Catholic Churches in India how long?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mo3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mo3

Guest
I am in a discussion with a person from Kerala area. He is claiming “Marthomans don’t practice Catholic teachings of Mary etc” “Catholics didn’t reach India until 16th century” “Catholocism was brought by Portuguese & forced Mathoma Church to join them” “Marthomans DO NOT follow the Catholic Church”

I directed him to www.stthomasmount.org but he responded: that shrine was built in 16th century, so what if St Thomas was martyred there.

I don’t understand this general term “Marthomans”?

How can I respond? Can you point me to references? Thanks, many blessings.
 
Perhaps he is misdirecting you by his use of terminology.
He states "Catholics reached India in the 16th Century. So he is separating “Christians from Jerusalem” in the 1st Century from Catholics.
Perhaps you can point to him that those pesky Catholics from the 16th Century are a continuation from the former who arrived earlier.
Then again some people might ignore facts and believe whatever they wish to believe.
Peace!
 
mo3 said:
I am in a discussion with a person from Kerala area. He is claiming “Marthomans don’t practice Catholic teachings of Mary etc” “Catholics didn’t reach India until 16th century” “Catholocism was brought by Portuguese & forced Mathoma Church to join them” “Marthomans DO NOT follow the Catholic Church”

I directed him to www.stthomasmount.org but he responded: that shrine was built in 16th century, so what if St Thomas was martyred there.

I don’t understand this general term “Marthomans”?

How can I respond? Can you point me to references? Thanks, many blessings.
Click to expand...
The Synod of Diamper brought the Christians in into union with the Catholic Church. Original group of Christians in Kerala were early in communion with the Assyrian Church of the East.


A Christian community known as “The Thomas Christians” has existed on the southwest coast of India since ancient times, attested to in documented sources dating back to the fourth century. The Thomas Christians claim with considerable credibility to have been founded by the Apostle Thomas, who had evangelized India following the death and resurrection of Christ. Located in what is now the state of Kerala, they were a distinct religious community fully integrated into Indian society. They were also in full communion with the Assyrian Church of the East, which in early centuries had regularly sent bishops to India to ordain deacons and priests.
Click to expand...
 
Did these 1st century “Christians from Jerusalem” say the mass? Did they venerate Mary? Did they pray to the saints?
 
40.png
Catholic Churches in India how long? Eastern Catholicism
The Synod of Diamper brought the Christians in into union with the Catholic Church. Original group of Christians in Kerala were early in communion with the Assyrian Church of the East. A Christian community known as “The Thomas Christians” has existed on the southwest coast of India since ancient times, attested to in documented sources dating back to the fourth century. The Thomas Christians claim with considerable credibility to have been founded by the Apostle Thomas, who had evangeliz…
Click to expand...
About the Catholics near Chennai at the site of St Thomas martyrdom, when was that community formed? Were they part of Assyrian Church of the East? Did they say the mass before 1600? Did they venerate Mary and pray to the saints?
 
“Marthomans” is a bit misleading the better term is Mar Thomite. The Mar Thoma Church is a reformist church that claims to be reformed orthodox and claims to be the original St Thomas Christians. Most of these claims, though, are pretty controversial. While it is correct that we were part of the Church of the East so 16 centuries, the Church of the East split into 2 during 1552. The Church of the East followed a hereditary pattern of succession. The family were relatives of St Joseph (According to tradition) and therefore were thought to be the fittest for the job. Problems arose, however, because of this, and many times there would be 12-year-old Patriarchs or cruel ones. The ruling Patriarch at the time, Shemon VII Ishoyahb, was lustful, consecrated his cousins as metropolitan bishops, sold church property, and allowed concubinage. Many protested and the opposing bishops decided to consecrate a monk named a Yohannan as the new Patriarch. Rabban Yohannan and the bishops approached to the Syriac Orthodox Church, who declined for doctrinal reasons. He then went to the Pope, who had him consecrated as Patriarch. He consecrated many metropolitan bishops, including his brother Mar Joseph Sulaqa. When Mar Yohannan arrived in Baghdad, he was killed by the Ottomans. He is considered a martyr by the Catholic Church. Mar Joseph Sulaqa was sent to India, basically saying that by this time, Christians in Kerala were Catholic. He was deported to Rome but died right before his trial. His tomb is unknown. The other faction sent a bishop, Mar Abraham. He too was deported but escaped to Alqosh and asked the new Patriarch of the Chaldean Catholic Church Mar Abdisho Maron if he can be Catholic and be consecrated as the Metropolitan and Gate of All India. Mar Abdisho Maron knew Mar Abraham had experience in India so he sent him to the Pope, where he was trained and he received the pallium. He came back to India. There was much resistance from the Portuguese, but a letter from the Pope had stopped them from deporting him. Mar Abraham built the first Cathedral in India in Angamaly. This Church was dedicated to Rabban Mar Hormzid and today serves as the Co-Cathedral of the Archeparchy of Ernakulam-Angamaly. He had clashes with the Archbishop of Goa and the Jesuits but nevertheless remained Catholic. He died without the last sacraments because of his clashes with Archbishop Meneses. After his death, another clash occurred with the Archdeacon and Archbishop Meneses. Eventually, the Archbishop won and he convened the Synod of Diamper, which brought us under the Latin Church. So we were Catholics from 1552, not at the Synod of Diamper. By then, 2 factions form but that is a whole other topic.
 
mo3 said:
Did these 1st century “Christians from Jerusalem” say the mass? Did they venerate Mary? Did they pray to the saints
Click to expand...
the Church in India was originally in communion with the Persian Church (aka Church of the East). This church collapsed by 1552 (“schism of 1552”). A part of this Persian Church joined in communion with Rome (the modern day Chaldean Catholic Church). The Persian Church employed the East Syriac liturgy (Anaphora of Mar Addai and Mar Mari). Interestingly the Persian Church was never in communion with the Orthodox churches.

The Persian Church had valid sacraments, venerated Saints and did venerate Mary as well. Their priests were allowed to marry as was common in many Syriac oriented apostolic churches.

Through the Synod of Diamper of 1599, the Indian church was brought under the jurisdiction of the Latin/Roman Church (Archdiocese of Goa). the group of the Indian Persian Church that joined in communion with Rome later on became the modern day Syro-Malabar Church (they basically employ a Latinized Persian liturgy but are fully Catholic in theology).

Mar Gregorios Abdal Jaleel Bawa (circa 17th century), of the Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch, brought a faction of the Indian St Thomas Christians in communion with the Oriental Orthodox communion (where they employ the West Syriac Liturgy of St James). This church is commonly known as the “Malankara Church”. A part of the Malankara Church due to British Anglican missionaries “reformed” and formed a church called “Mar Thoma Church” in the 19th century, which is technically Protestant in theology but their liturgy at the core is the West Syriac Rite. A part of this Malankara Church joined in full communion with Rome in 1930 to form the Malankara Syrian Catholic Church.

Many of the Latin Rite Catholics of India (whether Mangalorean Catholics or the Latin Catholics of Kerala or Tamil Catholics) were converted by Portuguese or Italian missionaries during the 13th/14th/15th/16th centuries. Northeast India has a large chunk of Catholics as well- thanks to the work of missionaries within the last 120 years.
 
Last edited:
Now about the “Not praying to Mary” part. I laugh when they say that. It’s really funny. They claim that we Nasranis never prayed to Virgin Mary, drew images of them, or prayed for the dead. It’s really funny they say this for several reasons. The first reason is because of the history of how the Mar Thoma church came to be. Fast forward 200 years later from the Synod of Diamper, and you see that we Nasranis have split into the Catholic and Syriac Orthodox factions. The Syriac Orthodox faction comes in contact with the Anglican Missionaries. These missionaries had a good relationship with the Syriac Orthodox Nasranis. Eventually, however, the relationship between the 2 becomes not so good. Many were highly influenced by them and one example was Abraham Malpan. Fr.Abraham translated the Holy Qurbana to Malayalam and removed parts dedicated to the Virgin Mary or parts praying for the souls of the dead (the concept of Purgatory was not considered doctrine by both the Catholics and Syriac Orthodox in India at the time.) He also translated the Bible to Malayalam. This angered the majority of the Syriac Orthodox, who added the prayers to the Virgin Mary back to the Qurbana.
We Nasranis have always prayed to the Virgin Mary. Google “St Mary’s Jacobite Syrian Cathedral Manarcad” and in this church, since around the 6th century, there have been prayers to the virgin mary known as Ettu Nombu(8 days fast)…Many churches are dedicated to the Virgin Mary in Kerala. Not only that, but Saints have always been revered in India. The tomb of Saint Thomas was always revered by us and in fact, the Church was actually built in the 10 century by Armenian immigrants. Marco Polo even stated that he had visited the Church. The Church was taken (a better word is stolen) by the Portuguese and eventually made their cathedral. Even before then, the tomb was visited by us…plus there are countless churches dedicated to the saints, and many churches contain relics of them or have ancient statues of them such as the statue of St George in Edathua and Angamaly. Both of these statues are from Persia. The Mar Thoma Church is the only Church that is reformed and has a long history of iconoclasm (like the throwing of the miraculous picture of Yeldho Mar Baselios in a well.) And so really, they have nothing to brag about or to claim that they are the original Church because they are reformed
 
mo3 said:
…
Click to expand...
Not much is known about the Divine Liturgy or Mass before about 400 A.D. The Holy Qurbono (Liturgy of Addai and Mari, for example) is and was used by the Assyrian Church of the East so at least by that time it was used in Kerala. For Chennai (Tamil Nadu), there is a St. Thomas Syro-Malabar Catholic Church in Guindy, east of St. Thomas Mount.
 
Last edited:
Yes to all three!
The mass was called “breaking the bread” and we still call it that.
Mary being the Mother of our Lord has a preeminent positions since antiquity. Read the Fathers!
As for praying to the Saints, it is in the Gospels. The prayer of someone who righteous availeth much. And praying in this context is asking for their intercession with GOD for our plights. It is biblical to the core.
Peace!
 
mo3 said:
Did these 1st century “Christians from Jerusalem” say the mass?
Click to expand...
Neither did the first century Roman Christians.

“Saying the Mass” wasn’t possible until the western liturgy was the Mass, which wouldn’t be possible. before Rome switched to latin, as the term is taken from the latin of the dismissal . . .

That said, it can be said with reasonable certainty that this group would havehd a liturgy with the Eucharist and with clergy in the Apostolic Succession.

You’re looking to use later developments as a lens, and it just can’t work . . .
 
St. Thomas established the Indian Rite of the Catholic Church in the 1st century. For a time, communication between the Indian Rite Catholics and the rest of the Church was cut off, but they always remained Catholic.
 
Thats a lie, there is no Indian rite first of all, and if there is, they are all 21 century christians adaptions of hindu practices. We have never been Catholic until AD 1552, when the Church of the East split into a Catholic faction and an Independent faction. The Church in Kerala became Catholic after they accepted the Catholic faction’s line of metropolitans and bishops. The Portoguese tried to latin Catholics, but we refuted and we split into 2. The orginal liturgy used in India is the East Syriac rite. The West Syriac rite was introduced in 1665 but only used 19/18 century. The Latin rite was practiced among converts and those who were excommunicated by the Archdeacon. Just admit it, the Church in India was not Catholic for 1552 years…If you want proof:
https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/256911/4/08_chapter-1.pdf
Now if you are aligning yourself to the teachings of Fr.Placid Podipara, he himself said we were not part of the Catholic Church
 
Elvis_George said:
We have never been Catholic until AD 1552
Click to expand...
What was meant by the statement is that Indian Christians held Apostolic Faith (perhaps until Church of the East business or so, not expert on that). St. Thomas the Apostle was Catholic, so by that logic St. Thomas Christians were also Catholic at least until certain period.
Elvis_George said:
Now if you are aligning yourself to the teachings of Fr.Placid Podipara, he himself said we were not part of the Catholic Church
Click to expand...
Perhaps not visibly. For example Maronites were separated from Catholic Church because they were disconnected from other Christians. But they maintained Apostolic Faith and when Crusaders came, Maronites re-established communication with Catholic Church. But they were never in Schism neither in Heresy, so they were part of the Church all this time despite hierarchy not being in contact.
 
Last edited:
dochawk said:
40.png
mo3:
Did these 1st century “Christians from Jerusalem” say the mass?
Click to expand...
Neither did the first century Roman Christians.

“Saying the Mass” wasn’t possible until the western liturgy was the Mass, which wouldn’t be possible. before Rome switched to latin, as the term is taken from the latin of the dismissal . . .

That said, it can be said with reasonable certainty that this group would havehd a liturgy with the Eucharist and with clergy in the Apostolic Succession.

You’re looking to use later developments as a lens, and it just can’t work . . .
Click to expand...
Well, “mass” is a Latin term, but the liturgy described by St. Justin Martyr in the mid 100s follows the same general outline the Latin Rite uses and has used.
 
OrbisNonSufficit said:
But they maintained Apostolic Faith and when Crusaders came, Maronites re-established communication with Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Yeah but we Nasranis were already part of a Church, the Church of the East. Sure, we were isolated too but that does not mean we were in communion with Rome. In fact, we the Portuguese arrived in Kerala, we did not accept the Pope immediatly because we already had a leader at the time, the Catholicos of the East… The Maronites were isolated but still consider themselves Catholics, the Nasranis did not
 
Last edited:
I see. As I said I am not expert, but I am glad to learn. Was Church of the East Nestorian?
 
Last edited:
Hmm the term Nestorian is misleading…Nestorianism was in fact, only believed in and taught by some non-mainstream protestants. Nestorius taught that Jesus had 2 distinctive natures, while Cyril of Alexandria taught the 2 natures were united into 1. Both teachings were and are considered Orthodox. What happened though, is the fact that Nestorius’s teaching was accused of being heretical by Cyril Of Alexandria. Many clergymen in Constantinople also rebelled against Nestorius because they were not happy with an Antiochian bishop ruling in a predominantly Greek Area. Cyril appealed to Pope Celestine, who sided with Patriarch Cyril. The Emperor and his wife sided with Nestorius. Eventually, he was condemned in the Council of Ephesus. Let’s go back 10 years before the Council. The Church of the East in the synod of Seleucia-Ctesiphon declares it’s Independence after pressure from the Sassanians. The new Catholicos, accepted the faith of Nestorius. They knew he practiced the Orthodox faith because of the Bazaar of Heracleides, a letter written by Nestorius to Patriarch Cyril after he had been deported stating that he had always believed the Jesus had 1 hypostatic union and 2 natures. Fast forward later, you see theologians like Mar Babai the Great who based his teachings off Mar Theodore … you can read his teachings here:

 
Short answer:
The Saint Thomas christians in India have apostolic roots and have been there since the first century. Along with the Church of the East they disapproved with the council of Ephesus and brook communion. Some of them later returned to the Catholic Church during the 16th century, these are the Syro-Malabar Church.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top