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

Re: [SOCM-FORUM] Re: Independence Craze

Expand Messages
  • dipu george
    thomas_pa1 wrote: As a layman, I understand this differently. Your faction denies the priesthood of St. Thomas by quoting Bible. Ancient
    Message 1 of 13 , Jan 30, 2002
    • 0 Attachment

      thomas_pa1 wrote:

      As a layman, I understand this differently. Your faction
      denies the priesthood of St. Thomas by quoting Bible.
      Ancient accounts (our local tradition, ancient Coptic
      Synaxis etc.) prove beyond doubt that the Apostle ordained priests
      and bishops in India.

      poor thomas...he says he respects malankara malpan but not his works !! there is no concrete evidence to prove st thomas had come to malankara.

      its is only a strong legend .atleast the saints relics are in mosul.....a part of which was brought to devalokam...on which is written " this was brought by HG augen from the "orthodox church " at mosul" !!!! no mention of the syrian in the syrian �orthodox church at mosul !!!....indeed the contemptuous attitude of the metran faction has to be mentioned here.

      �This means complete priesthood of the Apostle.

      the bible itself says that st thomas never recieved priesthood ....... why are you trying to break the umblical chord .....what are your intentions mr thomas!!??� guess u r trying to cock up a new history by cozzying up to the greeks and copts . good luck to you and your faction.


      So we have two teachings in our church. Awgen Bava was a firm
      believer (he was a great theological scholar and guru of
      Malankara Malpan) in priesthood of the Apostle.

      the malankara malpan's� humbleness lay in the fact that he presented his translation of the bible before�HG augen's�tomb at devalokam and his words were�� "knowing them (the metran� faction ) even if they throw away away this bible and do whatever they can to it i will always remember my guru who taught me the rudiments of this holy language".it was the devils team at work in devalokam which brought confusion between augen and the patriach.

      nobody can forget how the metran faction made him abjucate his title ( for reasons now unfolding before our own eyes )while his predecessor had the title till his death...what is the role of the catholicose....temporal powers ...thats all......the last days of his successor is worth remembering....he got the same treatment he meted out ot augen......the very hand which pulled the ring from augengs finger� became paralysed !!!! one wonders how he got to put his fingerprint on his will transfering the title to mathews2.......we dont need such catholicoses mr thomas...so lay off ..get lost

      so there mr thomas� i wonder how the metran faction will tolerate this bible which has the seal of antioch and forewords by our bishops in it ...knowing u people ....u might have desecrated it� ...and thrown it away.

      �If we don't
      preserve this tradition, no other Christian community will
      do this for us. So we are Malankara Orthodox Syrian Christians.

      we do preserve our tradition.....u people dont !! and we are the malankara� syrian orthodox church and not the other way round

      isnt it stupidity...there is the syrian orthodox church.the coptic orthodox church.the greek orthodox,russian orthodox,armenian orthodox� u guys have malankara "orthodox syrian" instead �......



      regards

      dipu










      Do You Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Auctions Great stuff seeking new owners! Bid now!

    • daniel_reji
      ... Dear Brother Thomas P The article in Glastonbury Review is possibly by Abba Seraphim, bishop of the British Orthodox Church and relies heavily on Western
      Message 2 of 13 , Jan 30, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In SOCM-FORUM@y..., "thomas_pa1" <thomas_pa1@y...> wrote:

        > Each side has a story to tell aboutthis part of history.
        > Kindly read the following about how this happened:
        > http://www.uk-christian.net/boc/102f.shtml

        Dear Brother Thomas P

        The article in Glastonbury Review is possibly by Abba Seraphim,
        bishop of the British Orthodox Church and relies heavily on Western
        histories written by Catholics and Protestants who had their own
        agenda in the Middle East. The British Orthodox themselves for years
        had attempted to be in communion with the Syriac Orthodox until the
        mid 90s, when they joined the Copts.

        What is the point though? Is the claim that the history of the Syriac
        Orthodox Church is somehow tainted? I would be the last person to
        argue against that. From that perspective the entire history of the
        Christian Church be it in the East or the West is tainted and
        reflects human frailty and weakness, often at its worst. I would
        readily admit that the turn of the 20th century was probably the
        worst period in the history of the Syriac Orthodox Church. The
        Ottoman Empire exerted its heavy hand on the church and the spiritual
        life of the church under the subjugation of the Moslem empire had
        reached a low point. In those days, a Patriarch was the civil head of
        his community, the millet, and was even responsible for collecting
        taxes. He could be in that position only with the firman of the
        Caliph and the Caliph would give the firman only to someone who made
        a payment. This set the stage for corruption in the church. The
        tussle between Patriarch Abded Messiah and Patriarch Abdulla II
        happened during this time and was most unfortunate for the Syriac
        Orthodox Church. Vattasseril Mor Dionysius, who went to Patr. Abdulla
        for consecration as Metropolitan later took advantage of a
        disgruntled Abded Messiah and got him to consecrate a Catholicos.
        This was all during a time when the Syriac Orthodox in Turkey were
        under complete disarray and immediately later thousands of them were
        massacred by the Ottomans. Our people never once during all the
        centuries of our association extended a helping hand, but instead
        took advantage of the situation. Fortunately, with Patriarch Elias
        III, the church came under the spiritual guidance of one of the most
        devout leaders of modern times and ever since has made progress under
        the succeeding Patriarchs. To extrapolate the history of a few years
        around the turn of the 20th century and paint the entire history of
        the Syriac Church with a broad black brush is just malicious.

        Personally, I think that history, esp. in the context of the
        Malankara Church, is used as a weapon selectively when it suits a
        denomination's claim to antiquity. The Catholics claim that St.
        Thomas Christians were always Catholic and make tenuous arguments to
        support that. Malankara Orthodox claim historical independence, where
        as some people with extreme views in Jacobite faction claim that they were
        always under Antioch. None of these positions are close to the truth.
        Even accounts of a single incident widely vary. For e.g., Catholics
        claim that in Koonen Kurishu Sathyam, people took an oath only
        against the Jesuits, the Indian Orthodox claim that they took an oath
        of independence, where as Jacobite faction claims that they took an
        oath to be under Antioch. I think the reality was closer to rejecting
        the Roman yoke, but it is hard to tell. The fact of the matter is
        that even if historians or archaeologists were to come up with
        evidence to support any of the statements, it doesn't make even a bit
        of a difference in the positions of the denominations. When history
        becomes inconvenient, it is conveniently forgotten.

        My point is that arguments based on history have little bearing on
        the current situation. If the different factions were to rise above
        the mean spirited struggle over money and power, focus on the will of
        God and attempt to resolve differences amicably in a Christian
        spirit, unity is possible. Hatred, even when justified by historical
        reasons, will never lead to Christian unity. If anyone thinks that I
        am going to be swayed away from the church that is the source of my
        spiritual heritage because of the actions of isolated people in its
        history, they are totally mistaken.

        In Our Lord's Love
        Thomas Daniel (Reji)
      • thomas_pa1
        ... This is absolutely not true. Malankara church did help Anthioc materially, buy gifting gold, money etc. So, the claim that we didn t help at all is not
        Message 3 of 13 , Jan 30, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In SOCM-FORUM@y..., "daniel_reji" <daniel_reji@h...> wrote:
          > Our people never once during all the
          > centuries of our association extended a helping hand, but instead
          > took advantage of the situation.

          This is absolutely not true. Malankara church did help Anthioc
          materially, buy gifting gold, money etc. So, the claim that
          we didn't help at all is not true.


          > Personally, I think that history, esp. in the context of the
          > Malankara Church, is used as a weapon selectively when it suits a
          > denomination's claim to antiquity. The Catholics claim that St.
          > Thomas Christians were always Catholic and make tenuous arguments to
          > support that. Malankara Orthodox claim historical independence,
          where
          > as some people with extreme views in Jacobite faction claim that
          they were
          > always under Antioch. None of these positions are close to the
          truth.
          > Even accounts of a single incident widely vary. For e.g., Catholics
          > claim that in Koonen Kurishu Sathyam, people took an oath only
          > against the Jesuits, the Indian Orthodox claim that they took an
          oath
          > of independence, where as Jacobite faction claims that they took an
          > oath to be under Antioch. I think the reality was closer to
          rejecting
          > the Roman yoke, but it is hard to tell.


          You are right.


          Peace to you.
          -Thomas


          > In Our Lord's Love
          > Thomas Daniel (Reji)
        • thomas_pa1
          ... Unfortunately this is what the RSS is teaching today. They teach exactly the same quoting Rome. Aim of Rome was absolute control over properties of
          Message 4 of 13 , Jan 30, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In SOCM-FORUM@y..., dipu george <dipu_george@y...> wrote:

            Dipu says:
            >!! there is no concrete evidence to prove st thomas had come to
            >malankara.
            >

            Unfortunately this is what the RSS is teaching today. They teach
            exactly the same quoting Rome. Aim of Rome was absolute control
            over properties of Malankara Nazranis. We resisted this in history.

            So, your plan is to change our tradition. Coptic Orthodox church
            is also an ancient church which gave many important saints.
            We can even say that we have our present confession of faith
            because of them. The Coptic church records in her Synaxarium
            that St. Thomas indeed came to India and ordained bishop.

            So there is no confusion about our local tradition. Awgen Bava
            was very strong in his criticism of Anthioc, when Anthioc sent
            a official letter that St. Thomas lacks in priesthood.
            Awgen Bava was an ascetic and guru of many and did not carry
            anything with him. So let us stop accusing Indian fathers
            that they plan to take away our properties.

            We have our local tradition about St. Thomas. Only we can
            maintain that.

            It is true that, being away from Roman empire (Byzantium), our
            ancient Christian community did not develop the model of church
            administration developed within Byzantium (I mean Patriarchates).
            When the church was small and confined to Byzantium, ecumenical
            councils, after discussing essential matters of faith, also spent
            some time to solve administrative problems. This is how Patriarchates
            came in to existence. The core of Ecumenical councils is the
            faith. Administrative/ disciplinary matters undergo change with
            culture and growth of church. But faith will not change.

            For example, Rome is strict that a priest should not be ordained
            from married men. But Nicea teaches that a married person can be
            ordained. So, can we say that Rome strictly follows this disciplinary
            decision of Nicea? Today we are entering to more and more
            agreements with Rome.

            The model of Katholikkos developed outside Byzantium,
            especially in Armenia, Georgia, Persia etc. Even today head
            of Armenian and Georgian churches are called Katholikkos.

            Ethiopia had a different model.
            From ancient times they had the position of "Echege of the
            See of St. Tekle Haimanot". The highest native born clergyman
            of the Ethiopian Church was the Echege, who was the Abbot of the
            Monastery of Debre Libanos, founded in the 1100's by the
            Ethiopian saint Tekle Haimanot. I have been to Ethiopian parish and
            know how spiritual these people are. They remove shoes like us and
            prostrate before Icons. This "Echege" was the spiritual head of
            the church.

            Though this is an ancient church, they didn't develop the model of
            Patriarchate. That concept was introduced from Byzantine culture
            (through Alexandrian Coptic Orthodox church).
            This helped in giving a leadership to Geez/ Amharic speaking
            Ethiopian christians. They still remain the largest Christian
            country in the world. So a good administrative setup will only
            help a local church. But spiritually we are related to Anthioc
            (because of our historic relationship) and consider Patriarch higher
            in position that an Indian Katholikkos.

            In India, our ancient community had "Jathikku Karthavyan" who
            was the head of the church. Mar Thoma 1 was elevated by 12
            Indian priests. Then, adherents of Vatican wrote to Pope:
            "not only was Mar Thoma's ordination sacrilageous but that all his
            subsequent acts were null and void". Today also we hear people
            criticizing Malankara church this way.

            We need to develop a broader understanding of our ancient
            church and view our present problem in Malankara in this context.


            -T
          • John Philip
            Dear SOCM members, Earlier I have taken a vow to stop arguing with this Thomas_Pal of Methran kakshi sabha, but his nature is to continuously harass our
            Message 5 of 13 , Jan 30, 2002
            • 0 Attachment

              Dear SOCM members,

               

              Earlier I have taken a vow to stop arguing with this Thomas_Pal of  Methran kakshi sabha, but his nature is to continuously harass our Church.  So once again I am forced to react in our SOCM forum to upheld our Church. I know he will continue to go on arguing from the points I mention in this article and if he can’t, he will raise some other matters.  But still…....

               

              Now something about his argument. This Thomas_Pal said Catholioca is very sincere in accepting the Patriarch. Is that true ?  If so why Catholica Mathews II published in Manorama a quarter page advt. in March 2000 (just before the Patriarch’s arrival to Malankara in 2000), mentioning that our present Patriarch is not the Malankara Church’s head and he cannot accept H.H Patriarch since H.H is not the genuine Patriarch according to his Methran kaksi Sabha and so on.  But at some other times and more particularly after the latest verdict, he says some thing different.  Why the Catholicose changes his attitude in every moment like a Kerala politician ?    Does he have any intention to trap the poor Jacobites as in 1958 ? (Late Paulose Mor Gregorious of Methran kakshi sabha had already warned about this particular trap of Methran kaksi in a statement published on 20th June 1995 –Ref:- Mathrubhumi daily). 

               

              Personally I don’t know whether Catholicose is responsible for all his talks, may be some others are influencing him, may be some fanatics in Methran kakshi. So before preaching peace, let throw out these undesirable forces (who ever may be) from Methran kakshi, to bring real peace in Malankara.   Then surely this Church will be like, as it was in the time of Parumala Thirumeni.  Let us pray for that.

               

              Anyhow whatever we say, a real peace at the moment is very difficult. It is a known fact that there is a historical divide between the two Churches. It cannot be solved by force. It is only because of these, we the Jacobites are wishing to remain separate atleast for this generation, so that in future we both will be in an ecumenical spirit, such as now between Marthoma Church and both our Churches.

              John Philip




              Download exciting Logos, Picture Messages & Ringtones for your mobile phonenew
            • John Philip
              Dear SOCM Members, Recetly I have read a posting in this forum by one Thomas_Pal of Methran kakshi sabha, about the controversies of 1912, in which he said
              Message 6 of 13 , Jan 30, 2002
              • 0 Attachment

                 

                Dear SOCM Members,

                 

                Recetly I have read a posting in this forum by one Thomas_Pal of Methran kakshi sabha, about the controversies of 1912, in which he said that his sabha is still remembering the deposed Patriarch Abdul Mesiha etc.  For proving his arguements, he has given a link to the 'Syrian Orthodox Church history' quoted from a British Orthodox site.   Anyhow I am not going to use all the space for arguing that this is a intentionally manipulated article.  My request to every one like Thomas_Pal, is to read the true history of Malankara Church, instead of digging into the British Orthodox sites. Its better to read the history written by the Church’s scholars. Or it may be “His Story”, as said by one scholar. Atleast this Thomas_pal could have given a link to his sabha's site instead of British site. But unfortunately, his sabha's practise is to confuse others through such twistings and tactics.

                 

                Now about the British Orthodox site that Thomas_pal have mentioned; I think in all probability, some one from Methran kakshi sabha influences the article in this link; Otherwise the people of Coptic Church may not have any knowledge about this matter. I think one Fr. V C Samuel has some role in it. His book is mentioned in the reference section.  (See the end of the article - in the reference section  --- ."C. Samuel, Truth Triumphs, An account of the Life and Achievements of Malankara Metropolitan Vattasseril Geevarghese Mar Dionysius (1986).")

                 

                Earlier, in the end of another article about ‘Patriarch Mar Sevarious’ by the same British group, it is mentioned that the Fr. V C Samuel’s book about the Chalcedonian Synod will be reproduced soon by this British orthodox Church. And in many other Internet sites of this Church, they are quoting this Fr. V C Samuel again & again.

                 

                So with all the circumstantial evidences, I think this article which thomas-pal have mentioned, is reproduced with the help of this Achen who is a member of Methran Kakshi sabha.  If it is so, then I am not wondering in seeing a distorted history, such as that reproduced in that British orthodox Internet site.

                 

                 

                Now again I doubt whether this thomas_pal have any connection with this achen ?  I am a member of Indian orthodox forum. I have seen many postings by this thomas-pal quoting & promoting this VC Samuel achen. That’s why I doubt. 

                (Someone has enrolled me in that forum without my knowledge- I don’t have a practice to unnecessarily provocate others through their forums. Recently without my knowledge, again this particular forum has enrolled me in another email address --kjphilip3@... from Malankara Church.org. This way they may be able to claim that their forum has so much number of members etc, as is done by some media tycoons in kerala -----So my advice to the promoter of SOCM forum, you also please use this method to increase the number of members.   This way you can also popularise your forum, eventhough it is unethical.)

                 

                John Philip

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                We the jacobites are still saying 

                :

                > There is only one church and there only one leader for it.  That is

                the

                > Patriarch of Antioch.  First of  all you accept that.

                > If you and your leader - catholica will not accept the H.H. the

                patriarch we

                > are also not ready to accept your so called catholica.  Let us  go

                > independently.

                 

                I think from Kaatholikka Bava's side, he did his duty by

                sending a letter to H.H. Patriarch explaining the situation

                and accepting H.H. according to the consitution. So, we

                Malankara Church already accept H.H.

                 

                But I have a personal ambition as a layman to see H.H. revoking

                the agreement with RCC. This agreement will mislead many

                members of our Malankara Church. Already many are going

                and communing there.  This must be revoked.

                 

                Regarding establishement of Catholicosate in 1912, it was

                H.H. Abded Messiah who did this and H.H. is remembered

                every year. Later H.H. Patriarchs accepted this and

                our relationship with H.H. Patriarch of Anthioc is

                defined in the constitution.

                 

                Each side has a story to tell aboutthis part of history.

                Kindly read the following about how this happened:

                http://www.uk-christian.net/boc/102f.shtml

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

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                     We the jacobites are still saying 

                :

                > There is only one church and there only one leader for it.  That is

                the

                > Patriarch of Antioch.  First of  all you accept that.

                > If you and your leader - catholica will not accept the H.H. the

                patriarch we

                > are also not ready to accept your so called catholica.  Let us  go

                > independently.

                 

                I think from Kaatholikka Bava's side, he did his duty by

                sending a letter to H.H. Patriarch explaining the situation

                and accepting H.H. according to the consitution. So, we

                Malankara Church already accept H.H.

                 

                But I have a personal ambition as a layman to see H.H. revoking

                the agreement with RCC. This agreement will mislead many

                members of our Malankara Church. Already many are going

                and communing there.  This must be revoked.

                 

                Regarding establishement of Catholicosate in 1912, it was

                H.H. Abded Messiah who did this and H.H. is remembered

                every year. Later H.H. Patriarchs accepted this and

                our relationship with H.H. Patriarch of Anthioc is

                defined in the constitution.

                 

                Each side has a story to tell aboutthis part of history.

                Kindly read the following about how this happened:

                http://www.uk-christian.net/boc/102f.shtml

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

                 

                 




                Download exciting Logos, Picture Messages & Ringtones for your mobile phonenew
              • V Thomas
                Sir, I would like to throw some light on Rev(Dr.)V.C Samuel.He hail from Omallur.Joined the manjinikkara seminary in Omallur.He got the early training under
                Message 7 of 13 , Jan 31, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Sir,
                  I would like to throw some light on Rev(Dr.)V.C Samuel.He hail from Omallur.Joined the manjinikkara seminary in Omallur.He got the early training
                  under Yulios bhava the then represetative of Partiarch.He left the seminary  in some unpleasant manner after quarelling with Bava and later was a priest in chengalam pally at Kottayam(Jacobite church)..Later he was a priest in Bangalore also.He was one of the early PhD of our church.While at Banaglore  got married.He then moved onto Ethioia and worked many years there.The last years were at Bangalore.He also has taught in Pazhaya seminary,some time..
                  His marriage after becoming a priest was not welcome by many.He has written many articles on Marriage and celibacy.Brought in arguments that there were Bishops in our early church who were married.He went to Orthodox side.Initially he was accepted,there,well.They used his scholarly position to emaphasise the argument that ours was an independent church,from the begining..
                  I have few years of association with him.But while appreciating his  scholarship we had some arguments on the independence  of the church.
                  We held the argument that ,if we remove the Kuppayams of these independent indian bishops,  which we have inherited from Syrian orthdox church,
                   they are more or less  are like our sadhus.But he was holding the veiw that our relation with syria is only after 16th centuary,that too through Persia.
                  Another matter to be mentioned here is that H.G Paulose Mor Gregorios(Rev,Fr,Paul Vargese) was also at Ethiopia.He was also an accepted scholar,but there was contant enimity between them.Infact VCS was a critic of Thirumeni.Once he told us,Thirumeni has only show but not deep knowledge.But Dr.Paul Varghese achen was more popular among youth of that time.This as per VCS was cheap popularity.
                  Now there is an organisation supported by his fans(who has worked in Ethiopia  during his tenure there and few others.There may be few  migrants to  UK  also)) ,working from Pathanathitta  to make him great.They publish his articles and articles onhim.Their veiw is-
                  .1. VCS  was all time great scholar syrian orthdox group has seen.
                  2.It is because of his research the syrian orthox church is respected.now.Early churches were treating us  as monophysite and after his reaserch papers only the western churches realised our real position.
                  3.They have agenda also to hurt Jacobites in world forums.
                   
                  Reagrds
                  vmt
                   
                   
                   
                • dipu george
                  ... and thomas says Unfortunately this is what the RSS is teaching today. They teach exactly the same quoting Rome. Aim of Rome was absolute control over
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jan 31, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment

                      thomas_pa1 <thomas_pa1@...> wrote:

                    --- In SOCM-FORUM@y..., dipu george <dipu_george@y...> wrote:

                    Dipu says:
                    >!! there is no concrete evidence to prove st thomas had come to
                    >malankara.
                    >
                    and thomas says


                    Unfortunately this is what the RSS is teaching today. They teach
                    exactly the same quoting Rome. Aim of Rome was absolute control
                    over properties of Malankara Nazranis. We resisted this in history.

                     

                    .....well this what i have to say

                    .....the RSS is very proud of u guys!!! remember what sudarshan said of your faction and the marthoma church.!!! for us ...our patriach  ( and i hope yours if u believe in him)has said thus - love your country only then can u love this church- and we as obedient children under our holy father will obey his statement.

                    get lost mr thomas



                    So, your plan is to change our tradition. Coptic Orthodox church
                    is also an ancient church which gave many important saints. 
                    We can even say that we have our present confession of faith
                    because of them. The Coptic church records in her Synaxarium
                    that St. Thomas indeed came to India and ordained bishop.

                    2...at times u quote history and not traditions to suit ur view points.what are u trying to prove.

                    i can point out lots of mistakes in our legends and songs about the coming of st thomas!!!! thats why

                    all i am trying to say that here in the case of malankara it is because of tradition and traditon only that we can claim st thomas had come to india. india at that time comprised the whole of the indian subcontinent and not just malankara alone !! i hope u be careful in quoting augen because if u are at  fault in what u r saying then i pray that god forgive you !!! besides one need not guess the letters sent to antioch by devalokam (who had actually written it instead of HBaugen ). for that please read malankara malpan's sabha charithram for u would also read about HB augen's allegiance and statement about the holy syrian orthodox church.... how come his anniversary is commemorated with only a munninmel qurbana while that of his predecessor is celebrated by a pompous festivallasting three days !!!!!! u have villified that man of god not us...forcing him to abjucate his title while he was still  alive...thats the first in history of the tradition of catholicose!!!!

                    remember the age of his predecessor when he died !!!! this was needed for u couldnt digest the unification of this church...dont teach us crap mr thomas !!! this is what i meant by the diabolic attitudes of those fanatics at devalokam.



                    So there is no confusion about our local tradition. Awgen Bava
                    was very strong in his criticism of Anthioc, when Anthioc sent
                    a official letter that St. Thomas lacks in priesthood.
                    Awgen Bava was an ascetic and guru of many  and did not carry
                    anything with him.  So let us stop accusing Indian fathers
                    that they plan to take away our properties.

                    oh great !!! i believe u r trying to confer sainthood on your metran faction by saying this !!!

                    i pity your hollow hopes in this ....good luck to you ... pity u cant point out further scholars in your faction  mr thomas.... cause u dont have one....the only eligibility ur faction have is in fighting and cunningness.....

                     


                    It is true that, being away from Roman empire (Byzantium), our
                    ancient Christian community did not develop the model of church
                    administration developed within Byzantium (I mean Patriarchates).
                    When the church was small and confined to Byzantium, ecumenical
                    councils, after discussing essential matters of faith, also spent
                    some time to solve administrative problems. This is how Patriarchates
                    came in to existence. The core of Ecumenical councils is the
                    faith. Administrative/ disciplinary matters undergo change with
                    culture and growth of church. But faith will not change.

                    For example, Rome is strict that a priest should not be ordained
                    from married men. But Nicea teaches that a married person can be
                    ordained. So, can we say that Rome strictly follows this disciplinary
                    decision of Nicea?  Today we are entering to more and more
                    agreements with Rome.

                    3..  well rome did have married bishops atleast till the time of the rennaissance ....i dont know when they adopted celibacy for their priests

                    please mr thomas!! it would be nice if u leave this forum!!! go and start your factions forum and discuss these craps !!! we have our faith,our liturgy and traditions and culture to uphold.

                    u need to consider inventing your own faith and history to lay the foundation of your faction's church.

                    The model of Katholikkos developed outside Byzantium,
                    especially in Armenia, Georgia, Persia  etc. Even today head
                    of Armenian and Georgian churches are called Katholikkos.

                    great......i cant take this crap any longer........the title of katholicose ur present leader currently holds is holy for many holy saints once adorned it like the likes of Bar Hebraus...by ur catholicose actions it has only brought disrepute to that once holy name!!!!! atleast their catholicoses are called His Beatitudes ...i believe that title seems too lowly for ur faction catholicose who prides himself in signing as His Holiness mathews2 !!!!

                    Ethiopia had a different model.
                    From ancient times they had the position of "Echege of the
                    See of St. Tekle Haimanot". The highest native born clergyman
                    of the Ethiopian Church was the Echege, who was the Abbot of the
                    Monastery of Debre Libanos, founded in the 1100's by the
                    Ethiopian saint Tekle Haimanot. I have been to Ethiopian parish and
                    know how spiritual these people are. They remove shoes like us and
                    prostrate before Icons. This "Echege" was the spiritual head of
                    the church.

                    Though this is an ancient church, they didn't develop the model of
                    Patriarchate. That concept was introduced from Byzantine culture
                    (through Alexandrian Coptic Orthodox church).
                    This helped in giving a leadership to Geez/ Amharic speaking
                    Ethiopian christians. They still remain the largest Christian
                    country in the world. So a good administrative setup will only
                    help a local church. But spiritually we are related to Anthioc
                    (because of our historic relationship) and consider Patriarch higher
                    in position that an Indian Katholikkos.

                    In India, our ancient community had "Jathikku Karthavyan" who
                    was the head of the church. Mar Thoma 1 was elevated by 12
                    Indian priests. Then, adherents of Vatican wrote to Pope:
                    "not only was Mar Thoma's ordination sacrilageous but that all his
                    subsequent  acts were null and void". Today also we hear people
                    criticizing Malankara church this way.

                    ya ya ...the seeds of discontent!!!! one can read what u intend .....hmm...do i see the day when ur catholicose awards u with the title of chevalier.....for ur indepth analysis in discovering what we lacked in!!! the abbysinian church was under heresy ....whose concept of christ was what the muslims (muhammed's followers took refuge under this kingdom during their exile)believes in . it was the coptic church which through the grace of god removed that heresy from that church....hope ur faction wont be like the heretic abbysinian church then !!! good luck to you  


                    dipu george




                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    SOCM-FORUM-unsubscribe@egroups.com



                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                    Do You Yahoo!?
                    Yahoo! Auctions Great stuff seeking new owners! Bid now!

                  • V Thomas
                    Dear All, It is meaning less to talk of RSS whenever you have no argument. (In fact if orthodox fanatics can be there ,Hindu fanatics(RSS) also can be there .
                    Message 9 of 13 , Feb 12, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dear All,
                       
                      It is meaning less to talk of RSS  whenever you have no argument.
                      (In fact if orthodox fanatics can be there ,Hindu fanatics(RSS) also can be there .
                      They all do the same thing.Try to destroy others,.Rewrite history,etc.)
                      Dear Thomas_P,in fact , there is no proof in the scientific way.!
                      But we all accept  and believe that St.Thomas came to India and
                      converted the natives and Jews into Christianity,who were our forefathers.
                      So also we  understand  and  accept that St Peter was the leader of
                      Christ's disciples(from bible) and through him the church -priest hood lives.
                      (through his actions later).
                      Three  first synods are proven,matter.It shows clearly the ecclesiastical
                      powers of Patriarchs and bishops. 
                      First thing to Christian,is to accept Christ,his teachings ,his disciples their acts and teachings
                      and teachings of our forefathers.So accept Patriarch first!
                      It also a logical thing to say what we give can be taken back.by the owner.God has given us life
                      and he  takes  it back.  .It is logic.If Patriarch has power to give priest hood to
                      catholica, he has also power to take it back,if he is found undeserving.In that reasoning present
                      catholica  does not have priest hood.(pattathvam)This is what every Jacobite believe.
                      Is it clear?
                      As per science,the life came  on earth billions of years back.Human beings
                      took millions of years to develop to this status.They can carbon date fossils and say there is proof,.
                      But we christains do not  believe that.We accept Jesus,Bible and church.
                      One cannot travel in two boats at one time.If you are a syrian christain,the
                      our priest hood came from Patriarch.Long live HH Zakka I and long live
                      the Patriarchate!
                      Regards
                      vmt
                       
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 12:01 PM
                      Subject: Re: [SOCM-FORUM] Re: Independence Craze

                        thomas_pa1 <thomas_pa1@...> wrote:

                      --- In SOCM-FORUM@y..., dipu george

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