Church-goers staged a protest at Our Lady of Visitation Church on St. Mary’s Road this Monday morning when staff of GCC arrived at the campus to followup on a court order to close and demolish what is the present main church premises.
A large posse of policemen and women were also stationed at the church premises to handle untoward incidents.
The GCC team which oversees the local area returned to its office after it was told that the church was in the process of challenging the court order.
The church has been at the centre of legal as well as internal battles that have been going on for sometime now. Much of this seems to have started after the church authorities won a legal battle against a set of families who rented church property as residences and where many unauthorised houses had come up.
The aggrieved seem to be the ones who have challenged the church. First, the group challenged the building of a grotto and bell tower inside the church, saying it was unauthorised. The issue was taken to GCC which slapped a ‘stop’ notice on this project and froze this work.
The group also went to court, saying that the main church, built in 1970s, did not have requisite orders for its building and development and hence must be closed and demolished. The High Court accepted the plea of the petitioners and ordered requisite action.
A lawyer who handles legal cases of the church and is in the know of the local issues said that there were ‘mistakes’ made by the state in land records and that those were set right but also admitted that the church was built without obtaining all required permissions and that the church/diocese has appealed to CMDA and asked it to approve the church building.
In this church campus, lies a vintage, small church which is associated with the legends of saint Thomas. It is said that the apostle used to rest and preach here while moving between San Thome and Little Mount.
No tags for this post.
Your article dated 05.05.2025, titled “Tense Morning at Church Premises on St. Mary’s Road”, is a textbook example of journalistic dereliction. What could have been an opportunity to uphold facts and public interest has instead devolved into a puff piece that obscures judicial findings, trivializes land encroachment, and romanticizes lawlessness in the garb of heritage and faith.
Let’s set the record straight.
1. This Is Not a “Tense Morning” — It’s a Court-Ordered Demolition
What your article downplays as a mere “tense morning” was the rightful execution of a Madras High Court order. The court found that the main church building, grotto and bell tower were constructed without statutory approvals on government poramboke land—public land meant for communal benefit, not private religious expansion.
2. This Is Not About “Aggrieved Families” — It’s About Fraud and Forgery
Your attempt to frame the petitioners as disgruntled tenants borders on defamatory. The truth is far more serious: the church, under Pastor Antonyraj and builder Titus Thanga Primus, forged documents to justify illegal constructions. These forgeries were exposed in court. The “group” you refer to were whistleblowers fighting for rule of law, not personal gain.
3. A Lawyer’s Admission Isn’t a Footnote — It’s a Confession
The casual mention that the church was “built without obtaining all required permissions” should not be a side note—it is a central criminal issue. No private citizen or organization could get away with this, yet your tone suggests that the Church deserves special treatment. Is this journalism or public relations?
4. Stop Using Myth to Justify Encroachment
The reference to the “legend of St. Thomas” is utterly irrelevant to this case. Sacred folklore cannot serve as a legal shield for violating the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act. Should every religious group now start citing myth as a land claim?
5. Where Was This Outrage When the Law Was Being Broken?
You mention a “protest” by churchgoers. Where was this passion when the church was funding illegal structures via a banned lottery scheme? Or when it forged letters to the Corporation? Civil protest is a right—but it loses moral weight when it defends the indefensible.
It’s deeply troubling to see a local paper, with presumed loyalty to the truth, turn into a mouthpiece for institutional illegality. We expect better from Mylapore Times. Journalism should inform—not sanitize or mythologize. You are not in the business of public relations for religious institutions. Stick to facts, not fiction.
We don’t expect the likes of Mylapore Times to suddenly rediscover journalistic integrity—but let’s see if even now, you’re capable of publishing a follow-up grounded in verified facts, not vague generalities and romanticized half-truths. Let the public judge—but only after hearing the unvarnished truth.
There exists a “Church” ( Our Lady Of Visitation) that has long strayed from the values and mission it claims to uphold. While it bears the title of a place of worship, in truth, it operates more like a business—one obsessed with wealth, status, and control. The core message of faith, love, humility, and service to others has been drowned out by the clinking of coins and the shallow echoes of praise for the wealthy.
In this church, money speaks louder than morality. Those with deep pockets are given the loudest voices, the highest seats, and the greatest influence. Decisions are not guided by spiritual conviction, but by financial contribution. The rich are revered as untouchable pillars, while the less fortunate are treated as burdens or invisible shadows.
This toxic place fosters an environment where favoritism thrives. Nepotism, pride, and vanity have replaced humility, servanthood, and grace. Leadership is no longer about shepherding souls, but about maintaining power and privilege. The sermon is used less to preach the gospel and more to subtly manipulate, guilt-trip, and pressure the congregation into giving more—promising blessings in return for donations, as if God’s grace is for sale.
Instead of being a refuge for the broken, it has become a social club for the elite. Instead of feeding the hungry or visiting the sick, resources are poured into extravagant buildings, flashy events, and the comfort of the inner circle. Transparency is non-existent. Questioning authority is discouraged. Spiritual abuse is masked as discipline. And those who dare to challenge the system are labeled as rebellious or “not walking in faith.”
What remains is an institution hollow at its core. A house of God in name, but not in spirit. A place where Christ’s teachings are quoted, but not lived. It’s a tragic mockery of what the church is meant to be—a family, a sanctuary, a light in the darkness.
Now, in a final display of misplaced priorities, the church’s leadership is fiercely fighting to preserve a structure that was illegally built—an edifice raised without proper permits or respect for the law. Rather than acknowledging their wrongdoing or seeking reconciliation, they are rallying the congregation to defend what should never have been erected in the first place. They frame it as a spiritual attack, twisting the narrative to paint themselves as persecuted saints rather than lawbreakers. Instead of standing for truth and integrity, they choose defiance and deceit, showing once again that their allegiance lies more with pride and property than with God’s truth.