The report on “Bishop Jacob Muricken’s plan of leaving the bishopric to lead an ascetic life” raises many questions:

Leaving the bishopric to become an ascetic is purely a ‘personal decision.’ Why should others raise questions? Who are we to pass a judgement on the bishop? The bishop has been nursing the dream to become an ascetic since 2017. It is a clear evidence that he has been prayerfully ‘discerning’. It is my opinion that he seems to have found his real vocation. I quote three points from the report to substantiate my view:

1) “The decision was communicated to Pala Bishop Joseph Kallarangattu earlier in 2017. Initially, the bishop had not given approval for my demand.” However, Bishop Muricken was quoted as saying, “I persisted in my demand and he asked me to continue in the bishop’s position and lead a monastery life. Since that is impractical, I have decided to follow my mind”.

2) He said that although he was not interested to lead a secluded life it was on “inspiration from God” that conditioned his mind.

3) The priest also pointed out that the bishop is related to Saint Alphonsa, the first woman saint of India. “Muricken is the maternal house name of St Alphonsa, and her spirituality has influenced him a lot”.

Taking the clue from the above point, “call to priesthood” is indeed a “call to a life of renunciation.” Jesus had laid down his condition clearly: “If you wish to be my disciple, “take up your cross and follow me”. Jesus also spoke about the “broad path” (meaning the life of luxury and comfort) and the “narrow path” (meaning the life of sacrifice). The apostles and followers carried their cross and walked on the narrow path. They were the real witnesses to Jesus.

The Church history mentions clearly how the priestly class took the side of the kings and followed their life style of comfort and luxury. The vows of poverty and chastity lost their significance in course of time. Bishop Jacob’s decision is a ‘reminder’ to the priestly class about the type of life they need to live. He is in fact returning to the life that he is called for. He is moving from the “artificial life” to the “real life”. This is not a ‘heroic action’ at all. He is a bit late in doing this. Better late than never!

The report says, “Bishop Muricken had actually given a letter to Cardinal Alencherry in 2018. The Cardinal will send it to Rome after getting the approval of the Syro Malabar Bishops’ Synod”. Why does it take so long to get the approval from Rome? When the former Pope Benedict, the topmost in the Catholic Church, could decide about his resignation and announce it without any delay, why such a long time is required to accept the resignation of an auxiliary bishop?

I find a serious ‘contradiction’ in this report: At one place the report mentions: “He plans to leave the bishop’s post by 2023”. At another place it says, “He has applied for permission to leave the bishop’s post. Not sure if it is approved,” a priest of the diocese told Matters India on May 2 on condition of anonymity”. Who is correct? – the bishop? or the priest?

The report on Bishop Jacob Muricken’s plan of leaving the bishopric to lead an ascetic life sounds to me like “blowing the trumpet” and seeking “unnecessary publicity”. Late bishop George Saupin (of Daltonganj and Bhagalpur) was the ‘simplest’ bishop of his time. He was true to his vocation. Swamy Sadanand (CMI priest) lived an ‘ascetic life’ in one of the remote villages of Madhya Pradesh. He was true to his vocation.
The former bishop of Salem decided to serve as an Assistant parish priest (soon after his retirement) in the same diocese and he went to this parish on his motor cycle. The former bishop of Meerut was known as ‘cycle bishop’. There are examples like these about ‘trend-setters’.
Allow Bishop Jacob to lead a life that he is called for. Let us pray for him without much publicity.
Let others do a sincere introspection about the ‘broad path’ of luxury and comfort they have adopted. Let them repent for deviating from the true path and the message of Jesus.

In the context of Covid-19 pandemic, let the clerical groups realize the “NOTHINGNESS” of their power, pomp, prestige, status, degrees/designations, wealth and luxurious lifestyle. The time is ripe and conducive for their ‘renunciation’ and ‘personal transformation.’

M.L. Satyan, Bengaluru