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

Re:Thrikkunnathu Seminary- Some realities

Expand Messages
  • Bibu Philip Matthew
    Dear All The news that High court has dismissed the case by IOC prohibiting Jacobites the real owner from entering seminary is most welcome. Court has given
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 28, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear All

      The news that High court has dismissed the case by IOC prohibiting Jacobites the real owner from entering seminary is most welcome. Court has given interim justice.

      As I told you earlier politicians and media has limit and they will stand neutral in public for votes and business, they cannot provide a solution ,only court can give us justice. I understand Jacobite Syrian church never want to drag it to court as a principle, that we Jacobites will not approach the court first, but IOC has taken it to court and have utterly failed in the case. This has given us a temporary legal solution and helped us.

      Trikkunath seminary belongs to Jacobite Syrian church and we have all legal documents to prove it ,silence is not an option when things are ill done,we should not be hesitant in approaching court for a noble cause, H.B.Catholicos Thomas-I should not feel bad in  approaching court to execute will of former Jacobite bishops if necessary to prove ownership legally. I repeat fighting for a noble cause is not a sin, for false prophets who violate Shalmootho ,will resist by all means. Similarly Jacobite church should get the control of Mor Athanasious High school in Nedumbassery as its real owner according to the registered will of Jacobite bishop Mor Gregorios Vayaliparambil is Jacobite Syrian Church .

      Vayaliparambil Itty Mathu was the treasurer in charge of Trikkunath seminary construction in 1903 and Mor Gregorios Vayaliparambil inaugurated the seminary in 1957 with new building,we have long association with Jacobite church and seminary since its construction. Vayaliparambil Matthew Matthew, a government servant was the architect who supervised the construction of some new buildings in seminary and he was an adviser to St.Athanasious Paulose. We have built it for Jacobites Syrian Church using the money of Jacobites loyal to Holy throne of Antioch only and not for false bishops and trespassers.

      But if Jacobite church as the real owners should get permanent ownership, we have to make it a legal issue, by applying correct legal procedure and not a democratic issue which will lead to a law and order issue ultimately, giving upper hand to political leaders, who will always take a neutral stand as a popular way. Media also wants it to be a political issue,so that they can have debates which will be a good time pass for channel.

      Only a court can approve our ownership as the final authority and the only solution is to prove our ownership in a court, otherwise this issue will remain for ever though we will have right to enter church during annual feast,once a year. Our Church leaders should deal this, the legal way for a permanent real solution. Catholicos HB.Thomas-I and metropolitan of Angamaly has to realise that the only solution is by court and our reluctance in moving to court as a principle (this principle is good but by applying this principle we are in a way not claiming the ownership) will only create more and more law and order issue bringing disgrace to Christianity and Jacobite church. There will be pressure on us not to follow the legal way. If our intention is permanent ownership we must follow the legal way immediately.

      We are now following a policy of appeasement in a way by not going for the correct permanent solution. For the Jacobite masses entering the seminary once a year may be sufficient, but for real Jacobite they need a permanent solution. Otherwise Every January we have to claim ownersip, making it a law and order problem for entry.This is my personal opinion.

      Let The Truth Prevail.
      Bibu Philip Matthew
      Vayaliparambil Pynadath
      0074
    • Thomas Varghese
      Dear Johnson You may aware that there was an agreement between orthodox and Jacobites regarding the praying at the tombs on 2005. The agreement contains( I
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 28, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Johnson

        You may aware that there was an agreement between orthodox and
        Jacobites regarding the praying at the tombs on 2005.

        The agreement contains( I think, As per jacobite request) that no
        orthodox priest should offer "Dhoopam" at these three bishops tombs.

        Since orthodox church always was telling JSC to abide by these
        agreement, It will be very difficult to present the case further if
        they themselves contradicts this agreement.

        This is the simple reason.

        Thanking you

        Thomas
        #2316

        --- In SOCM-FORUM@yahoogroups.com, Johnson wrote:
        >
        > >
        > 1) All the time IOC say that both the Seminary and the Church belong
        > to them. To support this claim they say and declare that the fathers
        > who are entombed there are their fathers or common fathers. They
        > celebrate the feast of these fathers !!!. Then when the Govt.who are
        > the current custodian of the closed church allowed 4 hours to them
        > to conduct intercessionary prayers at these father's tombs why they
        > did not enter the holy tomb's place and conducted dhoopa prarthana?.
        > Instead they prayed at the tomb of their bishop, Mar Theophelos
        only"
      • Mathew
        Mr.Johnson, You may not aware that there was an agreement between the Orthodox brothers and us regarding the seminary issue which is to keep the status
        Message 3 of 8 , Jan 29, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Mr.Johnson,

          You may not aware that there was an agreement between the
          Orthodox brothers and us regarding the seminary issue which is to
          keep the status quo(existing state)is only a temperory agreement. The
          status quo has to be kept untill the court has finalized the issue
          regarding the ownership of the seminary and the church.But there is a
          question still existing. Was this agreement approved by any legal
          system in India after that? Because there was a court order during
          the close out of the church that the status quo has to be kept. That
          was in 1977(I believe)The status quo in 1977 means the manager is our
          beloved Mannaraprayil Achen and the Angamaly Metropolitan is
          Philipose Mar theophilose Thirumeny. Was this status quo kept by our
          beloved brothers in Orthodox Church and its respectful leaders? But
          after 1977 Status Quo has been repeatedly violated.

          1) Orthodox brothers restructure the seminary building and start a chapel inside the seminary

          2) Beloved Mannaraprayil Achen has been removed and beloved Bobby Varghese Achen replaced him

          3) Theophilose thirumeny entered in to eternal life and beloved Paulose Mor Pakomiose replaced him

          4) All the bishops and the regular priests of the orthodox church
          entering in to the seminary SINCE 1977 and denying our bishops and
          priests to enter in to the seminary

          5) Beloved Orthodox leaders kept forty people inside the seminary and named as 'THEOLOGY STUDENTS'.

          Who is violating the status quo? If there is a decision to keep the
          status quo, it has to be the state of 1977 that Mannaraprayil achen
          as the manager of the church and immediate discontinuation of the
          chapel functioning inside the seminary untill the court has to
          finalize the issue. There is no other bishops or priests can enter in
          to the church or seminary from both factions untill the problem is
          resolved through the legal system. Untill then let Mannaraprayil Achen (Media Maniach) take the control.

          I request the attorney who is representing our church in the court
          has to read all these postings also. Thank you,

          Mathew
          Oklahoma
          ========================
          From the desk of the Moderator:

          Please sign your messages with member ID. If not having a member ID, please send your details including contact number to moderators
          (SOCM-FORUM-owner@yahoogroups.com)and obtain a member ID BEFORE POSTING ANY MORE MESSAGES in SOCM. Thank you for your cooperation.
        • Johnson
          Dear Mr. Thomas V Shlomo I am not aware of any such agreement which is binding to the faithful. But I have a question. If your leadership is honouring a so
          Message 4 of 8 , Jan 30, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Mr. Thomas V

            Shlomo

            I am not aware of any such agreement which is binding to the
            faithful. But I have a question. If your leadership is honouring a
            so called agreement of 2005 why can't you honour the probated wills
            of founders and former custodians of the said Church and Seminary
            which are legally standing?.

            The real and true fact is that your leadership do not have any
            respect to these saintly fathers but only want to hold the property
            by any means. You may not understand the tears of true followers of
            them because you always believe in money and might. Otherwise why
            Dr. Theophilos was buried there against his wishes?. Didn't you read
            the letter written by your own Mannaraprayil Cori?. So please don't
            try to be smart. Smartness in this world may not stand correct on
            the day of last judgement if you believe in His Words.
            Try to think rationally and in the light of Holy Scripture.

            In his love

            Johnson
            #2335

            --- In SOCM-FORUM@yahoogroups.com, Thomas Varghese wrote:
            >
            > Dear Johnson
            >
            > You may aware that there was an agreement between orthodox and
            > Jacobites regarding the praying at the tombs on 2005.
            >
          • Sbu Alias
            Brother, Johnson the said agreement itself is a clear indication of the true nature of IOC. Had they considered the entombed fathers as theirs, they would not
            Message 5 of 8 , Feb 1, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Brother, Johnson the said agreement itself is a clear indication of the true nature of IOC. Had they considered the entombed fathers as theirs, they would not have conceeded to such an aggreement. They need their brothers / neighbours property. For that they will come to any agreement as a Mammon worshipper is not afraid of God.

              Sbu Alias
              3323
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.