Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Digest 1170/Paul Siniraj, Malanakra Sabha Missionary

Expand Messages
  • Raju Thaluvachira
    Glory to God Dearly beloved brothern, Thank you very much for the reply of resp, member Jose Kurian Puliyeril regarding the difference of Pastor and Priest.
    Message 1 of 272 , May 4 5:20 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Glory to God

      Dearly beloved brothern,

      Thank you very much for the reply of resp, member Jose Kurian Puliyeril
      regarding the difference of Pastor and Priest.

      Our Indian Orthodox Church has only one official missionary, ie Br. Paul Siniraj Recently there are many
      writings in this forum about the evangelical work of our Sabha Missionary. As far as I understand that Br. Paul Siniraj is a much learned man left everything in the cause of Lord Jesus and become a FULL TIME missionary, evangelist, prayer warrier, great writer etc. much better than many of our part-time priests. I hope the next Mg.Committee may consider this case also.. I am happy to read "Rev.Fr. Paul Siniraj" instead "Pastor Paul Siniraj".

      Pray for all ever & ever with love

      Raju Baby Thaluvachira- Mehsana.

      (PS: We all are knowing about the Dr. KP Yohannan become a Bishop directly without becoming a priest in CSI)
    • Thomas P
      I have few questions as a lay person and writing my opinion since our present reality is a system of election, a process which begins with people nominating
      Message 272 of 272 , Jun 14, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        I have few questions as a lay person and writing my opinion since our
        present reality is a system of election, a process which begins with
        people nominating candidates. Since the reality is a church level
        election, as the people of the Malankara Church we expect the process
        to happen in a fair and just way 'from the beginning'. Please
        consider this message in a positve sense, towards improvement.

        The four candidates declared as elected would be elected even with
        out a secret screening committee and the panel, because they were so
        obviously among the best seven! Congratulations!

        Most news reports mention that the candidates in the panel were
        elected, stressing the panel. But if we closely examine, it is clear
        that panel has no relevance in the existing system (i.e. the system
        according to the present constitution). Perhaps the only effect of
        the panel is to sideline some candidates using the members of the
        secret screening committee.

        If it is truly 'Vox Populi' (voice of the people), then people of the
        Malankara Church elected six candidates!

        The candidates who are fifth and sixth in the elected list were not
        in the managing committee list. One of them was totally ignored by
        the secret screening committee, yet accepted by the people
        through 'vox populi'. What does this prove?

        Few questions to all to consider.

        1. Since the secret screening committee and a panel by the managing
        committee is not in the constitution, why the Synod is allowing an
        unconstitutional method again and again?

        2. Is it fair to have a screening committee not visible to people?
        Why we need secret committee and secret processes here? All Church
        processes should be clearly visible to the people. Church
        is 'janakiyam' in nature. Even Holy Qurbana cannot be celebrated
        without the presence of ordinary lay people.

        3. If the system is election, then it should be pure election as
        suggested by Shri Raju Babu here in IOIF. Panel actually is about
        slidelining some candidates (in effect equal to Church level negative
        campaigning), i.e. not allowing people to make decision through
        freewill. The Church can teach tradition, which includes the
        teachings of the Church about qualities of a bishop. Then people
        decide through freewill. A secret screening is not needed in a fair
        system, if the system is based on church level election. The freewill
        of people should be respected. Even Orthodox theology teaches
        freewill.

        4. If the Synod allowed something not in the constitution (screening
        before election, allowing managing committee to publish a list based
        on screening, and promoting it through leading newspapers), which
        negatively affected the election, then the Holy Synod can also select
        seven based on majority received through 'vox populi'. This means
        that the Synod can accept the next three in elected Christophorus
        Ramban, Fr. Dr. M.O. John and Fr. M.S. Skariah. The first two already
        received the votes of people to be elected.

        5. An alternate system was proposed by Chor-episcopa V. Rev Kuriakose
        Thottupuram. Will the Church consider this report.
        http://orthodoxherald.com/current/editorial.html

        What can be done now?

        1. If a process not in the constitution was allowed before the
        election, then necessary allowances can be made after the election
        also by the Holy Synod towards electing seven as planned. This is one
        way to correct what happened now.

        2. In the future the Church can make amendments to the constitution
        or introduce a new method of electing bishops, so that from the
        beginning everything happens according to the guidelines of the
        constitution.

        What I wrote here is just my personal opinion as a lay person. No one
        asked me to write this, but thought of asking these questions to all
        to consider in the Church, since our present system is election
        (which we expect to happen in all fairness 'from the beginning').

        Thank you,
        Thomas
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.