Connect with us

Opinion

Priest, Prophet and Martyr for Justice

Published

on

by Rev. Fr. Leopold Ratnasekera
OMI.
Oblate Seminary, Ampitiya.

The 37th anniversary of the death of Fr. Michael Paul Rodrigo is being celebrated on 10th November this year. He was a Catholic Priest belonging to the Oblate Congregation (OMI) working in the village hamlet of Alukalavita-Buttala in the Monerāgala district located at the 12th Mile-post on the Kataragama road, where he had founded a Christian-Buddhist Fellowship and Dialogue Centre since 1980. He was brutally gunned down at point-blank range on that fateful evening in the middle of a Holy Mass he was celebrating with two of his co-workers. The assassination finally came following a series of death-threats against his presence and work in Buttala. To this day those responsible for this dastardly crime remain unknown. It is indeed a tragedy continuing to be a mystery surrounding the death of an innocent man who paid the price for bravely facing challenges that came from the powers-that-be who cast spells of suspicion and questioned his work among the poor farmers and peasants of this historic Ūva-Wellassa province.

Once an agriculturally thriving area with soil rich for farming and paddy cultivation, about eighty-thousand acres of its land had been taken over for a sugar-cane project by a multi-national corporation: “Booker-Tate Agriculture International establishing a factory in Pelawatte, making the local farmers and peasants lose their land as well as means of employment and traditional farming livelihoods. Fr. Michael Rodrigo had taken issue with the government and even writing to the President about the injustice that was crippling the lives of the poor of Wellassa and asking for redress. The Wellassa episode of the erosion of local enterprise is one of the tragic instances of the open-economy unleashed at that time. There was serious concern over the environmental impact caused by deforestation and the use of chemical fertiliser. The priest in solidarity with the monks and the people of Buttala had raised a strong voice against this oppression of the poor and demanded social justice to the peasants of Ūva. Fr Rodrigo often clashed with the authorities on behalf of the youth in Buttala. The Centre for Buddhist-Christian dialogue named “Suba Seth Gedara” was a humble house of wattle and daub which later transformed itself into a clinic, a school, and small library to address the community’s health and educational needs and a garden for indigenous medicinal plants to match. The Centre also facilitated collaboration between the farming youth and university students which helped improve the skills and techniques of their trade.

Fr. Michael Rodrigo was born on 30th June 1927 at Dehiwela and had his secondary education at St. Peter’s College, Bambalapitiiya. He was trained for priesthood in Rome where he was ordained as a priest on 4th April 1954. On his return to the country, he was posted to the staff of the newly inaugurated National Seminary of Ampitiya and eventually proceeded to Rome again for a Ph.D. (1957) at the prestigious Jesuit-run Gregorian University. After a spell of teaching in Ampitiya he embarked on a sabbatical to Paris where at the Catholic Institute of Paris he earned a doctorate in Theology (1973). Though equipped with two doctorates with research in Buddhist-Christian comparative studies, he declined a professorship in Paris and chose instead active social involvement with rural poor. Always interested in Buddhism as a vehicle of dialogue with the Buddhists of his motherland, his doctoral thesis in Rome was on: “Some Aspects of Enlightenment of the Buddha” making an in-depth psychological and metaphysical analysis of the enlightenment and was awarded first-class honours. The second doctorate in Paris was entitled: “The Moral Passover from selfishness to selflessness in Christianity and other Religions in Sri Lanka”. On his return from Paris, he assisted Bishop Leo Nanayakkara OSB of Badulla diocese in inaugurating a new style of a seminary where priestly training was more contextual and including exposure programs. This experimental seminary was named “Sēvaka Sevana” at Bandārawela. From here Fr. Michael Rodrigo extended his interest to live out an option for the poor and chose Buttala, one of the poorest villages in the Monerāgala district thus directing his knowledge and experience for the care and liberation of the poor who had lost their land and livelihood. He decided to do it in an entirely Buddhist milieu (99%). In due course winning over the monks, he was able to work together with the people in many projects that affected the living standards of the people, education and religious formation of the youth.

It was the time when winds of change came over the Catholic Church which opened up to the world and its joys and hopes, to the various religious traditions and cultural diversities of humanity as well as identifying with struggles of the world poor and the oppressed. Fr. Michael Rodrigo brimming with this spirit of reform plunged himself into action in his own home-country, the motherland of Sri Lanka venturing right into a Buddhist village (99%), where poverty was widespread. The situation proved ideal to begin his work of dialoguing with the Buddhists and working for their liberation, confronting the oppressive forces that were dehumanizing the poor of Buttala. They needed to be empowered with knowledge and skills, trained to utilise their natural resources, and live with dignity. When structures and systems get entrenched, liberation is needed to neutralise them to harmonize the liberation process. He also wished to be an agent of reconciliation healing the aching memory linked to Christianity in the aftermath of the Ūva-Wellassa rebellion of 1818 that led to the massacre of people by the colonial British. He had a thorough knowledge of Buddhism including texts in Pāli and could even give an “anusāsanā” on a Pōya day in the temple when requested. The monks and the Buddhist laity marveled at his knowledge of Buddhism. He was able to present the Buddhist radical teachings of the ten pāramithās and four brahma-vihāras such as mettā and karunā (mercy and loving kindness) aligning them with Christian moral values of mercy and compassion convinced that Buddhism and Christianity could co-exist. Mettā comes from the Pāli word “mejjati” ie melting in loving kindness to all paralleled with Christianity’s “compassion” from the Greek meaning ‘welling from the bowels’. Both have kindred roots. What Fr. Michael Rodrigo did was no mere social work but bringing the religious teachings to bear on his work and people’s struggles. Oppression is both anti-Buddhist and anti-Christian. Working together the religions could release the power needed to usher in liberation.

He was against new-liberal economic policies embedded in the immoral agenda of the multi-national economic procedures and especially the subcultures of the governments in office. He followed the “pedagogy of the Oppressed” proposed by the Brazilian author Paolo Frêre who promulgated conscientisation as needed to unleash the forces of liberation which came alive at the village level at Ūva-Wellassa. Fr. Michael used to say that he is a Buddhist by culture and a Christian by religion. Dialogue was at the core of all his endeavours. While to Christians he posed the challenge of God’s preference of the poor, he invited the Buddhists to look closely at anatta (impermanence) and sangha to see their relevance in social life. His true message lay in his life-style and spirituality, posing a challenge to people of all faiths. His dream was to see Buddhists live genuinely according to the tenets of their religion and help one another attain a fuller humanity: one of contentment, peace, fraternity and justice: the so-called Sāradharma virtues. He was sensitive to the environment and decried deforestation and use of chemical fertilisers that poison the land, the home of the people. Instead, to overcome poverty, he improved rural agriculture and ecological mechanisms tapping local labor and resources. His rejection of the mega profit-maximising projects of the TNC’s was one of the factors that ignited suspicion and hostility from the powers-that-be. Added to this unfortunately was the completely false accusation that he was a sympathiser of the JVP youth. The youth to whom Suba-Seth Gedara was open came there seeking education, skill-learning and spiritual empowerment.

Father Michael was endowed with a sparkling sense of humour as well, adding lustre to his conversations and talks with gems of wit. He was surely the most educated man in the Ūva province, a true prophet and the only stalwart who came forward to fight for the dignity of the peasantry of Buttala and forever to be remembered as a saint living and journeying with them. There is recent news of him being declared a martyr-saint in the Catholic Church but people overwhelmingly affirm that he became a saint at the very moment of his death, having lived a life of love and self-emptying for the poor and taking part in their struggles. An immortal oft-repeated saying of Fr. Michael Rodrigo to be gratefully remembered at his anniversary is: “We must be ready to die for our people, if the hour comes, and in the moment it comes”. His last words have been in reference to Archbishop Saint Oscar Romero of San Salvador who was also gunned down at his altar in March 1980: “If they kill me, I shall rise up in the hearts of the people… Let my blood be the seed of freedom and a sign that hope may soon be a reality to them”. Fr. Michael Rodrigo OMI, our Sri Lankan prophet and martyr for justice continues to be alive in the memory of the people of Buttala. Celebrating his glorious death provides an occasion to renew our commitment to keeping his dream alive and be energized in our work of inter-religious dialogue and action for social justice.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

The science of love

Published

on

A remarkable increase in marriage proposals in newspapers and the thriving matchmaking outfits in major cities indicate the difficulty in finding the perfect partners. Academics have done much research in interpersonal attraction or love. There was an era when young people were heavily influenced by romantic fiction. They learned how opposites attract and absence makes the heart grow fonder. There was, of course, an old adage: Out of sight out of mind.

Some people find it difficult to fall in love or they simply do not believe in love. They usually go for arranged marriages. Some of them think that love begins after marriage. There is an on-going debate whether love marriages are better than arranged marriages or vice versa. However, modern psychologists have shed some light on the science of love. By understanding it you might be able to find the ideal life partner.

To start with, do not believe that opposites attract. It is purely a myth. If you wish to fall in love, look for someone like you. You may not find them 100 per cent similar to you, but chances are that you will meet someone who is somewhat similar to you. We usually prefer partners who have similar backgrounds, interests, values and beliefs because they validate our own.

Common trait

It is a common trait that we gravitate towards those who are like us physically. The resemblance of spouses has been studied by scientists more than 100 years ago. According to them, physical resemblance is a key factor in falling in love. For instance, if you are a tall person, you are unlikely to fall in love with a short person. Similarly, overweight young people are attracted to similar types. As in everything in life, there may be exceptions. You may have seen some tall men in love with short women.

If you are interested in someone, declare your love in words or gestures. Some people have strong feelings about others but they never make them known. If you fancy someone, make it known. If you remain silent you will miss a great opportunity forever. In fact if someone loves you, you will feel good about yourself. Such feelings will strengthen love. If someone flatters you, be nice to them. It may be the beginning of a great love affair.

Some people like Romeo and Juliet fall in love at first sight. It has been scientifically confirmed that the longer a pair of prospective partners lock eyes upon their first meeting they are very likely to remain lovers. They say eyes have it. If you cannot stay without seeing your partner, you are in love! Whenever you meet your lover, look at their eyes with dilated pupils. Enlarged pupils signal intense arousal.

Body language

If you wish to fall in love, learn something about body language. There are many books written on the subject. The knowledge of body language will help you to understand non-verbal communication easily. It is quite obvious that lovers do not express their love in so many words. Women usually will not say ‘I love you’ except in films. They express their love tacitly with a shy smile or preening their hair in the presence of their lovers.

Allan Pease, author of The Definitive Guide to Body Language says, “What really turn men on are female submission gestures which include exposing vulnerable areas such as the wrists or neck.” Leg twine was something Princess Diana was good at. It involves crossing the legs hooking the upper leg’s foot behind the lower leg’s ankle. She was an expert in the art of love. Men have their own ways. In order to look more dominant than their partners they engage in crotch display with their thumbs hooked in pockets. Michael Jackson always did it.

If you are looking for a partner, be a good-looking guy. Dress well and behave sensibly. If your dress is unclean or crumpled, nobody will take any notice of you. According to sociologists, men usually prefer women with long hair and proper hip measurements. Similarly, women prefer taller and older men because they look nice and can be trusted to raise a family.

Proximity rule

You do not have to travel long distances to find your ideal partner. He or she may be living in your neighbourhood or working at the same office. The proximity rule ensures repeated exposure. Lovers should meet regularly in order to enrich their love. On most occasions we marry a girl or boy living next door. Never compare your partner with your favourite film star. Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. Therefore be content with your partner’s physical appearance. Each individual is unique. Never look for another Cleopatra or Romeo. Sometimes you may find that your neighbour’s wife is more beautiful than yours. On such occasions turn to the Bible which says, “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife.”

There are many plain Janes and penniless men in society. How are they going to find their partners? If they are warm people, sociable, wise and popular, they too can find partners easily. Partners in a marriage need not be highly educated, but they must be intelligent enough to face life’s problems. Osho compared love to a river always flowing. The very movement is the life of the river. Once it stops it becomes stagnant. Then it is no longer a river. The very word river shows a process, the very sound of it gives you the feeling of movement.

Although we view love as a science today, it has been treated as an art in the past. In fact Erich Fromm wrote The Art of Loving. Science or art, love is a terrific feeling.

karunaratners@gmail.com

By R.S. Karunaratne

Continue Reading

Opinion

Are we reading the sky wrong?

Published

on

Rethinking climate prediction, disasters, and plantation economics in Sri Lanka

For decades, Sri Lanka has interpreted climate through a narrow lens. Rainfall totals, sunshine hours, and surface temperatures dominate forecasts, policy briefings, and disaster warnings. These indicators once served an agrarian island reasonably well. But in an era of intensifying extremes—flash floods, sudden landslides, prolonged dry spells within “normal” monsoons—the question can no longer be avoided: are we measuring the climate correctly, or merely measuring what is easiest to observe?

Across the world, climate science has quietly moved beyond a purely local view of weather. Researchers increasingly recognise that Earth’s climate system is not sealed off from the rest of the universe. Solar activity, upper-atmospheric dynamics, ocean–atmosphere coupling, and geomagnetic disturbances all influence how energy moves through the climate system. These forces do not create rain or drought by themselves, but they shape how weather behaves—its timing, intensity, and spatial concentration.

Sri Lanka’s forecasting framework, however, remains largely grounded in twentieth-century assumptions. It asks how much rain will fall, where it will fall, and over how many days. What it rarely asks is whether the rainfall will arrive as steady saturation or violent cloudbursts; whether soils are already at failure thresholds; or whether larger atmospheric energy patterns are priming the region for extremes. As a result, disasters are repeatedly described as “unexpected,” even when the conditions that produced them were slowly assembling.

This blind spot matters because Sri Lanka is unusually sensitive to climate volatility. The island sits at a crossroads of monsoon systems, bordered by the Indian Ocean and shaped by steep central highlands resting on deeply weathered soils. Its landscapes—especially in plantation regions—have been altered over centuries, reducing natural buffers against hydrological shock. In such a setting, small shifts in atmospheric behaviour can trigger outsized consequences. A few hours of intense rain can undo what months of average rainfall statistics suggest is “normal.”

Nowhere are these consequences more visible than in commercial perennial plantation agriculture. Tea, rubber, coconut, and spice crops are not annual ventures; they are long-term biological investments. A tea bush destroyed by a landslide cannot be replaced in a season. A rubber stand weakened by prolonged waterlogging or drought stress may take years to recover, if it recovers at all. Climate shocks therefore ripple through plantation economics long after floodwaters recede or drought declarations end.

From an investment perspective, this volatility directly undermines key financial metrics. Return on Investment (ROI) becomes unstable as yields fluctuate and recovery costs rise. Benefit–Cost Ratios (BCR) deteriorate when expenditures on drainage, replanting, disease control, and labour increase faster than output. Most critically, Internal Rates of Return (IRR) decline as cash flows become irregular and back-loaded, discouraging long-term capital and raising the cost of financing. Plantation agriculture begins to look less like a stable productive sector and more like a high-risk gamble.

The economic consequences do not stop at balance sheets. Plantation systems are labour-intensive by nature, and when financial margins tighten, wage pressure is the first stress point. Living wage commitments become framed as “unaffordable,” workdays are lost during climate disruptions, and productivity-linked wage models collapse under erratic output. In effect, climate misprediction translates into wage instability, quietly eroding livelihoods without ever appearing in meteorological reports.

This is not an argument for abandoning traditional climate indicators. Rainfall and sunshine still matter. But they are no longer sufficient on their own. Climate today is a system, not a statistic. It is shaped by interactions between the Sun, the atmosphere, the oceans, the land, and the ways humans have modified all three. Ignoring these interactions does not make them disappear; it simply shifts their costs onto farmers, workers, investors, and the public purse.

Sri Lanka’s repeated cycle of surprise disasters, post-event compensation, and stalled reform suggests a deeper problem than bad luck. It points to an outdated model of climate intelligence. Until forecasting frameworks expand beyond local rainfall totals to incorporate broader atmospheric and oceanic drivers—and until those insights are translated into agricultural and economic planning—plantation regions will remain exposed, and wage debates will remain disconnected from their true root causes.

The future of Sri Lanka’s plantations, and the dignity of the workforce that sustains them, depends on a simple shift in perspective: from measuring weather, to understanding systems. Climate is no longer just what falls from the sky. It is what moves through the universe, settles into soils, shapes returns on investment, and ultimately determines whether growth is shared or fragile.

The Way Forward

Sustaining plantation agriculture under today’s climate volatility demands an urgent policy reset. The government must mandate real-world investment appraisals—NPV, IRR, and BCR—through crop research institutes, replacing outdated historical assumptions with current climate, cost, and risk realities. Satellite-based, farm-specific real-time weather stations should be rapidly deployed across plantation regions and integrated with a central server at the Department of Meteorology, enabling precision forecasting, early warnings, and estate-level decision support. Globally proven-to-fail monocropping systems must be phased out through a time-bound transition, replacing them with diversified, mixed-root systems that combine deep-rooted and shallow-rooted species, improving soil structure, water buffering, slope stability, and resilience against prolonged droughts and extreme rainfall.

In parallel, a national plantation insurance framework, linked to green and climate-finance institutions and regulated by the Insurance Regulatory Commission, is essential to protect small and medium perennial growers from systemic climate risk. A Virtual Plantation Bank must be operationalized without delay to finance climate-resilient plantation designs, agroforestry transitions, and productivity gains aligned with national yield targets. The state should set minimum yield and profit benchmarks per hectare, formally recognize 10–50 acre growers as Proprietary Planters, and enable scale through long-term (up to 99-year) leases where state lands are sub-leased to proven operators. Finally, achieving a 4% GDP contribution from plantations requires making modern HRM practices mandatory across the sector, replacing outdated labour systems with people-centric, productivity-linked models that attract, retain, and fairly reward a skilled workforce—because sustainable competitive advantage begins with the right people.

by Dammike Kobbekaduwe

(www.vivonta.lk & www.planters.lk ✍️

Continue Reading

Opinion

Disasters do not destroy nations; the refusal to change does

Published

on

Floods caused by Cyclone Ditwah

Sri Lanka has endured both kinds of catastrophe that a nation can face, those caused by nature and those created by human hands. A thirty-year civil war tore apart the social fabric, deepening mistrust between communities and leaving lasting psychological wounds, particularly among those who lived through displacement, loss, and fear. The 2004 tsunami, by contrast, arrived without warning, erasing entire coastal communities within minutes and reminding us of our vulnerability to forces beyond human control.

These two disasters posed the same question in different forms: did we learn, and did we change? After the war ended, did we invest seriously in repairing relationships between Sinhalese and Tamil communities, or did we equate peace with silence and infrastructure alone? Were collective efforts made to heal trauma and restore dignity, or were psychological wounds left to be carried privately, generation after generation? After the tsunami, did we fundamentally rethink how and where we build, how we plan settlements, and how we prepare for future risks, or did we rebuild quickly, gratefully, and then forget?

Years later, as Sri Lanka confronts economic collapse and climate-driven disasters, the uncomfortable truth emerges. we survived these catastrophes, but we did not allow them to transform us. Survival became the goal; change was postponed.

History offers rare moments when societies stand at a crossroads, able either to restore what was lost or to reimagine what could be built on stronger foundations. One such moment occurred in Lisbon in 1755. On 1 November 1755, Lisbon-one of the most prosperous cities in the world, was almost completely erased. A massive earthquake, estimated between magnitude 8.5 and 9.0, was followed by a tsunami and raging fires. Churches collapsed during Mass, tens of thousands died, and the royal court was left stunned. Clergy quickly declared the catastrophe a punishment from God, urging repentance rather than reconstruction.

One man refused to accept paralysis as destiny. Sebastião José de Carvalho e Melo, later known as the Marquês de Pombal, responded with cold clarity. His famous instruction, “Bury the dead and feed the living,” was not heartless; it was revolutionary. While others searched for divine meaning, Pombal focused on human responsibility. Relief efforts were organised immediately, disease was prevented, and plans for rebuilding began almost at once.

Pombal did not seek to restore medieval Lisbon. He saw its narrow streets and crumbling buildings as symbols of an outdated order. Under his leadership, Lisbon was rebuilt with wide avenues, rational urban planning, and some of the world’s earliest earthquake-resistant architecture. Moreover, his vision extended far beyond stone and mortar. He reformed trade, reduced dependence on colonial wealth, encouraged local industries, modernised education, and challenged the long-standing dominance of aristocracy and the Church. Lisbon became a living expression of Enlightenment values, reason, science, and progress.

Back in Sri Lanka, this failure is no longer a matter of opinion. it is documented evidence. An initial assessment by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) following Cyclone Ditwah revealed that more than half of those affected by flooding were already living in households facing multiple vulnerabilities before the cyclone struck, including unstable incomes, high debt, and limited capacity to cope with disasters (UNDP, 2025). The disaster did not create poverty; it magnified it. Physical damage was only the visible layer. Beneath it lay deep social and economic fragility, ensuring that for many communities, recovery would be slow, uneven, and uncertain.

The world today offers Sri Lanka another lesson Lisbon understood centuries ago: risk is systemic, and resilience cannot be improvised, it must be planned. Modern climate science shows that weather systems are deeply interconnected; rising ocean temperatures, changing wind patterns, and global emissions influence extreme weather far beyond their points of origin. Floods, landslides, and cyclones affecting Sri Lanka are no longer isolated events, but part of a broader climatic shift. Rebuilding without adapting construction methods, land-use planning, and infrastructure to these realities is not resilience, it is denial. In this context, resilience also depends on Sri Lanka’s willingness to learn from other countries, adopt proven technologies, and collaborate across borders, recognising that effective solutions to global risks cannot be developed in isolation.

A deeper problem is how we respond to disasters: we often explain destruction without seriously asking why it happened or how it could have been prevented. Time and again, devastation is framed through religion, fate, karma, or divine will. While faith can bring comfort in moments of loss, it cannot replace responsibility, foresight, or reform. After major disasters, public attention often focuses on stories of isolated religious statues or buildings that remain undamaged, interpreted as signs of protection or blessing, while far less attention is paid to understanding environmental exposure, construction quality, and settlement planning, the factors that determine survival. Similarly, when a single house survives a landslide, it is often described as a miracle rather than an opportunity to study soil conditions, building practices, and land-use decisions. While such interpretations may provide emotional reassurance, they risk obscuring the scientific understanding needed to reduce future loss.

The lesson from Lisbon is clear: rebuilding a nation requires the courage to question tradition, the discipline to act rationally, and leadership willing to choose long-term progress over short-term comfort. Until Sri Lanka learns to rebuild not only roads and buildings, but relationships, institutions, and ways of thinking, we will remain a country trapped in recovery, never truly reborn.

by Darshika Thejani Bulathwatta
Psychologist and Researcher

Continue Reading

Trending