Syro Malabar girl marry Marthomite guy with out converting! PLEASE ANSWER!

[SyroMalankara]

The bishop of the non-Catholics he visited was called Mar Dionysius. That bishop had no connection whatsoever with Antioch.

I asked you this before and you avoided answering:

WHO ordained Mar Dionysius?

There was no connection with Antioch at the time of the visit of Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan. The Metran group of non-Catholics is proof of that. The BAVA (Patriarch) faction was formed much later, after Synod of Mavelikkara in 1836, after the joint training with CMS missionaries.

Who is the spiritual head of the Metran group? Who do they commemorate in their Qurbana first?

There was no local Archdeacon in 1806. The non-Catholic group Rev Dr Buchanan visited was a poorly organized group who needed help to form a proper church. This he promised to help them with. That included providing Syriac Bibles etc.

So your claim is that the “poorly organized” non-Catholic group could organize themselves to read Syriac Bibles, but not do anything else? Even the Vatican historians recognize that the non-Catholics used the same Liturgy as used by the Syro-Chaldean Catholics (except for commemorating the Pope) at first; they must not have been than poorly organized as you claim.

You forget there are two groups within the Syro Malabar Church. The Knanayi Christians, who follow a different Syriac Liturgy was part of the non-Catholic group who trained with CMS missionaries. The group that calls itself Knanayi Christians have a non-Catholic Jacobite counterpart, who are not within the Syro Malabar Church.

So what? Your claim is that the entire academic scholarship of the Syro-Malabar Church is conspiring to hide your version of history to appease this minor subgroup of Knanaya Catholics? Just for your information - the majority of Knanaya Catholics follow the same Liturgy as the Syro-Malabar Church (some among them follow the Syro-Malankara Liturgy, but they are minority even among the Knanaya Catholics)

The year of Rev Dr Buchanan’s visit was 1806. The Synod of Diamper took place in 1599. You have not made any response to my question asking why the non-Catholic groups never looked for a Patriarch in the Middle East during the Dutch period, 1658 - 1795,

They did, I answered you repeatedly. Mar Gregorios of Jerusalem (who followed the West Syriac Liturgy and was under the West Syriac Patriarch of Antioch, came to Kerala in 1665 and ordained a bishop for these non-Catholics.

and there had never been any mention of Synod of Diamper until the late nineteenth century when the non-Catholic groups decided to invent a connection with the ancient community of Christians.

Perhaps you failed to read these mentions. It has been mentioned over and over. Mor Gregorios (Abdul Jaleel) traveled to India in 1665 to regularize the ordination of Mar Thoma I, the head of the non-Catholic group - and to oppose the Portuguesem he died April, 27 1681, and is interred in the St. Thomas Church at North Paravur.

 

[Mariamkutty]

I asked you this before and you avoided answering:

WHO ordained Mar Dionysius?

Who is the spiritual head of the Metran group? Who do they commemorate in their Qurbana first?

So your claim is that the “poorly organized” non-Catholic group could organize themselves to read Syriac Bibles, but not do anything else? Even the Vatican historians recognize that the non-Catholics used the same Liturgy as used by the Syro-Chaldean Catholics (except for commemorating the Pope) at first; they must not have been than poorly organized as you claim.

So what? Your claim is that the entire academic scholarship of the Syro-Malabar Church is conspiring to hide your version of history to appease this minor subgroup of Knanaya Catholics? Just for your information - the majority of Knanaya Catholics follow the same Liturgy as the Syro-Malabar Church (some among them follow the Syro-Malankara Liturgy, but they are minority even among the Knanaya Catholics)

They did, I answered you repeatedly. Mar Gregorios of Jerusalem (who followed the West Syriac Liturgy and was under the West Syriac Patriarch of Antioch, came to Kerala in 1665 and ordained a bishop for these non-Catholics.

Perhaps you failed to read these mentions. It has been mentioned over and over. Mor Gregorios (Abdul Jaleel) traveled to India in 1665 to regularize the ordination of Mar Thoma I, the head of the non-Catholic group - and to oppose the Portuguesem he died April, 27 1681, and is interred in the St. Thomas Church at North Paravur.

I have already answered your question.

Why did the non-Catholic group need to ask the help of Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan in 1806 and need joint training with CMS for twenty years if they already had a well established church connected to Antioch? Why did the non-Catholic group have a Metran faction? And a BAVA faction was created only in the late nineteenth century?

If the arrangement for joint training with CMS had been different, as an independent group merely seeking education, there would have been no need for a break up and litigation to get the seminary. As it is the non-Catholic group had agreed to come in communion with Church of England when they met Rev Dr Buchanan. But of course when they discovered that CMS was “low” Anglican, without the political power of Church of England, at a time India was a British colony, it is understandable it was not so good to continue as part of CMS.

But Church of Scotland was a part of political power.

Vatican historians recognize that the non-Catholic group used the same Syriac Liturgy as the ancient Christian community in See of Cranganore?

You are getting completely confused aren’t you? At the time of Rev Dr Buchanan’s visit, the non-Catholic group did NOT use the same Syriac Liturgy as that used by Syrian Catholics of See of Cranganore!

Now they are non-Catholics under Patriarch of Antioch, using the West Antiochian liturgy, now they are not.

Such confusion happens when fiction is invented and needs to be changed when it is challenged.

 

[Mariamkutty]

So what? Your claim is that the entire academic scholarship of the Syro-Malabar Church is conspiring to hide your version of history to appease this minor subgroup of Knanaya Catholics? Just for your information - the majority of Knanaya Catholics follow the same Liturgy as the Syro-Malabar Church (some among them follow the Syro-Malankara Liturgy, but they are minority even among the Knanaya Catholics)
.

There were two Catholic jurisdictions in Malabar Coast from 1657 - 1886. Portuguese Padroado under which the See of Cranganore was and Carmelites sent by Papal Congregation of Propaganda Fide. The Carmelite religious order started by Blessed Kuriakose (Cyriac) Elias was done with the help of Carmelites of Papal Congregation of Propaganda Fide. They helped the Malabar Carmelite congregation to attain a Papal status within a short time because they had to hand over their own power to diocesan clergy in the later stages.

So any scholarship regarding history of Christianity in Kerala has to take into account the work done by both jurisdictions - Portuguese Padroado and Papal Propaganda Fide. It is a historical fact that the religious orders of Augustinians and Jesuits, both orders which had worked directly with the ancient Christian community got suppressed by the Pope. Portuguese Padroado itself got suppressed by the Pope. Since the Carmelites came on the scene nearly sixty years after the ancient Christian community of St Thomas Christians came in communion with RCC in 1599, they could not have had much access to records that was held by Portuguese Padroado. See of Cranganore was under Archdiocese of Goa until 1886.

 

[Mariamkutty]

So what? Your claim is that the entire academic scholarship of the Syro-Malabar Church is conspiring to hide your version of history to appease this minor subgroup of Knanaya Catholics? Just for your information - the majority of Knanaya Catholics follow the same Liturgy as the Syro-Malabar Church (some among them follow the Syro-Malankara Liturgy, but they are minority even among the Knanaya Catholics)

The Knanayi Christian community follow the same Syriac Liturgy of the non-Catholics, except that one group joined the Syro Malabar Catholic Church and the other group still remain Jacobites.

They have a separate diocese and administration within the Syro Malabar Church only because they follow a different Syriac Liturgy to the other Syro Malabar Catholics of the 1887 Vicariate of Thrissur.

I have already pointed out to the fact 1887 Vicariate of Kottayam either had two Syriac Liturgies, one followed by the non-Catholic Knanayi Christian Jacobite group and the other followed by 1887 Vicariate of Thrissur, or if all followed the same Syriac Liturgy, then it was not the same one followed by 1887 Vicariate of Thrissur.

1887 Vicariate of Kottayam was formed by Carmelites of Papal Propaganda Fide, whereas the 1887 vicariate of Thrissur was the continuation of See of Cranganore which had been under Archdiocese of Goa until 1886. As early as 1896, a bridge between the two vicariates which followed different Syriac Liturgies were created by taking eleven ancient churches from 1887 vicariate of Thrissur in the creation of a new diocese, Ernakulam. The bishop of Ernakulam was from Changanasserry. The simultaneous creation of a new diocese of Changanasserry also helped bridge the discrepancy. A special diocese of Kottayam was set up for Knanayi Christians in 1911 only because they continued to follow the different Syriac Liturgy of non-Catholics.

 

[Mariamkutty]

The non-Catholics on Malabar Coast, whom Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan called Syrian Christians, were patronized to the extreme by the British government during British Raj because Rev Buchanan had written such a glowing report about them and wanted them to helped in every way possible. His call for Syriac scholarship in the academic circles in Britain also led to great interest in Syriac studies in language and Liturgies in the Middle East.

Goa was a Portuguese colony for nearly four and a half centuries - 1510 - 1961. It is a well known fact that Portuguese intermarried with locals. Goan Christians have mostly Portuguese names. They are Indian citizens and treated as Indians.

Portuguese were in control on Malabar Coast from 1500 - 1663, and Dutch from 1658 - 1795. Yet there is not a single Keralite with a Portuguese or Dutch name! What is the difference? The presence of an ancient Christian community of natives who did not value European version of Christianity above their own! A community that was proud of its traditions and antiquity and unique identity. So it is that Europeans who came since 1500 preferred to merge with them, as they would not merge with outsiders.

The non-Catholics whom Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan met in 1806 were a migrant group who wanted to maintain an identity of their own. They never claimed to be part of the ancient local community of Christians in See of Cranganore.

The political unity that has been created in Kerala by developing stories that gives every group a piece of the Apostle Thomas cake, has nothing to do with history as it was recorded by those who interacted directly with the ancient local community. Augustinians and Jesuits before the arrival of Dutch.

 

[Mariamkutty]

While Goa remained a Portguese colony from 1510 - 1961, Kerala saw three European powers in the same period. Portuguese from 1500 - 1663, Dutch from 1658 - 1795 and British from 1795 - 1947.

Since Dutch took over all the Portuguese holdings, it would not have helped to have a Portugese name.

When Dutch lost power to British, it wouldn’t have helped to have a Dutch name either.

That is why adoption of local names must have been resorted to.

Everyone could merge into the ancient Christian community without any problem. Creating new churches with some roundabout story of connection to the ancient community was a clever way of merging with the local tradition.

In all groups there were local converts and locally born mixed race descendants. Many writers have confirmed the presence of Eurasians on Malabar Coast, yet there is not a single group of Christians in Kerala today that will admit to being of mixed race or of European descent!

Yet it is freely admitted by all that many Malayali Muslims are of mixed Arab descent from the early centuries of trade with Arabs. They are not Moghuls from North India. They are a fully native group with their unique culture, which includes matriarchy, which has nothing to do with Arabia.

 

[SyroMalankara]

I have already answered your question.

Why did the non-Catholic group need to ask the help of Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan in 1806 and need joint training with CMS for twenty years if they already had a well established church connected to Antioch? Why did the non-Catholic group have a Metran faction? And a BAVA faction was created only in the late nineteenth century?

Who ordained Mar Dionysius? This is the 3rd or 4th time you’ve avoided answering that question.

If the arrangement for joint training with CMS had been different, as an independent group merely seeking education, there would have been no need for a break up and litigation to get the seminary. As it is the non-Catholic group had agreed to come in communion with Church of England when they met Rev Dr Buchanan. But of course when they discovered that CMS was “low” Anglican, without the political power of Church of England, at a time India was a British colony, it is understandable it was not so good to continue as part of CMS.

Is there any evidence that one single priest, let alone a bishop, was ever ordained jointly with the Anglicans prior to the formation of the marthoma church? Was there ever ONE instance of any of the Anglican clergy celebrating or even receiving Eucharist with any of the non-Catholic native St. Thomas Christians?

Vatican historians recognize that the non-Catholic group used the same Syriac Liturgy as the ancient Christian community in See of Cranganore?

You are getting completely confused aren’t you? At the time of Rev Dr Buchanan’s visit, the non-Catholic group did NOT use the same Syriac Liturgy as that used by Syrian Catholics of See of Cranganore!

You are the confused individual - I stated that AT FIRST, after the separation, they used the same Liturgy NOT that they did at the time of your sloppy Buchanan conspiracy theory…

From Fr. Ronald Roberson’s book [cnewa.org/ecc-bodypg-us.aspx?eccpageID=9&IndexView=toc]:](http://www.cnewa.org/ecc-bodypg-us.aspx?eccpageID=9&IndexView=toc]

n the mid-17th century, most of the Thomas Christians in India (see The Thomas Christians and the The Syro-Malabar Catholic Church) had become increasingly upset with the high-handed methods of the Portuguese and the increasing latinization of their church. This led thousands of faithful to gather at the Coonan Cross in Mattancherry on January 3, 1653, and to take an oath to submit no longer to the authority of Archbishop Francis Garcia of Crangannore or his Portuguese Jesuit associates. This oath would later become a rallying point for those who wished to break entirely with the Catholic Church. The leader of the dissidents attempted to reestablish communion with the Assyrian Church of the East, but this was not achieved. Then in 1665, the Syrian Patriarch agreed to send a bishop to head the community on the condition that its leader and his followers agree to accept Syrian christology and follow the West Syrian rite. This group was eventually administered as an autonomous church within the Syrian Patriarchate.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Such confusion happens when fiction is invented and needs to be changed when it is challenged.

That’s why you’ve provided so many sources to back up your self-created theories – so far not ONE single primary source from you, how’s that for fiction?!

The Knanayi Christian community follow the same Syriac Liturgy of the non-Catholics, except that one group joined the Syro Malabar Catholic Church and the other group still remain Jacobites.

They have a separate diocese and administration within the Syro Malabar Church only because they follow a different Syriac Liturgy to the other Syro Malabar Catholics of the 1887 Vicariate of Thrissur.

No, they have a separate diocese and administration because their claim to Jewish heritage and endogamous marriage tradition is considered a valid reason for such according to both the Vatican and the Syriac Patriarchate of Antioch. Do you even know any Knanaya people, or is this some more theoretical fiction that you’ve concocted, with no basis in reality?

This is the Qurbana that the majority of Catholic Knanaya faithful celebrate:
What parts of this Syro-Malabar Knanaya Qurbana are different than the Syro-Malabar non-Knanaya Qurbana?
youtube.com/watch?v=Wg_RyuVCU7c
youtube.com/watch?v=herpUqwEREc
youtube.com/watch?v=XZqV9lX0wcA
youtube.com/watch?v=1Lgfq_4NKjs

Here is part of the Qurbono of the Jacobite Knanaya faithful:
youtube.com/watch?v=WNXJYMnRxao

It is exactly the same as the Syro-Malankara Qurbono. The vast majority of Catholic Knanaya people belong to the East Syriac/Syro-Malabar Tradition, a minority celebrate the West Syriac/Malankara Tradition. docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=17858826

Catholic Knanaya people of both Traditions belong to the same Diocese of Kottayam - not based on their Liturgical Rites, but solely on their Jewish roots and endogomous marriage Tradition.

1887 Vicariate of Kottayam was formed by Carmelites of Papal Propaganda Fide, whereas the 1887 vicariate of Thrissur was the continuation of See of Cranganore which had been under Archdiocese of Goa until 1886. As early as 1896, a bridge between the two vicariates which followed different Syriac Liturgies were created by taking eleven ancient churches from 1887 vicariate of Thrissur in the creation of a new diocese, Ernakulam. The bishop of Ernakulam was from Changanasserry. The simultaneous creation of a new diocese of Changanasserry also helped bridge the discrepancy. A special diocese of Kottayam was set up for Knanayi Christians in 1911 only because they continued to follow the different Syriac Liturgy of non-Catholics.

The Knanaya Catholics were only given permission to follow the Malankara Rites in 1921, your timeline and your story are offtrack. They were given their own diocese for their Jewish roots and their endogomous tradition, not because of their liturgy.

 

[josethomas2005]

Ecclesiologically and spiritually, the Church was indirectly under the protection of the Antiochian Patriarch and a local “archdeacon” (called Moopen).

Dear syromalankara
I need an explanation and evidences for the above. If it was true, there must be some mention of our church in the book ‘World chronicle’ written by Patriarch Micheal the great in 12th century. Is there any one?

 

[EagleWatch]

I don’t know where to begin. Your post here, “Orthodox do not believe change of material - that bread becoming flesh, wine becoming blood literally.Orthodox church believe it is equivalent to the the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ by blessing it through Holyspirit” is nonsensical… Both Catholic and Orthodox believe the Eucharist is “is the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ by blessing of Holy Spirit” literally.

If Marthoma have the same faith as the Orthodox, why did they split?? Go back and reunite with the Orthodox Church! Then why did Abraham malpan go to the trouble of conforming these texts to Anglicanism? Why did he both being excommunicated over such a “minor” thing?

It is same the belief that they are flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. We did not wish to split and form a new church. The reformation move coexisted in Malnkara Church. It was the Seminary case which lead to the split ultimately. Why do you think I am writing this - to show the basic belief is not changed about holy Qurbana. There are many things in common. Reuniting with all the apostolic churches in communion is our goal. Now you know it is a political issue to excommunicate Abraham Malpan for revising the Text.

Again, this makes no sense. You’re basically saying that your church teaches “symbolic presence”.

It is not sybolic presence - After blessing it is equivalent to the flesh and blood of Jesus - It is a divine mystery

I don’t have the minutes to Diamper.

If I find them I will put them in this forum.

When are the Mother of God and the Saints venerated in Marthoma churches? Which part of the Holy Qurbono?

Your concept of veneration may be different than Mar Thomites - our meaning is - feeling of profound respect for someone or something;s -

Intercessory prayer is NOT a different topic - it has to do with one’s belief in the Communion of Saints - either they understand it in the Apostolic manner or they do not.

Are the Saints in heaven? IF so, then they should be venerated and also recognized as intercessors - that is their God-given role. If you recognize this, you have a duty to act on your faith.

I told you personally I have certain understanding of the position of Saints and their communion with God. Any person who study bible cannot deny it outrightly. They are alive infront of God - They can know thing on earth - They have concerns and feelings over us - They worship God - They pray to God - They can come to earth as part of God’s mission - all I agree. It need a broader out look to understand and digest them.

But how many of us could be such. Do you think these are the only mysteries heaven hold for us. There will be definitely many others.

In case if someone tell you some mysteries revealed to him from heaven, you will not accept him immediatly until it is confirmed to you by Holy Spirit. Why ? It is for the fear of getting wrong on it and possible heresy.

So if a person just wish to hold on to the basics provided for salvation - that is only Jesus Christ (essential) - can you blame them? - and excommunicate them?

So if Mar Thomites decide to stay away from intercession through Saints do you think they have lost apostolic line. There is no direct call or doctrines for intercession prayers through Saints in Bible. Jesus also not taught them while teaching the disciples how to pray.

So I believe the intercession prayers through the Saints are later addition on understanding of certain bible verses and mysteries revealed to the Church Fathers. I don’t have scriptural support for the call for the intercessary prayers through Saints by any of the apostles.

The problem of giving undue importance to the intercession prayers can often (not be always) shift the focus from Christ.

Personally I believe Sanits can intercede for us. But my focus is not on them but - to Jesus only. He is all sufficient for me.

The limitation of intercession is that if you have no true relationship with Jesus and walking against the word of God, then interceders are of no use. Though they can help you to start your walk with Christ. But intercession of Saints are not the ultimate thing. I know many Mar Thomites may not agree with my understanding on the subject of intercession.

There may be many Mar Thomites who do not understand Mar Thoma theology as well. We do not teach catechism in Sunday schools but Bible. May be they should add them too.

Hope one day we can truely find each other without prejudice.

God Bless

 

[josethomas2005]

Dear eaglewatch

Years pass after coonan cross oath, the non-Catholic Indian Church ordains bishops with an on-and-off relationship with the Syriac Patriarch, who assists as needed. The British come to power, offer to assist financially and academically with a non-interference agreement, the non-Catholic Indians accept. The British start interfering, the majority of the non-Catholic Indian Church decides to end all connection to the British missionaries because of this intrusion. A small minority, headed by a rebel priest (Abraham Malpan) like this new protestant teaching, they are excommunicated. This rebel priest sends this his nephew to the Syriac Patriarch with falsified papers (claiming that the native non-catholic church had selected him to be bishop). The others pledge allegiance to the Syriac Patriarchate - the Patriarch, unaware of the goings on in India ordains this rebel priest’s nephew to bishop. This new protestant-leaning bishop comes back to India and claims to be the head of the non-Catholic church. The majority non-protestants object, but since the British are in charge, they side with this rebel protestant bishop. This Syriac Patriarch them comes to India to settle the matter and this rebel bishop is excommunicated. This is the first Bava /Metran dispute. This excommunicated bishop and his group eventually form the Marthoma Church.

This is the basis of the formation of Mar Thoma church.

Protestants are those communities which split from the Catholic or Orthodox Church and formed out of the teachings of Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin - that is the very definition of the Marthoma church. All of its early leaders were educated by British missionaries. The early history of the Marthoma split mentions “Claudius Buchanan” and other low-church Anglicans, not Orthodox bishops or theologians. The community was FUNDED in its infancy by the British government in India. Not too many know this - or will admit it if they do know it - Rev. Abraham, the reformer who created the Marthoma community was ordained a celibate priest. After being influenced by Anglicans and refusing to submit to his bishop, he was excommunicated. The British government in those days offered R20,000 for celibate clergy who would renounce their vows and marry, in order to influence the Malankara Church. One of the first priests to take that money was Abraham Malpan.

**
This is the basis of the theology of the Mar Thoma church. That is —money**.

 

[EagleWatch]

Dear eaglewatch

Years pass after coonan cross oath, the non-Catholic Indian Church ordains bishops with an on-and-off relationship with the Syriac Patriarch, who assists as needed. The British come to power, offer to assist financially and academically with a non-interference agreement, the non-Catholic Indians accept. The British start interfering, the majority of the non-Catholic Indian Church decides to end all connection to the British missionaries because of this intrusion. A small minority, headed by a rebel priest (Abraham Malpan) like this new protestant teaching, they are excommunicated. This rebel priest sends this his nephew to the Syriac Patriarch with falsified papers (claiming that the native non-catholic church had selected him to be bishop). The others pledge allegiance to the Syriac Patriarchate - the Patriarch, unaware of the goings on in India ordains this rebel priest’s nephew to bishop. This new protestant-leaning bishop comes back to India and claims to be the head of the non-Catholic church. The majority non-protestants object, but since the British are in charge, they side with this rebel protestant bishop. This Syriac Patriarch them comes to India to settle the matter and this rebel bishop is excommunicated. This is the first Bava /Metran dispute. This excommunicated bishop and his group eventually form the Marthoma Church.

This is the basis of the formation of Mar Thoma church.

Protestants are those communities which split from the Catholic or Orthodox Church and formed out of the teachings of Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin - that is the very definition of the Marthoma church. All of its early leaders were educated by British missionaries. The early history of the Marthoma split mentions “Claudius Buchanan” and other low-church Anglicans, not Orthodox bishops or theologians. The community was FUNDED in its infancy by the British government in India. Not too many know this - or will admit it if they do know it - Rev. Abraham, the reformer who created the Marthoma community was ordained a celibate priest. After being influenced by Anglicans and refusing to submit to his bishop, he was excommunicated. The British government in those days offered R20,000 for celibate clergy who would renounce their vows and marry, in order to influence the Malankara Church. One of the first priests to take that money was Abraham Malpan.

**
This is the basis of the theology of the Mar Thoma church. That is —money**.

Ok I have done with my postings - our side is already there - it seems that I am wasting my time arguing with you guys. I leave what you have said to my Lord to judge - You can dwell on your version of thinking about Mar Thomites and Rev. Abraham Malpan since it certainly gives you some kind of kick to believe so. Wish such things help in your spiritual life.

God Bless

 

[SyroMalankara]

Dear eaglewatch

Years pass after coonan cross oath, the non-Catholic Indian Church ordains bishops with an on-and-off relationship with the Syriac Patriarch, who assists as needed. The British come to power, offer to assist financially and academically with a non-interference agreement, the non-Catholic Indians accept. The British start interfering, the majority of the non-Catholic Indian Church decides to end all connection to the British missionaries because of this intrusion. A small minority, headed by a rebel priest (Abraham Malpan) like this new protestant teaching, they are excommunicated. This rebel priest sends this his nephew to the Syriac Patriarch with falsified papers (claiming that the native non-catholic church had selected him to be bishop). The others pledge allegiance to the Syriac Patriarchate - the Patriarch, unaware of the goings on in India ordains this rebel priest’s nephew to bishop. This new protestant-leaning bishop comes back to India and claims to be the head of the non-Catholic church. The majority non-protestants object, but since the British are in charge, they side with this rebel protestant bishop. This Syriac Patriarch them comes to India to settle the matter and this rebel bishop is excommunicated. This is the first Bava /Metran dispute. This excommunicated bishop and his group eventually form the Marthoma Church.

This is the basis of the formation of Mar Thoma church.

Protestants are those communities which split from the Catholic or Orthodox Church and formed out of the teachings of Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin - that is the very definition of the Marthoma church. All of its early leaders were educated by British missionaries. The early history of the Marthoma split mentions “Claudius Buchanan” and other low-church Anglicans, not Orthodox bishops or theologians. The community was FUNDED in its infancy by the British government in India. Not too many know this - or will admit it if they do know it - Rev. Abraham, the reformer who created the Marthoma community was ordained a celibate priest. After being influenced by Anglicans and refusing to submit to his bishop, he was excommunicated. The British government in those days offered R20,000 for celibate clergy who would renounce their vows and marry, in order to influence the Malankara Church. One of the first priests to take that money was Abraham Malpan.

**
This is the basis of the theology of the Mar Thoma church. That is —money**.

Hmm… looks like an EXACT quote from me.

 

[lukathomas]

The Problem with Mar Thoma Church is not just liturgy.
Abraham Malpan was a scholar in syriac and he only made few changes in liturgy when Mar Thoma Church was formed as Protestant Church.

But after that in 1915’s there were factionalism in Mar Thoma Church. They completly changed the liturgy making it with Protestant doctrine. What they use now is not from Abharaham Malpan, the current liturgy is from hardcore Protestants.

The problem with Mar Thoma Church history is its hard to find any Mar Thoma Church memeber saying truth. Of course i wont say its done purposefully, they seem to live in a different world.

 

[lukathomas]

The use of the liturgy Abraham Malpan re write according to the Protestant teachings was limited in Maramon. Until 1875, when Mathew Mar Athanasius was the Malankara Metropolitan he did not made any changes in the practices. Until, 1893, the liturgy reformed by Abraham Malpan was in use in Mar Thoma Syrian Church. There is certain ambiguity about the liturgical changes.

After 1893, differences in the books of liturgy began to increase as changes were made. Two groups were formed, one pro- Orthodox, who did not want to make further changes and the other pro- protestant who wanted to make further changes. Finally in 1926, December, the consultative assembly confirmed ten reforms in the Taksa ( Eucharistic Liturgy) and three changes in practices which they identified as the reforms of the modern reformers of the Church of Malabar. The Liturgy currently use in Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church has been composed in accordance with these articles. They also came to be known popularly as Reforms of Abraham Malpan.

nasrani.net/2007/01/14/saint-thomas-christians-history-of-divisions-churches/

The quoted site dont explain in details. But the main issue is what Mar Thoma Church now use is a Protestant version not from Malpan, but from some hard core Protestants.

 

[Mariamkutty]

Ok I have done with my postings - our side is already there - it seems that I am wasting my time arguing with you guys. I leave what you have said to my Lord to judge - You can dwell on your version of thinking about Mar Thomites and Rev. Abraham Malpan since it certainly gives you some kind of kick to believe so. Wish such things help in your spiritual life.

God Bless

The version of Mar Thoma Church I read was this:

In 1806, at the time of visit by Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan, which happened eleven years after the Dutch were ousted from Malabar Coast, after they had been there for over one hundred and thirty years, 1658 - 1795, there was only ONE non-Catholic group on Malabar Coast. They gave themselves as a migrant group.

The recommendations of Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan and his desire to help the non-Catholics to build a church of their own in communion with the Church of England, led to the arrival of CMS missionaries in Kottayam (one region of it was known as Kozhencherry) and providing joint training to non-Catholics in their seminary. In the twenty years of joint training, CMS missionaries trained 150 non-Catholics. Since Rev Dr Buchanan was very keen to advance the study of Syriac and Syriac Liturgies in the Middle East, all the non-Catholics who passed out from the CMS seminary were proficient in Syriac. When CMS missionaries started a secular college, CMS College in 1817, and offered free education for all, including study of Syriac, there was less need to be trained in the CMS seminary. Besides the twenty years of joint training had produced enough number of clerics for the non-Catholic group.

Two from the non-Catholic group, went on to do further studies in Madras Christian College at Chennai (then known as Madras) started by Scottish missionaries and run directly by them at the time. On completion of studies, both of them took different paths to the group of non-Catholics they belonged to.

One joined the Anglican communion and thus established the Mar Thoma Church.

The other went to the Middle East in search of a Patriarch. He was consecrated there by an ME Patriarch. He spent sufficient time in ME learning the language and local religious practices before returning to Malabar Coast to appoint himself as the bishop of the non-Catholic group.

Until the Synod of Mavelikkara in 1836, there was only ONE group of non-Catholics on Malabar Coast and ALL of their clergy had been trained by CMS for twenty years.

The decision to split with CMS was taken at Synod of Mavelikkara, and it was followed by a lawsuit to get access to the seminary, which the local non-Catholic group won because the British government was keen to support the non-Catholic group. CMS missionaries were guests and helpers after all.

At the visit of Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan, there had been an unwritten understanding that the British would help the non-Catholics to set up a proper church of their own, which would be in communion with Church of England. This would be mutually beneficial because the clergy from England involved in missionary work in British India, and also serving British personnel working in British India, could be ordained locally and their local clergy from among new converts likewise. In 1806, British India, the large Empire was still in its infancy and Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan wanted to take care of the spiritual needs of British working in British India as well as spread the Good News in India. He had a very dedicated missionary spirit and wanted to convert as many Hindus as possible to Christianity. He had been shocked at the practice of “Sati” (burning of widows in the funeral pyre of their dead husbands) in Bengal, while he had worked in the newly founded British college.

Synod of Mavelikkara 1836, followed by litigation to get the seminary, was the end of Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan’s dream of having a local church of non-Catholics in communion with Church of England. The dream however was realized by two groups - Mar Thoma Church, the breakaway group of non-Catholics, and Chaldean Syrian Church, the break away group of Latin Rite Catholics of Diocese of Cochin when Portuguese Padroado was to hand over all its churches to Vicariate of Veropoly.

Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan did not live to see the establishment of CMS seminary or the shattering of his dream at Synod of Mavelikkara in 1836. He had passed away on 9 February 1815. He also did not live to see the happy instance of creation of Mar Thoma Church and Chaldean Syrian Church, both churches in communion with Church of England. The establishment of Chaldean Syrian Church would have pleased him most because of his anti-Pope stand, and his strong support for all who did not want to have anything to do with the Pope in Rome. The European Protestant - Roman Catholic Church rivalry was still at their height at the time of his visit in 1806, and the time of wars between Catholics and Protestants in Europe was not really old.

The Mar Thoma Church was formed at an early stage immediately following Synod of Mavelikkara in 1836, so they did not involve themselves in the legal battles for church property that followed for nearly a century between the bishop (Metran) and Patriarch (BAVA) faction of non-Catholics, then known only as Jacobites.

So among the non-Catholics after Synod of Mavellikara 1836, there were two groups:

Mar Thoma Church

Jacobites

When the clergy who went to the ME returned after being consecrated by a Patriarch there, the Jacobite group split into:

Jacobite Metran faction
Jacobite Bava faction

In 1910, one group, which included the Knanayi Christians, went to ME and accepted the Patriarch of the Syrian Orthodox Church.

 

[Mariamkutty]

All the churches derived from the non-Catholic group of 1806 fail to acknowledge that there was only ONE non-Catholic group in 1806, when Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan visited Malabar Coast. The only other Christians at the time were Latin Rite Catholics of Portuguese Padroado, Latin Rite Catholics of Papal Congregation of Propaganda Fide, Syrian Rite Catholics of the ancient Christian community in See of Cranganore under Archdiocese of Goa.

ALL non-Catholics had joint training in CMS seminary for twenty years 1816 - 1836. They all got to learn Syriac and study Syriac Liturgies of the Middle East in the scholarly fashion of the British. Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan had been trained at Cambridge before he came to India and had later been awarded a Doctorate from Cambridge university for his work in India. So CMS seminary established in response to Rev Dr Buchanan’s call in Britain and British India was in the best and highest of British academic traditions.

During the twenty years of joint training 150 clergy had been trained for the non-Catholic group. All of them had been taught Syriac and the academic study of Syriac Liturgy in the Middle East had been part of the training.

Lutherans of Basel Mission came on the scene 1833 in North Kerala (Malabar District of Madras Presidency) when British government allowed for other Christian missionaries to work in British India. Lutheran Basel Mission was shut down at the beginning of WW I, but they continued to actively support all non-Catholics of Kerala and Latin Rite schismatics of Thrissur.

Syro Malankara Church formed in 1932, was part of the non-Catholic group until then and share the history of both the Metran and Bava faction, because one priest from the Bava faction and two priests from the Metran faction went on to form the separate church in communion with RCC.

One can say that the non-Catholic group of 1806 split and formed various churches, after twenty years of training with CMS and scholarly study of Syriac and Liturgies in ME, and sought communion with different bigger churches.

 

[Mariamkutty]

At the time of the visit of Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan, the fiction of Coonan Cross Oath didn’t exist. There was only ONE non-Catholic group and they gave themselves as a migrant group, who considered themselves “like Jews in Egyptian captivity!”

Cochin had been a Portuguese colony since 1500, and Mattancherry was a Portuguese town in which only those who worked for the Portuguese lived. That included all the local converts and mixed race Latin Rite Catholics in Portuguese service.

In 1663, when Cochin was captured by the Dutch in the second attempt, it is understandable that those who lived in Mattancherry, the Portuguese colony, for 163 years by then, could not continue to live there if they did not renounce their allegiance to the Portuguese. Hence Carmelites were brought to Veropoly by Papal Congregation of Propaganda Fide to take care of Catholics. All those who chose to become non-Catholics, were taken care of by the Dutch. Having Portuguese names during Dutch rule could not have helped. Hence all adopted Indian names. Claiming to belong to the ancient community of Christians, who did not live in Cochin, also helped with being accepted by the Dutch, who had nothing against native Christians, but only against Portuguese colonial traders from whom they merely wanted to take over the trading rights.

The Dutch were known to be good organizers, who kept the king of Cochin happy, even while doing their own thing in regard to trade because they were the rulers after defeating the Portuguese. The king was merely a puppet figure. The Dutch also did not have missionary zeal of Portuguese, although they did look after all the Christians in their charge. That is why the non-Catholic group never looked for Patriarchs from the Middle East during Dutch time 1658 - 1795.

Wherever there were Dutch settlements, there were segregated living areas. We know from the history of Jews in Europe, that they likewise lived in segregated areas. Hence the Jewish colony in Mattancherry, Cochin for White aka European Jews. We also know that there were plenty of Jews and Jewish Christians in Portugual, Spain and Holland before Second World War, and Portugal was not very friendly to Jews who did not become Christians. It stands to reason that some groups of Jews and Jewish Christians would have migrated to Malabar Coast between the years 1500 - 1806. Dutch Protestands (Dutch Calvinists and Dutch Jacob Arminius Reformists) were known particularly for being supportive of Jews who were not accepted by Catholics.

The so called “Black” Jews on the other hand, the earliest Jewish migrants to Malabar Coast, had lived among locals. They had not been mentioned by Jesuits or other Catholic missionaries before Rev Dr Claudius Buchanan mentioned their presence in 1806.

All Europeans in colonial era looked down on native Indians as second class, and called them “Black”, irrespective of the shade of their skin. Indo-Portuguese, and Indo-Dutch had a higher status in the colonial era of India. The authentic ancient community of Christians kept out of the way of European colonial traders. Kerala consisted of many independent kingdoms, and not all of them were under Portuguese or Dutch control.

The Synod of Diamper, which took place in 1599, and Coonan Cross Oath, all began to discussed by non-Catholic groups only after the Dutch left and they wanted to create fiction to become part of the ancient local traditions. See of Crangnaore, under Archdiocese of Goa, was suppressed only in 1886. The local ancient Christian community had absolutely no reason to break with RCC at any time. They had their own churches, their own priests and their own Syriac liturgy. They had a common Latin Rite bishop along with Latin Rite Catholics of Portuguese Padroado. But as long as they were allowed to maintain their identity and their liturgy and their own churches (remember the ancient Christian community was a full fledged church with their own priests, churches and liturgy even when the Portuguese arrived in 1500 and remained so until their bishop was no longer allowed to come 97 years after the arrival of Portuguese!).

So why has the fiction of Coonan Cross Oath become “his-story?”

Church politics of European colonial traders.

 

[Mariamkutty]

**Portuguese Padroado who were in Malabar Coast from 1500 - 1663, during Portuguese colonial trader presence, and later only as a religious presence until Portuguese Padroado was suppressed in 1836, and took care of See of Cranganore of ancient Christian community until 1886, Order of Saint Augustine, and Jesuits, hold ALL the truth about the authentic ancient Christian community of Malabar Coast.
**

1. The co-founder of the Jesuit Order, St Francis Xavier came to Malabar Coast, including Cochin in 1542. Later Jesuits worked with the ancient Christian community in an attempt to “convert” them to Roman Catholicism.
2. The Synod of Diamper 1599 took place under their watch of Portuguese Padroado. Archbishop of Goa, Alexio de Menezes, was an Augustinian, as was Fr Antonio de Gouveia who wrote the book about Synod of Diamper in 1606.
3. See of Angamaly instituted for the ancient Christian community at Synod of Diamper, changed to See of Cranganore in 1600, was done by the Archbishop of Goa.
4. The first priest to be put in charge of See of Angamaly - See of Cranganore was a Jesuit, Fr Francis Roz (Rodriquez).
5. Jesuits had a seminary in Vaipicotta (Cochin) and after the arrival of Dutch at Ambalakkad (now Ambazhakkad) near Cranganore (Kodungallur) where they jointly trained the Syrian Rite priests for See of Cranganore until their order was shut down by the Pope.
6. Order of Saint Augustine (OSA) was likewise shut down by the Pope. Martin Luther, the father of Protestantism was a member of OSA.

7, See of Cranganore was under Archdiocese of Goa until 1886.

1. Latin Rite Diocese of Cochin, which schismed and became the Chaldean Syrian Church of Thrissur in the nineteenth century, was under Portuguese Padroado until 1836.

Since Order of Saint Augustine, Portuguese Padroado and Jesuits were suppressed, getting information from them has become difficult. Besides all the missionary activities of Jesuits in India seem to me to have been converted later into Apostle Thomas legends by the priests of Papal Congregation of Propaganda Fide! Priests of Papal Congregation of Propaganda Fide who came in 1657 had nothing to do with the ancient Christian community, until See of Cranganore was suppressed in 1886.

 

[EagleWatch]

Following are some references that indicate that the Veneration Mother Mary and of Saints in liturgy as existing in Catholic Church was added in the 3rd century AD.

Part -1

Quote - Ref: www.memorare.com/mary/marianprayershistory.html
The Angelus
The name of this prayer derives from the first Latin word (‘angel’). The Angelus was not officially approved in its current form until 1724 by Pope Benedict XIV, who prescribed the prayers be said at dawn (6am), noon (12pm) and dusk (6pm) throughout the year except during the Easter season when the Regina Coeli was to be recited. Originally, three Hail Marys were said, with the words of the Incarnation coming into popular usage as time passed. An Angelus bell (three slow peals) would ring calling the faithful to prayer at the appropriate times, which has varied historical origins:
• Evening
Francicans of Assisi ring a ‘Hail Mary Bell’ in 1269 to call to mind the Incarnation
Pope John XXII approves the now widespread custom of the bell and three Hail Marys in 1318
• Morning
The three Hail Marys and ringing of the bell is done at dawn as well as in the evening in Parma, Italy, 1318
The custom spreads rapidly throughout Europe
• Midday
Pope Callistus III orders the practice of the bell and Hail Marys at midday as an ‘Angelus of Peace’ in 1456

Hail Holy Queen (Salve Regina)
The origin of the prayer is disupted between Petrus of Monsoro (d. about 1000), Bishop of Compostella, and Adhémar, Bishop of Podium, the first to answer the call to a Crusade. It was definitely popularized and set in its current form by Bernard of Clairvaux and the Abbey of Cluny in the 12th century. From that time, it has enjoyed wide liturgical use from the Mass to the Divine Office.

Hail Mary
The early history of the Hail Mary is not clear, as the words are taken from Scripture and it is difficult to ascertain when the greeting/prayer was distinctly used. One source attributes the distinct use of the first half to St. Idlefonsus of Toledo in the** 7th century**. Its use as a salutation and prayer begin to appear from frequently in the 11th and 12th centuries, though the first half only was regarded as the ‘Hail Mary’. Here are the parts of the prayer:
• Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with thee (Luke 1:28 with ‘Mary’ gradually added by the Church)
• Blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus ( Luke 1:42 with ‘Jesus’ being added by Pope Urban IV in 1261)
• Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen (based on the declaration of the Council of Ephesus in 431, this part of the prayer appeared in the mid-15th century, being codified by the Council of Trent in 1568)

Queen of Heaven (Regina Coeli)
The first lines of the Regina Coeli (from the Latin words which begin the prayer) were spoken by angels to St. Gregory the Great in the **7th century **on an Easter morning as he was in procession. He added the fourth line. It continued to be used with a prayer added later, and was officially designated as an alternate prayer to the Angelus by Pope Benedict XIV in the 18th century.

Sub Tuum
This prayer was found on a 3rd century papyrus in Egypt, making it one of the oldest verifiable prayers to Mary. It emphasizes the Blessed Virgin’s role as intercessor, and is one of the few non-European prayers to gain popularity in the Latin Rite Church.

Quote end.

Quote - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Roman_Catholic_Mariology#cite_note-0

“The earliest recorded prayer to Mary, the sub tuum praesidium, is dated in its earliest form to around the year 250.” In the fifth century, the Third Ecumenical Council debated the question of whether Mary should be referred to as Theotokos or Christotokos. Theotokos means “God-bearer” or “Mother of God”; its use implies that Jesus, to whom Mary gave birth, is truly God and man in one person.

Nestorians preferred the title Christotokos meaning “Christ-bearer” or “Mother of the Messiah” not because they denied Jesus’ divinity, but because they believed that God the Son or Logos existed before time and before Mary, and that Mary was mother only of the human person of Jesus, so calling her “Mother of God” was confusing and potentially heretical. Both sides agreed that Jesus took divinity from God the Father and humanity from his mother.

The majority at the council, backed by the Pope believed that denying the Theotokos title would carry with it the implication that Jesus was either not divine, or else would go to split him into two separate personhoods, one of whom was son of Mary and the other who was not. Ultimately, the council affirmed the use of the term “Theotokos” and by doing so affirmed Jesus’ undivided divinity and humanity.

Thus, while the debate was over the proper title for Mary, it was primarily a Christological question about the nature of Jesus Christ, a question which would return at the Fourth Ecumenical Council. Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican theological teaching affirms the “Mother of God” title, while some other Christians give no such title to her.

Quote end