Apostle Tomb, Coonan Cross Oath, Division and Rite, Early History, Early Reference, Medieval History, Syond of Diamper, Thomas the Apostle

Dear M. T. Anthony: Although I strongly disagree with …

Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to consider the subscription options.

Follow us on Facebook, or Twitter, or Google +.

Comment posted Kerala Syrian Christian, Apostle in India, The tomb of the Apostle, Persian Church, Syond of Diamper – Coonan Cross Oath, Subsequent divisions and the Nasrani People by John Mathew.

Dear M. T. Anthony:

Although I strongly disagree with Abraham’s angry statements, I also think it’s quite naive to say that Mar Ivanios did not gain anything by joining the Catholic Church. By joining, the leader of the S-Malankara became a Major Archbishop, rather than a mere Metropolitan. That is a significant upgrade. That era was a golden era of the Indian Orthodox Church—the Church abounded with plenty of highly qualified scholars, who were taught directly by the old masters of the West Syriac tradition in Malankara: Konat Malpan, his descendents, Mar Gregorios and his descendants. Mar Ivanios would have been just another competent Metropolitan in a sea of competent Metropolitans. By splitting, he gained significantly. I’m not claiming that this is the *truth* — I’m merely claiming that one shouldn’t be blind to the politics that have been a key part of our people for at least 500 years.

I have little faith that many of the schisms of the Malankara Church were ever done on principle. The first schism, between the Pazhayakoor and Puthenkoor, one can understand as a desire to retain (1) rite or (2) independence. But the schisms of the Mar Thomites, the Malabar Independent Syrian Church and the Syro-Malankara all had quite a bit of politics involved — none were purely done due to principle, and all of those resulted in a power boost for the perpetrators. And all, except for the MISC, resulted in an attempt by the schismatics to grab property and cash reserves (the IOC/Jacobites honed their legal teeth during their lawsuits against the Mar Thomites and the Syro-Malankara).

The onus is on those who claim that the Orthodox Church was looking to enter into foreign communion at a Parumala Synod: is there proof? I’d like to see it because I can not see this as likely, since the Orthodox Church (the IOC, rather) has always been (1) fastidiously Oriental Orthodox and (2) extremely keen on maintaining the independence of the Malankara Metropolitanate.

But who really cares … this is all 20th century trivia. Let’s go for the pre-15th century gold…

As well, I must say that Abraham’s pov is not that of the IOC; it is his personal opinion. I don’t think the IOC or the Jacobites care about the minor schism of the SyroMalankara, and certainly none have much to say on the topic. The only main problem was the significant amounts of property and money that the Syro-Malankara tried to take with them — which were all properly returned to the Orthodox after a lawsuit.