Pictoral Explanation: Syro Malabar Vestments

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thomas48
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Thomas48

Guest
Hey Guys, for those of you who are interested, I would like to give an explanation of the beautiful vestments of the Syro Malabar Church :). If you would like to share pictures or explain the vestments of your Church, please be my guest.

First we start with the Kottina: Kottina is the long tunic type garment reaching from the neck to the ankles, of any color. Kottina is the Syriac term used for the outer garment of lso’-Msiha, which was woven as one whole by Blessed Virgin Mary and is said to have grown big with him.The person who wears Kottina, puts on Iso’-Msiha and performs His priestly ministry in His place.

View attachment 17968

Next we have the Zunara: Zunara is the Syriac word for the belt-like strip of cloth worn over the Kottina at the waist. It is the symbol of “Chastity”. Holy Qurbana and other rites of divine worship are acts which are to be performed with perfect holiness, keeping oneself away from all kinds of worldly thoughts and emotions.

View attachment 17969

Next there is the Urara: Urara is the special humeral vestment worn by priests in the neck in such a way that its both ends extend beyond the knees in front. The Subdeacons (Heuppadiakana) wear it around their neck in such a way that its ends fall to the back and front on the left shoulder. The Deacons (Msamsana) wear it on the left shoulder without putting it around the neck. In Latin tradition, they call it the Stole.This sacred vestment is the symbol of ministerial priesthood in all liturgical traditions.

View attachment 17970

Next there is the Zande: Zande is the Syriac word for gloves or handcuffs. They are worn to keep the handcuffs of the Kottina in order.

View attachment 17971

And finally we have the Paina: Paina is the outermost liturgical vestment that priests put on. It is similar to the cope in Latin tradition. In Syriac it is known as Gulta. Paina or Gulta is the garment of justice. It proclaims the fact that a priest is the fount or source of all kinds of virtues.Historically, paina appears to be the outer garment of shepherds, thus it proclaims the pastoral duty of a priest as well.

View attachment 17972 View attachment 17973

Source: marthommamargam.blogspot.com/
 
Thanks! My confessor was a bi-ritual Syro Malabar/Roman priest for the past few years.

So lso’-Msiha means Jesus?

Thanks again!!!

-Tim-
 
Thanks for the explanation! 🙂 Just to add:

The payna is related to the Western chasuble and cope and the Eastern phailonion/felon. (The name in fact is derived from an alternative Greek name: phainolion. Phailonion/phainolion is in turn derived from the Latin paenula, which is essentially a round poncho of sorts.) The difference between the three I think is that the chasuble was reduced at the sides (resulting in the shorter yet still ample ‘Gothic’ chasuble - more cutting produced the apron-like fiddleback), the phelonion was cut at the front from about the waist down, and the payna is totally open, clasped at the neck like a cope.
 
First we start with the Kottina: Kottina is the long tunic type garment reaching from the neck to the ankles, of any color. Kottina is the Syriac term used for the outer garment of lso’-Msiha, which was woven as one whole by Blessed Virgin Mary and is said to have grown big with him.The person who wears Kottina, puts on Iso’-Msiha and performs His priestly ministry in His place.
Click to expand...
Thomas,

The Chaldeans and Assyrians pronounce the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in Aramaic slightly differently from you guys, and even slightly differently from amongst each other… 🙂

The Chaldeans say: Maran Eesho’ Mshiha
The Assyrians say: Maran Eeshoo Mshikha

God bless,

Rony
 
MorEphrem said:
Yep, Jesus Messiah.

Although, Thomas48, is it Msiha or Mshiha? I only ask because in the West Syriac tradition Messiah is Mshiho.
Click to expand...
ronyodish said:
Thomas,

The Chaldeans and Assyrians pronounce the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in Aramaic slightly differently from you guys, and even slightly differently from amongst each other… 🙂

The Chaldeans say: Maran Eesho’ Mshiha
The Assyrians say: Maran Eeshoo Mshikha

God bless,

Rony
Click to expand...
In the Syro Malabar Church we pronounce His name:

English: Jesus the Messiah
Malabar East Syriac: 1.Eesho Mishiha 2.Isho Mishiha

English: Jesus Christ
Malabar East Syriac: Yeshu Christu

Englsh: The Messiah My Lord
Malabar East Syriac: Mishiha Karthave
 
Also if I may add, in the highest form of reverence and respect, His name in the Syro Malabar Church is:
Maran Mar Eesho Mishiha
 
Thanks! This post was incredibly informative. 😃 I’d love to see a pictoral explanation of Byzantine vestments, if anyone wants to do one.
 
Medical_Student said:
Do you know what was worn pre-Portuguese? Was it the same?
Click to expand...
To my knowledge the Church doesn’t seem to have any written records of what was worn during this era. However the Portughese do write that when they arrived, the St.Thomas Christians had mixed many pagan (Hindu) aspects into their religion (or this could have been East Syriac and the Portuguese couldn’t tell the difference) but if it is true that they had mixed these Hindu traditions, it would be likely to assume that Pre-Portughese Malabar Christians wore vestments of East Syriac tradition with some Hindu aspects.

Although I am not sure about vestments, it is true according to written record that the St. Thomas Christians had a very diluted form of Christianity when the Portuguese arrived (at least according to them). This is most likely due to the great distance between Malabar and Mesopotamia where the Thomas Christians received their bishops and liturgical tradition from. It can be assumed that it took years for the Assyrian Church to continually send bishops and most likely the communication was not the best between the Church and Her adherents in Malabar. A good example of the diluted Christianity is that when Alexio De Menezes (Portuguese Bishop of Goa) came to celebrate a Mass at Kadhurthurthy Knanaya Church in the 1500’s, he had raised an icon of St. Mary in reverence in front of the Christians, in return the Christians spat on the floor and turned there heads away. However this could be a result of many different scenarios, one the Portuguese could have heavily fabricated the story of the Thomas Christians having a diluted religion to show that they needed a new shepherd and guidance, in this case the Portuguese Latin Catholics. Two it could have been the Christians of Kadhurthurthy showing spite towards Menezes or three it could have been that the Thomas Christians were not accustomed to idol veneration.
 
Thomas48 said:
To my knowledge the Church doesn’t seem to have any written records of what was worn during this era. However the Portughese do write that when they arrived, the St.Thomas Christians had mixed many pagan (Hindu) aspects into their religion (or this could have been East Syriac and the Portuguese couldn’t tell the difference) but if it is true that they had mixed these Hindu traditions, it would be likely to assume that Pre-Portughese Malabar Christians wore vestments of East Syriac tradition with some Hindu aspects.

Although I am not sure about vestments, it is true according to written record that the St. Thomas Christians had a very diluted form of Christianity when the Portuguese arrived (at least according to them). This is most likely due to the great distance between Malabar and Mesopotamia where the Thomas Christians received their bishops and liturgical tradition from. It can be assumed that it took years for the Assyrian Church to continually send bishops and most likely the communication was not the best between the Church and Her adherents in Malabar. A good example of the diluted Christianity is that when Alexio De Menezes (Portuguese Bishop of Goa) came to celebrate a Mass at Kadhurthurthy Knanaya Church in the 1500’s, he had raised an icon of St. Mary in reverence in front of the Christians, in return the Christians spat on the floor and turned there heads away. However this could be a result of many different scenarios, one the Portuguese could have heavily fabricated the story of the Thomas Christians having a diluted religion to show that they needed a new shepherd and guidance, in this case the Portuguese Latin Catholics. Two it could have been the Christians of Kadhurthurthy showing spite towards Menezes or three it could have been that the Thomas Christians were not accustomed to idol veneration.
Click to expand...
It’s possible that the icon was offensive to the Malabar Christians, since Assyrians hadn’t - at that time - made general use of iconography for various reasons. It is also possible, in addition to the reasons you stated already, that the icon was seen as too European – or in a Knanaya Church at that time, even too Northist!
 
SyroMalankara said:
It’s possible that the icon was offensive to the Malabar Christians, since Assyrians hadn’t - at that time - made general use of iconography for various reasons. It is also possible, in addition to the reasons you stated already, that the icon was seen as too European – or in a Knanaya Church at that time, even too Northist!
Click to expand...
Good speculations, however I don’t understand the Northist one. Southist and Northist had the same liturgical tradition just celebrated in different churches, same as today. What would seem offensive to Southist would be the same to Northist atleast in relation to religion.
 
Thomas48 said:
Good speculations, however I don’t understand the Northist one. Southist and Northist had the same liturgical tradition just celebrated in different churches, same as today. What would seem offensive to Southist would be the same to Northist atleast in relation to religion.
Click to expand...
What I mean in regard to the Northist/Southist divide is more superficial. It could have been as simple as “this icon is popular among Knanaya, therefore we non-Knanaya are opposed”, or vice versa… at that time, not today.
 
SyroMalankara said:
What I mean in regard to the Northist/Southist divide is more superficial. It could have been as simple as “this icon is popular among Knanaya, therefore we non-Knanaya are opposed”, or vice versa… at that time, not today.
Click to expand...
Ah that is very correct, it is sadly very superficial. I’m sure during those years they had oppositions over the simplest things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top