You have been actively taking up the cause of farmers. Are you too from a family of farmers?
Yes. I come from a farming family that migrated from Travancore to Malabar. There was a large migration from the Meenachil taluk of Kottayam district during my grandfather’s time, when land in Travancore was controlled by feudal landlords. These migrants settled in Malabar, bringing with them their faith, lifestyle, and farming traditions, which gradually shaped the region. Since they were primarily farmers, their struggles and concerns have been part of my life from a young age. I don’t need to study farmers’ issues academically — they are my lived experiences.
Parents now accompany children to school fearing animal attacks. What was it like during your childhood?
There was fear in the early years of migration but direct encounters were rare. Wild boars existed then too, but they fled at the sight of humans. We never saw them attacking people. Elephants occasionally entered our land; we watched them and they returned to the forest. Serious human–animal conflict began only in the last 20–25 years. The ecosystem has been disrupted. The forest department bears some responsibility — large areas, especially in Wayanad, were replanted with eucalyptus and acacia, which are hostile to wildlife and drain water resources, lowering the water table. Another factor is that much farmland is now left idle. Earlier, every inch was cultivated. Today, labour shortages, migration of youth abroad, and fear of animal attacks have pushed farmers to abandon land, especially hilltops. Farmland near forests increasingly resembles forest itself, blurring boundaries and intensifying conflict. Farmers have realised agriculture is no longer a viable livelihood.
There is a perception that settlers damaged Malabar’s ecology...
That is not true. This narrative is pushed by armchair environmentalists who have not studied Malabar’s ecology. Historical records show that settlers protected forests. Large-scale deforestation was carried out earlier by feudal landlords in collaboration with the British who even built rail lines to transport timber. By the time the settlers arrived, much of the land they purchased from the government — officially recorded as early as 1926 — consisted largely of shrubs and low vegetation. Far from destroying forests, settlers converted barren land into fertile plantations of coconut, cashew, and other crops. There were isolated cases, such as the Kottiyoor land issue, where land sold by the Devaswom shouldn’t have been alienated. And settlers were later evicted. But branding settlers as forest destroyers is a gross misconception. These claims are often used to portray farmers as anti-environment, which is fundamentally incorrect.
Perhaps the misconception persists because the Church was at the forefront of agitations against the Gadgil and Kasturirangan reports...
Whether it is the Gadgil report, Kasturirangan report, or the latest Oommen V Oommen report, our approach has always been fact-based. It is true that these agitations were often portrayed as “Christian” because the Church is a highly organised institution, and many priests were visible at the forefront. But in reality, people of all faiths — Hindus, Muslims, and Christians — were equally affected and stood together. We do not oppose scientific studies. If objective research proves a land to be ecologically sensitive, we accept it.
The problem arises when experts suggest the eviction of thousands without addressing where they would go. That becomes a question of survival and identity. We reject the extremist view that the environment belongs only to plants and animals, excluding humans. Kerala has a green cover of around 30%, higher than the national average.
This was created largely by farmers. You cannot brand those who maintain rubber, cashew, and coconut plantations as anti-environment. When these lands were marked as buffer zones, land values collapsed overnight, destroying the only asset many families possessed. Farmers reacted emotionally because they were never treated as stakeholders.
The Christian belief that God created the world and other life forms for humans could also be the basis of such perceptions…
No. That’s a misunderstanding popularised in the 1960s. The Bible does not promote exploitation. Man is God’s representative on earth, entrusted with stewardship, not destruction. The Old Testament even discourages cutting trees. Christianity is inherently eco-friendly.
Farmers allege overpopulation of wild animals has intensified human–wildlife conflict...
It is a fact that wild animal populations have increased. Species once rare are now common and this imbalance has led to conflict. Conservation does not mean ignoring ecological balance. Just as we regulate human population, we need scientific measures to control animal populations. All developed nations do this. Failure to intervene has worsened the crisis.
The Christian community’s low population growth is now seen as a disadvantage. How serious is this?
It is a real concern. For population stability, the average should be 2.2 children per family. Among Christians, it is around 1.6. If this continues, the community could virtually disappear by 2080. Pastoral letters addressing this aren’t irresponsible, as critics claim. Our diocesan data show a sharp fall in Sunday school enrolments.
But hasn’t migration to foreign countries caused the drop in population?
Migration is one factor, but the numbers matter. Only around 4–6% of people have migrated abroad. Compared to the sharp decline in student enrolment and birth rates, migration plays a relatively minor role. It cannot be cited as the primary reason for the population decline.
The Christian community seems to have lost political clout. Is population decline the reason? Leaders like P T Chacko, Oommen Chandy and A K Antony are no longer there…
We have realised that mistakes were made. The Church failed to motivate students to see politics as a serious and dignified vocation. In fact, we consciously removed student politics from many Church-run colleges, which discouraged Christian youth from entering public life. Families prioritised education, jobs, and financial stability — often abroad — and politics was sidelined. There was a widespread belief that politics was unsuitable for students from “respectable” families, that it was meant for the lazy or indolent. This created an apolitical mindset among the new generation, especially in central Kerala. In Malabar, however, we don’t support banning campus politics. Political engagement is essential to develop civic sense and democratic values.
Does the Church recognise that the possibility of another Christian chief minister in Kerala is remote?
The Church does not think in terms of having a ‘Christian chief minister’. We do not believe a Christian CM would automatically benefit the community. Kerala has had Christian chief ministers before. Did they do anything exclusively for Christians? No, and we never demanded such favours. We focus on our legitimate rights as citizens, irrespective of who is in power. In fact, the Church led major protests even during Antony’s tenure. Our position isn’t based on the religion of those in office.
With the decline of the Kerala Congress after K M Mani, hasn’t the community’s bargaining power weakened?
That is true. From the time of the Liberation Struggle (1958-59), the Kerala Congress gradually evolved into a force that also sought social balance. There was a period when the party had as many as 25 MLAs, a strength that even mainstream political parties feared. Over time, repeated splits driven by personal ambitions weakened it. The idea that a party grows by splitting proved disastrous... today, it continues to split without growing. Some suggest the Church should unite Kerala Congress factions. We are not interested in such political exercises. If like-minded people unite on their own, we would welcome it, but the Church will not take the initiative.
Was Kerala Congress (M) joining the LDF a mistake?
At the time, they themselves were uncertain about whether to stay or leave. In that situation, a leader from the front (UDF) publicly stated that they had been expelled. They immediately took advantage of that statement and exited. Whether that decision proved beneficial or harmful is something they alone must assess. In the elections that followed, they did achieve certain political gains. By becoming part of the ruling front, they also gained a sense of security and political cover.
The Church often intervenes in political issues. How do you view this?
We don’t see this as political involvement, rather as addressing survival issues. When we demanded a higher rubber price, I said I would support whoever delivered it — LDF, UDF, or BJP. Many in the media interpreted this as I abandoning the LDF and the UDF in favour of the BJP. But my position was clear. Rubber farmers abandoned cultivation after trusting government assurances that later failed them. Doesn’t the government have a responsibility to protect such livelihoods? The Church does not engage in party politics, but we take firm stands on existential concerns. The Liberation Struggle is often misread as anti-communist. In reality, it was about protecting educational autonomy, not ideological hostility. Historically, Christians in Kerala have never treated the Communist Party as untouchable.
The Catholic Church had an anti-Left stance from the Liberation Struggle era. But in recent years, there seems to be some rethinking. Why?
The Church’s earlier opposition stemmed from ideological differences. Communism is rooted in atheism and dialectical materialism, while the Church believes in individual moral transformation as the basis of social change. Over time, however, the Communist Party has liberalised and moved away from rigid positions. We welcome positive changes in the Left’s approach to religion, though it is not for me to judge whether these shifts will ultimately benefit the party.
The Syro-Malabar Church has faced prolonged unrest over the Uniform Holy Mass, with even papal orders being resisted...
Initially, I too believed this was defiance of the Pope. But after discussions, it became clear that the priests were not anti-Pope. Their objection was that decisions were taken without hearing them. To prevent the archeparchy from breaking apart, we adopted a reconciliation formula after consultations with the Pope and the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Eastern Churches. There was no anti-papal movement here.
Did the crisis alienate the youth?
Unfortunately, yes. Protests and violence disillusioned many, especially youngsters. We recognise this and are working on corrective measures.
There are rumours that the Ernakulam–Angamaly Archeparchy may be split. Is there any truth to this?
No. The redrawing of boundaries approved by the Pope is unrelated to this archeparchy. A diocese cannot exist independently outside a rite. The priests here remain loyal to the Pope.
Is there a deadline to implement the Uniform Holy Mass?
No deadline has been fixed. Both sides went through severe trauma. The Synod decided to allow time and move forward only through dialogue. A top-down approach would only worsen matters.
The protests, including those involving priests, shocked even non-believers. Has this hurt the Church’s image?
Sadly, yes. It caused embarrassment. Some incidents were instances of indiscipline rather than criminal acts. The leadership has acted where necessary and is focused on ensuring unity and preventing a repeat.
Does the Church direct its members to support any political party?
No. We do not tell people whom to vote for. Our role is to raise social issues — like rubber prices or human-animal conflict — and place them before governments. People assess parties based on how they respond. Voting is an individual right.
The BJP has fielded many Christian candidates. Has it ceased to be ‘untouchable’?
We do not treat the BJP as untouchable. But concerns remain about attacks on churches and nuns in north India. Friendship with Christians cannot be limited to Kerala. Equality and constitutional rights must be ensured nationally.
Do Christians feel safe under BJP rule?
I won’t generalise, but repeated incidents raise doubts. Discrimination must be called out. Protecting constitutional freedoms is the government’s responsibility.
There’s talk of Christian votes shifting to the BJP, especially after the Thrissur Lok Sabha election result…
Electoral outcomes may reflect protest votes or anti-incumbency. Such claims often mask parties’ reluctance to introspect and correct themselves. There is a common narrative that whenever the BJP wins, it is because of Christian votes. This argument only highlights the failure of political fronts to introspect. If some Christians voted for Suresh Gopi, it may have been because they viewed him as a familiar and popular public figure. That cannot be interpreted as the Christian community as a whole backing the BJP.
So the Church doesn’t get the credit in Suresh Gopi’s victory?
There is no data to prove that Suresh Gopi won because of Christian votes. The diocese does not claim any credit for Suresh Gopi’s victory.
In Kerala, power alternates between the UDF and the LDF. Does the diocese see either front as more pro-Christian?
We don’t seek a pro-Christian stance. We only expect governments not to be anti-Christian. The Christian community has never demanded anything beyond its constitutional rights. Our position is that rights should be distributed fairly, in proportion to population, in line with court directives. It would also be better if major parties within a front handled key departments, instead of these being seen as controlled by particular communities. When the Congress or the CPM themselves handle such portfolios, decisions tend to be more balanced.
Is this a reference to the education department and the IUML?
I’m not naming anyone. We have never demanded that a particular person be made minister. Our concern is about avoiding injustice to any section.
There’s a perception that the UDF listens more to the Church, compared to the LDF...
We don’t receive anything illegal from any side. Earlier, some Congress leaders interacted with us more. Today, LDF leaders also maintain cordial relations. For instance, Speaker A N Shamseer frequently visits the Thalassery Bishop’s House. Even Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has personally spoken to me several times. These interactions show that the Left does not carry an anti-Christian mindset. During discussions on human-wildlife conflict, several proposals we submitted were included in the Wildlife Protection Bill, which I have publicly acknowledged.
Has the Christian community’s traditional support for the Congress changed?
There has been no drastic shift. The recent local body elections show that Christians are analysing issues independently. We don’t force political choices, but the community continues to play a decisive role.
Will this trend continue in the assembly elections?
Unless something extraordinary happens, the general stand is likely to remain the same.
While the Christian influence in politics is declining, the political clout of the Muslim community seems to be growing…
In a democracy, numbers matter. The Christian population has declined, while the Muslim population has grown, relatively. This naturally affects political influence and should not be viewed with resentment. Another factor is division within the Christian community, especially splits within the Kerala Congress.
Political immaturity and fragmentation weakened bargaining power. Unlike Muslims, Christians don’t have a unified political thought, which has both advantages and disadvantages.
Your thoughts on the perception that the Muslim community decides who rules Kerala…
Hindus remain the majority in Kerala. Like Christians, they (Hindus) are not politically polarised. Kerala has largely resisted religion-based politics, which has benefited its social and cultural fabric. This balance is one of the state’s strengths.
Is the Catholic Church still worried about ‘love jihad’?
Our position is that love should not be used as a trap. We respect interfaith relationships in a society where communities mingle freely. The issue isn’t love, but cheating and exploitation in some cases. Certain radicalised individuals misuse relationships, and we condemn that. At the same time, the word ‘jihad’ is sacred for Muslims, as their own leaders have told us. They have asked us not to use the word ‘jihad’ as it wounds religious sentiments. We respect that. But the social problem exists and has to be addressed.
What’s the relationship between the Church and CASA?
CASA represents a far-right ideological group of Christians. They don’t coordinate with the Church leadership. Their activities align more with certain political agendas and aren’t associated with us.
Your Christmas message…
“Peace on earth to people of goodwill.” Goodwill means giving space to others in our lives, just as Christ was given space in a manger. When we learn to share, empathise, and include others, peace follows. That’s the timeless message of Christmas.