Mural Tradition, Traditions

We see that liturgy was corrected by Menezes …

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 on The Mural tradition of Kerala Churches by Admin

We see that liturgy was corrected by Menezes and was printed in Gouvea. Was this ever used in Malabar ?

It never came in to use in Malabar. Fr. Placid mentions that the corrected rite as printed by Gouvea was never in actual use by the Church. That would be the reason why there aren’t any copies other than what is printed in Gouvea.(?). With regard to Taksa and Divine Praises, the lack of sufficient books and the impossibility of making new ones prevented it from getting destroyed during the destruction at the Synod of Diampoor.

In 1601, Franics Roz became the first Latin prelate of Saint Thomas Christians. He was well versed in Syriac and Malayalam. He made further changes in the liturgy in the order in conformity with the Latin rite.

There are ancient Catholic Syrian Manuscripts which contain the ordinary of the Qurbana and rubrics for the Raza ( most solemn celebration) which mentions the Second Diocesan Synod of Angamali celebrated by the first Latin Arch Bishop Franics Roz ( 1601-1624) of Saint Thomas Christians in 1603. This manuscript is preserved at Carmelite Monastery, Mannanam.( 68 Pages- which contains text of the Qurbana, rubrics for the most solemn celebration called Raza- The title of the text is “ The Order of saying Raza in the Indian Church clarified by Mar Franics in the Syond of Angamale on the forth month of the forth year of his Administration”

This was some 50 years before the Coonan Cross Oath. I am not sure if the order in the manuscripts of Qurbana of 1603 has the same order of the prayers before the Syond of Daimpoor ie, Vat Syriac Codex 65.(?) Anyway, we see that it was used by all Saint Thomas Christians in 1603.

In 1606, Bishop Roz codified ‘ Diocesan Statutes” which gives a better picture of the Malabar Church after the period pertaining to Syond of Diampoor.. This MSS is at Vatican library ( Codex Borgiano Indiano No-18).

The Syriac title is “ Thukasa d’maritha Thomaytha d’hendo which means Statutes of the Thomite fold in India. The Malayalam title is Malankara Mar Thoma Sleeha Edavakede Kalpanakal meaning Statutes of St. Thomas fold of Malankara Church. This is written in Malayalam of Sixteenth century with a slight mixture of Syriac and Tamil. ( A copy of this is in Manjumel Monastery but not complete)

Matheiken mentions that , The Malabar Qurbana remained altogether Oritental in general arrangements and almost entirely so in its texts and formulae. Romanisation effected to an extent more in the externals. ( For a detailed study please refer the book by Matheiken “Malabar Liturgy in the Light of the Roszian Statutes”. This ‘ Diocesan Statutes” were brought to light recently by J Matheiken. This MS has 142 folios and the detailed study and authenticity of the content can be read in this same book)

What happened afterwards to the Liturgy ?

My understanding is both the Pazhyacoor and Puthencoor continued the use of Roz version of liturgy. As mentioned according to the Scholars this is very identical to the earlier liturgy which was in use and different from what Menezes has worked on.

Following are some changes happened henceforth.

In 1757, Propaganda considered reprinting the draft Menezes had left, but ten years later they decided that the opposition to change would be too great for it to succeed.

In 1768, Propaganda ruled that the name of the Chaldean Patriarch should be removed and that there should be elevation immediately after the consecration.

With these changes the Taksa was printed in 1774 and came in to use. This missal printed in Rome in 1774 was substantially that of Archbishop Roz celebrated in 1603 and agrees with Addai and Mari more closely than what was printed by Gouvea.

This liturgy got further changes by gradual latinisation and was in use till 1962 in Syro Malabar church until it was restored in 1962. There are many books on this topic available to study for those interested. From my experience one has to have a decent understating about the Liturgy of Addai and Mari to make benefit from the detailed studies. ( To start with, I would suggest “Studies on The Anaphora of Addai and Mari” by Bosco Puthur, “Anaphora of Mar Theodore and Mar Nestorius” by LRC. For a comprehensive study please use, “Chaldeo-Indian Liturgy Volume I to IV” by Dr. Pathikulangra)

Jacobites also followed the same liturgy. It is said that it was Mar Kurilos, who has changed this liturgy to Saint James Liturgy.

The letter which Jeevan quoted is nothing but a petition against the restoration of the Qurbana in Syro Malabar Church. I have earlier explained where it comes in the restoration picture. It is not something which can be looked at independently with out even knowing the details. One really has to have lack of common sense to make irreverent claims based on this. I have already mentioned in earlier post very briefly why was such a letter send to Rome and what was the result.