Prof.Joseph Arakal

 It is with deep sadness that we bade farewell to Prof.Joseph Arakal, yesterday. He was laid to rest at  the Jiobavan cemetery at Kochi. Memories crowd in mind of my association with him spanning several decades in Washington DC as well as in Kochi. He was one of the pioneer Indian immigrants in Washington D.C. After his stint at Cochin University as a professor in the Management school, he came to US for his doctoral studies.After his study, he began a long teaching career in Business Management at the District of Columbia University.

Using the words of Jesus, we can say he was a lamp placed on a pedestal.He was a model to all as a great teacher, a devout Christian and a gentleman to the core.In him we lost a man who is an ideal of gentleness and good manners.He never spoke ill of others and always tried to see the good in them.He was very respectful and compassionate.He made others look honored and respected.I have been always touched by his courtesy and respect.He would come down to see me  off after my visits even though I told him not to come. He was interested in talking about the past  and  was very aware of the past accomplishments of different religious and educational institutions.I have very vivid memories of my visits with him.Prof.Joseph and Leela were always present at the Syro-Malabar masses whenever they were celebrated in Washington D.C.

He was very calm and prayerful when I was called to give him the sacrament of the anointing of the sick.He was well prepared for the call from heaven as he was very much aware of  the fragility of his life.

May God protect his beloved wife, Leela,Dr.George, Simon and their families.

The words of Henry Adams that a teacher affects eternity are very true of him as he he has touched the lives of hundreds of students in India and the US through his  brilliant teaching career.In him I have lost a good friend, a true model of gentlemanliness and an ideal Christian who bears no grudges.

What Jesus said to Martha is the source of our comfort: " I am the  life and resurrection and one who believes

in me will not die". May he find eternal rest in the loving abode of our dear Father in heaven.

Universities as Architects of the Future,Gobal Education

 

Universities must dare to become architects of the future

James Yoonil Auh  14 May 2025

The modern university stands at a crossroads unlike any it has encountered before. Once regarded as trusted centres of knowledge, civic debate and human flourishing, universities are now facing a series of converging crises that threaten their very foundations.

The stakes could not be higher: it is not only the future of higher education that is at risk, but also the intellectual, social and moral vitality of the societies they serve. If universities falter, the ripple effects could destabilise democratic institutions, fracture social cohesion and impoverish the collective search for meaning and purpose in a rapidly changing world.

At the core of this moment lies a convergence of five deeply interrelated crises: truth, autonomy, belonging, survival and purpose. Each strikes at a fundamental role that universities have traditionally played, and each demands far more than incremental adjustments.

To endure and lead in the 21st century, universities must reconceptualise their identity – not merely as transmitters of knowledge, but as resilient, ethical, civic institutions capable of embracing complexity without collapsing under its weight.

Universities have always been shaped by tension: the tension between advancing knowledge and serving society, between preserving tradition and fostering innovation. Yet today, those tensions have intensified into something far more volatile. In recent years, scholars introduced the idea of the ‘University Trilemma’ to capture this growing complexity – the struggle to balance three increasingly conflicting imperatives: truth, autonomy and belonging.

The trilemma marked a profound shift in higher education’s traditional mission. Where once these ideals reinforced one another, universities now find that defending one often puts the others at risk.

Upholding academic truth through rigorous research, open inquiry and evidence-based teaching has increasingly invited political backlash. In polarised societies, even careful, peer-reviewed findings on issues such as climate change, racial inequality or public health have been recast as partisan activism. Academics face growing accusations of ideological bias, and universities risk alienating governments, donors and sectors of the public they were once able to count on.

Defending institutional autonomy, historically a pillar of academic freedom, has become equally fraught. Universities that resist aligning with political agendas or national priorities are increasingly depicted as elitist, unaccountable or out of touch with the public interest. In trying to safeguard their independence, many institutions inadvertently fuel broader narratives of mistrust surrounding higher education.

Efforts to expand belonging, while essential for redressing historic exclusions, have also generated new complexities. Initiatives to diversify faculties, revise curricula and address systemic injustices, though urgently needed, are often perceived by critics as threats to academic standards or as restrictions on open debate.

In their efforts to create more inclusive spaces, universities frequently find themselves walking a fine line between broadening access and protecting the conditions necessary for critical inquiry.

Structural vulnerability

The University Trilemma, then, has not only sharpened longstanding tensions but exposed a deeper structural vulnerability: the core ideals of higher education no longer easily coexist in an increasingly fragmented world. Defending one principle often risks weakening another. Navigating these contradictions has become a defining challenge for university leaders around the globe.

This broader reality is evident in multiple contexts. In Hungary, the government’s restrictions on academic freedom have become emblematic of a broader authoritarian turn in state capitalism. In India, growing political intolerance has led to fierce battles over curriculum content and academic autonomy. In the United States, ideological polarisation has created deep divisions over the role and value of universities, with public trust in higher education becoming increasingly partisan.

These examples demonstrate that the core commitments to truth, autonomy and belonging can no longer be taken for granted.

Yet while today’s crises are acute, the tensions themselves are not entirely new. Universities have always operated within dynamic political and economic forces. What is different now is the scale, intensity and mutual reinforcement of these pressures – and the degree to which they demand a fundamental transformation.

The tensions relating to truth, autonomy and belonging once defined the central struggle of modern universities. During the era of the trilemma, institutions were often accused – sometimes fairly, often simplistically – of losing touch with the societies they served. In various countries, universities were branded either as strongholds of progressive ideology or as failing defenders of national values.

As universities sought to uphold truth, autonomy and belonging, the balance between these ideals became increasingly fragile. Speaking truth to power risked political repercussions.

Expanding access and representation triggered accusations of bias. Institutional independence – long a cornerstone of academic life – was eroded by shrinking public investment and growing government intervention.

From trilemma to quintilemma

Through it all, many universities remained committed, however imperfectly, to holding these three principles in tension. Yet today, even the trilemma no longer captures the depth of the challenges higher education faces. The crisis has grown larger, sharper and more existential. Beyond the tensions among truth, autonomy and belonging, universities must now grapple with two additional forces: survival and purpose.

This expanded reality – what we might call the quintilemma – reflects a five-dimensional crisis that threatens not only the university’s relevance but its very existence. Universities are no longer merely navigating tensions among competing ideals; they are confronting profound disruptions that demand a reimagining of their role in society.

Two global forces have accelerated this shift. The Fourth Industrial Revolution has radically challenged traditional models of academic authority and autonomy, with artificial intelligence, platform economies and automated knowledge production reshaping how information is created, distributed and valued.

At the same time, the COVID-19 pandemic forced an abrupt digital pivot, exposing vulnerabilities in infrastructure, governance and financial models, while widening existing inequalities in access and opportunity.

These forces did not create the crises facing universities; rather, they exposed and magnified longstanding structural weaknesses. The pandemic revealed how dependent many universities had become on private digital platforms. It accelerated the rise of alternative credentials, flexible learning pathways and new market entrants who now compete directly with traditional degrees.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution has further amplified these disruptions: generative AI tools, blockchain-verified credentials, automated tutoring platforms and remote labs are beginning to displace the traditional university monopoly on knowledge and certification.

Meanwhile, broader forces of climate disruption, global conflict and demographic transformation continue to reshape the social contract that once anchored higher education. Universities find themselves in a world where neither their status nor their survival can be assumed.

The addition of survival and purpose to the trilemma marks a decisive shift. Questions of truth, autonomy and belonging remain central – but they now operate within a broader existential frame.

Universities must ask not only how to defend their ideals but whether they can adapt quickly enough to preserve their own viability. And they must confront perhaps the most difficult question of all: What is the enduring purpose of the university in a fragmented, accelerated and uncertain world?

The five pressures

The ‘University Quintilemma’ is shaped by five interwoven and mutually reinforcing forces – truth, autonomy, belonging, survival and purpose – pressures that no institution can address in isolation. Navigating this new landscape requires more than defending isolated principles. Each pressure intersects with and amplifies the others, creating a web of tensions that traditional strategies can no longer untangle.

• The fragmentation of truth: Truth today faces not only external attack but internal fragmentation. The challenge is no longer limited to defending scientific rigour or academic evidence. It now requires operating within a landscape where knowledge itself has been destabilised – politicised, algorithmically amplified and often valued more for its emotional resonance than for its veracity.

• The erosion of autonomy: Autonomy, too, is under renewed strain. No longer solely threatened by overt political interference, universities now face subtler dependencies born of the digital age. Institutions that once prided themselves on self-governance increasingly rely on commercial platforms, private data infrastructures and external funding sources.

• The epistemic challenge of belonging: Belonging has evolved into a fundamental epistemic challenge. Inclusion is no longer simply a question of who is admitted to the institution; it is a matter of whose knowledge is recognised, whose histories are legitimised and whose futures are imagined within the academic project.

• The existential struggle for survival: Survival has become an existential question. Financial models based on tuition fees, global student mobility and competitive research funding are increasingly fragile. Climate disruption, demographic shifts and geopol

Farewell to Pope Francis

 Farewell to Pope Francis

At Abraham Lincoln’s death, Walt Whitman wrote a powerful elegy, O Captain! My Captain!, capturing the country’s sorrow even at a moment of victory over destructive forces. I believe those words are strikingly appropriate now, as we bid farewell to another great leader — a man of moral conviction, a champion of the poor and the migrant, and an indefatigable advocate for mercy and compassion in an increasingly wounded world. Today, we say: O Father, my Father.

The funeral of Pope Francis on Saturday, April 26, was a profound and resounding testament to his moral leadership.
In a relatively short time, he became a father to the world, awakening in all of us the need to treat one another with love and compassion. He reached out to the marginalized and the forgotten, offering them solace and comfort. He famously described the Church as a "field hospital," charged with caring first for the wounded, just as medics tend to injured soldiers before asking further questions. The Church, he insisted, must go beyond its own walls, reaching out to those abandoned at the peripheries of society — bringing them in, healing them, and only then addressing the deeper causes of their estrangement.

He called pastors and bishops to embody this mission — to smell of the sheep, to be so close to their flock that they carried the scent of their shared lives.
Where there was hatred, he sowed love; where there was vengeance, he preached forgiveness. In an unforgettable gesture, he knelt to kiss the feet of warring leaders from South Sudan, pleading for an end to bloodshed and hostility.

What a great Father he was. Through his words and actions, Pope Francis mirrored the love and compassion of Jesus: kissing the untouchable, embracing the outcast, and washing the feet of prisoners. The thought that this loving presence — this Father to us all — is no longer among us fills the heart with deep sorrow.
The moral sun that warmed people of every race, nation, and creed has set.

From the beginning of his papacy, Pope Francis spoke of God as Mercy. He praised Cardinal Kasper’s writings on the subject and, later, in his own reflections, he emphasized that believers must not be trapped in the guilt of their sins but surrender to the embrace of God’s mercy. He loved to recall the story of St. John Vianney, who told a grieving widow that her husband, though he had taken his own life, might have repented in the final moment — such is the overwhelming mercy of God.

In his autobiography Hope, Francis' message of love and forgiveness flows through every page. In a chapter titled "The Almond Blossoms," he urgently calls those burdened by failure not to be crushed by guilt, but to entrust their broken past to the mercy of Jesus and begin again.
What a call to renewal! He encouraged everyone to rise from their failures and live anew, restored by God’s forgiveness.

The crowds at his funeral — the leaders of nations, the millions watching on television, the thousands lining the streets as the cortege moved to Santa Maria Maggiore — all bore witness to the impact of his life and ministry.
The many tributes — calling him the "Pope of the Peripheries," the "Pope of the Poor," the "Voice of the Voiceless," the "Shepherd with the Odor of the Sheep," and the "Pope of Compassion and Mercy" — are a testament to his profound influence on the world.

In an era torn by violence and war, he tirelessly called for peace and reconciliation. He grieved deeply over the tragedies unfolding from the invasion of Ukraine and the renewed hostilities in Palestine and Israel. His final Easter homily rang out as a clarion call for peace across the world.

Even amidst extraordinary scientific and technological advancements, his voice remained clear and insistent: we are all brothers and sisters — Fratelli Tutti.

Thus, Whitman's O Captain! My Captain! becomes for us:
O Father, my Father.

Pope Francis: An enduring example of love and mercy

 

Pope Francis — An Icon of Reconciliation and Mercy

March 13 was a unique day in the history of the Church. On that day, 115 cardinals selected a successor to Pope Benedict XVI, and a crowd of more than a hundred thousand heard for the first time that a new Pope was elected from the Cardinals outside of Europe. For the first time, a Cardinal from Latin America, a Jesuit named Francis, has been elected as the new Pope. More than 5000 journalists were waiting outside to witness this event and report about it to their people spread all across all the  continents of the world. Thus, a new chapter has been opened in the history of the Church with the election of the new Pope. Within a few moments after his public appearance, he gained the affection of the people waiting to see and hear him. His first words were full of love and concern, calling the people to walk with him in this great pilgrimage of faith: “And now let us begin this journey… a journey of fraternity, of trust between us. I hope that this journey of the Church will be fruitful for the evangelization of this beautiful city.”

It would be interesting to note what the media, especially the Western media, were saying about the situation of the Church and about the role the new Pope has to play. According to the Press, the Church is falling apart, bedeviled with scandals and moral bankruptcy. Some of the major problems affecting the Church mentioned in the media are the following: sex abuse scandals, bureaucratic infighting in the curia, financial difficulties, money laundering, lack of transparency in the handling of finance, the rise of secularism, women's disenchantment, married clergy etc. According to these media reports, the Church is going to disintegrate unless the above issues are settled.

Some see the Church as a corporation and predict that the infighting among the curial bureaucrats would affect the functioning of the Church. The Economist of March 9, in its leading article, thinks of the Pope as CEO. According to the writer, for the successful governing of the Church, a new management style has to be adopted. They see the Pope as a CEO of a corporation. They suggest that, as the Church is international, it would be wrong to have all the bureaucrats who work in the Curia selected from Rome itself. More internationalization is needed in the functioning of the Church. It has even suggested moving the summer residence of the Pope to a country in Latin America. (This was published before the election of the Pope from Latin America).

With  the election of Pope Francis, the situation has changed, and the media and the people were taken by surprise by his humility and down-to-earth understanding of the people and their problems.

 Pope Francis has consistently used the language of reconciliation, love, and mercy. He has never spoken in a way that would undermine the dignity of any person. Even when urged during meetings or conversations to take stringent actions against individuals whose actions were deemed detrimental to the Church, he refrained from harsh responses or remained silent. He understood that such measures could deepen divisions and escalate hostilities.

From the time of his election as Pope, he led the Church with a new and distinctive perception. The very name he chose—Francis—was initially misunderstood by some as a reference to St. Francis Xavier. However, he clarified that he had chosen the name in honor of St. Francis of Assisi, whose love for poverty and nature deeply inspired him, even in his early life.

The Face of Mercy

The central focus of Pope Francis's ministry was mercy. His pastoral approach was deeply marked by compassion, especially in his interactions with the poor and marginalized. He paid close attention to the needs of those living on the streets near the Vatican, ensuring they received food, shelter, and warm blankets.

During the last Synod, upon learning that a homeless person had died, he instructed a cardinal to conduct the funeral rites and have the man buried in the Vatican cemetery. In every country he visited, he made it a point to organize special programs for the poor. He also gave particular attention to migrants. For example, in response to the plight of the Rohingya refugees who fled from Myanmar to Bangladesh, he raised substantial funds to assist the local government with their resettlement. I learned of this personally through Archbishop Kocherry, the former Apostolic Nuncio in Bangladesh.

The Pope was always impartial in his approach. He prioritized visiting poorer nations and reaching out to people of different religions.

A New Definition of Hierarchy

Pope Francis redefined the Church's hierarchy by appointing laypeople, women, and religious to leadership positions in Vatican departments that were traditionally led by cardinals. A layman was appointed as the Prefect of the Dicastery for Communication, and a religious sister became the head of the Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life. Through these appointments, he emphasized his commitment to recognizing the capabilities of all members of the Church, regardless of their clerical status.

In the Council for the Economy, he appointed three laywomen, demonstrating his intent to involve everyone in the mission of the Church. To further this inclusive vision, he convened two synods and published their findings to guide the Church forward.

Love of Nature

The protection of the environment was one of Pope Francis’s core missions. His love for nature was powerfully expressed in his encyclical Laudato Si'. He called on humanity to recognize the Earth as a divine gift, urging everyone to preserve and enrich it for future generations. He spoke of nature as “our mother” and reminded us that God’s love extends not only to humanity but also to the creation itself.

His Care for the Syro-Malabar Church

Pope Francis took a deep interest in the growth and welfare of various Eastern Catholic Churches. . It was thanks to his encouragement that we were able to establish four dioceses outside India. 

He maintained warm, friendly relationships with those who worked closely with him. Yet, he never hesitated to express his views firmly when necessary, even to those dear to him. He never compromised the good of the Church for the sake of personal ties. 

He had a heartfelt desire to visit India, though sadly, that visit never materialized.

Inclusivity

Pope Francis never made decisions to favor specific groups. His guiding vision was that all people are children of God, regardless of their beliefs or backgrounds—even those who may hold extreme or misguided views. He respected the autonomy of local Churches in addressing diocesan issues, believing it was not his role to impose from above.

He viewed all religions and ecclesial communities through the lens of shared humanity and mutual respect. His stance was clear: every Church must make its own decisions, grounded in its unique local context.

A Visionary Shepherd

With his passing, the world has lost a shepherd, a guide, and a visionary. He reached out to all people across races, religions, and nations, seeking to unite them under the umbrella of love. His was a broad, inclusive, and undiluted vision of the Church and of humanity.

 

St.John of the Cross,The Dark Night of the Soul

                                     St.John of the Cross(1542-1591)

 

St. John of the Cross is known in Christian circles as a great mystic and an author of mystical works. As a companion and counselor of St.Teresa of Avila, he grew in mystical experience and became a founder of a new order of Carmelite spirituality. Even as a young friar, he caught the attention of St.Teresa of Avila because of his theological knowledge, deep attachment to Jesus, and mystical experiences. Surprisingly, in the 20th century, he had another great disciple and fan in the US. , T.S. Eliot, the father of modern English poetry. T.S. Eliot passed through very dark experiences as a Christian and St. John of the Cross and his works became a source of comfort and strength for him. The following quote from East Coker in the Four Quartets shows the profound influence of John of the Cross on his life :

“You say I am repeating

Something I have said before. I shall say it again.

Shall I say it again? In order to arrive there,

To arrive where you are, to get from where you are not,

    You must go by a way wherein there is no ecstasy.

In order to arrive at what you do not know

    You must go by a way which is the way of ignorance.

In order to possess what you do not possess

    You must go by the way of dispossession.

In order to arrive at what you are not

    You must go through the way in which you are not.

And what you do not know is the only thing you know

And what you own is what you do not own

And where you are is where you are not.”

It is very easy to see that T.S.Eliot is expatiating upon the theme of detachment enunciated by St.John of the Cross in the following lines from The Ascent to Mount Carmel:

“In order to arrive at that which thou knowest not,
Thou must go by a way which thou knowest not,
In order to arrive at that which thou possessest not,
Thou must go by a way that thou possessest not.
In order to arrive at that which thou are not,
Thou must go through that which thou art not.

(“The Ascent of Mount Carmel” I, xiii)

Reading the biography of St.John of the Cross is excruciatingly painful. Although his father belonged to the nobility, he was disinherited on account of marriage to a lady from a poor background. The father left his hometown to live at his wife’s place. John’s father passed away when he was very young. His mother took the children to their ancestral place but the family was not welcoming. She then left the place and got John admitted to an orphanage. However, through his studiousness, others noted him, and he was appointed as a caretaker of an infirmary. He was very kind to the patients and took care of their needs. His education was taken care of by a kind gentleman. He helped him to join a college nearby and after his studies, John decided to join the Carmelite monastery. There he developed a great thirst for holiness and lived a rigorous ascetic life. It was there that he came into contact with St.Teresa of Avila. Although he was young, St.Teresa chose him as her confessor and of other sisters of her convent as she was drawn by his scholarship and deep attachment to Christ. He became a part of the Reform movement started by St.Teresa in the Carmelite monastic system. John was entrusted with creating the reform for monks and encouraged to start monasteries for them. The new monks and sisters in the new movement began to be known as discalced Carmelites.

Many of the monks in the monasteries that followed the traditional system did not like the initiative of St.John and hence they imprisoned him in a room with no convenience, as a prisoner, for almost six months. He had to endure their insults, punishments, and all kinds of inhuman treatment. He lived like a condemned prisoner in a prison-like cell. He suffered all these inhuman treatments because of his thirst for a pure and more authentic monastic life. He escaped from the prison after six months and ran away to a distant place as he was afraid he would be caught and punished again. With the help of St. Teresa of Avila, he continued his ministry of being a spiritual father and confessor to the sisters of the new movement. In the end, he died in a monastery where the superior was very antagonistic to him. With a lot of pain on account of his breathing problems and skin blisters,  he breathed his last.

When we look at his life, we become amazed at the suffering he endured just because he wanted to be a holy priest. He was compassionate to the poor, the sick, and the suffering and whenever it was possible he spent his time caring for the sick. He knew that he had to help his mother and brothers as they were still not financially successful. He got a chance to visit his mother only a couple of times. He couldn’t be present at the deathbed of his beloved mother when she breathed her last.

It is  in these dark moments of his life that he composed his beautiful poem,The Dark Night of the Soul, explaining in allegorical images the comfort and solace one gets in union with Jesus. One has to pass through the dark night, through a life of detachment, through the world of suffering and hardship ,to  reach this state of perfect bliss with Jesus.

                                    The Dark Night of the Soul

In a dark night,

With anxious love inflamed,

O, happy lot!

Forth unobserved I went,

My house being now at rest.

II.

In darkness and in safety,

By the secret ladder, disguised,

O, happy lot!

In darkness and concealment,

My house being now at rest.

III.

In that happy night,

In secret, seen of none,

Seeing nought myself,

Without other light or guide

Save that which in my heart was burning.

IV.

That light guided me

More surely than the noonday sun

To the place where He was waiting for me,

Whom I knew well,

And where none appeared.

V.

O, guiding night;

O, night more lovely than the dawn;

O, night that hast united

The lover with His beloved,

And changed her into her love.

VI.

On my flowery bosom,

Kept whole for Him alone,

There He reposed and slept;

And I cherished Him, and the waving

Of the cedars fanned Him.

VII.

As His hair floated in the breeze

That from the turret blew,

He struck me on the neck

With His gentle hand,

And all sensation left me.

VIII.

I continued in oblivion lost,

My head was resting on my love;

Lost to all things and myself,

And, amid the lilies forgotten,

Threw all my cares away.

o

 

SSt.John gives a detailed exposition of the meaning of the Dark Night in his commentary, Ascent to Mt.Carmel.

   What this poem tells an ordinary person is that the soul is searching for union with Christ and when it becomes united with Jesus, it experiences unbounded bliss. Everyone who goes through suffering and purification of senses and of spirit in his holy pilgrimage to Jesus, finds in the end this happy union that takes away all the pain of suffering and purifications.

  This poem is thus a source of consolation to all those who suffer on account of their attachment to Jesus.

  The following  quote from John of the Cross is a source of great comfort and peace:

“   "In the twilight of life, God will not judge us  on our earthly possessions and human successes, but on how well  we have loved.”