In its latest piece of political theatre, The Telegraph published an article claiming that the RSS is now setting its sights on Catholic Church land following the passage of the Waqf Bill in Parliament. The story, lifted from an RSS-linked magazine, makes a sensational claim — that Catholic institutions own 7 crore hectares of land and are the “largest non-governmental landowner” in the country.
The article reeks of agenda, not journalism. And worse, it is built on assumptions, fear-mongering, and convenient amnesia.
Let’s talk about facts — and here’s one that might make the Congress party and its media friends uncomfortable:
In 1965, it was the Congress Government that moved to bring Church properties under state control.
Yes, you read that right.
The 1965 Circular Congress Doesn’t Want You to Know About
On August 3, 1965, the Ministry of Defence under the Congress-led Government of India issued a letter to all State Governments. It wasn’t vague. It wasn’t speculative. It was an official directive.
The circular stated in black and white that:
> “There is nothing in the Indian Church Act or in these rules which divests the Central Government of their ownership of church sites and church buildings.”
It further added that Church Trustees only had beneficial rights of possession, control, and use — but the actual ownership lay with the Central Government.
In fact, the letter asked all States to revise their revenue records to reflect this.
This wasn’t a blog, a column, or a speculative magazine piece. It was a government order.
So here’s the million-dollar question: If the Congress party was so comfortable asserting ownership over Church lands in 1965, why is it crying foul now when similar facts are merely being discussed?
The Real Hypocrisy
Let’s break it down:
In 1965, when Congress took control of Church properties = “Secular governance.”
In 2025, when anyone talks about Church land = “Communal RSS agenda.”
The Media’s Role: Fiction Over Facts
The Telegraph’s piece uses phrases like “RSS focus shifts” and “terming it the largest landowner” — without any proof of actual action being taken. No government order. No notification. Just an article in a magazine.
Compare that to the 1965 circular — which actually directed action, change in revenue records, and recognition of government ownership.
But hey, that doesn’t fit the narrative, right?
This isn’t about land. This is about political narratives and the weaponization of selective history. When The Telegraph pushes fiction to fuel a manufactured panic, it exposes more about itself than the subject it covers.
If quoting a 1965 government circular is now communal, then the Congress government that issued it was the original culprit.
But don’t expect them to admit that. History, for them, is just something to edit — not learn from.
Author: Rishi Kalia is a seasoned entrepreneur, Digital media Strategist and political analyst with 23 years of diverse experience in business and public discourse. Tweets at Rishi Kalia
