Facts about Kolanchery Church episode

  Given below a detailed Communique from Fr Dr Johns Abraham Konat which is self explanatary

Subject:- The Kolenchery Church ue

Fr. Dr. Johns Abraham Konat, Priest Trustee.

            Let us thank God the Almighty for the peaceful ending of the fasting undertaken by H. H. Bava Thirumeny and H.G. Dr. Mathews Mar Severios Metropolitan. Both of them decided to end the fasting by 11.30 p. m. on Sunday 18^th September by receiving karikinvellam from H.G. Thomas Mar Athanasius Metropolitan (Chengannur) and H. G. Dr. Thomas Mar Athanasios Metropolitan (Kandanad East), the president of the core committee which was entrusted to lead the Upavasa Prarthana Yagnam. Honb’le Chief Minister Sri. Oommen Chandy gave leadership to the discussions which finally culminated in the ending of the fasting. The decision came after Bava Thirumany received a written assurance from the side of the Government that the Court order will be implemented after 15 days. A last attempt will be made during these 15 days to solve the issue amicably. If no result comes out from these discussions, the Government will implement the court verdict. This decision of the government was written and signed by the Ernakulam District Collector for the Government of Kerala. We received the document by 11 p.m. which was scrutinized by our advocate Sreekumar and the bishops of the church present at Kolenchery. After getting the consent of all, H. H. Bava Thirumeny declared that H. H. is ending the fasting. It was a moment of great joy for the whole Church. So many disputes with the Patriarch’s group have been settled in the past through the mediation of ministers or other representatives of the Government; but no Government had ever before written a document of settlement assuring to implement court orders. So by getting such a written assurance from the Government, the Orthodox Church has got what it was asking for during the last few decades. This is our victory.

            May be there are some confusions among our people about the genuineness of this assurance. Let me make it clear that it is not just a verbal assurance but a written assurance. Our advocate Sreekumar said that this is the best way to end this Upavasa Prarthana Yagnam.

            The Patriarch’s faction committed some blunders in this issue.

1.      Their first mistake was that they themselves filed an Original Suit (OS 43/07) in 2007 for getting full possession of the church and its properties. The verdict which was given on 16^th August 2011 went against them.

2.      They could not get a stay order from the court immediately and thus H. G. Dr. Mathews Mar Severios, Metropolitan of Kandanad West could celebrate Holy Qurbana in the Church the very next day. This proved that H. G. has full authority over the church and the Patriarch’s faction could not oppose it. They proclaimed that their bishops will also celebrate during the subsequent Sundays, but nothing happened. They should have at least refrained from making such declarations.

3.      Within 2 days the same court which gave the verdict allowed a stay for 15 days and thus the status quo was restored. The day on which the stay expired the Superintend of Police (Aluva rural) asked them to vacate the church and remove all their belongings from the premises because they have no more any right there. They acted accordingly and left taking everything which belonged to them. They did not come back for three days. After 3 days a single bench of the High Court (HC) extended the stay for one more week and they came back to the church and celebrated Qurbana for a day according to the status quo.

4.      In the meanwhile they tried to file an appeal with the HC which was initially avoided by a few benches, but finally they could file an appeal. The biggest blunder they committed was that they approached the HC for staying the lower court’s verdict and for maintaining the status quo. Both prayers were mercilessly rejected by a High Court Division bench headed by the Chief Justice of Kerala. “We do not see any justification for granting the stay order in favour of the party, whose suit was dismissed, ……. The prayer is, therefore rejected”

5.      Now they say that the court verdict is not yet ripe for execution because the court has not yet given a decree. If so why did they abandon their claims when the stay period came to an end and came back when the stay was extended? There is no consistency in whatever they say.

6.      Now how can their demand for maintaining the status quo be granted? They had approached the court with this prayer and the court said NO. Now they say that accepting an appeal is equivalent to getting a stay order. If so why did they approach the HC for a stay order and demanding the maintenance of status quo? Moreover their argument that accepting an appeal is equivalent to stay is not true because according to Civil Procedure Code order 41 rule 5, an appeal does not have the effect of a stay order.

All the arguments of the Patriarch’s faction are baseless. They are making arguments just to save their faces before their people who were lead into a useless agitation. Let the Almighty forgive them.

I express my sincere gratitude to each and everybody who toiled and moiled for the victory of Upavasa Prarthana Yagnam.

MOC shouldnot walk into the trap of Oomman Chandy Government

MOC faithfuls are greatly relieved that HH PauloseII and HG Mar Savariose have called off their fast and two precious lives are now not at stake.The statement of Oomman Chandy that in 15 days there will either be an amicable settlement or implementation of Court order is not something to be taken at face value.For a clear understanding we need to look at facts and events that led to the explosive situation in Kolanchery.

Kolanchery St.Peters &St Paul's Church,its Chapel at Kottur and other establishments have been decreed by High Court as the Church to be governed under the Constitution of 1934.This decree has been executed and there was a mediation process whereby the Puthancruz Society enjoyed the facilities to conduct worship at one Sunday per month.Having got a toehold on the Church ,they went to the Court claiming ownership of the Church.Court naturally repeated the earlier judgment which said Orthodox Church is the sole legal claimant to the ownership of the Church.Court directed the implementation of the order by asking RDO to hand over the keys of the church to the Vicar under Mar Savariose.This was complied with.The Puthancruz followers removed the worship accessories which were kept by them in the Churches  for use in their turn.The court order was implemented in its full sense.

All on a sudden,ThomasI Mafriana appeared from nowhere and started squatting on the road claiming that HB is on a "Prayer Yagna"(God only knows what it means) demanding rights on the Church.What the rights were, HB or Puthan Cruz faction themselves were not clear(they kept shifting their stances so often that their spokesmen themselves are confused.At the compromise talks,their stances changed on day to day basis sometimes more than once a day.

There appears to be connivance from high echelons of the government for the drama of Mafrian ThomasI.Government officials including District Collector,Police officials were all partisan,favouring the Mafrians.Examples
1.When PuthenCruz followers broke open the Cross Tower,the entire police force remained passive spectators. For namesake,a Case has been registered,but no follow up action like arrests of the accused.       
2.A priests from Puthen Cruz society came to the place where HH PauloseI was fasting in civil dress and made provocative statements,which was resented by MOC followers.Case has been registered against MOC people,the priest who caused the provocation is scotfree even now
3.On Sunday the 11th September,lawful Vicar and Asst Vicar were arrested and removed from the church when they were going to celebrate the Holy Qurbana.

These are some of the blatant misuse of power by Police.Police officials justified their action by admitting in privet that they have Orders from the top.Who and what that top is not difficult to infer

Now the media.Reporter Channel was the only media which was giving a balanced version of the events.Their Cameraman was manhandled by PC followers.All other Channels and newspapers blacked out the news.When a journalist was attacked,the journalist union which normally makes so much noice were silent.Even Reporter Channel left it alone!!

Ooman Chandy is now playing a game of deception.On the face of wrath against his one sided action,he wants to get the Orthodox Church to cool off,so that he can continue his favouritism to PC.Orthodox Church leadership and followers should not walk into the trap.We should keep our battle readiness intact to react to the deception as and when it occurs.

Can Any Community be Above Law?

Implementation of a Court order in relation to Kolanchery St Peters and St Pauls Church is growing to the potential of a law and order problem in the entire state of Kerala. Mafriana Thomas I triggered of the issue by his hunger strike and the Catholicose retaliated.The former declared a hunger strike (deceitfully calling it "Prayerful sit in"(Prarthana Yagnan) for not implementing court order and the later for getting a court decree implemented.Merits and demerits of the core issue on the ownership/custody of the Church has been debated for long
Both sides have explained their points of view before Courts,right up to the Supreme Court.A decision has come from the court.Its execution petitions are being processed.Competent Church Court(ie the court which is designated to deal with Church Cases)have given a decision.Kolanchery Church and its establishments have been handed over to the Orthodox Church.An appeal against the decree is filed by Puthan Cruz Society  which is pending at the High Court.Prayer for a stay on lower court judgment has been rejected by HC.That means the lower court order is in force now.
The Puthen Cruz society(which calls themselves Jacobite Church)now claims the right to worship in the Church quoting rights to worship.Of course nobody can deny them their rights to worship in any manner they deem fit.So long as that is done at a place which is owned or leased or acquired by legal means nobody will stop them.For those who want to worship in Kolanchery Church or its Chapels,they can do so when the lawfully appointed priest calibrate the Sacrament.Or they can pray while the Church is open.They cannot have their terms implemented at somebody else's place.That is a simple logic.
But the important question is can anybody overcome the rule of the law by getting mobs to assemble and whip up their frenzy?Unless the country is run on Mobocrazy and not by democracy,no community can be allowed to prevent court orders.All interested in rule of the law should condemn the attempts to run the country on mobocrazy lines

MOC should disown Kolanchery Medical College

Medical College owned by Medical Mission Kolanchery is in the news for wrong reasons.The so called Inter Church council of which Kolanchery is the only non Catholic organisation has been granted the position of its spokesman .Very clever move by the Catholic Church in passing off the ill will and bad name that is generated out of the daylight robbery in the name of Medical College admissions to MOC,who has nothing to do with Kolanchery Medical College.Of course ,there can be no denying the fact that the name board of the Medical College has Moc's name prominently encrypted.It is also a fact that Kolanchery Medical Mission in its initial days had close links with the church.At that point of time it was lead by people with good intentions like Dr K.C.Mammen.During the early days ,help of L/L Philipose Mar Theophilose and Fr Paul Varghese(later Paulose Mar Gregoriose)were valuable in raising funds.Substantial funds came in since the donors mistook it as an institution of MOC(which it was for all practical purposes at that point of time)
     Today things are different.Except for the mention on the name board and a decorative post to one of the Bishops of the Church,there is nothing that the institution has in common with the Church.It is administered by a group of rich and influential men in and around Kolanchery.The sole purpose of the organisation is to amass wealth by collecting exorbitant capitation  and tution fees.The inter church Medical colleges refuse to follow any other guidance from Government or even Medical Council of India.They use the minority rights as a shield to their plunder and are managing to get favourable court orders which are a mystery to those knowledgeable in legal matters.Minority rights are now being interpreted as the right to run educational institutions on their own terms.The terms that are acceptable to MES and other minority institutions are not acceptable to inter church council who believes that it is their right to plunder just because they are classified as minority institution.
     They are not prepared to consider weaker sections of minority community for admissions and some small mercy in fees etc,which can aptly be termed as  booty.Former Chief Minister and present Defence minister lamented in public that the institutions who got the Govt NOC on the promise that 50% students will be admitted in self financing colleges based on Merritt had gone back and managed to get court orders such that they can loot the people at large.And the irony is that Christian institutions were the ones in the forefront of this unscrupulous move.Its another matter whether a seasoned and efficient politician like Antony was knave enough to accept the oral statements as gospel truth,given the track record of the members of the inter church council.But it does not absolve the perpetuaters of the crime of their sins.
        Why should MOC carry on its shoulder the burden of ill will,bad name  and ridicule in the public eye  for the omissions and commissions of an institution which it has nothing to do with

MOC Should Play Proactive Role in the Move to get Endosulphan Banned

In the present scenario of Neros in Delhi fiddling while Indians in various parts of the country are subjected to boundless suffering due to a pesticide,can MOC wash its hand a la Pontious Pilate?
Silence of the Church hierarchy is deafening.Just because Endosulphan has not created much of havoc in the Nazrani heartland stretching from Kunnamkulam to Chathannoor,the Church cannot turn a blind eye to the human suffering in Kasarkode and other parts of this country.Latin&Malankara rites have made a symbolic presence at the one day hunger strike of Kerala CM-apreciable on the lines of something better than nothing.

Of course most of our Bishops are outside India for passion week,and it will be sometime for them to return.A few who happen to be in India and Kerala are now busy solemnising the sacrament of wedding now that the lent is over.But what about the Lay leadership?They have no such fig leaves to hide.

Is our Church afraid of the interests of Planters who cares only about their ringing Cash Chests irrespective of what happens to the human beings?They have nothing to loose in this greatest cruelty to humanity.There is no family of the planter who is a victim of Endosulphan.Victims are mostly from the poorest of poor,who has no place to live which is safe from the evil grip of Endosulfan

Church has a role to play in awakening the conscience of the people against the barbaric act of the Government of India in being a lobbyist for the present avthar of the devil in perpetuating human misery.The act of omission of the Church is aiding and abetting the Satanic forces

History In Perspective

This is with reference to the column Letter from Metropolitan published in the Diocesan Bulletin of Kandanad East Diocese,issue dated March 15th.I am referring to the portion dealing with the events relating to the factional fight that took place in Malankara Church with Palakkunnathu Mathews Mar Athanasiose and Pulikottil Joseph Mar Dionysus heading the two factions.Points under reference herein are as follows:
1.There was no serious difference of opinion within Malankara Church prior to the arrival of Pulikkottil Thirumeni after his consecration as a Bishop.
2.There does not appear to be any historical record to prove that Palakkunnathu Athanasiose was a controversial Bishop on his stances on faith related matters
3.After he took over he co operated with his predecessor Cheppat Mar Dionysious,Bishop from Antioch Joachim Mar Coorilose and Osthathiose Abdulnoor
4.Pulikkottil Thirumeni's election papers were fabricated(Athanasiose Thirumeni quotes here and in many places the Malankara Church history of YakoobIII Patriarch)

In short Thirumeni quotes select events and writings to portray Palakkunnathu Mar Athanasiose as legitimate and accepted leader of Malankara Church and Pulikotil Thirumeni as the person responsible for the split in the Church.The problem appears to be that of quoting events selectively for proving a point.To have a proper understanding of the events leading to the split,one has to go slightly back in history,that of the attempt made by Britishers to take Malankara Church to Protestantism.

The events narrated by Mar Athanasiose  has its roots in the work of Palakkunnathu Abraham Malpan.The malpan appears to be a person enamoured by the white skin.He got himself re ordained by a Bishop from Antioch when there was a hue and cry that the Bishops of MOC ordained by Thozhiyoor Bishops didnot have proper high priesthood(reason being that the Thozhiyoor Bishops themselves were not ordained properly,according to some)..He got fined by the Travancore King of that time for that,for which historical records are available.Further,when the CMS Missionaries preached Protestant faith he got enamoured by that and became the leader of the so called Reformist Movement.He used his influence with the Patriarch of Antioch and got his nephew Deacon Mathai consecrated as a Bishop with a view to take over the Malankara Church and take it to Protestantism.That was how  Palakkunnathu Mar Athanasiose became a Bishop.There was no meeting of Chuch representatives to elect him as a Bishop,the reigning Malankara Methran was totally in the dark,the whole thing was done surreptitiously.He could not even produce a snathicon from the patriarch who consecrated him.His only claim to the post of Malankara Methran was that he was consecrated by the patriarch of Antioch and the reigning Malankara Methran was consecrated by an Indian Bishop(of Thozhiyur Church).The additional disqualification(according to Palakkunnathu and his camp followers)was that Cheppattu Thirumeni was old.

Normally it could not have been much difficult for Palakkunnathu group to influence the Travancore Rajah,given the support of the British Empire's resident.But Rajah withstood the pressure of British resident for quite a long time before finally succumbing to the pressure from the resident.Any student of Travancore History would find that the Rajah was for all practical purposes remote controlled by the resident.If he uncharacteristically resisted the resident it could have been only due to his sense of justice.Cheppattu Mar Dionysious played into the hands of Palakkunnathu by abdicating in favour of Joachim mar Coorilose and thereby making it easy for the Crown to oblige the resident.Palakkunnathu Mar Athanasiose must have thought that he should at least do the last rites of the prelate whose indiscretion made his usurping of power easier.

Pulikottil Thirumeni stepped in as per the wishes of a large number of faithfuls who didnot like the idea of Malankara Church going the protestant way.Before accepting the Crown of Thorns of a Bishop,he had very long deliberations and took up the job on persuasion by a large number of Malankara Church faithfuls.He had a long drawn battle to free the Church from the clutches of deviation from faith.Naturally,he had to get the Royal proclamation undone for preventing the deviation from faith.

I am unable to comprehend how Dr Athanasiose overlooked all this and started his analysis from a time when Palakunnathu Mar Athanasose had manipulated everything in his favour and mainly due to the Royal Proclamation in his favour,there was calm outside and storm inside Malankara Church.Marthoma Church tries to make it as though Palakunnathu Mar Athanasiose was the legitimate Methran and Pulikkottil Thirumeni was a usurper,Having got the Royal proclamation in his favour,Palakunnathu could rule over the Church in Malankara as no one could dare to oppose him for fear of incurring the wrath of the crown as well as the musclemen of Palakunnathu Bishop.This is the reason for the exterior calm that Dr Thomas mar Athanasiose is talking about.Having ousted and consigned to Cheppadu Church,Cheppattu mar Dianisious was inconsequential for Palakkunnathu and conducting a Kantheela and leading the funeral service is nothing but small mercy.

I am sad to see a learned person like Dr Athanasiose is repeating the propaganda of Marthoma Church without a proper study of Historical events.

Orthodox Church and Politics

This posting  in the context of the noises that are being raised regarding the role of the Church in relation to the Elections that are round the corner.An analysis has to start with the objectives of Church entering the political areana.It should be for for the welfare of all citizens in general and more particularly its members . The Church should also participate actively for realizing social goals like ensuring a Corruption free, equal opportunity driven political environment 
 There are certain fundamental questions that needs to be addressed to get proper answers to the questions that are being thrown up

1. What is the role of the Church in Politics? To rephrase the question, whether the Church should interfere in politics at all? And why?

In my opinion, the Church has a role in Politics for the purpose of ensuring Social Justice, for securing the Civil rights for its members,

2. What should be the kind of activism the church should take up for achieving the above objectives?

In my view, the Church should continuously involve itself in issues stated above.  Co-operation of various other organizations which can identify with the above goals of the Church. The Church should be less of a vote bank and more of a corrective force.

Within the frame of above parameters I am proceeding to analyze the present events that are being unfolded.

In the first place the present system of waking up at the 24^th hour will not take Church or the Diaspora anywhere. It may give some temporary sense of importance to some functionaries. Some promises and some nice words might come from here and there – like candies to a crying kid. There it will all end –as has been the experience in the past. Bargaining for a few seats for members of the Church irrespective of their past service to Church or even their morality and image is only going to affect the larger mission of the Church. The leadership of the Church needs longer vision and larger perspective.

Marginalization in political sphere that the Church is facing now is the result of the unimaginative actions of the Laymen leadership for many a decade. The situation needs to be corrected not by impulsive reactions when elections are round the corner. It has to be by way of long term strategies and grass root level work. For that there has to

be competent laymen leaders. Bava and Bishops should stay away from politics, but should educate the faithfuls on social issues and political stances should be based on such an ideological base. The present situation is that in Church hierarchy(Both Cleric and Laity),there are pro LDF and pro UDF persons, but hardly any pro Orthodox Church leaders. They act as power brokers for their political favourites.The goal is to canalize the votes to the Political force they are aligned with and gain access to powers that be. They are not bothered whether the interests of the church are short changed. All that bothers them is whether their political masters are pleased with their work and there is a good service entry in their service book kept by their masters. These good service entries are encashable at an opportune time. There are leaders who publicly proclaim that they are above Church affiliations, but interfere in Church elections to see that their Trojan horses are in place at the right places.

In such a messy situation, the politics of issuing statements when elections are round the corner, getting politicians to Church Headquarters, getting some promises that are forgotten in no time and raking up another controversy at the time of next election is an absurd drama that is being staged with monotonous regularity.

If the Church is serious about dealing in politics seriously for effecting social changes according to the church stances, there has to be proper home work to be done. Acting as brokers for some politicians to gain seats is certainly not the mission of the Church

Again a Dissenting note

I had been reading with intense interest writings of Dr Thomas Mar Athanasius Metropolitan  in Diocesan Bulletin of Kandanad East Diocesan,particularly,Thirumeni's Memories of  Service to the Church spanning 2 Decades.It appeared to me as a candid and honest account of Thirumeni's trials and turbulence in life and efforts to render selfless service to Church without deviating from convictions.For the same reason I feel duty bound to point out some of the wrong perceptions as stated in the 10th part of the said memories published in the issue dated February 15 th,2011.
What I am referring to is the following statements featuring in the said article pertaining to HH Basilio's GeevargheseII,the late lamented Catholicose of the east and Malankara Metropolitan.The statements in brief can be translated as follows:
1.Post 1958 unification of the Church,HH GeevargheseII Catholicose humiliated H.G.Paulose Mar Philaxinose(later HH Basaliose PauloseII)at the instigation of H G Augean Mar Timotheus.
2.HH Basaliose Geevarghese II also insulted Vayaliparambil Thirumeni also in an open Synod meeting

The two prelates at the receiving end reacted differently to the humiliations ,but these incidents were the seeds for the Antiochian Movement

It is extremely difficult to check the facts of these incidents since all involved are now on the other side of the wail.Even the ones who could possibly give some secondary testimony are also far advanced in age to give any meaningful testimony.But I am willing to accept the account of HG mar Athanasious at face value,recognizing the fact that there could be some distortions in the narrations Thirumeni may have received from sources HG has reason to believe.

This issue appears to have caused heated debates in MOC Managing Committee and Synod.Thirumeni had been on the receiving end of criticism,but there were some who admired the action of the then Catholicose in exercising HH's authority over his Bishops!!! Perceptions also vary from person to person.

The point that I want to make is  not about the propriety or otherwise of what Thirumeni wrote.In the total context of Thirumenis memories this could be considered as a perception HG gained based on accounts the ones whom Thirumeni trusted for this information.Purpose of this note is to draw the attention of those interested in Church History to certain facts relating to post 1958 events.

The Supreme Court verdict of 1958 had no ambiguities unlike the one in 1998.It was 100% victory for HH GeevargheseII.The result of the verdict had been that if the Patriarchal Party chose to have a separate  identity,it would have become necessary for them to build new Churches and to pay about 12 lakhs by way of Costs of litigation.In such a circumstances, it was the magnanimity of HH Basaliose GeevargheseII that paved the way for a unification.A large majority in the Catholicose Party was elated at the victory in litigation and were wanting to avenge the humiliations from the Patriarchal group.

But H.H.Basaliose Geevarghese II took a highly Christian view that the victory in the court cases is meaningless if your brethren on the other side of the factional divide is thrown out into the streets.There were many even in the synod which HH was presiding over,who could not digest the idea.But H.H.could impose his noble vision on them.

Therefore when he found Paulose Mar Philexinose Metropolitan tried to reopen the factional feud,it might have caused indignation in HH and might not have minced words in expression his disapproval.He always maintained that the Catholicose had the duty and authority to correct the erring Bishops.But he always tried to console those wounded by words or actions at the earliest opportunity.But Paulose Philaxinose Metropolitan could not function as a disciplined Bishop and believed in doing things at his whims and fancies.

One cannot ignore the fact that on either side of the factional divide there were many who could not digest the unification of 1958.The Patriarchal faction accepted the reunification since they had no other option and the Catholicose faction since HH GeevargheseII imposed it on them.I am not saying that as a universal truth.
I am talking about a good number of activists.Paulose Philaxinoese Metropolitan became a rallying point for the activists from Patriarchal faction who had severe indigtion of the idea of unity.Although Vayaliparambil Thirumeni took the unification in letter and spirit and did all he could to strengthen it,it was not the case with the activists of Angamaly Diocese.This perhaps could have disturbed HH GeevargheseII and the sharp reactions could have its roots therein.To imply that HH GeevargheseII didnot give respect to the Bishops from Patriarchal side post unification is not factually correct.HH's concern was unity and discipline,two cardinal principles HH was fully committed.

I will be the last person to suggest that Dr Thomas Mar Athanssios Thirumeni made a distorted statement.HG was making a point that unification process needs a healing touch and the official faction has more responsibility to provide that.But inadvertently HG implied that behavior of HH Geevarghese II was crude and impertinent.This dissenting note is only against that implication.

A Dissenting note to certain statements of Dr.Thomas Mar Athanasios Metropolitan

History of Malankara Orthodox Church has been mutilated to the extent that more you try to understand it, more confused you become. Almost all historians starting from Ittoop writer to the mind boggling number of present day historians (few exceptions like Fr.Dr.V.C.Samuel excluded) have contributed their mite to make the picture as clear as muddy water.Dr.Thomas Mar Athanasios Thirumeni has not tried his hand in history parse but his article Sabhanthara Bandhangalil Samyamanam Avasyam (Diocesan Bulletin vol21, No11) contains some interpretations of history which are based on certain incorrect premises. As a person I am one who has highest regard for Thirumeni and have very good personal rapport which will certainly continue in spite of differences in views.

A condensed translation of the first two paragraphs of the article referred herein is as follows. According to the historians of MOC it is in the 17^th century that Orthodox faith started in this Church in . At that time, other Christian denominations named us Jacobites and we became a congregation of faithfuls under that name. This limits our tradition to 3 centuries and we do not have a legacy of 2000 years. Although as Christians we have a tradition of 2000 years, it is a common legacy for other denominations too. If we have to claim an orthodox identity of 2000 years we have to take the stance that orthodox Church was in existence here much prior to that ………etall

There are a few errors in the above statements. The first wrong premises are that Orthodox faith can be there only if a western Syrian connection is there. No west Syrian connection, no orthodox faith; nothing can be more away from truth. The Persian church with which the Malankara Nazarenes had connection in pre Udayamperoor days were as much Orthodox in their faith as anyone. Of course, they were branded Nesthorians and therefore heretics and hence untouchables by the western Syrian tradition. But contemporary theological studies have revealed that the Nesthorian-Cyrilian theological clashes were more due to external factors (charitable view of not understanding each other to a more harsh view of personality clash)The authentic publication Orthodoxia also recognizes the so misnamed Nestorian Churches as part of  the Orthodox faithfuls.Factually too, one cannot be objective and hold that the Persian Church was not Orthodox in faith. Of course one can safely state that the Persian Church is not following the faith of the Church conglomerate of Oriental Orthodox fraternity. But Orthodoxy exists even outside the Orientals.

Next point to be taken note of is that the Malankara Church very strongly followed the apostolic faith, which in their lexicon was Marthomayude Margavum Vazhipadum and they were very clear about their identity which was different from Kefayude Margam .(Of course this has nothing to do with the 20^th century controversy over the Thrones of St.Peter and St.Thomas, it only referred to the cultural and lifestyle difference between the Indians and Westerners ) The statement of Mar Athanatious that the Throne of St Thomas is a recent creation is also incorrect. Much before the establishment of Catholicate in India, the Malankara Metropolitans had been using that title for which documentary evidence is available.

The argument of Thirumeni that by the establishment of Catholicate and holding the view that the relationship with West Syrians is only 3 centuries old, we loose all our tradition of 17 centuries prior to that is logically and factually incorrect. I am baffled to see that a learned person like Thirumeni can make statements that can be interpreted as that protestant faith of Marthoma Church followers and the Kefa margis can claim the 21 centuries of the tradition of Marthomayude Margavum Vazhipadum and not the followers of the  original Margam!!!!