracias, by twisting and eliminating certain uncomfortable points from the depositions. Would like you to note the following and decide for yourself.

Deposition by Greg Pereira:

  • Findings…..:  Mr. Greg Pereira states in his deposition, “It has been a practice of keeping the collection box of Asmita Jyoti Cross on Fridays, at Mr. Robert Gracias’ place with the approval of the Parish Priest since the collection box is removed at 12 midnight”. (The following morning it used to be handed over to Fr. Ajit Bandekar).

Deposition by Godfrey Patel. (Pg. 13 & 14).

Vittur and Greg used to take the collection box to Robert’s Place; (This statement is missing from the Findings……)

v  Greg and Vittur arriverd on the scene.

v  Vittur wanted to keep the box at Roberts place and he (Fredrick Gracias) told him, “let it be here in my shop for tonight and will take it to Church in the morning”.

Statement by GREG, in Publication ACTS: This has been explained earlier. Godfrey repeats the version of Fredrick. “Let the box be here in my shop for tonight and I will take it to Church in the morning”. This has been countered in the deposition of Fredrick. I wish to add over here. I suspect their intention, since Roberts house is just few meters away from this spot. This will give an indication, as to why we were trying to keep both of them away. This was brought to the notice of Fr. Ajit Bandekar, time and again. He did nothing about it. This implies that he is shielding these rogue elements. (This statement has been ignored by AEC)

Deposition by Fredrick Gracias:

  • “For the first time the collection box was kept in my shop. I then told Fr. Ajit that I did not want to keep the box in my shop”.
  • On being questioned by victor (Vittur), as to why the box was being kept at the shop? I told him, “let it be here tonight and I will give it to Fr. Ajit the following morning”.
  • AEC question to Fredrick Gracias:  Did Fr Ajit give you any instruction, at anytime, to keep the box at your place?  He answered, “No”. (This statement is missing from the Findings……)

Publication ACTS by GREG, in response to Fredrick Gracias: If he had told Fr, Ajit Bandekar that he did not want to keep the box in his place, why did he take the box in his shop?

The idea of keeping the box in Chapel was shot down by me, because it is not safe. I was prepared to carry it to the Church. However, it was decided to keep it at Robert’s place.  Fr, Ajit Bandekar, am sure will vouch for this.

It has already been stated in my reply to Fr, Ajit Bandekar’s deposition that Vittur and I did come, before the box could be transported. Therefore it was no reason for them to take the box. We did not want to allow them, because there was no such instruction from Fr, Ajit Bandekar.” On being questioned as to why………………….. I will give it to Fr. Ajit the following morning”. To me this statement doesn’t make any sense. If it does to you, please let me know, how? In fact, there was no conversation between them. Fredrick just took the box away before Vittur could realize. So says Vittur in his statement. (This statement has been ignored by AEC)

Deposition by Vittue Rodrigues:

  • When the Rickshaw stopped at Kharodi, Fredrick took the box and ran into the gully. The rickshaw driver asked me whether I should complain to the police. I told him, how to complain to police when it is a church matter. (This statement is missing from the Findings……..).

AEC has stated that Greg Pereira and Vittur Rodrigues are not truthful.  You decide your Eminence, who is truthful.


Manipulation of terms for mandaps for Holy Week services 2009.

The lowest tender was rejected because it was not in proper format:

Deposition by Godfrey Patel. (Pg. 13 & 14).

“Since this was not the proper format of giving the quotation as per the law, the Committee decided to reject the quotation”.

Fredrick Gracias has also expressed similar views.

Statement by GREG, in Publication ACTS:  If the property committee is so particular about everything that has been written; then the quotation of Nityanand Decorator, who was awarded the contract, should have been rejected outright; for the following reasons.

  • If I remember well.  Quotation of Nityanand decorator carries multiple dates. 9/4/2009, 10/4/2009, and 11/4/2009. Is it permitted in any document? (AEC has explained, these are the dates specifying Maundy Thursday, Good Friday and Easter Sunday. Yes AEC is right. Then where is the date of the Tender?) Of course, AEC has taken pains to mention, “This quotation is not dated”, in bold.
  • There is variation between the amount mentioned in figures, which reads as Rs. 100001/- and amount mentioned in words, which reads “Rs. One lakh one thousand only”. Besides, the figure seems to be overwritten; you may draw your conclusion. I can say with conviction that this quotation is an afterthought to counter the allegations. Can Fr. Ajit Bandekar deny it? Again, what is the role of finance committee in this matter? (AEC on variation in amount in Figures and Words: “This appears to be mistake on part of Proprietor”.)????? However, AEC is silent on the issue of overwriting of the amount in figures.

Mismanagement and neglect of Church Properties deliberately, amounting to dereliction of duties:

Exhibit L: Page 77 to 79: This letter, signed by members of Property Committee; 1). Fr. Ajit Bandekar, 2). Harold Miranda, 3), Godfrey Patel, 4) Patric D’souza, 5) Fredric Gracias, 6) Esbin Baptista, speaks about various properties and their efforts in protecting them.  It also says that “NO PLOT HAS BEEN SOLD BY US TO ANY PARTY, irrespective of claims made by various unscrupulous elements.”

Isn’t it great that Church Properties are safely protected by these members? If only Fr. Austin Norris, the present Parish Priest, could explain to Parishioners the actual status of these properties, we shall withdraw our allegations.( The list of properties, belonging to the Parish was sent to you vide Letter, dated 22nd, February, 2012).

Meanwhile, Mr. Sunil Karveer has already accepted that he has developed some Church Plots. How did he do that?

Besides, would like to know the status of following properties.

Extracts from Publication ACTS, related to Plots bearing CTS nos. 3173/2305.

To Fr. Ajit Bandekar’s Deposition:  I wish to draw your attention to the letter, dated 1st, December, 2010, in relation to plot nos. 3173 and 2305. It is submitted to you as an Exhibit. I do not remember its reference. Copy of this letter was marked and handed over to Fr. Ajit Bandekar, with instructions to interact with BMC and the police, to whom the copy was marked. At this point the land filling had just begun. Yet they seem to have done nothing.  These are the plots about which I have mentioned in the letter dated 2nd, May, 2011, to Fr. Ajit Bandekar and submitted to you during my deposition, in which mention is made about Rs. 30lakhs, changing hands. As I perceive, the members have conceded the plot to encroachers. I stand by my statement of modus operandi by property committee members, having applied in this case. (Modus Operandi is to encourage encroachments before getting into clandestine deals.)

To Godfrey Patel’s Deposition:          As regards to Cheques given by one Mr. Godwin Baretto, One cannot just come and give you the cheques unless there is some discussion about the property. Has the clandestine deal failed because he issued cheques instead of Cash?  This gives credence to my statement about Rs. 30 Lakh being collected by some members of the church. Has the deal gone through clandestinely, with him or some other party? Please remember, the plots were untouched by encroachers till recently, though a lot of slums have come up around it. It is because, the plots belonged to Church.

Now that Mr. Karveer has accepted on record that he has developed some Church Plots, with whose support is debatable; which means that he is an encroacher. Will the Parish authorities take cognizance and initiate process to recover these properties? By now the process should have started, we hope. Through the copy of this letter we seek answer from Parish Priest, Fr. Austin Norris. We take this opportunity to mention that since his taking over as PP, Fr. Austin has initiated some very good changes, which are appreciated by Parishioners. We personally congratulated him for this and assured our support. We are sure; he will initiate a process to cleanse the Parish administration of corrupt elements.

Your eminence, we term the effort of AEC as, COLLECTIVE SUBVERTION OF TRUTH. Do you approve their efforts? Only your actions shall speak. Meanwhile, we stand by our decision of GUILTY VERDICT, against the accused Fr. Ajit Bandekar, Former Parish Priest of St. Anthony’s Church, Malwani; conveyed to you through the letter dated 12th May 2012.

Your Eminence, this EXPOSE of biased attitude of AEC, would have not been possible, if you had not intervened to get us the copy of findings of the Archdiocesan Enquiry Committee, With regards to St. Anthony’s Church Malwani; which Fr. Savio Fernandes, the Chancellor of Archdiocese and member of AEC were reluctant to give. I was not given the copies of depositions too, to prepare presentation of PUBLICATION ACTS, and was made to copy them manually, spending two days. The matter would have gone into oblivion, with corrupt ones escaping and the TRUTH being a casualty at the hands of corrupt elements within Church Administration.







Copy to:       Fr. Austin Norris, Parish Priest: St. Anthony’s Church, Malwani :  Dear Fr. Austin, as we have already mentioned to you, We shall be meeting you to discuss these matters. We hope you will not think of our actions, AGAINST THE INTEREST OF PARISH. If it is so, without malice, you may decline to discuss them with us. We will get in touch with you shortly.

Date: Thursday, 3 November 2011 8:45 AM

Dear Fr. Michael,

I have waited patiently, though i am not convinced with your reply. It is ambiguous, and suspicion has started creeping into my mind. Your statement, “We will let you know, when the time comes”; I believe, has troubled me. I hope, the attempts are not being made do derail the INQUIRY, and brush it under the carpet, as the perception among the Lay people is.



Church to let go institutional approach



It was felt during the first convention of the small Christian communities.




(Photo: newsofgoa)


The Indian Church is considering a paradigm shift from an institutional approach to a Church of communion with people following the successful completion of the first national convention of the small Christian communities (SCC).

“This is the beauty of SCCs, as the church is experienced more as a communion than hierarchy. And that is the paradigm shift we want to make from an institution to church of communion,” said Fr. Anthony Fernandes, a Goa diocesan organizing team (GDOT) member.

The event held from Nov. 19 to 21 in Goa brought together the country’s cultural diversity in a unique bonding exercise over faith and other things when a 2,000 outstation delegates participated with about 5,000 local ones.

“Many of the bishops came back with a sense of joy after their personal encounters with people as a result of their visits to the parishes and even parishioners’ homes,” Fr. Fernandes said.

Taking stock of the three-day event, church leaders said the occasion and organization of event was a journey of growth and learning.

Fr Leonardo Souza, GDOT convener, said the presence of Apostolic Nuncio Archbishop Salvatore Pennacchio, CBCI president Cardinal Oswald Gracias, archbishops and bishops, hundreds of priests and sisters and over 7,000 active lay animators, affirm that SCCs now occupy a central place for a new way of being the Church and that the Church in India intends to promote SCCs as home and school of communion for the 21st century.

It was also a rich cultural interaction as the guests stayed with Goan families and enjoyed their hospitality.

Church leaders said an event of this magnitude with representatives from 140 dioceses from the length and breadth of the country was held for the first time.

“Goa had the privilege of hosting it and it is a big achievement in itself that we were up to the mark,” Fernandes said.

“We carry with us happy memories of gathering all over Goa, celebrating the Eucharist joyfully with people, visiting families, participating in the gospel sharing and exchange of experiences and partaking of a meal with them,” Fr. Souza said.

National services team (NST), which was responsible for the organization of the event, has expressed satisfaction after a post-event evaluation.

“We will have a similar program soon at the regional level,” said NST secretary Fr. Vijay Thomas.

Source: Times of India


Indian Church ,Small Christian Community ,Panaji , Institutional Approach 



English: Alcove with crucifix in Portuguese co...

English: Alcove with crucifix in Portuguese colonial church, Panaji (Panjim), Goa, India. July 2008. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)



SCCs can transform society: Cardinal Gracias

The SCCs have the power to transform the Church from an inward looking community to an outreaching Church, he said.

Old Goa:

Cardinal Oswald Gracias has said that living a life of love is an authentic living of Christian faith and small Christian communities leading a genuine life can bring about society’s transformation.

“The SCCs have the power to transform the Church from an inward looking community to an outreaching church through a life of love,” Cardinal Gracias said while delivering the homily during the Eucharistic celebration on Nov. 21 outside the Basilica of Bom Jesus.

The celebration also marked the conclusion of the first national convention of small Christian communities (SCCs).

The third-day program shifted back to Old Goa after 2,000 outstation delegates, including bishops, priests and the laity held a day-long interaction with local parishioners at the deanery and parish level in Goa.

The cardinal, who is also president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India (CBCI), said SCCs are the primary locus and means of national integration, ushering in truth, honesty, justice, human rights and dignity, good governance, eco-care and eco-justice in society.

The event that brought to a close the Year of Faith for the Church in India saw the faithful from different parishes come in a rally and join the delegates during the closing function.

While acknowledging the Church’s contribution in the fields of education, healthcare and social service, Bishop Thomas Dabre, president of the National Service Team for SCC, challenged the faithful and the leadership to offer resources to the Church for the service of society.

Source: times of india

SCC , Small Christian Communities , Cardinal Oswald Gracias 


Laity Speaks on MEMORANDUM cum MINUTES:Archbishop Cardinal Oswald Gracias meets GREG: Part II

  1. SILENT VOICE has always been inspiring Laity to speak up and express their opinion on happening in the Church, particularly at Parish Level. Many are responding to the posts and putting up their comments. But, as we mentioned in earlier post, once the reader visits a particular post, he wouldn’t be visiting it again, missing on the comments. We, therefore, have begun a practice of putting up the comments on the main body, for the benefit of the readers.


    Laity Image.

    fergymisquitta said,

    November 4, 2013

    It is indeed sad that amidst all this ” hoo ha ” about transparency in the financial matters of the Church in Bombay, the glaring corruption involved in the transfer of many tenancies in Khotachi Wadi during the reign of Jude Pereira as parish priest of St. Stephen’s Church, the trustees of properties donated to the church, in order that the then “POOR PARISH” of St. Stephen’s, Cumballa Hill, could earn some money for the parish upkeep; since the parishioners at that time were only the ayahs, cooks and servants of the bungalow owners of the area.
    The situation has changed drastically, and St. Stephen’s Church now looks like a Cathedral, and not like the little village, bungalow church it was.
    The avarice has increased and the upper echelon of the Bombay Archdiocese has perhaps got its cut from the various ” transactions “;
    hence the “blind eye” silence and collusion.
    SAD, SAD, indeed !!!!!!

  2. at 8:36 am · Edit
  3. dmelloalex said,

    November 4, 2013 at 1:37 pm · Edit

    Dear Mr Greg, The BMC has served written notices to the Churches at Malwani & Dahanukarwadi for Land acquisition and they are not yet withdrawn. AB claims that he has taken up up the matter with the CM and talked to some people in Delhi, did u have the privilege to see any of the correspondence exchanged between the CM & AB or its just a verbal discussion. In the absence of written assurance from the authorities are we supposed to believe that the matter is resolved and BMC notices will be withdrawn in the near future? What is the guarantee that they will not come again as we know that some unknown people visit the Malwani Church compound again & again?

  4. November 4, 2013 at 6:46 pm · Edit

    Reblogged this on The Iniquitous: Church Crimes.

    1. November 5, 2013 at 3:51 pm · Edit

      Greg your note minuted on the Christian Workers Movement discussed with His Excellency Bishop Oswald Cardinal Gracious could not have come at a better time, read what Bishop Oswald Lewis. CWM Chairman CBCI office of Labour stated at the national convention of CBCI Office for Labour and Workers’ India Federation (WIF) in New Delhi on Oct 31. Ucan news dt. today 5th Nov.2013. quote “They also asked the Church to take active steps to combat bonded labor in the country. “It is a national shame that in the city we see child labor so evident and rampant than any other place in the world,” Read:

      The Christian Workers Movement founded in MUMBAI by Joseph Cardinal Cardijn was instituted by Pope Pius XII in the year 1957 “to underline the importance of work and of the presence of Christ and of the Church in the working world”, was officially recognized by the Archdiocese of Bombay and the CBCI in the year 1968, and affiliated to the (WMCW) World Movement of Christian Workers in Brussels, and (WSM) World Solidarity Movement, these Prerogatives, have since shifted to establish it’s base and H.O. to Chennai. See WHY ??



      1. One of the KEY DIFFICULTIES faced is Lack of Support Co-operation and Motivation from most Religious & Priests.
      2. Clergy Unwilling to Change the Situation and Accept the Initiatives of the Laity.
      3. Inadequate trained leaders on issues concerning the working class.
      4. There is no Diocesan Policy which makes working class movement as a pivotal center
      5. Lack of dedicated leaders for expansion.

      Present CWM Mumbai Structure (Not Verified), 353 registered members. ( M-242, W-75, Y-36 )

      During my present tenure as an Elected Arch.Exco.Member.2012 – 2014, The attendances at AGM’s and functions held at the H.O are DISMAL. Besides my functioning unit of 12 members working outside the parameters of the Church, due to non-acceptance of our Unit by our Parish Priest Fr. Bartholl Barretto (I.C.Parish Borivali) for reasons not disclosed either by him or recorded at Exco.members meetings at the head office. As on date I have not known of any other fully functioning unit in the whole Archdiocese of Bombay despite making my requests in writing. The last AGM held in August 2013, held without the approval of the Exco. Members giving only 3 days notice of the AGM date, Unapproved Agenda and UN-Audited Financial statement distributed 5 minutes before meeting, Why ?

      I have requested an appointment for a meeting with His Excellency. AB, and have now been given to understand Rev. Bishop Domnic Savio Fernandes has now been given charge (Laity, Family & Women Commission) hopefully the Symbols represented on his Coat of Arms will justify my request for approval. Letter dated 5th September 2013 to this effect, couriered earlier to the diocesan office.

      Not surprising, I am at a loss to understand in ones own backyard where lies the discord,!! the decisions on concerned Prerogatives !! However I believe. “MIRACLES HAPPEN EVERY DAY”

    2. noel corriea said,

      November 6, 2013 at 12:23 pm · Edit

      Dear Greg,

      With regards to the MOM between H.E Cardinal Oswald Garcia’s and you, where in you discussed on various issues. You have also mentioned that the discussion was fruitful in many cases.

      As I was going thru the MOM and the issues raised by you to the Cardinal. I still wonder how this discussion has been fruitful, As not on single issue the Cardinal has confirmed that there would be concrete action or certain steps would taken to change the situation.

      If you analyses the MOM you will notice that many of the cases either the Cardinal is not sure or not aware of the fact.

      In case of Examiner Press Building the concluding statement of cardinal was:

      AB: It is not possible to be transparent in every aspect of the deal; but would try to be transparent to some extent.

      Observed: Not a definite conclusion. Nor does he promise to be transparency in future.

      On ARCHDIOCESAN ENQUIRY COMMISSION: It was concluded that Fr Ajit was transferred from the Parish. And Fr. Dominic Savio and Company to save their corrupt colleague.

      Observed: Fr Austin was placed instead of Fr Ajit, by doing this does the role of Fr Ajit and Fr Dominic Savio forgiven or forgotten. Merely by changing the Priest the problem has been solved or diverted.


      Observed: Not much was concluded.

      CHRISTIAN WORKERS MOVEMENT (CWM), IC CHURCH : you mentioned that the Parish Priest was not responding , Did the Cardinal find it necessary to write or talk to such priest who do not find it necessary to discuss the subject with laity and Cardinal has no answers for the same.
      Observed: No action undertaken.
      AB: I do feel for the litigants and agree that they must be handled with Kid Gloves. But such matters do take long, to come to settlements, because of their sentimental nature.
      Observed: Again a polished sympathy but no conclusion or steps to ensure such things do not occur again.

      AB: Mr. Pereira, I must mention to you that it has been decided and a decision has come from highest level, the center. However, there is a kind of hurdle, which is beyond our control.
      Observed: the story of the helpless leader narrated once again.
      And what was found in the remaining two or three issues are also the same. Where in no definite conclusion or mere sympathy acknowledged. Nothing more than that, the cardinal can offer of give you.
      The whole exercise is to listen to you but not to act upon it. Because you will also feel good about the whole meeting and have a story to tell the parishioners of Arch Diocese Bombay but the Outcome is zero and the situations has not changed and will never change.
      Do not feel sad because I am blunt over it, it is the same story of all the communities and Organisation who struggles to find a way out to some solutions and approach the cardinal. But somehow return empty hands only blessing in the name of any solutions which do not require any efforts.
      Time and again I Narrate this lines.
      The Cardinal plays a role of the Pontius Pilot and we are bound to be crucified.
      Noel Corriea.

      • Silent Voice said,

        November 7, 2013 at 8:49 am · Edit

        Dear Noel,
        I appreciate your concern for deteriorating condition of the Church in Archdiocese of Bombay. You have been quiet vocal about happenings in your Parish. We are aware of how the Clergy brainwash the Laity on various issues.
        We, particularly me, do not get elated with smooth talking by these people. We should always take their word with a pinch of salt; and I do. With our persistent efforts, at least we get the Hierarchy to talk on certain issues, from time to time; bring their views in public domain Via SILENT VOICE.
        SILENT VOICE in not only meant for reading pleasure. If only, the readers could put up a brief note to Archbishop on the issue that is being discussed here, by few concerned readers and copy of the same could be marked to SILENT VOICE; certainly, we shall publish all the correspondence on SILENT VOICE, in the category, LAITY SPEAKS, which we have for the purpose. With many voices speaking and questioning the Hierarchy, will certainly make a difference.

    3. Isaac Gomes said,

      November 11, 2013 at 8:44 am · Edit

      With reference to the news report in the Hindu dated 4th November 2013 and its reproduction in UCAN and ICAN on Mar Thoma Bishop seeks houses for all, the Bishop deserves congratulations for speaking to the Chief Minister of Kerala to arrange housing for all the houseless in Kerala to make it a “Zero Houseless” state. It is probably the first time a church authority in India has directly spoken to the government on solving housing problems for all.

      To maintain continuity to the Bishop’s great initiative, Archbishops of other states should make similar representations. The minimum they can do is to approach their respective state governments for housing for all homeless Christians (2.3% of the total population as per the 2001 census). Religion-wise figures from the last 2011 census which showed the Indian population at 122 crores, are yet to be released by the census authorities.

      Instead of asking for dole-outs where the chances of rejection are high, proposal(s) for housing for the homeless can be made on the basis of Public Private Partnership (PPP) which is the norm now. The approach can be:

      1. The Archbishop of each state along with the Laity Group takes up housing proposal with the respective state government / minority department or

      2. The Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI) under the Chairmanship of Cardinal Oswald Gracious (if he could meet Sonia Gandhi the other day to reportedly appreciate the welfare programmes of UPA II, then certainly he can meet her and the concerned government authority on housing for the homeless Christians) combines force with Lay Representatives of each state and takes it up with the Central Government / Ministry of Minority Affairs for single-window clearance applicable to all the states and union territories of India.

      All the Empowered Groups should meet and discuss beforehand a common action plan (Common Minimum Programme in political parlance!) to avoid duplication of proposals and widely divergent cost estimates.

      Proposals to the Government with emphasis on safe drinking water and sanitation should be based on facts and be well-documented. According to Rural Development Minister Jairam Ramesh poor sanitation is the one “significant failure” of Indian society. In this connection Sulabh Complex and Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) which are renowned for water-saving sanitation projects, should be consulted. Tenders are to be floated on low-cost and eco-friendly housing (taking care of ventilation, rainwater harvesting, natural light and solar/wind energy and use of local expertise including Community-led Total Sanitation – CLTS, an innovative methodology approved by United Nations Development Programme for mobilising communities to completely eliminate open defecation). Open tenders (should be restricted to Indian bidders as the money will then circulate in India without costing the exchequer for remittance in foreign currency) will attract competitive bidding from the best in the business and also maintain transparency. The Laity which is the co-partner and backbone of the Church should be invited through church announcements and notification, for participation and suggestion. Indian Laity is rich with talent and this is the time it can be utilized provided it is handled with care and due respect.

      For the above exercise to be effective, diocese-wise and state-wise parishioners’ data on each parish would be necessary to arrive at state-wise all-India requirement. Therefore creation and updation of a well-structured database of each parish would come in handy for correct assessment of housing needs of each state. The same database could be used for parishioners’ information on other areas e.g. higher education, health, profession, percentage of youth, talents, etc.

      Jesus told Peter “Take care of my sheep”. This actually means no Christian should be without food and shelter. But the reverse is the reality. Can the Indian Church produce any credible statistics on how many Christians are homeless? Therefore, the resolution for the “Shepherds of the Church” i.e. Cardinals, Bishops and Archbishops including stalwarts of the Laity at the conclusion of the Year of Faith should be “Let us take care of our sheep”.

      Isaac Gomes

    Roney Corriea said,

    November 14, 2013 at 11:53 am · Edit

    Not a single reply from him is satisfactory. He along with the politician out here made fools of the villagers asking them to withdraw the dumping ground agitation on 3 grounds. 1) it would be shifted within a year 2) cases would be withdrawn 3) monitoring committee would be set up to see that villagers are not troubled by the stink in that year. All his promises have become false and he has left the sheep and run away by seeing the wolves coming.

    I met him on Jan 2013 and he said that if your local politician had lied to you all what can I do. I mentioned that you had asked the people from the pulpit to withdraw the agitation and solve it amicably and when the politician has cheated us, please announce from the same pulpit that because the NCP/Congress have betrayed the Christians, no one will vote for them. And he said he cannot do this. Here when I asked him are you working for Congress, he said YES. Matthew 23:5 “They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear and lay them on the shoulders of others; but they themselves are unwilling to lift a finger to move them”
    Now I have left everything in the hands of Lord Jesus Christ (Emmanuel) who has come again in flesh. He will judge the world truly and have no partiality. He will separate the goats from the sheep. For he said: Matthew 15:13 “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted”.

    In HIM I remain
    Roney Corriea


Those Who Administer Justice in the Church Must Remember the Good Shepherd

Pope Francis Address to the Apostolic Signature 2013

Vatican, November 8, 2013

By Pope Francis
Allegory of Justice, by Raphael. In the Italia...

Allegory of Justice, by Raphael. In the Italian Renaissance, Justice did not usually appear blindfolded. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


On November 8, 2013, Pope Francis received in audience the
participants in the plenary assembly of the Supreme Tribunal of the
Apostolic Signatura, the dicastery of the Curia Romana which aside from
exercising the function of supreme judicial authority, oversees the
correct administration of justice in the Church. On this occasion, the
Assembly focused on promoting an effective defense of the bond of
marriage in canonical annulment.

Your Eminences’

Dear Brothers in the Episcopate and in the Priesthood,

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

This,your Plenary Session, gives me the opportunity to receive all of you
who work in the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signature, expressing
to each one my gratitude for the promotion of the correct administration
of justice in the Church. I greet you cordially and I thank the
Cardinal Prefect for the words with which he introduced our meeting.

activity is geared to fostering the work of the ecclesiastical
tribunals, called to respond adequately to the faithful who turn to the
justice of the Church to obtain a correct decision. You do your utmost
so that they function well, and you support the responsibility of
bishops in forming suitable ministers of justice. Among these, the
Defender of the bond carries out an important function, especially in
the process of matrimonial nullity. It is necessary, in fact, that he be
able to fulfill his own part with efficacy, to facilitate the
attainment of truth in the definitive sentence, in favor of the pastoral
good of the parties in question.

In this regard, the Apostolic
Signature has offered significant contributions. I am thinking in
particular of the collaboration in the preparation of the Instruction Dignitas connubii, which
explains the applicable trial norms. Placed in this line also is the
present Plenary Session, which has put at the center of its works the
promotion of an effective defense of the matrimonial bond in the
canonical processes of nullity.

The attention given to the
ministry of the Defender of the bond is without a doubt opportune,
because his presence and his intervention are obligatory for the whole
development of the process (cf. Dignitas connubii, 56, 1-2;
279, 1). Foreseen in the same way is that he must propose all sorts of
proofs, exceptions, recourses and appeals that, in respect of the truth,
foster the defense of the bond.

The mentioned Instruction
describes, in particular, the role of the Defender of the bond in the
causes of nullity for psychic incapacity, which in some Tribunals
constitute the sole reason for nullity. It underlines the diligence that
he must put in assessing the questions addressed to the experts, as
well as the results of the opinions themselves (cf. 56, 4). Therefore,
the Defender of the bond who wishes to render a good service cannot
limit himself to a hasty reading of the acts, or to bureaucratic and
generic answers. In his delicate task, he is called to try to harmonize
the prescriptions of the Code of Canon Law with the concrete situations
of the Church and of society.

The faithful and complete
fulfillment of the task of the Defender of the bond does not constitute a
pretension damaging of the prerogatives of the ecclesiastical judge, to
whom corresponds solely the definition of the cause. When the Defender
of the bond exercises the duty to appeal, also to the Roman Rota,
against a decision which he holds damaging to the truth of the bond, his
task does not abuse that of the judge. In fact, the judges can find, in
the careful work of him who defends the matrimonial bond, a help to
their own activity.

The Second Ecumenical Vatican Council defined
the Church as communion. Seen in this perspective are the service of
the Defender of the bond and the consideration that is reserved to him,
in a respectful and attentive dialogue.

A final, very important
annotation as regards the workers committed in the ministry of ecclesial
justice. They act in the name of the Church; they are part of the
Church. Therefore, it is necessary to always keep alive the connection
between the action of the Church that evangelizes and the action of the
Church that administers justice. The service to justice is a commitment
of apostolic life: it requires to be exercised by keeping one’s gaze
fixed on the icon of the Good Shepherd, who bends down to the lost and
wounded sheep.

At the conclusion of this meeting, I encourage you
all to persevere in the search for a limpid and correct exercise of
justice in the Church, in response to the legitimate desires that the
faithful address to Pastors, especially when, confidently, they ask to
have their own status authoritatively clarified. May Mary Most Holy, who we invoke with the title Speculum iustitiae, help you and the whole Church to walk on the path of justice, which is the first form of charity. Thank you and good work!

Related articles

« Older entries

%d bloggers like this: