Should this be permitted? Your opinions please

[SyroMalankara]

I believe in this particular case it would have had to been the sharing of parishes. Portuguese records mention numerous times that the Knanaya reserved their parishes to themselves.

Thomas, I like and get along with most people. I have no hate toward Knanaya or anyone else. But, can’t you see how it can be problematic for a parish - any parish - to declare that it is “off limits” to others? In India, in the old days, it was so bad that an outsider could be beaten for daring to show up at a parish he wasn’t “a member” of. If a non-Knanaya showed up, it was like when the British Raj saw the dirty Indian wanting to attend services with him - no way… (This is what happened to Gandhi, and why he never became a Christian). I am glad those days are over, we don’t need “traditions” like that.

What I mean by loose membership is that their membership is transferred to the nearby Syro Malabar Parish. I would like to think the majority of Knanayas care when it comes to this issue

If you polled the majority of Knanaya in the US, the majority of Catholic Knanaya attend Latin parishes. The Orthodox Knanaya attend Syriac Orthodox Knanaya Churches or protestant/non-denominational sects.

, for example just yesterday the KCCNA president came down to Houston to speak of the Church transfer issue. He left Houston with a petition composing of hundreds of signatures on the matter of preserving endogamy at St.Mary’s Knanaya Catholic Church.

Is that indicative of a larger interest or does it show that the folks who he spoke to are those who care? I’d say the majority of Knanaya don’t know who the KCCNA president is, nor have anything to do with the organization.

Another recent example is the Protest March in front of Mar Angadiath House, thousands of Knanaya rallied in Chicago from all states to show there support in preserving endogamy. From seeing all of these forms of mass petition I would think that the large majority of Knanaya care on this issue.

Or it shows that people like a good rally. India is full of them. Rallys for this, and against that. I’ve always contended that Indians, especially Malayalis, have taken democracy and made it into another way to self-promote (either themselves or whatever ideology they profess at the moment).

You have to understand endogamy is the basis of the Knanaya Community, if the Catholic Church stated something like you may not continue to invoke Vazhu Pidutham no one would put up such a fight to try to preserve it because its a minor tradition.

What about the faith? Is endogamy worth schism? You stated earlier that you and others would be fine leaving Catholicism to join the Syriac Patriarch to preserve endogamy. What if both Churches disallowed separate parishes? Would you join a protestant group or make your own?

Many Eastern Catholics on this thread have argued that we should just blatantly adhere to the bishops commands but none of you will understand our dilemma until those in Rome try to remove one of your long standing Eastern traditions. I guarantee that if Rome re-scripted a custom of the Malankara Catholics especially one of such deep root like endogamy, many Malankara Catholics would protest and petition as well.

Malankara Catholics currently aren’t allowed (I don’t think the Pope these days cares if we choose to or not) married clergy, and we have very few deacons. Most in the know want these restored, but we pray, speak to the hierarchs, and hope these change for restoration of the Tradition. We haven’t yet sparked a protest rally or had petitions signed and deliver to our Catholicos.

You ask me to what cause do we protest? The answer to that is easy, to protect the Identity of the Knanaya Catholic Church and to have one Knanaya tradition globally.

The identity of the Knanaya Community is as an Endogamous group within the Syro-Malabar and Syriac Orthodox Churches. There is no separate Knanaya Catholic Church per se.

Ask yourself SyroMalankara, does it make sense for us to be able to practice one way in India but another way in North America?

No one is asking you to change your practice. Just asking that you don’t reserve parishes to yourself and exclude others.

For example, why can Kottayam Archdiocese not have any suffragan diocese when every other Archdiocese can?

Maybe because the Knanaya Archdiocese is itself a suffragan diocese for Knanaya people under the Syro-Malabar Diocese.

Why is it that a Knanaya priest was denied the position of auxiliary bishop of the St.Thomas Syro Malabar Diocese when it was proposed to be a diocese for both Syro Malabar and Knanaya Catholics?

The diocese is right now a diocese for Syro-Malabar, which the Knanaya people are a sub-Community. What’s the problem with the current set up? There are many plausible reasons why the St Thomas Eparchy does not have another bishop - for one, it is quite new and not very large. Why would the diocese spend money to build another Cathedral and have another prelate? Also - wouldn’t having a second bishop for the community weaken the bishop currently in place, and divide it’s assets - which are still being structured and built?

 

[Thomas48]

Thomas, I like and get along with most people. I have no hate toward Knanaya or anyone else. But, can’t you see how it can be problematic for a parish - any parish - to declare that it is “off limits” to others? In India, in the old days, it was so bad that an outsider could be beaten for daring to show up at a parish he wasn’t “a member” of. If a non-Knanaya showed up, it was like when the British Raj saw the dirty Indian wanting to attend services with him - no way… (This is what happened to Gandhi, and why he never became a Christian). I am glad those days are over, we don’t need “traditions” like that.

Thank you for your reply, I understand your point but the problem I see is if the Catholic Church found this problematic would they not have stopped our exclusive custom a long while back? Many people have argued to me that the Catholic Church was unaware of the endogamic custom of Kottayam in 1911, be that may, H.G Mar Kuriakose Kunnacherry petitioned to Rome when the first exogamous marriages sprang in Kottayam. It was with the understanding and counsel of Rome that this membership transfer Idea formulated.

If you polled the majority of Knanaya in the US, the majority of Catholic Knanaya attend Latin parishes. The Orthodox Knanaya attend Syriac Orthodox Knanaya Churches or protestant/non-denominational sects.

Is that indicative of a larger interest or does it show that the folks who he spoke to are those who care? I’d say the majority of Knanaya don’t know who the KCCNA president is, nor have anything to do with the organization.

I do not mean any offense to your knowledge about the Knanaya Communtity when I say this but that doesn’t seem to be the case at all. Each Knanaya Parish only grows in membership yearly and new missions come about every year or two. It is true that there are some members that go to Latin Parishes but that is not the majority at all, it is only a minority. I myself go to our local Latin Parish some weekends, and of course after Holy Mass us Malayalees chat and there are only five or six Knanaya families there at the max. Usually people in the Houston Community only attend Latin mass if they happened to be late for Knanaya Qurbana or some other minor reason.

I think being a Knanaya Catholic myself I would know this but at every single party or event, the endogamy crisis is always a topic that is brought to the table. Trust me when I say this SyroMalankara this is no small issue among the Knanaya Community. It has become such a large issue that even other Malayalee Communites know about it, for example my Malankara friends came over last month and told me that Knanayas should have been granted their own Metran and Diocese by now. They jokingly told me that our parishes should be brought under the Catholicos and that he would allow us a diocese within the next month.

Or it shows that people like a good rally. India is full of them. Rallys for this, and against that. I’ve always contended that Indians, especially Malayalis, have taken democracy and made it into another way to self-promote (either themselves or whatever ideology they profess at the moment).

That is true in Kerala there a rallies every single day but no, the Protest March was an official event planned by KCCNA and Parish Councils for months. The community is not trying to self-promote but instead we are trying to get our voices heard to Mar Angadiath who has made no initiative towards the endogamy crisis for the last several years. The protest has made the most process against the Re-script above any other mode of petition.

What about the faith? Is endogamy worth schism? You stated earlier that you and others would be fine leaving Catholicism to join the Syriac Patriarch to preserve endogamy. What if both Churches disallowed separate parishes? Would you join a protestant group or make your own?

Count myself out of anything schismatic but yes perhaps the more prideful members would join over to the Jacobites. I am prideful myself but not enough to leave the Catholic Church.

Malankara Catholics currently aren’t allowed (I don’t think the Pope these days cares if we choose to or not) married clergy, and we have very few deacons. Most in the know want these restored, but we pray, speak to the hierarchs, and hope these change for restoration of the Tradition. We haven’t yet sparked a protest rally or had petitions signed and deliver to our Catholicos.

How long has it been since Rome has decreed this order? Knanaya Catholics have had this issue hanging about for near thirty years now. Yes at first we were silent and talked things out with our bishops to no avail but only recently have we gone into large scale protests and petitioning. The Protest March seems have the greatest impact in our fight against the Re-script to a point where H.B Mar George Allencherry has taken initiative.

 

[Thomas48]

The identity of the Knanaya Community is as an Endogamous group within the Syro-Malabar and Syriac Orthodox Churches. There is no separate Knanaya Catholic Church per se.

No one is asking you to change your practice. Just asking that you don’t reserve parishes to yourself and exclude others.

What is endogamy without the community being able to control membership? The practice has been changed in all but one parish in the U.S.

Maybe because the Knanaya Archdiocese is itself a suffragan diocese for Knanaya people under the Syro-Malabar Diocese.The diocese is right now a diocese for Syro-Malabar, which the Knanaya people are a sub-Community. What’s the problem with the current set up? There are many plausible reasons why the St Thomas Eparchy does not have another bishop - for one, it is quite new and not very large. Why would the diocese spend money to build another Cathedral and have another prelate? Also - wouldn’t having a second bishop for the community weaken the bishop currently in place, and divide it’s assets - which are still being structured and built?

Why is it that we must be limited when all other Archdiocese can expand? Also SyroMalankara thats not the issue,when Vicar General Fr. Abraham Mutholath was petitioned as Auxiliary Bishop, Rome proclaimed that the St.Thomas Diocese cannot have a Knanaya Bishop at all. That right there is what I do not understand.

 

[Aramis]

What is endogamy without the community being able to control membership? The practice has been changed in all but one parish in the U.S.

Why is it that we must be limited when all other Archdiocese can expand? Also SyroMalankara thats not the issue,when Vicar General Fr. Abraham Mutholath was petitioned as Auxiliary Bishop, Rome proclaimed that the St.Thomas Diocese cannot have a Knanaya Bishop at all. That right there is what I do not understand.

I don’t know why Rome would deny a bishop within the US for the Knanaya; I can hazard some theories.

The most likely - Rome probably doesn’t want to look like it’s preparing to separate the Knanaya from the SMCC. And having separate bishops in the diaspora would give that appearance. (Note that the Ukrainian Eparchy for the Slovaks in Canada is a separate UGCC eparchy for Catholics under the care of the UGCC, but belonging to a different sui Iuris church.)

Secondarily, the need to support the bishops… dividing the still fairly small eparchy in the US would hurt both sides.

As for being limited: endogamy inherently does that. The Knanaya parishes can only grow by Knanaya immigration or births while endogamy is in force If the Knanaya are to grow, then formal endogamy isn’t the way to do it.

 

[Thomas48]

I don’t know why Rome would deny a bishop within the US for the Knanaya; I can hazard some theories.

The most likely - Rome probably doesn’t want to look like it’s preparing to separate the Knanaya from the SMCC. And having separate bishops in the diaspora would give that appearance. (Note that the Ukrainian Eparchy for the Slovaks in Canada is a separate UGCC eparchy for Catholics under the care of the UGCC, but belonging to a different sui Iuris church.)

Secondarily, the need to support the bishops… dividing the still fairly small eparchy in the US would hurt both sides.

As for being limited: endogamy inherently does that. The Knanaya parishes can only grow by Knanaya immigration or births while endogamy is in force If the Knanaya are to grow, then formal endogamy isn’t the way to do it.

I agree with your first theory Aramis, perhaps in the future an auxiliary bishop for the Knananites may appear and soon after that a separate diocese. I wish however, that your second theory was the case. I recently reviewed “Prot. No. 264 / 2005” which elevated Kottayam Eparchy to a Metropolitanate. I do not understand why but the Prot states that Kottayam Metropolitanate may not have any suffragan diocese’. Do you have any theories to why this may be?

“Prot. No. 264 / 2005”
“After the Synod of Bishops of the Syro-Malabar Church was granted the exercise of all its faculties, the request was renewed and the Synod of Bishops of the Syro-Malabar Church in its session held from 1 to 13 November 2004 gave its consent and the Holy See gave its no-objection with the explicit understanding that the Metropolitan See of Kottayam is to remain without a suffragan eparchy.”

Heres a link to the full Prot.
kottayamad.org/decree-of-elevating-the-eparchy-of-kottayam-to-the-metropolitan-see/

 

[SyroMalankara]

A couple of possible reasons. For one, the vocal people within the community prevent Rome or the Syro-Malabar Synod from extending appropriate jurisdiction within the Eparchy without some sort of protest, as it is. Imagine if the protesting group got the ear of the Metropolitan’s auxiliary bishop - an auxiliary would be one step outside the direct jurisdiction of the Holy Synod, potentially contesting the appointments of the Major Archbishop and the Holy Synod. The auxiliary would also unofficially have right of succession, and what if he does not get it, and the Holy Synod chooses another candidate? Neither Rome nor the Major Archbishop and the Holy Synod need a(nother) rogue bishop in India. Until the Community can show restraint, I don’t think wide allowances will be made.

Another reason: The Syro-Malabar Church has proper jurisdiction, both territorial and personal over all the Syro-Malabar faithful, including all Knanaya Catholics. The Knanaya Diocese is erected as a personal jurisdiction for Knanaya Catholics for temporal and pastoral reasons. There is no need at this time to extend suffragan eparchies under a personal jurisdiction, such as Kottayam since temporal jurisdiction is provided for by the Syro-Malabar Church.

 

[Aramis]

The metropolitan status is probably rooted in some historical elements.

In all seriousness, amongst the ECC’s, only separate sui iuris churches have parallel dioceses; if Kottayam has suffragans, it begins to look like a Sui Iuris Church, beacuse they could only be parallel and overlapping the SMCC eparchies.

This isn’t grounded in the blackletter, but in the visible praxis - tho’ only the UGCC and the SMCC have such non-territorial overlaps. And the UGCC only does so because those served belong to a different church sui iuris already. Even then, it’s not divided into multiple dioceses.

The Knanaya focused Diocese of Kottayam is not a sui iuris church, and when looking at the restrictions, they all appear to be to avoid giving the appearance that it is.

 

[Thomas48]

A couple of possible reasons. For one, the vocal people within the community prevent Rome or the Syro-Malabar Synod from extending appropriate jurisdiction within the Eparchy without some sort of protest, as it is. Imagine if the protesting group got the ear of the Metropolitan’s auxiliary bishop - an auxiliary would be one step outside the direct jurisdiction of the Holy Synod, potentially contesting the appointments of the Major Archbishop and the Holy Synod. The auxiliary would also unofficially have right of succession, and what if he does not get it, and the Holy Synod chooses another candidate? Neither Rome nor the Major Archbishop and the Holy Synod need a(nother) rogue bishop in India. Until the Community can show restraint, I don’t think wide allowances will be made.

Another reason: The Syro-Malabar Church has proper jurisdiction, both territorial and personal over all the Syro-Malabar faithful, including all Knanaya Catholics. The Knanaya Diocese is erected as a personal jurisdiction for Knanaya Catholics for temporal and pastoral reasons. There is no need at this time to extend suffragan eparchies under a personal jurisdiction, such as Kottayam since temporal jurisdiction is provided for by the Syro-Malabar Church.

If the people acquired the Suffragan Diocese there would be no need to protest. To the common man it seems quite unfair when looking at statistics, all other Syro Malabar Archdiocese’ seem to have suffragan diocese but ours cannot? Why is that? Whatever the case if a Suffragan Diocese was acquired and an auxiliary bishop ordained, the bishops loyalty would always lie with the Syro Malabar Church and Rome, not to a protesting group. Knanaya Bishops are not the puppets of there people as no bishop of the Catholic Church is. Besides the Knanaya people are not in some way trying to uproot the Syro Malabar Church. Bringing in another fact, Kottayam Eparchy was elevated without tension, because of the strong friendship between H.G Mar Kuriakose Kunnacherry and H.H Mar Varkey Vithayathil. The petition for a Knanaya Diocese in Kalayan only occurred after the elevation of the Kottayam Eparchy.

Also I believe an Auxiliary Bishop for the Knanayas under St.Thomas Syro Malabar Diocese would calm down all tensions and improve relations. It would give the Knanayas under the diocese a feeling of equality and a hierarch from the same community. Besides for the last twenty six years Knanaya Clergy has not given much support in protest and petition, their allegiance lies with their ordinaries as it should. Only recently have Knanaya Clergy shown their support in restoring endogamous customs and that in no way was shown in precarious methods.

The metropolitan status is probably rooted in some historical elements.

In all seriousness, amongst the ECC’s, only separate sui iuris churches have parallel dioceses; if Kottayam has suffragans, it begins to look like a Sui Iuris Church, beacuse they could only be parallel and overlapping the SMCC eparchies.

This isn’t grounded in the blackletter, but in the visible praxis - tho’ only the UGCC and the SMCC have such non-territorial overlaps. And the UGCC only does so because those served belong to a different church sui iuris already. Even then, it’s not divided into multiple dioceses.

The Knanaya focused Diocese of Kottayam is not a sui iuris church, and when looking at the restrictions, they all appear to be to avoid giving the appearance that it is.

The whole thing seems like a paradox of some sort to me, Rome is trying to restrict an already not Sui Juris from giving off the look that it is a Sui Juris? If anything the only force pushing a persona of a Sui Juris on Kottayam Metropolitanate is Rome itself. Without all the restrictions and limitations would it not seem like a regular metropolitanate of the Syro Malabar Church?

 

[Aramis]

The whole thing seems like a paradox of some sort to me, Rome is trying to restrict an already not Sui Juris from giving off the look that it is a Sui Juris? If anything the only force pushing a persona of a Sui Juris on Kottayam Metropolitanate is Rome itself. Without all the restrictions and limitations would it not seem like a regular metropolitanate of the Syro Malabar Church?

No, it would not, not at all. It would look like a separate sui iuris church, since no sui iuris church has multiple metropolia with overlapping jurisdiction of their separate suffragans.

 

[beingchristian]

hi thomas and everyone

lets not focus on what the church says since there are alot of them and they have differentr beliefs, so lets just jusdge upon what god says.

doesnt the bible say not to divide?
1 Corinthians 1:10-13
I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Ephesians 4:3-6
Eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

Romans 16:17-18
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.

…it is wrong to place tradition and cultures above your religion. if your a knanaya catholics are good christians then they should accept others into their community also, that is how you build faith and community. its not wrong to follow tradition but why exclude anyone? why cant you grow your community by including others? since thhat is what your fighting about.

 

[Thomas48]

hi thomas and everyone

lets not focus on what the church says since there are alot of them and they have differentr beliefs, so lets just jusdge upon what god says.

doesnt the bible say not to divide?
1 Corinthians 1:10-13
I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Ephesians 4:3-6
Eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

Romans 16:17-18
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.

…it is wrong to place tradition and cultures above your religion. if your a knanaya catholics are good christians then they should accept others into their community also, that is how you build faith and community. its not wrong to follow tradition but why exclude anyone? why cant you grow your community by including others? since thhat is what your fighting about.

To answer your question simply, Christ told his follwers to spread the word of the Lord, not Knanayaism. Through the implication of the Syro Malabar Church, thousands of
Knanaya faithful do just that.

 

[beingchristian]

hi thomas

erm in that case why are knanaya people mixing their community with the church? what is your community got anything to do with the church? church and knanayaism are totally different things. why are you giving ‘only knanaya’ people memberships there? not any non-kna? church is for christians not for any specific community and any christians shoukd join any church they want. plus why are you removing membership for kna’s who marry non-kna’s? like why is politics and segregation taking place within gods holy church?

 

[beingchristian]

To answer your question simply, Christ told his follwers to spread the word of the Lord, not Knanayaism. Through the implication of the Syro Malabar Church, thousands of
Knanaya faithful do just that.

hi thomas

erm in that case why are knanaya people mixing their community with the church? what is your community got anything to do with the church? church and knanayaism are totally different things. why are you giving ‘only knanaya’ people memberships there? not any non-kna? church is for christians not for any specific community and any christians shoukd join any church they want. plus why are you removing membership for kna’s who marry non-kna’s? like why is politics and segregation taking place within gods holy church?

 

[John_Lazarus]

Side question prompted by this thread: do the Knanaya Catholics permit conversion (from another religion, paganism or atheism) into their churches? Or does a convert to Christianity have to go over to a different parish or diocese?

Like, if I was a non-believer and wanted to become Catholic, could I become a member of a Knanaya Catholic church?

 

[beingchristian]

Side question prompted by this thread: do the Knanaya Catholics permit conversion (from another religion, paganism or atheism) into their churches? Or does a convert to Christianity have to go over to a different parish or diocese?

Like, if I was a non-believer and wanted to become Catholic, could I become a member of a Knanaya Catholic church?

A convert can’t be memember of knanaya church and has to go to different non-kna parish. I don’t know why knanaya churches are like that. They are mixing their community with christianity.

 

[Filii_Dei]

Side question prompted by this thread: do the Knanaya Catholics permit conversion (from another religion, paganism or atheism) into their churches? Or does a convert to Christianity have to go over to a different parish or diocese?

Like, if I was a non-believer and wanted to become Catholic, could I become a member of a Knanaya Catholic church?

No. The Knanaya community is only composed of those who descended from Knanaya families which are strictly endogamous. No new Christian from other communities is permitted to join the Knanaya community. They would be directed towards the nearby Syro-Malabar parish.

That being said, if you were a Knanaya who left the faith but returned later, you would likely be accepted back into the community.

 

[SyroMalankara]

No. The Knanaya community is only composed of those who descended from Knanaya families which are strictly endogamous.

This is far from reality, but it is the claim.

 

[Thomas48]

hi thomas

erm in that case why are knanaya people mixing their community with the church? what is your community got anything to do with the church? church and knanayaism are totally different things. why are you giving ‘only knanaya’ people memberships there? not any non-kna? church is for christians not for any specific community and any christians shoukd join any church they want. plus why are you removing membership for kna’s who marry non-kna’s? like why is politics and segregation taking place within gods holy church?

And why can we not mix our community with church? Every other Eastern Community has the right to. How is this small private community hurting anyone? Knanaya Holy Qurbana is open for all to attend, and if you would like to become a member of an East Syriac Church the Syro Malabar Church is always a great option.

This is far from reality, but it is the claim.

Like I have posted earlier in this thread and given DNA Test evidence to, the majority of the Knanaya Community posses middle eastern ancestry, giving reality to Knanaya History.

 

[malphono]

And why can we not mix our community with church? Every other Eastern Community has the right to. How is this small private community hurting anyone? Knanaya Holy Qurbana is open for all to attend, and if you would like to become a member of an East Syriac Church the Syro Malabar Church is always a great option.

It’s not quite the same thing. The Knanaya are a community but NOT a Church. Also, I think it should be noted that the Knanaya are not exclusively of one Church.

Personally, I have no problem with Knanaya customs, but at the same time, one must be careful not to ascribe communal (or even “ethnic”) customs to the Church. Such may overlap in some cases, but they are not one and the same.

Like I have posted earlier in this thread and given DNA Test evidence to, the majority of the Knanaya Community posses middle eastern ancestry, giving reality to Knanaya History.

As I’ve said before, I don’t have a horse in this race, but from what I have learned and read, both in this thread and elsewhere, let me say this:

Whereas there may be DNA evidence that some, if not most, Knanaya do show Middle Eastern Ancestry, it is certainly not a “pure” ancestry. IOW, there has clearly been intermarriage over the centuries, and it seems to me (and I could be wrong) that may be at least part of what our brother SyroMalankara intended to point out.

 

[Filii_Dei]

This is far from reality, but it is the claim.

Do note I very specifically limited my words to ‘Knanaya families’. I did not rule on whether they were truly descendents of those first Christians. That is the claim, not mine. However, what we do know is they are called Knanaya, and their community is defined by endogamy, whether or not we believe their claims to ancestry. That is all I have said.