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

Re: Easter Guidance..

Expand Messages
  • mathewgeo29
    Dear Ronnie, I may not have anything new to tell because the same points are being argued over and over again. I did nt find anything new in the points you put
    Message 1 of 47 , Jun 8, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Ronnie,

      I may not have anything new to tell because the same points are being
      argued over and over again. I did'nt find anything new in the points
      you put forward. So you will have to bear with me if some of what I
      write may seem repetitive.

      > Meddling is 1. Ordaining Bishops and Catholicose without the
      > approval of the Malankara Synod.

      Every Bishop who has been ordained in the Syrian Orthodox church had
      the Holy Synod's approval. Of course they did not have to campaign a
      lot for the same. They did not have to give newspaper advertisements
      and handbill campaigns. We are lucky to have none of our senior
      bishops to show favouritsm and promote their candidates. We still
      believe in the age old tradition that ' Pourohithyam is a gift of the
      Holy Spirit '. So far none of the actions of any of our Bishops has
      shown otherwise. Just look at the rousing reception they have got in
      the church and how well they have been accepted as their shepherds by
      the ordinary people. When there was a vacancy in one of the dioceses
      or one of the spiritual institutions within the church the candidates
      were selected and their names proposed to the Holy Patriarchate. The
      Patriarch has only acted upon this proposal and not taken any
      decision of his own. And ordination of Bishops to his church is fully
      within his rights as the supreme spiritual head of the church. How
      can you call this as meddling ?

      2. Entering in to MOSC territory
      > without invitation. Eg. You are living in France. Your father may
      be
      > living in Kerala. He is your father and have all right on you. But,
      > still he will come for your sons baptism when you invite him and
      > allow him to stay with you. Suppose your father is coming on a
      > treatment visa and stay with your enemy in France and steal your
      > child; you will call that father a thief. Right ??
      >

      That was a fine example put forth by you. This is one of the
      fundamental differences between IOC and SOC. While IOC says your
      father has to be invited to visit you, we believe that he as our
      father has full right to visit us as and when he wishes and more so
      it is his duty to visit his children regularly and care for them. Now
      the second part is a bit confusing. The Patriarch as our spiritual
      father came to visit us. He did not stay with any of our enemies. He
      stayed with us. He did not come on a treatment Visa as your church
      leaders may want you to believe ( I am not aware of any type of visa
      called treatment Visa issued by the India government ). He holds a
      Lebanese diplomtic passport and was using the privileges of a
      diplomatic passport. That was one of the reasons why he was welcomed
      as a state guest. He did not come and steal anything. Thiefs do not
      move around in a state governement vehicle escorted by the State
      police and ministers. Open up your eyes. I was one of those lucky
      people to witness the gathering at marine drive. Thieves do not
      address public gatherings.

      But I can give you some exapmles of thieves on MC road in
      Muvattupuzha and Mannuthy in Thrissur who ran away with the
      properties worth crores of rupees. Now that is what you call thieving
      right ?

      > The Patriarch arrived in 1873 by invitation of MOSC. In 1964 the
      > patriarch arrived upon invitation and chaired the Holy Synod.
      Nothing
      > has changed. I think we will still invite if the Syrian church
      stops
      > creating dissent in the Indian church.
      >

      In 1873 the initiative was from the Patriarchate and it was to give a
      structure and direction to otherwise disorganised Indian wing of the
      church. In 1964 again the initiative was from the Patriarchate and
      dont give into arguments that this was because we lost the case. The
      initiative had come right from the time HH Ignatios Yacoub III became
      the Patriarch and this was at a time the SOC was in a jubilent mood
      after securing a favourable court judgement. The Patriarch visited
      India three times after but I cannot recall one instance where some
      dissent has been created. For your information the dissent has always
      come from Malankara and never from the Patriarchate. This has been
      the case right from the time of Palakunnathu methran upto Mor Augen.


      > United church is still united. It did not split. A group of overly
      > ambitious people under the leadership of some people with high
      level
      > suicide tendency chose an uncertain path for themselves and formed
      a
      > new church and occupied some property of MOSC by force. They may
      > still keep those properties by force. I have no doubt about it.
      > But, the united church and association as established in the
      > Mulanthuruthi Synod will remain the same.

      I agree with you fully here. But you have to just change MOSC as
      MSOC. It is the ancient name of our church. And also they are not
      happy with the properties they occupy by force. So they have been
      filing cases for police protection to occupy other churches also by
      force. But God is great... these devious plans have clearly failed
      and the church is as strong as ever guided by His holy spirit.

      > A group called Knanaya church had separated. A group called
      > Simhasana churches separated from MOSC. Malankara Catholics
      > separated. Mar Thoma Church separated. All of them formed new
      > churches; some with foreign collaboration and some independent.

      Knanaya Church has never seperated other than that they are
      maintaining an identity of their own. Simhasana churches have never
      seperated. They had to form these churches to face the persecution
      and stealing of properties by the dissidents. Other churches I need
      not comment. But I can just say that reeth had its humble beginnings
      in the IOC's own backyard and the reasons for its birth if we go on
      to discuss may put IOC in a very embarassing situation.


      > You know Geo, there is an old saying in Malayalam " Makan
      > thannolamayikkazhinjal, than ennu vilickanam". Than means when your
      > son becomes as mature as you; you should consider him as a man; not
      > as a child.
      > MOSC has grown as a Man in all respect and grown faster and bigger
      > than the Syrian Church.
      >

      And once the son has grown faster and bigger than his father will his
      father lose his right over his son ? Will his father cease to exist
      as his father ? So then what can a fatherless son be called
      however big or great he may ?

      Prayers
      Geo Mathew
      Montpeiller, France
    • moscelder
      This is in response to Mathews mail. Sir the father of Malankara Church as of now spiritual and temporal is HH Catholicose Didymus I. None of the choices in
      Message 47 of 47 , Jun 14, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        This is in response to Mathews mail. Sir the father of Malankara
        Church as of now spiritual and temporal is HH Catholicose Didymus I.
        None of the choices in your mail has anything to do with Malankara
        Church. We are not an Idavaka Palli. We are the spiritual children of
        St.Thomas and have always been led by our own leaders. It is true
        that some foreigners were given hospitality, but that era is over.

        The Malankara church was never led by the Babylonian or Chaldean
        Patriarchs in the sense you are writing. We may have been in
        communion with them at some point of time. The church was forcibly
        led by the Pope of Rome and after him by the Patriarch of Antioch.

        If anyone disputes the Apostolic See of St.Thomas then they are not
        from Malankara. He/ She is not a spiritual child of St.Thomas.

        Finally I wish to conclude this discussion. No further mails on this
        topic shall be posted.

        Yrs
        Itoop

        -----------------------------Moderators Note--------------------------

        Kindly read the messages numbered #5558, #5565, # 5576 and #5599.
        MOSC wants to move ahead. Please pray that MOSC synod and Managing
        Committe will accept our Groups proposals and end this prolonged feud.

        Group Elder
        Owner MOSC forum
        -----------------------------Moderators Note--------------------------
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.