"In an ideal situation, the patriarch and HH Mathews
II should set up committees�����."
Rev Dn George Mathew(Digest no 693)
"Old habits die hard"
It seems Rev Dn have addressed HH The Patriarch as
"the patriarch" by mistake. (Probably its another
mistake that he have addressed IOC catholicose as "HH
Mathews II" in the same breath.)
Anyway iam sure that rev dn would not have done it on
purpose because there had been some long postings from
the dn earlier on the need to respect each others
It seems some people have got up from their sleep only
now to talk on the need to have unity among the two
Probably they are in the dark on the results of the
"dialogues" conducted earlier. I can point out atleast
20 peace initiatives which took place in the last
century. Starting from the peace initiatives by HH
Ignatious Elias the third at Kuruppampady, alwaye, and
panampady. Then there was the "Alwaye dialogue" later.
Then there was the "Chingavanam round table
conference", then there was the "palampadom
initiaive", to name only a few.
All of those efforts fell through because IOC was not
sincere in having peace.
In late seventees there was a peace initiative led by
the then Chief Minister of Kerala.It was decided by
the two factions to have a permanant settlement in the
presence of the Chief Minister.
But what happened??
IOC in the middle of the night changed their word
given to one of the most respected politicians ever
born in kerala.
When the other church leaders offered to mediate, it
was IOC which declined.
Any peace initiative taken during the course of the
last one century have fallen apart only because of the
stubborness of IOC.
For them "peace" means the unilateral acceptance of
their catholicose and 34 by the jacobites.
And every time their stuation is bad they start
chanting "peace", only to confuse the jacobites.
Any peace brokered with out attending to the "core
issues" will fall apart.
If we look into the basic differences in the
community, it centers around two points.
1) The role of HH the Patriarch in malankara.....We
believe that HH the Patriarch have the central role in
the affairs of malankara. HH The Patriarch can never
be tied down by any constitution. The extend of
spiritual power of HH the Patriarch will be decided
by the Holy See and not by anybody in malankara.
2)Independence of Parish Churches.... The parish
churches will be governed by the parishers. There can
be no "undue" interference from the diocese or the
church with regards to the affairs of the parish. The
ownership of the parish churches are with the
So if a settlement can be reached on the above two
then probably there is scope of finding that elusive
But IOC will never agree on the above.
Without accepting the above two there wont be any
settlement from the jacobite side.
And if by any chance there is a "forced" unity, it
wont last long.
We have the experience of 58, when IOC was not sincere
in the peace process. And peace in 58 was made without
addressing the core issues.
Early 59 saw the formation of "Antiocian Syrian
Movement", when it became clear to the jacobites that
IOC was not sincere on peace efforts. In no time the
movement had spread all along especially in the
northern dioceses. It was purely a lay organization
initially, but still it achieved its goals almost a
decade later. ( iam always proud that my grandfather
was one of the founder members of the movement)
So nothing can be achieved by mere lipservice on
"peace".or even by "writing letters" to bishops.
There should be a definite plan on the future course
without which there will be more confusions.
The time before the parumala association was the best.
But IOC shied away thinking that they will get
everything from supreme court.
PS: And dear Dn, one more doubt. Dont you see any role
for IOC in the peace process. If so, you should
definitly involve them also, atleast by writing in the
IOC forum. Try to speak to the IOC leadership. Militioses
and karakens will eat you alive.(but if your idea was only
to confuse jacobites,then best wishes)