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

19354Re:A Metran Kakshi priest's ramblings

Expand Messages
  • Mathew G M
    Dec 13, 2010
      Dear Dipu,

      I am not worried about the Metran Kakshi's. They have to decide for themselves, what kind of relationship they want with the Patriarchate of Antioch and the rest of Oriental Orthodoxy. They are in a state of confusion, they want a relationship with the Patriarchate on the one hand and on the other hand accuses all the Patriarch's rigth from H.H Peter IV as greedy and power hungry. They want to be Oriental Orthodox, but at the same time they have no heistation to teach that the Malankara Church was Nestorian prior to the arrival of the Portuguese. They are even willing to accept Nestorian heresy to reject the historical connection with the Oriental Orthodox Patriarchate and the Maphrianate. This is something that they have to sort it out.

      However for us who has a relationship with Antioch, it needs to be clearly defined. You say that we are a diocese of the Syriac Orthodox Church. I have no problem accepting that fact, if we are treated like any other diocese of the Syriac Orthodox Church.

      1) How may people are there in the Diocese of Homs or the Diocese of Lebanon ? How many are there in Malanakra ? The ratio is 1:10

      2) So if Lebanon is a diocese, then Malankara can't be just one diocese. Each diocese of Malankara; namely Angamaly, Kandanad, Kochi, Niranam, Kollam, Thumpamon etc should be considered as dioceses of the Syriac Orthodox Church.

      3) If the Bishop of Lebanon can vote to elect and be eligible to become the Patriarch, then our Maphrian and other Bishops should also have the same eligibilty.

      As you can see we dont have that. So we are not really a diocese of the Syriac Church like Lebanon. We are different.

      We are a Church (not a diocese) under the Maphrian (Catholicose). We have a canonical and historical relationship with the Patriarchate of Antioch. So our Maphrian represents all of us and participates in the election of the Patriarch with no right to become the Patriarch himself. In the same way, when we elect our Mpahrian, the Syriac Bishops dont get to elect the Maphrian, however the Patriarch presides over the enthronement.

      This is why I said Malankara Church with a canonical relationship with the Patriarchate of Antioch. I would be happy to be 100% part of the Syriac Church as dioceses with the same privilages as Lebanon and Homs etc.

      In Christ,
      Mathew G M
      From the desk of moderators:
      The subject of "Why can not the "Catholicos" be elected as Patriarch?" debated in this forum many times. Please refer our FAQ section to clear your doubts on this subject.
    • Show all 11 messages in this topic