Malankara Jacobite Syrian Christian Network

My friend has first created a myth by himself by combining a fact and a fiction. Let me quote his words,

" Myth: The church is universal. Therefore, to stress on one's national heritage is unchristian."

This statement is presented by Georgy as a myth created by the Jacobites! To me, the first sentence is not at all a myth but is a fact accepted and honored by all. The IOC also accepts this as it is. Anyone who accepts the Nicene Creed should attest to it. It is not at all a myth. The second part is also another unquestionable truth. It becomes fictional only when Georgy says that 'some' says it to be unchristian to stress on one's national heritage! There is no problem at all in 'stressing one's national heritage'. I heard even recently H. H. our blessed Patriarch admonishing the SOC followers to be good citizens of their own countries. The SOC in India is greatly upholding the cultural antiquities of their great country. We are by faith universal, adaptive to cultural heritages and social observances in countries where we live and politically we are nationalists. I have never heard anyone in SOC challenging this equation. These are by no means unchristian and none says like this. So this 'myth' created and replied by Georgy is a mere smoke screen created to attack the SOC and to wrongly emphasize that the SO Christians are not nationalists. This is just Don Quixotic to fight against imaginary enemies.

The Indian Christian community is composed of many denominations that have spiritual and temporal ties with sister and partner churches abroad. I have heard none other than RSS and VHP saying that the Christian ties abroad amounts to anti nationalism of Indian Christians! The Roman Catholics, The Church of the East, Episcopal Protestants and Pentecostals keep their religious and financial ties with partners abroad and live as good Nationals. Why the IOC alone is skeptical on SOC's relation with their spiritual head on the reason that he is living abroad. To the best of my understanding the SOC is the least financially assisted church in Kerala from overseas. We can be proud of our indigenous self support.

Dear Georgy, Nationalism and spiritual affiliation are two different aspects of life which will go together without harming each other. Our forefathers proved this very well when they lived in Kerala before the formation of the Indian Union or the Unification of Travancore. They were then members of different petty Kingdoms but they gave their due to the Kings and kept their spiritual unity among themselves as well as with their spiritual supreme lived far beyond the seas. They also very meticulously discerned their spiritual shepherds coming from abroad and received only those who were united in faith and rejected those professed heresies.

Let me now come to some specific inferences by Georgy on this subject.

1. Christological separation of Antioch and Alexandria was also prompted by self assertion of ethnicity and Nationalism. I am very sorry to say on this issue that our Church Fathers defended the faith of the three councils not on the basis of their nationalist spirit nor for their Copt/Syriac identity. This is a very unkind expression against their sincerity of conviction and faith. Actually it was easy for them to be 'National Christians' and the supporters of the King! But they preferred the other way of professing the faith of their forefathers in spite of all sufferings and persecutions. Our Church and its Fathers always worked beyond the territorial limitations.

2. Antioch is the model of the first multi ethnic, multinational and multi cultural church. Please read AA.11:20 and 21. We see here the Greeks are told about Christ and many turned to Him. The model of the Church at all times was that of Peter to Cornelius. Read AA.10:28 to understand the policy followed by St. Peter and the early church on ethnic and national issues. The work of Jacob Burdono all over the churches in all places is another later example of the attitude of the church that worked beyond ethnic and national parameters.

3. The Copts worked among the Ethiopians and the Syrians worked in Armenia, Persia, India and up to China beyond these limitations. Georgy's examples are very recent on the separation of Ethiopians and Eritreans forming national Churches. This too was upon the inclination of the local churches that tuned themselves to the whims and fancies of the rulers. They favored this notion to avail the protection of rulers like Hailee Salasee and the present Eritrean administration. The present situations there will prove the aftermath of their actions. Also note the return of Eritreans to Copts for their consecration. The attitude of Armeian Church to the Antalias (Lebnon) Catholicate was not liberal nationalists. They emphasised the idea of one church. Similarly the Ethiopians preferred to keep the Eritrean church to be with them as one church beyond the national spirit. None of it worked. SOC is fully confident that the so called oneness and unity in MC is impossible and is calling for a peaceful separation and to continue as a mutually accepting and respecting sister churches.

The Syrian Church declared its willingness to accept the TOC as a sister Church in the Mulanthuruthy declaration 2004 in presence of H. H. the Patriarch. But the IOC is not coming forward to accept this and to negotiate. A simple response to this call will solve all the problems in the Church.

4. The Syrian Orthodox Church, outside India is also a mix of nationalities, languages and Cultures. Georgy, please read about the Syrian Orthodox Church of the middle ages with dioceses in Gulf Countries. There were bishops like George of the Arabs. Qatar and Bahrain were once populated by the SOC. Even now in the Syrian Church there are peoples of different languages and different ethnic origins. But are all united as one in Christ as members of the one SO Church.

Moreover, it is we, the Malayalees are more confined to these limitations. We are more prone to be boasting with the pride of the fallacy of Brahminic origin, Malayalee complex and the national limitations: we prove thus to be more ethnic, linguist and narrow minded nationalist people . With these allegations we are proving ourselves much more selfish and narrow minded.

Part 2 (Nationalism and Ethnicity in the OO Church)

The back ground described in Part 1-A of this chapter pointed to the syncretism that was experienced within the oriental churches and particularly in the Syrian Church of Antioch.

The Syrian Church was never a nationally bound church nor limited by ethnic and linguistic closed community. It had Aramaic, Semitic, Arabic, Persian, Greek and Indian stock of communities almost all through. It transcended the geographical boundaries of nations and empires. It was united in its Syriac liturgical traditions and the much coveted Petrine succession.

The theological and Christological affirmations were their convictions and the bond of unity among the members of this church. Even the different dialectical forms of the Syriac language was also not the simple unifying factor. The Nissibian School of Syriac learning was not capable of 'self asserting' to unify the Syrian Orthodox with that of the so called 'Nestorians' eventhough they had the same Syriac as their common language. They considered considered faith above to all issues of language, race or nation.

Let us again come to the Indian situations. How many principalities, nations and empires reigned and vanished since the establishment of our Church. Even linguistic priorities also changed. The present Malayalee complex is also very new compared to our faith ties to the Orthodoxy. Now the IOC claims with their own valid reasons that the Malankara Church is universal in the sense that it has faithful all over and parishes and dioceses in all continents. It is true, but again it points to the fact that the Universal Church in its basic concept transcends National, Ethnic and language boundaries and limitations.

I know at least a few bishops of the IOC who are not anymore nationals of India. There are thousands among the migrant second generations who are not at all Malayalees! I know a few of the priests who are ordained as priests of the 'Indian Orthodox Church' when they are not at all Indian in ethnic sense. They are the so called 'whites' belonging to an entirely different race. The 'Indian' in their Church affiliation is not to nationality but to affiliation of faith. They are also not limited by the malayalee complex. This is the faith effect of the church. I mentioned earlier it transcends all earthly barriers and boundaries.

If I can believe the reports, I read, the name volunteered and talked about the next Catholicose elect is that of a 'foreigner' by citizonship. How can an 'Indian National Church' afford to have such a person as its future head. All nationalistic pleadings will have to be subjugated on the above grounds.

The Indian Orthodox Church with its claims of universality itself is a pointer against Georgy's argument for a national Church.

The Byzantine concept of 'national autocephalous church' had to compromise in the USSR regime and also during this period of Global village thinking. We can see many 'national churches' extending themselves beyond their territories to cater to their migrants and converts. This concept of 'national church' once upheld by the Byzantines are now practically nullified by becoming 'universal' in the globalized situation extending beyond all its former specified limitations. The IOC becoming universal is the apt example.

The worst paradox can be seen in the Oriental family itself. The Ethiopians becoming a national church under the imperial regime of Hailee Salasee turned against the Eritreans when they declared independence and opted for nationalism. They refused the so called ethnic oneness with the Ethiopians and opted for the alliance with the Copts going beyond national, lingual and ethnic collegiality. This is not at all an ideal model, but it is to be studied as a case of natural outcome of the 'national independent' tendency.

Part 3 (Independence based on Antiquity of St. Thomas Tradition)

The following is the statement verbatim of Georgy on the defense of the independence of the Malankara Church.

" Considering its antiquity, its cherished St Thomas tradition, and the importance of conveying the message in an idiom rooted in the cultural milieu, the Malankara Orthodox Church is justified in its claims of independence and quest for Indian moorings. At the same time, it's desirable that the Church continues its spiritual association with the Syriac Church. Instead of getting apoplectic about it, our Jacobite brothers should join forces with others in creating a structure for the Malankara Orthodox Church which will enable a united church to honor both our spiritual association with the Syriac Church founded by St Peter and our legacy as a church founded by the apostle St Thomas."

My comments:

Following are the grounds summarized by Georgy as the basics for the justification on claims of Independence of the MOC

a) Antiquity
b) St. Thomas tradition
c) Cultural milieu.

Antiquity As A Basis For Independence

We are all united, except a very few, in upholding the antiquity of the Malankara Church. It is the strong tradition of the Universal Church. So the discussion should be on the question whether we can co relate this antiquity of the Malankara Church from the apostolic times to claim independence of administration.

During the apostolic times and the times up to first ecumenical synod the church everywhere was considered one and universal in all aspects including administration, if any, in the modern meaning of that terminology in the church affairs. 'Control' and 'administration' comes only when there are establishments. During those periods anything that divided them or differred among them was only on issues of faith. The church everywhere then was united under the 'administrative control' of paternal love, gentleness and interdependence. The Church then was all depended on each other on spiritual and humane activities.

The Synod of Nicaea held to defend faith also thought of bringing the Church under four Patriarchates. Many think that the church was 'divided' by the synod into four, under four Patriarchs. It was really something different. The Universal Church was brought into the 'supervision' of four Patriarchs. (The fourth one added at Constantinople). This division for spiritual supervisor ship was not on the basis of Nation, language or ethnicity. It was also not based on the regional activity of any of the apostles. If the antiquity of the establishment or the apostolicity of preaching is considered the basis of justification to 'national independent churches' the dioceses in Iraq of SOC should be another independent Church.( Jerusalem should be the first national and apostolic Church.) The SOC in Iraq has more claims of Thomite ancestry or Edessan provisional Nationality. Even in the traditions of the 'Church of the East', they don't have any idea like this on the basis of antiquity of traditions. (The IOC propagandists are now very keen to support the pre Portuguese connection and allegiance of the Malankara Church to the Church of the East.)

St. Thomas Tradition:

As I mentioned earlier the St. Thomas tradition is not of the Malankara Church alone. It is common to Malankara, Edessa, the present dioceses of Iran, Iraq (of Both SOC and Church of the East), the church in China, etc. We don't hear any move for independence or justifications anywhere there based on this antiquity of establishment. St. Thomas tradition is our heritage and lineage to the faith that we profess through Christ. It is not to be counted to the least to delimit the universality of the Church. The SOC considers the St. Thomas tradition as common tradition of the Universal Church. The MC also observes July 3rd, the day the Church in Edessa received the holy relics of St. Thomas brought from India, as St. Thomas day. St. Thomas patrimony (as the apostolic sacrifice of any other apostle) is not limited to Malankara or any of the churches. It is not a justification for independence and autocephaly.

Cultural Milieu:

I can't understand the cultural milieu involved in the split in the Malankara church and the claims of its autocephaly. I just visualize a situation where Parumala Thirumeni outlived Pulikkottil thirumeni and took the helm of the Malankara Church. Would there have been a split like this. If Parumala Thirumeni was to receive Abdulla Patriarch what would have been the rest of the History? This is only visualization! All these claims of independence and autocephaly came as an after effect, in the twentieth century, after the excommunication of Vattaseril Thirumeni by Abdulla Bava. If suppose, that excommunication and related split would not have happened what would have been the history of the church? It would have continued as one united Malankara church with close allegiance and spiritual ties with the SO Patriarchate. To me,there is no cultural inevitability that necessitated the unhappy split in Malankara.

Freedom and Independence to all levels:

When the Church passed through centuries it accumulated wealth and properties. The parishes also accumulated wealth and assets. Now the IOC trend is that the freedom and independence of allegiance is limited in a national spectrum. It cannot be taken down to the individual or parish level. The same time Georgy and his partisans argues for independence at a National level, they negates all the basic rights of a parishes to take a decision in unanimity or majority to opt to continue in association with the universal church. But I know they are very keen in the so called association with the OO fraternity. They are projecting a double edged paradox. OO interrelationship will become more fruitful if we in Malankara settle our disputes and opt for a peaceful coexistence. The Copts and the Armenians will be most happy if we can sit together as brothers. There is no meaning in in saying about the OO communion when we are fighting each other. So also comes the parish issues and the freedom issues. The IOC stand takes freedom only upto a national level only. Even the parish properties are being tied up with litigations for the thirst of authority and power. Is it the freedom of the members and parishes as unit of the Church? Or is it the freedom of the bishops that are envisaged here?

What should be the ideal? Is it better to concentrate the wealth and authority to persons or is it better to have an authority practiced at different levels. Why the hierarchy is more concerned at the properties of the parishes rather than the souls of its members? Where goes the concept of freedom and independence of these parishes? When the hierarchy feels to offer Eucharist with police protection and paves ways to closure of churches where goes the freedom of the people to worship? These are not questions to be answered, but to be prayed for.

Willingness for Spiritual ties with SOC.

I am happy that Georgy is willing and is suggesting for a desirable spiritual ties with the SOC. H. H. The Patriarch and the official body of the MJC officially declared their preparedness to accept the IOC as a sister church of the OO Church. This is an open stand of the Church. This in another sense is willing to let you hold all your claims of 'nationalism. universalism, Thomite independent throne, cultural elitism, financial superiority, succession from Nestorian Catholicate, connection to Maphrianate of Tigris' and the like. You can support, defend or propagate as you like according to situations. As Georgy fears we are not apoplectic to any of these claims or defenses. We are concerned only because of this unending and unhappy strife is continuing for the last one century. All calls for settlements were aborted. It is proven that the efforts for unity is a flop and let us think for a settlement for a co existence. Then the spiritual and social ties will strengthen. We pray for that. We as sister churches in Kerala can be more meaningful in witness in our separation than in the stigma of continued wounding rivalry. This also gives IOC the unchallengeable opportunity to be independent.

NEXT: The Myth of Autocephaly in OO Churches

Original Posting of Mr. Georgy S Thomas in IOCN Malankara's Mythical Minefields-I

Top..