By Albert Thyrniang
It is encouraging to see Joseph Teron’s “Other side to ‘Twin celebrations – A Half and a Century’” on February 5, in response to my article three days earlier. Since the rejoinder has joined issues on this very forum it is legitimate that a public platform is the right place to debate issues on. The argument that a newspaper is not a suitable stage to discuss ‘internal’ matters now falls flats on its face. At the outset I reproduce here the words (not verbatim) of a bishop of one of the dioceses in the North East in a talk to priests and nuns a few months back, “Earlier people say ‘don’t criticise the Church. We must keep the good name of the Church’. Now that age is over. Many things about the Church, pleasant and unpleasant have come out. So, if something has to be said it must be said, even publicly.”
The Church is not a private body. The Salesian society and other religious groups in the Church are not private organisations. They are public entities. They perform public works and their members are public figures. Their activities are open to scrutiny. Should an insider be a faultfinder? It is debatable. But if an ‘outsider’ does the job we could turn around and say, “What does he or she know about us? His or her knowledge is superficial.” Does someone then need to do the dirty job?
It is not the intention of the writer to engage in a spat with Joseph Teron but a few observations are in order. At the very outset Joseph alleges that in my introduction I resorted to government-bashing. The initial paragraphs he refers to were neither an introduction nor an anti-government tirade. It was very much the body of the composition but there was absolutely no diatribe of the slightest degree. The article only raised certain questions to the Chief Minister vis-a-vis his pledge that Meghalaya will be one of the first 10 states in the country in the next 10 years. They are very legitimate queries by a voter on to how the head of the present government plans to take the state to such heights. On the Salesian history and works too basically questions were placed before the readers.
The writer says that criticism is welcome. But one could sense that he is upset and has even taken recourse to personal remarks like, “I wonder what marvellous things would have been achieved by the author in these circumstances if he was at the helm of affairs then!” The ‘then’ is referred to Second World War when North East missionaries faced grave challenges, including being expelled from the Assam to Europe. Well, the responder is right to wonder because it is a hypothesis, that too of the past. The intended message, however, is obvious, “The critic would have done nothing then because even today he is incapable of anything.” That’s fine by me. But who knows if one is able to anticipate one’s existence in another historical setting one might have done marvellous things too! We will see more about the ‘marvellous things’ in a bit!
Joseph Teron gives a public advice saying this critic should “begin to appreciate the faith he received.” He has taken the liberty to presume that this writer has not even begun the ‘appreciation’ journey. This is objectionable. It is against prudence and common sense. In matters of faith there is a much higher Being who knows the heart and judges. No humans can pass such verdicts, especially in a public space.
The other accusations are that I am prejudiced, biased, partial and partisan. Prejudiced and biased against whom and against what? The published essay was a general critique and not directed at any individual or individuals. Most curious is the use of the word ‘partisan’. It is quite emphatically stated here that this writer is not in any sort of party or group, indoors or outdoors. Another statement reads “…he holds out on a platter to decapitate.” I fail to understand its meaning. Hold out what on a platter? And to ‘decapitate’ what? The meaning of ‘decapitate’ is to behead, to execute, to guillotine, to amputate, to truncate and to kill. Was my article capable of all these?
Very rightly the respondent reminds us that every story always has two sides. Perhaps, my column bears a little more semblance of a two-sided coin than the ‘complementary.’ What follows was but the usual obsequious positioning, the triumphalism and the credit taking tendency where it is not exclusively deserved. The word ‘marvellous’ was used at least four times in the article published on the right column of this page. Therefore, he flashes back that the literacy rate in India in the independent year, 1947 was 12% but today the jump is multiple times. This is quite bizarre because by no means should the entire credit go to the Salesians. We can claim an insignificant part of it. That’s it! He then assumes that the literacy rate in Assam in 1922 was much lower than the national record. The unstated conclusion is that the Assam literacy rate is much higher now, after 100 years, thanks to the Salesians. Here too the tribute does not belong solely to the Salesians. Is that not a more balanced outlook?
The next figure is that today there are 15 dioceses in the region as opposed to none in 1922. This too is not the achievement of the Salesians alone. The contribution is there for all to see but to claim the whole basket is a blatant disregard for other contributors, to say the least.
Then the fact that today India has the legislation of the Right to Education (RTE) Act was strongly noted. Education is now a right. The government has to provide education for all. There you are! All the responsibility is passed to the government. All of us can sit back and watch. We, the Salesians have nothing more to do. We have educated the educated in the past. It is their job now to pass on the baton. Even as we debate there is a section which asserts that we have done great things. We are doing enough. We run universities, colleges, schools, social work institutions, etc. Let others also do these and more. If this is not complacency then its definition has to be altered. The Salesians in the Guwahati region are currently on a 5- day marathon deliberation called “Provincial Chapter”. If there is not ‘slowing down’, if the society is ‘marching on’ with all the ‘marvellous things’ which the writer listed then there is no point in wasting nearly a week to validate on the ‘wonderful’ works. There is also a realisation that Salesians have little presence on social media, the new playground or Areopagus of young people today. So should not more be done in this crucial virtual territory?
John Teron launches a broadside that this writer considers ‘the Salesians incompetent and outright lazy.” Nowhere did I explicitly or implicitly say so. My story was an appreciation for the good work done; an observation that more could have been done and flagging that more can be done. What is wrong with that? My ‘slowing down’ remark was not aimed at this challenging pandemic time. What is feared is that the present generation might not be of the calibre anywhere near the first batches of missionaries and their successors. The decline, if there is, has been taking place over time. There are still some who are equally great and whose efforts are unmatched. This is readily noted.
Strangely my detractor diagnoses, “The author has been accelerating his criticism to the last couple of decades of the Salesian work.” Perhaps what he means to say is, “The author has been accelerating his criticism in the last couple of decades against the Salesian work.” I flatly deny this charge. I have never done it so consistently to be labelled as such. My last article was the first critique on the subject, that too because this year happens to be the centenary year. I started writing regularly only from 2012 or so. The writer of the rejoinder is a Mathematics and Science graduate. Certainly these years do not add up to a couple of decades. Secondly, this writer is not a four/five gear engine that he can accelerate at high speed.
Prior to summing up, the contribution of Salesians in the growth of indigenous languages is incalculable. Joseph Teron speaks many languages fluently. He also brought up text books in the Karbi language. He is a firm believer that education in the primary level should be in one’s mother tongue. He is a promoter of this scientifically proven principle. If Karbi becomes a medium of instruction in Karbi Anglong all credit (pun intended), goes to him for his commendable textbook pioneering works. Hats off to him! Wish him greater heights in the next few years.
Email: [email protected]