The Catholic Church has decided to label all those who asked questions on the Vanxim land sale as malicious and mischievous. Manohar Parrikar calls all those who question his pet projects as anti-development, name calling seems to be a general pastime.
This has reference to the press release by the Church with regard to the sale of Vanxim land. The press release is a little different from the information posted on the Archbishop’s website. The details of the Mamlatdar’s order were not mentioned. It means that because the Church felt their land would go to tenants at a cheap price of Rs 0.36/sqm they preferred to transfer their rights to others who could squeeze out a better deal. If aggrieved why was a legal challenge not mounted directly. Yet the same social justice ministry is up in arms pushing for Baina squatters to be accommodated.
In the website, the land was sold to Gaunakar, in the press release he is referred to as “one Gaunekar” someone unknown. Really. Did the committee that chewed on his offer not consider for one moment, how an offer exactly equal to the one suggested by the valuer was received. Valuation is based on many factors, one being last sale deed of the piece of land nearby and only on the official declared price. Most land deals have a cash component. The Church cannot take cash so the cheque portion should increase. No one sells their land at the price it is valued by valuers unless it is a distress sale. The value is taken as a reference point. Every seller will attempt to get more. The simplest mechanism available was an auction. Maybe that was not feasible as secrecy was key.
The stated reason for the sale was because the Santa Monica Fund which owned the land needed funds for the ever growing maintenance needs of the Santa Monica Convent, one of the worst reasons to sell land. Surely today the monastery requires funds for repairs which lands will be sold, how will the repairs be funded? Did the finance committee not think of this future requirement? Who are the worthies that make up this committee, are they financial or spiritual gurus? If the mega retreat center could be funded by donations of the faithful, so could Santa Monica be repaired by donations without selling land.
The press release also clarifies that Canon law was followed. It would be nice to see what was the logic used in applying for permission to sell. Did they mention that the proceeds were for repairs and the basic idea was to preempt tenants from getting their due as per the law?
In this year of mercy may the Church forgive me for asking questions as a concerned Catholic. I do hope that the Church which is in the process of selling other lands learns from the Vanxim experience and becomes more transparent at the start. As Papa Francis has observed, the long standing experts within the clergy need to be changed, he is well aware of the issues that plague the church and the causes of the same. The center for social justice speaks up when they feel aggrieved but will not dialogue with Catholics who wish to know more about certain decisions of the Church. Will the leadership hear the laity and act or will they continue to berate them, call them names and basically bully them into silence. Only time will tell.
