Solomon says in the Proverbs, "There are many ways
which appear good unto men: but the end thereof leads to the pit of hell"
(Proverbs 14:12). He says this of those who do not understand the will of God,
but follow their own will. For such people, not knowing the will of God, at
first receive from Satan a fervor which is like joy, but is not joy; and
afterwards it turns to gloom and lays them open. But he who follows the will of
God endures great labor in the beginning, but afterwards finds rest and
gladness.

Ammonas
The Letters of Ammonas, successor of Saint Antony

The Patriarchal Encyclical of the Holy Great Lent is issued

During this time of year, at the beginning of the Lent Season, our beloved
Patriarch distributes his blessed Encyclical to our churches worldwide. The
Encyclical is to be read in our Syriac Orthodox Churches, and it is now
available in three languages. You may read it by clicking on the web address
below:

Syriac
http://www.soc-wus.org/patriarchate/syriac2010/index.html

English
http://www.soc-wus.org/patriarchate/english2010/index.html

Arabic
http://www.soc-wus.org/patriarchate/arabic2010/index.html

Shlomo to all,

Please read the A/c as 'KARUNYA FOUNDATION, VADODARA'

In His love,

For SMJSOC,
Johnson #2335

--- In SOCM-FORUM@yahoogroups.com, Johnson wrote:
>
> Shlomo to all,
>
> All donors who wish to contibute towards the construction of St.Mary's JSOC,
Baroda are requested to send the cheques / drafts in Indian Currency as far as
possible. This is due to the inconvenience in getting the foreign currency
cheques remitted which comes under FERA regulations.
>
> If any one want to do online transfer please use the following information.
>
> Account : KARUNY FOUNDATION, VADODARA
> BANK : FEDERAL BANK, BRANCH : BARODA
> A/C NO: 13350100026735
> IFS CODE :FDRL0001335
>
> We express our sincere thanks to all those who are participating in this
divine project and pray for them. Also we thank SOCM Forum and MSV team for
publishing our appeal and requesting our brotheren to help us.
>
> In His Love,
> For St.Mary's JSOC Baroda,
>
> Johnson
> #2335
>

Closer to Heavenly Things

This sermon talks about seeing God afar off and being drawn by His everlasting
love. But in order for us to draw near, we need to learn about right worldly
things in order to draw closer to heavenly things.

"The Lord has appeared to me from a far, saying Yea I have loved you with an
everlasting love; therefore with loving-kindness have I drawn you." Jeremiah
31:3

"..I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh.." Joel 2:28

"If I have told you about earthly things and you do not believe, how then will
you believe me if I tell you about heavenly things?" John 3:12

"...then shall every man have praise from God." 1 Corinthians 4:5

This sermon uses the readings appointed from the Malankara lectionary and was
given on Sunday, January 24, 2010 by Fr John Brian Paprock at Holy
Transfiguration Orthodox Mission Chapel, Madison, Wisconsin.

PODCAST OR DOWNLOAD: http://feeds.feedburner.com/frjohnbrian or
http://frjohnbrian.hipcast.com/rss/spiritual_reflections_or_fr_john_brian.xml
LISTEN ONLINE HERE:
http://frjohbrian.blogspot.com/2010/01/closer-to-heavenly-things.html

Barekhmor Rev. Fr. Dale Johnson,

Thanks for the labor of love among the unfortunate victims of the earthquake. It
is heartening that there is a Syriac Orthodox mission that is helping the
Haitians in distress under your leadership and I hope that at least those of us
on this list in the neighborhood in the Americas rise to the occasion and offer
what we can to those suffering in one of the worst calamities man has seen in
recent times.

I see that you prefer to receive payments by PayPal. Do you have an alternate
arrangement? (I stopped using PayPal after a phishing attempt). It would be
ideal if you have an US-based address to which contributions can be made.

Regards,
Thomas Joseph
ID: 0202

--- In SOCM-FORUM@yahoogroups.com, Rev. Fr. Dale A. Johnson wrote:
>
> Dear moderators,
>
> Saint Ephrem Mission, a division of Dominican Outreach is 40 miles from the
border of Haiti. I just returned from visiting sites to prepare for refugees.
Thousands are fleeing the country and crossing the border. We have 40 Haitian
orphans we are assisting. Help! We have sent 30 tons of supplies and have been
donated land to build school and longterm solutions.
> One of our teachers is reported missing. She teaches some of our Haitian
children.
>
> We would welcome donations through PAYPAL. We are the only Syriac Orthodox
presence on the island.
>
> See  http://www.dominicanoutreach.webs.com
> or
> http://www.Saintephrem.webs.com for updates.
>
> Father Dale A. Johnson
> Dominican Outreach
> Saint Ephrem Mission

Dear Moderators,

I saw the message from Fr. K.K.John about the miracle at Kattachira chappel.  I
always considered Fr. John as a level headed priest, who happend or forced to be
joined with the Devalokam group for his own reasons.  I am also aware that John
achen was the front fighter of the SOCM Forum in its starting time, in refuting
the 'newly invented theologies' of the so called nick named 'Thomas P.' I still
considered his writings are gneuine in many matters.

However, when I gone through his recent post on 'miracle at Kattachira chappel',
I see some kind of a partisan spirit in it.  While he genuinly explains about
the 'tear' and relevant biblical incidents in the first part of his message,
later part he laments about it that why it is happend in a 'Jacobite Chappel'!!!
He put it simply in his words " because the leadership lost Christian virtues,
defy the revealed will of God, 1Cor 11:18, Jude 19, aversion to put an end to
the century-old infighting in the Holy Church. Failure to take the tears of St
Mary as a warning sign to the recalcitrant and ego-centric leadership who are
poised to continue the fight and division in the Church and not recognizing the
need to repent is all the more pitiable."

Well John achen, here comes the cat out of the basket!!! I think you shows your
frustration in these words, as it was NOT HAPPEND in your Church!!! If the
miracle was happend in an IOC Church, do you dare to mention anything like this
in your forum about your present leadership??? I am sure you will be praising
about the incident and will try to establish that it is happening because of the
"pious nature" of your leadership!!  Since the SOCM Forum moderators are still
loving you as a 'lost soul', they put all your derogatory remarks about our
heirarchy without any moderation, which you cannot enjoy or even think in your
own forum at any time!!

You also mentioned that "Equally so, claim of monopoly of a miracle by a section
is ill-intended. Relentless tirades to aggrandize and commercialize the miracle
are evident from all quarters."  I always considered you in high esteem, but now
I feel pity about your above silly remarks.  Commercialisation of anything in
the Church matters is to be deplored, but how can you 'keep log in your eyes and
trying to remove the dust from some one's eyes'???  The commercialisation of
everything you can study from the Parumala Church, if you go there Achen.  It is
not started now, but since long long time ago.  For a small example, if you keep
a vow to give a 'Muthukuda' (Ornamental umbrella) in Parumala Church and
fullfils it by keeping it infront of the Holy Kabar, the next minute, it will be
taken from there and will be SOLD to somebody else in front of your eyes!!!! Is
it a commercialization or you have some other biblical explanation for it??

My dear Achen, I think if the poor Kattachira Chappel members is selling the
photographs of Mother Mary, please don't try to colour it as a commercialisation
of the miracle, as you mentioned.  The Jacobite Church is not going to use any
offeratory income from that chappel for paying any advocate fees or to Judges to
persuade them to give favourable verdict in any legal cases, as IOC does.  I
hope you will become the same John Achen, who write useful messages for the
laity, and I pray for it.

With regards

Varkey Titus
Member ID No: 1024

--- In SOCM-FORUM@yahoogroups.com, Rev. Fr. John Kunjukunju wrote:
>
> Tears in the Bible
>
> "Tear is drop of salty water coming from the eye." (1) Tears flow down when
cries, hence tear is said as a byproduct of weeping. It is an effective tool to
contain sorrow and excruciating experiences. `Tearful' and `tearless' are thus
adjectives of weeping.
>
> We have been hearing a good lot of miracle news these days. The most recent
one is at Kattachira St. Mary's Jacobite Syrian Chapel in Kerala. According to
news, "It started on 21st Oct 2009. As on today 17 bottles of divine fragrant
fluid is filled. The bottles using are the same our church using to keep Holy
Mooron, which takes about 250 ml." Many dignitaries visited and convinced of the
miracle. Patriarch by his bull # 187/09 dated Dec 06, 09, in response to local
bishop's request, declared it a pilgrim center.
>
> As the Patriarch rightly pointed out in the bull, the Church has had numerous
instances of miracles manifesting the presence of St Mary, Mother of God, St
George, the Martyr, Parumala St Gregorious and many other saints throughout
history. Many are healed from sickness, problems solved, devil exorcised,
devotees blessed with childbearing and so on. I surely believe St Mary and all
the Saints who pleased and martyred for the sake of Gospel and the Kingdom of
God, are still at work for the spiritual welfare of the people and the unity of
Church. A lawyer interpreted the miracle, "I could feel an unseen hand guiding
us during the entire period of conduct of appeals in the division bench of high
court and their offshoots in the supreme court of India." Neither St Mary nor
any Saint will show a miracle to favor litigation, escalate hatred and sustain
division in the Church. Again it is wrong for a few complaisant people
misinterpret the miracle as a favor. Miracles are not manifested in the places
of Protestants and independent factions who do not believe in saints. Again,
miracles are manifested in other religious centers, such as Sabarimala,
Thirupathi, etc because people believe. It is a matter of heart, faith and
conviction, not a matter to be proved by arguments. Equally so, claim of
monopoly of a miracle by a section is ill-intended. Relentless tirades to
aggrandize and commercialize the miracle are evident from all quarters. I wonder
why the esteemed visitors, dignitaries and or hierarchy failed to discern the
true meaning, why St Mary is shedding tears! St Mary is lamenting, similar to
that of Rachel, because the leadership lost Christian virtues, defy the revealed
will of God, 1Cor 11:18, Jude 19, aversion to put an end to the century-old
infighting in the Holy Church. Failure to take the tears of St Mary as a warning
sign to the recalcitrant and ego-centric leadership who are poised to continue
the fight and division in the Church and not recognizing the need to repent is
all the more pitiable.
>

"God, as the eternal Mercy, 'will have all men to be saved, and to come into the
knowledge of the truth' (I Tim. 2:4). And we, the children of the merciful God,
also must wish with our whole hearts that all men, and even our enemies, should
be saved, and must care for this."

St. John of Kronstadt.

--------------------------------------------------------------

"Then Jonah prayed to the Lord his God from the fish's belly. And he said: I
cried out to the Lord because of my affliction, And He answered me. Out of the
belly of Sheol I cried, And You heard my voice."  Jonah 2:1-2

Dear All,

Let us come out from our normal way of pointing fingers to others ( a
sin nature inherited in human beings once Adam & eve fallen in the
garden of Aden) . Pls refer Genesis 3- 12 ( verses reflects indirectly
blaming God itself).

12 The man said, "The woman you put here with me-she gave me some fruit from the
tree, and I ate it

Let us think of the great agony Jesus Christ suffered for us...Just
imagine , in what condition the tongue sticks to the roof of the mouth
?. We need to remember the great pain rendered by Jesus Christ to all of the
mankind in our each day in our life. For salvation , we do not have any other
name in the world, only Jesus Christ.  Also, we do not have much time to blame
others, instead what we need is to help people from dark to the true light,
through God's verses and also basis on our life as the witness in any society
where we live.  If we carry the name as a Christian and following an evil life,
then certainly it is the right time reform ourselves and turn back to follow the
steps of Jesus Christ.

Read Galatians 5- and ascertain ourselves where we stand.

Psalsm 22 - verses,14-15

I am poured out like water,
and all my bones are out of joint.
My heart has turned to wax;
it has melted away within me.

15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
you lay me in the dust of death.

Thanks
Benny
Id 4190

Dear Rev. Fr. Dale Johnson,

I have also tried the website you provided but is not currently working. Please
provide an alternate arrangement for contributions.

Thank you
Binu Aramath
#902


> --- In SOCM-FORUM@yahoogroups.com, Rev. Fr. Dale A. Johnson wrote:
> >
> > Dear moderators,
> >
> > Saint Ephrem Mission, a division of Dominican Outreach is 40 miles from the
border of Haiti. I just returned from visiting sites to prepare for refugees.

Dear All
Satan has created a very deep problem for my mother in office & she is now under
suspension ,she is innocent, please pray for her.

Cijoy Varghese

Dear Moderators / Thomas / Binu,

For those who do not want to use PAYPAL, a check can be sent to Martha Johnson
PO Box 39 Ridgefield, Wa. 98642. Please note in memo section Saint Ephrem
Mission.

By the way I have Good News. Dr. Ilyas Gunduz and a dental team from Holland
will be here in the Dominican Republic on Sunday. They will treat 1500 poor
children, many of them will be Haitian. Dr. Gunduz is originally from Tur Abdn.
I am so thrilled as a priest who has been doing this lonely work for many years
among the poor to have a fellow Syriac Orthodox believer working with me this
week.

Remain in Peace
Father Dale A. Johnson


--- In SOCM-FORUM@yahoogroups.com, Dr. Thomas Joseph wrote:
>
> Barekhmor Rev. Fr. Dale Johnson,
>
> Thanks for the labor of love among the unfortunate victims of the earthquake.
It is heartening that there is a Syriac Orthodox mission that is helping the
Haitians in distress under your leadership and I hope that at least those of us
on this list in the neighborhood in the Americas rise to the occasion and offer
what we can to those suffering in one of the worst calamities man has seen in
recent times.
>

All UAE Sunday School Winter Camp was held on 22nd and 23rd January 2010 at St.
George JSO Simhasana Church, Al Ain. The theme of the camp was "New Life in
Christ". Classes on this theme were taken by Rev. Fr. Zacharia Alexander, the
Student Chaplain for Mar Thoma Church, U.A.E..   Mrs. Shiney Zacharia also took
classes on Examination Phobia of the young's.  Fr. Aji Mathew Karimpanackal, the
Vice President of MJSSA, UAE Chapter and Mr. James Varghese Markerayil, the
Secretary of MJSSA, UAE chapter made the necessary arrangements. Mr. Levi Luke
from Dubai Church conducted interesting variety games for the kids. Mr Chacko
Kurian was the Choir Master for the event. The Sunday School students from
various Jacobite churches including Abu Dhabi, Al Ain, Dubai, Sharjah, Ras Al
Khaima, Fujairah and Ruwais were participated in this camp. The students enjoyed
the camp, and had great fun and they were not in a mood to go back home. It was
a great blessing for all the Sunday school children in UAE.

With Prayers,

Fr. Mathew Karmpanackel (Ajiachen)

Photos could be download from following:

http://picasaweb.google.com/rengy65/UAESundaySchoolsWinterCampJan222010#

The Role of the Bishop of Rome in the Communion of the Church in the
First Millennium.

Joint Coordinating Committee for the Theological Dialogue between the
Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church

Aghios Nikolaos, Crete,
Greece, September 27 - October 4, 2008
(Text Now Released for the First Time, 23 January 2010)

Introduction

1. In the Ravenna document, "The Ecclesiological and Canonical Consequences of
the Sacramental Nature of the Church - Ecclesial Communion, Conciliarity and
Authority", Catholics and Orthodox acknowledge the inseparable link between
conciliarity and primacy at all levels of the life of the Church: "Primacy and
conciliarity are mutually  interdependent. That is why primacy at the different
levels of the life of  the Church, local, regional and universal, must always be
considered in the context of conciliarity, and conciliarity likewise in the
context of primacy" (Ravenna document, n. 43). They also agree that "in the
canonical order (taxis) witnessed by the ancient Church", which was "recognised
by all in the era of the undivided Church", "Rome, as the Church that "presides
in love" according to the phrase of St Ignatius of Antioch, occupied the first
place in the taxis, and that the bishop of Rome was therefore the protos among
the patriarchs' (nn. 40, 41). The document refers to the active role and
prerogatives of the bishop of Rome as "protos among the patriarchs', "protos of
the bishops of the major Sees' (nn. 41, 42, 44), and it concludes that "the role
of the bishop of Rome in the communion of all the Churches' must be 'studied in
greater depth". "What is the specific function of the bishop of the "first
see" in an ecclesiology of koinonia?" (n. 45)

For the full text
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1341814?eng=y

COLOMBO, SRILANKA: WCC conference on 'Christian Self Understanding in the
context of Buddhism' held here on December 2009. WCC Moderator for Ecumenism and
Metropolitan for Niranam Diocese and UK of Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church, Dr.
Mor Coorilos Geevarghese was the moderator.

View Photos
http://malankarasyriacvoice.com/Albums/WCCChristianSelfUnderstandinginthecontext\
ofBuddhism/index.html

"...the Scriptures possess inexhaustible grace. But if we are able to pluck
anything profitable from outside sources, there is nothing to forbid that. Let
us become tried money-dealers, heaping up the true and pure gold and discarding
the spurious. Let us keep the fairest sayings but let us throw to the dogs
absurd gods and strange myths..."

St. John of Damascus.

--------------------------------------------------------------

"I acknowledged my sin to You, And my iniquity I have not hidden. I said, I will
confess my transgressions to the Lord, And You forgave the iniquity of my sin." 
Psalms 32:5

New Metropolitan for Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church will be consecrated on Feb
01, Monday at Puthencuriz Very Rev. Ramban Geevarghese Thengumtharayil is the
Metropolitan Designate.

PUTHENCURIZ: H.H Patriarch Ignatius Zakka I gave approval to ordain Very Rev.
Ramban Geevarghese Thengumtharayil as the new metropolitan of Holy Jacobite
Syrian Orthodox Church, as per the recommendation of the Holy Episcopal Synod in
Malankara. Very Rev. Ramban works as the Church Managing Committee Member,
Director of Mor Gregorian Centre, Keekkozhur, Superior of St. Antony's Mount
Moriya Ashram, Ranni. Very Rev. Ramban is the vicar of St. Mary's JSO Cathedral,
Pathanamthitta.

Viswasa Samrakshakan Special Edition
http://www.malankarasyriacvoice.com/VS/thengumtharayil.rambachan.ordination.pdf

Dear All:

I hope you all are doing well by the grace of God. As you know, the St. Ephrem
Universal Syriac Orthodox Medical Mission/SEUSOMM is the official social service
ministry of our Holy Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch, and it is directly under
the supremacy of the Holy Patriarch of Antioch. We are in action to collecting
funds and organizing some other services for the benefit of the victims in the
devastated Haiti. The conscience of humanity is again touched and challenging by
this calamity after the Tzunami of 2005. The situation is pathetic, and it would
be appropriate that all the efforts should be made to raise funds and pool
resources to help out these kind of people expeditetly. Although the world
attention is focused on them, as Christians we should join in this massive
relief work along with other agencies. The Executive Board of SEUSOMM is urging
all the faithful of our Holy Syriac Orthodox Church and other interested donors
for their earnest contributions from either the Archdiocese, parish or personal
level as soon as possible.  We would make sure that the funds and the resources
must be better used for the victims. You may send the contributions for this
noble cause to its central office:

Archbishop Mor  Clemis Eugene Kaplan
SEUSOMM President
417 E. Fairmount Rd.,
Burbank, California 91501

Tel:  818-845-5089
Fax: 818-953-7203
Emai: morclemis@...

If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Respectfully in the ministry of the Lord,
Father Babu Peringol
Secretary General, SEUSOMM
Tel: (405) 824-0961
Email: babuachan@...

Dear All,

I had sent a posting to the Orthodox forum about the relatioship bwtween MOSC
and the East Syrian church, of whom MOSC claims as the forefathers of Malankara
Sabha, but the moderators of that forum sunk the messsage. Now I am posting the
same in this form and expect those Orthodox people who read SOCM forum might
response to this message. The message is given below

(Quote)

"Many people in this forum(ICON) as well as in other Orthodox pblication have
written that during the pre-1653 (Koonan Kurishu Satyam) period Malanakra Church
had been followed the relationship with the East Syrian Church established by
St. Thomas, which is now known as Assyrian Church of the East and Chaldean
Syrian Church in India. The Patriarch and all other bishops of the Assyrian
Church(East Syrian Church) were in India in last week and  had a global synod in
Trichur. But neither the Assyrian Patriarc or any other bishop visited 
Devalokam nor MOSC leadership officially met them. There was no official
communication so far, why didn't they meet,
if MOSC is a desendant of the Assyrian Churh there should have been a
reciprocal visits.  Where is the so called "unity in Orthodox communion"? Is it
the purported relationship of Malankara Sabha and East Syrian Church is just to
negate the tradition of Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch?".

(unquote)

J M. Paul
#1040

Mor Osthatheos Issac and Mor Philoxenos Zacharias celebrated Holy Qurbono at St.
Mark's Monastery (Sehion Malika), Jerusalem.

JERUSALEM: Metropolitans Their Graces Mor Osthatheos Issac and Mor Philoxenos
Zacharias celebrated Holy Qurbono at St. Mark's Monastery here. Earlier Mor
Severios Malke Murad, Patriarchal Vicar of Jerusalem
gave a warm welcome to the metropolitans and delegation. Later on Jan 28th, the
38th Birth Day of Mor Philoxenos Zacharias was celebrated at Nile River, Egypt.

The delegation includes Very Rev. Sleeba Kattumaangattu Cor Episcopa,
Ardhiklo De Etho Youfadyokhono Commander Santhosh John.

View Photos
http://www.malankarasyriacvoice.com/Albums/StMarksMonasteryJanuary2010/index.htm\
l

"...every word of Scripture is beyond reproach. The appearance of contradiction
is due to our ignorance. We ought not to find fault with the Scriptures, but to
the limit of our capacity we should attend to them as they are, and not as we
would like them to be..."

St. John of Damascus.

--------------------------------------------------------------

"I called on the Lord in distress; The Lord answered me and set me in a broad
place."  Psalms 118:5

Great Lent  - Relaxation and reduction of the number of days of fasting is
withdrawn by His Holiness Patriarch Ignatius Zakka I Iwas through Apostolic Bull
E/209 dated 19 December 2009 as per the request of Holy Episcopal Synod of
Malankara.

Apostolic Bull
http://malankarasyriacvoice.com/Kalpana/greatlent.apostolicbull.pdf

Radio Malankara and Malankara Vision will be telecasting the Bishop Ordination
of Very Rev. Ramban Geevarghese Thengumtharayil From Puthencuriz St. Athanasius
Cathedral on Monday 01 February 2010 at 08:00 AM (IST)

The live audio broadcasting can be heard in " Radio Malankara" at
http://www.radiomalankara.com
The live video broadcasting can be viewed in " Malankara Vision" at
http://www.malankaravision.com

Official press release of Ordination from Holy Episcopal Synod secretary H.E Mor
Gregorios Joseph.
http://malankarasyriacvoice.com/News/thengumtharayil.consecration.pressrelease.p\
df

Tuned in and be blessed
SOCM Moderators

-- DEAR FRIENDS,

1] We have seen messages and postings regarding Judgement by First Additional
District Judge ,Ernakulam, in Palakuzha church case, in the forum of our Sister
Church.[ Malankara Orthodox Church]. It will seem as if it is the end of the
world as far as the litigation of that Parish is concerned.

2] It is the trial court's view without considering important Constitutional
questions raised before the Judge. The judge did not enter any conclusions on
the Constitutional issues raised before her.IT IS A VERY ORDINARY JUDGEMENT BY A
VERY ORDINARY JUDGE.

3] The said judgement was immediately challenged by the Jacobite Church members
of Palakuzha Church who were the defendants therein. The number of the Appeal is
RFA 38 OF 2010[ REGULAR FIRST APPEAL.]*The entire judgement has ****been
**stayed by the Honorable High Court of Kerala. ****

4] I am enclosing herewith the Appeal Memorandum of the said Appeal for the
information of all concerned ****including members of the MALANKARA ORTHODOX
CHURCH.****
=====================================================================
**** BEFORE THE HONORABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM
R.F .A  NO      38    OF 2010

[ Challenging the judgment dated 16.1.2010 in O.S No 50 of 2003 of the
First Additional District Court, Ernakulam]

BETWEEN
APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS

[1] ST;John’s Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church,[Kappil Pally], Palakuzha Village,
Muvattupuzha,

[2] Fr Varghese Edumariyil, aged 60,Edumariyil House, Mekkadampu,
Muvattupuzha,

[3]  Scariah, aged 61,  son of Varghes, residing at Kallanayil House,
Moongamkunnu, Palakuzha,

[4] Abraham Avirah, Son of Avirah, aged 55, Avalumthadathil, Karimpana
[PO], Palakuzha

VS

RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS

[1] Fr Shibu John,S/o Kuriakose Paily,aged 36,claiming to be vicar,
ST;John’s  Orthodox Church, Palakuzha

[2]   John Thomas,son of Thomas, aged 74, Kusumakunnu, Kulirankal,
Palakuzha,

[3] T.T Paulose, son of Thomas, aged 51, Tholanikunnel, Palakuzha

Notice and processes on the Appellants may be served on their Counsel MR P .J
Philip, Advocate, 55/2519, Chilavannoor Road, Kochi-682020

Notice and processes on the respondents may be served on the respondents in the
above address or on their counsel as and when engaged

MEMORANDUM OF FIRST APPEAL UNDER ORDER XLI RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 96 OF THE
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE BY THE APPELLANTS CHALLENGING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE
DATED 16.1.2010 IN O.S NO 50 OF 2003 OF THE FIRST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT,
ERNAKULAM.

[1] The Appellants, the defendants in O.S No 50 of 2003 of the First
Additional District Court, Ernakulam,were sued by the respondents herein for a
decree of declaration that the first Appellant Church is to be managed and
administered by the 1934, Constitution of Malankara Orthodox Church and for
consequential reliefs following therefrom. Sanction under Section 92 of the Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908, was obtained by the respondents/plaintiffs for
instituting the suit,

[2]   The reliefs asked for in the suit are as follows, viz;

‘[a] A decree of declaration that 1st defendant church, its
three chapels and properties are to be administered and managed by 1934,
Constitution,

[b] A decree removing defendants 3 and 4 as trustees of 1
st defendant church;

[c] Pass a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants 3
and 4 from functioning as trustees of the 1stdefendant church,

[d] A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants 2 to
4 or any body claiming under them from bringing any Vicar/priest to 1st
defendant church or its chapels for Holy Services or any other religious or
spiritual functions other than those appointed by Metropolitan of Kandanad
Diocese East in accordance with 1934, Constitution

[e] decree of permanent injunction restraining the 2nd defendant from
discharging the duties of Vicar/priest of 1st defendant church,

[f] A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants 2 to 4
or any body claiming under them from causing any let or hindrance or any kind of
obstruction to 1st plaintiff in convening the pothuyogam of 1st defendant church
and conducting election to managing committee and lay trustees in accordance
with the 1934, Constitution,----

[3] There was an earlier suit, O.S No 166 of 1977 of the same Court, between the
representatives of the two rival groups[ originally filed as O.S No 17/1977 of
the Munsiff Court, Muvattupuzha] . The second Appellant herein was the
Additional fifth defendant therein. The plaint in that suit was marked as
Exhibit B-24 in this suit. The reliefs were the following, viz;

‘ A] Declaring that the plaint Palakuzha St John’s Church also called Kappil
Church and cemetery and its assets scheduled hereinbelow are to be administered
in all matters spiritual and temporal under the Episcopal authority of Moran Mar
Basselios Mar Thoma Mathews I, Catholicos and Malankara Metropolitan and the
Kandanad Diocesan metropolitan Joseph Mar Pakkomios and whomsoever may succeed
them in office under the Constitution governing the Malankara Orthodox Syrian
Church and that the right to appoint Vicar and priests for the said church is
vested in them,

B] Restraining by permanent injunction the 3rd and 4th defendants or any other
religious dignitary not appointed or functioning under the said Mar Thoma
Mathews I Catholicos and MalankaraMetropolitan and metropolitan Joseph Mar
Pakkomios and whomsoever may succeed in their office under the 1934,
Constitution of Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church,from entering, officiating or
anyway interfering in any matter or religious worship and administration of the
plaint church, cemetery, chapels, crosses and institutions scheduled
hereinbelow;---------‘

[4] During the pendency of the suit ,O.S No 166 of 1977 in the court below,
interim orders were passed, in IA 196 of 1987 , allowing both the rival factions
in the parish to conduct religious services on alternate weeks. It was found
that no relief whatsoever was asked for against defendants 1 and 2 who were
admittedly the trustees.It was found that the suit has abated due to death of
defendants 3 and 4. The judgment became final.The Appellants did not prevent the
conduct of services in the first Appellant Church by the respondent’s section
even though the Suit instituted for exclusive control of the church was
dismissed by B-26 judgement,

[5] O S No 50 of 2003 was instituted thereafter after obtaining sanction under
Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for reliefs similar to O S No
166 of 1977 [ B 24 suit] , styled ingenuously in a different manner. Written
Statement was filed contending inter alia that the suit is not maintainable,that
the judgement rendered in O.S No 166 of 1977 has become final,that the plaint
church by decisions taken in its Parish Assembly held on 30.6.2002 has decided
to join the Jacobite Syrian Christian Association under the spiritual Head of
the Syrian Church, that the metropolitan of the Malankara Orthodox Church has no
authority to appoint priests/vicars to the plaint church, that the object of
foundation of the plaint church was to have religious services conducted therein
by only those religious dignitaries who possess the spiritual grace emanating
from the Apostolic Throne of St Peter at Antioch through the Patriarch of
Antioch, that joining the Jacobite Syrian Christian Association is consistent
with the object of foundation of the first Appellant Church,that the Malankara
Orthodox Church is another unit of the Syrian Orthodox Church under the
Patriarch of Antioch and they have no exclusive rights over the plaint
church,that the plaint church have the fundamendal right under Article 19[1][c]
read with Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India to associate itself to
the Association of its choice to protect its object of foundation,that AIR 1995
SC 2001 ,does not grant any relief with respect to the plaint church and its
properties etc.

[6] Evidence was adduced by both the plaintiffs and defendants. The plaintiffs
examined two witnesses and marked Exhibit A 1 to   A 14.

The defendants/Appellants examined DW 1 to DW 4 and marked Exhibits B-1 to B-26.

After detailed argument and filing of Written Submissions spreading over a
period of one and half years, the court below has now decreed the suit allowing 
reliefs [b] to [f] by the impugned judgement . Aggrieved by the said judgement
the Appellants are preferring this Appeal on the following grounds among others,
viz;

GROUNDS

[1] The impugned judgement is incorrect, illegal, unconstitutional and is the
result of wrongful exercise of jurisdiction vested in the court below by law,

[2] The impugned judgement is grossly erroneous in excluding the majority of the
parishioners from the conduct of religious services and administration of the
first Appellant Church. It amounts to ousting the majority of the parishioners
from the plaint church,

[3] The impugned judgement has not followed the binding decisions of the
Honorable Supreme Court of India while deciding Issue No 1. The said decisions
are Pragdasji VS Ishwarlalbhai- AIR 1952 SC 143, Bishwanath VS Sri Thakur Radha
Ballabhji-AIR 1967 SC 1044, and Harendra Nath Vs Kaliram Ds-AIR1972 SC 246.It
was contended on the basis of these binding decisions that a declaratory relief
cannot be granted in a suit instituted under Section 92 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 and as such relief [a] in the suit is not grantable.

[4] The impugned judgement specifically holds at paragraph 8 that the first
relief [a] is outside the scope of S.92 CPC It should have been found that
reliefs [b] to [f] are consequential to relief [a] and, therefore, are not
liable to be granted in the absence of the declaratory relief prayed for as
relief[a]. The impugned judgement, having not granted relief [a], ought not to
have allowed the consequential reliefs [b] to [f]. This approach of the Court
below is fundamentally erroneous and, therefore,liable to be interfered with by
this Honorable Court.

[5] It should have been found that the cause of action in the present suit is
the claim by the first plaintiff to be the vicar. The earlier suit,O.S No 166 of
1977,was to establish the authority of the predecessor of the present first
plaintiff and his successors-in-office as Vicars of the plaint church. In both
the suits rights are claimed on the basis of 1934, Constitution. Since the
previous suit-OS No 166 of 1977 of this Court- was dismissed as abated by
Exhibit B -26 Judgement, this suit is barred under Order XXII Rule 9 of the Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908.

[6] It should have been found that defendants 1 and 2 in B-24 suit were the then
trustees and defendants 3 and 4 in the present suit are their
successors-in-office. The cause of action ,should have been found to be the
bundle of facts necessary to be established to get  the reliefs asked for in the
suit and not merely what is stated by the plaintiffs in the paragraph allotted
to describe the cause of action. The most essential fact for the same is the
claim of the plaintiffs in the two suits about the applicability of 1934,
Constitution. It should also have been found that the plaintiffs and defendants
in the present suit are successors-in-office of the plaintiffs and defendants in
O S No 166 of 1977-B 24 suit. At any rate both the parties in this suit claim
under the parties in B 24 suit which was dismissed as abated.

[7] It should have been found that the reliefs in the present suit is also
barred under Order 2 Rule 2 of CPC,1908.The plaintiffs in O S No 166 of 1977- B
24-omitted to sue defendants 1 and 2 in that suit for removing them and for
election of new trustees through the first plaintiff therein. The present suit
for such a relief is,therefore, barred under Order 2 Rule 2 ,CPC,1908.

8] It ought to have been found that the issue as to whether the plaint
church represented by the majority of its parishioners can opt to associate
itself with the Jacobite Syrian Christian Association in exercise of the
fundamendal right under Article 19[1][c] of the Constitution of India involves
interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution of India and it is a
substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution -the
determination of which is necessary for the disposal of the suit. It should, 
have been found that the court below has no jurisdiction to take a decision on
the said issue being barred under Article 228 of the Constitution of
India.Having found that it is necessary to decide the issue involving the
interpretation of Article 19[1][c] of the Constitution, the court below should
have referred the case to this Honorable Court-Ganga Pratap Singh VS Allahabad
Bank- AIR 1958 SC 293. The findings entered on issue Nos 2 to 4 are vitiated for
this reason alone,

[9] The impugned judgement has wrongly understood the history of the Church in
general at paragraphs 12 to 15 of the impugned judgement. The submission of the
defendants in this regard is not even referred to and the view point is only
that of the plaintiff’s faction.

[10] The impugned judgement is fundamentally erroneous in relying upon the
minority judgement rendered by Justice Sahai in AIR 1995 SC 2001 which does not
reflect the operative decision of the Apex Court, thus vitiating the judgement
as a whole. It should have been found that the Learned Judges of the Apex Court
have considered the conclusions of Justice Sahai as a minority view . This is
clear from the directions given to frame the decree in AIR 1997 SC 1035. Not a
single conclusion contained in Justice Sahai’s judgement is part of the decree
of the Supreme Court of India following the judgement reported in AIR 1995 SC
2001.

[11] It is submitted that the finding quoted at item [7] at page 20 of the
impugned judgement is contrary to the findings at paragraph 141, 142[4] of  AIR
1995 SC 2001 which alone is part of the decree.It is this decree which is sought
to be executed through E.P No 1 of 2009 in O.S No 4 of 1979 of this Honorable
Court,


[12] The finding at paragraph 15 that the Supreme Court of India did not find
that the churches are to be administered by 2002, Constitution, is absurd. AIR
1995 SC 2001 is dated 20TH of June,1995,

[13] The impugned judgement has interpreted the judgement reported in AIR 1995
SC 2001 wrongly .It should have been found that relief [a] of the suit finally
disposed off by AIR 1995 SC 2001 contain three parts ,VIZ;

[i] Declare that the Malankara Church is Episcopal, [ii] Declare that the
Malankara Church is not a union or federation of autonomous church
units,[iii] declare that the Malankara Church is governed in its
administration by the Constitution of the Malankara Church It is submitted that
the second part of this declaratory relief was not granted at all by the
judgement and decree of the Apex Court.This is clear from paragraph 141 which
finding was incorporated in the decree by order dated 5.2.1997-AIR 1997 SC 1035.

[14]It should have been found that AIR 1995 SC 2001 has not granted any
declaration affecting parish churches. No declaration that the properties of the
parish churches are vested in the Catholicos, Malankara Metropolitan, Diocesan
Metropolitan- authorities of the Malankara Association under the 1934,
Constitution.No declaration that the Church is Episcopal, if it means that it
gives the Catholicos / Malankara Metropolitan / Diocesan Metropolitan any title
to or any control over the properties and temporal affairs held by the parish
churches.The said power is restricted to the Common properties of the Malankara
Church only. This aspect of the Apex Court judgement is not considered and
followed by the impugned judgement,

[15] There is no declaration in AIR 1995 SC 2001that each church is a
constituent unit of the Malankara Church.Title to and control of the properties
of the parish churches is vested in its parishioners represented by the General
Body/ Parish Assembly which is found to be the final authority.

[16] The finding in AIR 1995 SC 2001,that the Malankara Church is Episcopal to
the extent it is declared in the 1934, Constitution can only mean that the
authorities of Malankara Association can exercise managerial activities over
those parish churches that voluntarily associate themselves to it and continue
as such. This does not give the said authorities any title to the said parish
churches.

[17] It is abundantly clear from the majority judgement in AIR 1995 SC
2001,that the Malankara Association is a voluntary Association with Individual
Parish Churches as its units-having voluntarily joined it and became members.
There is no direction/injunction in the judgement/decree of the Apex Court that
each parish church should continue as its members till eternity. Nothing
prevents them from opting out of the Malankara Association by decisions of its
parishioners as reflected in its parish assembly. These aspects are not referred
to or considered by the impugned judgement,

[18] Paragraph 4 of the Written Statement specifies the object of foundation of
the plaint church viz; for conducting religious services by only those religious
dignitaries who possess spiritual grace emanating from the Apostolic Throne of
St Peter at Antioch through the Patriarch of Antioch And All The East or his
authorized representatives.This is proved through Exhibits B-10, B-12 to  B 22
by DW 3  who was the trustee of the plaint church. .The existence of these
documents and its effect is not denied by the plaintiffs.The impugned judgement
does not apply its mind to these aspects .

[19] Exhibit B-1 ,Minutes of the Parish Assembly meeting dated 30.06 2002, is
not denied by the plaintiffs/respondents. It should have been found that it has
taken effect and the parishioners in general has accepted it. The question
whether the plaint church has the fundamendal right under Article 19 [1] [c] of
the Constitution of India as pleaded in the Written Statement is a substantial
question of law relating to the interpretation of the Constitution of India. In
such circumstances, Article 228 of the Constitution of India should have been
followed by the court below.

[20] 2009 [4] KLT 848= Ramlath Memorial Charitable Trust VS Peerukannu by His
Lordship Mr Justice S.S.Satheesachandran, has no application to the facts of
this case. In this case the suit is filed after obtaining sanction under Section
92 of C.P.C. It is admitted that the trust is a public religious trust having an
independent legal status. The decision  does not say that a suit with the main
relief being Declaration and the other reliefs are consequential to the said
relief can be maintained if the consequential reliefs taken independently will
fall under Section 92[1][a] to [f]. At any rate the binding decisions of the
Supreme Court of India are not considered in the said decision,VIZ Pragdasji VS
Ishwarlalbhai AIR 1952 SC 143Bishwanath VS Sri Thakur Radha Ballabhji-AIR 1967
SC 1044, AND Harendra Nath Vs Kaliram Ds AIR 1972 SC 246. The law declared by
the Apex Court is binding on the court below  and should have been followed.

[21] The judgement and orders of This Hon'ble Court in 1995 supp[4]: SCC286-AIR
1995 SC 2001,1996[10]SCC 470-AIR 1996 SC3121, 1997[8]SCC
614- AIR 1997 SC 1035,and orders dated 28.11.2001[2002[1] KLT 125[SC] and
12.7.2002 in Civil Appeal No 8185 of 2001 does not amount to an injunction
restraining  the  parish churches from dissociating from the Malankara
Association. The judgment and orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court does not take
away the fundamental rights  of the parish churches, guaranteed by the
Constitution of India. Every Parish Church is a juristic person having all the
rights of a citizen under Part III of the Indian Constitution. It may be seen
that the Church is a ‘juristic person’ as held by the Supreme Court of India in
Shriomani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee, Amritsar Versus Shri Som Nath Dass &
Ors. etc. —2000[4]SCC146. It is held as follows at paragraph 24;

‘An idol is a "Juristic Person" because it is adored after its consecration in a
temple. The offerings are made to an idol. The followers recognise an idol to be
symbol for God. Without the idol, the temple is only a building of mortar,
cement and bricks which has no sacredness or sanctity for adoration. Once
recognised as a "Juristic Person", the idol can hold property and gainfully
enlarge its coffers to maintain itself and use it for the benefit of its
followers. On the other hand in the case of mosque there can be no idol or any
images of worship, yet the mosque itself is conferred with the same sacredness
as temples with idol, based on faith and belief of its followers. Thus the case
of a temple without idol may be only brick, mortar cement but not the mosque.
Similar is the case with the Church. As we have said, each religion have
different nuclei, as per their faith and belief for treating any entity as a
unit’

[22] The Church being a juristic person have the right to exercise the
fundamental right to freedom of Association under Article 19[1][c] of the
Constitution of India.At any rate the rights of the parish churches are the
conglomeration of the rights of its parishioners which is reflected through the
decisions of its Parish Assembly where the majority decision prevails.

The title to and control of the properties of the parish churches are vested in
its parishioners who exercise the said right through decisions taken by the
majority, without violating the basic faith of the Syrian Christian Church. The
properties of the parish churches follow the majority of its parishioners.The
rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India cannot be taken away or
abridged by the Courts. Moreover, the Supreme Court of India cannot be said to
have or understood to have curbed,curtailed or taken away such rights,

[23] It is submitted that every Parish Church is part of the Syrian Orthodox
Church established and consecrated to maintain the faith of the faithful members
of the said sabha. It is subject to the Ecclesiastical Heriarchy accepting the
Apostolic Succession from the Apostolic Throne Of St: Peter at Antioch through
the Patriarch Of Antioch And All The East. Parishes are certainly congregations
of the members of the Sabha------The Syrian Orthodox Sabha under the Supreme
Spiritual Headship of the Patriarch of Antioch And All The East.By Malankara
Church is meant the Malankara Church Community consisting of parish churches
which were founded and dedicated as parish churches accepting the Apostolic
succession from the Apostolic Throne Of St: Peter at Antioch through the
Patriarch Of Antioch And All The East..A Parish Church, also have the very same
rights as its parishioners who are members of the Syrian Orthodox Church.

24] The Malankara Association was established in 1876 at Mulamthuruthy Synod by
the then Patriarch Of Antioch  as a accredited representative body of the then
existing Parish Churches Of the Syrian Church in Malankara commonly referred to
as Malankara Church. The Malankara Church is admittedly a division of the Syrian
church under the supreme spiritual headship of the Patriarch of Antioch.The
Malankara Association was an organization for the entire Syrian Christian
community in Malankara.The said Syrian Christian Community was comprised in a
total of 1064 churches in 1974 when the plaintiff’s group instituted the suit
that culminated in the judgement of The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India reported
in AIR 1995 SC 2001- 1995 SUPP: SCC 286.

[25] The Said Syrian Christian Community Constituting more than 1000
churches [ which is the Malankara Church] split into two groups after First Of
January, 1971 when the then Catholicos claimed that the Malankara Church is
totally independent[ autocephalous] and has divided off from the Syrian Church
under The Patriarch Of Antioch And All The East.The then Catholicos instituted
the suit, O.S No 4/1979 of this Honorable Court claiming interalia that each
parish church is a constituent unit of the Malankara Church under him to be
administered by the 1934, constitution framed by the Malankara Association in
1934.This defendant specifically contended therein that the Malankara Church is
a part of the Syrian Church and that it is only a union/federation of the Parish
Churches which in turn were established as Churches of the Syrian Christian
Sabha under the Spiritual Headship of the Patriarch Of Antioch. The declaration
asked for by the petitioner in the suit with respect to the parish churches were
not granted but rather specifically stated to be rejected.

[26].The defendants in the suit O S NO 4 OF 1979 Of High Court Of Kerala were
not sued as representatives of any of the parish churches. The several Parish
Churches filed applications to get themselves impleaded in that suit which were
rejected accepting the stand of the plaintiff therein that they are only asking
for a declaration of the supervisory and spiritual control over the ‘Church’.[
Please refer to Para 141 at page no 2070, left-hand column , of AIR 1995 SC
2001]. The plaintiffs therein and others under him claimed the said declaration
on the basis that they alone were elected by the Malankara Association.The
authorities of the Malankara Association can exercise powers only with respect
to the Syrian Christian Community that continue to be associated with it. Every
Syrian Christian in India[Malankara] has the fundamental rights guaranteed under
Articles 19[1[[c], 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution vested in them.The said
Syrian Christians has got the right to give effect to the said rights remaining
as parishioners of the parish churches in India which are consecrated and
dedicated accepting the faith of the Syrian Christian Church. They exercise
their rights qua the church building, the cemetery and other properties of the
Parish Churches in which they are the parishioners and in them alone the title
to the above indefeasibly vest.. A Parish Church cannot have rights separate
from the majority of its parishioners

[27] The judgement and decree of The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the suit
instituted by the Catholicos of the Malankara Orthodox Church does not amount to
an injunction restraining the defendants therein inclusive of these
defendants/Appellants from going out of the Malankara Association. It also does
not restrain any member of the Syrian Christian Community or its Parish Churches
from opting out of the Malankara Association in exercise of the right under
Article 19[1][c] of the Indian Constitution.The entire erstwhile Patriarch Group
of the Syrian Christians in  Malankara who alone constitute more than 800 parish
churches opted out of the Malankara church and its  Malankara Association by
unanimous decisions taken by them in duly constituted parish assembly meetings
in the said parish churches.By such decisions taken by the said Syrian
Christians of Malankara, the parish churches constituted by them also opt out of
the  Malankara church and Malankara association. They have not left the Syrian
Christian Sabha under the spiritual Headship of the Patriarch Of Antioch but on
the other hand continue as its integral unit and function under its Episcopal
authority subject to the Constitution of the Jacobite Syrian Christian
Association.It is a case of more than 800 churches out of a total of about 1500
churches carving out a separate division within the Syrian Orthodox Sabha by
name Jacobite Syrian Christian Church.The rest of the churches remain as
Malankara orthodox church which is also a division of the Syrian Orthodox Sabha.

[28] The hierarchy of authorities elected in accordance with the provisions of
1934, Constitution have no title to or control over the properties or temporal
affairs of the parish churches.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India held as follows at para 144, page Nos 2071 –
2072 of AIR 1995 SC 2001…… “ The situation resulting from the above summary of
the findings is that the situation obtaining on January 1 , 1971 (ie the day
after the election of Mathew Athanasius at the meeting of the Malankara
Association held in December 31, 1970, in accordance with the 1934,
Constitution),  Shall be deemed to be the position even today in all respects. 
It is after January 1,  1971, that there was fresh spurt of quarrel between the
two groups and the Patriarch and the Catholicos.  Any attempt to bring peace,
reconciliation and rapprochement between the two groups must take the said date
as the starting point………………. It is with reference to the said date that the
directions to be mentioned hereinafter are made with the hope that the said
measures will succeed in bringing about reconciliation between the two warring
groups and establish peace in Malankara Church which should be the desire of
every well meaning member of that church……….”

29] It is, therefore, clear that The Hon’ble Supreme Court was considering the
situation in the Malankara Church as on 01/01/’71 and thereafter when the suits
were filed.  At that time there was no decision by any section to form another
division in the Syrian Orthodox Sabha. It was a situation where the erstwhile
patriarch group claimed to be the real Malankara church. The finding by The
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that the 1934, Constitution also governs the
affairs of the parish churches and shall prevail etc are with respect to parish
churches in the Malankara church which were associated to the Malankara
Association as it stood on 01/01/’71. It is most humbly submitted that this does
not amount to an injunction restraining all parish churches preventing them from
opting out of the Malankara church and forming another division by name Jacobite
Syrian Christian Church in the Syrian Orthodox Sabha under the spiritual
Headship of the Patriarch of Antioch And All The East.  Such a contention, if
accepted, will be contrary to the  fundamental rights guaranteed by The Indian
Constitution under Articles 19 (1) ©, Article 26 read with Article 25, therein.

30]  Articles 19 (1) (c), 25 and 26 gives complete freedom to a section of  a
denomination to  form an Association within the same denomination without
violating its faith, and basic object of foundation(parishioners of more than
800 parish churches form such a section].  The faithful members of the said
parish churches continue as Syrian Christians in the Syrian church under the
Patriarch of Antioch And All The East and it is incorrect for the plaintiffs /
respondents to contend that they have joined another community and the impugned
judgement is wrong to find that the members of the Jacobite Church should go out
of the parish church.Ousting the majority of parishioners from the parish church
is not contemplated by AIR 1995 SC 2001 and subsequent orders and judgements,

31] The nature and character of the plaint  church as a parish church in the
Syrian Orthodox Church under the Spiritual Headship of His Holiness, The
Patriarch of Antioch has not been altered.  In fact  the plaint church was
established as a church in the Syrian Orthodox Sabha in Malankara. It always
remain as a constituent of the Syrian Orthodox church and serve as parish church
in the Syrian Orthodox Church for worship by members of the Syrian Christian
Community in Malankara . The formation of Jacobite Syrian Christian Church as a
Division in the Syrian Orthodox Sabha in India by Parish Churches, previously in
the Malankara church which is yet another Division within the same Syrian
Orthodox Sabha,  will not in any manner alter their nature and character as
parish churches in the Syrian Orthodox Sabha

32] The  parish churches who constituted themselves into the Jacobite Syrian
Christian Church with its Association does not claim to be independent of the
Syrian Orthodox Sabha but they remain as its division.They have separated from
the other division of the Syrian Orthodox Sabha, the Malankara Syrian Orthodox
Church.

33] The creation/establishment of the Malankara Association, the framing of the
1934, Constitution of the Malankara church etc are only for the management and
administration of the Syrian Christian Community in Malankara.  The said
Malankara Association itself was established in a meeting of the accredited
representatives of the then existing parish churches.  The said representatives
were elected by majority decision of the General Body Meetings of the said
parish churches.  It is most humbly submitted that if the elected
representatives of the parish churches can constitute the Malankara Association,
it can also opt out of the said Association and form another Association within
the Syrian Orthodox Saba. The 1934, Constitution cannot be construed as a
statute enacted by a legislative process nor can it have efficacy and legal
consequences as that would flow from the Constitution or a statute.These aspects
are not considered by the impugned judgement,

34] AIR 1959 SC 31 and AIR 1995 SC 2001 were only dealing with a situation
wherein a section continuing to remain as part of the Malankara Association
refuse to participate in its meeting and hold their own separate meetings
claiming to be the legally valid Malankara Association.  AIR 1959 SC 31 found
that the meeting held by one of the sections is the validly held meeting and the
decisions taken therein are  valid.  There was no occasion therein to consider
the effect of a substantial number of Syrian Christians constituting several
parish churches deciding to opt out of the Malankara Association and Malankara
church and creating another association and
division within the same sabha viz Syrian Orthodox Sabha.

[35]  The  judgement of The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has
categorically held that the Malankara church is a division of the Syrian Church
under The Patriarch and has rejected the stand of the plaintiffs that the
Malankara church is an “autocephalous” church.  The said judgement has also held
that title to and control over the properties of the parish churches are not
vested in the catholicos / malankara metropolitan / Diocesan metropolitan of the
Malankara church who are the authorities elected and appointed in accordance
with the provisions of the 1934, Constitution of the Malanara church.  It
naturally follows that the parishioners of the parish churches have the title to
and control over its properties.  In exercise of the said  right vested in them,
the parishioners of more than 800 parish churches have decided to secede the
said churches from Malankara church and to constitute themselves into another
Division named Jacobite Syrian Christian Church under the  Syrian Orthodox
ChurchExhibit B-1 proves that the plaint church has decided to Associate to the
Jacobite Syrian Christian Association.

36] .  There is no provision in the 1934, Constitution vesting the title to and
control over the properties of the parish churches in the spiritual and temporal
hierarchy contemplated by the provisions of the 1934, Constitution, nor can the
provisions thereof vest or create title forever in the said heriarchy.  It is,
therefore, clear that The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in its judgement,
decree and directions has not prevented the parish churches from constituting
themselves into another Division in The Syrian Orthodox Sabha under, The
Patriarch and thus opt out of the Malankara church which is another division of
the said Syrian Church.  This option exercised
by the parish churches including the plaint church on the basis of the
decisions taken in their respective General Body Meetings of its
parishioners in exercise of the fundamental rights under Article 19 (1) (c) and
Article 26 of the Indian Constitution as well as their rights as title holders
of the properties of the parish churches.  This is not inconsistent with the
declarations in the judgement of The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil
Appeal 4958- 4960 of 1990. The impugned judgement does not apply its mind to
these important legal and constitutional issues and is vitiated in toto.

[37] The assumption at paragraph 18 that the plaint church is to be
administered by the 1934, Constitution because the Catholicos Section have
included it in the list attached to the plaint in O.S No 4/1979 instituted by
them is incorrect. AIR 1995 SC 2001 has not held that the plaint church/First
Appellant is to be administered by the 1934, Constitution.

[38] The impugned judgement is wrong in assuming that the law of the land has
been violated by the defendants. Basic law of the land is the
Constitution of India and the decision of the Parish Assembly on 30.06.2002 to
join the Jacobite Association is consistent with the fundamendal rights
guaranteed under Article 19[1][c] of the Constitution of India. AIR 1995 SC 2001
cannot be interpreted in a manner that will run contrary to the provisions of
the Constitution of India,

[39] The finding that the so called “ auxiliary reliefs” to the main relief can
be granted without granting the main relief is fundamendally erroneous and the
impugned judgement is liable to be set aside,

For these and other reasons to be submitted at the time of final hearing,this
Honorable Court may be pleased to call for the records leading to the impugned
judgement in O.S No 50 of 2003 of the First
Additional District Court, Ernakulam, peruse them and be pleased to set aside
the same and dismiss the suit with costs.

Certified copy of the judgement in O S No 50 of 2003 is produced
herewith.

Jurisdictional value is below Rs 1,00,000/
Valuation as in the Court below  Rs 3500/
Court Fee paid Rs 140/

Dated this the 20th day of January, 2010
ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT


BEFORE THE HONORABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM
I. A.     NO         OF 2010
IN
R.F .A  NO          OF 2010
BETWEEN

St;John’s Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church,
Palakuzha & ors
Petitioners

VS

Fr Shibu John & ors
Respondents

AFFIDAVIT

I, Scariah, aged 61,  son of Varghes, residing at Kallanayil House,
Moongamkunnu, Palakuzha do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows, viz;

1] I am the third Appellant/third petitioner herein. I know the facts stated
herein. I am swearing this affidavit on behalf of the other
petitioners/Appellants also as instructed by them,

2] The Petitioners have today filed the Regular First Appeal challenging
judgement dated 16.1.2010 in O.S No 50 of 2003 of the First Additional District
Court, Ernakulam. On the grounds taken in the Appeal Memorandum,the
petitioners/Appellants are likely to succeed in the Appeal,

3] By reason of an order passed by the Court below in 1987, in IA 196 of 1987 in
O S No 166 of 1977 both the rival factions were conducting religious services in
the First Appellant Church on alternate weeks. The petitioners/Appellants are in
administration of the plaint church and its properties and this fact is admitted
in the plaint itself,

4] The earlier suit, O S No 166 of 1977, was dismissed by the Court
below by judgement dated 28.2.2003. The plaintiffs therein belonging to the
group of respondents herein, filed I A No 618 of 2003 in O.S No 166 of 1977 to
direct the parties to maintain the status quo as on the date of the said
judgement till the statutory appeal period is over after getting the certified
copy of the judgement. An order was passed by the court below on 6.3.2003
directing maintainance of status quo as it existed on the date of judgement
until the expiry of one week from the date of preparing the carbon copy of the
judgement. True copy of the order dated 6.3.2003 in I A No 618 of 2003 in O S No
166 of 1977 of the court below is annexed as Annexure P-1.


[5] Although the said order worked itself out, the petitioners herein
did not prevent the respondents section from continuing to conduct religious
services in the church. Accordingly it continued, although there was no interim
order in OS No 50 of 2003. This is admitted position,


[6] After the impugned judgement, petitioners filed IA 198/2010 , praying to
stay the operation of the judgement until copy of judgement is got and for one
week thereafter. It was rejected by order dated 19.1.2010 without following the
above order earlier passed. A true copy of the said order in IA No 198 of 2010
in O S No 50 of 2003 is annexed as Annexure P-2,

[7] The weekly turn for conduct of religious services by the respondent’s Group
will come to an end on 23rd of January-Saturday-,evening and immediately,
thereafter the turn of the petitioners group has to start. This practice has
been going on in the plaint church from 1983 onwards peacefully.The
administration is carried on by the present trustees who are successors in
office of defendants 3 & 4/Appellants 3&4 herein.

[8] It is submitted that it is only fair and just to allow the existing status
quo in the plaint church/first Appellant Church as on 15.1.2010 to be continued
until the final disposal of the above Appeal in the interest of justice. An
application for this relief is filed herewith, which may be allowed in the
interest of justice. Otherwise,the petitioners will be put to irreparable harm,
loss and injury

All the facts stated above bare true and correct to the
best of my knowledge and belief.

Dated this the 20th day of January,2010

DEPONENT

Solemnly affirmed and signed before me by the deponent who is
personally known to me in my office at Ernakulam, on this the 20th day of
January,2010

ADVOCATE

BEFORE THE HONORABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM
I. A.     NO         OF 2010
IN
R.F .A  NO          OF 2010

BETWEEN

PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS

[1] ST;John’s Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church,[Kappil Pally], Palakuzha Village,
Muvattupuzha,

[2] Fr Varghese Edumariyil, aged 60,Edumariyil House, Mekkadampu,
Muvattupuzha,

[3]  Scariah, aged 61,  son of Varghes, residing at Kallanayil House,
Moongamkunnu, Palakuzha,

[4] Abraham Avirah, Son of Avirah, aged 55, Avalumthadathil, Karimpana
[PO], Palakuzha

VS

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS

[1] Fr Shibu John,S/o Kuriakose Paily,aged 36,claiming to be vicar,
ST;John’s  Orthodox Church, Palakuzha

[2]   John Thomas,son of Thomas, aged 74, Kusumakunnu, Kulirankal,
Palakuzha,

[3] T.T Paulose, son of Thomas, aged 51, Tholanikunnel, Palakuzha

Application under Order 41 Rule 5[1] read with section 151 of C.P.C,1908

For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, this Honorable Court may
be pleased to direct maintenance of status quo as on 15.1.2010 with respect to
religious services and administration of the First Appellant Church/Plaint
Church until the final disposal of the above Regular First Appeal in the
interest of justice.

Dated this the 20th day of January, 2010
Advocate
BEFORE THE HONORABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM

R.F .A  NO          OF 2010
BETWEEN
St;John’s Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church,
Palakuzha & ors
Petitioners

VS

Fr Shibu John & ors
Respondents

SYNOPSIS

1]  This Regular First Appeal is instituted, challenging the judgement dated
16.1.2010 in O S No 50 of 2003 which effectively excludes the majority of the
parishioners from the plaint church. The impugned judgement, quite wrongly and
illegally have found that the petitioner’s group should be kept out of the
church,

[2] The impugned judgement specifically holds at paragraph 8 that the first
relief [a] is outside the scope of S.92 CPC. It should have been found that
reliefs [b] to [f] are consequential to relief [a] and, therefore, are not
liable to be granted in the absence of the declaratory relief prayed for as
relief[a]. The impugned judgement, having not granted relief [a], ought not to
have allowed the consequential reliefs [b] to [f]. This approach of the Court
below is fundamentally erroneous and, therefore,liable to be interfered with by
this Honorable Court.


[3] It should have been found that the cause of action in the present suit is
the claim by the first plaintiff to be the vicar. The earlier suit,O.S No 166 of
1977,was to establish the authority of the predecessor of the present first
plaintiff and his successors-in-office as Vicars of the plaint church.

In both the suits rights are claimed on the basis of 1934, Constitution. Since
the previous suit-O.S No 166 of 1977 of the Court below- was dismissed as abated
by Exhibit B -26 Judgement, this suit is barred under Order XXII Rule 9 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

[4] It should have been found that defendants 1 and 2 in B-24 suit were the then
trustees and defendants 3 and 4 in the present suit are their
successors-in-office. The cause of action ,should have been found to be the
bundle of facts necessary to be established to get  the reliefs asked for in the
suit and not merely what is stated by the plaintiffs in the paragraph allotted
to describe the cause of action. The most essential fact for the same is the
claim of the plaintiffs in the two suits about the applicability of 1934,
Constitution. It should also have been found that the plaintiffs
and defendants in the present suit are successors-in-office of the
plaintiffs and defendants in O S No 166 of 1977-B 24 suit. At any rate both the
parties in this suit claim under the parties in B 24 suit which was dismissed as
abated.

[5] It should have been found that the reliefs in the present suit are also
barred under Order 2 Rule 2 of CPC,1908.The plaintiffs in O S No 166 of 1977-B
24-omitted to sue defendants 1 and 2 in that suit for removing them and for
election of new trustees through the first plaintiff therein. The present suit
for such a relief is,therefore, barred under Order 2 Rule 2 ,CPC,1908

[6] It ought to have been found that the issue as to whether the plaint church
represented by the majority of its parishioners can opt to associate itself with
the Jacobite Syrian Christian Association in exercise of the fundamendal right
under Article 19[1][c] of the Constitution of India involves interpretation of
the provisions of the Constitution of India and it is a substantial question of
law as to the interpretation of the Constitution -the determination of which is
necessary for the disposal of the suit. It should,  have been found that the
court below has no jurisdiction to take a decision on the said issue being
barred under Article 228 of the Constitution of India.Having found that it is
necessary to decide the issue involving the interpretation of Article 19[1][c]
of the Constitution, the court below should have referred the case to this
Honorable Court-Ganga Pratap Singh VS Allahabad Bank- AIR 1958 SC 293. The
findings entered on issue Nos 2 to 4 are vitiated for this reason alone,

[7] The impugned judgement is fundamentally erroneous in relying upon the
minority judgement rendered by Justice Sahai in AIR 1995 SC 2001 which does not
reflect the operative decision of the Apex Court, thus vitiating the judgement
as a whole. It should have been found that the Learned Judges of the Apex Court
have considered the conclusions of Justice Sahai as a minority view . This is
clear from the directions given to frame the decree in AIR 1997 SC 1035. Not a
single conclusion contained in Justice Sahai’s judgement is part of the decree
of the Supreme Court of India following the judgement reported in AIR 1995 SC
2001

[8] The judgement and orders of This Hon'ble Court in 1995
supp[4]: SCC286-AIR 1995 SC 2001,1996[10]SCC 470-AIR 1996 SC3121, 1997[8]SCC
614- AIR 1997 SC 1035,and orders dated 28.11.2001[2002[1] KLT 125[SC] and
12.7.2002 in Civil Appeal No 8185 of 2001 does not amount to an injunction
restraining  the  parish churches from dissociating from the Malankara
Association. The judgment and orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court does not take
away the fundamental rights of the parish churches, guaranteed by the
Constitution of India. Every Parish Church is a juristic person having all the
rights of a citizen under Part III of the Indian Constitution. .It may be seen
that the Church is a ‘juristic person’ as held by the Supreme Court of India in
Shriomani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee, Amritsar Versus Shri Som Nath Dass &
Ors. etc. —2000[4]SCC146. It is held as follows at paragraph 24;

‘An idol is a "Juristic Person" because it is adored after its consecration in a
temple. The offerings are made to an idol. The followers recognise an idol to be
symbol for God. Without the idol, the temple is only a building of mortar,
cement and bricks which has no sacredness or sanctity for adoration. Once
recognised as a "Juristic Person", the idol can hold property and gainfully
enlarge its coffers to maintain itself and use it for the benefit of its
followers. On the other hand in the case of mosque there can be no idol or any
images of worship, yet the mosque itself is conferred with the same sacredness
as temples with idol, based on faith and belief of its followers. Thus the case
of a temple without idol may be only brick, mortar cement but not the mosque.
Similar is the case with the Church. As we have said, each religion have
different nuclei, as per their faith and belief for treating any entity as a
unit’

[9] The Church being a juristic person have the right to exercise the
fundamental right to freedom of Association under Article 19[1][c] of the
Constitution of India.At any rate the rights of the parish churches are the
conglomeration of the rights of its parishioners which is reflected through the
decisions of its Parish Assembly where the majority decision prevailsThe title
to and control of the properties of the parish churches are vested in its
parishioners who exercise the said right through decisions taken by the
majority, without violating the basic faith of the Syrian Christian Church. The
properties of the parish churches follow the majority of its parishioners.The
rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India cannot be taken away or
abridged by the Courts. Moreover, the Supreme Court of India cannot be said to
have or understood to have curbed,curtailed or taken away such rights,

[10] It is abundantly clear from the majority judgement in AIR 1995 SC
2001,that the Malankara Association is a voluntary Association with
Individual Parish Churches as its units-having voluntarily joined it and became
members. There is no direction/injunction in the judgement/decree of the Apex
Court that each parish church should continue as its members till eternity.
Nothing prevents them from opting out of the Malankara Association by decisions
of its parishioners as reflected in its parish assembly. These aspects are not
referred to or considered by the impugned judgement. At any rate, the court
below has no jurisdiction to decide Constitutional issues
arising in the suit, being specifically barred under Article 228 of the
Constitution of India,

[11] The finding that the so called “ auxiliary reliefs” to the main relief can
be granted without granting the main relief is fundamendally erroneous and the
impugned judgement is liable to be set aside.

Dated this the 20th day of January,2010

P J PHILIP
ADVOCATE

=============================================

Posted
ADVOCATE P J PHILIP,
MEMBER ID-1837

Now therefore, beloved, ask continually night and day that the blessings of my
fathers may come upon you, that the hosts of the angels may thus rejoice over
you in all things, and you may complete the rest of your days in all joy of
heart. For if a man attains to this measure, the joy of God will be with him
continually: henceforth he will not toil in any matter. For it is written, "The
light of the righteous is never put out" (Proverbs 13:9).
Ammonas

The Letters of Ammonas, successor of Saint Antony

Can anyone please let me know, in which service is the following hymn used:

Kelpin ithu jathikalellam
pavanamam thiru shabayodevam
chonne eshaya nibi mukhyan
unaruka nin shobha samagatamayi
nin manavalan mrithi rahitan

You can listen to and download the hymn from:

http://tinyurl.com/ydznzhn

Does anyone have the full lyrics of the hymn.

In Christ,
Mathew G M
# 0929

Dear moderator

Sorry,

But how it can be that the Pope is ther first among the Patriarchs, if in the
first great Christian Council were present more than 250 bishops form all Asia
and Africa and the Pope send only two priests?

Please, we must analyse historically the presence of the first bishops of the
Christian Church and their acts.

In the time of Ignatius the Iluminator, of Antioch, the Church was being yet
organized and there were many bishops acting locally.

It is with the first three great councils that Antioch and Alexandria gain
importance in Christian history.

Rome appears later in the roll of history, and no confusion must be made in
respect of the great thinkers fathers of the Church.

Nowadays due to religious persecutions and the dizimation of the Church in the
Middle East, Asia Minor and North Africa, and even Ethiopia, Rome gains
importance due to its liberty of action in the west world.

Please analise all the trouble that we had in the Middle East and Asia Minor and
compare nowadays our churches - Orthodox Church of Antioch or of Alexandria
(Coptic Orthodox) in the establishment of new communities in the West World such
as in Europe, USA, Canada, and even Latin America, and we will understand that
the first are those who suffered, were martirized, persecuted and by themselves
returned and had a great revival; and are also recognized by the university
masters as the eldest christians and that must thus be respected.

The above affirmation that the Pope is the first among the Patriachs, is
obviously of a converted Byzantine Orthodox into Catholic, what was common in
the past times.

Please remember what John Paul II said in his visit to Syria, to our Patriarch,
His Holiness Moran Mor Ignatius Zakai I, Iwas -  This is the real Patriarch of
Antioch! The real first throne of christendom (my complement)

The Church of Antioch is the only one that apears in the New Testament, in the
Acts of the Apostles. Rome only received a letter from Paul, and afterwards,
Paul the Architec of the Christian Church was killed there, as was also Ignatius
of Antioch and many other Christians that were imprisioned all over the Roman
Empire.

Now what we can say of Antioch, with Ignatius; or Adai in Irak..... We must
never forget that our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ spoke our language, the Holy
Language that only our Church uses till our days.

Why the Son of God didn't choose to speak the language of the Jews? Remember
that Peter was accused because he spoke like Jesus, the Aramaic Language, and
thus he denied Christ three times. Peter didn't speak like the Jews, he was a
Galilean...

Well Jesus could choose the Greek Language that was also well used in that
times, and was cultuated as the language of the learned men - The Great Library
of Alexandria - Musêion - yet existed in those times.

Why dind't He choose the Latin Language and appeared in Rome so that he could
establish his Church directly in Rome?

Why didn't He choose to appear in India or China where great civilizations
already existed?

Why humbly He was born in Bethlhem - Ephrata?

Really we need study our history, the Mesopotamian Antiquity where many people
already waited the comming of the Saviour in many different ancient religions...

About this last topic I sugest that our learned men and priests read the books
of Malfono Abrohom Gabriel Sowmy that already some of them ar scanned in the
site http://www.siriacaort-santamaria.org.br

Aniss Sowmy
Evangelist Deacon of the
Syrian Orthodox Church in São Paulo - Brasil

Radio Malankara and Malankara Vision started the live telecasting of Bishop
Ordination of Very Rev. Ramban Geevarghese Thengumtharayil From Puthencuriz St.
Athanasius Cathedral

The live audio broadcasting can be heard in " Radio Malankara" at
http://www.radiomalankara.com
The live video broadcasting can be viewed in " Malankara Vision" at
http://www.malankaravision.com

Tuned in and be blessed
SOCM Moderators

Ordination Prayer's First section started here at Patriarchal Center,
Puthencruz, Leaded by the Senoir Metrapolitian H.G. Abraham Mor Severios, in the
presence of His Beatitude, The Catholicose H.B.Baseliose Thomas I, and other
metrapolitian of the church....

For latst Photos
http://www.malankarasyriacvoice.com

or

http://picasaweb.google.com/reveeshmvarghese/Ordination_geevarghese_ramban#
----

-Team Malankaravision

Catholicose Aboon Mor Baselios Thomas I consecrated Very Rev. Ramban Geevarghese
Thengumtharayil with the name, " Mor Barnabas Geevarghese ” as the metropolitans
of Spiritual Organizations of the Malankara Jacobite Syrian Christian Church
under the Holy Apostolic See of Antioch and All the East.
-------------
Photos Updates
visit http://www.malankarasyriacvoice.com
or
http://picasaweb.google.com/reveeshmvarghese/Ordination_geevarghese_ramban#

Latest photos of ordination of Mor Barnabas Geevarghese

http://www.malankarasyriacvoice.com
or
http://picasaweb.google.com/reveeshmvarghese/New02#

Team Malankaravision