Suriani Christians were in a unique and anomalous situation in the 19th century. Divided among themselves into fractions, the Suriani Catholics remained unorganized, confused and manipulated. The majority of Suriani Christians, both Catholic and non-Catholic were in the states of Thiruvithamkore and Kochi. The Residents of the English government in Malabar were as a rule on good terms with the apostolic vicars and missionaries. Some of the documents of this time show that the English government in India granted financial help to the missionaries from 1799. (APF, SC 10 3, f.285). For the Suriani Catholics of Malabar, the early years of the 19th century were of disunity, digression, unsteadiness of governance and precariousness in ecclesiastical obedience. In seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Suriani Catholics had to undergo different phases of Padroado and Propaganda jurisdictions, sometimes under the former alone, or under the latter alone and at other times under both. In the last quarter of the eighteenth century the see of Kodungalloor was left vacant. Mar Joseph Cariattil was not fortunate enough to fulfill the long cherished wish of the Christians of Malabar due to his sudden death in Goa. Under the leadership of Gubernador Thomas Paremmakkal (1786-1799), all the Syrian Catholics would come together.
8.1. The Pandari Schism
In November 1796, the Christians of Malabar sent four representatives with the letter of their king Rama Rajah and of their clergy and the people to the Chaldean patriarch of Mosul, Joseph IV. The letter contained their grievances against the Carmelites and their request for a native bishop. Patriarch Joseph IV was dead already in 1791 and Mar John Hormez was the administrator of the Patriarchate. Having received the delegation from Malabar, Mar John wrote to Propaganda Fide on November 25, 1796. In his letter he showed no doubt regarding his right of jurisdiction over the Malabar Christians. In December Hormez wrote again to Rome. Without having obtained any answer from Rome, Mar John Hormez, after 16 months, decided to ordain Paul Pandari, one of the four from the deputation. Thus Mar Paul Pandari was consecrated bishop by Archbishop John. He was not ordained for Malabar but as a titular bishop for the monastery of St. Behnan, near Mosul. Pandari’s written profession of faith was then sent to Rome. After the consecration Pandari returned to Malabar. Mar Hormez’s letter reached Rome on March 17, 1797. On May 10, 1799 the Congregation sent him a reply expressing its regret on the distressing event of which Mar Hormez himself was the only author.
The Congregation stated that Mar John had no authority to consecrate a bishop for a nation which neither belonged to him nor was of his rite. Syrians of India, they concluded, depended immediately upon the Holy See and Mar John was asked to call back Pandari or suspend him from the ministry and from episcopal functions as long as he was not rectified by the Holy See. The Congregation wrote also to Msgr. Aloysius Mary, the apostolic vicar of Malabar that he might bring Pandari back to the obedience of the Holy See. Mar Hormez replied immediately explaining the circumstances in which he consecrated Pandari. On January 20, 1800 he wrote again to the Congregation two letters expressing sorrow rather than astonishment. Mar Hormez justified himself, saying that he thought it opportune to send a bishop to Malabar in the person of Pandari, but not with jurisdiction, just to help them in their despair, other wise they would have become heretics or idolaters. He held the view that the Congregation could not find fault with him because he consecrated Pandari only after waiting for a reply from Rome for one year and four months. He concluded that the Congregation did not want to answer nor to solve the problem. Finally respecting the order given to him, Mar Hormez agreed to call back Pandari
Mar Paul Pandari, titled Mar Abraham, reached Malabar in March 1798 and was, with the two Chaldean priests, welcomed by the people. Msgr. Aloysius Mary went to the ecclesiastical administrator Thomas Paremmakkal and inquired about Pandari. They endeavored to accept Pandari as a simple priest. At this time the Syrian Christians of the Archdiocese of Kodungalloor had no bishop to confer the sacraments of confirmation and ordination either in their diocese or in Kochi. So they turned to their own bishop who just came from Baghdad. The events took another turn when Thomas Paremmakkal died on March 19, 1799. Priests and two representatives from each parish met together [yogam] to decide on the future. They decided to elect one among the twelve priests [The yogam of February 2, 1784 decided that the twelve priests selected from among the Suriani priests should work for the spiritual good of the faithful and should live in those places designed by their ecclesiastical head; if any one of these dies, then the rest should select the twelfth one; the spogli should belong to this group and not to the family members of the deceased ones; …] Ukken Varghese (Kaliparambu), Thekkekara Chakkuriathu (Velianad), Pazhayattil Itticheriathu (Puthenchira), Cheramel Geevarghese (Chalakudi), Urumpathu Abraham (Angamaly), Thachil Abraham (Kuthiathodu), Kachappillil Ouseph (Chennamangalam), Muttanthottil Korathu (Pattamana Paravur),Kattakayam Abraham (Pala), Plathottathil Thoma (Anakkallu), Illikkal Punnus (Chunkam) & Thekkekkara Kunjicheriathu (Changanassery) were those twelve representatives. Accordingly, after the death of the gubernador, the twelve automatically took up the responsibility to elect one vicar general, and that in the person of Kattakayam Abraham Malpan. Documents differ regarding the how of the election. Bernard Thoma (Mar Thoma Christians, 231-232) basing on the local manuscripts wrote: Paul Pandari, with the advice of the 12 priests, elected one among them as the vicar general. The Apostolic vicar of Malabar, Msgr. Aloysius Mary wrote to the Congregation that convinced of the inability and insufficiency of Mar Pandari to govern the churches, those who met at Changanassery forced him to declare as the governor one of their important teachers called Abraham Malpan. At any rate, the rule of the archdiocese came into the hands of the illegitimate vicar general Abraham Malpan. Illegitimate because, the community had no right whatsoever to elect their vicar general.
On April 13, 1799 the representatives of the churches met in a church at Changanasery and recognized Mar Pandari as their bishop. They also presented some of their clerics to be ordained priest by him and he did so. Mar Paul Pandari, although an illegitimate bishop, could exercise the episcopal functions as he was supported by the new vicar general. Only a few Syrian Catholic churches declared formal obedience to the new vicar general and to Mar Paul Pandari, and slowly the number of churches which declared obedience increased, which came up to 29.
8.2. Reunion of Mar Dionysius I
An interesting event that happened at this time was the temporary reunion of Mar Dionysius I and his followers with the Catholic Church. We do not know whether the initiative was from the illegitimate bishop Mar Paul Pandari or from the unauthorized vicar general Kattakkayathil Abraham Malpan or from mar Dionysius himself. With the intention of reunion the representatives of the Jacobites headed by Mar Dionysius and the those of the Catholics, headed by Mar Pandari met in the Holy Cross Church at Alappuzha and signed an agreement on May 20, 1799. They came to the following conclusion:
Now we of both parties unitedly agree on oath to be united as were our forefathers, and to submit ourselves to the Holy Father the Pope, celebrating the mass, reciting the breviary, observing the fasts and other rites as they were prescribed by the Synod of Diamper and to inform the Holy Father the Pope accordingly, with a view to obtaining his permission to conduct all ceremonies according to the Syro-Chaldean rite of those who are in union with the Holy Roman Church. Moreover, we agree that those who accepted and at present retain the Jacobite creed and rites shall abjure them and make the profession of Faith prescribed by Pope Urban VIII for the Orientals and submit to the orders of His Holiness the Pope. …
Mar Dionysius with a few followers according to the prescribed formula which they already had prepared, on June 11, 1799, formally embraced the Catholic faith at St. Michael’s church, Thathampally, before bishop Pandari and declared the acceptance of the Synod of Diamper. Then Mar Pandari in the name of Archbishop Mar John Hormez, absolved Mar Dionysius from ecclesiastical censures. This was followed by a solemn Mass celebrated by the reunited prelate according to the rite prescribed by the Synod of Diamper. All this was concluded with a public document, rendering Mar Dionysius’ faction to pay a sum of 30,000 Rupees to the Thiruvithamkoor government, in case he might go against the decision. It was a general practice of the time in Malabar to pay a sum of money to the government when making public contracts [pecuniary sanction]. There is difference of opinion about the pecuniary sanction: Fr. Placid held, “Among other things, this condition has been the subject of special comment on the intention of Mar Dionysius I. Some say that the sum of money in question was a debt he had contracted with the Thiruvithamkoor government and that Thachil Mathu by his influence made the king condone the debt, declaring Mar Dionysius liable to pay it up only if he abandoned the Catholic Church. Others say that Mathu Thachil, after making Mar Dionysius a debtor, forced him to become a Catholic. Yet others say that the latter sought an opportunity to fish in troubled waters, hoping he could rule over the Catholic Syrians who were not then on good terms with their Latin authorities. (PODIPARA, The Efforts for Reunion, 92, See also KOLLAPARAMPIL, Mar Dionysius the Great, 186-187.) Whatever the case be, this reunion could be considered as the epilogue to all the reunion attempts of Dionysius I with the good intention. He had been working for not less than 35 long years for reunion. [For the reunion attempts of Mar Dionysius see, KOLLAPARAMPIL, Mar Dionysius the Great 151-184]. However this reunion was not a legitimate one since there was no legitimate Church authority behind it. After the formal reunion at Thathampally the pseudo vicar general with another Malpan came to the Apostolic vicar of Malabar Aloysius Mary, to inform him of the happenings and asked him to inform the Holy See. The apostolic vicar did not give ear to their request.
The Archbishop of Goa sent to Malabar Fr. Aloysius of St. Joseph de Remibar, a Franciscan, as gubernador of Kochi. He instructed the Syrians not to communicate with the schismatics adhering to the intruder bishop Pandari and the illegitimate vicar general Kattakayam. Rebimar, through the apostolic vicar of Malabar collected a list of priests from the Syrian Catholics. The list presented by the Syrians met at Holy Cross Church at Alappuzha, had the following names: Sankoorikal Geevarghese, Thottakattu Chacko Kuriathu, Thachil Abraham & Plathottathil Thomas. Sankoorikal Geevarghese [He had his studies in Propaganda] was appointed as the administrator of Kodungalloor. The appointment of a new vicar general left the pseudo vicar general no chance to remain in his office. This effected in Mar Pandari’s loosing his influence among the people. Mathu Tharakan fell into disgrace with the Thiruvithamkoor government. Thus one after another the supporters of Mar Dionysius lost their influential stands. Mar Dionysius could then understand that what he had accomplished at Thathampally had no meaning at all. He could not find any Latin authorities well-disposed to promote his cause. Keenly aware of his uncertain status and futile position, in December 1799 he reverted to Jacobite faith, after six months of Catholic life. He had to pay the government the accorded stipulation and before being reinstated in the former office, as a penance he had to celebrate 40 Masses at his own expense. Mar Dionysius eventually turned to the Church Missionary Society.
8.3. The Church Missionary Society
In 1806, an English clergyman Rev. Claudius Buchanan, who was chaplain of the English East India Company, visited Malabar. At the request of the British Resident, the Church Missionary Society sent Rev. Thomas Norton to Malabar in 1816. Benjamin Baily (1816), Joseph Fenn (1818) and Henry Baker (1819) were the first missionaries who worked among the Syrians. The relations between the Syrian Church and the missionaries began to fade due to many reasons. In spite of the material prosperity and cultural progress, the union of Jacobites with the Anglicans affected their faith badly even causing many splits in the community. With the Mavelikara Synod of 1836, the Jacobites dissolved all connections with the Church Mission. The Carmelite missionaries were on guard against the spread of Protestantism among the Suriani Catholics.
8.4. The Period after Schism
The new vicar General, Sankoorickal could get the support of the English resident at Kochi. As the English resident wrote to both the kings of Thiruvithamkoor and Kochi, the king of Kochi wrote to the new vicar general to stay in the church near to his palace, and to the Christians to take the new vicar general as their superior if they would like. During the Pandari schism the churches of the Suriani Christians were divided in three jurisdictions: Padroado, Propaganda and Chaldean. By this time the order from Propaganda Fide regarding Mar Pandari reached Malabar. The faithful were informed of the suspension of Mar Pandari. He then went to the vicar apostolic of Malabar and expressed his readiness to stay in the seminary for the Syrians. He then left to the mountains and later he was seen going from place to place to find a settlement. On July 5, 1800, the Thiruvithamkoor government announced the Royal declarations allowing the Syrian Catholics of Malabar to choose either Kodungalloor of Padroado or vicariate apostolic of Malabar under Propaganda. The Angamaly church with some other churches declared their allegiance to the apostolic vicar. That lead to the reestablishment of the system that prevailed before 1786, i.e., before the appointment of Mar Cariattil as archbishop of Kodungalloor for all the Syrians. This revived the inter-jurisdictional and intra-jurisdictional problems in Kodungallore and in Malabar vicariate. Although it was the right of the Syrian Catholics to be under their head in the see of Kodungalloor according to the age old tradition, Propaganda represented by the apostolic vicar Aloysius Mary wanted to take to his jurisdiction as many churches as possible. This lead to conflict between the vicar apostolic and the vicar general.
The general assembly of Propaganda Fide on March 30 and later on September 23, 1801 discussed the matter of Malabar. After discussions, the cardinals decided:1) To give faculty to Bishop Pandari to be absolved from the irregularity and to confirm approval, a cautela if he had incurred a suspension because of his acts; 2) To give faculty to Mar John to be absolved, a cautela, from the irregularity if incurred in his acts in the case of the jurisdiction over the Syro-Chaldeans of Malabar; 3) To give faculty to Mar John to depute Mar Iso’yahb Guriel, the bishop of Salsmat, as his vicar in Malabar with full jurisdiction over the Syro-Chaldean Catholics; and also in those dioceses of the Latin rite where the Latin prelates cannot exercise jurisdiction over the Syro-Chaldeans and 4) To depute the apostolic vicar of Bombay as visitor in Malabar with all the faculties. The report of the General Assembly of April 13, 1807, states that the ‘provisions’ taken in the General Assembly of September 23, 1801 over the Syro-Chaldeans of Malabar have not been executed. The documents speak little about the last days of Pandari. In March 1807, the Bombay apostolic vicar wrote about his departure from Bombay to Bassora and then to Mosul to his consecration.
8.5. Propaganda vs. Padroado
By January 1802, 37 Syrian churches came under the subjection of the apostolic vicar of which 10 were from the former schismatic faction. Though in 1803, Msgr. Raymond of St. Joseph OCD an Italian Carmelite was nominated as the successor of Aloysius Mary as vicar apostolic, he was consecrated only on January 3, 1808. During the time of Aloysius Mary, there were four missionaries, but when Msgr. Raymond took charge there was only one, Fr. Prosper, who was very new to the mission of Varapuzha. The years of Msgr. Raymond witnessed pitiable and rather scandalous events. It was decided to remove him for his inappropriate behaviour i.e.,
Immoderate use of wine, alienation from the religious practices and devotions, irreverence in performing the sacred functions of his pastoral office, the lewd way of behaviour in public with the youth and women, either Christians or gentiles…
Msgr. Raymond died on July 7, 1816, before the letter of his dismissal and the brief of appointment of Francis Xavier reached Malabar. From 1804 to 1817, the vast mission of Malabar was governed by only two missionaries. One among them was Fr. Prosper who was accused of immoral character and even apostasy and was forced to leave the house of Varapuzha. Fr. Francis Xavier declined to take up the responsibility as the apostolic vicar of Malabar and the apostolic vicar of Mogul, Bombay, Msgr. Peter Alcantara was in charge of the vicariate. In July 1818, Congregation decided to appoint Fr. Prendergast as the vicar apostolic of Malabar. Fr. Prendergast had so many qualifications in studies and knowledge in several languages and had virtues that would help him in the missionary work in Malabar. Rome’s satisfaction in the person of Prendergast and in his election as apostolic vicar of Malabar did not last long. He found himself out of place in Malabar. His fellow missionaries accused him of behaving in a manner unworthy of a bishop and inhuman and unjust towards others. In addition, he was found guilty of immorality. Propaganda, with the approval of the Pope appointed Msgr. Maurilius Stabililni, coadjutor of the apostolic vicar of Mogul to inquire about the accusations against Msgr. Prendergast. On receiving Msgr. Stabilini’s report from Malabar, the Congregation decreed on May 5, 1827 that Msgr. Prendergast be removed from the office. Msgr. Stabililni was made the interim apostolic vicar of Malabar. He too could not rise up to the expectations. The fishermen problem, the jurisdictional problem between the dioceses of Kodungalloor and Kochi and the apostolic vicariate of Malabar as well as the problems between himself and his vicar general, the sole missionary in Varapuzha and so on made him to wish to return to Europe. Propaganda decided to withdraw Stabilini in 1831 and to appoint Francis Xavier. Stabilini left Malabar in January 1833. When Francis Xavier reached Malabar there was only one missionary, Fr. Nicholas. (In buying and selling of Mass wine he used to make great profit. Conforming to the order of the Congregation he left for Bombay in 1834. In the same year two missionaries reached Malabar vicariate, and in 1836 two more reached there. Francis Xavier died in December 1844.
8.5.1. Padroado
(On August 4, 1600, the right of patronage over the archdiocese of Angamaly was granted to the Portuguese by Pope Clement VIII through the bull In Supremo.) The division among the Mar Thoma Christians due to the Latinization policy of the Portuguese and the double or triple jurisdiction over the same community are the consequent pitiable results of the Padroado in Malabar. The line of succession of Jesuit prelates continued till the appointment of the autochthonous archbishop Mar Cariattil in the See of Kodungalloor. After him no prelate either Portuguese or native ruled Kodungalloor. In the initial years of the 19th century Fr. Sankoorikal was the administrator of Kodungalloor followed by a series of Portuguese priests who were appointed governadors. A letter from the parish of Thalassery to Propaganda in 1836 says that “For the whole period of 60 years the above see [Kodungalloor] has been filled by certain regular priests appointed by the government of Portugal under the title of governors and who receive their jurisdiction from the metropolitan of Goa.” All these appointments were nominal and provisional, with the result that the Padroado rule in Malabar at this period was just a device to hold their name and fame. [Fr. Paul of St. Thomas Aquinas was administrator of Kodungalloor. He was consecrated on March 4, 1821 at Goa, took charge of the archdiocese of Kodungalloor in January 1823 and died on December 19, 1823.]
The jurisdictional controversies became acute in the nineteenth century when Padroado could not provide bishops to the sees under their jurisdiction. The apostolic vicars who were against the inadequate and anachronistic existence of the Padroado in India demanded to get extended their jurisdiction over all the faithful. The jurisdictional controversies sometimes reached the point of calling the other section enemy. The jurisdictional controversies between Padroado and Propaganda took a new turn in 1838 with the brief Multa praeclare. According to the 1786 report of Aloysius Mary, there were 46 Syrian parishes and 14 chapels and 17 Latin parishes and 11 chapels in the vicariate apostolic of Malabar while there were 41 Syrian parishes and 44 Syrian Jacobite parishes, six of them were common to the Syrians and Latins; three were dependent upon the apostolic vicar and three upon the archbishop of Kodungalloor. There were 117 Syrian priests and 47 Latin priests and 70,500 Syrians and 30,100 Latins.
8.5.2. Towards the suppression of Padroado
The deplorable situation of the Church of India under Padroado jurisdiction in the first decades of the 19th century necessitated the intervention of Rome to provide for the needs of the faithful in those dioceses. Card. Pedicini, the prefect of Propaganda Fide wrote to the ambassador of Portugal to Holy See regarding the necessity of approaching the king of Portugal, requesting him to see to the need of the spiritual care of the Catholics in the missions in India. The archdiocese of Kodungalloor from 1750 till 1838 had one archbishop only in the first 26 years; from 1777 to 1838 there was only one archbishop for a period of eleven years. Kochi from 1800 onwards had no bishop. Mylapore from 1759 till 1838, a period of 32 years had one bishop; from 1800 onwards the see was vacant. From the beginning of the nineteenth century the vacant sees of Kodungalloor, Kochi, and Mylapore were put under the immediate jurisdiction of the archbishop of Goa. Against the right of patronage the Portuguese could not fulfill their obligations for the provision and maintenance of their dioceses in India. Lack of seminaries for the formation of clergy was an important problem. The revolution of 1834 in Portugal lead to the suppression of Religious Orders (1834-35) and the rupture of diplomatic relations with Holy See. The English political supremacy in India reduced the Portuguese power to very limited areas. On the basis of the new political situation in India and the desolate situation of the Church under Padroado, the general assembly of Propaganda held on July 9, 1833, discussed what was to be done for the spiritual welfare of the Catholics in those regions where the English had already established their political supremacy. The Cardinals decided to induce the English government to take necessary steps favorable to Catholics in India and it had positive results. Sensing the need to repair the difficulties in the Church in India, the Holy Father, Pope Gregory XVI decided to take new steps to give the Church liberty from the state, even though it was detrimental to the demands of the Padroado. The earlier decision of Rome to provide missionaries in those places where there was no Church presence at all was not met with opposition from the Portuguese Padroado in India. Since the Portuguese were unable to provide missionaries for many areas claimed to be under their control, the Holy See had no choice but to appoint apostolic vicars for those areas where there was no Church presence all. Calcutta or Bengal was erected an apostolic vicariate under Propaganda on April 18, 1834. Taking into consideration the protest of the Portuguese clergy in Calcutta, the Holy Father on December 27, 1834 ordered them to hand over the churches to the apostolic vicar. But they protested vigorously. The Portuguese held that the Pope should have got permission from the Portuguese and English governments before the erection of the new vicariate. “There is no need to recognize any authority in the head of the Portuguese nation to regulate anything temporal or spiritual with in the limits of the British territory” was the English position. [Letter of the governor of Calcutta APF acta 199. F. 238r. 1835]. On August 4, 1835 the Pope repealed the brief of 1606 of Pope Paul V [Hodie Sanctissimus erecting the diocese of Mylapore] . (New vcariates were erected: Madras, Bengal, Pondichery, Madura, Ceylon). Msgr. Francis Xavier the apostolic vicar of Malabar informed Propaganda that the administrator of Manoel de S. Joakim Neves, a Portuguese Dominican was causing great trouble in Malabar in the Diocese of Kochi. Pope Gregory XVI himself was in background of the steps taken in favour of the appointment of apostolic vicars in the Padroado sees. In conformity with the ideas of the Pope, a draft of the brief Multa Praeclare was prepared. After discussions in two general assemblies [Sept.19, 1836 and December 18, 1837], the Brief Multa praeclare was published on April 24, 1838. The consequences of the Brief were many and varied both in India and in Portugal. The opposition from the part of the Padroado clergy was very strong. The great opponents of the Brief were the Goan group under the leadership of Fr. Antonio Carvalho, the archbishop elect of Goa and Fr. Antonio Teixeira, the bishop elect of Madras. [Their argument was Jus Patronatus was not privilegio grazioso but privilegio acquisto that cannot be denied even by the same pontiff].
8.5.3. ‘Goan Schism’
Seeing the efforts of the Padroado clergy to hold to the right of patronage, preaching even against the authority of the pope, Msgr. Francis Xavier on April 19, 1838, wrote a circular letter prohibiting his subjects to have communion with those who maintain the schism. Soon after the brief reached Malabar on September 4, 1838, Msgr. Francis Xavier promulgated it in whole Malabar but with little effect in the ex-diocese of Kochi. Although Francis Xavier sent a copy of the brief together with an exhortative letter ex-governor Neves, the schismatics accused that the brief and the circular letters were composed by the apostolic vicars in India and were false. Neves could find 12 Syrian priests of the archdiocese of Kodungalloor to stand against the decision of the Pope, but he had the support of not a single Syrian parish. In October 1838, only two churches of Kochi followed the apostolic vicar. By Feb. 1839, 20 churches of Kochi followed him but still 50 remained with Neves. Before the promulgation of the brief, the administrator of Kodungalloor, Fr. Peixoto died and before his death he expressed his wish that the Syrians in his archdiocese would go to the jurisdiction of the apostolic vicar of Malabar. On April 10, 1840, Francis Xavier was made archbishop. A letter of Francis Xavier to the Congregation on September 14, 1840shows that in central Malabar only two churches and two oratories were in schism and all others were under the archbishop. The temporal suppression of Padroado jurisdiction and the consequent end of the conflicts between the two jurisdictions did not satisfy the Suriani Catholics. [The resistance has been called the Goan or Indo-Portuguese schism by many authors. The term schism appears frequently in Papal pronouncements, however do not call the Goans schismatic (except four priests in Bombay) but only openly disobedient. According to the 1886 concordat, the ecclesiastical province of Goa under Padroado was to comprise of three more dioceses: Kochi, Mylapore and Daman, with the further title of Kodungallore. After India Independence in 1947 a new concordat limited the Padroado to Portuguese territory, i.e., Goa. In 1961 when India occupied Goa, Padroado terminated in India.
8.6. Rocos Schism
In 1833, there were 41 parishes, 106 priests 25 deacons 30,607 faithful and 11 filial churches under the jurisdiction of the vicar apostolic of Malabar (Varapuzha). After the suppression of Padroado most of the Syrian parishes came under Varapuzha. In 1855? Archbishop Bernardine Bacinelli OCD of Varapuzha gave orders to stop the malpanate system of priestly formation, which was the practice among the Suriani Catholics. He declared that only those candidates who had studied at Puthenpally seminary under Carmelite missionaries or at Mannanam, Elthuruth or Vazhakulam under native Suriani Carmelites would be ordained. The Suriani Catholics placed under Padroado did not have a bishop in Malabar to ordain their candidates. That might have been the main reason why they approached the Chaldean Patriarch who sent to Malabar Mar Rocos. Under the influence of Dhanah Barjona, who reached India in 1853, was staying at the Kuravilangadu church, some St. Thomas Christian leaders- especially from the Portuguese Padroado- came together in 1854 at Kuravilangadu and resolved to send representation to the Chaldean Church. Two priests, Antony Kudakachira and Antony Thondanatt were to lead the delegation. They started for Baghdad in 1857. Kudakachira died there and Thondanatt took up the leadership. In 1861 Thondanatt came back to Kochi with Mar Rocos who was sent by the Chaldean Patriarch., Mar Audo. Already in 1860, Pope Pius IX had asked the Patriarch not to interfere in Malabar affairs. The great majority of the Suriani Catholics followed Mar Rocos since he claimed to have been sent by the Patriarch at the order of the Pope. He visited many parishes: Vadayar, Kaduthuruthy (both Little and Great), Kumarakam, Muttuchira, Kuravilangadu and Athirampuzha and ordained more than a hundred. At the order of the Pope, Patriarch Audo had to recall Mar Rocos on September 7, 1861, but eighty-six full parishes and thirty-one partial parishes had already joined the Rocos schism. Thondanatt accompanied Mar Rocos, received episcopal consecration from the Nestorian Patriarch Mar Shim’un, and returned to Malabar as Mar Abdiso. After the return of Mar Rocos most of the churches were reintegrated into Varapuzha. Those churches which did not joint Varapuzha (most of them north to Varapuzha and two churches in the south) were in a vicious circle: they did not want to go back to Varapuzha, but the option for Padroado was not available. They followed Antony John Santimano who lived in Kollam as gubernador of the Goan schismatics. In 1863, after the return of Mar Rocos, Archbishop Salvator Saba reached Malabar coast as apostolic commissary with a lay representative of the Portuguese king. The purpose of their commission which began in 1861 was to put into effect the concordat of 1857 between the Holy See and Portugal. Among the terms of the concordat, it was endorsed that those churches and Christians under Propaganda and those under Padroado on the day of the signing of the concordat, were to maintain their status quo. On April 21, 1863, Saba ordered the churches in Malabar to decide within eight days either for Varapuzha, or for Portuguese Padroado. Under Varapuzha there were104 churches, 37 under Padroado; while 16 churches had two communities, one under Varapuzha and the other under Kodungalloor of Padroado.
When the see of Kodungalloor was reestablished, as a result of the 1857 concordat between Holy See and Portugal, some followers of Rocos joined the Padroado; but there was no bishop in Malabar under Padroado. This remained a great problem, especially with regard to the ordination of seminarians. According to an order given by the papal commissary, Archbishop Saba, that “… all those who were ordained by Mar Rocos should remain in those minor orders until the reception of an order from the Vatican; there were among Suriani Catholics, seven priests and more than a hundred clerics who received other minor orders from Rocos. They waited for an arrangement from Rome, but after many years and repeated petitions, they received no positive sign from Rome. Some of them again sent petitions to Patriarch Audo asking for a bishop. The Patriarch still claimed powers of jurisdiction over the Church of Malabar. The Patriarch came forward with his arguments in the First Vatican Council in 1869, but no clear cut decision was taken, since the Council came to an early end. The apostolic vicar of Varapuzha, Msgr. Leonardo Mellano OCD, who was in Rome for Vatican I, asked permission to receive the Suriani Christians from Under Padroado. Propaganda advised him to receive the at their request without endangering the 1857 concordat. According to this permission, 18 churches which followed Padroado fully and 8 churches partially, were accepted into the Varapuzha jurisdiction; 4 churches which followed Padroado fully, split into two communities, of which one accepted Varapuzha jurisdiction, whereas 15 churches fully and twelve partially remained under Padroado. Fr. Kuriakose Chavara TOCD who took lead in fighting against the Rocos schism was made vicar general of Varapuzha, but when Propaganda inquired about him to make him a bishop for the Syrians, the apostolic vicar presented him to be too old to nominate bishop. Thus the Suriani Christians had practically no hope to have a native bishop.
According to the report of Msgr. Bonnand, (the Visitor of all the Vicariates of East India), prepared in 1861, there were 233,000 Christians in the vicariate of Varapuzha, with 263 parishes, seven missionaries, 418 native priests and 40 thousand Christians under Padroado jurisdiction. Varapuzha was entirely different from other vicariates of the Indian subcontinent in the number of Catholics, churches and native priests. The mission with the second highest number of native priests was Mangalore with 18 priests. Besides the numerical difference, the visitor categorized he churches in India into three: churches of the Suriani Christians had all that was needed and the income was administered carefully; in the churches of Portuguese origin the temporalities of the missions were firmly stabilized and where there was insufficient annual income to manage, they used to impose contributions and tithes; the other Christian communities, for the maintenance of missionaries had to depend mainly on the resources provided by Propaganda or on government subsidy for the military chaplains.
8.7. Mellus Schism
Under the initiative of a Chaldean monk, Philip Aziz, who came to Malabar for a second time to collect money, the Chaldean Patriarch yet again sent a bishop, Mar Elia Mellus, to Malabar who reached Bombay in August 1874. In spite of the efforts of Msgr. Leo Meurin, the then apostolic vicar of Bombay, he reached Thrissur on October 21, 1874. As Mar Mellus reached Malabar, Mar Abdiso [Antony Thondanatt], the parish priest of Edamattam who had been reconciled with the Catholic Church, relapsed and joined him. The parishes of Suriani Catholics which followed Mar Mellus were mainly in the North of Varapuzha and in such places as Kuravilangadu, which were under Padroado. Mar Mellus also ordained many in Malabar, and, at his request, another bishop, a certain Mar Philip Jacob Uraha reached Malabar from Persia. The Mellusian schism was a stronger movement than that of Rocos, increasing confusion and division among the Suriani Catholics of India. From various signals from Malabar, Propaganda sensed that the situation was growing out of Mellano’s control. The arrival of Mar Philip Jacob and the association of Mar Abdiso with Mellus were alarming. There were also Carmelite missionaries like Fr. Leopold of St. Joseph OCD, who wanted a separation of Suriani Catholics from Latins. It was he who took the lead to write petitions to Propaganda at the end of 1873. Some disciples of Fr. Leopold from Mannanam TOCD house, started writing petitions against the apostolic vicar Mellano who expelled seven of them from their religious houses. (Paul Sankoorickal, Mathew Matheikal, Emmanuel Meenattoor, Joseph Chiavara, Varghese Irumpan, Hilarios Tharavattathil & Aloysius Pazheparambil are known as seven ‘dolores’). In this background, in spite of Mellano’s objection, The Roman Congregation Propaganda Fide decided to send Msgr. Leo Meurin s.j., Apostolic vicar of Bombay, as apostolic visitor of Malabar.
8.8. Msgr. Leo Meurin s.j., Apostolic Visitor of Malabar.
Meurin already had presented the Malabar situation before the Congregation. Meurin’s frequent reports confirmed the urgency of nominating a separate bishop for them and this attitude of Meurin increased the Suriani Catholic’s desire for a separate bishop if not autochthonous. Mellano considered Meurin’s policy unbearable, the Carmelites considered Meurin a partisan of the Suriani Catholics and the missionaries and their devotees wrote to the Holy See against him. The dissension between Meurin, the apostolic visitor, and Mellano, the apostolic vicar, prompted Propaganda to discuss the issue in a general assembly in 1876 and wrote to Meurin that ‘he went beyond the Holy See’s instruction and, because of his strategy, instead of pacifying the Malabarians their unrest increased. As long as Meurin remained in Malabar, he was asked, he should proceed strictly according to Propaganda’s instructions trying proficiently and with prudence to taper off the hope given to the Suriani Christians’. On the other hand Mellano was advised to observe the utmost temperance and tenderness towards the Suriani faithful, priests and the Suriani Carmelites. Propaganda’s new directives did not change Meurin’s conviction that the only remedy for the predicaments in Malabar was to nominate a separate bishop for the Syrians. On September 26, 1876 the Holy Father approved the decision of the Propaganda to send a second visitor to Malabar.
8.9. Msgr. Ignatius Persico Apostolic Visitor of Malabar
Msgr. Ignatius Persico reached Malabar as visitor on February 23, 1877. He studied the situation to prepare an objective report without interfering overly in the affairs. According to Persico, the earnest desire of the Malabarians to have a bishop of their own proper rite was age old and exhibited many times. The longing became intense due to the abandoned state in which they found themselves estranged from the missionaries, who for the lack of or little knowledge of the language, not only disregarded the Suriani Catholics but treated them with haughtiness and rudeness. Persico reported that, there were schools and charitable institutions established for the Latins, while for the Syrians little or nothing was being done, but they were left in ignorance and almost abandoned to themselves. The visitor insisted that the missionaries should learn Malayalam. Finally the visitor affirmed that the Carmelite missionaries, though good religious, their administration was rough and almost brutal. (Even Fr. Leopold who was pictured as a pro-Suriani, in his letters to the Cardinal prefect requesting a separate vicariate for the Syrians, envisaged a vicariate with a Carmelite as the apostolic vicar.) Even the missionaries themselves expressed discontent and frustration about their mission, and knew for certain that they were not doing justice to their work especially because of the lack of personnel and of money. The psychological state of the Carmelite missionaries could be read in the letter of Fr. Emidio OCD from Varapuzha: “Now I am staying here with Msgr. Leonard, who is in good health, as are also the other missionaries. However, all are almost like sheep assaulted by a wolf, frightened and alert, assaulted not by a wolf but by a Lion [Leo Meurin, Leo = Lion] whom I might call apostolic visitor, better apostolic perturber.”
8.10. Separation of Syrians from Latins
On July 9, 1877, the General Assembly of Propaganda decided to end the visit of Leo Meurin, to defer the division of the vicariate of Varapuzha and to appoint Fr. Marcelline Berardi OCD as coadjutor to the Leonardo Mellano with exclusive charge of the Syrians. Meurin left Malabar in September 1877 accompanied by the reunited Chaldean bishop Mar Jacob Urahah. The appointment of the coadjutor, though somewhat bitterly received, was joyfully accepted by the Carmelites, as they were afraid of being deprived of the mission. But, Mellano did not want to communicate the instruction from the Holy See that Marcelline should act for the Syrians independent of the apostolic vicar, and in consultation with a vicar general and four counselors. Marcelline himself did not want to act according to the directives, to have a vicar general and the counselors. More than once he wrote to Rome explaining the difficulties in appointing them. Moreover, he could not justify the necessity having four counselors since there were no cases in which he had to get counsel. Since Marcalline was too dependent on the apostolic vicar Mellano, the Syrians could not accept him as their own bishop. As a result, they continued writing petitions to Rome. Some of the main points of the petitions were: That great confusion existed in the Suriani churches because of the presence of Mellus who resided in Thrissur; that lax Carmelite bishops did nothing against the daily growing schism and that as a result the pagans, Protestants and Jacobites laugh at the Catholics who were being despised; that in order to suppress their development the Carmelites did not educate the Malabarians; that the Suriani Catholics claimed the right to have what other nations already had, a bishop of their own rite. Those who supplicated the Holy Father for a bishop of their own rite were considered rebels and so on. Rome appointed an expert to scrutinize the petitions from Malabar.Two of Louis Pazheparambil’s letters were scrutinized and the expert pointed out that the names undersigned seemed to be fraudulent in order to increase the number of priests. After repeated insistence from Rome Marcelline appointed a vicar general and four councilors, all known Carmelite supporters. Marcelline was not satisfied either. He wrote to Rome different times expressing his desire to resign.
8.10.1. Carmelite Missionaries and English Education
The missionaries seem to have been afraid of giving the people English education. They thought that pious Christians would be led astray by the absorption of modern thought or Protestant ideas through the medium of the English language. They were afraid of even publishing an encyclical of Pope Leo XIII [Inscrutabili dated April 21, 1878, describing the evils in the society to which the Church offered remedy in the spiritual and cultural levels], so as not to give the people a bad impression of religious conditions in Europe. Already in 1861, Protestant missionaries had opened a college in Kottayam; Jacobites had also moved forward in the field of education. As a result, both Jacobites and Protestants were able to obtain posts in government offices. But the Suriani Catholics who had no opportunities for an English Education felt themselves regressing as a community. Even though the government of Thiruvithamcore put 5,000 rupees a year at the disposition of Catholics for English education, Marcelline did not make use of the 20,000 rupees, the sum of four years. Marcelline wrote to Rome, “… it is necessary to teach it (English), and of course I must consent, though in truth I fear its miserable consequences.” When pressure increased both from the Syrians and from the part of Rome, the missionaries planned to start a college, but in Kochi which was not a Syrian Catholic centre as Ernakulam or Alapuzha. Even Mellano was aware that the college of Kochi because ofd its location could not serve the Christians, especially Syrians. He wrote to his superiors: “ It is true that these students are not all Christians, there was not being such a big Christian community in Kochi, and a large part consists in Protestants, Muslims and Hindus. Any way there is hope for great results.” Thus the long expected college did not serve the wishes of Suriani Catholics.
The Suriani Catholics of Malabar contrasted themselves with the Jacobites and the other Oriental Catholic Churches which made them feel that it was their right to have autochthonous bishops. The Jacobites had two archbishops and seven bishops; Catholic Armenians, at that time numbering about 80,000 had eighteen diocesan bishops, and some titular bishops; Chaldeans still less in number had twelve bishops. Other Oriental Catholics as Rumenians, Ruthenians, Syrians, Maronites, Melchites and the Bulgarians had their own bishops. The Suriani Catholics, the largest Catholic Church outside Europe, did not have even a single bishop. An awareness of this reality, joined with the growing nationalist spirit, prompted the Syrians to struggle for autochthonous bishops. Natrionalist spirit was growing in the minds of Indians irrespective of cult and religion.
8.11. Church Cases
After the arrival of Mellus, the faithful in many parishes were divided into two groups, as Catholics and Mellusians. As dissension increased, some suits were filed in the civil court for the ownership of the churches. The Chittattukara church was one of the first to be repossessed by the Catholics. This Church was under the Padroado jurisdiction, of which the major part followed Mellus and the minority, the apostolic vicar of Varapuzha. A lawsuit began in 1875, in the District Court of South Malabar was judged in favour of the Mellusians. Appeal against the decree of the district judge was brought before the Madras High Court in 1877. In this suit, Leo Meurin, the visitor was leading the Suriani Catholics. When he had to go back to Bombay terminating the visit, he handed over to Fr. Nidiry the responsibility to deal with the church cases. In 1878, the High Court inferred that Mellus, who received a letter of recall, no longer possessed the authority of the Patriarch as a bishop over the congregation at Chittattukara. Velianadu, Palayoor, Aranattukara, Mattudesam, Chevvur and Arthatt church cases followed the Chittattukara case. Mar Abdiso Thondanatt, after four years of association with Mellus, was reunited already in August 1878. The parishes which welcomed Mellus reverted to Varapuzha on a piecemeal basis. Mellus’ vicar general Fr. Mathew Palakunnel too reunited. After reunion, Mar Abdiso Thondanatt remained as an ordinary priest in his parish Anakallumkal till January 10, 1882 when again he switched allegiance from Varapuzha to Mellus. At the request of Mellus, Mar Abdiso started administering the Mellusians with Elamthottam as his see. On March 5, 1882, Mellus returned from Malabar entrusting the Mellusians to Mar Abdiso and the Chaldean monk Augustine, giving them the faculty for blessing oil, for administering confirmation and ordinations up to acolyte. In September 1887, Mar Abdiso again approached Nidiry expressing hi desire to reunite. He was considered to be an apostate and the practice of the Holy See was to recognize apostates in the same grade as before their desertion. Mar Abdiso was received back to the Church in 1865 and in 1878 as a simple priest. Because of the position of Rome to receive him as a priest after an appropriate span of time and not to concede episcopal ministry or insignia, Mar Abdiso’s reunion never came about. He remained in Elamthottam near Pala and later went to Thrissur probably in late 1897.
8.12. Erection of Thrissur and Kottayam Vicariates.
One of the important steps taken by Leo XIII to organize the Church in India to settle the problems was the appointment of an apostolic delegate for India. On September 23, 1884, Antony Agliardi was appointed as the first Apostolic Delegate. The second important step was the concordat of June 23, 1886, between Leo XIII and the King of Portugal. The third step taken towards the organization of the Indian Church was the institution of the Indian Hierarchy. In the last quarter of the 19th century there were twenty vicariates and two apostolic prefectures in India. The decision of the Holy Father to institute the Catholic Hierarchy of India was promulgated by the apostolic letter Humanae Salutis Auctor dated September 1886. Christopher Bonjean, vicar apostolic of Jaffna and Francis Laouenan, Apostolic vicar of Pondichery prepared separate projects to organize the hierarchy. Both suggested to erect an episcopal see for the Suriani Christians.
Agliardi the apostolic delegate reached Malabar and visited Koonammavu first at the request of Marcelline and Mellano. Then he reached Mannanam along with Marcelline and remained there for a few days. He met the Suriani Carmelites on the following day. A good number of priests and representatives of the Suriani parishes visited Agliardi. His report on his visit to Malabar gives the actual situation of Malabar. He wrote: “the Suriani clergy in general are neither erudite nor well educated, but good. … Among them there are priests who surpassed many of the Carmelite Fathers who are now in the mission, for the doctrine acquired by private studies, for good manners and for ecclesiastical spirit. It could also be said with certainty that almost all of the Suriani Catholics, clergy and people, desire a bishop of their own rite; those whom I have seen on the contrary opinion have told me that they are one to six”. For the time being, he suggested that it would not be prudent to give them a bishop of their own, but pointed out the absolute necessity to do something immediately. He suggested to create two vicariates for the Syrians, the division between them being the Aluva river, with Thrissur in the north and Alapuzha in the south. He suggested that two European bishops of Latin rite be appointed. Though the Carmelites and also many other apostolic vicars of India held the idea that Indians and Suriani Catholics in particular were absolutely incapable of government and even less to be bishops, Agliardi thought that an Indian could be found with the same civilization and formation as a candidate from Europe. He wrote that he found many such candidates in Malabar and pointed out some of their good qualities for which other nationalities were wanting: “… the gentleness of the mind, the patience, the temperance and the respect towards the authority”. It is interesting to note some of Agliardi’s reasons behind the suggestion to divide the Suriani Catholics into two vicariates: it would show the good will of the Holy See top do some thing for the Syrians without prejudicing the question of a native bishop; it would divide the strength of the Syrians into two centers etc. he thought it would not be prudent to appoint native bishops as it would seem to be a victory they achieved over the Carmelite Order and it would have the appearance of being as the vindication of one of their rights. He suggested Carmelites again as apostolic vicars for the would-be-erected apostolic vicariates in Malabar. On December 20, 1886, the Propaganda Congregation decided to separate the Syrians from the Latins forming one or two vicariates under Latin prelates. An important decision taken at this assembly was to impede all possible contacts between the Chaldean Church and the Malabar Christians. The Congregation decided to entrust the vicariates to a religious institute other than Carmelites, preferably to Jesuits. The assembly of the apostolic vicars of South India to be convoked in early 1887 was to decide the details regarding the new vicariates. The January 25, 1887 Bangalore meeting praised the resolution of Propaganda and declared it opportune to create two Suriani vicariates. They suggested the division according to the natural limit of Aluva river which divides the region from Malayattoor to Kochi. They suggested Thrissur and Kottayam as for the residence of the bishops. Agliardi suggested Marcelline OCD for Thrissur and for the other Fr. Polycarp OCD.
Though Jesuits were not ready to take up the Suriani vicariates, after repeated request of the Congregation, presented two terne Along with the two terne, Anderledy suggested the name of Fr. Charles Lavigne. In case Jesuits refused the proposal, Agliardi recommended the election of two indigenous priests as apostolic vicars, but from the Latin rite. He suggested the name of Fr. Adolph Medlycott. At this juncture, when it took time for the Congregation to find two proper candidates, the Holy See decided to take prompt action to calm the faithful of Malabar. Holy Father thought fit to order the sending of the Brief for erection of the two apostolic vicariates for the Suriani Catholics in the cities of Thrissur and Kottayam. The Brief Quod jampridem dated may 20, 1887 was sent to Aiuti, the then apostolic delegate. The dealings with the Jesuits were kept secret so as not to clash with the susceptibility of the Carmelites.
By the time Agliardi was transferred to Rome and Andrea Aiuti was nominated as the new apostolic delegate. Suriani Catholics wrote many letters to the delegate stating that they appreciated the care and solicitude shown by the Holy Father and that their sentiments would vanish if what the Carmelites were saying was verified, i.e., the new apostolic vicars would again be Carmelites. The General Assembly of Propaganda on July 25, 1887 decided to nominate Msgr. Marcellinos OCD for Thrissur and Fr. Polycarp OCD for Kottayam. Notable was the change of mind on the part of the Congregation in favour of the Carmelites. In the absence of the secretary of Propaganda, the Holy Father took the report and resolution of the Congregation, on August 23, 1887. The Holy Father had before him a telegram of Aiuti to Agliardi the former apostolic delegate for India who was then working in Rome. “In all charity prevent His Holiness from nominating Marcelline and Polycarp as apostolic vicars for the Suriani Catholics; otherwise schism certain.” The Holy father ordered Agliardi to reply by telegram: “You are authorized to declare that the Holy Father has not nominated any Carmelite as apostolic vicar for the Suriani Catholics; letter follows”. The Holy Father nominated Fr. Charles Lavigne as vicar apostolic of Kottayam and Adolph Medlycott as the apostolic vicar of Thrissur.
8.12.1. Thrissur Vicariate
A part of the territory of Thrissur i.e., Chavakkad and Paraur taluks was spread in the Malabar province of the Madras presidency of British India and the other remaining part belonged to the kingdom of Thirukochi. Thrissur was the stronghold of Mellusians. Adolph Medlycott was born in 1835 in Chittagong, Bengal India, of European parents. He had his studies in Rome and upon returning to India, he worked as a military chaplain in Frozen, Punjab, when he was nominated apostolic vicar of Thrissur. Propaganda requested Aiuti to call Medlycott to him to confer the episcopal consecration and to give him opportune instructions because “he [Medlycott] is not exempt from some defects incompatible with such dignity…”.Majority of the parishes of Thrissur vicariate came from Varapuzha jurisdiction and about twenty churches came from Padroado. A good number of the churches were under Mellus before they joined Varapuzha. There were more than 100,000 faithful, 123 priests, 83 parishes and 22 chapels and around 5000 Mellusians. The social situation of the Christians was superior to that of the Christians of the neighbouring missions. The majority, according to Medlycott, did not know the rudiments of dogma. They were very attached to some religious practices and to the performance of certain formalities which they believed made them good Christians. The people in general led a satisfactory moral life. The most urgent need of the vicariate of Thrissur designed by Medlycott were: 1. elementary education, 2. A middle and upper school, 3. Erection of a minor seminary, 4. A girls school, a catechumenate for females, 6. A residence for the apostolic vicar and for the personnel and 7. Some good missionaries. On his way to Thrissur from Ootty where he was consecrated, he visited the Mellusian parish at Wadakanchery and that church yielded to him. Medlycott tried to introduce the teaching of catechism in the churches and parish schools. He constantly urged churches to start keeping the Blessed Sacrament. He arranged annual retreat for clergy and insisted on Sunday sermons and reestablished the custom of providing retreats for the faithful. He also began a minor seminary in Thrissur. Medlycott won the Palaur church suit and some other church cases. His attempt for reform was not easy, because he was very harsh with his subjects. He followed the counsel of Fr. Polycarp OCD which created diffidence among the Suriani Christians. Medlycott excluded natives from his refectory and that showed his attitude towards the natives. Medlycott was hesitant as was Lavigne , to appoint the vicar general and the counselors. The appointment was differed as Medlycott and Lavigne continued discussing the question of vestments for the native vicars general. While Lavigne suggested to appoint the vicar general for three years, Medlycott objected saying it could be inconvenient at times to retain the same person for three years. He also wanted that the pontifical insignia be the property of the apostolic vicar and remain in his custody. Later he appointed Fr. Varghese Mampilly as his vicar general and Frs. Paulos Malieckal, Francis Alappatt, Marcelline Menachery and Devasia Manavalan as counselors; Fr. John Menachery was appointed as secretary.
Medlycott tried hard to get some foreign missionaries. Even to teach in the minor seminary he found the native priests unfit. Regarding the moral aspect of the priests, some of the old and many young priests were exemplary, Medlycott held. According to him only 15% of the priests could be relied upon entirely. The construction of the residence for the bishop and his personnel gave him enough headache. He had insisted on paying five percent from the parishes which caused many complaints. He displayed keen interest in the formation of priests. The aspirants for priesthood were received in the minor seminary. He also sent some students to Rome. He disagreed with Lavigne on the location of the planned college; rather than at Kottayam he held that it should be located at a place central to both vicariates. As the project was deferred he started his own programme. Almost all the parishes started Malayalam elementary school, some more than one. Besides, there were also six elementary English schools and two English middle schools entrusted to native Carmelites. He started St. Thomas College in Thrissur which at his time had the form of an English middle school. Regarding church administration, Medlycott started examining the parish accounts, and made residence in the rectory compulsory for parish priests. He was badly in need of financial assistance for constructions. Entrusting the property of the mission to Fr. Rossi, the only foreign missionary who was in the vicariate, Medlycott left Thrissur in early 1896 for America.
8.12.2. Kottayam Vicariate
The Suriani Catholics south of the river Aluva were placed under the vicariate of Kottayam, one of the important cities in the kingdom of Thiruvithamcoor. There were 12,000 inhabitants according to the 1881 census; Catholics numbered around 300. Kottayam was the centre of the Syrian Orthodox Christians and this was one of the main reasons to select Kottayam as the residence of the apostolic vicar. Charles Louis Lavigne, was born on January 6,1840 in France. He was ordained priest in 1864 and later he became a Jesuit. He received episcopal consecration on November 13, 1887 at Marvejols, his native place. When he reached Mannanam, there were 25 to 30 thousand people with two elephants to receive him. The schism was almost extinct in the Kottayam vicariate except for Elamthottam, where Antony Thondanatt stayed. Lavigne planned a systematic development of the vicariate, building a college, a seminary, bishop’s residence and schools and orphanages all of which required an enormous amount of money. Though the Suriani Carmelites of Mannanam treated him well, he naturally wanted to have a residence for the apostolic vicar. A college to prepare the students for the public examination was an urgent need. Lavigne was interested in the reunion movements. In April 1888, Lavigne went to Ootty at the apostolic delegation with Mar Dionysius, the Jacobite metropolitan and Fr. Nidiry. The Suriani Christians both Catholic and non-Catholics, were divided from time immemorial into two sections: Nordists and Suddists [Vadakkumbhagar & Thekkumbhagar] As the separation of the Suriani Catholics from Latins was effected, the question of this division came into serious discussion for the first time. Most of the Suddist priests wanted to remain under Varapuzha. Mathew Makil, along with Nordist Varghese Valiaveettil (Vazhakulam, Muvattupuzha) went to Ootty to meet Aiuti as representatives of the apostolic vicar of Varapuzha. In Ootty, Makil submitted a petition of the Suddists as their representative to Aiuti. There were 15 to 20, 000 Suddists with 12 parishes and 21 priests and 100-109,000 Nordists with 133 parishes and 256 priests. The general picture of the vicariate in 1888 was as follows: Suriani Catholics 107,000; Priests 271; Seminarians 190; churches 96; chapels 49; seminary: besides the common seminary at Puthenpally there was one exclusively for the Syrians at Mannanam; religious men: 69; religious houses 5; Religious women: 25; religious houses 1, secondary schools 5 & primary schools 200. A petition of ten parish priests of the Suddist community dated November 21, 1887, requested the Holy Father to place them under Mellano or his coadjutor Marcellinos. Even before the arrival of Lavigne, the division was clear in Malabar, and from Lavigne’s very reception he had to face the division. During the reception the Suddists requested him for an occasion to read a special address after the official one. Lavigne agreed to do this on the following day. Aiuti and Lavigne found the only solution to resolve the problem forever was to give a separate administration for the Suddists. Aiuti had already informed Propaganda that the project for a separate vicariate for the Suddists was designed by archbishop Mellano and Carmelites of Varapuzha. Following Aiuti's proposals, the general assembly of Propaganda Fide decided to give a separate administration granting them a vicar general and two councilors. Thus though Mellano could not attain his objective, i.e., a special vicariate for the Suddists, his strategy proved to have a bad effect, the growth of a division among the Suriani Catholics. Mellano was vehemently opposed to the separate administration of the 200,000 Suriani Catholics comprised of 172 parishes, 360 priests, 213 seminarians and 59 religious priests. He wanted to erect a third vicariate for the Suddists who numbered 15-20,000, with 21 priests and 12 parishes.
8.12.2.1. A test for Lavigne
One of the first tests Lavigne had to face was an unpleasant incident that took place in his vicariate. The seminarians who studied at Mannanam at that time paid 3.5 rupees monthly. Seeing that amount was not sufficient to provide good and substantial food for the seminarians, Lavigne ordered the fee to be increased to 4 rupees. The seminarians received this communication negatively, 58 of them left the seminary and moved to Kottayam, where they asked for an audience with the apostolic vicar to set forth their complaints. Lavigne refused to receive them and entrusted Frs. Nidiry and Pazheparambil to persuade them to return to the seminary and ask forgiveness and pardon from their rector for their insubordin- ation. The seminarians followed the directives of Nidiry and were readmitted. After some time Lavigne reached Mannanam and following an inquiry, expelled 8 of them. This expulsion produced a very bad impression on all. Later Lavigne recognized Aiuti’s [delegate apostolic] reasons for readmitting the seminarians. Aiuti in order to save Lavigne, asked Paray Tharakan to approach Lavigne. Lavigne granted Parayil’s request, telling him that it was only because of his merits towards the Church that it was granted. But the Suriani Christians understood the drama properly.
8.12.2.2. Appointment of vicar general
Lavigne, like Medlycott, desired to prolong the appointment of vicar general. The reason they said was that they needed more time to know their priests. Aiuti wrote to the Congregation that “ And here I cannot but sincerely declare to your Eminence, as I have reason to believe, that the reluctance of those prelates is not longer that need,… Many times in speaking with me at Ootty and later also in writing to me they made allusions to the prelatical gown and to the pontifical ornaments which could be used by the two vicars general, …”. Without a doubt Nidiry was the most distinct priest among the Suriani Catholics. Such was the observation of the Congregation, but Lavigne did not want to appoint Nidiry. Nidiry was accused of proposing equal rights for the Jacobite and Catholic bishops in the college project and was considered as a ‘wicked man’ who, though Lavigne had no positive proof, would become a Jacobite if mar Dionysius offered him a good church. Carmelite missionaries always considered him as the leader of all the movements against them and who organized the petitions to Rome against Carmelites. Lavigne was aware of the urgency of appointing the vicar general, but his dislike for Nidiry prolonged the appointment. In order not to appoint Nidiry as vicar general, Lavigne recommended Nidiry and Pazheparambil for papal honours, but it was seemed a delicate matter to Propaganda. Aiuti clearly told Lavigne that if Aiuti were in Lavigne’s position, he would not have the courage to place the Prefect of the Propaganda in such a situation by insisting strongly. Even though Aiuti did not expect a change of mind from Lavigne, to his surprise, Lavigne decided to appoint Nidiry. “… St. Ignatius tells us that, after having informed the superiors, we must obey upon a sign of their will, without waiting for a formal command. The letter of Your Excellency manifests very clearly the will of the S. Congregation for the Propagation of Faith, who substitutes the Rev. Fr. General for me. Tomorrow without much delay, I will publish the nomination.” The nomination [on Sept. 8, 1889] was a surprise for Nidiry himself. His nomination was generally almost taken for granted. Lavigne nominated Makil Mathew as his vicar general for the Suddists.
8.12.2.3. College at Kottayam
To start a college at Kottayam was originally the idea of the Syrian Christian Association, the Jathyaykya Sangham, formed by Catholics and Jacobites under the leadership of Nidiry and Mar Dionysius. The general meeting of Propaganda on December 20, 1886 had decided to impede the erection of the mixed college for the Syrian Catholics and the Jacobites of Malabar. Neither Mar Dionysius nor Mr. Dharrah opposed the prohibition from the Holy See. Moreover Dharrah himself, instead of Lavigne, agreed to pay the price of half of the land to Mar Dionysius, so as not to cause embarrassment for the Jacobites. Lavigne was content with this conclusion and was ready to start the college at Kottayam despite his expressed reasons against the location of the college in Kottayam. Medlycott suggested that the college should be established at some other place central to both vicariates. Aiuti felt that only a direct intervention of the Holy See would solve the discord between Lavigne and Medlycott. Later, Lavigne wanted to change his ordinary residence to Changanassery so that he could direct the college, that would be built there. Propaganda did not find any difficulty in Lavigne’s desire to establish the college at Changanassery, but to change the ordinary residence of the apostolic vicar in order to direct the college needed the approbation of a general assembly of Propaganda. George Parayil was approached for financial help who agreed to help in some way, but not to the extent of erecting the college, as the family already had erected the Leo XIII school in Alleppey. A meeting of priests and lay representatives of the vicariate, [300 in number] was convoked on November 14, 1889, at Pala, on the occasion of the first Pontifical Mass by Nidiry. They decided on a contribution for the building and maintenance of the college as well as for the bishop’s residence, to find a way to assure the support of a bishop of that nation and his episcopal curia. They decided to contribute for six years, each parish 20% its annual income, parish priests 10 rupees each, other priests 8 rupees each and laity who paid a tax of 1% to the government, also contributed as much to this fund. The beginning of the institute [today’s St. Berchmans] was any way delayed till 1891.
8.12.2.4. Transfer of Residence from Kottayam to Changanassery
Because Kottayam was not a centre for Catholics, Lavigne wanted to change his residence to some other place where there was a greater number of the faithful. The 300 Catholics were mainly Suddists, and the Suriani Catholic church which existed in Kottayam belonged to the Suddists. Before the separation of the Syrians from Latins, there was one church under Varapuzha, the Good Shepherd’s church, which Lavigne without much discussion left to the Latins. The Congregation found no difficulty in the foundation of the college in Changanassery, but the difficulty was in the transferring of the apostolic vicar’s ordinary residence to Changanassery just to direct the college. To grant Lavigne the freedom to change his ordinary was in a way a modification of the brief Quod jampridem. A modification in the brief needed the approval of the general meeting of Propaganda and the approval of the Holy Father. General Assembly of Propaganda discussed the matter on September 15, 1890 and the decision was approved by the Holy Father on the following day, as follows: “Lavigne was granted the faculty to reside in Changanassery instead of Kottayam, however the Brief Quod jampridem remained unchanged; he would retain the title of the apostolic vicar of Kottayam and try to ameliorate the conditions of Kottayam, which could be the ordinary residence of the apostolic vicar in the future.” On March 19,1891, the residence was changed to Changanassery, where there were about 8,500 faithful. Lavigne made definitive the transfer of residence from Kottayam to Changanassery which Rome allowed provisionally. This irritated the people and clergy very much. Lavigne found it difficult to cope with the liturgy and liturgical life of the Suriani Catholics. In order to separate the Malabarians from the Chaldeans forever, Lavigne suggested translating the Roman Pontifical. The practice of fasting was another problem Lavigne encountered in Kottayam. Lavigne asked Rome for permission for himself and as well as for his secretary to conform to the regulations of the Latin Church in India on fasting and abstinence. Propaganda could not understand why he should feel obliged to follow the customs of the Syrians. The congregation of the Tertiaries of St. Francis of Assisi was founded by Lavigne at Pala and instituted also the visitation convent for the Suddists at Kaipuzha.
Though Lavigne nominated Nidiry his vicar general his diffidence continued. The change of residence increased the conflict. Under Nidiry’s leadership a land near Kuravilangadu was also suggested for the residence of the apostolic vicar, but it was not acceptable for Lavigne. Nidiry did not support a central seminary, and his attitude was considered by Lavigne as offensive since it was against his own wish and the plan of the Congregation to found a central common seminary, Puthenpally. The reunion attempts of Mar Dionysius was seen by Lavigne with doubt. He could not understand the attitude of Nidiry who did not want to unite with the Catholic Latins, but wanted to unite with the Jacobites. Lavigne had nothing against Nidiry possessing his two-wheeled horse carriage and recognized that it was necessary for his work. But he could not understand on what pretext, true or false, because of the difficult character of the horse, he used to make Fr. Aloysius Pazheparambil sit on the back seat, the very back where a servant sat. In April 1892, Lavigne removed Nidiry from the office of vicar general. Lavigne had a very difficult time in India. He could gain neither the confidence of his subjects nor popularity. The Suriani clergy and faithful were not happy either. The Suddists were happy since they got a quasi-separate administration. Priests along with lay leaders sent petitions to Rome and to the Chaldean Patriarch as well. Zaleski, the apostolic delegate gives the real picture in his letter to the Congregation: “Thus the relation in the vicariate of Kottayam, the apostolic vicar on one side and the people and clergy on the other is one of mutual dislike, of mutual distrust and, humanly speaking, there is no possibility that it could return to a normal state. In such a situation, in the beginning of September 1895, Lavigne left for Europe with Fr. Aloysius Pazheparambil. Following Lavigne’s departure, some telegrams were sent to Pope Leo XIII: “The misgovernment of Lavigne induced the Malabar Chaldeans to submit to the Chaldean Patriarch” and “Do not believe Bishop Lavigne and his Malabar companion. Place us under the Babylonian Patriarch. Petition follows. Malabar Chaldean churches.”
8.13. Carmelite missionaries and the Suriani Vicariates
The concordat between the Holy See and Portugal was signed on June 23, 1886, to settle the Padroado problem. According to the concordat, Varapuzha had to leave some of her churches under the re-established Padroado diocese of Kochi. In 1887, 180,000 Syrians were also separated from Varapuzha. Before the concordat and the separation of the Suriani Catholics, Varapuzha had 90,000 Latins and 180,000 Syrians. Now Varapuzha would remain with 29,081 faithful. In Leonardo Mellano’s own words, “… this archdiocese of Varapuzha would be in such a miserable state, not to say ridiculous, that it would be better for it to be changed into only an apostolic prefecture.” Mellano tried to get some more faithful under him some way or other. The first attempt was to get Alappuzha and Poongavu Latin parishes, telling that the Christians of those two parishes belonged to a different caste from those of the other surrounding churches. The Ezhunooticar who had been assigned to the diocese of Kochi wrote petitions to Rome requesting that they again be placed under Varapuzha. As the decree for the division of the Suriani Catholics from the Latins reached the apostolic delegate Aiuti, he invited Fr. Mani Nidiry to Ootty. Remaining there for some days Nidiry prepared the translation of the decree. Aiuti’s act of publishing the new disposition of the Holy see regarding the Syrians through the priors of the Syrian Carmelites of Elthuruth and Mannanam instead of through their local superior to whom they belonged till then was unbearable for Mellano. The reaction of the Carmelites had started manifesting itself in different ways. Wherever they found it possible to make use of the division among the Syrians, they turned it around to suit their purpose and the different factions of Suriani Christians, knowingly or unknowingly, started pleading for Carmelites and for a separate vicariate under them. When the separation of the Syrians from the Latins became a reality, the Suddists began to send petitions to Rome in favour of the Carmelites. Congregation informed Mellano through Aiuti, the impossibility to erect a third vicariate exclusively for the Suddists. Mellano did not favour a separate administration for the 200,000 faithful with 172 parishes and 360 priests, insisted for separate administration for 15-20,000 people with 12 parishes and 21 priests, on condition that it would be entrusted to a Carmelite bishop. When this attempt failed, a new endeavour began. Medlycott seems to have had some information regarding the scheming pro-Carmelite priests, as stated in a petition for the third vicariate. He asked Lavigne to take action with their leader Fr. George Valiaveettil who was then professor of Puthenpally seminary and whose local ordinary was Lavigne. Lavigne decided to remove him from the seminary, gave him the order to leave and to reside in the Arakuzha church as assistant. He sent the petitions in the name of more than thirty priests from the central part of the Malabar coast who formed Nadumissam kakshi. They requested that a third vicariate be formed in the centre of the Kottayam and Thrissur vicariates, with the possibility of entrusting it to bishop Marcelline OCD who remained without assignment. They envisaged the restoration of the ancient see of Ankamaly to form the third vicariate in the centre. Propaganda requested them to be obedient to the dispositions taken by the Holy Father. Later Zaleski, the delegate apostolic reproached Valiaveetil declaring that an attempt for a third vicariate would be considered as an act of insubordination to the Holy See and that the first time he would cause an upheaval, he would certainly be suspended. By this admonition the attempt for the third vicariate came to an end. Fr. Candid OCD, the vicar general of Varapuzha presented a special project to reunite the schismatics and the rebellious of the apostolic vicariate of Kottayam, but this project did not meet with the approval of Zaleski. Fr. Boniface OCD, rector of the inter-ritual seminary of Puthenpally, suggested to form a Syrian hierarchy creating an archbishop and two bishops, of course all Europeans but would have adopted the Suriani rite. Zaleski presented this project before the Congregation and suggested to make Boniface himself the Metropolitan archbishop. The Congregation believed that this proposal would be insufficient to suppress the movement to have autochthonous bishops.
8.14. Syrian national union association of Malabar (Nazrani Jathyaykya Smgham)
The concept of the Nazrani Jathyaykya samgham was developed by Fr. Mani Nidiry in collaboration with Mar Dionysius, the Jacobite metropolitan. They acquired a piece of land in Kottayam, called Woodlands estate. Since education was one of the association’s main objectives, Nidiry and Mar Dionysius planned to start a college in the Woodlands property. The association envisioned various broad sweeping projects to encourage clever students by sending them on for higher studies including to foreign countries, to undertake more schools both English and Malayalam, as well as schools for girls, to teach girls in each village the arts of stitching, music and painting, to start orphanages, reading rooms and libraries, to start a bank, shop-network and so on. The Cardinal prefect of Propaganda requested for exact information from Mellano regarding the association and Nidiry presented a copy of the statutes. The general assembly of Propaganda on December 20, 1886 which decided to separate the Syrians from Latins forming for them one or two dioceses under Latin bishops, had also decided to impede the erection of the mixed college for the Syrian Catholics and Jacobite, proposed by the Indian Christian Association. Aiuti, the apostolic delegate, though he appreciated Nidiry very much, had his distrust for the association under Nidiry’s leadership. Aiuti managed to convince Nidiry that the realization of the project was impossible. Thus the attempt for the Nazrani Jathyaykya Sangham was aborted through Aiuti’s diplomatic approach. Still, the reunion attempts of mar Dionysius continued with Nidiry himself as the intermediary.
8.15. Mar Dionysius’ reunion Attempts
Mar Dionysius was the head of the Jacobite Suriani Christians of Malabar, having his residence in Kottayam. The history of the Jacobites in Malabar went back to the Koonan Cross Oath taken on January 3, 1653, in the Mattanchery church. Eventually on Pentecost Sunday, May 22, 1663, twelve priests imposed hands on the Archdeacon calling him Archbishop Mar Thoma I. In 1665, Mar Thoma I invited Mar Gregorios, Jacobite bishop who propagated Jacobitism among his followers. In 1772, Mar Thoma VI received episcopal consecration from the Jacobite bishop Mar Gregory and took the name Mar Dionysius. His attempts for reunion through Mar Cariattil were not accomplished.
In February 1874, Mar Dionysius V visited Mellano at his residence expressing his desire to reunite with the Catholic Church along with his people and clergy. On April 26, 1888, Mar Dionysius along with Lavigne and Nidiry reached the residence of the apostolic delegate Aiuti in Ootty, where they remained for two days. Mar Dionysius, who was waiting for the court decision of the civil court cases, asked Lavigne for a loan of 20 to 25 thousand rupees. Mar Dionysius decided to write to the Holy Father. The questions regarding the reunion included the following: 1. Whether the Jacobite hierarchy would be conserved; 2. Whether Mar Dionysius and other bishops who converted along with him would be left in their respective sees, and whether they would be provided with an annual financial allowance unless there were another stable provisions for their subsistence; 3. Whether married priests at the time of the reunion would continue to live with their wives, by requiring celibacy of the unmarried priests and also those who would become priests afterwards; 4. Whether the clergy and people would be permitted to keep the Maronite Catholic rite of the missal and the breviary; 5. Whether some colleges or seminary would be established for them
On June 25, 1888, the general meeting of the Propaganda took the matter under discussion and made the following decisions:1. that the general assembly suggested an examination of the baptism, form and the mode in use by the Jacobites in order to stabilize norms for the future; 2. that the apostolic delegate, through the apostolic vicars of Kottayam and Thrissur, explore whether or not the actual bishops were validly consecrated. If they were validly consecrated, they could be received accordingly, but if found null or dubious, they were to be consecrated absolutely or conditionally according to each case; 3. that their hierarchy be conserved with the converting bishops having jurisdiction in their respective sees and the converted priests allowed to exercise their occupations in their respective offices; 4. that they be allowed to maintain their after examining the books and use of the rituals of the Jacobites; 5. that regarding the use of the leavened bread, the apostolic delegate should try to eliminate it but, in case of difficulty, he should collect information on the quantity of salt and oil used and the motive for such mixing; 6. that there was no problem regarding priests married before ordination, but the case of each priest married after ordination would be treated individually. For future, the apostolic delegate should investigate whether there was and is any basis for Mar Dionysius’ declaration in favour of celibacy; 7. Mar Dionysius’ request for subsistence and books were to be answered positively. The Holy Father approved the decision of the Cardinals.
In August 1888, Mar Dionysius wrote to the Holy Father and in his covering letter to Aiuti, he wrote, “the Royal appeal which I mention of in that letter is to come on within two or three months. Therefore if I am to get any help I desire that it should be as early as possible.” Mar Dionysius was not pleased with the reply from Rome and informed Nidiry that he already had received 10,000/- rupees from one friend and another promised to give him an additional 10,000. He told Nidiry that “to him no other alternative remains than that of opening a school in the place that was previously bought with the purpose of establishing a school by the Jathyaykya Sangham. In the high court of Thiruvananthapuram, Mar Dionysius won the case against Mar Athanasius, the protestantising Jacobite bishop and after the victory, his people went on making a feast for him wherever he was present. That made it difficult for Nidiry to meet him in person and there ended the reunion attempts of Mar Dionysius.
8.16. Mar Abdiso Thondanatt
Antony Thondanatt was born around 1827 in Anakallumkal or Bharananganam. After the
Indo-Lusitanian schism The Suriani Catholics who were previously under Padroado became more active in writing either to Babylon or to Rome for autochthonous bishops. In 1857, Fr. Antony Thondanatt went with Fr. Antony Kodakachira to Baghdad as representatives of some Suriani Catholics. In the feast of the Ascension of the Lord, May 9, 1861 Thondanatt reached Kochi together with Mar Rocos. When Rocos left Malabar, Thondanatt with two seminarians followed him. They reached Mosul on August 31, 1862, but since the Chaldean Patriarch did not receive them in his residence, the british consul’s brother took him to his house. On October 17, he went to the Nestorian Patriarch to be consecrated as Mar Abdiso and his companion as deacon Sulaka.
Mar Abdiso reunited in1865 and remained in Mannanam before he was made parish priest first at Edamattam and then in Vilakkumadam. In 1875 he left the Catholic Church to join Mellus to reunite for a second time in 1878. Again in 1882 he received the invitation of Mellus to lead his followers. From 1887 onwards, the reunion attempt of Mar Abdiso was also taking its course. The already twice reunited and relapsed Mare Abdiso wanted to reunite for a third time. Though he did not want to be under the Carmelites whom he thought were the basic reason for his condition, later, the attempt initiated through Nidiry was shifted to Marcelline.This shift was not without reason. When Fr. Antony Thondanatt went to Baghdad and became mar Abdiso Thondanatt, his intention was to gain an autochthonous bishop for the Suriani Catholics. Even though his shift of allegiance is generally seen as instability he seems to have had very clear ideas from the very beginning. After becoming Mar Abdiso, even when he reunited and lived as an ordinary priest under Varapuzha, his aim was nothing less than to be a bishop. He was clever and intelligent. When he used to be the parish priest of Edanad and after having been reunited, even Mellano wrote to Rome praising his orderliness. If he reunited- his intention is rather clear in his letter to Marcelline, i.e., from what he had learned and seen, he hoped for certain that he would be admitted as a bishop as it was done in case of Nestorian, Jacobite, Armenian, Greek and other Oriental bishops. Even after living so exemplary a life as to cause envy among the other priests, as Mellano put it, if he was not permitted to use his Episcopal dignity, he believed it was only because of the Carmelites’ ill will. The arrival of Mellus gave him hope, especially since there was no hope from the Carmelites. But the attitude of Mellus was no better than that of the Carmelites. He, too, never wanted to hand over the power to Indians. Mar Abdiso’s turnabout to Catholicism leaving Mellus was the result. Since the Suriani Catholics were given a special bishop in Marcelline, he might have hoped against hope, but was all in vain. When Mellus invited him to Thrissur his hopes arose again and on Mellus’ departure from Malabar, Mar Abdiso hoped that he would be entrusted with the care for the Mellusians. Mellus again was too cunning and, instead of handing over his followers to an Indian, delegated his power to his Chaldean associate, Malpan Michael Augustine, making him a cor-episcopa. Mar Abdiso had to move to Elamthottam with a very insignificant role in the Mellusian Church. When two vicariates were erected for the Suriani Catholics, Mar Abdiso started hoping again and approached Lavigne through Nidhiry. When he saw Marcelline recommending the Parayil brothers for papal honours, he misunderstood that gesture as the Carmelites sponsoring Indians for high ecclesiastical dignities. He did not realiza that marcelline did so to exploit Parayils’ munificence. In late 1880s the sole anchor Mar Abdiso had was his pontifical and as the Mellusians needed him for ordinations, he was invited and went back to Thrissur, where he died on November 16, 1900. The salutary effects of Mar Abdiso’s role seems to have taken effect as a blessing in disguise.
8.17. The Third Order Suriani Carmelites
The desire of some of Suriani priests under the leadership of two malpans, Fr. Thomas Palackal of South Pallipuram and Fr. Thomas Porookara of Chambakulam, to lead a religious life was presented before Msgr. Stabilini, apostolic vicar of Malabar in 1829. Though disinclined at first, after seeing that some of the priests who made the request shared his ideas regarding the fishermen and low castes, on November 1, 1829, Stabilini permitted them to look for an appropriate place. After much searching, they selected Mannanam to start their house. They were given the name “The Suriani Regulars of Holy Mary.” Though they managed to build the church and the monastery, everything remained at the status quo since Stabilini’s successors showed no interest in their requests. Fr. Marcelline OCD presented their cause before Msgr. Bernardine Bacinelli of Varapuzha who decided to receive them on the feast of Immaculate Conception, giving them a rule to observe and the designation “Third Order Discalced Carmelites.” Their constitution was modeled on that of the Carmelite Third Order. Eleven priests took vows on December 8, 1855. Later a disagreement developed between the apostolic vicar Leonardo Mellano and the religious regarding the constitution; the religious were also divided among themselves. The apostolic vicar wanted to keep the congregation under his full control, which many of the Suriani Carmelites did not want. Therefore, in 1869/70, they wrote a petition to the Carmelite general asking to place them under a regular superior. The difference of opinion among the missionaries was reflected also among the Third Order Suriani Carmelites. The rift among the religious increased when Fr. Leopold OCD’s students who were the leaders in writing petitions to Rome against Mellano were expelled from the Third Order in 1875. The seven expelled is known as seven dolors. They are: Frs. Paulose Sankoorickal, Mathew Matheikal, Emmanuel Meenattoor, Chavara Ouseph, Gregory Irumban, Louis Pazheparambil and Hilarios Tharavattathil. Fr. Leopold OCD, who stayed in Koonammavu from his arrival in the mission in 1860 was called back from Varapuzha mission.
In 1877 the Third Order Suriani Carmelites were found divided among themselves mainly in two factions: one group which stood with Mellano and his companions who wanted to keep the Suriani Carmelites under their full control, and the other-the majority- which stood for self-government. This division was a reflection of the mentality prevailing among the Suriani Catholics in general Those who stood for self-government wrote petitions to Rome not only for the autonomy of their congregation but in particular for that of the Suriani community. Since in the organization of the Suriani Catholics in the Varapuzha vicariate, the Carmelite missionaries involved their Third Order Carmelites more than the secular clergy, the Suriani Carmelites had an important role in the ecclesiastical affairs of the Suriani Church, in particular on those who were under the Varapuzha vicariate. That was why Fr. Chavara could exert his influence on the Suriani faithful at the time of Rocos schism. Naturally the antagonism of the faithful in general against the Carmelite bishop and missionaries reverberated among the Suriani Carmelites, who, too, were disgruntled due to the treatment they received. The struggle to have a constitution apart from the one envisaged by Mellano after the desolation of the original one became the important issue for them in early 1880s. The creation of Kottayam and Thrissur vicariates for the Suriani Catholics brought about significant changes in the relationship between the Suriani Carmelites and the Suriani Catholics with their secular clergy. When Medlycott, perhaps owing to the Carmelite missionary influence, deliberately excluded Suriani Carmelites among the councilors, Lavigne’s attempt to nominate one from Mannanam as his councilor was objected to strongly by the religious of Mannanam themselves. As a result of the disengagement knowingly or unknowingly effected, after 1887 the Suriani Carmelites generally approached Ro9me for the matters of their congregation and showed little interest in the affairs of the Suriani Church in general. This segregation seems to have also another economic footing, i.e., before the arrival of Medlycott and Lavigne, the Suriani Carmelites banked heavily upon the Suriani parishes and individuals for financial support whereas after the erection of the Suriani vicariates, the Suriani parishes had to contribute to the vicariates for their various developments. In addition, the Suriani Carmelites, with the apostolic delegate as their superior general, found other means to get financial support. The Suriani Carmelites were seen as having a rather tranquil course of history by the middle of 1890s.
8.18. Autochthonous Bishops
The ardent desire of the Suriani Catholics to have autochthonous bishops was a question which troubled Propaganda continuously from 1862. The provisions taken to regulate the problems were not fruitful, especially since the missionaries in the field overlooked the Holy See’s orders. The nomination of a vicar general for the Suriani Catholics was the first arrangement made, but the missionaries objected to Propaganda’s suggestion to provide a vicar general with episcopal character. As the troubles grew, the Cardinal Members of the Propaganda Fide, depending heavily on reports of the apostolic visitors, Msgr. Meurin and Msgr. Persico, decided to nominate Marcelline Berardi OCD as the Varapuzha apostolic vicar’s coadjutor with special care for the Syrians. That arrangement was not successful either since Mellano, the apostolic vicar did not collaborate and, as a result, Marcelline failed to put orders from Propaganda into effect. Continued agitation from the Syrians led the Congregation to separate them definitely from the Latins of Varapuzha in 1887. A few years after the arrival of Lavigne and Medlycott, the Suriani Catholics clearly discerned that their apostolic vicars did not differ much from the Carmelite missionaries in their attitude towards the natives and, consequently, they would never promote the natives to self-government.
In 1892, Zaleski wrote to the prefect of P.F., Cardinal Ledochowski that the source of continuous disturbance among the Suriani Catholics of Malabar is in their desire to have native bishops and in the disordered tendency to wish to arrive at this purpose through means of agitation and intimidating the Holy See with the menace of schism. He called the leaders of this movement, sectarians. A move of the so-called ‘sectarians’ who tried to obtain bishops from Chaldea or Syria was brought to the attention of Propaganda in July 1894, by Archbishop Henry Altmayer, Apostolic delegate of Mesopotamia. British Consular Agent Nemroud Rassan received a petition from Thiruvithamcore, from a priest named Mathew. Letters followed: the ongregation wrote to Zaleski, Zaleski in turn wrote to Lavigne, Medlycott, Fr. Bernard of Jesus OCD, and to Fr. George Irumpan, for information. In October 1894 all replied. All accused Nidiry masterminding the movement, with whom also Fr. Peediyeckal, Ignatius Puthett, Palakunnel, Mathew Panamkuzhackal, Mani kanjirakatt ex TOCD, and a certain Mutickal from Trichur. They were considerd as rebels. They vowed to try to get the fund from British government (interest of Rs. 3000). Zaleski informed the P.F. the details of it. 1/3 of the expense, he wrote, was met by Kuravilangad church, which would be the headquarters of the new bishop. It was designed to be a joint venture of Trichur and Kottayam.
In December 1894, Zaleski wrote to Rome: “The Syrians have already collected the required amount. They have already made agreement with a bishop of Syrian rite- Catholic or Nestorian, not known- come to India to consecrate a Nestorian bishop. Expects the bishop in the first weeks of December.” Zaleski lamented that the vicars apostolic do not furnish with proper information. He did not want to go to Malabar because at that moment, there was no means to impede the schism. He thought it would be like ‘going to war unarmed,” and suggested to excommunicate the bishop coming and those who receive ordinations from him. What they wanted was not a Chaldean bishop or a schismatic, but someone who would come to India to consecrate native Suriani bishops.
8.18.1. General Assembly of the P.F. on January 7, 1895
The general Assembly discussed “What provisions should be adopted in view of a probable schism in Malabar?” The relator was absent. Cardinal Ignazio Persico was referente of the session. After recollecting the desire of the Syrians in the past, the relator presented the issues set forth by the agitators: 1. to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the Latins; 2. to obtain a native bishop. The news of the plan to build a bishops house and seminary in Kuravilangad where Nidiry was vicar was not considered as a good news. They thought that they could prevent some one coming from Mesopotamia through Altmayer, the delegate Apostolic, but if Abdiso was to receive consecration from Mar Dionysius? Could excommunicate him But they rememberd that Abdiso was already under censure. The relator stood for a change of regime in Malabar. But conceding native bishops would seem to be imposed on the Holy see by Suriani Christians themselves; which would damage the prestige of Holy See. According to the apostolic vicars and the apostolic delegate there is not actually any Suriani priest worthy to be elevated to the Episcopal dignity. One solution found by the relator was to entrust the Suriani Christians to the Chaldean Patriarch especially since Patriarch Khayyath was favourable to the Holy See. It too has complications: “One would have to abrogate the dispositions of Diamper.”
Decision of the general Assembly was to write to the apostolic delegate and to the apostolic vicars for the Suriani Catholics to know whether among the secular or regular clergy especially among the priests called by them to fulfill the office of V.G., there were subjects worthy to be adorned with Episcopal character. “Thus to invite the apostolic delegate if he saw suitable and if there wa no fear of major tumults and agitation to make it known to the Suriani prudently that the Sacred Congregation is disposed to give them native bishops and that such design would be put into effect as early as possible.” On January 17, 1895, the Holy Father gave his approval. Zaleski, Medlycott, Lavigne were informed on January 18. Cardinal Ledochowski sent a private letter to Zaleski which followed the official letter.
8.18.2. Attempts from Malabar
Some Syrians of Malabar who were trying to get a bishop from Mesopotamia or Syria contacted the British Consular agent of Mosul Nemroud Rassan. (Promised Rs. 2000).He had approached the Nestorian Patriarch mar Shim’un (ottoman Empire). The move from India to get a bishop from the Nestorian Patriarch was effectively controlled Propaganda through Altmayer, the apostolic delegate of Mesopotamia, with the help of the French Vice Counsel and Grand-Vizier of the Turkish Government. Altmayer spoke to Mellus to discourage Nemroud Rassan. Though this attempt was attributed to Nidiry and his friends, the letter from Trichur dated October 31st 1894 was signed by Nadakavookaran Inasu and Chettupuzhakaran Lona Ouseph and thirty one others. It was accompanied by a letter of the king of Kochi. They were waiting for Mellus and the silence of Mellus made the dissidents of Kottayam and Thrissur reluctant to join he Mellusians. The petition stated that they, recently through Protestant missionaries of Kottayam communicated with the Nestorian patriarch, who promised them a bishop. But their “beloved archbishop” Mellus had a new face then to transmit their letter to Rome. When Mar Shim’un did not find a bishop whom he could send to Malabar, Nemroud Rassan presented two Chaldeans before him to be ordained. Altmayer most tactfully moved to use his influence with the Governor General Aziz Pasha who denounced the act of the British agent Rassan before Ottoman Government of Constantinople. The chief officer of state of Turkish Government forbade Mar Shim’un to consecrate the Chaldeans. Since Nemroud Rassan was a British Consular Agent, Altmayer also tried to contain him through the British Government through the influence of cardinal Herbert Vaughan, Archbishop of Westminster. This move from the schismatics had its positive effects in making Rome feel that the thirst and thrust of the Suriani Catholics to have autochthonous bishops could not be impeded. The Cardinal members of Propaganda decided to act against the intense disapproval from different corners, against the difference of opinion of the missionaries, the apostolic delegate and the Chaldean Patriarch. Zaleski’s objections presented the real situation in the missions, for the missionaries feared that they would have to leave their mission in all of India, not just in Malabar. The Suriani Church had a strong motive which the other missions lacked, their rite.
Zaleski’s reply for the private letter stated that native bishops would be dangerous, so also Chaldean bishops. He suggested as lesser evil, at the most European bishops assuming Suriani rite. If the Syrians reach the goal through agitation, then also the others would follow. Soon Zaleski received the official letter from the Propaganda Fide which advised him 1. to cooperate with the decision of the Cardinals to concede as far as possible to the National sentiment of the Syrians; 2. enquire about the VGs of Lavigne and Medlycott; and 3. to reveal the new to the Suriani Catholics. Zaleski still insisted that nomination of native Syrian bishops would be the greatest disaster. Regarding the VG’s he wrote, they were totally incapable and was evident from the desire of the vicars apostolic to entrust a vicariate to the surviving on the death of its titular. He advised the prefect that the decision could be kept a most rigorous secret also in Rome, otherwise Latins also might ask for native bishops. Cardinal Ledochowski wrote back to him that the situation of latins was entirely different. On March 12, Ledochowski wrote another private letter to Zaleski to act according to the decision of Rome. Zaleski again mentioned of the same in his official letter and gave the list of the agitators, starting with Nidiry. According to the delegate apostolic, the selection of Lavigne and Medlycott went wrong. In spite of Zaleski’s repeated objections and forewarnings, Propaganda requested the apostolic vicars to submit names for bishops’ candidates from among the Suriani clergy. Lavigne and Medlycott seem to have believed that the bishops to be nominated would be their assistants. Before presenting the name of the candidates, Medlycott clearly expressed his belief and later on Lavigne did the same. Perhaps because of this Lavigne suggested two bishops, one for the Suddists and the other for the Nordists. While Medlycott suggested the name of his secretary Fr. John Menachery, Lavigne suggested two presenting the two sections, the Nordists and the Suddists. For suddists he recommended Fr. Makkil, “secretary to the lete Msgr. Marcelline. He was very much attached to him, sincere love for Roman Catholic Church, fidelity to his bishop; Visitation convent was started thanks to him; He has not manifested any tendency to flaunt his pontifical privileges.” For the Nordists, was recommended Fr. Louis Pazheparambil, who was secretary. His love for the Holy Roman Church was highlighted, “he was submissive in his action and opinion with regard to superiors, he was faithful in informing his bishop of the conduct of the clergy.” Though his VG Fr. Thayyil was presented to be faithful to his ecclesiastical superiors both to bishops of Varapuzha and to Lavigne himself, he was not recommended. The recommendation given as devoted to the Holy Catholic Church is to be understood as opposed to the accusation against those leaders of the Suriani Catholics as schismatic because of their insistence to have native bishops and Chaldean liturgy.
The attitude of the Chaldean Church towards the Suriani Catholics was clearly manifested in the reaction to Propaganda’s decision to nominate autochthonous bishops for them. While advising the Suriani leaders to write to Rome, the Chaldean Patriarch prudently informed Rome of all his contacts from India. From his direct experience, Mellus the intruder, informed the apostolic delegate of Mesopotamia that the love of the Suriani Christians for Chaldean rite was only to have autochthonous bishops which is presented as their love of perversity and objected to Chaldean Patriarch Khayyath’s project to provide Chaldean bishops for the Suriani Catholics. Khayyath fought vigorously to convince Propaganda that the desire of the Suriani Catholics was not for autochthonous bishops but for bishops of their rite, i.e., Chaldean rite. Rome’s consideration to provide autochthonous bishops was circulated among the Suriani Catholics and, as a result, agitation ceased.
8.18.3. General meeting of the PF on May 20, 1895
Cardinals voted to leave the decision to the secretary with the Holy Father (udienza May 31). Pope Leo XIII wanted to discuss the matter again in another General Assembly. Zaleski, meanwhile, accused Paul Alappatt who studied in Rome, spreading in Malabar the news over the decision of the Propaganda Fide. Lavigne left India for Europe with his secretary Louis Pazheparambil. After Lavigne’s departure, there were pro-chaldean petitions from Malabar, stating that they are not Syro-Malabarians but Syro-Chaldeans.
8.18.4. General Assembly of PF on March 23, 1896
On March 23, 1896, the Cardinals of Propaganda got together to unravel the problem that troubled Rome for more than three decades. They discussed in details the Chaldean question, a possible annexation of the Suriani Church to the Chaldean Patriarchate. After long deliberation, they concluded that the actual Suriani rite is substantially different from the Chaldean rite. The arguments of Cardinal Galimberti, the relator are not historically valid. He gave full credit to Dom Menezes and the Synod of Diamper for converting the Malabar Christians. But still the conclusion was in favour of the Suriani Church. Recognizing a bond of sympathy and a religious solidarity between the Suriani Christians and the Chaldeans, Cardinal Galimberti presented before the Cardinals the arguments for and against regarding the project of annexation. Arguments for the annexation: 1. The petitions from Malabar for the unification stated that in the past the Suriani Church received their bishops from Chaldea and that the Chaldean rite was their own; 2. Patriarch Khayyath affirmed that such an aggregation would remove all agitation from Malabar; 3. The concession of a Chaldean bishop would paralyse the attempts from Malabar made in the previous year to get a new bishop from the Chaldean Nestorian Patriarch. The relator found the first argument true and with ample significance. As for the second one, he pointed out that the delegate apostolic Zaleski who held a contrary opinion had information which affirmed that the Suriani catholics wanted a native bishop, and one from Chaldea that he might consecrate native bishops. Even Mellus objected to Khayyaths’s proposal and stated that if a Chaldean bishop were sent to Malabar and did not consecrate a native, the Malabarians would revolt against the Chaldean Patriarch as well, as they did against Latin apostolic vicars. According to Mellus, the Suriani Catholics including priests being corrupt, scornfully resisted all restraint, and now awail themselves of the principle of nationalism. The Cardinal concluded that the concession of a Chaldean bishop could lead some Mellusians to the Catholic faith but not the Jacobites who would turn to Antioch. The following were the arguments against the proposed project of annexation: 1. The petition from the Suriani Catholics of Malabar were only an able maneuver of Khayyath’s which reflected his own ideas; 2. The Chaldean episcopacy and clergy, even Khayyath himself, did not offer sufficient guarantees nor were they adorned with moral qualities, zeal and ecclesiastical spirit, that would be necessary to successfully try a daring reform; 3. The number of Suriani catholics was about seven times higher that that of the Chaldeans; 4. The very reason which promote the nomination of autochthonous bishops for the Suriani Catholics are objections to the project of annexation; 5. The enormous distance from Chaldea would lead the Suriani Catholics to disintegrate from the Chaldean Patriarch; 6. If the annexation were effected, the Chaldean Patriarch would consider it as perpetual and the Suriani Catholics after a few years, would againask for native bishops and protest against the Patriarch. Then the Holy See would be forced to seek even more difficult alternative and 7. if annexation meant only the giving of some Chaldean bishops without modifying the rite, without changing liturgy and without abrogating the dispositions of the Synod of Diamper, then the diversity would lead to great confusion and diminish the affection between the bishop and the faithful. If it were effected by transforming the Suriani rite and substituting the Chaldean rite, that would lead to a general agitation aand disturbance inevitable regarding communion under double species, introduction of leavened bread, and priestly celibacy. The Cardinals were to decide on 1. Whether it was expedient to concede to the Suriani catholics some bishops of the proper rite and nation directly subject to the Holy See? If affirmative, 2. Which of the candidates proposed by msgr. Medlycott is to be recommended to the Holy Father for the spiritual government of Thrissur? 3. Which of the candidates proposed by Msgr. Lavigne is to be recommended to the Holy Father for the spiritual government of Kottayam? 4. How to provide for the Kottayam vicarate in view of the perils created by the division of caste? If negative for the first, 5. Whether and under what cautions would it be expedient to extend the jurisdiction of the Chaldean Patriarch of Babylon over the Suriani catholics of Malabar? 6. Whether and what provisions are to be adopted?
The Cardinals on March 23, 1896 decided the following. 1. Affirmative; 2. Affirmative and supplicating to the Most Holy Father for the third, i.e., for Rev. John Menachery; 3 & 4. Affirmative and supplicating the Most Holy Father for Rev. Matthew Makil and Rev. Aloysius pazheparambil, dividing the present territory of the vicariate into two apostolic vicariates; 5. anticipated in the first; 6. anticipated.
. The fact that the Suriani Catholics had a large number of faithful, priests, parishes, religious and seminarians was considered a positive argument for providing their own bishops for them. The painful situation of the Suriani Catholics, deprived of the great religious feasts celebrated in their own rite, was considered as something serious. Compared to the other Oriental Churches, they recognized that there truly was a great disparity in Rome’s attitude towards Suriani Catholics and understood the ardent national spirit of the Suriani Catholics. On March 23, 1896, the general assembly of the cardinals decided to nominate as autochthonous bishops, Menacherry, Pazheparambil and Makil. When Propaganda requested Lavigne for the name of candidates, he suggested Makil for the Suddists and Pazheparambil for the Nordists. When the question of selecting between these two candidates was presented before the Cardinals, along with the question how to deal with the division of caste in the Kottayam vicariate, the Congregation decided to divide the territory into two and appoint both Makil and Pazheparambil. Propaganda’s decision to solve the caste problem through a territorial division seems to have had a serious defect. The cardinals, who thought it necessary to provide a bishop for the 12,000 Suddists and 12 parishes, did not take into account the 90,000 Nordists with 64 parishes who would be subjected to a Suddist bishop. Another major problem was that to this 90,000 faithful belonged the bulk of the so-called ‘agitators’ or ‘sectarians’, for whose sake Propaganda had to separate the Suriani Catholics from Latins and concede autochthonous bishops. The hope that this division would bring about peace and unity among the Suriani Catholics did not attain fulfillment. The divergence between Suddists and Nordists was already aggravated by the influence of some Carmelites, and Lavigne brought about a distinct estrangement. In preparing the details and boundaries for the Suriani vicariates, Zaleski was cautious enough to limit the Suriani Catholics within the boundaries of Varapuzha and requested the Congregation to specify definite limit. [The boundary suggested by Zaleski: “Thus these three vicariates are limited to the following confines: to the North, by the limits of Mangalore and Coimmbatore dioceses; to the East, by the dioceses of Coimbatore and Trichinopoly; to the South, by the diocese of Kollam and to the West, the ocean.] Zaleski suggested also to use the name Syro-Malabar which was designed to contain the Suriani Church to the Malabar coast. Anyhow, the Holy See’s determination to individualize the Suriani Church as different from the Chaldean Church was a solid and valiant one.
On July 28, the Holy Father erected the three vicariates for the Suriani Catholics with the brief Quae Rei. The geographical limits were mentioned, exactly as suggested by Zaleski. He consecrated the three apostolic vicars in Kandy [Ceylon] on Sunday, October 25, 1896. Thus, the intense struggle of the Suriani Catholics of Malabar for autochthonous bishops was brought to fruition and the Suriani Church of India took a new turn in its odd and unique history.
1 comment:
I would like to know more about family "Collaparambil/Kollaparambil/Kollaparampil"
They are located at Kottayam.
Post a Comment