FAITH SHARING SERIES                        #10 

And you will know the truth,

and the very truth will make you free. (Jn 8:32) 

“Love your Church by Knowing your Church” (Card. Tisserant)

“Go forth and be Witnesses” 

Chapter 1 (contd) 

Liturgy of Mar Thoma Nazranis of India

The great Suppression and painful Rebirth 

Historical Background (contd)  

Re-emergence of Mar Thoma Nazrani Identity and effort to purify the altered Liturgy of the Nazranis.

In our last discussion (FSS #9), we saw the painful process by which a semblance of identity was being regained by the ancient Mar Thoma Nazrani Church of India, but with  a much truncated size and “cut-down to the bone” spirituality. Though two Vicariates were erected for the Nazranis, they were both headed by two Latin bishops, with one of them being quite antagonistic towards Nazrani sentiments. Serious efforts were going on for re-unification of the separated brethren, of “Puthen Coor” faction to their mother community. Towards this goal, under the leadership of Nidhirikkal Mani Kathnar and others, “Pazhayakoor” and “Puthencoor” groups got together to form an association called “Jathikya Sangham” with its base at Kottayam. The Jathikya Sangham acquired a large area of landed property in Kottayam, for the purpose of starting joint institutions for English education and higher learning for all Nazranis. Note that until almost that time, the Varappuzha Carmelite Bishops had banned the “Pazhayakoor” Nazrani laymen from learning English language, while the “Puthencoor” brethren were already pursuing their English studies with the help of Protestant missionaries, so also were the Hindus and others. (During that time, a group of   young boys under the leadership of Thoma Kurialacherry (later Bishop) had started attending private English tuition, at Champakkulam, by using the services of a Brahmin teacher. The vicar of Kalloorkad church reported this matter to the Archbishop of Varappuzha, who immediately issued an order stopping that effort. At least two of those youngsters, Nanthikatt Varkeychan and Illipparampil Chacko, went to Trivandrum, away from Varapuzha jurisdiction, to further their English studies. Later, Thoma Kurialacherry, who was called the “Little Angel” by his colleagues, was selected for Seminary studies in Rome.)

Nidhirikkal Mani Kathanar and his leadership of the Nazranis were not to the liking of Bishop Lavigne. Against his own objections, Lavigne had appointed Mani Kathnar as his Vicar General, only because he was ordered to do so by Rome. To escape the influence of the “Jathikya Sangham”, Lavigne decided to shift the seat of the Diocese out of Kottayam town. Kuravilangad was the obvious choice being the traditional center of the Nazranis and also their stronghold. But, fearing the influence of the local Nidhirikkal Mani Kathnar, the Bishop selected Changanacherry, and moved the diocese to that town, in 1891. And the name of the Vicariate was changed to Changanacherry. The bishop managed to transfer Mani Kathnar from Vicar General to Vicar of Kuravilangad, Marth Mariam Church, where he died a heart-broken man in 1904, at the age of 63. Again, to preempt Mani Kathnar and his “Jathikya Sangham”, the Bishop started St Berchmans College High School, at Changanacherry in 1891, offering English education. Bishop Medlycott also started St. Thomas College High School at Trichur, at the same time. Under the influence of   Lavigne and as advised by the Papal Nuncio Antonio Agliardi, the Holy See issued a directive to the Catholics to withdraw from the Jathikya Sangham. Thus the Catholics gave up all their stakes including investments in the Jathikya Sangham. The Puthercoor group went ahead with the plan, by themselves. MD Seminary School system is the result of their effort. With this, the influence of the Catholics in Kottayam was much adversely affected .

While Medlycott did not antagonize the Nazranis of his diocese, Lavigne’s steps, at all levels, were very unpopular with the Nazranis. The angry faithful sent many petitions to Rome requesting his removal. Bishop Lavigne went to Rome to visit the Mar Papa, and never came back. With the erection of one more new Vicariate, Ernakulam in 1896, the Nazranis now had three Suriyani Vicariates, Trichur, Ernakulam and Changanacherry. Bishop Medlycott resigned in 1896. When John Menachery, Louis Pazheparampil and Mathew Makil were ordained as Vicar(s) Apostolic (Bishops) of Trichur, Ernakulam and Changanacherry, in 1897, the 300 year struggle of the Nazranis to have their own East Syriac Bishop(s) finally bore fruit.

Dawn of a New Era

With the appointment of the three new Nazrani bishops, a new era had started for the Nazrani Church of Mar Thoma. All the three new bishops were Nazrani Kathnars. While John Menachery was a priest of Trichur, Louis Pazheparambil was from Pulincoonnu in Kuttanad. Pazheparambil was one of the seven priests who were expelled from the Carmelite order of monastery by Archbishop Leonardo Mellano of Varappuzha, in  1875, for writing and sending a petition to Mar Papa requesting appointment of native bishops for the Church. These seven priests, who came to be called  “Seven Sorrows”, were subjected to much mental persecution by the Varappuzha authorities. Mathew Makil who became the new bishop of Chnaganacherry belonged to the “Southist” faction of Kottayam. In a very wise move and with great vision, Rome had appointed Makil to head the Nazrani diocese of Changanacherry, which would have brought about a better integration of the “Southists” into the mainline. Unfortunately, the short-sighted “Northists” of Changanacherry could not appreciate this, and objected to the appointment of a “Southist” to head their diocese. Due to their non-cooperation, it became difficult for Makil to function effectively at Changanacherry. Because of this development, Rome had to erect another (non-territorial) Vicariate at Kottayam, in 1910, exclusively for the “Southists”, and transferred Mar Makil to Kottayam as its first bishop. In his place Thoma Kurialacherry was appointed as the bishop of Changanacherry 1910.

Though Mar Thoma Nazrani Church had emerged out of the shadows, it was a far cry from the glorious days prior to sixteenth century. By now the geographical area of this apostolic Church was cut down from “All India” jurisdiction, to a small area in Travanacore and Cochin, between the two rivers of Bharathapuzha in the North and Pampa in the South. This great, Eastern Aramaic Church had almost completely been transformed into a Latin subordinate entity. The Portuguese Jesuits, ardent Scholars as they were, made great theological and ecclesiological changes to the Nazrani Church to get it in line with the Latin canons and theology. The strong point of the Italian Carmelites, who followed the Jesuits, were their spirituality and faith life, based almost entirely on pious exercises and devotions And they ensured that they passed on that way of faith life to the Nazranis, in a very effective manner. The souls of Dom Menezes and other early Jesuits would gleefully be smiling in their graves, to see the great fruitfulness of their efforts.

 By now, the only catechesis that the Nazranis received, children and adults alike, were a large set of prayers, which they learnt by heart, and a system of pious exercises and devotions which formed the back bone of their faith life. The Nazranis had, by now, become ignorant of their East Syriac spirituality and theology. Immediately following the “Synod” of Udayamperoor, the struggle of the Nazranis was to maintain the purity of their liturgical regime and East Syriac heritage. Slowly, their struggle lost focus and its aim got shifted to having their own native bishops.  Devotions to many European saints and festivities had become quite popular and common. All the priests  underwent training and formation fully under Latin ways, in Latin seminaries, and could not appreciate anything different or better. Generations after generations passed by without any formation based on their true East Syriac heritage. Thanks to the slow indoctrination, all the Nazranis: the faithful, clergy and even the bishops came to think that “to be Catholic” meant “to be  Roman (Latin) Catholic”. “Law of Thoma”, was removed even from memory. Once the Syro Malabar Church obtained a hierarchy of their own native bishops, it appeared that they had no more higher levels to climb. Fortunately, by this time, the Holy See realized that the Eastern Churches, more so the Malabar Nazranis had become almost completely  Latinized and were on the verge of losing their Eastern heritage. This put the “Catholicity” of the Universal Church on a question mark. Consequently, the Holy See wanted to start a process thru which to re-introduce and re-invigorate the Eastern liturgical celebrations. The Church believes that it is thru the sacramental and liturgical celebrations that any Church expresses its faith. In 1931, the Oriental Congregation of the Holy See asked all the four Syro Malabar bishops (Trichur, Ernakulam, Kottayam and Changanacherry) to recommend a procedure and submit a draft text to  re-introduce the Pontifical (administration of Sacraments by the Bishops, including Holy Orders and Confirmation), according to their East Syriac (Chaldean) heritage. But the Syro Malabar bishops did not share the view of the Holy See. They met together and made a unanimous representation to Rome, stating that the Syro Malabar Church would be happy to have the “Latin” Pontifical and liturgy. And they requested the Holy See to have the Latin texts be fully translated into Suriyani language and the same be introduced as the liturgical text of the Malabar Nazrani Church. The Plenary Council at Oriental Congregation, who considered this request of the Malabar bishops in 1934, could not arrive at a decision. They referred this matter to the Mar Papa, Pius XI, for his directive.

After prayerful and careful consideration of the issue, the Mar Papa (Pius XI) directed: “It is not the wish of the Church that all Churches and Christians be “Latin Catholic”, but, we wish that  every Church and Christian to be “Catholic”. It is only when each and every particular Church bears witness to their particular heritage, the Universal Church truly becomes Catholic. The request of the Syro Malabar Bishops to introduce Latin Liturgy in the garb of Suriyani language is not agreed to. Steps are to be taken immediately to renew and re-introduce, the original East Syriac Liturgy, which is your true patrimony.”

Since no positive action was forthcoming from the Syro Malabar hierarchy, the Holy See appointed a commission to renew and re-introduce the Holy Qurbana, Pontifical and Liturgy of the Hours. The Malabar hierarchy, at first did not give much  support to this effort of the Holy See. But, in time, some of the bishops came forward to support this initiative. The Commission re-introduced all the three Anaphoras of Syro Malabar (East Syrian) Church, including the two Anaphoras which were banned by the “Synod” of Udayamperoor. (Anaphoras of (1) Addai and Mari, (2) Theodore and (3) Nestorius) After obtaining much feed back from the bishops and expert opinion of many scholars(*1), the report of the Commission was examined by the full Committee of the Oriental Congregation. The texts of the Liturgy of the three Anaphoras were submitted to and approved by Mar Papa Pius XII, on June 26^th, 1957 and also by Mar Papa John XXIII in 1959. It was this liturgy (of Addai and Mari) which was prepared by a body of experts in  Eastern Theology and Liturgy and as approved by two Mar Papas, which was introduced on July 3^rd, 1962, thru a joint Pastoral letter of all the bishops of Syro Malabar Church. The joint Pastoral Letter stated: “ The ancient Chaldean Suriyani rites of liturgical celebrations (of Syro Malabar Church), underwent many changes (for the worse), under the interference of the foreign bishops. In order to re-introduce and to find and maintain the ancient purity of our liturgy, the Holy See took great pains to prepare and present us with this text. Every Christian faithful of our Church has a solemn duty to fully and respectfully understand and accept the meaning, relevance and applicability of these steps and effectively participate.’

The Joint Pastoral Letter, however did not result in joint support to the renewed Liturgy. Soon, two opposing opinions gave rise to two factions;

(a) One group of dioceses, a minority in number, supporting the efforts of the Oriental Congregation of the Holy See in its efforts, and also to fully implement the call of the Church Fathers of Vatican II, vide “ORIENTALIUM ECCLESIARUM”  calling upon all the Eastern Churches to “retrace and return to their roots and to return  to their liturgical rite, their established way of life and ancestral traditions which they originally had, before they were led astray by outside elements”, was in favor of re-introducing the ancient and rich East Syriac (Chaldean) liturgy.

(b) However the other group of dioceses, a majority number, thought that going back, fully to the original liturgy was too cumbersome. They wanted the Holy Qurbana should be shorter, comparable to the Latin Mass. Similarly this group also wanted to follow many features of the renewed Latin liturgy, like the celebrant facing the congregation, kneeling during “Institution Narrative” etc.

This led to the formation of two opposing ideologies. The faithful and many of the clergy; who received very little catechesis and/or inadequate formation took sides based on attachment/opposition to personalities. Note that this was an era when liberalism in society was gaining much ground. Universal adult franchise had become an established principle in political decision making. Authorities began taking important decisions solely based on public support and not on “what is right and what is wrong”. A shorter version of the Holy Qurbana, was introduced as an “experimental measure for two years”, in 1968. This also led to more forms of Holy Qurbana, without any mandate: (“Indian Mass” and “Indianized Mass”) with additions of prayers from Hindu scriptures and Hindu symbolisms. But, in spite of all these differences, a semblance of unity was shown in 1972, when all the Bishops jointly under the leadership of Mar Joseph Cardinal Parekkattil, Archbishop of Ernakulam, appealed to the Govt of India to issue a Postal Stamp to commemorate the 19^th Centenary Celebration of the Martyrdom of Mar Thoma, the Apostle of India. The Symbol that the Bishops selected, which the Govt. of India gladly used in the Potage Stamp issued on July 3^rd, 1972 was the “Mar Thoma Sleeva”. It was a great symbol of unity among the Mar Thoma Nazranis, at that time.

Postage Stamp Issued by Govt of India in 1972

But it did not take long for differences to reappear. The Mar Thoma Sleeva which was a great symbol of unity of all the Syro Malabar Nazranis and their dioceses, in 1972, was slowly made out to be a symbol of disunity. The parties concerned used this ancient sign to ferment much ill will and hatred of one another and even against senior Bishops. As of now, the Mar Thoma Sleeva has come to occupy the not so coveted a position as the most “Dividing Issue” in the Nazrani Psyche of the two opposing groups. We will discuss “Mar Thoma Sleeva” in detail, and dispassionately, in a later chapter.  

(*1)  The Syro Malabar Church did not have any noteworthy scholars, at that time, in the fields of Liturgy and Eastern Theology, barring the singular exception of Rev Fr Placid T.O.C.D. Fr. Cyril Korlovsky and Mgr (later Card) Eugene Tisserrant were among the many scholars who advised the Oriental congregation in the preparation of the Texts. The Malabar Church did not possess any resource material which would have guided the bishops, clergy and faithful in anything concerning their East Syriac heritage, as all such documents were collected and burned, consequent to the “Synod” of Udayamperoor.

 

(Ch 1  Liturgy-Historical Background: to continue: Faith Sharing Series #11)  

FAITH SHARING SERIES                        #9 

And you will know the truth,

and the very truth will make you free. (Jn 8:32) 

“Love your Church by Knowing your Church”(Card. Eugene Tisserant) 

Chapter 1 (contd)

Liturgy of Mar Thoma Nazranis of India

The great Suppression and painful Rebirth 

Historical Background (contd) 

Aftermath of Udayamperoor: Period of Decline 

We discussed and found the events that led to the “Synod” of Udayamperoor, and the enormous changes that were made to the Nazrani Church and community as a result of that invasion. The Nazrani delegates went back to their parish communities, thoroughly disillusioned about any possible good motives or feelings that they thought that the colonial missionaries might have had towards the Nazranis. They were convinced that nothing good would come out of the Latin rule over the Nazranis, and were eager to escape from the grips of the Portuguese colonists. The Nazranis were very proud of their East Syriac heritage and their communion with the Chaldean Patriarch and the communion that the Patriarch had with the Bishop of Rome. They did not like the nefarious way in which the Firangees cut off the ties that the Malabar Nazranis had with their Patriarch. They started sending out messages and secret envoys to the Chaldean Patriarch to intervene and to appoint East Syriac bishops to once again take their spiritual leadership. They also sent letters to Rome, to the Mar Papa, informing him of the dire straits that they were in. But the highly influential western missionaries did their best to intervene and interrupt all efforts of the Nazranis at getting justice.   

In the meanwhile, the Chaldean Catholicos-Patriarch kept sending envoys and bishops, in the hope that they would make contact with the Malabar Nazranis and would be able to re-establish communion. But none of them could make any effective contact or assume the episcopacy of the Malabar Church, due to the blockage by the Westerners. Some efforts by Rome to intervene to rectify the Malabar fiasco, created by the Portuguese and subsequently by the Italian Carmelites also did not bear much fruit. Let us briefly examine the important happenings starting after the “Synod” of Udayamperoor (1599) until the Suriyani Nazrani hierarchy came into existence in 1896. 

1. The so called “Synod” of Udayamperoor was held in1599. We have dealt with the “Synod” in our last two discussions. (FSS #7 and #8).
2. The Angamally Autonomous Arch eparchy of the Nazranis was suppressed. In its lieu, Kodungallore diocese was erected, as a suffragan to Goa Archdiocese. Portuguese Padroado was imposed on the Nazranis effective August 4^th 1600. Due to persistent representation by the Nazranis, Rome (Mar Papa Paul V) reinstated the Metropolitan status to the diocese and moved it back to Angamally, (but still kept it under Goa). But, bishop Roze prevailed on Rome and moved again to Kodungallore (1609). Roze made many further changes to the Nazrani liturgy and sacramental regime.
3. Chaldean Patriarch sent a bishop to Malabar, (1609), who was ceremoniously received by the Archdeacon. But, as serious concerns about his safety and security arose, he went back to Iraq just after 8 months, under protection of the Archdeacon.
4. Roze died in 1624. He was succeeded by Stephen Britto S.J., who was quite antagonistic towards the Archdeacon and all the Nazrani traditions. On Britto’s passing in 1641, Francis Garcia S.J. became bishop of Kodungallore. Garcia, though was well versed in Suriyani language, also maintained a high-handed and prejudicial approach towards the Nazranis. Nazranis knew that they could not expect to get any fair treatment from the Jesuits or their bishops. (In the meanwhile, in 1628, Dominican Missionaries had landed in Malabar. With the help of the Archdeacon, the Dominicans opened a seminary in Kaduthuruthy. But, before long, the Jesuits managed to evict the Dominicans and send them packing, to ensure monopoly of Jesuits in Malabar.)
5. The Nazranis kept sending petitions to the Chaldian Patriarch, praying to send a Suriyani bishop and save the Nazrani Church from the misrule of the Portuguese. The Patriarch asked Mar Ahthalla, the East Syrian bishop taking spiritual care of the Suriyani Nazranis in Cairo, Egypt, to immediately proceed to Malabar to take care of the Nazranis there. In August 1652, Ahthalla landed in Madras on a Dutch ship. Learning that Ahthalla was the Suriani bishop, the Portuguese managed to get hold of him and kept him in a Jesuit monastery there. Coming to know of his arrival at Madras, some representatives of the Nazranis reached there and managed to meet him. Ahthalla asked the Nazranis to await his arrival in Malabar. News of arrival of the Suriani bishop Ahthallah was received by the Nazranis with great jubilation. They exerted great pressure on the Latin bishop Garcia, to release Ahthalla and permit him to travel to Malabar. The Portuguese finally agreed that bishop Ahthalla would be arriving on a ship from Madras bound for Goa arriving at Kochi port on January 3^rd 1653. Thousands of Nazranis gathered at Mattancherry, near the Port, to receive their bishop. The ship arrived, but Ahthallah was not on board. Rumor soon spread that the Suriani Bishop Ahthalla was thrown overboard by the firangee Jesuits, and that he was drowned in the Arabian Sea. (Nothing has been heard of Mar Ahthallah since). The much enraged Nazranis gathered in great strength, under the leadership of the Archdeacon, (some accounts say 25000 Nazranis had assembled), at Mattancherry. They tied a long rope on the great granite cross at the Mattancherry Bazaar, and by holding onto the rope, the Nazranis took an oath: “We take a solemn oath that we or our progeny, would never again be subject of or ruled by the “Sanpaulur Padres”” (“priests of St. Paul Seminary”, a name by which the Jesuits were known among the Nazranis). This “Oath” is known in history as the “Coonen Cross Oath”. (The Cross is said to have developed a stoop to one side, following the tying of the rope and holding of it by the multitude of people, hence the name “Coonen Cross”.) Further developments following the “Coonen Cross Oath” led to the greatest blow and wound to the body of the Malabar Nazrani Church and community: the great split of the Church into two groups. This brought forth the new group which came to be called “Puthen Coottu”. We will discuss this schism, in detail, in a separate chapter dealing with “Schisms in the Church”.  

Coonen Cross Oath (an old drawing) 

6. We see that a major part of the Nazrani history, from this point on, was influenced by this schism in the community. The part played by the Western missionaries to perpetuate this division was significant, which we will see in detail, later. (“Divide and rule” is an important principle in Western political science.)
7. Seeing that things were going out of hand, Archbishop Garcia sought the help of Portuguese civil authorities. But, the Viceroy was supportive of the stand of the Archdeacon. Not satisfied with this, Garcia sought help of Portuguese king. In the meanwhile the Archdeacon wrote to Mar Papa in Rome to intervene, and also sought the help of the Carmelites, to save the Nazranis from the Jesuits.
8.  Mar Papa appointed two Italian Carmelite priests; Fr. Joseph Maria Sebastiani and Fr. Vincent Hyacinth, as Commissaries to inquire into the happenings in Malabar and submit a report to Rome. As the Carmelites were apprehensive of their safety for travel thru the routes mostly controlled by the Portuguese, they traveled separately by two different routes, to ensure that at least one of them would be able to make the journey. Sebastiani reached Malabar on February 22^nd 1657 Along with another Carmelite, Fr Matteo; he visited most of the Nazrani parishes and wrote detailed reports, periodically, to Rome. We see that the reports that Sebastiani sent to Rome were generally very supportive of the Nazranis. (Please read “The Grave Tragedy of the Church of St Thomas Christians and the Apostolic Mission of Sebastiani” by Paul Pallath. This book throws much light on the “heartbreaking, cruel and tragic story of the Nazranis” thru the writings of a Roman Commissary and thru other Roman Documents). After appointing Matteo for follow up, Sebastiani returned to Rome on January 7^th, 1658.
9. Hyacinth arrived in Malabar on January 7^th, 1658. He tried to make some compromises with the Puthen Coottu Nazranis, but his efforts were not much fruitful.
10.  Archbishop Garcia died on September 3^rd, 1659. (The Carmelite) Sebastiani was appointed as bishop of the Nazranis by Rome (Propaganda Fide Congregation), and he arrived in Malabar on May 14^th, 1661 and assumed charge of the diocese of Varappuzha, which was erected for the Nazranis. Sabastiani was also the administrator of Kodungallore diocese of the Nazranis. In the meanwhile, Hyacinth had died in Kochi on February 10^th 1661.
11. In September 1662, the Dutch army defeated the Portuguese and the Dutch annexed Kochi. (Note that the Dutch were Protestant Christians.) They ordered all European Catholic clergy to immediately leave Malabar. Before he left Malabar, Mar Sebastiani, as authorized by Rome, ordained a Nazrani priest, Parampil Chandy of Kuravilangadu as the bishop of Varappuzha. Before the Episcopal ordination, Sebastiani had obtained an undertaking upon oath from Mar Chandy, that he would not appoint another Nazrani to succeed him unless specifically authorized by Rome.  
12. Bishop Chandy was based at Kuravilangad. He requested permission from Rome to install a Nazrani Kathnar, Fr. Mathai, as his auxiliary bishop. But, Rome, gave him a Latin Euro-Indian Carmelite, Raphael de Figueredo, instead, to be his auxiliary. This was not much liked by the Nazranis. Figueredo and other Carmelites in the area were not helpful to Mar Chandy.  Bishop Chandy died on January 2^nd, 1687 and Bishop Figueredo took over.
13. In the meanwhile, restriction on European priests to work in Malabar was eased. The Nazranis were divided between two dioceses; Varappuzha of the Carmelites and Kodungallore of the Jesuits. The title and position of “Archdeacon” became extinct. The Nazranis soon found that their hope of any relief thru the Italian Carmelites were quite in vain. The Carmelites were equally prejudicial and racial in their dealings with the Indian Nazranis. The Europeans considered the Indian Nazranis as less than their equals. No Nazranis, even senior Kathnars, were permitted to take a seat in the presence of even junior European priests. There are many instances of Nazrani Kathnars being beaten by the Europeans for venturing to sit in their presence. There is a record of at least one Kathnar (Ikkakka Kathnar of Edapppally), beaten to death by the Phirangees, on trumped up charges. The perpetrators of this murder got away by paying some monetary penalty to the Kingdom of Kochi.
14. As was mentioned earlier, the Nazrani community had split into two factions: the “Puthencoottu” and the “Pazhayacoottu”. This was a very painful division which split even many families. The differences between these factions were not of any matter concerning faith or of their communion with the Bishop of Rome. A great Majority of the Nazranis had supported the “Coonen Cross Oath”, to express deep anguish towards the “Cruel” Jesuit rule. Due to the effort of Sebastiani, Hyacinth and Parambil Chandi, most of the dissidents returned to the obedience of “Latin” law. A large section along with a powerful leadership still remained separate. There was deep and strong desire amongst both the “Pazhaya Coottu” and “Puthen Coottu” factions to reunite into one unified Church and community as they had always been, for over 1600 years. All the efforts of Nazrani leadership for unity were thwarted and foiled by the foreign missionaries; both Jesuits and the Carmelites, who were more influential with Rome. Nazrani community produced many powerful leaders who played prominent roles in this effort at reunification. Some outstanding names are: Archbishop Mar Yawsep Kariatti, Paremmakkal Thoma Kathnar (Governodor), Thachil Mathu Tharakan, Mar Abraham Pandari, Nidhirikkal Mani Kathnar, (now Bl.) Chavara Kuriakose Elias Kathnar and Placid Podipara Kathnar are the most prominent among them. (We will discuss in detail, the re-unification efforts leading to the formation of Syro-Malankara Church, later, in a different chapter).  
15. There was another split among the Nazranis that occurred with the arrivals; first of Bishop Roccos, followed by Bishop Elia Mellus and Bishop Yakkov, (1860-1882), all sent by the Chaldean Catholic Patriarch. (The Nazrani quasi-bishop Abdeeso Thondanatt from Palai also played a part) These visits, created quite some stir amongst the Nazranis and many Nazrani churches declared their allegiance to the Chaldean East Syriac bishops. Faced with this new development, Mar Papa Pius IX, overruling the recommendations of the Carmelite Archbishop of Varapuzha, appointed Bishop of Bombay Leon Meurin S.J., a German Jesuit, as Apostolic Visitator (on March 24, 1876) to Malabar. Meurin was given a directive “to enquire into the grievances of the Syrians, to do everything to end the schism, and to establish permanent peace in the State.” With much help from the great Nazrani priest, Nidhirikkal Mani Cathnar, Meurin visited most of the Nazrani parishes and made detailed reports every fortnight to Rome. He took great pains and effort to study the predicament of the Nazranis and reported to the Holy See, that Nazranis ought to be served with better justice and compassion and also that they deserved to have Bishops of their own “rite”. Meurin was also very critical of the Carmelite way of handling the affairs in Malabar. Bishop Meurin, with the help of Mani Kathnar and other prominent Nazranis, could stop the Roccos/Mellus schism. Under pressure from Rome, the Patriarch recalled the Chaldean bishops, thus practically ending the schism.   Meurin traveleld thru  Malabar for over 16 months (May 5, 1876 to Sep 28, 1877) and visited most of the Nazrani parishes, and sent 50 fortnightly, detailed, reports to Rome. The Italian Carmelites of Varappuzha, who were very influential in Rome, were very unhappy with Meurin and made sure that the reports of Meurin, never received due attention in Rome and were just kept aside. Under pressure, Rome (Propaganda Fide) sent Bishop Ignatius Persico, an Italian Capuchin, as an additional (unofficial) Visitor to Malabar. He arrived in Malabar on February 23^rd, 1877 and returned on 26^th March 1877. His entire one month stay was spent with the Carmelites and he never met any Nazrani representatives to learn about their grievances. The report that Persico sent to Rome at the end of his visit seemed to have received much attention there. As desired by the Carmelites, Rome recalled Meurin. He was promoted as Archbishop, and transferred to the Indian Ocean island of Mauritius.  (Please read: “Kerala Church in 19^th century; (i) Letters of Meurin and (ii) Report of Persico”: both by Charles Pyngott. Meurin took pains to know the Malabar Church, hence came to love it. There was another great Frenchman, Cardinal Eugene Tisserant who famously said “I love your Church, because I know your Church” We will study about Tisserant later.)  
16. The Nazranis kept sending letters to Mar papa for a bishop of their own “rite” to take care of them. On May 20^th, 1887, Mar Leo XIII Papa, thru his Papal Bull “Quom Jam Pridem” erected two Vicariates (provisional dioceses), exclusively for the Nazranis of Mar Thoma, based at Kottayam and Trichur. Kodungallore Diocese was suppressed. All the Nazranis under Varappuzha and Kodungallore dioceses were transferred to the two new Vicariates. Two Latin priests, French Jesuit, Charles Lavigne S.J. and Anglo-Indian Adolph. Medlycott were appointed as the new titular Bishops for Kottayam and Trichur Vicariates. 
17. Later, in February 1908, Mar Abimalek, an Archbishop of the “Church of East” (not in communion with Rome) visited Trichur. A small group of Nazranis joined him and formed the “Church of the East”. They are, now known as “Surayis” and are found mainly in Trichur.

(Please read “Church of Mar Thoma Christians thru centuries” by Kurian Mathoth and Sebastian Nadakkal and “Mar Thoma Nazrani Church through Crises” by Joseph Perumthottam)

 

 (Ch 1  Liturgy-Historical Background: to continue: Faith Sharing Series #10)  

FAITH SHARING SERIES                        #8 

And you will know the truth,

and the very truth will make you free. (Jn 8:32) 

Chapter 1 (contd) 

Liturgy of Mar Thoma Nazranis of India

The great Suppression and painful Rebirth 

Historical Background (contd) 

In our last discussion we were seeing the developments which led to the convening of a meeting of Nazrani representatives at Udayamperoor in 1599, which has come to be called as the “Synod of Udayamperoor (Diamper)”. This was a major step taken by the newly created hierarchy of the Latin Church in India, to bring the ancient Indian, Apostolic Nazrani Church of Mar Thoma, completely under the rule and regimen of the Latin Church of Rome. Apart from wresting full control of the Indian Nazrani Church, by the Roman Latin hierarchy, this meeting also resulted in great changes to the liturgical and sacramental regimes as well as the faith and prayer life of the ancient Nazrani Church of India. There is an ocean of documents, both from Western and Eastern sources, which gives us a clear picture of what transpired before, during and after this “Synod”, and the events resulting from it.  

Let us summarize and examine the salient features and results following this extra-ordinary meeting and the effects that it had on the Nazrani Church and community.  

1. Archbishop Menezes of Goa convened and presided over this “Synod”. Archdiocese of Goa or its bishop, had no authority or jurisdiction to call, convene, preside over and make decisions at a Synod or presbytarium or any such meeting of the Mar Thoma Nazranis.The Nazranis, canonically and ecclesially, were under the jurisdiction of the ancient Arch eparchy of Angamally, in communion with the Catholicos-Patriarch of the Chaldean Catholic Church. Though Menezes claimed that he was authorized by Rome, no documents, either in Rome or in India, support such a claim. Alternately, it is also suggested that what Menezes called for was a “Diocesan Synod” which can be convened by its bishop. Actually, even during the life time of Mar Abraham, Menezes had convened a diocesan synod at Goa, to discuss the ways and means to convert the Malabar Nazranis to Latin rite Roman Catholics. Neither Mar Abraham nor any representative of the Nazranis took part in that Goan synod nor played any part in its deliberations. This “Synod” was called to be convened at Udayamperoor, precisely because of the presence of a large garrison of Portugese military in its vicinity. During the assembly of the “Synodal” meetings, Portugese soldiers stood guard outside the church, as a precaution against any potential revolt by the Nazranis.
2. There is no record of the minutes of proceedings of the Udayamperoor Synod, ever having been submitted for approval, to Mar Papa in Rome or to the Chaldean Catholicos-Patriach in Iraq. Some partisan books do suggest that the minutes of the preceedings of the “Synod” were sent to Rome for approval, but no record of such submission exists in Rome.
3. Several Portugese Jesuit priests (Fr. Roz S.J. and Fr. Camperi S.J.) who took part in the “Synod” have reported to their Jesuit superiors in Portugal, that the proceedings were conducted in a very unfair manner and that provisions were added/deleted after the end of the meeting. Also that, even days later, provisions were added to the minutess by Menezes. Also, that the proceedings of the meeting were conducted in Latin or in Portugese, two languages that the Nazranis were neither familiar with nor understood. There were some Phiringees who acted as translators who also did a very unfair job. The decisions were all prepared, in advance, in the hands of Menezes and were generally read out. No deliberations took place about any of the resolutions. Fr. Roz S.J.,wrote also to Rome about the unjust decisions of the “Synod”.
4. The Nazranis were forced to affix their signatures/thumb impressions, on the document of the minutes of the meeting, under threat of “excommunication”. (also as reported by the Jesuits)
5. The “Synod” convened from June 20 to 26, 1599. The meetings were conducted in the mornings from 7 AM to 11 Am and in the afternoon from 2 PM to 6 PM. There were a total of 9 meetings in which 181 decrees were read out and passed without any discussion.
6. The composition of those who attended the meetings are explained in our last discussion (FSS #7).  

The “Udayamperoor Synod” completely upset the faith life and balance of the Nazrani Church. As discussed earlier, the only aim of Menezes and his friends were to “convert” (in their own words) the Mar Thoma Nazranis to follow Latin, Roman Catholic regimen. A great majority of the decisions at the “Synod” led to immense damage to the Nazranis. Yes, credit should also be given to Menezes for taking steps to correct some of the social anomalies prevalent amongst the local Nazranis. Let us see some of the major decisions taken at this “Synod” and its effects on the Mar Thoma Nazrani Church and community. 

7. “Mar Thoma Margam” or “The Law of Thoma”, which the Nazranis had scruplously depended on, for centuries, to guide them in their ecclesial and faith life was declared null and void. Hereafter, only Latin Canon Law (Law of Peter) would be applicable to the Nazranis. (Please see that this step has now been corrected, to some extant, by the promulagation of the “Code of canons of the Eastern Churches” in 1986, as a result of Vatican II.)
8. The Catholicos-Patriarch of the Chaldean Catholic Church is declared to be heretic. His name is prohibited to be included in the Holy Qurbana (dyptics). Chaldean bishops would no longer be acceptable to the Nazranis. Only bishops appointed by the King of Portugal will hereafter rule over Nazranis.
9. The ancient Archdiocese of Angamally of the Nazranis was suppressed. In its place a diocese of Kodungallore was erected for the Nazranis, as a suffragon to Archdiocese of Goa. Fr. Francis Roz S.J. was appointed as the first bishop of Kodungallore.
10. A total of 40 changes were made to the Holy Qurbana by Menezes. (It was further, greatly changed by Roz and other western bishops as well.) This completely altered and Latinized liturgy was translated into Suriyani and, henceforth, was being celebrated as the Holy Qurbana of the Nazranis. Let us examine some of the major changes which came into effect to the celebration of the original Qurbana of Addai and Mari (AM) and other sacramental matters.

(a)    Nazranis had the use of three Anaphoras: (i) Anaphora of Addai and Mari (AM), also known as the Anaphora of the Apostles. (ii) Anaphora of Theodore and (iii) Anaphora of Nestorius. Apart from AM, the other two Anaphotas were banned as heretic. (Rome has since agreed that these two Anaphoras also are orthodox and has asked for their re-instatement. But Anaphora of Theodore alone, has recently been introduced, experimentally)

(b)   All books, prayer books, books of liturgy, nazrani Peshita bibles were all asked to be brought to the “Synod”. They were all put on a pile and burnt. This burning precess continued for many months thereafter. Whenever Menezes or any of the Portugese prelates visited the Nazrani churches, more books were found and burnt. A great archives at the cathedral at Angammalyy was fully burnt.

(c)    Institution Narrative, (IN) (some Latins call it “Words of Institution”) was inserted into AM. The most ancient anaphora of Addai and Mari had no explicit Institution Narrative. Even without an IN, AM is fully valid. This fact has been accepted and endorsed by the Common Christlogical Declaration (Nov, 94). This point will be discussed in detail while we discuss the Institution Narrative, later.

(d)   The mystery aspect of the Holy Qurbana, gave way to the Latin system of “Elevation”, “Exposition” etc. (We will discuss this subject, in detail, later.)

(e)    The system of preparation (for the offering) of slightly salted bread, using “Malka”, (as is the tradition of all the Eastern Churches), was stopped. Use of unleavened bread, as in Latin Church, was introduced. Though Rome has since asked us to return to our rich tradtion of using the “Leavened” bread, our Church has ignored this call and has elected to remain with the Latin ways. 

(f)     Use of Peshita (Suriyani) bible was stopped. In its place Vulgate (Latin) bible, translated into Suriyani was put into use. (Now, though Rome has encouraged the Nazranis to start using the Peshita bible for liturgy, most Nazranis do not seem to be aware of this fact. We will discuss it in detail, later.)

(g)    The Latin Creed with “Filioque” replaced the Nicene Creed. (Though with the reinstatement of our liturgy, Rome has called upon the Eastern Churches to return to the Nicene Creed, most of our faithful, and heirarchy as well, have not heeded to this call. We will discuss it in detail, later.)

(h)    All mention of Marth Mariam as the “Mother of Christ”, during prayers were changed to “Mother of God”. (The title “Mother of Christ” is equally valid as “Mother of God”; ref: Common Christological Declaration, which will be discussed in detail, later.)

(i)      Use of bells, as in Latin Mass, was introduced.

(j)     Some changes were made to “Epiclesis” (invocation of the Holy Spirit) as well. (We will discuss “Epiclesis”, in detail, later.)

(k)   Kneeling during the Holy Qurbana and genuflection were introduced to follow the Western custom. (This has now been corrected, but we find that some of our churches prefer the Latin ways. To be discussed, in detail, later.)

(l)      Latin liturgical vestments were introduced (initially “Roman” and subsequently “Gothic” vestments), replacing East Syriac vestments. (We have returned to our original vestments now, except a few churches, who prefer the “Gothic” vestments.)

(m)  It was encouraged to have daily celebration of Holy Qurbana, instead of only Sunday celebration, as was the practice of other Eastern Churches.

(n)    Many signs and symbols were Latinized. “The sign of the cross” is to be made from “left to right” as is done by the Latins. Faithful are to be taught to make the “Sign of the Cross” only from left to right. Note that all Eastern Churches have a rich and most ancient theology and tradition of making the sign of the cross “from right to left”. Rome has asked and encouraged us to return to our ancient tradition, but most faithful have not been adequately catechized about this matter. (This subject will be dealt with, in detail, in a following chapter.)

(o)   The tradition and rich heritage of Nazranis to offer the Holy Qurbana on a fully wooden altar was stopped. The Latin practice of making the “offering” on a stone slab was introduced. All parishes (75 of them) were given an altar stone each which was to be carried back to their churches and installed on the altar. (We will study more of this later) 

11. All the East Syriac sacramental regimes were stopped. In its place the texts of all sacraments, as in Latin rite, were translated into Suriyani and was thrust on the Nazranis. Also, administration of the sacraments of “Chrismation” and “Eucharist” together with Baptism was banned. Only bishops would henceforth be authorised to administer this (latinized) “Confirmation”. (Now, this has, to a great extent, been corrected with the promulgation of CCEC (Code of Canons of Eastern Churches)  and the re-instatement of the “Sacraments of Initiation” for the Eastern Catholics. It can be seen that some of our Eparchies still prefer to follow the Latin regime. (This requires a detailed discussion, which we will carry out in a later chapter.)
12. Statues, paintings and pictures were installed in the churches, as well as at private homes, in place of Icons. (Note that Joseph Ratzinger, in his “Spirit of the Liturgy” calls these Western pictures as “plastic”.) Also, as a part of Latinization, crucifixes, in preference to “crosses without a corpus”, were introduced amongst Nazranis. This effort of the missionaries has since found much popularity amongst the Nazrani public.
13. The practice of Nazrani families to say their family prayers in Suriyani language was stopped. Henceforth family prayers were to be said in Malayalam language only.
14. Many East Syriac Feast days were cancelled. Latin feast days were introduced. We will have a detailed discussion on the Nazrani Feasts, in a later chapter.
15. Nazranis were used to observing severe fasting on several occasions like: Great Fast for 50 days leading up to Resurrection Sunday, 25 day fasting leading to the birth of E’eso, 15 day fast before the Assumption, 8 day fast before the birth of Marth Mariam, and 3 day fast known as Rogation of the Ninevites (Ba-oota d' Ninevaye) which is a Fast observed exclusively by the Suriyani Churches are just some of the Fast days. (The missionaries, in the earlier letters to their superiors, had called the Nazranis as a “People of Fasts”.) All Nazrani Fast days were stopped, and in its place “Fasting” was ordered to be performed strictly in accordance with Latin canons and practices, which were quite lax, compared to the Nazrani tradition.
16. Anointing with the Vibhuthi was shifted from first Monday of the Great Fast to the first Wednesday, to be in line with the Latin Church. (this has now been corrected, but some of our dioceses still prefer Latin observance).
17. The “Synod” disapproved the designs of the Nazrani church buildings. The Nazrani churches all had Indigenous Indian design, which also looked similar to Hindu temples. All these churches were brought down, and in their places, new churches following Portuguese architecture were built. Nazranis were prohibited to have contacts and dealings with Hindu temples and their religious entities.
18. Priestly celibacy was made compulsory. Note that in all Eastern Churches, the priests are allowed to marry and have family.
19. The Nazrani prayer regime, liturgy of the hours etc, was all stopped. In their place Latin prayers and popular devotions and pious exercises were introduced. (Our Liturgy of the Hours; “Yamaprarthanakal” has now been officially reintroduced. We will discuss this in detail, later.)
20. One of the most severe blows inflicted on the Nazrani Church was to terminate their all-India jurisdiction and restrict their Church to a small geographical area in central Malabar, between Pampa River in the south and Bharathapuzha in the north. Even within this area the Nazranis did not have an exclusive jurisdiction. The Latins were free to establish churches and dioceses anywhere, even within this Nazrani area. All areas outside the above Nazrani area were exclusive to the Latin Romans and, all Christians found in those areas, whether of the Nazrani rite or of the Latin rite, automatically came under Latin jurisdiction. All those new converts who were being baptized in these areas were to be of the Latin rite alone. Note that a great majority of priests and religious serving in all the Latin dioceses in India have been, and continue to be even today, children of the Nazrani Church (who had to transfer themselves to Latin rite, in order to do any mission work.) All Nazrani priests traveling outside their small area could celebrate the Holy Qurbana and sacraments, only according to Latin rite. This position has changed, substantially, within the last fifty years. Some vestiges of colonialism still linger on with respect to jurisdiction, which we hope and pray would vanish sooner than later.
21. The role and influence of Archdeacon in the Nazrani Community was, slowly reduced, until his role became just a namesake, to consolidate all powers, spiritual as well as temporal, with the bishop(s), as is the practice in Latin Church. Similarly, at the parish level the role of the parish councils were reduced to an advisory role and all powers got concentrated on the Parish vicar. Note that until then, the bishop and priests had exclusive realm of spiritual affairs only and archdeacon and parish councils were responsible for the temporal affairs of the Church. (There is some effort, of late, to reinvigorate the operation of the parish councils, with mixed stresses. Latin model of concentration of power with the bishop and vicars is still preferred by many in the hierarchy)  

(Ch 1  Liturgy-Historical Background: to continue: Faith Sharing Series #9)  

FAITH SHARING SERIES                        #7 

And you will know the truth,

And the very truth will make you free. (Jn 8:32)

Chapter 1 (contd)

Liturgy of Mar Thoma Nazranis of India

The great Suppression and painful Rebirth 

Historical Background (contd) 

The Indian Nazrani Church had always remained in communion with and under the spiritual and ecclesial leadership of the Catholicos-Patriarch of the Persian “Church of the East”, whose base was in Iraq. For a major period of its history, the Church of the East, for no fault of its own, had fallen out of communication and communion with the Western Churches. But the fact that the faith of the Church of the East had always remained orthodox has now been recognized. (Common Christological Declaration between Mar John Paul II Papa and Catholicos-Patriarch Dinkha IV, 11^th November 1994, refers. We will see this Declaration in detail later on, along with the discussion on Nestorianism). However, the above alienation of the Persian Church with the Western Christianity had no direct effect on the Malabar Nazranis. The Indian Nazranis had no direct and active contact with the Christians of the rest of the world, except thru the Persian Church. The theological aspects of any perceived differences between the West and the Persian Church were beyond the life of the Indian Nazranis and they were not party to any of the so called imaginary disputes.  However, ancient records show that the Malabar Church had always prayed for the Bishop of Rome, before the name of the Persian Patriarch, during the celebration of Holy Qurbana (dyptics). We see that Mar Mar Shimun VIII Yohannan Sulaqa the newly appointed Patriarch of the Church of the East traveled to Rome and met the Mar Papa, in 1553, and ensure communion with the See of Rome. Mar Sulaqa was consecrated with the title of "Patriarch of the Chaldeans” by Mar Papa. Those who differed with Sulaqa formed the Assyrian Church of the East as the successor of the (original) Church of the East. The bishops sent to India, including our dear Mar Abraham were appointed by Patriarch Sulaqa and Patriarchs preceding him. This was the state of the Nazrani Church when the Portuguese landed on the shores of Malabar. The missionaries found the ways of faith of the Nazranis to be orthodox and true, and were very appreciative of this fact. The Nazranis extended a cordial fellowship to their brothers in faith from the West. The colonialists wanted help of the Nazranis to establish their trading interests in Malabar and to that extent they were very friendly towards them, in the beginning. They kept their motive (of subjugating the Nazranis to the Latin regime) hidden close to their chest, at first. 

Once the Westerners started getting the upper hand in the affairs of the Malabar Church, they began finding fault with everything that the Nazranis did: their prayers, their churches and its layout, Holy Qurbana, their sacraments, their social life, everything. The Nazranis had great respect and love for their Kathnars and the East Syrian bishop. The selection and training of Kathanrs of the Malabar Church was done in a unique and indigenous manner. Kathnars were selected always for a particular local Church (Edavaka). Selection of the candidates was done by the local Palliyogam. The candidate is then entrusted to the care of a senior scholarly teacher (Malpan), who would take him under his wing and give him a thorough formation, extending over many years, in Suriyani language, East Syriac theology and Holy Qurbana. Once the Malpan is satisfied with the progress of the Msemmassan, and feels that he is ready to be ordained as a Kathnar, he is presented to the bishop. After satisfying himself of the suitability of the Msemmassan, the bishop administers the sacrament of priesthood and appoints him as a Kathnar. All the time during his formation and training, the Kathnar is a part of the local Church and grows in the spirituality of the Nazrani Church in relevance to the local community. There were about 40 Malpanates spread throughout the Malabar region. The influence of the Kathnars and the bishop on the Nazrani community was very strong, which the intelligent Phirangis understood. To get control of the Nazrani Church, the westerners had to get control of their priests and bishop. As a first step, they put a stop to the “Malpanate” and started a western style seminary at Kodungallore and later at Vypeen Kota and at other places. The seminarians began to be trained completely in accordance with Latin curriculum including Latin language, Latin liturgy of the hours (omission to pray the same would bring on the wrath of mortal sin!), Latin spirituality, Latin devotions, western philosophy; and western dressing and even western table manners. They also wanted to make wholesale changes to the Holy Qurbana, the sacraments, sacramentals, the prayer regimen, the feast days and other Nazrani traditions and replace them with practices in accordance with Latin theology. Note that the missionaries had arrived fully prepared and strengthened with the latest theological and ecclesial developments in the Latin Church in conformity with the “Counter Reformation” movement which was an aggressive response to the Protestant reformation. Also, moreover, the Portuguese were under the intoxication of Padroado (Patronage) power formally granted to the King of Portugal by the Vatican in 1514 (Pope Leo X), which in effect divided the Earth into two parts and granted the Eastern half to the Portuguese and the Western part to the Spanish; to conquer, convert and rule the newly found territories. But it was not so easy for them to cut the Nazranis off from their East Syriac roots. The channels of communications with India, more particularly with Malabar, had completely been taken over by the Phiringis. It had become impossible for the Catholicos-Patriarch to keep in contact with his spiritual flock in Malabar. Any emissary sent by him would be intercepted by the powerful Phirangis, detained, incarcerated, sent back or dealt with in any manner which they thought appropriate. The Nazrani Archbishop of Angamally, Mar Abraham, a very venerable and docile holy bishop, was put under great duress by the invaders. He was subjected to much pressure, including great physical duress and jail time, to toe the line of the westerners and to make changes to the Nazrani sacramental and liturgical regime, according to the wishes of the Latins. He resisted as best as he could, with much mixed results. To the chagrin of the western missionaries, the bishopric reign of Mar Abraham lasted a long time (1568 to 1597) until he passed away in 1597. This was the opportunity that the Portuguese were waiting for. 

Mar Abraham(1565-1597)
Metropolitan and the Gate of All India.
Diocese	Angamally
Installed	31st of January 1565
Term ended	1597
Predecessor	Mar Joseph- Brother of first Chaldean Patriarch Shimun VIII Yohannan Sulaqa Mar Joseph Sulaqa of India, held the office from 1556 to 1568 of Metropolitan of the Thomas Christians in South India
Orders
Ordination	1565 by Pope Pius IV
Personal details
Died	1597 Angamali
Buried	Mar Abraham died in January 1597 at Angamaly and his body was buried in the Cathedral church (St. Hormis or East Church, Angamally

 

Church of Mar Hormisdas, the Cathedral church,

which was built by Mar Abraham.

 

 The young (37 year old) Latin archbishop of Goa, Aleixo de Menezes immediately came to Malabar to take control of the Nazranis. But, it was not easy as he had thought. The archdeacon, Geevarghese of the Sleeva of the Pakalomattom family,  had already, according to the tradition of the Nazrani Church, taken control as the Administrator of the Church. Though Menezes appointed Fr. Francis Roz S.J. as the Administrator, he had to retreat and withdraw Roz from this position, in view of the strong opposition of the Nazranis. (Note that (Latin bishop) Menezes had no jurisdiction over the Suriyani Nazranis.) Menezes started visiting the Nazrani churches (Edavaka palli) and one by one he visited all the churches and made himself dear to the local people with his endearing diplomatic behavior (Mt 7:15) . He managed to bring up a rival cousin of Archdeacon Geevarghese, Thoma Kurian of the same Pakalomattom family, as a strong rival to Geevarghese. By this clever move, Geevarghese was pressurized to be pliant to the wishes of Menezes, who made further moves in a very calculated way. During his visits to the local churches of the Nazranis he selected, ordained and appointed many men as priests, by giving them just a few days or weeks of orientation, or even none at all. This was in total violation of all known canons and practices of either the Western or the Eastern churches. A total of 230 men were thus appointed by Menezes as Kathnars, all of whom would naturally be subservient to him. Menezes called for a “Synod” to be convened in June 1599, at Udayamperoor, south of Kochi. There was widespread resentment amongst the Nazranis against the convening of this so-called Synod. Menezes ordered all the clergy and lay representatives to attend the “Synod”, under threat of ex-communication. He ordered all the churches to bring all their liturgical and prayer texts and holy books to the “synod”. About 150 priests and less than 600 appointed/ selected and elected lay representatives from the Nazrani churches attended the meeting, in addition to many Portuguese Latin priests and Menezes himself. We will discuss the details of this “Synod” of Udayamperoor in our next installment of Faith Sharing Series. (#8). (Recommended reading: (1) “Synod of Diamper” by Jonas Thaliath, (2) “Jornada”, a Portuguese account and biography of Archbishop Menezes by his secretary, Antonio de Gouvea, translated into English and edited by Pius Malekandathil, published by LRC Publications, Kochi. Journada will give us a good picture of the prejudice and arrogance that the Western missionaries cultivated towards the native Nazranis and their East Syrian Patriarch and Arch Bishops.) .

(Ch 1  Liturgy-Historical Background: to continue: Faith Sharing Series #8)