By S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole –

Prof S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole

There is a persistent myth that a Bishop’s testicles should be cleared for damage prior to consecration. It flows from Pope Joan a woman pope. It is claimed that after Joan was discovered when she gave birth, all future popes were required to sit on a special chair with a hole in it (sedia stercoraria). Cardinals would then examine the new pope to confirm he was male, often phrased as verifying he had “two balls and a penis” (duos testes et bene pendentes). There is no reliable primary source evidence from the Middle Ages to support it.

The origin, however, lies in Mosaic Law (Leviticus 22:24) that any male (animal or man) with “damaged, crushed, torn or cut testicles” was disqualified from serving.

In ancient Rome, it is suggested that men taking an oath of allegiance sometimes held each other’s testicles, or their own, as a sign of truthfulness. The word testify is believed to have an etymological association with the word testicle.  While it is true that testis in Latin also refers to “testicle” (a “witness to virility”), there is no reliable evidence that the legal term “testify” is derived from the Roman practice of swearing an oath while touching their genitals.

Whether the practice existed or not, the lack of guts in Anglican bishops shows the loss from not testing Anglican bishops for undamaged organs. The Assisted Schools and Training Colleges (Special Provisions) Act No. 5 of 1960, enacted on December 1, 1960, enabled the Sri Lankan government to take over the management and ownership of most private, religious-run schools (mainly Catholic).

The 1960 Act has a special provision that if an institution taken over by the state is not used for its original purpose, it ought to be returned. The Catholic Church is aggressive about this provision. Many schools that have fallen into disuse because of the drop in population have been returned. I am aware that the Rome-educated Rev. Fr. Mariya Patrick Ananthakumar of the Jaffna Diocese is in charge of ensuring that such institutions are returned.

The Anglicans in Jaffna with rare exceptions have charlatan priests who cannot think or argue with highly qualified ministry officials for our rights. With the Anglican Church, moreover, there is no enthusiasm because the church lacks qualified persons to run any institution that may be returned. Indeed, there is nothing in the Act to say that if a school is returned it should be run as a school.

A property that begs attention is the former Nallur Teachers’ Training College and the Associated Practising School where I began my education. The Teachers at the College would practise their teaching at my school. An integrated institution, it had one large common playground.

Over time, the numbers had dropped to about 30 teachers and 30 students (although now student numbers are marginally better), while the teachers’ college where The Rev. Phillipus Baldaeus ran his mission and translated the New Testament into Tamil has been converted into the Ministry of Education’s administrative offices. Drawings from Baldaeus’ book show the teachers’ classrooms from my time as a student as being substantially the same.

The government is unwilling to return the buildings to the church as it is obligated to do because of its worth. When raised with a Director, she claimed it cannot be returned because it is Sivaboomi – when in fact the Queen of Jaffna gave the land to the church, and there is no legal claim that a long-gone Hindu temple might have. Indeed, there is a stronger case to demolish the Nallur Kandasamy Temple and hand over that land to the Muslims who with their mosque were displaced to make room for that temple.

As the educational administration grew, they needed a canteen and they took off the back of the Mission House. We Christians were too weak to protest.

The Ven. Fr. Sam D. Horshington is credited with managing church institutions during the difficult war years as Archdeacon (1978 to 1987). As many hero-worship their religious elders and confer them with respect and powers they do not have, Horshington abused his powers. For whatever reason he gave a letter transferring church property to the ministry. He could have written a hundred letters but no archdeacon by himself has the power to alienate church land to the state.

At this point, demanding that land back is to expose Horshington’s abuse of power and dismantle his legacy. The church is unwilling to do that. To me, when it is a choice between one well-loved man’s abuse of power and the rights of the church, it should be clear that we should side with the church.

The Ministry knows the day of reckoning will come some day. So they have divided the common playground into two using a fence, keeping the bigger part on the ministry side. What playground for seat-warming ministry officials? When there is no playground for the school children? Who will carry our case? Not the Hindus! Bishop Dushantha Rodrigo? Hah! This is the future of Sivaboomi.

The Bishop lacks the hormones to assert the rights of the church. It is lack of leadership. It is absence of androgens to exercise the badly needed leadership.

The teachers’ college is far from being put to the same use as training teachers. It is also used as a huge bus parking lot. A strong case exists for demanding it back.

The Bishop ducks responsibility by not chairing the CMS as was the custom till recently, and letting a layman take over. As chairman he needs to be accountable. But handing over reins to a layman lets him escape any responsibilty, as he can count on a lay-chairman to do his bidding. Absolute, obsequious obedience to the Bishop in the Anglican way. The Bishop gets impunity without accountability as he has demonstrated in Fr. Daniel’s case where the Bishop has been seen shouting at Daniel in un-Christian anger at a dinner party in Kaitady. What Christian example!

In this new order, where a layman does the Bishop’s bidding taking responsibity for the Bishop’s dirty ideas, the CMS Board led by Chairman J. Setukavalar, Manager D. Senathirajah and Principal Silva Thuseetharan have fired the Rev. Daniel Jeyaruban. The Bishop hated Daniel because he did not like nonstipendiary priests brought in by former Bishop Dilo Canagasabey and likely voted against Rodrigo for Bishop. This also played into Principal Silva Thuseetharan’s power-play because Daniel was more qualified and versatile in English. So Daniel had to go.

Bishop Dushantha Rodrigo, lacking the androgens, pleads Daniel’s sacking is a Board decision as if he was drinking tea and eatng vadai at CMS meetings. What does Bishop Rodrigo do at CMS meetings? Sit on his fat ass? Board members like the principals and old-pupil representatives say it is the Principal, Chairman and Manager! No one takes responsibility. If one believes them, they sit on. Their fat asses while the CMS Chairman, Manager and Principal take all decisions while they shout “Aye, Aye!” in unison.

For the first time, we have a Bishop whose only role is to shout “Aye, Aye” at the CMS. Let us go back to the Mosaic test to improve the Anglican Church now with a woman as Archbishop.

Some of the charges against Daniel are meritless; the others questionable. At the Labour Tribunal where Daniel filed charging wrongful and vindictive termination, counsel for the school has proposed a settlement – as I understand, Daniel must withdraw his case, and he would be offered backwages and offered a permanent position in the church somewhere, but there will be no reinstatement because the principal is desperate to save face.

It is obvious that the school has been advised by counsel that it will lose the case. So the CMS is bending backwards to save face for the Bishop and the three villains of the piece. If the Bishop had passed the ancient test, he would show virility, fire the persons responsible for this unmitigated fiasco that makes the church look terrible, and would retire for the damage he has caused the church and the school.

Daniel who stands to regain his permanent job by staying the course, will by winning, remain in Jaffna where his wife is a banker. If he has any brains, he would not take a job under this bishop who has amply demonstrated his firm authoritarian (even vengeful and un-Christian) view that those who do not bow to his authority must be crushed. At St. John’s Daniel has the protection of a job associated with the ministry. Under the Bishop he faces the real risk of being posted to a jungle parish somewhere, separated from his wife and two children.

And why would Fr. Daniel help the Principal, Manager and CMS Chairman save face? The Bishop, the Principal, Manager and CMS chairman and the rest of the CMS Board have been irresponsible, going to Board meetings to suck up and say “Yes Sir,” rather than to put some sense into the CMS.

If the judgement goes according to the law as I understand it, it will cost the school a substantial financial loss. If the CMS palms off the fruit of their corrupted power to the church and the school, we should not stand for it. They should be forced to pay out of their own pockets any adverse judgement that I expect. All three are rich. Perhaps the Bishop too. Board members need to be taught that if they accept a Board position, they cannot go to Board meetings to eat cake and savoury, and drink tea. The damage they have done the school and the church through their irresponsible indolence should not be borne by the relatively poor Daniel and poor subscribers out of Colombo. Nor by the school and church.

Those responsible must hide their faces in great, everlasting shame and never be allowed to blight the corridors of the church and its boards.

Father Daniel Jeyaruban must refuse to withdraw the case and pursue it to its natural end. Let that be a lesson to errant and arrogant administrators including Bishops who think they can do anything with impunity. We may be too small to reform Sri Lanka but can make the church and its institutions better. Fr. Daniel has a big role to play. Fr. Daniel’s vow of obedience to the bishop has been nullified by the Bishop’s own vengeful narcissitic makeup.