The booklet, The Kuravilangad Case – A Critical Study, released by the Forum of Religious for Justice and Peaceon September 22, 2022 raises and answers, questions voiced by ordinary Catholics around the alleged rape by a powerful man from the Church of a young Mother General, a Nun.
The painstaking efforts to address questions and concerns, even those often guided by stereotypical notions and propaganda by the powerful is what makes this little effort an example of direct and effective communication.
—Edtors
Excerpts:
“There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.” -Elie Wiesel
What are some of the questions that the booklet raises and how does it answer them?
In the five year plus campaign launched within the Catholic community, comprising of women and men from the religious fraternity and laity, questions, often stereotypical were thrown at them. Seeking to draw in the wider Catholic community and conscientise it towards a sense of justice
1. The survivor claims to have been violated thirteen times…. why has there been a delay in filing the case? Why did the survivor nun keep quiet all this while?
As a nun, the survivor neither had the courage nor the knowledge about how to deal with the incident. Her formation had never prepared her to deal with a situation such as hers. The Bishop, who was the perpetrator, had full authority over her and the Congregation, and was capable of going to any extent to impose his will; all this paralyzed her emotionally. One of her siblings being a nun in the same Congregation made the survivor to think about her future as well. She didn’t know how to or whom to turn to for help.
Finally, after much personal struggle, she talked about it to Sr. Lissy FCC, her spiritual guide, and then to her confessors. At first, she was advised to pray for the Bishop, who they said is possessed. She earnestly did so. One of her confessors at a Retreat Centre advised her to resist the assault. This gave her the courage to approach some of the authorities in the Church, thinking that she will get justice within the system. Accordingly, she sent a letter dated 11 July 2017 to Cardinal Alencherry, the head of the Syro-Malabar Church in Kerala. On 28 January 2018, she wrote to the Apostolic Nuncio to India. Having received no satisfactory answers, she wrote on 14 May 2018 directly to the Pope himself and to three Dicastries of the Vatican. The survivor nun thus made every effort to resolve the issue within the Church, but her complaints were ignored. Finally, when bishop Franco filed false cases against her and her family members, she approached the police.
It is important to mention here that the survivor has not received a reply to her letter from the Nuncio till date. But in the course of the trial when her Mother General visited the survivor’s Convent, she mentioned that the Nuncio had received her letter. Recently the survivor came to know that the Nuncio had sent a letter to the Mother General in response to the letter, but it was never shared with the survivor!
It is such circumstances that ultimately compelled the survivor to pursue the case with the civil authorities.
2. Wasn’t it all consensual? If so, is not the survivor culpable?
It was never consensual. Under threat and coercion, the bishop sexually abused the survivor. The Missionaries of Jesus is a Diocesan Congregation and the Bishop is the supreme authority and patron of the Congregation. He has full control over the affairs of the Congregation including on its members, their transfers, finance and other aspects. The Superiors including the Superior General were powerless figure heads.
3. As a Mother General of a Congregation the survivor was powerful enough to say “No”. Why did she not resist?
The survivor was made Mother General at the age of 28 years, the very next month after she took her Final Vows in the Congregation. The Congregation was started as a Pious Association under the name ‘Missionaries of Jesus Society’. As part of the process of raising it to the status of a Diocesan Congregation, it was a requirement of the Vatican that there should be a Superior General and a Novice Mistress from among the sisters. There was also the requirement of a Constitution and the source of income. These requirements prompted Bishop Symphorian Keeprath, the founder of the MJ Congregation to appoint the Sister survivor as the first Mother General from the eleven finally professed members. She was neither prepared for the responsibility, nor did she have any power to act on her own accord like the Mothers General in other international congregations of religious sisters. She functioned solely according to the directions of the founder/patron Bishop who exercised their power through priests from the diocese appointed for the purpose.
4. The survivor travelled with the accused Bishop immediately after one of the alleged abuses for a family function. She was seen to be happily relating to the Bishop.
The occasion was the first Holy Communion of the survivor’s nephew, the son of her widowed sister. The presence of the survivor on the occasion meant a great deal to her sister. So, she could not absent herself after the incident. The survivor’s cousin Fr. Sebastian Pallassery of Jalandhar Diocese had helped to organize the program, including getting Bishop Franco as the main celebrant. Since the Bishop had stayed in
the survivor’s convent at Kuravilangad the previous night, she along with other sisters travelled with the Bishop for the function. Given the circumstances, the survivor had to pretend that nothing had happened to her to avoid embarrassing questions being asked. Besides, since the function was in her own family, the survivor was forced to relate to the Bishop in a normal way as he had come as a guest to her family.
5. A letter from the survivor’s cousin alleges that she had an illegal relationship with her husband. The Bishop’s initiative to investigate the matter has led to the accusations against him, What is the truth of the matter?
It is a false accusation. The revengeful Bishop Franco in collusion with the Superior General persuaded her cousin to write the letter. After understanding the intention of the Bishop, the cousin regretted her action. She has stated before the Court the circumstances that forced her to write the letter with the false allegations. She has also recorded the same as a witness in the case.
6. Prior to taking legal recourse, did the survivor approach authorities in the Church? Who are the ones she approached? What was their response?
The survivor approached different authorities in the Church, but did not receive a response from any of them. The Church leaders who were contacted in person or through letters are:
Cardinal George Alencherry, Archbishop of Ernakulam-Angamaly Archdiocese and Major Archbishop of the Syro-Malabar Church was informed about the incident on July 11, 2017.
Bishop Sebastian Vadakkel of Ujjain was informed of the incident on July 11, 2017
Archbishop Giambattista Diquattro, Apostolic Nuncio to India was informed on January 28, 2018 and again on June 24 and 25, 2018
S. Em Za Reverndissima Cardinal Marc, PSS Prefetto Congregazione Per I Vescovi at 00120 Citta Del Vaticano was informed on May 14, 2018
Archbishop Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer S. J., Perfetto Congregazione Dotterina Della Fede at 00120 Citta Del Vatican was informed on May 14, 2018
Sua Santita Papa Francesco at Santa Maria, Citta del Vaticano was informed on May 14, 2018.
7. What are the immediate circumstances that made the survivor to take to legal recourse?
When the Bishop came to know that the community members of the survivor are aware of the sexual abuse, he started filing false cases against the sisters and their relatives. In November 2017, a false case was filed with the Punjab Police alleging that the survivor and Sr. Anupama had threatened to commit suicide. In May 2018, a case was filed with the Punjab Police against Mr. Darwin, brother of the survivor, alleging that he had threatened to kill the Bishop. Mr. Darwin received summons from the Punjab Police regarding the case. Besides, on June 23, 2018, false cases were filed with the Superintendent of Police (SP), Kottayam, alleging that the relatives of the six sisters along with the driver had conspired to murder the Bishop. It is when the relatives and the driver were summoned by the Kuravilangad Police to investigate the above complaint that Mr. Darwin was forced to inform the police
about the abuse of the survivor by the Bishop and his revengeful actions. The police asked them to submit letters and documents submitted to authorities in the Church regarding the alleged abuse. The same were produced before the police. Thus, when the survivor and her companions realized that neither they nor their relatives will be allowed to live in peace (Even the paralyzed father of Sr. Neena Rose, one of the sisters in the community was not spared, making him Accused no. 5 in the case!), and that they had not got any reply from within the Church despite repeated representations, that the survivor was forced to take legal recourse.
8. By bringing the issue to the public, are the sisters not bringing the Church to disrepute?
The survivor had repeatedly approached Church authorities for remedy. It is when they found that no justice will come from the Church, and that the Bishop continually kept harassing them and their families that the sisters filed case in self-defense.
9. Is there truth in the allegation that the survivor and her companions receive support from Islamic groups?
They categorically deny that they are in any type of association, contact or relationship with any Islamic organization. They have never sought any support from such groups and do not intend doing so!
10. The cases need a lot of financial resources. Where do the sisters get these from?
The State Government appointed the Special Public Prosecutor in the lower court. It is the State Government that meets his legal expenses. An organization called Save Our Sisters (SOS) engaged a personal lawyer for the survivor. Some sympathetic individuals and other concerned citizens also helped with small donations.
11. The present Superior General has claimed that the survivor and her companions have been financially supported by the Congregation. There are allegations that their expenditures are higher than that of other members of the Congregation. Haw far are these true?
The Congregation gives the survivor and each of her companions an allowance for normal food, medicine and a pocket money of Rs. 500 per month to meet other needs. Since the time the case was filed, they have not been provided with any money to meet their travel or holiday expenses. The usual Christmas gift, feast day gift and such other niceties have also been denied to them. The only extra ordinary expenses incurred were for two ENT surgeries, and when one or other were hospitalized. In 2011, some of the sisters had completed their graduation through correspondence course. They like many others in the Congregation had made repeated requests that they are allowed to complete their higher studies. But permission was not granted. Since 2019, thanks to some generous people, some of them are pursuing their studies.
12. How come the survivor did not surrender her mobile phone and the laptop to the police or the court? These probably had valuable evidence.
The survivor had a small old model Nokia mobile phone. In May 2017, after all the happenings with the Bishop, she had decided to leave the Congregation. Many of her companions and friends who came to know about her decision were calling
her constantly enquiring about the reason for the same. This became a serious cause of disturbance for her. Therefore, she abandoned the old sim cards well as the old mobile phone that had become practically dysfunctional. It had never occurred to her then that she would be asked to hand over the sim and the phone as evidence. The laptop was the common property of the convent. The survivor did not have a personal laptop. The police had examined the laptop and took the hard disk into their possession.
13. Did the family of the survivor threaten Bishop Franco?
Never did anyone from the family of the survivor or any family members of her companions ever threaten the Bishop Franco. These are all false and fabricated allegations.
Related:
Rape of a Nun: Bishop Franco Mulakkal Arrested
Kerala nun rape case: Court dismisses Bishop Mulakkal’s discharge plea
Key witness in Kerala nun rape case found dead in Punjab
Kerala Nun Rape Case: Vatican temporarily relieves accused Bishop of his duties
Rape of a Nun: Bishop Franco Mulakkal Arrested
How the Church needs to change the way it addresses Sexual and Gender-based abuse