Archdeacons, Medieval History, Nasrani History, Tomb of Archdeacons

Role, Characteristics, List and Tomb of Archdeacons (Arkadiyakons) of Saint Thomas Christians

Authored by NSC- Admin on Thursday, June 14, 2007 12:11 - 19 Comments

Archdeacon or Arkadiyakon in Malayalam was “the prince and head of the Christians of Saint Thomas” and had such titles as “Archdeacon and Gate of All India, Governor of India.”  tomb-of-archdeacons-marth-mariam-church Under the Metropolitan of Saint Thomas Christianity send by the Patriarch of Seleucia- Ctesiphon , there existed from ancient times the office of the Archdeacon (Arkadiyakon). The temporal administrations of the church of St.Thomas Christians were conducted by Archdeacons (Arkadiyakons) who were very influential in the society.

With the arrival of Portuguese in Kerala, the Church in India in the Sixteenth century began to undergo many changes of different type. After the Syond of Diamper, under the Latin prelates from the beginning of the Seventeenth century, the competence and the office of the Indian Archdeaconate ( office of Arkadiyakon) gradually diminished. Finally after a century, after a series of deception the office itself was left unprovided.

These changes were not a natural progress in the Indian Church. On the contrary it was a coerced change executed under the missionaries. It was an aberration- a deviation from the genuie structure of Church of Thomas Christians. Those who  are thinking of restoring the genuine form of Church of Saint Thomas Christians, could also restore the glorious institute of Archdeaconate, adapting it of course to the exigencies of our time.

Among the Catholic Syrians, the last Archdeacon was Mathew who was the nephew of the first indigenous Bishop Mar Chandy Parampil of Kuravilangad. He was nominated in 1678 (1694) under the Portuguese Padroado. He died on 1706 and since then the office was left un provided.

Among the Malankara Syriac Orthodox, after the Coonan Cross Oath, Archdeacon Thomas became the Bishop as Mar Thoma I in 1653. Thus the role was changed from Archdeacon to Bishop . His line continued in the Malankara Syriac Orthodox until it was replaced by Mar Dionysios II in 1815 .

From the available records, Archdeacon was a hereditary position from the Parambil family of Kuravilangad. Some say it was from Shankarapuri and Pakalomattam families earlier. In this way the See of Archdeacons existed at Kuravilangadu.

This article briefly outlines the 1) Role of Archdeacons, 2) Distinct Characteristics of Nasrani Archdeacon, 3) List of known Archdeacons 4) Tomb of Archdeacons at the Archdeacon Nagar Kuravilangadu 5) Efforts to restore Archdeaconate of India and 6) Summary.

1. Role of Archdeacons (Arkadiyakon) in Saint Thomas Christian Community

Archdeacon was “the prince and head of the Christians of Saint Thomas” and had such titles as “Archdeacon (Arkadiyakon) and Gate of All India, Governor of India.”

According to the traditional structure, the Indian diocese of the Church of the East was governed by a Metropolitan sent by the Patriarch of Seleucia-Ctesiphon. At the same time, on the local level, the affairs of the India Church were governed by the Malabar yogam, that is the Assembly. There was also an indigenous head of the Church of Malabar, called “Archdeacon (Arkadiyakon) of All India.”  which, according to historians, means “the head of the caste,” that is, the head of the St Thomas Christians, but also the “Archdeacon of All India.” One local palm leaf document also call this position in Malayalam as “Jatikku Karthavian“.

This was a peculiar characteristic of the St Thomas Christian community, which was combined with an existing function of the Church of the East or Chaldean Church with broader powers.

2. Distinct Characteristics of Nasrani Archdeacon (Arkadiyakon)

2.1 Origin and Evolution

There are no authentic documents available about the origin of the office of Archdeacon (Arkadiyakons). Many people has tried their own interpretations with some existing polemic literature.  The reference of Patriarch Timothy as “Arken” in eight century refers to Archdeacon or Arkadiyakon. There are also some fragmentary evidences which suggests existance of Indian Bishops in the early Church of Saint Thomas Christians. The Bishops in Indian Church some time after ninth century were Chaldeans or Persians in origin. It is not known if the evolution of the office of Arkadiyakons are linked with early Indian Bishops for want of further evidences.

2.2 Archdeacon VS Arkadiyakon

In Malayalam language locally this position is still known as Arkadiyakon. The pre- Portuguese tomb of Arkadiyakon’s at Kuravilanagadu is known in the name of Arkadiyakons. Most of scholars who have studied about the office of Arkadiyakon has compared it with an existing office of other churches in different liturgical traditions called Archdeacon. They have also concluded that this is a distinct position in comparison to any other church. It is not known, if this was a distinct position from the beginning of evolution of the office of Arkadiyakon. Such a hypothesis holds value based on the fact that Patriarch of Seleucia- Ctesiphon Thimothy in eight centurycalls “Arken” the head of faithful in India .

2.3  Secular leader
The Archdeacon had all the attributes of a secular leader and was normally escorted by a number, sometimes several thousands, of soldiers.

2.4 Several bishops, One Archdeacon

It is important to note that while there could be several bishops appointed for the Malabar Diocese, there was always only one Archdeacon. This was a custom contrary to the canons of the Chaldean Church.

2.5 Socio-political, Princely role

In East Syriac Church, the  Archdeacon was an ecclesiastical function, but from that of the St Thomas Christian community it was also a socio-political, princely function, representing the unity of the Christian nation, or caste of Hindu India. archdeacon-memmorail-gate

The Kings and Princes used to consider him as the chief of Christians. The kings of Cochin used to give royal insignias to the newly elected Archdeacons. Armed Bodyguards used to escort the Archdeacons on their journeys. On behalf of the Christians he used to parley with the rulers and negotiated with local chieftains.

2.6 Role of Bishops & Archdeacons

These bishops who come from Chaldea used to ordain priests, gave sacraments, bless churches, bless “syth” and performed other functions. The metropolitans used to be known as the head of See of Saint Thomas, exercising supremacy over Indian Church. The Metropolitans used to exercise their control over the Church through the Archdeacons. In practical and day-to-day functioning of the Church Archdeacon exercised superintendence.

The Archdeacons were the right arm of the Metropolitan Bishop, and in their absence or vacancy held spiritual control of the Church also. They also exercised many special powers. Selection of Seminarians, appointing and transferring of priests, exercising temporal powers over the church properties, collecting the levies from the faithful etc fell within the domain of the powers of Archdeacon. Some reports suggest that the Archdeacons in certain situations also had episcopical role as well. An example being the Archdeacon Jacob appointed by Mar Simon.

2.7 Archdeacon in East Syriac Church and Saint Thomas Christians

According to the canons of the East Syriac Church, the Archdeacon is the highest priestly rank. Archdeacon is the head of all the clerics belonging to a bishopric who is responsible for the whole worship of the cathedral church and represents the will of the bishop in his absence.

The rank of the Archdeacon in India was much more important than this. The Indian Archdeacon  fulfilled the role of an Ethnarch. He was “the prince and head of the Christians of Saint Thomas” and had such titles as “Archdeacon and Gate of All India, Governor of India.” The origin and the meaning of the term “Gate” is mysterious. One might suppose that it is a Christological title: “I am the Gate of the sheep” (Jn 10:7).

2.8 Distinct position in comparison to any other Church

Archdeacon of Kerala Church was not an equal position to the Arch-deacons of any other Church. The position of Archdeacon exists in Latin, Byzantine, Areminian, Alexandrain, Antiochean and Chaldean rites.  The Archdeacon of Saint Thomas Christians was a much larger entity with wider powers and exalted position. He was called prince of believers, Lord of the Christians, and Archdeacon of the whole of India.

2.9 Hereditary Succession

The Archdeacon in the Church of the East or Chaldean Church was elected by the bishop according to merit. The office of the Archdeacon of India seems to have been hereditary. It was the privilege of the Pakalomattam family, at least from the sixteenth century onwards. History has left us the details of a number of Pakalomattam Archdeacons, beginning with 1502, when Metropolitan John of India appointed George Pakalomattam.

The name of the family varies, and the family seems to be identical with the Parambil family of Kuravilangad, translated into Portuguese as De Campo. The patriarchal succession seem to have happened for Archdeacons until the 18th Century. Malankara Syriac Orthodox Metropolitans of Pakalomattam family also had patriarchal succession from 17th till 18th  century. The word nephew used in the text shall not be misunderstood as sister’s son, it means only successor. The Syrian Christians followed Patrillineal succession of Brahmins. Hence word usually means brother’s son.

3. List of known Archdeacons (Arkadiyakon) of Saint Thomas Christians

There are only very little information about Saint Thomas Christians before the arrival of Portuguese in India. The Chaldeans held the Church of India as a province under their Patriarch who used to send Metropolitans to govern it. The names and succession list of most of the Archdeacons prior to the Portuguese period is not known to us. After the arrival of the Portuguese, their records has mentioned about Archdeacons. The following list of Archdeacons are compiled using the ” The Archdeacon of All India” by Dr. Jacob Kollaparambil.

Archdeacon ( Arkadiyakon) Name- Appointed by Year
Patriarch Thimothy calls Archdeacon ( Arken), head of faithful of India c.780-826
Metropolitan Mar John appoints George Pakalomattam ( Ittikuriath) as Archdeacon 1502
Followed by Archdeacons Jacob and Alexander according to tradition Dates unknown
Archdeacon George of Christ ( Mentioned in 1552 documents onwards) c.1552-1585
Archdeacon John ( exact dates not known) c.1585-1591
Archdeacon Jacob appointed by Mar Simon ( exact dates not known) c. 1584-1596
Archdeacon George of the Cross appointed by Archbishop Mar Abraham 1593-1640
Archdeacon Thomas appointed by Archbishop Brito. In 1653 Archdeacon Thomas was consecrated as Bishop Mar Thoma I, thus the role was changed  and his line continued till Mar Thoma VIII in 1815 among the Malankara Syriac Orthodox. 1640-1653
Archdeacon Kunju Mathai appointed by Archbishop Gracia SJ 1656- unknown
Archdeacon Mathew appointed by Mar Chandy Parambil for the Catholics 1678-1706

3.1 Unknown Archdeacon during Patriarch Thimothy

The earliest historical documents that shows the existence of Archdeacons is around the year 800. The Patriarch Thimothy (780-826) wrote to the Archdeacon ( Arken), the Head of the Faithfull in India, about the right norms to be followed in the ordination of the priests, bishops, metropolitans and Patriarch. He wrote that only superiors could ordain the inferiors and therefore no Bishop could ordain a metropolitan neither a metropolitan another Metropolitan. Up to the time of Mar Timothy, the bishops of China and India used to ordain their Metropolitans laying the letter of the Patriarch over the elected as if the very hand that wrote that letter were laid upon the ordained.[1]

3.2 Archdeacons-  George, Jacob, Alexander

According to a tradition mentioned by George Kurien in his dissertation on Syrian Church of India, Metropolitan Mar John appointed George Pakalomattam in 1502 as Archdeacon. He was followed by Jacob, Alexander and George ( this George may be Archdeacon George of Christ or his uncle Professor George who are mentioned in few documents).[2]

A padiyola document written in palm leaves which is now in the possession of Pothanikat family at Kothamangalam mentions an Archdeacon in the early years of Sixteenth Century. The document says that in the year 1509, Archdeacon Ittikuriath effected a compromise between two parties contending for the ownerships of two Churches at Kothamangalam. Archdeacon Ittikuriath seems to be the George Pakalomattam mentioned earlier.

3.3 Archdeacon George of Christ

After the death of the Chaldean Bishop Mar Jacob in 1552, Professor George, uncle of Archdeacon George of Christ, sent a message to the Chaldean Patriarch requesting bishops for the Saint Thomas Christians.[3]

There are many references about this Archdeacon in Portuguese records of Fr. Amador Correi SJ, Fr. Francis Dionysio etc.

The reports of Jesuits give much information about the extent of power and authority exercised by Archdeacon George among the Christians of Saint Thomas. These reports praise him for his great authority, learning, zeal, virtues etc.

In 1583, the Archbishop Mar Abraham and the Archdeacon convoked synods in two places. With in the period of five years ( 1576 to 1581) , Pope Gregory XIII addressed FIVE Apostolic Briefs to Archdeacon George. All of them were to praise him and to grant him new privileges and honors.

Even though there is some uncertainty concerning the appointment of Archdeacon George of Christ as the first indigenous bishop there are many books written clarifying and discussing this in detail.

In March 5, 1580, the Pope confirms the election of Archdeacon George as Bishop, suffragon to Mar Abraham. In 1566 Patriarch Abdisho authorized Mar Abraham to ordain him (George of Christ) as bishop and suffragan (successor) to Mar Abraham. Both Mar Abraham and the Jesuit fathers had written to Rome about it. Pope Gregory XIII confirmed this nomination by his brief “Accepimus quod”, issued on 4 March 1580.(G.Beltrami, La Chiesa Caldeo, pp. 196–7). But the archdeacon who, out of humility, had previously declined this honor was not consecrated even after the papal confirmation.This was a real pity. Our tradition is also that St Thomas ordained two Bishops one for Mylapoor and other for Malabar. If an indigenous line of bishops had again started in 1566, the St. Thomas Christian community would have been spared many unnecessary troubles and unfortunate divisions.

Some Malabar accounts mentions his death around 1585 AD.

3.4 Archdeacon John

A report about the Church of Voipicotta, a “ Lona Cassanar Arcediago” is mentioned among those who met the expense, when the Church was re built under Fr. George Crasto SJ. A report of Archbishop Roz SJ in 1622 also states that one brother of Archdeacon George of Christ also held the office of Archdeacon.  Other reports indicate that Archdeacon George of Christ had a brother named John. Lona is a Malayalam version for “Lohannan ( John). It has been suggested that he held the office until 1591.

3.5 Archdeacon Jacob

Mar Simeon appointed Archdeacon Jacob in 1584 when he left for Rome in the company of two Francisacan Friars. Archdeacon Jacob maintained his authority against the prevailing trend of the latinising policy under Mar Abhraham. He did not accept the Gregorian Calendar. Marth Mariam Church He taught the followers Chaldean Divine Office. He also used to consecrate altars, chalices. He is also reported to have preached at Kuravilanagdu East Syriac teachings which caused the anger of Archbishop Menezes of Goa. He died impenitent in 1596.

3.5 Archdeacon George of the Cross

In 1593, Archbishop Mar Abraham appointed one of the nephews of Archdeacon George of Christ as his new Archdeacon. He was called George of the Cross. There were also other candidates for the dignity. Gouvea says that another nephew according to the custom had better claims to this dignity. In 1594, Archbishop Mar Abraham requested the Pope to appoint a coadjutor to him with right of succession. He indicated Archdeacon George of the Cross as the candidate. These letters were taken to Europe by Fr. Manoel Veiga SJ[4]

Archbishop Mar Abraham also wrote to the Jesuit General on December 17, 1594 about his desire to get the Archdeacon nominated as his successor.[5]

In 1595, Mar Abraham fell seriously ill. In the testament he made to Jesuits, the Archdeacon was announced as the administrator of the See after the death of Mar Abraham. In fact Mar Abraham wanted to make, the Archdeacon as his successor by the virtue of authority he had from the Patriarch of Babylon. But the Jesuits advised that it cannot be done and he requested Jesuits to obtain permissions from Rome.

After the death of Mar Abraham in 1597, the Archdeacon took charge of the administration according to tradition and commission from the testament of Archbishop. On hearing the death of Mar Abraham,  Alex de Menezes, the Archbishop of Goa appointed Fr. Roz SJ as the Vicar Apostolic. Finally Menezes had to confirm Archdeacon George of the Cross as the administrator.

Archdeacon had to sworn to break all relations with Babylon by Menezes and Jesuits. He also co operated with Menezes for the convocation and handling of Synod of Diamper. After the Synod of Diamper Franics Roz SJ was appointed as Bishop. For some years the Bishop Roz and Archdeacon George of the Cross worked in peace and harmony. The Archdeacon was consulted on important matters and he enjoyed all his rights and privileges.

In 1609, Bishop Roz excommunicated the Archdeacon.  The Archdeacon George of the Cross and party did not pay heed to this excommunication. The Major part of the Christians of Saint Thomas as well as Many Kings, Bishop of Cochin and Franciscans were on the side of Archdeacon. This rebellion continued until 1615 when it was reconciled.

Bishop Roz and Archdeacon were at odds again in 1618 and this continued till 1621. Before passing away the Bishop wanted to make peace with Archdeacon but Archdeacon did not seem to have answered the call. Bishop Roz left a nomination for Archdeacon as the administer after his death and Archdeacon George of the Cross under took that responsibility.

Bishop Brito was consecrated in 1624 and the Archdeacon received the bishop to Malabar. In general the relationship between Bishop Brito and Archdeacon were good except for two or three years.Archdeacon George of the Cross died on July 25, 1640.

3.5 Archdeacon Thomas

After the death of Archdeacon George of the Cross, Bishop Brito appointed Thomas, nephew of the late Archdeacon to the Archidiaconal dignity. There were also other candidates for the dignity and one was said to have more legitimate claims than Archdeacon Thomas. Things went on as before till the death of Brito in 1641.

Bishop Gracia SJ followed Bishop Brito. He did not like Archdeacon to have much part in the administration. He appointed a Vicar General apart from Archdeacon. The Archdeacon on the other hand wanted the Archbishop Gracia SJ to observe all the agreements which was in force. So from the very beginning of Gracia SJ, discord arose between the Archdeacon and the Bishop. There were agreements between the Archdeacon and the bishop but frequent quarrels broke between them.

In 1652, Mar Ahattalh arrived at Mylapore. Authors are not concordant with regard to Ahatallah place, rite and place of death. The Portuguese authorities arrested Mar Ahatallah and deported him to Goa via Cochin. The Archdeacon reached Cochin with a number of soldiers and demanded to see Patriarch Ahatallah and to examine his credentials. The Portuguese agreed first but soon they deported Ahatallah to Goa with out showing him or his credentials to the Archdeacon and his followers. The behavior of Archbishop Gracia SJ has been haughty. A false rumor was spread that Ahatallah was drowned by the Portuguese off the coast of Cochin.

All moved to Mattancherry near Cochin tied a long rope as tradition says to the open air cross called the Coonan Cross and holding the rope swore they would never be under the Paulists. ( ie, the Jesuits). All the Thomas Christians except a few ( 400 or 500 or 4000) adhered to those who had taken the Oath on Friday, January 3rd 1653.

A meeting was held at Edapally and then again at Alangat on May 22, 1653. Twelve priests imposed their hands on Archdeacon Thomas calling him Archbishop Mar Thomas I. Thus Archdeacon Thomas was ordained as Bishop and the role was changed.

3.6 Archdeacon Kunju Mathai

In 1656, Archbishop Gracia SJ excommunicated Archdeacon Thomas. Subsequently a nephew of Archdeacon Thomas who had claims for the position was appointed as Archdeacon. He was Kunju Mathai. According to the reports of Carmelites after the death of Bishop Gracia SJ, Archdeacon Kunju Mathai adhered completely to the Puthencoor group under the Mar Thoma I. There are not much information known about this Archdeacon after that.

3.7 Archdeacon Mathew

For many years Mar Chandy Paramabil, the Bishop of Catholic Syrians did not appoint Archdeacon. He was expecting a unification between the two groups. In 1678, Bishop Mar Chandy Parambil appointed Mathew as the “Archdecon of All India”. He continued till his death in 1706. He was the last Archdeacon among the Catholics as well as the last Archdeacon among the Saint Thomas Christians.

4. Tomb of Archdeacons (Arkadiyakons)

Kuravilangad has a unique place in the history of the Church of Malabar. tomb-of-archdeacons-kuravilangadu The See of Archdeacon existed at Kuravilangadu prior to the arrival of Portuguese in India. The mortal remain of a few Archdeacons (Arkadiyakons), five tombs are still preserved at the Arkadiyakon Nagar, Pakalomattam Chapel of the Marth Mariam Church at Kuravilangad.

It is very unfortunate that enough importance is not given to this plot in history. The plot was in the ownership of Alappatt and Parakkunnel families. Around 1953 they gifted this land to the church. In 1963 a Cupola was built there. Alappatt Fr: Paulose was the Vicar of the church at that time. The Nalukettu ground floor was visible even at that time. The well is preserved. Twenty feet north of the well are the tombs of the Archdeacons (Arkadiyakons). Many favors are received for all those who seek their intercession.

The tomb of Arkadiyakons were renovated by the present Vicar of the Kurvilanagad Church, Dr. Joseph Maleparambil. archdeacon-tomb-arkadiyakon-nagar

5. Efforts to restore Archdeaconate (Arkadiyakonate ) of India

There has been some efforts among the Catholics to restore the position.

5.1 Among the Catholics

In 1771 Fr. Ildefonsus a Praesntatione, who had been a missionary in Malabar submitted to the Congregation of Propaganda an elaborate report on the missions of East Indies suggesting appropriate means of betterment. One of his suggestion was to appoint a Chaldean Bishop in the position of Archdeacon to the latin rite Bishops in Malabar.

An assembly of the Catholic  Christians of Saint Thomas in August 1773 agreed that there should be an Archdeacon to remedy the evils of that time. They submitted their grievances to the Arch Bishop.

In 1782, Dr. Joseph Kairattil was appointed as Bishop but he died before occupying the See. After this the Catholic Syrians did not ask for Archdeacons. What they asked since then was for indigenous Bishops or Bishops of Chaldean rite. In 1896, indigenous Bishops were appointed to govern them but the Bishops continued the latin style of administration.

5.2 Among the Malankara Orthodox

With the elevation of Archdeacon Thomas as Mar Thoma I, the role was changed from Archdeacon to Bishop. His line continued till 1815.

6.Summary

The only infra – episcopical dignity in Church of Malabar now seems to be a matter of history. This development was not a natural change in the Church of Malabar.Those who are thinking about restoring the rite of Church of Saint Thomas Christians to ancient glory should also restore the ancient office of Archdeacon (Arkadiyakon).

Acknowledgment
Pictures Courtesy – Fr. Rubin Thottupuram

________________________________________________________________________________
Author can be reached on admin at nasrani dot net
________________________________________________________________________________

NSC NETWORK Article Footnotes

  1. IBN AT- TAIYIB- II-p.121 [↩]
  2. The Syrian Church of Malankara, George Kurien, Kottayam 1908 [↩]
  3. ARSI- GOA –MAL- Vol 12, SRD Vol XII, p.398 [↩]
  4. ARSI-GOA-MAL VOL,14, 310,336,357 [↩]
  5. ARSI, GOA-MAL,VOL,14,f,198 [↩]
____________________________________________________________________________

NSC NETWORK is a collaborative networking effort of many Syrian Christians who are for traditions, heritage and culture. The primary objective of NSC NETWORK is to build awareness about Nasrani culture, traditions, heritage, sharing different perspectives of history and other relevant information concerning the community.Please read About for policies. © 2007-2009 NSC NETWORK [ http://nasrani.net]

____________________________________________________________________________

Related NSC Network Articles

1 Star2 Star3 Star4 Star5 Star (11 votes, average: 4.55 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...



19 Responses

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Unknown UNITED STATES
Jun 15, 2007 18:44


Post : 1346

The statement about Patrillineal succession is factually wrong. Nairs followed matrilineal succession.
I suggest you to seek advice from learned people when you are in doubt.

Also try to contact some reputed scholars and request them to write guest coloumn. That will be very helpful.

Could you please make it a habbit to include as many reference as possible, so that the interested reader can go further?

V. John Abraham UNITED STATES
Jul 8, 2007 23:29


Post : 656

Very instructive, would like to read more and more on Nasranis.

John

T.Jacob CANADA
Jan 7, 2008 14:09


Post : 655

I never thought that ,we were having an illustrious hertiage.

Keep it up. Continue the good job of updating our roots.

T.Jacob
Calgary,Canada.

John Mathew CANADA
Jan 21, 2008 18:44


Post : 658

Are there any other tombs of the preceding archdeacons nearby? Although the records of succession may not exist, the actual graves would be far more useful a tool in understanding our origins. Who was before Geevarghese Archdeacon — and if his name isn’t know, is his burial site known? Since Christians bury their dead, these graves must exist somewhere.

NJ UNITED STATES
Jan 21, 2008 22:45


Post : 657

I dont know if it is known.From the time of arrival of Portuguese till the Syond of Diampor we have some kind of clarity on what was going around.

Before that its hard to say.History is interloven with traditions and traditions. Its difficult to prove the existance of Archdeacons in earlier centuries. It is also difficult to make a point when the Archdeacons started also.

Ethak UNITED STATES
Feb 16, 2008 19:20


Post : 1348

Dear NSC

I was not aware of the Jewish tradition in the history of Maratha Mariam Church Kuravilanagdu. Only few churches in Kerala celebrates feast of Prophet Jonah and Kuravilanagdu is one among them.

Being a prominent centre of Nasranis, Kurvilanagdu played major role in history in fight against latinisation and other things. But sadly over the last decades many of the traditions and rituals has been diaspperead. It is good that atleast the Kappalottam is preserved.

I am talking about Vechuuttu, Pachor Nercha, Thamuku Nercha. This has been completely disappeared from the feast over the last decades.

In Mununoyambu only the prevailing tradition of Kappalottam is preserved. We have lost many ethos of the feast over time. We can also see Chuttu Vilaku Nercha and Enna Nercha continued in Kuravilanagdu.

Can we start a discussion about Vechuuttu, Pachor Nercha and Thamuku Nercha.?

It is given in this site that the Orthodox church at Puthupally celebrate the Vechuuttu. Are their any other church other than this. Is there any church where , Pachor Nercha and Thamuku Nercha are still celebrated ?

John Mathew CANADA
Feb 16, 2008 20:58


Post : 1351

Dear Ethak:

One comment regarding the Prophet Jonah. If you are talking about the 3 day fast done in his honor, it is called the “Rogation of the Ninevites”. It is most certainly *not* a Jewish tradition! It is a Syrian tradition — since the Syrians believe themselves to be the descendants of the Ninevites. The fast is done in honor of the Ninevites who implored God’s mercy after the prophecy of Jonah.

Again: this is not proof of Jewish origin (in case anyone wants to use it) as the Syrians of Mesopotamia developed this fast to remember how their ancestors, the Ninevites, fasted to gain God’s mercy.

This Syrian tradition originated in Mesopotamia and was originally followed by both the Church of the East and the Syriac Orthodox, including their descendants in Kerala. Through them, their Uniate schismatic factions (including the Syro-Malabar in Kerala which split form the Church of the East when the Portuguese came over) also adopted them.

It is also followed by our Orthodox cousins in Egypt, Ethiopia and Armenia to a lesser extent.

Ethak UNITED STATES
Feb 16, 2008 22:02


Post : 1353

Dear John Mathew

I was not talking about Prophet Jonah as Jewish tradition, it is of Assyro – Chaldean, more of a sailors ritual. I was referring to the tradition of building churches at hilltop as Jewish. It is definitely Jewish custom to pray in hilltop. Sorry for the confusion.

Between John Mathew, you are very romantic. I have read some of your comments in other articles. I am pretty not much interested in this stupid original hair dialogue but i must say like NJ hinted you are extremely romantic. I am leaving the topic to some one interested to pick.

To be frank Syriac Orthodox in Kerala is a very late invention in Nasrani fold.

The Synod of Diamper which happened in June 20, 1599 was not for severing ties with Assyrian Church of the East. More than 50 years before the Syond of Diamper it was the Chaldean Patriach who was sending prelate to Malabar.

A schism occurred among Nasranis only after half a century as told in the Coonan Cross Oath in 1653. Note down the period Half a Century.The introduction of Syriac Orthodox started only after another two year, in 1655 after the arrival of Mar Gregorios Abdul Jaleel.

Mar Gregorios Abdul Jaleel was a good man and in fact he was against the Antiochisation happened later in the Jacobite fold.

As part of the Synod of Diampor latinisation did happen but the Syro Malabar and the new Jacobites kept the East Syrian liturgy. Only after another century large scale Antiochisation happened and in fact that’s what furthered the latinisation in Syro Malabar in later centuries.

Syro Malabar doesnot have any direct counter part and it doesnot come under your romantic Uniate definition. The only faction which is a close counter part is the Chaldeaon Church in india but that story is also not straight.

I just wish if our story was simple and straight forward.

Also even after all these things the Jacobite or Orthodox or the Syro Malabar has nothing in common with Orthodox churches. We are Oriental. The Non- Catholic churches are part of the Oriental rthodoxy and still have more things in common historically, traditionally with Assyro- Chaldean’s.

The Orthodox faction in Jacobite is just Orthodox in name sake. Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox are completely different.

Ethak UNITED STATES
Feb 17, 2008 0:25


Post : 1357

Dear John Mathew

I am more interested in knowing more information about Vechuuttu, Pachor Nercha and Thamuku Nercha. This is a kind of open question I had for sometime which I did not get any satisfying answer.

Are you aware of churches in Oriental Orhtodx side where these rituals are still followed ? I think most of the Catholic parishes has stopped this practice.

These Nercha’s are painful, need lot of effort co- ordinated and doesn’t offer a source of income for the clergy and church. My understanding is priests are not finding any reason to continue this.

Also I couldn’t find any articles here on Syrian Chrsitian cousine. Can something be included ?

John Mathew CANADA
Feb 17, 2008 1:12


Post : 1358

Dear Ethak,

1. The Rogation of the Ninevites is not a sailer’s ritual and it is not restricted to the Chaldeans. It’s a general Syriac thing. Your use of the term Assyro-Chaldean is restrictive. The Church of the East (the parent of the Chaldean schism) is not known by the “Chaldean” name (which was an innovation by Catholic missionaries in the east).

2. The Syriac Orthodox “thing” started after Mor Gregorios came in the 17th century. It’s about as “late” as the introduction of Catholicism in India (16th century). Your statement that Mor Gregorios was “against” Antiochization defies basic laws of cause an effect: how can a 17th century individual be against a process which commenced in the 19th century?

3. RE: your comment that the “antiochization furthered the latinization”. I find it hard to believe that the Latins would just follow the Jacobites — this makes no sense. Any proof or evidence? Antiochization was necessary for the Orthodox/Jacobites (same thing): since we went to the West Syriac faith, we needed to worship according to those norms. No big deal: the West Syrians were the parent church of the East Syrians anyways.

4. Do you know what Uniate means? The Syro-Malabar is definitely a Uniate church. The pattern is the same: the Roman missionaries come into an Eastern territory, gain converts form the local Eastern Church, and then — if they haven’t succumbed to latinization — they create a new archdiocese for the new “Eastern Catholic” group that is now in *union* with Rome (*union* —> *Uniate*).

5. Re: Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox
I don’t care about factions: there is only one Orthodox Church in Kerala and that is composed of the two Orthodox churches of the West Syrian traditions (which are split due to a stupid political fight).
I use the term Jacobite and Orthodox interchangebly because in Kerala they both refer to the West Syriac Church — no need to prefix Oriental, because there are no Eastern Orthodox churches in Kerala anyways, only Oriental Orthodox ones. And religiously, the Syriac Orthodox/Malankara Orthodox have more in common with our Oriental Orthodox brothers in Syria/Egypt/etc, than with the Assyrian Church of the East.

6. Finally, I don’t know why you think I’m a romantic. Perhaps it has to do with an absence of a dictionary on your part. I’ve never claimed that the Orthodox are the original faction. I’ve merely stated that the innuendos by some authors that the Syro-Malabar are the original Church is incorrect.

Ethak UNITED STATES
Feb 17, 2008 3:06


Post : 1361

Dear John

RE. 1 I am quoting a passage from a paper written by The Assyrian Academic Society, which has answers to the questions you raised.

“The Chaldo-Assyrians of Iraq remain the world’s largest compact safekeepers of the
living Aramaic derived language, classical Syriac and its contemporary spoken and written forms. ChaldoAssyrians are also the heirs of church traditions that retain not only the Eastern understanding of Christian precepts, but also the archaic hymns and chants, fasts and feasts, as well as customs, that link pre-Christian Mesopotamian social and cultural history to medieval eastern Christianity.

For example, a very important fast within this tradition is the ancient Rogation (or Fast) of the Ninevites (a three day fast preceding Lent). For this Aramaic speaking Christian community, the Rogation of the Ninevites commemorates the Biblical repentance of the population of the Assyrian capital of Nineveh upon the behest of the prophet Jonah.

No other Christian group in the world relates to this pre-Christian occasion or sees the Fast as part of its heritage. “

My intention was to specify Kappalottam mentioned in this article as a sailors thing and Rogation of the Ninevites as an original Chaldo-Assyrians tradition. Syriac Christianity is inter linked and am not deducing what you mentioned. About the terminology of usage of Chaldo-Assyrians, please refer any of the Assyrian Academic Society papers or any other academic works. Its not a restrictive terminology, rather it is the widely used term.

RE .2 Your statement on introduction of Catholicism in India in 16th century is wrong.
There are letters written by Jordanus Catalani, the First Catholic bishop in India, Diocese of Quilon from Gogo in Gujarat (12 October 1321), the second from Tana (24 January 1323/4) exists which describes the progress of his mission.

From these letters we can learn that Roman attention had already been directed, not only to the Bombay region, but also to the extreme south of the Indian peninsula, especially to Columbum or Quilon in Travancore.

Jordanus’ words may imply that he had already started a mission there before October 1321. Jordanus, between 1324 and 1328 (if not earlier), probably visited Kollam and selected it as the best centre for his future work. He was appointed as a bishop in 1328 and nominated by Pope John XXII in his bull Venerabili Fratri Jordano to the see of Columbum or Kulam on 21 August 1329. This diocese was the first in the whole of the Indies, with juristriction over modern India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Burma, and Sri Lanka.

His writing “Mirabilia” refers to the author’s residence in India Major and especially at Kollam, as well as to his travels in Armenia, north-west Persia, the Lake Van region, and Chaldaea.

Much before St. Francis Xavier arrived in India in 16th century ( 1542) there were Roman Catholic presence and mission in Malabar.

A continuation can be seen with John De Marignolli. He was another Catholic missionary through China apparently reached Quilon in Malabar in Easter week of 1348 ( 1347) . At this place he found a church of the Latin communion, probably founded by Jordanus Catalani, who had been appointed bishop of Kollam by Pope John XXII. Marignolli remained here for sixteen months.

You should also keep in mind that Quilon and Kodungaloor were the two major centers of Nasranis in those period.It is very much debated thing that whether the missions these Catholic missonaires conducted has some relation to Nasranis with varaying observations and differential findings.

I am not clear on your statement on Antiochization in 19th century. I said Mar Gregorios was against Antiochization when he reached Malabar in 1655 and during his tenure.

RE 3. About Antiochization furthering latinization, I can explain my observations later as it is time consuming. West Syrians parental church of East Syrians is a far fetched claim. In those consideration, I can not blame the Catholic Romans who claim as the parental church of all with at least some valid considerations.

RE 4. About Uniate term. The term itself is the invention of Rome, so I rather prefer to consider their own definition as worthy of consideration. It is used primarily to refer Eastern Catholic Churches who were previously primarily Eastern Orthodox ( EO). Gradually the usage was extended to all Eastern Catholic Churches by Latins and by Eastern Catholic till Second Vatican Council in purview of a unity among East and West. Syro Malabar doesnot come under the definition as there are no direct counter parts.

RE 5. At present there are no Eastern Orthodox ( EO) church in Kerala. God only knows what future has in store. Antiochization has made some similarities with global Oriental Orthodoxy just like Syro Malabar replicated latin but the Oriental Orthodox churches in Kerala has more to do with Assyrian Church of the East and Oriental Orthodoxy than Eastern Orthodoxy.

I agree with you on the stupid political fight as the reason of split in Oriental Orthodoxy in Kerala. That’s not a situation just with Oriental Orthodoxy. There are stupid political fights in every churches. I just wish that atleast if the younger generation can abstain from these kind of fights .

John Mathew CANADA
Feb 17, 2008 3:47


Post : 1362

I think you have a bit of confusion regarding terminology, Ethak.

Regarding 5. I think you are a little confused here. The Syriac Orthodox Church (i.e., the non-Chalcedonian Church of Antioch) is an Oriental Orthodox Church. There is also Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch which is Eastern Orthodox and *not* Oriental Orthodox. The latter Church has no connection with Kerala, so when I (or anyone else on this forum) says “Antiochene Church” we mean only one Church and that is the Miaphysite (Oriental orthodox) Syriac Orthodox Church. The Syriac Orthodox Church is the mother of the “Jacobites” in Kerala and their schismatic faction, the Malankara Orthodox. Both have **nothing** to do with the Assyrian Church of the East other than our people are genetic descendants of people who used to be of the Assyrian Church back before the time of Mar Gregorios. But the moment we *converted* to the West Syrian faith, we became Oriental Orthodox, and the Oriental Orthodox view the Assyrian Church of the East as heretics. (Not me personally; this is the official position). A major sticky point: The Assyrians are Dyophysites, whereas the Oriental orthodox (including the Syriac Orthodox) are Miaphysites. The Assyrians reject the term Mother of God, and instead say Mother of Christ–the orthodox reject this (and so do the Uniates)!

Again: you are mistaken in claiming the Oriental Orthodox includes the Assyrian Church of the East. Sorely mistaken. The Assyrian Church may be “oriental” in that it is in the east, but the term “Oriental Orthodox” has a very specific meaning which you are transgressing when you apply it to the Church of the East.

Re 4: The use of the word “primarily” is important to recognize there in your copy from Wikipedia! The *majority* of the Uniates were *primarily* from the Eastern Orthodox, yes. But there are Uniates (or Eastern Catholics if you want to use that longer term) from other Churches: the Uniates from the Church of the East (both in the Middle East — the Chaldeans — and in Kerala, the Syro-Malabar), and the Unitaes from the Jacobites (the Middle Eastern “Syrian Catholics” and the Kerala Syro-Malankara). And sure the Syro-Malabar have a *direct* counterpart: their brothers back in Assyria, the Chaldean schismatics! The only difference: the Syro-Malabar allowed themsleves to be Latinized, whereas the Chaldean Catholics retained their identity. And the syro-malabar only got the right to start using the original Qurbana in the 20th century — before that they had to use whatever their foreign masters told them to use.

Re 3: This is basic Christian history! You can trace all canonical Orthodox/Catholic Christian communities to the five original patriarchates–everyone *HAD* to get a valid episcopal ordination from one of the five. The Church of the East were originally under the Patriarch of Antioch and split during the Nestorian controversy; any historian knows this. This is not some far-fetched theory or opinion. Go and read the history of the Church of the East — their Catholicos asserted independence from the Patriarch of Antioch and become an independent Patriarch-Catholicos! I’m not talking about the Church in India being under the Patriarch of Antioch — I’m saying back up to the 4th century, the Church of the East was under the Patriarchate of Antioch.

Re 2: Fine, there were Catholic missions. But the Syro-Malabar started only after those missionaries started to target our community and kidnap our prelates. Before that, there was probably no big attempt at converting us to Roman Catholicism.

Re 1: From the looks of their site the The Assyrian Academic Society is an East Syrian Catholic group — note the term “Mother of God Church”! It is probably not a uniform Assyrian association at all! Otherwise they wouldn’t use the term “Chaldean” which is a hugely contentious term in the general Syriac community. If you want to read their position on history that would be akin to me reading a Mar Thomite history book for the history of the Nasrani community — it’s bound to have distortions.

The Church of the East most certainly does *NOT* refer to themselves as Chaldean. The term Chaldean was introduced by Roman Catholic missionaries to label their new schismatic fruit: the Chaldean catholic church. The Chaldean *patriarch* himself talks about this: he says “religiously” he is a Chaldean, but “ethnically” he is Assyrian and that the label Chaldean was introduced by missionaries. (You can search for this info yourself: the controversy in the Syriac community regarding labels is huge! Aramean vs Suryoye vs Assyrian vs Chaldean — these are loaded terms, Ethak.)

The Syriac tradition of the rogation of the Ninevites is a general Syriac thing: both the Assyrian Church of the East (including its Uniate counterpart, the Chaldeans) and the oriental orthodox Syriac Orthodox Church observe it. AND the other Oriental Orthodox Churches observe it too, to a lesser degree.

Ethak UNITED STATES
Feb 17, 2008 7:24


Post : 1365

Dear John Mathew

I am not confused about the terminology. I said Oriental Orthodox churches in Kerala has more to do with Assyrian Church of the East and Oriental Orthodoxy than Eastern Orthodoxy.

Eastern Orthodoxy is entirely different than Oriental Orthodoxy.

Oriental Orthodox churches in Kerala were earlier part of Church of East but later on accepted Oriental Orthodoxy. There are still many traditions of Church of East prevalent In both the factions of Oriental Orthodoxy in Kerala.

Assyrian Church of the East are Oriental but not part of Oriental Orthodoxy because of rejection of Council of Ephesus in 431. They were not in communion with any one earlier. Recently there have been agreements with Catholic Church. I didnot say they are part of Oriental Orthodoxy. They are Oriental.

I belong to Syro Malabar and know very well about people who get in to street on hearing the term Chaldean and a minority who supports the Chaldean. I don’t have a stand on this. It is the anti Chaldean’s who call shots in Syro Malabar.

Most of the differences in doctrine was never more than a misunderstanding of Christology . These differences in Christology are almost sorted out and their are christilogical agreements signed and discussions going on.

RE 1. I can not agree with your explanations. It is the Chaldeans ( 70%) who are majority in Iraq and Assyrians ( 15 %) do not count much and cant stand with out unity in the hostile situation in Iraq. I personally know Chaldean’s and Assyrians and it’s the Chaldeans calling shots based on their strength in Iraq.

The previous Chaldean Patriarch Mar Bedaweed I in the year 2000, declared him as being an Assyrian from an ethnic point of view and a Chaldean from the religious one.

Quoting Monsignor Jacques Isaac, General Secretary of the synod of the Chaldean bishops and Chancellor of the Papal University of Baghdad.

“”We do not accept who adorn himself with the title of representative of the “Chaldeans-Assyrians because this is an attempt by the Assyrians to englobe the Chaldeans, using it as a point of force.” ( Feb 2004)

(http://www.christiansofiraq.com/lugia.html)

The compound name ChaldoAssyrians has been used during the last two years to counter attempts to divide the Assyrians.

(http://www.christiansofiraq.com/yuash8305.html)

The Assyrian- Chaldean story is not straight forward like one group leaving and joining another. There have been to and fro moments through out the history. Historical distortions doesnot come much here as both are just factions and that too with a history of shifting allegiance for both.

I think only in Kerala we have this much of historical myths and differences. In most of the other Eastern Churches the history is presented much better than Kerala situation.

Off lately there have been joint efforts (http://www.zenit.org/article-2763?l=english) and these days they can even celebrate sacraments at any church.

Ethak UNITED STATES
Feb 17, 2008 7:29


Post : 1366

RE. 2 Kidnapping prelates is a story. In Mar Ahatulla’s case the credentials were questionable from a neutral point of view. I agree that before the Syond of Diampoor there was no large scale attempts to introduce Roman Catholicism.

RE. 3 I cannot agree with you there. There are people who say Church of East or Babylon ( my understanding is this was the terminology used earlier ) is from Patriarch of Antioch.

That’s not completely true as Babylon patriarchs are from the see of St. Thomas and they call St. Thomas as the first Babylon patriarch.

The Patriarch line is — Saint Thomas, Mar Tulmai, Mar Addai, Mar Agai, Mar Mari,Mar Abris……..

Patriarch of Antioch is from the See of St. Peter and has a different line.

The Patriarch line is — St. Peter, Evodius, Ignatius, Heron, Cornelius, Eros …………………

RE 4. The Eastern Orthodox- Catholic split is generally dated from 1054 and after that there had been many councils on unity and unification. Many factions from Eastern Orthodox rejoined Rome. Till Second Vatican Council they were just treated as rites and uniates and after the Second Vatican council they have been started recognising as Sui iuris (autonomous ) churches.

Syro Malabar doesnot represent as a Uniate from Church of the East. Your definition stands only if there can be a new Uniate from another Uniate (Chaldean to Syro Malabar ) . What I understand is the term itself is outdated but still holds good concerning the Eastern Orthodox churches and their Catholic counterparts. I have even heard some Eastern Catholic Churches discussing which side to join.

Let me ask you what do you call the schematics from different Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches.

Example -Your response in RE.5 – Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch and Syriac Orthodox Church split over Council of Chalcedon AD- 451. The schematics here are Syriac Orthodox Church.

You call Syriac Orthodox Church Miaphysite. Weren’t they were also called Monophysite ? Personally i don’t have any issues in referring as Miaphysite as there have been gradual changes in every churches official position.Thats true with some terminologies also.

NSC Admin UNITED STATES
Feb 17, 2008 21:38


Post : 1389

2007 Kappalottam Youtube Video

Curtsey- Lijesh Kuravilangadu

John Mathew CANADA
Feb 17, 2008 13:38


Post : 1377

Dear Ethak,

1. This isn’t history by majority vote. Just because X is in the majority does not mean that X is the older community. For example:
a. In Kerala, the Syro-Malabar number in the millions, whereas the Church of the East in the thousands. Yet it is the latter that is older.
b. In the UK, the Protestants exceed the Catholics, yet all were originally Catholic.
c. The anti-Chaldean faction of the Syro-Malabar (i.e., those who don’t want to let go of their missionary-induced Latinized faith) and the Chaldeans are another example. The latter have a claim to antiquity since they at least want to go back to the forms of their original faith, whereas the latinizing faction wants the opposite. Whos the majority? The Latins. Who’s “older” or represents the older ideal? The Chaldeans.
d. My own Orthodox Church gives another example. The Jacobites are smaller than the Malankara Orthodox; however it is the Jacobites who represent the more legitimate view, since we follow the West Syrian rite and the Patriarch is the ancient head of the West Syrian Orthodox faith. (Note: I belong, by ancestry, to the Malankara faction, even though I reject its position.)

The Chaldeans split from the Church of the East, pure and simple. Any historian will acknowledge that. Just because the Chaldeans are more in number, proves only that the Romans were very adapt at converting people.

2. I’m not going to go into the origins of the Babylonian Church. The history of this is fairly straightforward, and you can go and read a real historian to get the truth. The Church of the East is not one of the Pentarchy — so they must have gotten their episcopal ordination from somewhere… who do you think that was (until the council of Ephesus)? Your statement “They were not in communion with any one earlier” is extremely erroneous! They were most certainly in communion with the original Church which was administered by the Pentarchy (and it was the Antiochene fifth that handled the eastern churches).

3. In Antioch the Greeks and the Syriacs split over the Mia/Monophysitism issue — however, it was a lateral split. The Greeks can not claim that Chalcedonian christology predates Non-Chalcedonian Christology. The split occurred horizontally, and so an impartial observer can not claim either is the “legitimate” or “original” faith. However, you, as a Catholic follower of the Chalcedonian faith may wish to impose your view and say that the Greeks were right and the Syriac were wrong. That is your opinion. I as a Mia/Monophysite reject that.

4. Your use of the term “rejoin Rome” is typical of Catholic writers. The view that the Romans represent the original, undivided Church is controversial and not accepted at all by any of the Orthodox Churches (Eastern or Oriental). Indeed, the Romans introduced several innovations which damages its claim to be the original Church (which is why the Oriental Orthodox split, and why the Eastern Orthodox also split later on — because Rome was modifying the faith). The Orthodox who left Orthodoxy and joined Catholicism are hence schismatics — they did not *re*join anything, since they were not Catholics to begin with. The only Eastern Catholic group who can enjoy the claim of not being a mere schism of the orthodox/assyrian church are the Maronites. But apart from them, anyone else using a non-Latin liturgy was original a member of either: a) the Eastern Orthodox, b) the Oriental Orthodox, or c) the Church of the East.

Now, there is no point to us arguing since most of these issues are not a matter of opinion but of fact, and can be resolved by appealing to a history book (preferably written by a historian and not an Orthodox/Catholic church writer).

But I do have a question for you Ethak you could help me with:

You mentioned that there are still many Church of the East attributes in the Malankara/Syriac (West Syrian) Orthodox Churches. I would like to know if you could tell me what they are, since I am very interested in this.

Sibi Samson UNITED STATES
Feb 20, 2008 14:38


Post : 1528

I found this site via Google while searching for Munnu Noyambu Perunnal. All articles are interesting to me. I have seen many sites before and most of them do not look this good. Thanks for the excellent content.

Kenney INDIA
Jul 28, 2008 1:19


Post : 5467

Wow….. I am very much impressed….. I have been trying to promote blogging… and its a great effort… wonderful..

John Mathew CANADA
Nov 19, 2008 21:25


Post : 9038

RE: Tomb of East Syriac prelates

Does anyone have any information on where the various East Syriac (i.e., Church of the East, and later on, Chaldean) prelates were buried in Kerala?

I believe that Mar Gabriel, a “Nestorian” bishop who was influential in some Puthenkoor Churches in the 18th century, was buried in the Orthodox Cheriapally of Kottayam.

But what about Mar Simeon, Mar Abraham, Mar Denaha, etc., from the pre-Diamper era?

Participate – Your opinion-Leave a Response

NSC NETWORK is a non moderated forum. All are welcome to participate in the debates. We encourage comments, critiques, questions, additional information,corrections and suggestions. We also encourage participants to provide answers/ideas to questions raised on articles or on posts/comments.Links/Videos/Pictures of value to readers are most welcome.

We request that please stay on topic, respect other people’s opinions, avoid profanity, offensive statements or anything else that might otherwise violate our policy. Please understand that we reserve the right to edit or delete posts/comments for any reason we deem appropriate. By submitting a post/comment here you grant this site a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution.

Please note that NSC Network may, in our sole discretion, reject posts/comments for any reason we deem appropriate. Please try to post on relevant discussions and we may in our discretion move discussions to relevant threads.

Comment


Get NEW Articles by e-mail / Enter your e-mail

Nasrani Syrian Christians NETWORK Snapshot

How do you see the revival of Syriac in all Nasrani Churches ?

View Results