www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Questions on the Malankar Church

I was both surprised an delighted to learn that a Malankar Orthodox Church has opened in my neighbourhood. I would say that I have stumbled upon the place "by accident", but a wise confessor once told me that for us Christians, there is no such thing as "a co�ndence".

Mor Ephrem, I hope that you're reading this!
I need your help here!!!:

1.) When does the Malankar Church celebrate Pascha this year?

2.) Does the Maklankar Church welcome Catholics to receive the Holy Mysteries as doe the Assyrian Chruch?

Thanks!

I'm here, Dave, I'm here!!

Congratulations on "stumbling" on one of our churches. Incidentally, what's it's name?

1. All Indian Churches, including the Orthodox, celebrate exclusively on the Gregorian calendar, even for Pascha (Qyomto, in Syriac, or in English, Easter, but with an Indian accent ). So, Easter this year is 31 March, and we've already passed the Wednesday of Mid-Lent.

If you go to one of our churches from now until the end of Lent, you will see prominently displayed in the church the Golgotha, a high stand on which is a cross adorned with a red stole, a couple of candles and usually a couple of ripidia, and draped in red. This is usually venerated upon entering and leaving the church by kissing the cloth, and crossing oneself (like the Latins, but with the Byzantine finger formation ). It's there to remind us that not only do we have to practice self denial all the more, but also that the days of the Passion are drawing near.

2. In general, it depends on the priest. There is a limited form of intercommunion allowed between Catholics and Syrian Orthodox (and that's official), but only when priest's of one's own Church aren't available. But in most parishes, priests are as accomodating as I hear the Assyrians are, and will readily allow Catholics to receive (provided of course that they are free from serious sin).

Hope you have fun! And let me know how it goes.

I'm a little bit confused between Malankar and Malabar... who's catholic?, who's part of the syriac-orthodox?, who was part of the Nestorian church?

I have another question. I'd like to know if the Major Archbishop of Kerala uses the title of Katholikos (if not, who uses this title in India?).

And the next thing is about HB Patriarch Ignace Mousa Daoud. He has been one of the most active prefects of the Eastern Rites C. and recently he visited Romania and Gruzija and celebrated the Liturgy. I also know that he's very loyal to the Eastern tradition (that's great!) and I'd like to know something: does he always celebrate the mass according to the Syriac rite?

Dear Remie:

From a Catholic perspective, both the Malankarese and the Malabarese are Rites/Churches in union with Rome, originating from the ancient Church of Antioch in Syria. Presently, the following Rites/Churches are derived from the mother Antiochian Rite:

1. West Syrian:
--Maronite (Maronite Patriarch of Antioch);
--Syriac (Syriac Patriarch of Antioch);
--Malankarese (South India evangelized by St. Thomas; I don't know the designation of their head--Mor Ephrem might kow this.)

2. East Syrian:
--Chaldean (Patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans);
--Syro-Malabarese (Kerala, SW India; Mor Ephrem might also know their head's designation)

By the way, I think both have counterparts in Oriental Orthodoxy.

The Syro-Malankarese Catholic Church is headed by a Metropolitan Archbishop, just like the Pittsburgh Ruthenians.

The Syro-Malabarese Catholic Church is headed by an Archbishop Major.

Four groups not in union with Rome exist:

1. A diocese of the Church of the East. Despite popular belief, the "Nestorians" of India (about 5,000) have no connection to the St. Thomas Christians.

2 & 3. Two groups related to the Syrian Orthodox Church. One autonomous but connected (the patriarch's party); the other fully independent (the catholicos party). The groups are a result of the West Syrianization of the previously Chaldean liturgy and patrimony. A four group of an ethnic based schism may also exist.

4. The St. Thomas Church - This is in communion with the Archbishop of Canturbury.

Kurt, your information is for the most part accurate. Thanks for covering for me!

I do have one thing to amend, however. The Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church (Patriarchal, under Antioch) and the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church (not under Antioch, but in communion with her, indigenous Catholicos [of the East] governing in India) began this way.

After the Portuguese came to India and found the Church in India, which was Chaldean, since that's where we got our bishops from some few hundred years after Saint Thomas' martyrdom, they, with the help of the Jesuits and other Latin religious orders, started a process of latinisation. The Tridentine Latin rite was first observed in the Syriac language (so I've read), and then fully in Latin, while the Chaldean liturgy was severely latinised. The larger faction gradually came under Roman authority. A small minority kept to the old ways, and they are the "Nestorians" whom you mentioned in no. 1.

*I'm curious to know why you say Despite popular belief, the "Nestorians" of India (about 5,000) have no connection to the St. Thomas Christians.

A sizeable portion of those who did not like the happenings petitioned the Syrian Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch, who received them, and that's how the West Syrian tradition came to India. This was marked by an oath, taken before the large stone cross in front of one of their churches; the oath basically said that they and their descendants would never allow themselves to be under the yoke of the Portuguese or the Jesuits (Latin Church).

Also, the fourth group isn't a schism, per se, to my knowledge. They are a group of people who share a common ancestor(s), and they don't marry outside of that tradition. Therefore, for pastoral reasons, they have separate jurisdictions under their respective Churches...something akin to a personal prelature; they aren't a separate Church. They have a Catholic group (I think) and an Orthodox group. It's interesting...traditionally, a Catholic of this group may not marry a Catholic outside the group, but may marry an Orthodox in that group, and vice versa.

[ 03-15-2002: Message edited by: Mor Ephrem ]

I've visited the internet sites of both churches and I've seen that the Malankara Church is very loyal to the Eastern tradition, but the Malabarese Church is very latinized (Bishops with Roman vestments, and other "portuguezations").

Re-read Mor Ephrem. The Malankara Church is a split from the Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church, which did not stay loyal to its Eastern tradition, but was West Syrianized by the Syrian Orthodox Church. The Malabar Catholics are a mixture of latinizations as a result of their relationship with the Portuguese and the origninal Chaldean patrimony of this church. The Malankara Syrian Orthodox and Catholics have little of the Chaldean patrimony as they had the West Syrianization imposed on them.

Axios

I'm confused, Axios, so I hope you don't mind if I clarify things here, if for no other person, then for myself.

The Malankara Catholic Church is an offshoot of the Malankara Orthodox Church. The MCC is for the most part more faithful to their traditions than the Malabar Catholic Church, which is severely (perhaps hopelessly) latinised. But the Malankara Catholic Church has her own latinisations, just not as many.

The Malankara Orthodox Church is an offshoot of the Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church. The Churches are basically the same, except for jurisdiction. The MSOC is under the spiritual and jurisdictional authority of the Patriarch in Antioch. For many years they sent Arab bishops to India, while we had native priests. Eventually, the MOC broke out with native Indian bishops, and so they are under a Catholicos there. They look almost identical, except for who's in charge.

The Syrian (Antiochene) tradition wasn't the first in India; the first was the Chaldean. But after the Chaldean Christians in India were assimilated into the Catholic Church by the Portuguese and the Jesuits, they were severely latinised. A faction of those who didn't want anything to do with this, rather than side with the even smaller faction who remained with the "Nestorians", decided they would ask for entrance into the Syrian Orthodox Church, and that was granted by the Patriarch, thus beginning the West Syrian patrimony in India.

Any questions?

My point is that you cannot say what is now the the Malankara Orthodox Church stayed loyal to its tradition, as it was Chaldean and then was West Syrianized by the SOC Patriarch of Antioch. The community orginally had a Chaldean patrimony. This has been mostly lost through latinization or Syrianization.

Axios

The first people who willingly asked to join the SOC, and thus took upon themselves the West Syrian patrimony were of Chaldean patrimony, that's true, and it is they who now form the Malankara Orthodox Church. But when the Latins started systematically (and some reports, including an article in a Catholic encyclopedia I once read said without proper and canonical authority) taking the Chaldean patrimony and hopelessly latinising it, those who didn't want anything to do with that decided that the only thing they could do was join the SOC. There's a whole long sordid history of kidnapping/murdering non-Latin bishops sent from the Middle East and turning Latin priests into Eastern rite priests with the aim of turning them eventually into Latins and other horrible things that went on during that time, and I'd rather not get into it unless I have to. But because of that, patrimony wasn't as important to them as being able to "keep on keepin' on", and if they had to go West Syrian to do that, well then that's fine with me. At any rate, it isn't a terribly big jump...not as big a jump as Chaldean to Roman. That's also one reason why non-Catholic Christians in India have a big gripe with the Catholics. It's sad.

Mor Ephrem,

I saw in a newspaper sometime back - I think it might have been the Chicago Tribune? - a woman on her knees recieving the Eucharist, she was an Indian woman recieving the Eucharist from her Priest in the Malankar Rite Church. The thing I want to know, and what I found interesting, was she had an very elaborate ornative like blanket wraped around her and pulled up to the top back of her head - what was that? And what the story behind it (if there is one)?

Max, it was probably a sari or shawl or something...in our churches, women still wear veils...with the way one wears a sari, you can easily wrap part of it over your head. With some other dress, like a salwaar, they usually have shawls.

I can't think of any liturgical appurtenance it would be.

Could you please answer me the question about HB Patriarch Ignace Moussa Daoud?

Thank you.

Mor,

It must have been a shawl.