Irresponsible & misleading, Church slams CPM secy's remarks against Pamplany
In a statement, the Church said that the irresponsible and misleading remarks made by the CPM state secretary and others against archbishop Pamplany, the metropolitan of Thalassery and vicar of the major archbishop for the Ernakulam-Angamaly Archdiocese, were upsetting.
"The attempt by the CPM leaders to insult the bishop by raising out of context the issue regarding him thanking the Union home minister and the Prime Minister for the release of Catholic nuns imprisoned in Chhattisgarh is highly condemnable. Archbishop Pamplany merely reiterated the official stance of the Syro-Malabar Church, which expressed gratitude to the central and state govts, leaders of both the ruling and opposition parties, media and the public for their assistance in securing the nuns' release," the statement said.
However, a political party, for its own interests, unjustly attacked Pamplany with untimely statements through its various mechanisms. Subsequent reactions have shown that this was not just spontaneous statements.
"The Syro-Malabar Church does not have any special allegiance to any political party; its politics are based on its stance on issues. The Church is not hesitant to point out mistakes or acknowledge what is right.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around
Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List
Undo
The statement added that no political outfits have space in the process of deciding whom or when to thank or criticise. However, the Church has always respected political movements and their eminent leaders as part of the democratic system.
The Church wishes that political leaders demonstrate the same democratic decorum in their statements and actions," it added.
Therefore, those involved should refrain from unjustly singling out and criticising archbishop Pamplany, and since enough has been said, this matter should be concluded promptly, the statement said.
Stay updated with the latest local news from your
city
on
Times of India
(TOI). Check upcoming
bank holidays
,
public holidays
, and current
gold rates
and
silver prices
in your area.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Trump's job cuts leave a profession looking for its next act
Betsy Wolf has a doctorate in education, a record of publishing research and a strong professional network. What she doesn't have is a full-time job. In March, Wolf was placed on leave at the research arm of the Education Department. She was officially let go from her position compiling evidence of what works in schools—along with many of her colleagues—at the beginning of this month. The dozens of applications she has submitted to find a new job have yielded just a handful of interviews and no offers. Wolf is among a highly specialized group of professionals trying to remake or salvage careers after federal cuts hit their tiny industry—in this case, the niche and government-dependent field of education research. The Trump administration has argued that the federal research infrastructure was ineffective, outdated and politically biased. Some workers are fishing for consulting gigs or competing for a shrinking number of roles in education. Others are trying to pivot to different lines of work, such as insurance or technology. Eric Hedberg, who has a Ph.D in sociology, had worked for nearly two decades on federal contracts to study education and other government programs. In February, many of those contracts vanished, as the Department of Government Efficiency tore through the Education Department. He changed his résumé to nix jargon common in the research world and instead pitched his statistical expertise elsewhere. Hedberg soon landed a job as a data scientist at an insurance company. Now, he isn't looking back at his old industry. 'It's an intellectual dust bowl—there are no crops coming out of this ground anymore," Hedberg said. The turmoil shows a striking way that federal cutbacks are cascading across the economy, as the job market softens. The government has also frozen funds at universities—another main source of employment for education researchers. 'It's not like I'm losing my job," Wolf said. 'It's like I'm losing my field, my entire career pathway." The few job postings are often inundated with applicants. The Center on Reinventing Public Education, an education think tank, attracted a roughly 50% rise in applications, compared with a prior search, for two recently open roles. 'My LinkedIn just was like a graveyard," said Elizabeth Tipton, a statistician at Northwestern University. 'When an entire field is laid off, where are they supposed to find jobs?" Tipton is the president of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, whose members have been heavily affected by federal cuts, she said. With an annual budget of about $800 million, the Institute of Education Sciences, the Education Department's research arm, has produced basic facts about schools, supported studies of specific programs and run centers to help educators use research. Researchers say that if IES isn't rebuilt, educators and policymakers will be in the dark about how to improve and understand American schools. 'The Trump administration is committed to spending taxpayer dollars responsibly and on programs and activities that are best serving students, families and educators," said Madi Biedermann, a spokeswoman for the department. Eric Mason worked at IES managing contracts for research centers, known as Regional Educational Laboratories, designed to help schools solve difficult problems, such as filling teacher shortages. Since being placed on leave in March, Mason has put out 80 job applications and gotten zero interviews. A former teacher, he has started applying for teaching positions, after more than a decade outside the classroom. He has also looked for roles in sales or client success—'anything that would get me some kind of income," he said. At age 54, he is worried that potential employers will quickly pass him by. Former department staffers have been watching the courts, hoping for a lifeline. The Supreme Court recently undid a lower-court edict directing the Trump administration to retain Education Department workers. Three lawsuits from education-research groups have failed to win preliminary rulings. However, on Friday a federal district court ordered the Trump administration to restore the Regional Educational Laboratories at IES. The administration said that doing so might prove impracticable because contractors have already laid off staffers. In his recent budget request, President Trump is seeking to cut annual funding for IES by two-thirds, although Congress might not go along with that plan. The Education Department has brought on an adviser, Amber Northern, 'to re-envision" the institute's work. The impact of the research cuts extends beyond the department itself. Dan Frederking had been working at the American Institutes for Research, a private research firm that lost a number of federal contracts. He was among about 500 people, over 30% of the company, laid off earlier this year. He has landed a part-time role as an adjunct professor and is trying to drum up work as an independent consultant—where he is competing with other laid-off workers. Frederking is applying for data roles in school districts and professorships at small colleges in the Milwaukee area, where he lives. 'I personally feel I would be a great candidate but convincing people of that…that's always a challenge," he said. Write to Matt Barnum at
NDTV
2 hours ago
- NDTV
China's Wang Yi's 1st India Visit In 3 Years, 'Elephant', 'Dragon' To Dance?
New Delhi: China Foreign Minister Wang Yi met his counterpart S Jaishankar in Delhi Monday evening and will meet Prime Minister Narendra Modi later, hinting at a potential reset of fractured ties between two of the world's largest economies as they navigate being bashed by US President Donald Trump's trade tariffs. Mr Yi's visit signals the resumption of top-level Delhi-Beijing contact - this is his first visit to India in three years - a resumption to be cemented by the Prime Minister's trip August 31-September 1 trip to China's Tainjin for another meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Wang Yi's visit to India and the PM's China trip are significant from a border and regional security standpoint. Any peaceful resolution to long-standing disputes in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, and any step towards a less geopolitically volatile Eurasia, will be widely welcomed. The Chinese minister's visit is expected to help restart not just frozen border dispute resolution mechanisms, but also more important people-to-people contact like visas and direct flights stopped in the early days of the Covid pandemic and kept on hold after the violence in Ladakh. The Tariff Background Donald Trump's tariffs had an effect the American President may not have expected. Ties between India and China, finding themselves in similar predicaments, began thawing. In March, shortly after Mr Trump doubled tariffs on China to 20 per cent, Mr Yi called on Delhi and Beijing to work together and "take the lead in opposing hegemonism and power politics". "... making the 'elephant' and 'dragon' dance together is the only right choice," the Chinese leader said then, "Supporting, instead of wearing each other down, and strengthening cooperation, instead of guarding (against) each other, is in our fundamental interests." Fast-forward five-six months. The 'elephant' and the 'dragon' haven't quite taken to the dance floor, but the intent is still there, even if the choreography has not been worked out so far. China, however, has made it clear it intends to pursue this path. In July Chinese Vice President Han Zheng said 'becoming partners that enable each other's success and achieving the "dragon-elephant tango" is the right choice for both sides. And last week the Global Times, a Chinese government mouthpiece, referred to a 'ballet dance between dragon and elephant' as it called for a joint pushback against Trump's tariffs. The bonhomie hasn't been one-sided. In March the Prime Minister spoke to US-based podcaster Lex Friedman and said normalcy had returned to the India-China border. "Our focus is to ensure these differences don't turn into disputes. Instead of discord, we emphasise dialogue, because only through dialogue can we build a stable, cooperative relationship that serves the best interests of both nations." China welcomed the statement and said again, "cooperation is the right choice." The Pakistan Angle But for complete India-China cooperation to happen, the Pakistan issue needs to be resolved. Beijing continues to back Islamabad, particularly in the context of the war on terrorism. In May, for example, it reportedly blocked a United Nations Security Council proposal to label five Pak-based Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad individuals as 'global terrorists'. There was also a difficult moment in a SCO summit meet in June. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh refused to sign a joint statement there because it did not mention the Pahalgam attack. Worse, the document tacitly accused India of creating unrest in Pak's Balochistan province. This was reportedly done at Pakistan's behest. For India-China ties to be reset, both the border dispute and China's continuing support of Pakistan will have to be addressed. That could take time. But, till then, cooperation on multilateral platforms like the SCO and BRICS - to offset Trump's tariffs and benefit both economies will be a step forward. Mr Jaishankar made that point in July when he was in Beijing. "Our bilateral relationship, as you have pointed out, has been steadily improving since the meeting between Prime Minister Modi and President Jinping in Kazan last October...I am confident my discussions in this visit will maintain that positive trajectory," he said in televised remarks.
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
US tariffs threaten to derail India's growth ambitions, Moody's Analytics warns
New Delhi: The US threat to impose tariffs of up to 50% on Indian goods marks a sharp escalation in trade tensions and could slow growth in one of the world's fastest-growing economies, Moody's Analytics warned. The US has increasingly linked tariff relief to conditions that require countries to commit to large-scale purchases of American goods and pledge new investments on US soil. But such promises are 'unlikely to be met', Moody's cautioned in its recent report. 'Tariffs are emerging as a general-purpose policy tool (for the US),' the report said, noting that beyond revenue generation, they are being deployed to repatriate critical manufacturing and advance political objectives. Moody's Analytics pointed to examples, including efforts to sideline China from the global economy, restrict oil sales from Venezuela and Russia, and use tariff threats to pressure Brazil's judiciary or influence regional conflicts. While tariffs will slow growth across Asia and Europe, a global recession is not imminent, the report said. 'Most deals are non-binding, and chances remain that we might see higher tariffs further down the line. Investment pledges from partner countries appear largely unrealistic and lack clear implementation mechanisms,' it said. 'Despite the deals, tariff rates have risen since mid-2025 and are expected to remain elevated throughout President Donald Trump's term. Countries will be economically worse off than before the US elections, with the US itself facing the steepest downgrade to GDP growth,' it added. It noted that India is among the most exposed. A potential 50% tariff on Indian exports threatens to erode the country's competitiveness and undermine its growth ambitions. Globally, the strategy risks fragmenting supply chains, inflating costs, and amplifying geopolitical frictions as Washington wields tariffs not only as a revenue tool but also as an instrument of industrial policy and strategic influence. Other nations have responded by striking agreements that commit them to tariff concessions, investment pledges, and large purchases of American defence and energy goods. 'Trade deals with eight countries have been announced since Liberation Day. None of these is a deal in the conventional sense,' Moody's Analytics said. 'Instead, these should be thought of as high-level, non-binding agreements on the direction of travel. There is no guarantee that countries will not find themselves paying higher tariffs further down the line,' it added. So far, countries have avoided retaliating, a choice that reflects both America's economic clout and the lack of a platform for collective resistance, Moody's argued. 'Even the European Union, which ostensibly has a strong unified platform, did not, underscoring Europe's political differences and economic weakness,' the report said. 'Instead, countries have promised to buy a significant volume of goods from the US and have made substantial investment pledges. The feasibility of these plans is in doubt, and several deal components look largely symbolic,' it added. As an example, Moody's highlighted the EU's pledge to purchase $750 billion worth of US energy products by 2028, along with significant defence imports. Meeting that target would require the bloc to more than triple its annual purchases of American energy, source more than 85% of its total energy imports from the US, and effectively absorb all of America's export capacity, it said. 'And, at current market prices, it would still fall horribly short, with total US energy exports totaling only around $170 billion in 2024,' the report added.
