Acts Done by the Europeans on the Syriac Churches During the Previous Centuries

[amalthomas]

I want to research on the topic ‘Acts done by the European colonialists and catholic church against the syriac churches’ from the time of crusaders.
I found that syriac churches contains
‘Jacobite (syriac orthodox church),
Syriac catholic church’,
Maronite catholic church’,
Caldean catholic church,
Church of the east,
Caldean syrian church,
Syro malabar catholic church,
Syro malankara catholic church,
Indian Malankara orthodox church.

Among this I think from the time of crusades the existant churches were
Jacobite (syriac orthodox church),
MAronite catholic church,
Assyrian church of the east,
were present.
I heard from my friend that europeans and catholic church have done a lot of miserable things against these churches. If anyone can provide the details, I will be thankful.

One example I found is during 15th century, Portuguese latinised the syriac church in India and split the churc hinto two factions, namely, malabar catholic church and malankara jcobite church.
Please cite other examples in detail.

 

[robwar]

I think we need to focus on today and not what happen over 500 years ago. Today those Churches are in danger of wiped out by aggressive Muslims. For the wrongs of the crusades that happen in the past, Pope JP II did apologize and ask for forgiveness. We need to deal with today and not try and dig up what may or may not have happen during the crusades. The bigger threat is now.

 

[twf]

In what the West would call the “early Middle Ages”, the East Syriac Church spanned from Persia to China…geographically, it would have been far larger than the Latin and Byzantine Churches of the time. Today, if one includes the Syro-Malabar Catholics in India, there are only a few million East Syriac Christians primarily limited to Iran/Iraq/India (and of course, due to immigration, the West). While Europeans have certainly committed sins against their Syriac brethren…I think we need to look elsewhere to explain the horrible decline of East Syriac Christianity…

 

[SyroMalankara]

I want to research on the topic ‘Acts done by the European colonialists and catholic church against the syriac churches’ from the time of crusaders.
I found that syriac churches contains
‘Jacobite (syriac orthodox church),
Syriac catholic church’,
Maronite catholic church’,
Caldean catholic church,
Church of the east,
Caldean syrian church,
Syro malabar catholic church,
Syro malankara catholic church,
Indian Malankara orthodox church.

Among this I think from the time of crusades the existant churches were
Jacobite (syriac orthodox church),
MAronite catholic church,
Assyrian church of the east,
were present.
I heard from my friend that europeans and catholic church have done a lot of miserable things against these churches. If anyone can provide the details, I will be thankful.

One example I found is during 15th century, Portuguese latinised the syriac church in India and split the churc hinto two factions, namely, malabar catholic church and malankara jcobite church.
Please cite other examples in detail.

Amal,

Your friend is focusing on bashing the Catholic Church and Europeans but seems to have forgotten to include the rest of history. There were atrocities committed within the Eastern Churches, to other Eastern Churches - even within the Indian Churches, and between Bishops. The history of the Malankara/Indian/Malabar church is very difficult.

 

[amalthomas]

Amal,

Your friend is focusing on bashing the Catholic Church and Europeans but seems to have forgotten to include the rest of history. There were atrocities committed within the Eastern Churches, to other Eastern Churches - even within the Indian Churches, and between Bishops. The history of the Malankara/Indian/Malabar church is very difficult.

Okay, dear syromalankara. I just want to know some of the assasinations occurred in the syriac orthodox church. I heard assasinations of maphrians or catholicoses. As a scholar, can you point out some.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I want to research on the topic ‘Acts done by the European colonialists and catholic church against the syriac churches’ from the time of crusaders.
I found that syriac churches contains
‘Jacobite (syriac orthodox church),
Syriac catholic church’,
Maronite catholic church’,
Caldean catholic church,
Church of the east,
Caldean syrian church,
Syro malabar catholic church,
Syro malankara catholic church,
Indian Malankara orthodox church.

Among this I think from the time of crusades the existant churches were
Jacobite (syriac orthodox church),
MAronite catholic church,
Assyrian church of the east,
were present.
I heard from my friend that europeans and catholic church have done a lot of miserable things against these churches. If anyone can provide the details, I will be thankful.

One example I found is during 15th century, Portuguese latinised the syriac church in India and split the churc hinto two factions, namely, malabar catholic church and malankara jcobite church.
Please cite other examples in detail.

Sounds like you have fallen prey to " gossip. " Digging up the truth about the past is very difficult, if not impossible. Every historian has a " view point " and it may not be objective. And records from the past centuries are difficult to fine and full of prejudiced views. It is better not to place any stock in gossip. We live in the present time, let us live as Christians. However, the Catholic Encyclopedia has a lengthy article and the New Catholic Encyclopedia surely has more.

newadvent.org/cathen/14399a.htm

Linus2nd

 

[SyroMalankara]

Okay, dear syromalankara. I just want to know some of the assasinations occurred in the syriac orthodox church. I heard assasinations of maphrians or catholicoses. As a scholar, can you point out some.

Amal,

There was turmoil between Byzantines and Roman, Romans and Syrians, Byzantines and Syrians, Syrians and Assyrians/Chaldeans, between Assyrians and Chaldeans, between Malankara and Jacobite, between Anglo-Malankara and Jacobite/Malankara, between Rome and Malabar, between Rome and Malankara/Jacobite, between Malankara/Jacobite and Independent, between Malankara/Jacobite and protestant, between Armenian and Armenian, between Assyrian and Assyrian, between Copt and Ethiopian, between Ethiopian and Ethiopian, etc etc etc.

Why is your friend hating on Catholics and the Europeans?

 

[amalthomas]

Amal,

There was turmoil between Byzantines and Roman, Romans and Syrians, Byzantines and Syrians, Syrians and Assyrians/Chaldeans, between Assyrians and Chaldeans, between Malankara and Jacobite, between Anglo-Malankara and Jacobite/Malankara, between Rome and Malabar, between Rome and Malankara/Jacobite, between Malankara/Jacobite and Independent, between Malankara/Jacobite and protestant, between Armenian and Armenian, between Assyrian and Assyrian, between Copt and Ethiopian, between Ethiopian and Ethiopian, etc etc etc.

Why is your friend hating on Catholics and the Europeans?

ioch has primacy
Then SyroMalankra,
My question is
Suppose all the scholars and historians conclude that Antioch has primacy, Rome has nothing to do with apostle Peter, and Syriac orthodox is the genuine Antiochine church. I again say this is just an assumption. Then even if Antioch has primacy(just an assumption), what are the difficulties in the current situation to make it happen? Can you point out the difficulties currently with such a thing to happen. For example I found that Melkite catholic patriarch of antioch, Gregore iii laham, visited India two years before and advised and stressed in his speech that it is necessary to be under Rome. What are the practical problems church fear in these situations?
For example whether it has anything to do with economy of Europe, whether it has anything to do with economy of the catholic church, whether it has anything to do with Islam (since Syriac church of Antioch might be responsible for the spread of Islam in the middle east), whether it will affect the current power balance of the world and Christianity as a whole. Can you please elaborate by assuming that Antioch has primacy.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Antioch has primacy over what?

 

[amalthomas]

Antioch has primacy over what?

I say that antioch is the see of apostle Peter. It has primacy over other churches. Rome has no primacy. Peter did not go to Rome. (just assumptions). I can say that a lot of scholars has casted doubts on the presence of Peter in Rome.

Also note down the following pictures:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
In this picture we can see that Archbishop of syro malabar church MAr Joseph Powathil visiting syriac orth patriarch of antioch last year.

Then,
http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphot...403/375865_10151069834028786_2066226332_n.jpg
Picture shows that entire syrian catholic bishops after a synod met with Ignatius zakka, the orthodox patriarch of antioch. It also includes the head of syro malankara church cardinal baselios cleemis.
What meaning these pictures convey?

 

[theistgal]

What meaning these pictures convey?

Since this forum is for discussion of Eastern Catholic churches, and you’re posting about Eastern Orthodox churches, those pictures convey to me that you’re in the wrong forum.

 

[Vico]

I want to research on the topic ‘Acts done by the European colonialists and catholic church against the syriac churches’ from the time of crusaders.
I found that syriac churches contains
‘Jacobite (syriac orthodox church),
Syriac catholic church’,
Maronite catholic church’,
Caldean catholic church,
Church of the east,
Caldean syrian church,
Syro malabar catholic church,
Syro malankara catholic church,
Indian Malankara orthodox church.

Among this I think from the time of crusades the existant churches were
Jacobite (syriac orthodox church),
MAronite catholic church,
Assyrian church of the east,
were present.
I heard from my friend that europeans and catholic church have done a lot of miserable things against these churches. If anyone can provide the details, I will be thankful.

One example I found is during 15th century, Portuguese latinised the syriac church in India and split the churc hinto two factions, namely, malabar catholic church and malankara jcobite church.
Please cite other examples in detail.

An interesting book to read, that I read, is:

The Lost History of Christianity: The Thousand-Year Golden Age of the Church in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia–and How It Died by John Philip Jenkins (November 3, 2009) ISBN-10: 0061472816

Jenkins illustrates the Nestorians, Jacobites, Copts, Maronites and other eastern Christian churches in Middle East, mainly in their decline decline including different reasons, such as wars, hostility, and expansion of other faiths. He provides in depth, details on the wars against Christians and the evidence (e.g., Armenia and other Christian genocide, 1915 Assyrian Sayfo – Year of the Sword – of the Ottoman Empire).

 

[amalthomas]

An interesting book to read, that I read, is:

The Lost History of Christianity: The Thousand-Year Golden Age of the Church in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia–and How It Died by John Philip Jenkins (November 3, 2009) ISBN-10: 0061472816

Jenkins illustrates the Nestorians, Jacobites, Copts, Maronites and other eastern Christian churches in Middle East, mainly in their decline decline including different reasons, such as wars, hostility, and expansion of other faiths. He provides in depth, details on the wars against Christians and the evidence (e.g., Armenia and other Christian genocide, 1915 Assyrian Sayfo – Year of the Sword – of the Ottoman Empire).

You ca ndowload it from
en.bookfi.org/book/1165660

 

[UncleBill]

Since this forum is for discussion of Eastern Catholic churches, and you’re posting about Eastern Orthodox churches, those pictures convey to me that you’re in the wrong forum.

Some of those churches are Catholic churches…I believe he is in the right forum.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Amal,

None of those pictures show the Primacy of the Syriac Orthodox Patriarch, just friendly gestures by the other prelates.

Why not interpret it as the Syriac Patriarch showing 100% support to the Malankara Syriac Catholic Catholicos - afterall, they are sitting side by side.

Whether Peter went to Antioch, which is fact, or later Rome - accepted as Fact by all the bishops shown in the pictures, and every Orthodox Church - has nothing to do with your claim of primacy of the Syriac Orthodox Patriarch. What about the Melkite Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Syriac Catholic, Maronite Catholic, or other Patriarchs of Antioch? If anyone, the Melkite Patriarch would have a better claim, then the Syriac Orthodox or Maronite Catholic. Why do you automatically assume the Syriac Orthodox patriarch’s are more worthy than the others?

 

[malphono]

What about the Melkite Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Syriac Catholic, Maronite Catholic, or other Patriarchs of Antioch? If anyone, the Melkite Patriarch would have a better claim, then the Syriac Orthodox or Maronite Catholic.

FWLIW, (and it’s very little), I wouldn’t say it that way. The Byzantine “Patriarchate” of Antioch only came into existence due to machinations by Imperial Constantinople. The Maronite Patriarch came into existence due to the absence of a Chalcedonian claimant to that See. If we are speaking of continuity, the SOC Patriarchate would seem to be the legitimate one, at least historically speaking.

 

[SyroMalankara]

http://www.cnewa.org/blog-images/2012-9/IMG_7294.jpg

Amal - picture shows Patriarch Moran Mor Boutros Beshara with his hat off and on the side of Catholicos Moran Mor Baselios Cleemis. What meaning does this convey? Is M.M. Boutros Beshara subordinating primacy to M.M. Baselios Cleemis?

Or does the image have nothing to do with your assumptions?

 

[SyroMalankara]

FWLIW, (and it’s very little), I wouldn’t say it that way. The Byzantine “Patriarchate” of Antioch only came into existence due to machinations by Imperial Constantinople. The Maronite Patriarch came into existence due to the absence of a Chalcedonian claimant to that See. If we are speaking of continuity, the SOC Patriarchate would seem to be the legitimate one, at least historically speaking.

My question: Why would the Syriac Orthodox claim be any better? Mor Jacob Baradeus of Edessa ordained the entire hierarchy, as a reaction to the same Imperial machination. Does that make it more legitimate? I consider the two claims equal, but the original prelate was alive and switched to the Chalcedonian position, so any claim against such an act toward union with Rome would have to be seen with this in mind.

 

[amalthomas]

Amal,
If anyone, the Melkite Patriarch would have a better claim, then the Syriac Orthodox or Maronite Catholic. Why do you automatically assume the Syriac Orthodox patriarch’s are more worthy than the others?

I noticed a statement concerning Patriarch Gregory II Youssef of Melkite catholic church of Antioch as follows:
He earned the enmity of Pope Pius IX for this; during his next visit to the pontiff Gregory was cast to the floor at Pius’ feet by the papal guard and the pope placed his foot on the patriarch’s head.
The source is
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_II_Yusuf
Another source (Catholic Near East Welfare Association):

"He paid for his assertion: During Vatican II, Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch Maximos IV revealed that Pope Pius IX humiliated the patriarch, having him cast to the ground by members of the Swiss Guard and then addressing the patriarch with his foot pressed against his head. But Gregory’s defense of the Eastern Christian tradition is cited as the main influence behind the landmark apostolic letter, “Orientalium Dignitas Ecclesiarum,” issued in 1894 by Pius’s successor, Pope Leo XIII."

source:
cnewa.us/default.aspx?ID=3215&pagetypeID=4&sitecode=US&pageno=4

 

[dzheremi]

My question: Why would the Syriac Orthodox claim be any better? Mor Jacob Baradeus of Edessa ordained the entire hierarchy, as a reaction to the same Imperial machination.

What do you mean he ordained the entire hierarchy? And what’s your source on that? Because he wasn’t even ordained bishop of Edessa until c.543, i.e., about 100 years after Chalcedon. Do you mean to say that the Syriac Orthodox Church did not exist until that time? That’s an odd position for a Syro-Malankaran to hold…I figure you guys would know a church so related to your own history a bit better than that, but maybe you can’t acknowledge it now that you’ve come under Rome and have to tow the Chalcedonian line. Sad. I guess you’ve forgotten about its earlier patriarchs like St. Severus (exiled from the See in 518 AD), et al.